"Electric Caverns" & sequelae

[hilarleo]

As one of the over-educated masses I enjoy the info and the format of the various
"Thunderbolts"sites. I also note that I too sense that familiar hand
of suppression known to researchers through the historical ages.
In my own submissions to Wikipedia the subject of an Electric Universe has been shown
to me to be utterly verboten. Every time I or others known to me suggest such a theory,
someone immediately reverts that page, claiming "certain knowledge" and a fervor for the purity of 'Science'.
Unfortunate such Platonic puritans cannot abide the tinkering with reality of a democratic of Wikipedia.
It's opened my eyes regarding a "larger agenda" afoot.
Knowledge is a powerful tool, and moreso when hidden by the hand of power.
* * *
However I am burdened to report my perusal of recent TPODs' hypertext links
has led me to an unsettling instance of autocratic rhetoric.
I would very much like to know the source of one particular point of information in
"Electric Caverns", TPOD for 07December 2007,
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch ... averns.htm where we read:

"One significant aspect to Giant Crystals Cave is that it is bone dry...".

Is the author in any position to provide a source for such a singular contention?
If not please consider that the remainder of this TPOD could present thunderbolts.info in further bad light...
But the paragraph is fundamentally confused on the face of things. The full paragraph reads:
<
"One significant aspect to Giant Crystals Cave is that it is bone dry, with little evidence to imply that it was melted [sic] out of the rock by flowing water.
Coupled with the lack of moisture, we find nothing in traditional scientific theory that explains how water causes the precipitation of 12-meter crystals along all orthogonal axes."
>

There may be further posturing in this confused TPOD paragraph which I can't quite parse,
or the results unhappy editorial changes. Certainly the use of the term "melted" as read here
is inconsistent with other uses throughout TPOD, where "melting" generally
implies a deformation by heat and/or acceleration, rather than dissolution.
Primarily however I want to note the 2nd sentence's unhappy conflation of a supposed dry cavern
with more traditional theories of crystal precipitation in liquid.
How do these two suggestions find their co-incidence in this cave... Is it dry- or all wet?

National Geographic and others have reported on the Naica Mines caverns. For instance:
"Published April issue of the journal Geology", &quoted here from 07April 2007 National Geographic in
'Giant Crystal Cave's Mystery Solved':

"To learn how the crystals grew to such gigantic sizes, [Geologist Juan Manuel García- Ruiz]
studied tiny pockets of fluid trapped inside [these crystals]...
"The crystals, he said, thrived because they were submerged in mineral-rich water
with a very narrow, stable temperature range - around 136 degrees Fahrenheit (58 degrees Celsius)."

Should "pockets of fluid" survive lightning strikes in fulgarites?
No wonder "bone dry" is what this TPOD asserted and would have us believe.
But what's this TPOD author trying to pull? While it is true that the nearby 'Cave of Swords'
in the same Naica Mine complex of Chihuahua, Mexico may have appeared "bone dry" from the distance
of 90 years after discovery, such was manifestly not the previously reported case for the Giant Crystals Cave
pictured and discussed in this TPOD.

Numerous reports mentioned the "Giant Crystals" cavern rooms were submerged before year 2000.
Indeed though it is also true that these cavern rooms are now both lighted and air-conditioned,
author and photographer Richard D. Fisher wrote about documenting Giant Crystals Cave
under very different conditions for the recent edition of his book _Copper Canyon Mexico_ .
From his site http://www.canyonsworldwide.com/crystals/index.html :

"... the temperature in the cave is over 150 degrees Fahrenheit with 100% humidity...
At the moment, access is restricted to prevent damage to the soft crystals.
And humans can only get in the caves at all because of the continuous pumping operations
that keep them clear of water.
If, when Naica's ores are no longer viable, the mine is closed and the pumping is stopped,
then the caves will be submerged - and the crystals will start growing again."

* * *
In the same TPOD a second apparently equally confused reference is made to another famous cavern
[ http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch ... averns.htm ] :
<
"Jenolan Caves near Sydney, Australia is another instance where formations exist that are difficult to explain according to standard theories. Clear helicites grow everywhere with mind-boggling shapes that defy gravity. Some of the chambers within the cave complex are etched with Lichtenberg figures and upright columns of translucent gypsum crystal."
>
While Austalia might be renowned as a relatively dry continent on average,
the implication here of an anomalous cavern is also highly incorrect. The tourist attraction of Jenolan Caves demonstrably include partially submerged caverns. I would indeed be informed to read of arcing plasmas
forming in water solutions.

But the further attempt to question "standard theories" of limestone formation misses its' mark completely.
I have read nothing in the Thunderbolt pages which connects the generally-acknowledged-as ongoing, contemporary and continual Terrestrial creation in limestone caverns of wondrous stalagmites, stalactites, flowstones- not even our evocatively-named "helicites"- with electrical forces beyond those of
standard-theory molecular bonds involved in the chemical processes of mineral dissolution and depositing via liquids.

One might advance arguements here that plasmas are actually and ultimately responsible for any and all activity in the universe. Barring that, I have yet to read anything in the Thunderbolt pages which connects the [perhaps not-yet-completely understood] processes of seed-crystal precipitation with _any_ plasma experimentation or theories. I daresay that no fulgarite on earth- nor any created in a laboratory- has ever demonstrated the regular structure and smooth appearance of a crystalline Platonic solid form as this author suggests. Conversely, where can I find *any* reported plasma activities related to his "precipitation of ... crystals along all orthogonal axes" ?

Perhaps the author has confused modes of plasma. Are there further rational bases to be found for the assertions and inferences promoted in this TPOD?I would be pleased if the author could change my mind. Alternatively, I wonder- Might the Editors agree with me that any over-heated TPOD presentation could serve to undermine the integrity of the "Thunderbolts" thesis? Sober truths are only found dispassionately.

leo sullivan, berkeley

[Rick]

Leo's position deserves our attention. There are often statements in the forum that are rather too expansive and even unsupportable theoretically. Better semantics might be a partial solution.

RIck Smith

[Lloyd]

- Hilarleo, your argument sounds good, but I suspect that the giant crystals truly are formed by megalightning or something bigger, because they seem to resemble the crystals often found in geodes. Previous discussion of that subject on TPODs and the forum seems to show considerable evidence that geodes and other blob-shaped rocks are formed by megalightning. The net mentions that quartz crystals can be grown in solution under heat and pressure and also piezoelectrically. I think one TPOD suggested that hailstones are formed electrically, like geodes are. I'm not sure if snowflakes have been discussed as electrically formed, but a recent TPOD about a hexagonal crater on Mercury mentioned how hexagonal shapes form electrically. Plasma streams tend to have a central ion stream column surrounded by 6 other plasma filaments. The 6 filaments repel each other and the central column, causing the column to become hexagonal. So anything in nature that is hexagonal can be considered a possible result of electrical forces.
- Perhaps the TPOD was wrong in saying any of the giant crystals found in caves were under bone-dry conditions. If so, correcting errors is always helpful.