Are the planets growing?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
CTJG 1986
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 1:46 pm
Location: Southwestern Ontario, Canada

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by CTJG 1986 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:41 am

allynh wrote:
100625europaarcs.jpg
Small-Scale Moon
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/ ... lscale.htm

Look at the image, and notice that the burns on the ball on the right does not match the actual crust/mantle cracking of the growing moon on the left.
100625aluminumball small.jpg
Look at the close-up shot and you will see that the TPOD makes the point for the Growing Earth Theory rather than electrical discharge machining(EDM) as EU Dogma proposes.

Keep those great TPODs coming.
That is a bit of a stretch but I suppose I can concede it is possible. Your use of the term dogma however is wholly out of place as EU theory is constantly evolving as new evidence comes to light.

The purpose of that comparison is to show the similarity of the effects, not to replicate them.

Ignoring that there are possibly different factors involved in the case of Europa compared to the experiment, Europa and an aluminum coated child's ball are made of completely different materials and thus exact replication of the effects on Europa would be extremely unlikely.

I see the same type of effects on Europa as with the ball as the TPOD was pointing out, they are not expected to be identical unless the ball was made of the exact same composition as Europa and was subject to the exact same cosmic forces at play on Europa.

Edit: Cosmic forces, not comic forces...lol.
The difference between a Creationist and a believer in the Big Bang is that the Creationists admit they are operating on blind faith... Big Bang believers call their blind faith "theoretical mathematical variables" and claim to be scientists rather than the theologists they really are.

User avatar
nick c
Site Admin
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by nick c » Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:32 am

hi allynh
allynh wrote:as EU Dogma proposes.
That is somewhat of an unwarranted cheap shot, in my opinion. Sorry to see that your bitterness toward the EU (I assume due to the lack of an EU endorsement of the expanding earth) has clouded your judgement. If the EU were so dictatorial and dogmatic then why is it that this forum allows threads expressing the views of theories that the so called "dogma" does not endorse? Many of the theories on these forums are mutually exclusive to the EU, yet proponents are allowed to present their case. It seems to me that our hosts are open minded and believe that ideas need to be aired out, and of course, that does not mean that those ideas will necessarily go unchallenged. That is not the behavior that would warrant a charge of dogmatism.
Is it too much to ask that the top two forums be dedicated to discussion and debate of published EU material? while more freedom is allowed as you move down the boards? You really need to consider the venue...this is the EU forum. On any other forum on the web, discussion of the EU would be relegated to the New Insights and Mad Ideas (or corresponding) section, if allowed at all.

Perhaps it would be better if you explained just how the tpod, unwittingly, supports expanding earth, and Ransom's experiments with the aluminum ball do not apply to Europa.

It seems to me that Ransom's lab experiment goes a long way to offering an explanation of the appearance of Europa...is it the final and definitive statement on the subject? of course not. It is an analogy based on an experiment and the scalability of electrical discharges and plasmas. The effect on the aluminum coated ball presents a comparable morphology to that observed on Europa.
from the tpod:
-Europa has..." a vast network of trenches with v-shaped cross sections and steep walls were found. "
-"Electric currents flowing across a conductive surface are "pinched" into thin filaments by their associated magnetic fields and draw other filaments into parallel alignment. The trackways often overlap each other."
- "Also visible are loops that formed when the electric arc blasted the aluminum off the ball's nonconductive plastic substructure."
-"Darkened, scorched areas, pits, curving channels that appear to be centered on Europa's poles, and a lack of craters are all duplicated in the Vemasat experiment."

It seems to me that the tpod presents a nice summary of a lab experiment which goes a long way to help in the understanding of the conditions and forces that could have caused the formation of the features observed on Jupiter's moon Europa.

Nick

allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by allynh » Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:12 pm

The great strength in the TPODs is when they take NASA images and statements and show a better explanation. They do not hold back from saying "gravity based dogma", so why should the EU Dogma be sacrosanct. Every technical field has unquestioned beliefs that are clearly wrong, yet are repeated over and over as fact. The only way to move forward is by pointing to those unquestioned beliefs and trying for clarity.
nick c wrote: Perhaps it would be better if you explained just how the tpod, unwittingly, supports expanding earth, and Ransom's experiments with the aluminum ball do not apply to Europa.
I did. Look at the pictures. As you point out EU effects clearly scale up. The structures do not remotely match each other. The ball has lichtenberg scaring, branching, twisting, i.e., fractal; it does not have sharp lines and breaks the way Europa clearly has. Those straight breaks are classic cracking and filling of the crust/mantle.

These TPODs are great examples of lichtenberg scaring.

The Baffling Martian "Spiders"
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch ... piders.htm

The Baffling Martian Spiders (2)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch ... iders2.htm

The Baffling Martian Spiders (3)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch ... iders3.htm
060726lichtenspiders.jpg
Notice the fractal structure. The patterns on Europa are clearly not fractal.

This is not the first time I have addressed the problem of EU Dogma. Check out my post from last year.

Re: Recovered: Plasma cavitation?
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... =30#p18748

Everything is Fluid Mechanics. All aspects of people's daily life is possible only because of Fluid Mechanics, yet TPODs and Thunderblogs routinely bray with laughter at astronomer's misuse of Fluids while the EU guys misuse it as well. If any of the EU guys would pick up a book on Fluid Mechanics, they could come up to speed in no time, and instantly see how to start using the Fluid models to understand plasma.

Another example of EU Dogma is about the LHC and particle physics in general. Particle accelerators are the largest, most complex machines man has ever built, yet all I read in various TPODs and Thunderblogs are more brays of laughter. What is deeply disturbing about that, is unlike the NASA stuff, the EU guys never give an alternate explanation for what those giant machines routinely see in repeatable experiment after experiment. Any comment made by the EU guys is just vague hints and repeated quotes from one Thoth article from the 90s like I pointed out before.

Re: TPOD: Gamma Gamma Hey
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 632#p28660

The bottom line is:

- Without Fluid Mechanics you have no EU.

- Without explaining particle physics, you have no understanding of matter itself.

Those basic blind spots, that are routinely derided by the EU Dogma, are crippling you guys. No wonder you can't accept the basics of GET.
nick c wrote: On any other forum on the web, discussion of the EU would be relegated to the New Insights and Mad Ideas (or corresponding) section, if allowed at all.
If you will remember, Nick, this thread was in the top rows of the Forum for well over a year. It was even featured a few times in the Weekly Update. For some reason, still unexplained, the Thread was suddenly moved down into the basement. I have no problem with that. I'm not "bitter" in any way; thank you for caring. I'm having great fun discovering new things, and am constantly surprised by each new revelation. I'm also having great fun braying with laughter when the EU guys trot out their worn out dogma and cripple themselves.

I am taking what I know as a Civil Engineer, and what I am learning on a regular basis here and elsewhere, and filling out the puzzle far beyond the limits imposed by that EU Dogma.

As always, read the links and make up your own mind.

MosaicDave
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:56 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by MosaicDave » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:37 pm

Well, I'm having some fun reading this dialogue: Because my first reaction as well, to the TPOD being discussed, was that the patterns on the aluminized ball, don't in the least look anything like the patterns on Europa. I too smell Dogma somewhere... Mind you, I'm a passionate proponent of many EU & PC perspectives; Juergens, Perratt, and all the others get a lot of things right that mainstream cosmology has wrong. But still, even though EU/PC hasn't even been accepted yet into mainstream thought, it's already becoming a sort of new orthodoxy in these environs.
allynh wrote:Another example of EU Dogma is about the LHC and particle physics in general. Particle accelerators are the largest, most complex machines man has ever built, yet all I read in various TPODs and Thunderblogs are more brays of laughter. What is deeply disturbing about that, is unlike the NASA stuff, the EU guys never give an alternate explanation for what those giant machines routinely see in repeatable experiment after experiment. Any comment made by the EU guys is just vague hints and repeated quotes from one Thoth article from the 90s like I pointed out before.
Yet another example is the endless shrill and petty bashing of Einsteinian relativity. Such as the recent TPOD "Perceiving Einstein", http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/ ... nstein.htm. This TPOD smugly sets out to trash Einstein as being just some kind of dimwit, but really the whole article is founded on nothing but a bunch of misunderstandings and misrepresentations of special relativity, and makes many blatant errors.

But I digress, from the main subject of the original thread...

--dc

User avatar
nick c
Site Admin
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by nick c » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:36 pm

allynh wrote:so why should the EU Dogma be sacrosanct.
Who ever said that EU positions are sacrosanct? That is your assumption. Is the Expanding Earth dogma that is being written about on this thread sacrosanct?
Mosaic Dave: Is Einsteinian dogma beyond question. In most of academia the answer is yes. Personally, many EU supporters think highly of Einstein as a great mind. I do. I just happen to think that he was wrong, but any ideas that can dominate human thought for a century or more could only be the product of genius. Times change and our perspective changes too.
allynh wrote:Another example of EU Dogma is about the LHC and particle physics in general. Particle accelerators are the largest, most complex machines man has ever built, yet all I read in various TPODs and Thunderblogs are more brays of laughter. What is deeply disturbing about that, is unlike the NASA stuff, the EU guys never give an alternate explanation for what those giant machines routinely see in repeatable experiment after experiment.
What is your point here? Have they discovered the Higgs boson? I don't think that the EU grievance is with the machine but rather with the philosophies behind it, and the fact that a few theoretical physicists are spending billions of tax dollars in pursuit of their elusive white whales. Keep in mind that the EU is at this time mostly a study of the "macro" universe, primarily concerned with the role of electricity in space. As far as the "brays of laughter" maybe you are refering to reaction of the EU to the LHC scientist who blamed the future for not allowing the discovery of the Higgs boson, isn't that worthy of some "brays of laughter?" Seems hilarious to me :lol:
If you will remember, Nick, this thread was in the top rows of the Forum for well over a year. It was even featured a few times in the Weekly Update. For some reason, still unexplained, the Thread was suddenly moved down into the basement. I have no problem with that.
Apparently you do have a problem with that, as you have been slamming the EU ever since the thread was moved. Shortly thereafter you accused Wal Thornhill of going mainstream because he was going to Europe to lecture...failing to mention that he was lecturing before a group whose origins are in the investigation of Velikovsky's theories. And yes, I know that some of the Weekly Updates included links to this thread, because I am the one who wrote them.
The thread was not censored, no posts were altered or deleted, it was merely moved to a more appropriate section of the Thunderbolts forum. What more of an explanation do you need? It is here, and you and other EE proponents are free to present your case, even though it may or may not be contrary to the goose-stepping, tyrannical, repressive, and dictatorial EU dogma!

Nick

Grey Cloud
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:48 am

What does the team think?

Africa 'witnessing birth of a new ocean'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_ ... 415877.stm
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.

allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by allynh » Sat Jun 26, 2010 10:12 pm

Grey Cloud wrote: Africa 'witnessing birth of a new ocean'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_ ... 415877.stm
_48174567_2005vent_royalsociety.jpg
Used to understanding changes in the planet on timescales of millions of years, the international team of scientists including Dr Wright have seen amazing changes in Afar in the past five years, where the continent is cracking open, quite literally underneath their feet.

In 2005, a 60km long stretch of the earth opened up to a width of eight metres over a period of just ten days.
Here is the website from the article.

The Afar Rift, Ethiopia
http://www.see.leeds.ac.uk/afar/index.htm
Afar and world.jpg
Map of the Afar region from Google Earth
fig6_thumbw.jpg
fig6_thumbw.jpg (33.16 KiB) Viewed 12994 times
Looking NNW from the central part of the Dabbahu rift segment towards the Dabbahu volcano (~30 km away). Photo by Cindy Ebinger, University of Rochester, USA.
Here's the Wiki entry. (Harvest it while you can.)

Afar Depression
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afar_Depression
400px-EAfrica.gif
Location of the depression (the shaded area in the center of the map) and the local fault lines
800px-AfarDrape small.jpg
Perspective view of the Afar depression and environs, generated by draping a Landsat image over a Digital elevation model
Google Maps has high resolution satellite and terrain details if you zoom around. Enter "Afar, Ethiopia" and you will get close.

Love Google Maps.

Aardwolf
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Aardwolf » Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:36 am

In 2005, a 60km long stretch of the earth opened up to a width of eight metres over a period of just ten days.
So at the time did a similar stretch of land disappear at the northern edge of India underneath the Himalayas? Or did the mediteranean contract by 8 metres as the African plate slid under the Eurasion plate? I think there would have been signicant devastaion if so. If you argue a fixed earth size, this newly created area of land must have gone somewhere...


allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by allynh » Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:29 pm

Aardwolf wrote: If you argue a fixed earth size, this newly created area of land must have gone somewhere...
That is the whole point. At no time has any group discovered and placed instruments around a region that is vanishing through subduction. Yet those regions would have to be large, and blatant, to account for the amount of plate motion claimed by Plate Tectonics on a finite Earth. We would be seeing NOVA and National Geo specials all the time if those subduction regions existed.

Lizzie, thanks for the links. There is so much out there that has been interpreted separately, i.e., the classic four blind men describing the elephant story comes to mind. The task is for me to read broadly, then do a synthesis of what is out there to add to the puzzle. The puzzle is getting bigger than I realized over two years ago when I started trying to piece it all together.

I've got a ton of stuff to read.

Anaconda
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Anaconda » Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:09 pm

Grey Cloud, a timely contribution, allynh, I appreciate the elaboration and images :)

I've seen this before when I was researching faults for abiotic oil.

This is known as a triple junction or a forked rift.

From Academic dictionaries and encyclopedias:
A triple junction is the point where the boundaries of three tectonic plates meet. At the triple junction a boundary will be one of 3 types - a ridge, trench or transform fault and triple junctions can be described according to the types of plate margin that meet at them. Of the many possible types of triple junction only a few are stable through time.
The triple junction concept was developed in 1968 by W. Jason Morgan, Dan McKenzie, and Tanya Atwater. The term has traditionally been used for the intersection of three divergent boundaries or spreading ridges. These three divergent boundaries ideally meet at near 120° angles. In plate tectonics theory during the breakup of a continent, one of the divergent plate boundaries would fail (see aulacogen) and the other two would continue spreading to form an ocean.
The junction of the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and the East African Rift centered in the Afar Triangle is an example of a triple junction (the Afar Triple Junction). This is the only Ridge-Ridge-Ridge triple junction above sea level.
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/741275

These "triple junctions" are evidence of an expanding Earth.

Why?

Because triple junctions are an example of an "up & out" geologic force where even Standard Model geologists acknowledge the Earth bulges "up" and then is stretched "out" by expansion. Geologists, who subscribe to the Standard Model, attribute this to a localized plume rising up from the mantle, but an equally valid interpretation is that a triple junction is evidence of the crust rupturing from an overall secular expansion, not a localized mantel "plume" (although, a "plume" maybe part of larger expansionary forces).

A couple of other issues to note:

Triple junctions are fairly common, possibly more common than currently recognized by mainstream geology, although, even mainstream geology acknowledges a number of triple junctions across the world (see link above for a list of triple junctions).

This geologic feature is not the result of lateral compression. Other commenters have placed great stock in general ideas of "compression". But the triple junction or forked rift develops not because of lateral compression, rather, it forms as a result of upward expansion & outward stretching.

Yes, as seen in the Horn of Africa region, even continents will split apart, not because the continent is being pushed by other continents or is just "drifting" across the surface of the Earth's mantle, but because of internal expansion.

Note: There is no so-called "drift" involved, rather, the "skin" of the Earth is being pushed up & stretched out.

Question: Why would secular "drift" cause a break in the continental plate where the resultant pieces of continent move in three opposite directions from the central junction?

On the other hand, it's a logical consequence of an expanding Earth, that expansion would cause regions to splite apart and move in opposite directions, relative to the original central junction, whether on the land or under the sea.

User avatar
webolife
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by webolife » Thu Jul 01, 2010 9:10 am

It is also possible, as in the case of columnar jointing in cooling basalt flows, that the pieces of continental crust adjacent to the rift are contracting in some way as to open a gap between them... not saying that I think this is the case there in Africa, just that one should be careful about statements that imply there is only one logical solution.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

Anaconda
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Anaconda » Thu Jul 01, 2010 10:30 am

Quick postscript:

I agree with Aardwolf & allynh's discussion as summarized in the following quote:
Aardwolf wrote:
In 2005, a 60km long stretch of the earth opened up to a width of eight metres over a period of just ten days.
So at the time did a similar stretch of land disappear at the northern edge of India underneath the Himalayas? Or did the mediteranean contract by 8 metres as the African plate slid under the Eurasion plate? I think there would have been signicant devastaion if so. If you argue a fixed earth size, this newly created area of land must have gone somewhere...
On a constant sized Earth where does the land go...and how come there isn't physical evidence of rapid "subduction" as a result of these rapid (geologically speaking) Earth movements from a central point?

These questions typically go unanswered by constant-sized Earth proponents. Standard Model geologists most often fail to point out these contradictions, by their own volition, to their theory and usually fail to respond with an explanation when others "connect the dots" from this type of physical observation & measurement.

As far as webolife's comment:
webolife wrote:It is also possible, as in the case of columnar jointing in cooling basalt flows, that the pieces of continental crust adjacent to the rift are contracting in some way as to open a gap between them... not saying that I think this is the case there in Africa, just that one should be careful about statements that imply there is only one logical solution.
First, I acknowledge that webolife is only offering a possible alternative explanation (which is better than most Standard Model geologists). But it must also be pointed out that webolife offers not one stitch of evidence or analysis specifically in regards to the Afar triple junction which would suggest his alternative explanation has any physical validity. So, while recognizing a goodfaith offer of an alternative, it must be noted that it comes across as "throwing mud at the wall and hoping some of it sticks".

Now, moving on, Europa has been raised in the discussion thread, again. This seems to be a recurrent bone of contention, but it need not be.

This TPOD, Small-Scale Moon, Jun 25, 2010, argues that experimental electric discharging machining in the laboratory matches the patterns observed & measured on Jupiter's moon Europa:
Laboratory experiments reveal the effects of electric discharges on Jupiter's moon Europa.

Many Picture of the Day articles have discussed the ice moon Europa. The overwhelming conclusion, based on observation, is that it was the scene of cataclysmic events sometime in the recent past. Those events carved its surface into long, sweeping rilles called "flexi" that wend for thousands of kilometers, as well as blackened swaths that crisscross its landscape in multi-kilometer wide spans.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/ ... lscale.htm

Now, I link a high resolution NASA image of Europa:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegal ... _1339.html

Please link the NASA image and focus on the full image of Europa. Notice that directly below the superimposed box (to show where the higher resolution image which dominates the NASA webpage is taken from) is a structure that clearly matches the above fractal image allynh presented, a central point with "spider" arms radiating out from the central point.

What conclusions can be drawn from a comparison of images?

Easy, both physical processes, expansion & electric discharge machining, has gone on in the past on Jupiter's moon, Europa. Yes, allynh makes a valid point, which I agree with, that numerous structures identified as cracks are not consistent with electrical discharge machining. Some of these cracks are too long and too straight to be consistent with what Science knows of electric discharge machining from laboratory plasma experiments (others are ambiguous, and, as pointed out above, some are indisputably electric discharge machining).

And, as I have previously argued on this thread, celestial body expansion (stars, planets, and moons) is due to electrical processes, Birkeland currents with resulting Z-pinches of plasma filaments, specifically regarding Earth, the High Current Z-Pinch Aurora as proposed by Anthony L. Peratt.

allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by allynh » Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:25 am

Anaconda wrote: Now, I link a high resolution NASA image of Europa:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegal ... _1339.html
337341main_image_1339_946-710 small.jpg
Please link the NASA image and focus on the full image of Europa. Notice that directly below the superimposed box (to show where the higher resolution image which dominates the NASA webpage is taken from) is a structure that clearly matches the above fractal image allynh presented, a central point with "spider" arms radiating out from the central point.
spider.jpg
spider.jpg (32.12 KiB) Viewed 12836 times

Aromaz
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:36 pm
Location: Satahip., Thailand
Contact:

Re: Are the planets growing?

Unread post by Aromaz » Mon Jul 12, 2010 8:15 pm

I am still reading and trying to catch up on previous postings, but guess that will take a week!
Please forgive me if these few points are duplicated.

African Rift:
It might be of interest to know there are actually two major N-S rift valleys in Africa.
This particular one through Ethiopia does actually stretch right over the Red sea and the most northern part is what is called Ubhor, slightly N from Jeddah in Saudia Arabia. In Ubhor which is only some 10 km long and on average 500 wide the depth reaches more than 1,800 meters. Ubhor is moving SE with slight arch, and movement seems to be linked with that of Eastern Ethiopia and Somalia.

The other rift is actually much bigger and prominent.
It starts in Egypt as the Nile river delta and runs all through Africa down to Swaziland in the South. This one is much older and current displacement slower than the Ethiopian rift.

On expansion of the Earth:
There is no doubt that the Earth is expanding; but this is result of a number of incidents.
Off course the most obvious are meteors.
Less realized and less accepted: Earth is bombarded by Cosmic radiation; including dust, neutrons, protons, electrons, etc.

Some of these Particle/Waves can penetrate very deep. The earth has a molten core – high temperature, thus all sub-atomic particles will also be exposed to heat, friction and most likely result in formation of physical particles, further bonding and eventually have Atoms. . . molecules.

On the water issue: Posibility of comets, but that I am not so sure would have been enough.
We should rather look into Sapce for the formation of water, after all; Earth is not the only planet with water.
We know space is filled with Hydrogen and Helium related elements; and we (think we) know how those formed.
The big question: Where does the Oxygen came from? How was Oxygen formed?
To have H and O bind to water molecule requires heat; and earth had pleny of that in the core for a very long time.

Another issue I saw earlier: Himalaya Mountains;
Looking at a radiology and radar image of the ocean floor - Particular the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

There are very clear signs to indicate two major events:
1. A direct hit from astral body in the Pacific - large 'hole' in the crust that is still trying to heal i.e. Ring of Fire.
2. A angular hit by astral body colliding/glancing with Earth from near Antarctica, glancing up East of Madagascar and pushing (current) India right into the Eurasian continent; before moving out to space again.

There is a lot of proof for this concept besides the obvious scars and marks on the ocean floor: The Geology of minerals (and particular gemstones) in Western India corresponds to that of Madagascar. That glancing force would have been massive, and the force with which India crashed into Eurasia is perfect explanation of the whole Himalaya region. Even the ripples across Northern India all very clear.

Often I guess the simplicity of things makes it difficult to accept the real potential.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To overcome barriers by the conventional; one has to find the NEW.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests