Painted into a corner

[hertz]

Most days, right after i check my mail i go straight to TPODs...rarely am i disappointed...today i was shocked...i had no idea that anthony peratt was also an archeologist! Yet while the article was tantalizing it provided no links to peratt's work in this field...a quick google search turned up this:
http://saturniancosmology.org/peratt.php

The Peratt column may have lasted hundreds of years or more. It completely fascinated and confounded humans, who for these reasons needed to draw representations in areas where the far south plasmoid was visible

if anyone else has links to peratt's archeological work i'd be interested to see them...thanks

[hertz]

think i found a pretty good source
http://plasmauniverse.info/NearEarth.html

[mharratsc]

A most excellent article by Mr. Van Der Sluijs. Very well said indeed.

[hertz]

i'd still like to find a copy of the address peratt gave to the mainstream archeologists...i've read the ieee paper and can tell it you, if he started his talk to the archeologists in the same way, what is being labelled "derision" may simply be confusion; that is, i doubt too many archeologists have ever heard of a z-pinch, or talk much about amperes in their day-to-day discussions...could it be just a simple case of poor audience adaptation? dunno..can't find the archeological address

[jjohnson]

Here's one paper that I enjoyed, co-authored with Rens van der Sluijs, author of this TPOD.

Tony has explored widely in his passion for finding these petroglyphs. It was his work in the plasma lab at Los Alamos that gave him the insight to identify the unique patterns depicted on rock art all over the world as being of a plasma origin. He has painstakingly photographed, measured the direction facing and even the dating of such works. His conclusions and careful categorizing and linking into a coherent explanation make his work an important resource and component in the tangled web of the EU paradigm.

Jim

[tayga]

I was fortunate enough to have a recent visit to Loughcrew, a neolithic cairn site in Ireland. It is relatively unknown and I only paid a visit on the recommendation of my sister-in-law. I was delighted when I saw the petroglyphs there and grateful that I had previously read Tony Perratt's IEEE papers on the subject. The carvings are stunning:

http://www.knowth.com/loughcrew-images.htm

[hertz]

thanks jim, that's exactly what i was looking for...the stickman glyph (and its distribution) was particularly persuasive to me, and the article certainly reads differently than the ieee papers (as one would expect) but i can also see where it wouldn't exactly endear the two authors to the mainstream anthropological and archeological communities...in several instances the authors are for all intents and purposes calling the mainstream narrow minded, dull, and stupid, (sound familiar?) for example:

Both repositories, psychological and celestial anomalies or curiosities, can be described in terms of globally recurrent factors, setting them apart from the local determinants considered by anthropologists and archaeologists.
(subtext: mainstream anthros and archeos are stupid...their view is not broad enough)

and

Their decipherment by archaeologists and anthropologists, therefore, is akin to attempting to read a foreign language to gain an understanding of the speakers of that language. As a “dictionary” is not available in most cases, this often leads to an ill-defined circular method...
(subtext: mainstream anthros and archeos are stupid...they use tautological arguments that are meaningless)

and

In either case, the interpretation rests on simple and untestable speculation, and there is no systematic method to interpret larger sets of petroglyphs. In contrast, we approach petroglyphs as the possible man-made evidence generated after the occurrence of a few major environmental events.
(subtext: mainstream anthros and archeos are stupid...they are narrow minded but we're brilliant)

this is not the dale carnegie method of winning friends or influencing people that's for sure, but i suspect peratt could give a damn because he knows he's right and some day (but not likely the near future) he'll be proven right by other more adventurous archeologists who heed the advice: "Although it is wise to keep one’s feet on the ground at all times, it is also clear that archaeologists could benefit much from lifting their gaze up to the heavens." Oh, and uh, noting that hallucinations can be triggered by electrical fields applied directly to people’s brains...i'd probably have left that bit on the cutting room floor too, but then again i'm no anthony peratt...

[tb2]

The opening page of Peratt’s web site http://plasmauniverse.info/
contains this disclaimer in large, bold font:

“The Plasma Universe and Plasma Cosmology have no ties to the anti-science blogsites of the holoscience 'electric universe'.”

This is both insulting to Wal Thornhill’s work presented at his Holoscience web site and also counterproductive for Peratt himself. Tony psychologically requires the approval and acceptance of his work by his “colleagues” at LANL and in the IEEE so badly that he rejects being publicly linked with anyone associated with the Electric Universe. This is ironic because those sought after professional colleagues laugh at him behind his back. Archeologists laugh at him and even some other plasma cosmologists think it is ridiculous to think that ancient man saw plasma instability shapes in their active skies and then carved them into petroglyphs.

People here at the Thunderbolts and Holoscience sites do accept almost all of his ideas and honor him for this breakthrough work. But, for this we get nothing from him but his derisive “disclaimer”. He just doesn’t know who his real friends are. In my opinion this is a most regrettable shame.
Don Scott

[hertz]

i see, pride has blinded him...perhaps our respect can open his eyes again...this malady strikes many great men

[tayga]

pride has blinded him...

This is purely personal speculation but I doubt it's pride or that he's blind. I suspect that he has been leaned on. Tony Perratt is near the end of his career and probably feels dependent on money and access to facilities. I expect he fears ending up ostracised and impotent like Jacques Benveniste or Eric Laithwaite, for example.

I have tremendous admiration for Don Scott, Wal Thornhill, Dave Talbott and others farther afield from TB such as Halton Arp, Rupert Sheldrake, Miles Mathis, Eric Lerner, and Randall Mills - regardless of whether they are right or wrong. It takes something special to ignore personal attacks and lack of support from Big Science and press on with your research.

Carl Sagan would have branded all of the above heretics. That this says more about Carl Sagan than those listed above is irrelevant. Tony Perratt's work is brilliant but it takes more than brilliance to shift a paradigm, courage being pretty near the top of the list of requirements. While his work may be cited by those bringing about the coming change, I don't think that the man himself will be in the vanguard.

[jjohnson]

I would counsel not putting too harsh a spin on Tony Peratt. You do not know (nor do I) whether he posted that disclaimer himself, or whether someone at LANL thought it should go up so that they don't get tarred by the EU brush, themselves. In his papers on petroglyphs, I think Tony was pointing out some obvious thought processes or educational voids that might be tying many peoples' hands in archeology,through no fault of their own, but it was not written in a mean or a "blame game" voice at all, IMHO. Scientists are used to frank appraisals; you have to be cheerfully thick-skinned if you are going to accept criticism and turn it to use, or even assess it critically, yourself.

None of us has walked in Tony's shoes. We do not know what brickbats may have been thrown his way, professionally, by others who cannot conceive of a plasma universe with large scale electric phenomena, nor what pressures may have been applied to him to "toe the line"; he is after all, a respected engineer in a national laboratory, and you know that there are bound to be bureaucrats there who are very conscious of their "correct public image". There is no shortage of those, although, fortunately, we are starting to see more awareness and bolder research in just such areas, these days; a heartening sign.

So let's move on, here.

[Phorce]

Wonderful article . It really gave me the impression of living in a massive scientific revolution. The current derision of some ideas will look as absurd in maybe just even just 20 or 30 years time. As absurd as the derision in the late 19th century looks to us now.

It's also great to see an example used from another field of work, and another time. That is a very valuable technique that reduces some of the tunnel vision that these pursuits can sometimes suffer from.

I must admit I had a similar dogmatic reaction to the Thunderbolts of the Gods monograph when I first read it. But I knew I was having a reaction and put it away for later perusal. I have some deep beliefs about the meanings of certain rock carvings that it got into conflict with. I now realise that as they are mythological and symbolic then they most likely have multiple meanings inclusive of cosmological one's.

[Brigit Bara]

]“The Plasma Universe and Plasma Cosmology have no ties to the anti-science blogsites of the holoscience 'electric universe'.”

I had not seen this notice on Dr. Peratt's website. The wording appears a bit emotional and is disappointingly imprecise. It is impossible to tell what he is referring to when he calls the "holoscience 'electric universe'" "anti-science." There is a great deal of overlap between Plasma Cosmology and the Electric Universe, but there are certainly very imortant distinctions. Which of these differences deserve this moniker of "anti-science"? The externally powered electric sun does indeed arouse instant derision and ire from mainstream science, but I seem to remember that Don Scott's Electric Sky used to be featured on Perratt's site under a recommended books heading. So I thought there was a gentleman's disagreement on that issue. Has Anthony Peratt changed his mind about whether a respectable engineer and physicist can bring up inconsistencies in the thermo-nuclear sun models and still be scientists?

Does he call the Electric Universe "anti-science" because it questions General Relativity, and the curvature of space by massive bodies? Is it because the Electric Universe posits the existence of a plenum of neutrinos in space which form an aether, and give a medium for electromagnetic waves to travel in? Is it because it points out that the billions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted on the CERN project looking for a God particle, or is it particularly offensive and "aniti-science" because it denies the existence of black holes? Is it because in the Electric Universe, there is a near-instantaneous force which explains the coherence of electron structure and the shape of spiral galaxies? Any number of these could cause caustic reactions by even Plasma Cosmologists, but which is it? Or is it all of the above? Is he saying that questioning Einstein or current paradigms is in reality "anti-science"? There is not any way to tell what he is talking about when he uses the term "anit-science," and that is unexpected for a scientist of his caliber to rely on name-calling antics rather than using specific language so we can understand what he means.

[Jarvamundo]

pfff.... It's a dead ringer for a rashly placed, ambiguous 'prepared statement'... hardly attentive and thorough like the rest of Dr-P's work. If not, where is the detailed essay a true scientist (as Dr P >is<) would include? It doesn't exist. It's just relayed political yap that lands as an instruction in an inbox.

Regardless of the political effect, I don't buy it's >scientific< authenticity. If you do, you haven't read the Peratt work.

My advice, don't sell out your mind, go read all the mentioned authors and form your own view on all of the material and where connections are made. If you are relying on political instruction on which material to assess, you belong inside a gate where fluffy bails of hay can land next to you.

As Jim says, lets get on with it.

Darn i'd like to see that catalog and data prepared in an online format, google earth tag the evidence, locations and alignments... and 'fly through it'. /idea wink

[tayga]

pfff.... It's a dead ringer for a rashly placed, ambiguous 'prepared statement'..

As Jim says, lets get on with it.

You're right. It is and I already regret my earlier posting

I'm reading Jno Cook's Saturnian Cosmology at the moment and trying to work it into an ebook. It summarises, opines on and adds to work by Dave Talbott, Dwardu Cardona, et al. The contribution to this body of knowledge by Tony Peratt is absolutely mind-blowing and is a major pillar of a well-rounded argument .