Creationism, Myth and Catastrophism

[Lloyd]

369778

Somehow, my last post didn't post. Now I have to remember what it said, while I add more to it.

VENUS & FLIES
I got AI to make these comments, Nick.

Both Peratt’s plasma figures and Talbott’s Saturn theory propose that ancient motifs like the winged disk and flying insects (such as scarabs) are stylized records of spectacular plasma and planetary events witnessed in the ancient sky. Peratt’s research shows that high-energy plasma discharges create luminous, winged shapes similar to those found in ancient art, suggesting these motifs depict real atmospheric phenomena. Talbott’s Saturn theory argues that close planetary alignments and electrical activity produced radiant disks with “wings” or “arms,” inspiring myths of winged suns and beetles. Thus, these symbols may reflect ancient observations of dramatic celestial events, rather than just abstract religious or solar imagery.

The association of Venus with swarms of bees, flies, or wasps in myths-such as the Sherente story where Venus is trailed by bees-mirrors a global pattern where Venus is linked to insect motifs, as seen in the Maya calling Venus the "Wasp Star" and in various traditions where Venus is connected to buzzing or stinging creatures. This convergence aligns with Peratt’s and Talbott’s theories, which suggest that ancient observers interpreted dramatic celestial phenomena (possibly plasma discharges or planetary apparitions) as living beings or swarms, leading to myths that describe Venus accompanied by insect-like entities. Such motifs reflect a mythological encoding of striking visual events in the sky, with the persistent, sometimes overwhelming presence of insects serving as an apt metaphor for the awe-inspiring and sometimes fearsome manifestations of Venus in ancient cosmologies.

So maybe a plasma apparition accounted for the wings of the winged disk and winged creatures. In my post on the Evolution of Religion I found that the Squatterman and the Tree of Life were apparently the same plasma figure seen on Venus/Mars. Dave Talbott and Ev Cochrane figured Venus gave off streamers, but the plasma figures seemed to be in the same place as the streamers, so I wonder if they were the same thing or if they were two different things, kind of overlapping.

IS GENESIS HISTORY? VIDEOS
I organized their video titles along with the links into convenient categories at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... ory-videos.
The categories are PREFLOOD — NOAH’S FLOOD — GEOLOGY — DATING — MOUNTAINS — GRAND CANYON — COAL — DINOSAURS — FOSSILS — POST-FLOOD — BIBLE EVENTS

SATURNIST MYTHS & PHYSICAL MODEL
I also organized all my posts on myths and the Saturn Model in one post at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... cles-index.

LA LINDOSA ROSETTA STONE?
See https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... cles-index. While making the previous post, I came across Ancient Architects' video about the 8-mile-long La Lindosa rock art site in Colombia and realized that the images of extinct animals, such as the giant sloths, means at least some of the site must predate the Younger Dryas event, since that event likely wiped out those now extinct animals. So I figured if it includes any plasma figures or "sun" figures, it may show what apparitions were seen before the YD cataclysm. And that might provide a clue about how ancient myths evolved and guided civilization. Mainly, I want to know when and how the Saturn trio broke up and how they were involved in cataclysms on Earth. The smoking gun needs to turn up any day now.

[Lloyd]

369852

YOUNGER DRYAS DATING CAUTION

I told Ev Cochrane about the La Lindosa rock art and extinct animals images in it. He expressed interest, but also caution about relying on Creationist literature and/or supposed dates of Abraham in attempts to date any extinction event to 2400 BCE. I replied that I'm not making that mistake, as I don't have firm dates for much of anything. Offhand, I don't know what Abraham-related datings put the Younger Dryas at 2400 BC. What I think are the best dates for Abraham are around 1900-1800 BC, which may be the time of the destruction of the Cities of the Plain by the Dead Sea by an impact or airburst. I've seen what seem to be good evidence for that on video.

GREAT FLOOD
I don't believe in "creation", but Creation geologists & scientists have good explanations for the Great Flood as the cause of most of Earth's sedimentary rock. Most Creationists accept the Masoretic Bible's dating of the Great Flood at 2300 something to 2400 something BC, but someone on the TB forum informed me that the Septuagint Bible is more reliable. It dates the Great Flood at about 3200 BC. The fact that most dating methods greatly misdate known events, like the Mt. St. Helens eruption/s and the Hawaiian volcanic eruptions, shows that those dating methods are wrong. C14 seems to a much better method, although it's likely also imperfect. C14 dates dinosaur bones, coal and diamonds at 20-50 thousand years old. So there's good reason to scrap other conventional methods. C14 is now produced by cosmic rays striking N2 in the upper atmosphere, between 9 and 15 km altitude. If C14 levels were different before the Great Flood, that means those dates could come down to 5 thousand years old. We know the sky was different about 5,000 years ago, so C14 levels could definitely have been much less before the Flood.

ICE AGE
Michael Oard is a Creationist climate scientist and he has some well-reasoned articles and videos explaining that the Ice Age only lasted about 700 years right after the Great Flood. So that would put the end of the Ice Age at 2500 BC by Septuagint dating of the Flood. Oard seems to go with Masoretic dating, which would put the end of the Ice Age at 1800 BC, which I think is way too recent. Most Creationists seem to believe there was only one Great Flood, so they seem to prefer to believe that the Younger Dryas event was not a Flood, but the ice sheets melted rapidly and caused sever flooding over much of the Earth. So they seem to confuse that Flood with the Great Flood, wrongly confirming the Masoretic.

PANGAEA BREAKUP
Mike Fischer has a site, NewGeology.us, at which he shows that the Pangaea supercontinent broke up due to an asteroid impact and the continents moved rapidly to their present locations by sliding on the plasma Moho layer. He thinks that occurred a few centuries after the Great Flood, but it makes more sense that it occurred late during the Flood. Some Creationists tend to date the rapid continental "drift" to the beginning of the Flood. I think it occurred late in the Flood. First, impacts hit the ocean and the supercontinent, causing severe rain. The Moon or another body may have been close enough to Earth to cause tsunamis, especially if its Earth orbit was elliptical. I guess earthquakes could have caused tsunamis too. Baumgartner says there were 30-70 thousand tsunamis during the Great Flood.

SEDIMENTARY ROCK FORMATION
If there were no mountains on Pangaea, the tsunamis would have been able to cover all of the land eventually and to deposit the mile-thick sediments, which became sedimentary rock. The continents broke off the supercontinent after much of the sediment was deposited, since some sedimentary layers cover areas on several continents. The shock of the impact on Pangaea caused impulse mountains to form right away, like the Appalachians. India shoved under Asia forming the Himalayas. Australia broke off of India. The Rockies and Andes formed as the Americas came to a halt. The east Pacific rise stopped North America, although the plate slid a few hundred miles over the rise first, raising the Colorado plateau etc. Creationist scientist John Baumgartner has a video that explains the sediment deposition during the Flood in detail, which I plan to write about soon.

[Lloyd]

369866

SAHARA DESERTIFICATION

I just skimmed over a paper Plasmaglyphs part 1. apparently published about 2018. In that paper at https://www.academia.edu/69494985/Plasm ... view-paper the author said:

Origin of Sahara and “Desert Belt”: The truth is that there is no explanation currently for how the Sahara Savannah turned into hundreds of feet thick of sand, across an entire continent. And no one wants to talk about it, either, including from the EU, Hancock et al…, Sitchin-Donakin et al…, camps. It is a major problem. Though Wal Thornhill has mentioned it, and some of the EU Geology catastrophists, nobody has specifically done a study comparing the Sahara sands with the Martian samples. The author did a brief sampling, but results are not written, as of yet. Eye of the Sahara - Biggest Thunderbolt strike (Credit: Wikipedia, Credit: theecologist.org). “Desertification” (cyclical definition) due to unexplained shifting climate forces. Sometimes a comet is blamed, sometimes Precession/wobble, sometimes humans. The simplicity of the answer is obvious: the desert belt was dumped on Earth. However, not by the moon, but by Venus and then Mars. The shift in climate was first caused by the Moon and the Younger Dryas. The two events go hand in hand. A mutually supportive discordant cycle.

DATING VENUS & MARS ENCOUNTERS
He seemed to have followed Velikovsky's dating of the Venus and Mars encounters. I don't see much support for that. Those encounters seem to me to date to the Younger Dryas, which I date at c. 2500 BC.

SAHARA SAND ORIGIN
He said the sand of the Sahara came from Venus and Mars, but it seems more likely to have come from a Younger Dryas flood of the Sahara by impacts in the Mediterranean Sea and Indian Ocean, which the OzGeologic video channel discussed. I'm willing to discuss for details. I haven't looked yet to see details about the sand etc.

EYE OF THE SAHARA
The Eye of the Sahara surely isn't due to a lightning strike. Is there evidence of lightning making such a pattern? I read that the rock strata there show that there was a sort of bubble in the strata and the top was removed. I'm guessing that the Younger Dryas Sahara flood washed away the top of it, leaving behind the concentric rings patter.

[Brigit]

Lloyd says, "GREAT FLOOD I don't believe in "creation", but Creation geologists & scientists have good explanations for the Great Flood as the cause of most of Earth's sedimentary rock. Most Creationists accept the Masoretic Bible's dating of the Great Flood at 2300 something to 2400 something BC, but someone on the TB forum informed me that the Septuagint Bible is more reliable. It dates the Great Flood at about 3200 BC."

Hello Lloyd.
I'm sorry, I did not mean to give any impression about the Septuagint/LXX being more reliable than the Masoretic Text/MT in general. We did discuss the fact that in the LXX and the MT, chapters 5 & 11 in the book of Genesis are quite different from one another. This gives the different chronologies. LXX and Josephus, a historian of the 1st century, follow the older chronology. The Primeval Chronology gives a date of +/-3300 BC for the Deluge.

However, there is a larger question which comes up, and that is the source of the earth's oceans.

In my view, and as I understand Velikovsky's work and Wal Thornhill's Electric Universe model, the oceans were deposited by earth's (former brown dwarf) primary star. And perhaps the salt water depositions happened in several stages, or episodes.

The deluge, remembered near-universally in the folk religions and sacred texts of the world, not just in the Old Testament, would have been the most recent -- and the last -- deposition of salt water on the earth. This is where so many of the myths and legends, once again, overlap with the science of the space age: the rings of Saturn are similar to the waters of the sea. And not only that, Saturn's rings are arguably recent, having had no time to become darkened by interplanetary dust and removed by other forces.







ref: page 48 https://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/php ... &start=705

[Brigit]

Also, in the planetary capture model, periods of prolonged cold and heat -- which are also the subject of many myths and legends -- would correspond to the temporarily elliptical orbit of the earth around the Sun. That is, it would have made excursions further away from the Sun and possibly closer in, until it was settled into its current orbit. Therefore, an ice age would be a logical outcome of the model.

[Lloyd]

370021

That number is kind of easy to remember, because 3x7=21. I think I remember a friend's phone number as 3175171, because 3x17=51 and 71 is 17 backwards and there's progression of odd numbers.

Hi Brigit. You're the one who told me about the Septuagint dating a few years ago. JP Michael disagreed at first, but then he read a book that persuaded him that the Septuagint is indeed much more correct than the Masoretic, which latter was apparently intentionally dated in a way to try to disprove Christianity.

Velikovsky first proposed, I think, that Saturn went nova and poured a lot of water onto the Earth, including salt, but I don't recall him claiming that the oceans formed from that, but were merely added to. Dwardu thought the polar column vacuumed up a lot of ocean water to explain how river beds can be seen on the ocean floor and canyons on the continental shelves. And he thought the column got severed by Mars, I think, and the water in the column filled up our oceans again. But I don't know of evidence that a plasma column can do that.

And Ev says now that Venus, behind Mars, I think, is what myths indicate appeared blindingly bright during the Creation event, so I'm not sure Saturn was involved. Venus is still very hot, so it's plausible that it brightened somehow, but I don't know how. It's more plausible that Saturn had a nova event, but Ev says the evidence that Saturn was in the polar configuration is slim and late. It appears that Mars probably had an ocean, which was possibly removed by Venus, although there is no water on Venus now. AI told me a few weeks ago that a high current polar plasma column would be devastating for a planet with life, but if Earth was shielded by Venus and Mars to some extent, I guess that could have removed the ocean from Mars and sent some of it to Earth. But it seems unlikely to have amounted to a whole lot on Earth. Much of it would likely have dispersed in space.

I think the best explanation of the Ice Age is what Michael Oard has developed. The Earth gradually cooled off after the Great Flood due to dust from volcanism and impacts. It took about 500 years for the ice sheets to reach maximum size. Oard doesn't seem to explain how the ice sheets melted, but others have explained that impacts caused it. That was the Younger Dryas impacts.

TIMELINE
I was just checking out the timeline for the period from the Flood till the Younger Dryas and thence to the Exodus. There seems to be pretty good evidence for the Flood and Noah's Ark and maybe the Tower of Babel and the Exodus. It seems plausible that Moses could have had access to Egyptian records, which he used to write Genesis. Below uses the Septuagint timeline minus a century or so, in order to get the Exodus at 1446 BC, which seems to be the best date for that. The years are birth years etc.
5344 BC Adam
3782 BC Noah
3280 BC Shem
3182 BC NOAH'S FLOOD
3180 BC Arphaxad
3045 BC Cainan
2915 BC Shelah
2785 BC Eber
2651 BC Peleg (239>2412) The Earth was said to be divided during the time of Peleg.
2521 BC Reu
2500 BC YOUNGER DRYAS --- So the Earth divided may mean the Planets divided.
2389 BC Serug
2259 BC Nahor
2080 BC Terah
1950 BC Abraham
1850BC Isaac
1790BC Jacob
1699BC Joseph
1526BC Moses
1446BC EXODUS

So this all seems to work out well. I was afraid it might not, so I'm surprised. I'm surprised that Peleg lived past 2500 BC, which is the date I estimate for the Younger Dryas, because Oard said the Ice Age ended 700 years after the Great Flood. Peleg lived at about the time of the Tower of Babel destruction. So the Tower of Babel was possibly destroyed during the Younger Dryas impacts. The myths could have referred to the polar column as the Tower, or there could have been an earthly tower that was built and was destroyed by the cataclysm. David Rohl seemed to find good evidence that there was an earthly tower that was destroyed and some of the Sumerians moved after that to the Nile where they started or joined civilization there.

Peleg meant divided. Was it the people who divided, or the planets that divided, or both? The Younger Dryas cataclysm seems to be close to the right time for the planets to have dispersed from the polar configuration. So it's plausible that the breakup of the system contributed a lot to the cataclysm. By this timeline, Sumer started building large structures before the cataclysm, while Egypt didn't start building pyramids till a century or more after the cataclysm, although there were people living there prior.

[Lloyd]

370085

I've been keeping track of how many views my previous posts get for several years. My last post was a few days ago and the count was 370021. Now it's only 64 more. But prior to my last post the count each time was usually many hundreds. So maybe that means bots were raising the count, but now the bots are kept away. Maybe Nick knows. My weekly thread Major SCI News Blog still got many hundreds of views Saturday, so I don't know, but would like to find out what it means.

8 PLASMA COLUMNS, 1 POLAR TRIO

I just posted that at https://cataclysmicearthhistory.substac ... mns-1-trio. Whether lots of people are viewing or not, I made another interesting discovery today by reading this article published in 2013: https://www.academia.edu/50051117. The author, Marinus, who was a rock art co-researcher with Peratt, concluded that Peratt was wrong about the ancient polar column being confined to the south pole. Since the plasma figures were seen all around the Earth, Marinus decided that the magnetic poles wandered a lot, or there were numerous poles. I found that there were likely 8 or more poles on several occasions in ancient times that lasted for somewhat long periods of time.

That means only people near the north pole would have seen the plasma apparition overlapping the Saturn Trio, while at other northern locations they would have seen them somewhat far apart in the sky, the Trio being at the pole and the plasma column much farther south. In the southern hemisphere there would have been only plasma columns visible, since the north pole would have been below the horizon.

Saturnists have figured that Saturn, Venus and Mars were depicted in ancient images as concentric circles, crescents, circle within crescent, rayed star, rayed sun, rayed star within circle, rayed star within crescent, and don't forget Venus as dragon. AI tells me those images are found worldwide. Snakes are found in ancient rock art, but not dragons. Sometimes snakes are with wings or legs. The ouroboros snake is also not seen in rock art.

So now I want to determine if the polar Trio was ever depicted in prehistoric rock art, or only in later art. I'll have to ask Ev for his thoughts.

[Lloyd]

370098

Trivial note: Regarding my view counts, from March 20 - April 6 it was ~100/day, then from April 11 - 25 it was ~300 - 600/day, and since then it's been well under <100/day. So was there bot activity for 2 weeks?

[Brigit]

Lloyd says, "Trivial note: Regarding my view counts, from March 20 - April 6 it was ~100/day, then from April 11 - 25 it was ~300 - 600/day, and since then it's been well under <100/day. So was there bot activity for 2 weeks?"

There are some big concerns about the internet search engines and platforms right now. The concerns are that not only are as much as half of the view counts from non-human users, but the media is also becoming more automated. The twenty-somethings have a name for it. They call it the dead internet theory or the "encrapification" of the internet, but I don't like to be crude. It's just what they call it.

[Lloyd]

370294

DEADLY ANCIENT RADIATION

Brigit quoted Dave Talbott at viewtopic.php?p=11804&hilit=myths#p11804.
"Earth-shaking electrical activity recorded on stone around the world and recounted in archetypal myths and symbols provoked a collective response from ancient people as if their lives depended on it. In fact the lives of millions of people did depend on their response to these events, since as Peratt himself acknowledged, the synchrotron radiation would have most likely been deadly."
ref: DAVID TALBOTT: Carved on Stone -- New Light on the Electric Universe | Thunderbolts Podcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piKuO4YeRFQ

Peratt thought the radiation came from extreme solar flares, but some Saturnists figure the polar Saturn configuration may have been the source, or maybe both, if the Saturn train was closing in on the Sun. I found recently that red dwarfs flare a lot and can produce the high current needed for synchrotron radiation from the anciently reported polar column. So that seems like a promising lead. Before that I found that if the crescent in many ancient myths was the sunlit part of Saturn and if the crescent apparition lasted for some years, decades, or centuries, then the angle between Saturn in the lead and Earth trailing behind and the Sun at a distance had to be a constant angle of about 45 degrees. And the crescent would have been visible at least as far as the orbit of Pluto.

Ev Cochrane seems to accept Robert Driscoll's old model of the Saturn train planets in a line revolving around Saturn while the system revolved around the Sun, like someone twirling a single string with 3 balls at different lengths (or like a shishkabob). But nothing else is known to revolve like that and it would not allow a constant sunlit crescent to be visible on Saturn from Earth. Ev also says there is no clear early mention of Saturn in myths. So it's not certain that Saturn was involved in the polar configuration. Nor do the early myths apparently mention Jupiter. And lately, as I tried to find connection between ancient rock art and early myths, I found that all of the rock art images that I figured might have shown the polar configuration planets were said to have been common in the southern hemisphere, as well as in the north. Since the polar planets should have been visible only in the north, it seems that those images (concentric circles, sun in crescent, star in crescent, star in circle) did not represent the polar planets.

I've been reading some of Marinus van der Sluijs's articles and I think he claims that those figures were plasma apparitions in the plasma column. Since rock art from all around the Earth shows the plasma column, he figures there must have been 8 of them or so, in order for one or two to be visible at any location. Either that or the column moved around via magnetic pole excursions.

So in my research, there's still a disconnect between rock art and ancient myths, because rock art doesn't clearly show the planets, but ancient myths seem to clearly refer to them. I found that rock art sites were considered to be sacred by many ancient cultures, so it seems likely that there has to be a connection. I'm keeping my eyes peeled.

How deadly was the radiation? I suspect that it occurred during the Younger Dryas cataclysms and it could help explain the extinction of most large mammals.