MORE STANDARD (ASTRONOMICAL) MODEL NONSENSE
Sometimes I am amazed at the ability of clear-headed scientists to come up with nonsense:
Giant planet ejected from the solar system
Now...did you catch all that? The Kuiper belt is that belt of celestial flotsam (think of it as celestial driftwood), floating around out there, which astronomers came up with to explain, in part, the origin of comets. According to this model, "passing stars" are supposed to have wandered near the Kuiper Belt and kicked some of this driftwood into the wild orbits of comets. Yup...you read that correctly. Now we're being told that Juptier got in on this act and shunted things around a bit, and in the process all this shunting around was supposed to have kicked a huge planet out of the solar system (oh I can hear the chorus of "Nibiru!" even now) and changed its orbit. Proof? Well, all those interstellar free-floating planets out there.
Well, I read this article, sort of breathless, and was looking for a little bit more by way of cogent explanation. Not finding much other than that they have "modeled" all of this (presumably on computers), I come away from this latest fantasia on the theme of Kuiper Belt in the same frame of mind as Dr. Tom Van Flandern, the astronomer for the US Navy who first revived in modern astronomy the Exploded Planet Hypothesis as an alternative explanation for the origin of comets, a theory I reviewed at some length in the first chapter of The Cosmic War. Like me, Van Flandern just had too many difficulties with the whole Kuiper Belt model of modern astronomy.
I have to wonder... why would sober scientists view the solar system as...well...perhaps nothing more than a big game of celestial marbles, with orbit-shunting planets expelling other planets and creating comets by "passing stars", and the disturbing thought occurred to me. A disturbing thought, and nothing more than pure, idle speculation: could part of the reason for this whole model be precisely to keep people from looking at a different model of solar system history and mechanics? One that indeed included an exploded planet (according to Dr. Van Flandern's Exploded Planet Hypothesis), and therefore, that included the possibility of an ancient cosmic war, fought right here in our own celestial neighborhood? Such a war would imply, as I argued in The Cosmic War, a technology capable of fighting it and doing things like that.
Possibly, but why deflect attention away from that? Well, again, why deflect attention away from any alternative model of physics unless, astronomy too, is to be included in the grab bag of what I've called on occasion "public consumption physics," i.e., the covert promotion of models in the public view, while privately and covertly investigating alternatives? There is, of course, no evidence that this is so, at least in astronomy's case, that I am aware of, but it does remind me of those statements of Lockheed skunkworks leader Ben Rich, who is reported to have said that "we now have the technology to take ET home."
Well, if that be so, then the implications are staggering, for one of them might be that "they" already have discovered aspects of celestial mechanics and history that the rest of us are kept blissfully unaware of, while we contemplate elegant computer models of Jupiter shunting large planets out of the solar system, and shunting its own orbit.
27 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
While I do agree with your analysis regarding the Exploded Planet Hypothesis, I believe you neglected to consider additional evidence in favor of the Kuiper Belt. Most significant is the fact that astronomers have discovered many Pluto-like planets in similar orbits as Pluto, an area that has been dubbed the Kuiper Belt. This contradicts the notion you present in the Cosmic War that the Belt was created to support the Ork Cloud (hope I spelled that right) theory. I certainly agree with the end conclusion you draw, but I find this piece of evidence lacking support for it.
I hope you have had the time to watch besides Dark Matters on the Science Channel this seasons The Universe on History 2 formally History Internation the episode they had on I would call billards solar system. They had Mercury losing it’s outer mantel due to a collision and yes Jupiter roaming around booting planets out of the solar system. Then there is the Earth and Mars size planet colliding and producing the Moon. Mustn’t forget Uranus flip on it’s side this theory has been brought in because of all those Hot Jupiters they have been finding around other stars. They have been trying to explain these discoveries with this theory Immanuel Velikosky must be laugh in his grave. By the way have heard about what they are saying about Vesta they now think it was part of a planet. the excuses keep rolling in.
This is interesting, as I was just listening to a Red Ice program about Hollow Earth stuff (which I would normally lump in with Flat Earth stuff), but something the author said about celestial mechanics got me thinking.
Our little mudball is spinning around at over 1,000 mph (at the equator, 733 mph where I live), and circles the Sun at something like 66,660 mph (yes, I noticed that number). Given the mass of the planet, the momentum we are looking at here is incredible. Then to consider it has been zipping around like this for billions of years…..
What happened to entropy? Even though there is no atmosphere to provide friction, there is friction from gravitational fields, EM fields, solar wind, some amount of interplanetary dust, etc. It requires a lot of energy to keep this system moving, especially for billions of years. Where does that energy come from? Why doesn’t it slow down more? What started it spinning in the first place?
It made me stop and think about an experiment I have been running for over 10 years now – a tiny neo magnet holding a half inch carriage bolt suspended against the pull of gravity. I haven’t done the math, but that tiny (1/4 inch cube) magnet has expended a considerable amount of force over 10 years. Where does all that energy come from? Will it ever run down? (I can detect no sign of weakening in 10 years) I need to do the calculations and get actual figures. Probably would be more rigorous if I had it on some sort of really accurate scale to measure the force. Should probably even log the force over time……
The more I dig into the scientific mainstream, the less I trust what they have been saying about anything. A great deal of it just doesn’t add up if you really look at it.
Sunshine from cucumbers, indeed….
Maybe that little magnetic dipole is tranducing energy in from the quantum vacuum?
I knew you would have fun with that one Joseph 🙂
A something else to chew on from that site:
‘Physicists create hole in time to hide events’
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/07/18/physicists-create-a-hole-in-time-to-hide-events/
“A disturbing thought, and nothing more than pure, idle speculation: could part of the reason for this whole model be precisely to keep people from looking at a different model of solar system history and mechanics?”
Not “idle speculation,” but observable, self-evident truth!!!!!
Starting with Einstein, much of 20th century physics/astronomy could be explained by your above idea.
” “public consumption physics,” i.e., the covert promotion of models in the public view, while privately and covertly investigating alternatives? There is, of course, no evidence that this is so, at least in astronomy’s case, that I am aware of”
Joseph, do you not think the fact that Nasa sending out numerous probes stacked with equipment to measure electromagnetism, charges and currents and then talking of solar winds, black holes. big bangs and neutron stars is evidence enough to prove we are fed public consumption astronomy? Have you not been tempted as yet to listen to Wal Thornhill at the NPA?
I can understand your reluctance from a physicists point of view to embrace the electric universe but times are changing and surely we all need to change our most fundamental views to a more realistic replicable alternative, especially those with such a readership.
I tend to agree with what the Sumerians were taught by the “Gods who from Heaven came to Earth” (the Anunnaki): That while our Solar System was being formed Niburu (Planet X/ Hercolobus)/– one of its moons collided with a large Watery planet Tiamat, knocking her into our present orbit and becoming Earth (when the continents were all one land mass and the now Pacific Ocean being the ‘dent’), the Moon was the large fragment that was captured by Earth’s orbit…and the Asteroid Belt was the remaining debris caught near Tiamat’s original orbit.
Of course, this is all based on the work of Zachariah Sitchin (his first book “The 12th Planet’ was my introduction to this hypothesis)…but it makes more sense than anything else to me.
So there I said the no-no word: Niburu.
Terry Lamb
So you haven’t read Van Flanderan, J P Farrell, and what’s his name from the 18th century?
Or you’ve read those guys and you don’t buy that story why?
It’s all part of what I call “the Cabalistic Academia”. Lloyd Pye “dumps” on these so called scientists and professors BIG TIME, but what I cant figure out is, “WHO” is behind all this malarky about the solar system, and our hidden history (aka cremo & thompson).
I suppose you can include the UFO/Alien cover up as well, seems like all this “make believe story'” has been orchestrated by the secret societies down through the ages, and is still being played out today.
A classic example is NASA, nuff said.
It is a happy coincidence for me that you posted this blog today as I has just finished watching that episode of “Ancient Aliens” entitled “Underground Aliens” wherein they described the discovered ruins of so many underground cities all across the globe, cities that must have been built by societies of people fearful of events going on in the sky above them. And for any readers out there who may have seen the episode, I encourage you to pick up more research yourself on explorer Stan Hall’s work in Ecuador — because the History Channel portion of that story seems to be woefully incomplete — and visit his daughter’s official web site on the subject, namely:
http://www.goldlibrary.com/
At that web site, they even make available an online version of Stan Hall’s book “Savage Genesis.” I’m pretty sure that Dr. Farrell has quoted from Hall, or at the very least from Immanuel Velikovsky, when discussing the evidence of ancient Cosmic War. Professor Hall is, of course, a subscriber to that idea. In the forward of “Savage Genesis” he even lists it as one of the ten challenges of his research, quote:
“To prove that Catastrophism is the missing link between Evolutionism and Creationsim, and, as theorized by Immanuel Velikovsky, remains the cause of the traumas, aggressions, and auto-destructive neuroses sublimated through the memory chromosomes of nations and of individuals.”
I intend to get a copy of Professor Hall’s book and add it to my library along with “Cosmic War.” The truth has a way of leaking out, in spite of how forcefully the Bankster Priesthood tries to keep it submerged.
The History Channel’s Alien Series 1&2 are on DVD now. I’ve seen both and the episode you refer to is there. I’ve seen it. Theseries is framed in a way that nuanced/counter to Dr. Farrell’s writings, especially in dealing with the Nazi’s Black Top Secret Esoteric physics/ Alien artifect/writings connection.
I have noticed the same thing
I have Hancock’s book on that,
but haven’t read it yet.
I’ve seem some spots on TV.
I do cite Velikovsky, or rather, mention him, in Giza Death Star Destroyed but as most are aware, I am not a catastrophist. http://gizadeathstar.flywheelsites.com/wp-admin/edit-comments.php#comments-form
As usual the truth is in the middle.
It is not completely one or the other.
There is slow change over time.
There have also been sudden catastrophies
effecting permanent changes.
I have noted that is so in many debates.
I remember in school on a debating team,
when suddenly I looked at my teacher and
blurted out that I was having a problem:
I could see (understand) both sides of the argument.
Her reply was a good one.
She looked at me, slightly annoyed and said,
“Well then, just argue the side you’re on.”
I did and I remember we won, but I was still a bit upset.
I find your own thesis on this quite viable, Joseph.
You can destroy a planet basically the same way
you can make sick or destroy a living orgasm.
By reversing its electromagnetic field pulse and
directing it to/at the target, called in the case of Earth,
the Schumann Resonance.
The ‘planet’ would explode within such & such a
time, dependent on the frequency strength and
duration.
A planet with both rock and water would seperate
because of the density, sending the most water
to the outer edges of the system as our Ort cloud and
the denser rocks would remain pretty much in place
forming a “belt” in orbit.