Cosmic Warfare


A few days ago I blogged about "data correlation experiments" and ""non-obvious correlated systems" and so on. Well, this week, when going through all the emails and articles that people have sent me, I've noticed that some people were focused on earthquakes, and a few people sent along versions of this story, wondering what was going on:

Magnitude-4.1 earthquake strikes Delaware

Initially, some versions of this story were reporting that this quake was felt in Baltimore and regions of southeastern Pennsylvania. When I received these articles about this quake (or quakes), I was curious, but wasn't inclined to blog about it. To be sure, earthquakes in Delaware, Maryland, or Pennsylvania are not a very common phenomenon. One does not think of that region as being earthquake prone; if one asks "What regions of the USA are most associated with earthquakes?" one won't get "Baltimore" or "Trenton" or "Philadelphia" as the answer. Los Angeles, San Franciso, or even Portland or Seattle, yes; Baltimore, Trenton, Philadelphia, no.

If one thinks about it, however, there has been an increase in earthquake activity in regions of the country not normally associated with it, and even in regions where earthquakes are known - the lower plains states for example - this activity has been written off to the increased oil fracking. As a be-all and end-all model, however, the fracking explanation wouldn't seem to hold for Delaware!

Then, Mr. V.T. sent along this article, and things just became much more interesting:

Earth's Rotation Is Mysteriously Slowing Down: Experts Predict Uptick In 2018 Earthquakes

Slowing rotation in the Earth caught my eye, as one might imagine!  According to this Forbes article, this slowing rotation is part of a cycle:

Geophysicists are able to measure the rotational speed of Earth extremely precisely, calculating slight variations on the order of milliseconds. Now, scientists believe a slowdown of the Earth's rotation is the link to an observed cyclical increase in earthquakes.

To start, the research team of geologists analyzed every earthquake to occur since 1900 at a magnitude above 7.0. They were looking for trends in the occurrence of large earthquakes. What they found is that roughly every 32 years there was an uptick in the number of significant earthquakes worldwide.

The team was puzzled as to the root cause of this cyclicity in earthquake rate. They compared it with a number of global historical datasets and found only one that showed a strong correlation with the uptick in earthquakes. That correlation was to the slowing down of Earth's rotation. Specifically, the team noted that around every 25-30 years Earth's rotation began to slow down and that slowdown happened just before the uptick in earthquakes. The slowing rotation historically has lasted for 5 years, with the last year triggering an increase in earthquakes.

"OK... that seems sound," I thought. After all, every physical system one can think of has either a wave-form or a rotation as one of its components. And cycles of speeding up and slowing down rotation combines features of both, for a cycle is nothing but a wave form.

However, at this juncture, three important questions occur, and you've probably already thought of them: (1) is the amplitude of this rotational cycle itself declining over time, that is, is the Earth's rotation really gradually slowing down?  and (2) in either case, what accounts for this slowing down-speeding up cycle, whether or not the amplitude is declining over time? and finally (3) what role, if any, might phase play in all of this?

Needless to say, the Forbes article asks these questions, or rather, conflates these questions into one, and gives a typically closed-system and, quite frankly, fumbling sort of answer:

What Is Causing Earth's Rotation To Slow Down?

As with many new findings in science, this story began with the data that supports the cyclical slowdown then speed up of Earth's rotation. The research team is then tasked with the "why" to explain this phenomenon. While scientists aren't exactly sure the mechanisms that produce this variation, there are a few hypotheses.

One hypothesis involves Earth's outer core, a liquid metal layer of the planet that circulates underneath the solid lower mantle. The thought is that the outer core can at times "stick" to the mantle, causing a disruption in its flow. This would alter Earth's magnetic field and produce a temporary hiccup in Earth's rotation.

Currently, the data only notes a striking correlation, but no causation.

Molten stuff "sticking" to the mantle and thus slowing down the rotation of molten metal that creates the Earth's magnetic field? Note that while this sounds like an explanation, it really isn't. "Sticking" implies "cooling", and "cooling" implies slowed motion. So we're simply thrown back on the fundamental question by a carefully-disguised bit of circular reasoning: what is causing this rotational slowdown to begin with?  And why would it appear in historically correlated cycles (wave forms) of about 32 years?  What other waves have a phase of 32 years? Well, for one thing, a 32 year phase is about three times the 11 year phase of the sunspot cycle. And that, I suspect, is a clue: the cycle one is looking at might be correlated to several other cycles of a fundamentally electromagnetic nature. Is there a relationship? If so, then it would show up as "modulated information" in that 32-year rotational cycle. And if it does, that's another indicator of the interrelated dynamics of open systems.

Which leads to the high octane speculation and the real question. When Mr. V.T. and others began sending this "slowdown" story to me, some people asked whether this meant an overall slowdown over time, and a fewer still asked if this "slowdown" was accelerating suddenly in the last few years. Certainly some versions of the story made it sound that way though there wasn't much in the various articles that I saw by way of any data, and that gave me pause. And perhaps, I thought, if there was such data, it may be being suppressed.

After all, what could cause some of that molten magma - whirling around beneath us in that gigantic electro-dynamo that is the rotation of planet Earth - to "slow down" and "stick" to the mantle?  I had to throw out the "sticking-cooling-slowing" model implied by the Forbes article, and get back to basics: for that electrically dynamic magna to "stick" to the mantle means that the "sticking" isn't a general phenomenon but a localized one that has generalized effects.

So what could cause it to "stick" and thus slow down, and in slowing down, to cause a weakening in the magnetic field that it both produces and which, to some extent, contains it? If the sticking is localized, then it requires - here it comes - a very strong localized magnetic field somewhere above that rotating magma, either in the mantle...

...or on the crust.

Something like the hadron collider, with its big magnetic fields. And if that's the case, it might be changing the phase of that 32 cycle of rotational slowdowns, a cycle that might be correlated and couple to that sunspot cycle.

And of course, when one plays with rotations and cycles, one is playing with the very things that denote systems state changes, or time... and if one wants to play with time, it's best to do so - if one wants to observe results in the macrocosm - with a large open system...

Kardashev scale. "Farrell corollaries: the ability to engineer systems of a certain scale precedes the need for energy on that very same scale."  Rotational cycles... rolling up the heavens like a curtain...

Class one: planets.

Class two: stars...

See you on the flips side...



    1. Well, if I employ as above so below. The earths magnetic field being tampered with (in harmony with a long wave) and “they” manage to strike a resonance with a nearby celestial object (also in a cycle with a long wave) might I employ the Plasma Pinch phenomenon to our entire planet? That being an enormous discharge along the axis of rotation generating a temporary toroid magnetic field around the equatorial region drawing that region towards the axis and if the discharge being of sufficient magnitude, switching the polarity of the planet (North to South and vice versa). Of course if the magnitude of the discharge is way more than sufficient, “they” may create an asteroid belt.

  1. Dr. Farrell: what do you think of the particle accelerator that is being built in Lead, South Dakota, in that old abandoned gold mine? A.I. guru Quinn Michaels is very, very concerned about this. He feels that they are playing with toys that can “crack the crust” … and somehow there is a blockchain connection to the work being done by ALL the particle accelerators.

    And might all of this be connected to whatever is going on in Antarctica?

  2. Well I hate to state the obvious but the LHC has not been around long enough to create the cyclical anomaly that reportedly has been observed. It would have to have been around for at least one cycle (32 years) and preferably two, so that there are enough data points to confirm that the cycle — which is measured in milliseconds — indeed exists. And such accurate measurements only became possible in the 1960s with the advent of computers and atomic clocks.

    So clearly the LHC, whatever it might be doing, is not creating this anomaly. I did read but don’t understand how it ended up being imputed the cause, and I would much more believe that the extremely small periodic slowing is due to some undiscovered or unrecognized astronomical influence rather than something so eye-rollingly sophomoric as the proposition that the mantle is periodically getting sticky.

    As a pertinent aside, in Presence of the Past, Rupert Sheldrake noted that the value of the speed of light, the so-called “universal constant” has been periodically revised over the years to keep its official value accurate with observations. When he discovered this, he rang the scientist charged with verifying C and asked him if it was true that the value this universal constant fluctuates over time? Sheepishly, the Keeper of C admitted that the universal constant did indeed fluctuate. Sheldrake then asked him, So why then is it called a constant?

        1. When the field completely flips, the north and the south magnetic poles swap places. Remembering an old plot of magnetic-reversals within lava flows alongside the mid-Atlantic Ridge, they are near-random.
          “Such reversals, recorded in the magnetism of ancient rocks, are unpredictable. They come at irregular intervals averaging about 300,000 years; the last one was 780,000 years ago.”

          Since they are non-periodic – and given the immense timescales – the ’cause’ could be anything – from molten mixtures to solar mega-flares to ‘nearby’ supernova effects to ancient warfare(s). We just don’t know…

    1. nice one basta.

      rb, you’re talking about the sun’s poles flipping right? and how that effects the earth’s poles? given the maunder minima thang, the sun is due and looking like it’s a bout to flip right?

      if memory serves the gravity centric universe corporate science folk have it that the flips take a long time. decades back they talked centuries and then it came down to decades. hearing lately that number is still declining.

      electric universe theory put such occurences in the past and probably the future as slightly quicker – which splains some of the wooly mammoths preserved under tons of ice with fresh green clover in their mouths. sounds like in some electro-mag models, the rotation can also flip sometimes. which might splain some deluvian myths that might not be so mythy.

      does anyone else remember the end of childhood’s end where the last generation of human kids go all autistic/telekinetic and slow then reverse the earth’s rotation?

      1. ZDB,
        That’s what I enjoy about this site – the high octane speculation signature that’s expressed as Dr. Farrell entertains various in-the-news articles and what may lie behind/hidden it; and subsequently, by those herein reading same.
        So I threw out an out-of-the-box concept of the sun having a polar cycle as well.
        Then you, subsequently caught it and tossed it around.

        The only Childhoods End I’m familiar with is Author C Clarke’s book. It’s ending, and Kubrick’s 2001, are both project evolutionary scenarios in regards to the mankind/universe interface[for lack of a better word].

  3. From the Forbes article: “…this story began with the data that supports the cyclical slowdown then speed up of Earth’s rotation.”

    (First, one has to take into account that Forbes – being a large, mainstream magazine – is probably owned or administered by the PTB. As such, it prints only what it has been ‘instructed’ to print, for whatever unstated purpose.)

    Within the above quote, it appears that we are looking at just a local conservation-of-energy cycle. If the Earth were slowing-down, period, the energy would have been bled-off and departed the local area. Since it is stated that there is a ‘recovery’ in rotational speed (note that the quote is slightly ambiguous, since it does not state that there is a ‘full’ recovery of rotational speed), this has to be yet-another unrecognized ‘cycle’ within nature – like the carbon cycle or the water cycle or the Ice Age cycle.

    “Specifically, the team noted that around every 25-30 years Earth’s rotation began to slow down…”
    30 years is way to slow for anything tectonic. I would suggest something ‘orbital’…

    NASA uses close-passes of planets by spacecraft to speed-up or slow-down said craft. Passing-ahead slows-down and passing-behind speeds-up, if I remember correctly. What is left unmentioned is that the planet itself speeds-up or slows-down (and maybe torques-up or torques-down) by an infinitesimal amount.

    What if some semi-massive but unseen ‘object’ is orbiting the Earth in a highly-elliptical manner? Passing-ahead might torque-up and passing-behind might torque-down our Earth (or the reverse, if I remembered the effect backwards). Within a complete 30-year orbit, the total energy is conserved. Wax-on, wax-off…

    And, increased earthquakes might be more of a gravitational-field ‘shear effect’ during this passage than anything related to the (gradual) rotation change.

    This leaves, of course, the ‘type’ of matter or energy or whatever making-up the unseen Companion…

    1. Sorry: “Within a complete 60-year orbit, the total energy is conserved.” 30-years spun-up, 30-years spun-down.

      (Also, the Companion would have to be significantly out-of the ecliptic-plane to not intersect Mars or the Tiamat remains. Over geologic time, the gravitational influences of the planets on the Companion would mostly cancel-out, leaving it in roughly in the same orbit.)

    2. (And actually, with “every 25-30 years Earth’s rotation began to slow down,” this statement could be interpreted as a 30-year full orbit. I would have to look at the data to see which is true.)

      1. goshawks, throw some electromagnetic force into those equations. isn’t it 1 times 10 to the 32nd times stronger than gravity? loved that link foglamp sent.

  4. Having studied astrology, the first thing that comes to my mind is Saturn. It has a solar orbital “year” of 26-30 Earth years, and that fits rather well with the cycle mentioned. Saturn has significant gravitational influence in the solar system.

    An RCA engineer did a study in the 1950s which also correlated certain planetary positions and geometric relationships between planets with difficulties in transmitting radio signals at certain frequencies, and I would not be surprised if this is related.

    The folks over at Suspicious Observers are now up to between 70 and 80 percent accuracy in predicting earthquakes using various kinds of solar activity, which can also be related to various planetary arrangements.

    I think the Electric Universe folks are on the right track.

    1. yep. dutchsinse has been getting a bit better results and quite a bit more specific with timing and placement. suspicious observers has worthy takes on the macro view of the how the sun’s (and the rest of the solar system) are doing it. dutch is much better at seeing the pattern of results and predicting the follow along results.

  5. ”Ludvig Lundin sends this report of a spectacular Sun halo display, with a 22° halo, parhelic circle, sundogs and a tangent arc as well as 44° parhelia (sundogs) and 46° halo, in Vemdalen, Sweden today, Dec 1 – thank you.”

  6. Allegedly, when we crossed the Galactic Plane (2012) we entered into a denser area of space, where Ether, Dark Matter, etc was of a higher density and all sorts of weird stuff not explained by our current version of Physics were allegedly going to happen. Hence, the Mayan Calendar warning. Of those occurrences, a returning Ice Age and the shifting of wx patterns was one of the most interesting.
    I’ve been watching the USGS earthquake page for ~25 yrs. About 5 years ago, I had to turn the period down from 1 day to 1 week to track EQ’s. . That’s how much more seismic activity there is. And let’s not forget the record amounts of terrestrial and undersea volcanism driving the new Ice Age cycle.

  7. Why the (alleged) slowdown? What a wonderful scientific (or pseudo-scientific?) conundrum. Media pages are bursting with headlines with the opening “Scientists say….” and you fill in the blank.
    I’m still waiting for this one: “Scientists say that eating a big mac makes some people get fat, but are still not sure why…”

  8. First Tesla gets w/the bankster and you’ve got Earth being used in Tunguska.
    Now they’re playing with dimensional energies of “our” sun?
    Prey tell, these wanna b gods are rolling some fixed magnetized dice that aren’t going to play nice on a galactic crap shoot.

    1. Do these “breakaways” know the wherefore of the geology/astrology key[s] for unlocking these buried energies within the surmised ancient alien sun dimension/treasures? Was something recently uncovered to assist placing missing piece; or, has some trail and error process hit the jackpot? Is this rotation some tell tale sign of success?
      Or, is it just a crap shoot.

Comments are closed.