Possible electrical scars on Planet Earth...

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by webolife » Sun May 18, 2008 1:30 pm

So, nick, are you postulating "EDM only" as the mechanism for the Grand Canyon, or allowing for a combination of events (incl EDM) as one of the creative/destructive factors? JL's view of the water/earth interface as a double layer suggests to me two different cause/effect scenarios with the same underlying principles and geometry at work, more akin, though not identical, to my view.
If EDM only, how do you account for some alleged EDMs resulting in raised features, while others are carved? Not denying, just want to know.
We both quite agree regarding uniformitarianism as a philosophical underpinning of modern modern science (both "modern"s intended).
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by webolife » Sun May 18, 2008 1:33 pm

kevin, a bit too startrekky for me. I think you are confusing mass with matter?
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by webolife » Sun May 18, 2008 1:38 pm

Grey Cloud, I believe you are referring to the fractal nature of the lichtenberg pattern?
Interesting to me that the fractal valleys would have to be formed virtually simultaneously at all scales. This is what makes the widespread flood scenario and the "thunderbolt" scenario both work, as I see it.
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.

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by kevin » Sun May 18, 2008 1:53 pm

Webolife,
Whats the matter with using mass?
It's all just a question of density?
I have lots of that, dense-ity
K.I.S.S, as I am somewhat simple, I naturally keep it that way.
The present oceans could have been formed by the same dissolvement of matter, and the result may be water?
If the dissolvement back into space stays here rather than transferring back out into space, then the resultant alchemist transfusion may be back into base elements, mainly hydrogen and oxygen etc?
Then you would have a sudden total flood of the surface , slowly again transmuting into denser matter, until a revolving cycle of events strikes again, and converts vast areas back into base elements again.
Whats the matter with that?
Spock, nee Kevin

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Sun May 18, 2008 2:27 pm

Hi Kevin,
My turn to bite :D
The present oceans could have been formed by the same dissolvement of matter, and the result may be water?
If the dissolvement back into space stays here rather than transferring back out into space, then the resultant alchemist transfusion may be back into base elements, mainly hydrogen and oxygen etc?
Are you talking about the transmutation from the gross to the subtle? If so, then would not plasma be the 'fire' ? That is to say, wouldn't the plasma bolt be the catalyst which causes the transmution?
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Sun May 18, 2008 2:41 pm

webolife wrote:Grey Cloud, I believe you are referring to the fractal nature of the lichtenberg pattern?
Interesting to me that the fractal valleys would have to be formed virtually simultaneously at all scales. This is what makes the widespread flood scenario and the "thunderbolt" scenario both work, as I see it.
Yep, fractals, Fibonacci, Sacred Geometry.
Not sure that they would be formed 'virtually simultaneously' though. In the flood scenario the main thrust of the initial blast of water would carve out the main canyon, then over time, as the flooded area drained off into it the side branches would be formed. The assume the same pattern because that's the way Nature does it.
In the thunderbolt scenario, I'm not sure how the smaller ones are formed given the proposed size/power of the main bolt. Do these things have 'side-shoots' (for want of a better expression) around the main bolt?
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.

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by kevin » Sun May 18, 2008 3:16 pm

Grey Cloud,
Just wrote a lengthy reply to you and its gone off into the aether?
Yes the stuff ( plasma ) will be the fire.
Imagine the ionosphere been punctured by a sudden attraction of opposite charge towards it.
That would momenterilly open an hole into which the vast pressure of negative space would rush into and be attracted to the positive surface area of the earth ( biefeld-brown )
Balance will be the key to matter holding ( binding together) if a vast sudden flow of just one of those opposites occurs at a point along the surface area, it will break the bindings of what we think of as matter.
A sort of nuclear explosion will occur as the compressed and coalesced opposites break free and return to their origonal form, STUFF.
The increased pressure inside the zone below the ionosphere will result in base elements forming quickly, eventually they will coalesce and compress again into denser matter, but first of water will increase.
Creation is the capacitor plates of the earth and ionosphere acting in biefeld brown fashion of the incoming negative been attracted to the positive plate at the surface, therefore all creation occurs at the surface, wherever that surface is, even under water.
gravity will be this attraction, and will be local to the field about all formed matter, us included.
IMHO
Kevin

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Sun May 18, 2008 4:09 pm

Kevin
Thanks for that. I think I got it but will have a think about it. It might be one for Rangerover777 as it's a bit techy for me and still a bit star trekky for Webolife. :lol:

As for losing your post, either use the save button or write em up in notepad first ;)
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by nick c » Sun May 18, 2008 5:59 pm

Hi Webolife,
So, nick, are you postulating "EDM only" as the mechanism for the Grand Canyon, or allowing for a combination of events (incl EDM) as one of the creative/destructive factors?
Well, what I was saying in my post, is that I subscribe to the postulation in the holoscience link:
http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_mars.htm
that, the Grand Canyon is but one of many sinuous rilles in the solar system. Sinuous rilles appear on bodies that don't have water as well as those that do, so water is not necessary to explain their appearance. That being said, differences between worlds such as the presence of water, atmosphere, geology, etc. would modify the results in some manner. Furthermore, consideration of the conditions necessary to produce such a massive discharge, would require planet sized bodies in close quarters (touching plasmaspheres.) I would think that there would be all sorts of effects and their combinations...gravitational, tidal, electrical; resulting in movements and distortions of the hydrosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere: earthquakes, erupting volcanos, enormous tides, rains of hot stones, hurricanes, etc. etc...Pick your poison! Making the Earth not a happy place.
If EDM only, how do you account for some alleged EDMs resulting in raised features, while others are carved? Not denying, just want to know.
Here are some of the TPOD's summarizing the idea of (EDM) uplifting:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... gthree.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... oliths.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... oliths.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/ ... agonia.htm
In my own backyard we have a formation, West Rock in New Haven, Connecticut, which I have thought may be one of these raised features?
Here is a beautiful painting of it by the great 19th C landscape artist, Frederick Church, though the area is presently not quite so rustic.
http://www.nbmaa.org/Gallery_htmls/church.html#

Nick

rangerover777
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 7:28 pm

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by rangerover777 » Sun May 18, 2008 8:43 pm

Thanks for interesting suggestions about the formation of the Grand Canyon.

Here are some observations from looking at pictures of the Grand Canyon :
http://www.soultones.com/canyon/canyon5_LG.jpg

1. Obviously there is not so much soil erosion from rock and soil slides.
Also once there is a slide, from one cliff to the flat soil below (there are almost
no flat lands left anymore), the slide create a slope, and any other
future slide will slide over the old one or push part of it down. In other words,
almost any amount of soil that will slide from any “shelve” will go down and
washed by the Colorado river, or winter side streams.

2. Now the whole region is made of layers that somehow were eroded over the years
to create this magnificent vista. Some happen due to the wind, rain, streaming water
and maybe trapped water within the rocks, that when become ice, it cracked the rocks.
But this is maybe 5% - 10% of what we are looking at today.

3. I think the greatest question is what happen in “phase I” (and maybe Phase II) to the
Grand Canyon ? If it was a glacier, the bottom would be much more flat and the side
cliffs were much more smooth and the curves of the canyon would be much more round.
I think it answered for the cataclysmic flowing of water or debris from a volcano eruption,
in the same way.

4. One thing that caught my attention is the vertical forces that came from below :
http://www.bobspixels.com/kaibab.org/ge ... _stair.htm
(vertical scale has been heavily exaggerated - in this scheme)
It look as it was a platu before phase I, that was pushed up from below. Now, if
the lift was done by a relatively narrow area from below, the fracture of the canyon
would look like a V-shape (like in the link above). But if it was wide enough pressing
field from below, then the two sides of the canyon would spread apart (they are almost
matching like North America to Africa), as they look today and a deeper layer of earth
crust will emerge between them. All the small cliffs in the middle, the “islands” and the
deeper vertical cracks that goes along the canyon that were pushed up from below.
http://i.pbase.com/o4/64/345764/1/61792 ... G_0959.JPG

5. Another interesting point is that if it was pushed from below, cracks across
the bottom of the canyon are likely to appear, in different crossing angles (not only
along the canyon) and many “triangulars” like you see today would emerge.

6. I tend to believe that the three key elements are :
- The shape of the field that was pushing from below.
- The layers of this region, that cause it to crack in this beautiful characteristic way.
- The pressure was not equal all along the canyon.

7. Ways to put this theory to test :
- Measure the yearly lift in 40 different locations.
- Simulate this process in a laboratory.
- Test soil samples of 500 locations and try “To Close Up” the puzzle like when it use
to be a plateau.
- Same way (close it up), but instead of soil and rock samples, use the layers angles
and elevations only (can be easily done with computer).

This is only my opinion.

Cheers

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Mon May 19, 2008 12:49 pm

Okay. What about combining Kevin's idea with Rangerover's?
If the interaction between the surface and the ionosphere takes place, what happens to gravity in the local area? Would it go into neutral (for want of a better phrase)?
If so, would there be any pressure from below (or expansion) as the 'weight' of gravity was removed? I suppose that would depend on the time scale involved?
Add to this a good scouring by the thunderbolt which would do its thing.

Random question: What happens if one of these thunderbolt things strikes open water, e.g. the sea? Would it fizzle out, diffuse its charge or what?
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by webolife » Mon May 19, 2008 2:22 pm

RR777,
I agree wholeheartedly that any explanation of the Grand Canyon must include the uplift of the Kaibab Plateau of the north rim. Uplifting, tectonic activity, whatever its cause, will accompanied by faulting and rifting, as in the Grand Canyon. I believe the uplift carried a large amount of water, represented by lake bottom and ancient shoreline features that extend eastward in Arizona and northward into Utah. This uplifted floodplain thereby gained the potential energy needed to erode the canyon relatively quickly in my view. Where the sediments of the canyon originated has also to be explained, again evoking images of large bodies of water flowing over the region. The specific arrangements of major strata in the canyon by particle size evidences deep water flowing, rather than sitting still for eons of time while particles slowly precipitated. Vortices within this massive water current are responsible for many features (potholes, etc.) that can be seen throughout the canyon. At several places in the strata basalt lava flowed over previously deposited material, then was overlain was additional sediments. The basalt flows evidence again the "vertical" forces involved.
Kevin,
I acknowledge the electric universe, just have many questions about the effects of EDMs.
Your dowsing analogs bother me a bit, but I suppose mostly due to ignorance on my part.
I will keep listening.
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.

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

Re: Geology - cosmetics corrections

Unread post by webolife » Mon May 19, 2008 3:16 pm

Sorry, I don't get any of that.
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.

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

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Mon May 19, 2008 3:57 pm

And while we are at it, what about the Great Rift Valley?
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.

rangerover777
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 7:28 pm

Re: Grand Canyon formation

Unread post by rangerover777 » Wed May 21, 2008 11:08 am

Thanks guys for being so consistent on the Grand Canyon formation.
It was quit a surprise how small subject remained focused for so
many posts without deviation. Though we still not there yet, but I learned
from you and hope you did the same from others as well.

I keep saying that one of the things I like about EU is that they say that
they go back in time from observation to conclusions without based on
existing theories. Now in the case of the Grand Canyon, this method seems
to work at best. All is needed is to do the right tests (and do them well),
then you have a “footage” or raw matter to refine and make conclusions.

Now if my theory is right (the uplift one with the broken layers), there should
be no sediments at the end of the Colorado river, except for the for the
creek were the river trenched down (maybe 70 ft. - 200 ft.) over the years.
And the Grand Canyon would look very similar to how it look today, even
without the Colorado river.

By the way, if you go on Google-Earth, the resolution of the Grand Canyon
is unbelievable fantastic. So it’s a great source. While you are there, pay attention
to the difference between the flowing water section (the Colorado river and up
100 ft. or so) and the rest of the formation - there is no way on earth that the
Grand Canyon would be formed by any type of flowing liquids !!!

About the EU approach to that matter http://www.holoscience.com/views/view_mars.htm
I agree that on Mars, same as here, there is a misconception about the rivers like formations
which maybe some of them used to carry liquids in the past, though the majority, is due to
a different phenomena.

Now if I understood it well, EU claims that these formations could be due to “electrical arc scars”
which creates similar imprint on the ground (correct me if I’m wrong). This theory seems ok in
First glance, though it raises some questions :

1. Lightning scares have an impact point on the ground and from there it spread out. In other
words, it creates circle or ½ circles or rounded shape imprints, but the geological
formations we are dealing with, are elongated, curving, or shaped without ant geometric
shape (like a tree branches for instance).

2. I don’t believe that lightning can dig down a formation like that Grand Canyon. For many
reasons :
- Assuming lighting could “trench” an imprint. Multiple lightning that occur in the
same region will erode each other formation. So you could not see a sharp sinuous
channels and cliffs formations. It would look much more “dull” and rounded…
- If lightning excavate the ground all the channels will steep down to the hardest point
hits and if later on liquids will poured in, it will create a very strange looking lake…
- Where all this matter go ? How can billions of tons can evaporated ?

3. I’m wondering if someone in EU sat down to calculate the amount of energy
require to evaporate the Grand Canyon or other formations in planets and moons.
and when such an energy is being release as a lighting, can’t we observed in real
time such an event ? After all many of the rocky planets and moons have similar
formations, so this lighting should happen very often…

4. Isn’t it obvious that in many of these formations (not all of them), the amount
of matter sunk down equal to the amount of matter raised up ?


Sorry that I don’t agree with EU about this theory. But it sound as they decided that
everything in the universe happen electrically, then no matter what the phenomena is,
they will stubbornly stick to their model in order to explain it. I don’t think in this
case they follow their theme “going back in time from observations to conclusions” (which
is a very nice method of exploring…).

But maybe I missed something, so someone can explain.

Also, I still don’t understand why the simple explanation of vertical force acting from
below and cracking the crust, cannot be account for these formations (maybe someone
Can explain that as well).

Cheers

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests