How do you think heaven and earth?

[JaJa]

Hi John

The Bible contains a good deal of relevant information with regard to catastrophes and other occurrences.

And is it information that corresponds with empirical evidence otherwise what is the difference of looking in the bible for evidence of Jesus Christ. It seems kind of strange to look at the bible (the defining Holy Book) from a scientific view-point and accept writings about catastrophe but in the same breath reject the rest of it as religious bunk. What are your views on that?

Velikovsky wrote a paper on this subject and suggested that a series of simple Bolometric measurements be carried out to prove his case ref 'Is Venus' Heat Decreasing' (1966)
In fact Velikovsky describes this as a 'crucial test' of his theory.

I'm inclined to believe that this has most likely been established and swept under the carpet. Then surely if Venus cools eventually she might form at atmosphere like Earth's?

The other 'gas giants' also display similar properties by their own nature, so something it seems, appears to be 'brewing'.

Do you mean as in the appearance of Jupiters electrical aurora's, is this a relatively recent phenomenon, or is it we have only just had the technology to "see" what has already been there for some time. I'm curious what you mean by "brewing"?

Sorry for all the questions, I appear to be using like a library at the moment

Thanx

JJ

[JohnMT]

Hi JJ,

And is it information that corresponds with empirical evidence otherwise what is the difference of looking in the bible for evidence of Jesus Christ. It seems kind of strange to look at the bible (the defining Holy Book) from a scientific view-point and accept writings about catastrophe but in the same breath reject the rest of it as religious bunk. What are your views on that?

First off, the Bible is NOT a scientific treatise.
However, it is a good source of information to enquire of as to what actually happened during various cosmic and geological occurrences such as the 'Great Flood', the 'Exodus', the 'Sun and Moon 'standing still', the 'Sun going up by 10 degress and then retreating backwards', the 'demise of Sennacherib's army' where 185,000 warriors were killed overnight...and with their garments intact?, the 'destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah' etc.
As you know, Velikovsky wrote about these events and much more in 'Worlds in Collision'...and subsequent publications.
Secondly and more importantly, Jesus Christ is the key to the Bible.
I say this because there is not a chapter in either the Old or New Testament in which you will not find Him spoken about, prophesied of, or foreshadowed.
That to me is an amazing fact.
As to some who reject the rest of the Bible as being 'religious bunk' (not yourself, because you admit to not having read the Bible), well that is their choice.
If such persons believe the Bible NOT to be true, then why do they spend so much of their precious time in rediculing it and trying to persuade others not to read or believe it.

I wrote:
"Velikovsky wrote a paper on this subject and suggested that a series of simple Bolometric measurements be carried out to prove his case ref 'Is Venus' Heat Decreasing' (1966)
In fact Velikovsky describes this as a 'crucial test' of his theory.

You replied:

I'm inclined to believe that this has most likely been established and swept under the carpet. Then surely if Venus cools eventually she might form at atmosphere like Earth's?

Quite possible.
Also, there is no 'runaway greenhouse effect' on Venus.
The planet is simply just cooling down, 'poco a poco' (little by little)

I wrote:
"The other 'gas giants' also display similar properties by their own nature, so something it seems, appears to be 'brewing'.

You replied:

Do you mean as in the appearance of Jupiters electrical aurora's, is this a relatively recent phenomenon, or is it we have only just had the technology to "see" what has already been there for some time. I'm curious what you mean by "brewing"?

By 'brewing', I used the word loosely to represent a possible future parturition event.
Whereas all the planets are now evenly spaced from each other (Bodes Law?), following the recent bouts of catastrophes, the so-called 'gas giants' all remain to be in various states of utter turmoil!
So maybe within one of these giant planets various pressures/densities/electrical stress etc might be reaching potentially explosive proportions.

There does certainly seem to be a connection between the fairly recent increase in auroral activity on all the planets (not just Jupiter) and the current behaviour of the Sun (still at minimum)
Perhaps it has something to do with an increased influx of interstellar electrons/cosmic rays etc intended for the Sun and that the planets are usurping this energy by abnormal amounts.
I'm sure others on this site could elaborate more.

Sorry for all the questions, I appear to be using like a library at the moment

No problem.
It is quite refreshing to get the old grey matter working, though of course I certainly do not know it all.

Cheers.

[JaJa]

Hi John

First off, the Bible is NOT a scientific treatise.

I agree. But like you say its a great source for information. It sounds like any EU enthusiast could draw much from it to support catastrophe etc, but like I said, to draw support in one area would also mean one couldn't really dismiss Jesus Christ in the other. Your quite right I don't think the bible is 'bunk', I just remember it being incredibly hard to read, plus I don't believe in the religious take on God - I think if anything, Jesus was most likely someone that had figured life out (completely)

If such persons believe the Bible NOT to be true, then why do they spend so much of their precious time in rediculing it and trying to persuade others not to read or believe it.

If the bible was a written record of those times, which recorded catastrophe's that actually took place, one has to seriously consider who Jesus actually was - and why the PTB got rid of him?

There does certainly seem to be a connection between the fairly recent increase in auroral activity on all the planets (not just Jupiter) and the current behaviour of the Sun (still at minimum)
Perhaps it has something to do with an increased influx of interstellar electrons/cosmic rays etc intended for the Sun and that the planets are usurping this energy by abnormal amounts.

Yes I have read that planets were heating up - does that include Venus, as that goes against what was previously stated. I read one of Wal Thornhills articles "electric sun verified". Has it been confirmed then that there is an inflow of electrons into the sun?

It is quite refreshing to get the old grey matter working, though of course I certainly do not know it all

You know a great deal more than I because I am a student of philosophy... the taboo of modern science

JJ

[JohnMT]

Hi JJ,

Your quite right I don't think the bible is 'bunk', I just remember it being incredibly hard to read, plus I don't believe in the religious take on God - I think if anything, Jesus was most likely someone that had figured life out (completely)

Though we are discussing Biblical matters somewhat, I still think we are on track within the topic of this thread.
I agree with you, the Bible can be a very hard read, which is probably why in the initial attempt, many people don't get much beyond Exodus (at least this applied to me in the early days).
In order to overcome this difficulty, I searched around for a suitable 'Commentary' on the Bible and eventually found the works of Dr. Basil Atkinson, which are quite up-to-date and therefore recent.
Other good commentaries are by Mathew Henry and Charles Spurgeon.
Such commentaries truly are enlightening and at the end of the day, I can say to anyone in confidence that I have read the Bible in its completeness and each reading reveals more than before.

If the bible was a written record of those times, which recorded catastrophe's that actually took place, one has to seriously consider who Jesus actually was - and why the PTB got rid of him?

Like I said in an earlier post, Jesus is the key to the Bible.
The PTB of those times, the Jews, obviously did not understand what the Prophets had said.
Jesus declared to the Jews that the Scriptures referred to Him and that if they did not believe what Moses wrote, they could not believe what He said.
He also said that before Abraham was, I AM
This was an extraordinary claim to Divinity, which is why the crowd attempted to stone him.
Later claims ultimately led to His crucifixion...and Scripture was thus fulfilled.

Yes I have read that planets were heating up - does that include Venus, as that goes against what was previously stated. I read one of Wal Thornhills articles "electric sun verified". Has it been confirmed then that there is an inflow of electrons into the sun?

Certainly their auroral displays have increased, but their real heat sources lie deep within each planet.
In this context then, all planets give out more heat than they receive from the Sun.
Venus is in the process of cooling down, therefore it gives off much more heat than it receives from the Sun.

As yet and in my understanding, there has been no confirmation as to an actual inflow of electrons into the Sun.
The main reason is that to date, a suitable probe/satellite has not been specifically designed and launched in order to detect them.
Such electrons move at a 'slow drift' and would be very difficult to detect by any probe moving through them at great speed.

You know a great deal more than I because I am a student of philosophy... the taboo of modern science

Perhaps because my student days were over long ago, though I am always learning.
Best of luck in your pursuit of the subject that makes simple things much more complicated
A bit like mainstream astronomy if you will

Cheers.

[JaJa]

Hi John

Not wishing to get into a bible discussion, although very interesting I admit;

The main reason is that to date, a suitable probe/satellite has not been specifically designed and launched in order to detect them. Such electrons move at a 'slow drift' and would be very difficult to detect by any probe moving through them at great speed.

From where and how and through/along what are the electrons flowing towards the sun, electron behaviour is erratic and formed by collisions isn't it - would that mean a potential difference is being applied to the electrons to create a field that will direct them towards the Sun (it being positive). Rather than look for electron flows wouldn't it be easier to detect regions of space that had higher voltage - could have that totally wrong off course but then I'm not an electrical engineer/physicist

Best of luck in your pursuit of the subject that makes simple things much more complicated
A bit like mainstream astronomy if you will

Thanx. That might be true of philosophy and science in general but I adhere to the idea that sense can be found in simplicity

JJ

[JohnMT]

Hi JJ,

I wrote:
"The main reason is that to date, a suitable probe/satellite has not been specifically designed and launched in order to detect them. Such electrons move at a 'slow drift' and would be very difficult to detect by any probe moving through them at great speed.

You replied:

From where and how and through/along what are the electrons flowing towards the sun, electron behaviour is erratic and formed by collisions isn't it - would that mean a potential difference is being applied to the electrons to create a field that will direct them towards the Sun (it being positive). Rather than look for electron flows wouldn't it be easier to detect regions of space that had higher voltage - could have that totally wrong off course but then I'm not an electrical engineer/physicist

In short, these electrons/cosmic rays etc that power the Sun are 'spent carriers' from other stellar objects within the vicinity of our local interstellar neighbourhood that form a cathode drop at the Sun's heliosphere measured in billions of electron volts.

Perhaps the best way to answer your questions and to save on time, is to quote a few excerpts from Wal Thornhill's site 'Twinkle electric star' ref:
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=x49g6gsf ie:

A star is a pinpoint object at the center of a vast plasma sheath. The plasma sheath forms the boundary of the electrical influence of the star, where it meets the electrical environment of the galaxy. The Sun’s plasma sheath, or ‘heliosphere’ is about 100 times more distant than the Earth is from the Sun. To give an idea of the immensity of the heliosphere, all of the stars in the Milky Way could fit inside a sphere encompassed by the orbit of Pluto. The Sun’s heliosphere could accommodate the stars from 8 Milky Ways!

Clearly, in the immense volume of the heliosphere an unmeasurably small drift of electrons toward the Sun and ions away from the Sun (the solar wind) can satisfy the electrical power required to light the Sun. It is only when we get very close to the Sun that the current density becomes appreciable and plasma discharge effects become visible. The enigma of the Sun’s millions-of-degrees corona above a relatively ‘stone cold’ photosphere is immediately solved when the Sun’s power comes from the galaxy and not the center of the Sun!

and, in respect of "...regions of space that had higher voltage -"

the 'neon light' analogy:

Electric lights come in a wide variety. There are the original incandescent filament lamps where the light comes from a filament heated internally by electric current. And today we have fluorescent lights, high-intensity gas discharge lamps, arc lights, neon lights and solid-state light emitting diodes (LEDs).

the explanation:

Stars fall into the categories of neon lights, gas discharge lamps and arc lights. They are not incandescent (heated from within). The main differences between these types of lights are the power density of the discharge and the location in the gas discharge path where most of the light comes from. For example, in a neon tube the light comes from the extensive plasma column between the electrodes at each end of the tube. In an arc light, the light is concentrated at the electrode. As the power of an arc light is increased its color changes from yellow-white to white to blue-white. The sharp discontinuities in the nature of the light from an electric discharge as it switches from a red glow to a bright arc explain many of the mysteries of starlight.

(Click on the 'H-R diagram' on Wal's site to get the overall interpretation.)

It seems then that voltage intensity will vary according to the strengths and/or weaknesses of the pervading Birkeland Current within a particular area of galactic space.
As the current density varies, so will the electrical stress on that particular star also vary, hence giving birth to 'white dwarfs', 'red giants', hot blue stars, cool red dwarfs etc or even 'mainstream yellow stars' like our Sun.
So basically, stars act and behave (as a discharge phenomenon) according to their local environment (which generally speaking, is huge!) and which is determined by the Birkeland Current/s within.
That is my brief take on the subject.

For your further information, the following papers by Ralph Juergens might be of interest:

Electric Discharge as the Source of Solar Radiant Energy (Part I) ref:
http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/k0 ... tric-i.htm

and,

Electric Discharge as the Source of Solar Radiant Energy (Concluded) ref:
http://www.kronos-press.com/juergens/k0 ... ric-ii.htm

I am sure this subject has been discussed perhaps several times on this site, but I couldn't find the appropriate refs to answer your questions.
Trust your questions are now sufficiently answered.
(Pity no-one else has chimed in)

Thanx. That might be true of philosophy and science in general but I adhere to the idea that sense can be found in simplicity

Occam's razor?

Cheers

[JaJa]

Hi John

Thanx for the info and links and for taking the time to respond - where all others (for some reason) wish to steer clear, I like what Mr Thornhill writes, and the way in which he presents his work - you have certainly helped generate an abundance of questions in my Mind but we would really be going off topic on the thread if I off-loaded onto you.

As for Occams razor - I do believe a great many people are under the illusion that complexity is cool or clever. I find this very bizarre

JJ

[JohnMT]

Hi JJ,

Thanks for your kind remarks.
My reference to others chiming in was meant as a means of correction, in case I deviated somewhat from EU principles.
I am always open to constructive criticism on matters such as these.

Anyway, during our recent exchanges no-one did 'chime in' so I guess on this occasion I was more or less correct in my assertions.

you have certainly helped generate an abundance of questions in my Mind but we would really be going off topic on the thread if I off-loaded onto you.

Well, I'm glad about that, for I am always willing to be of some assistance, but of course we must stay on Topic, which I think we have done within the confines of its title.
Like youself, virtually every meeting I have attended over the years, has later generated more questions in my mind than I could think of at the time of such gatherings.

I note your comment on Occam's razor.

Cheers

[JaJa]

Hi John

In an attempt to keep the thread going and I was trawling for information.

Found @ http://www.christianityboard.com

Joshua 10:12–14

“Sun, stand still at Gibeon, and moon, in the Valley of Aijalon.”
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies"

Greek Mythology - Ovid. Metamorphoses

"The chariot of the sun moved 'no longer in the same course as before.' The horses 'break loose from their course' and 'rush aimlessly, knocking against the stars set deep in the sky and snatching the chariot along through uncharted ways. The constellations of the cold Bears tried to plunge into the forbidden sea, and the suns chariot roamed...as a useless ship driven before the headlong blast, whose pilot has let the rudder go and abandoned the ship to the gods.."

Egyptian Mythology - Plato. Timaeus

Solon - On his visit to Egypt, questioned the priests on early history and lore was told '.... in truth, the story that is told in your country as well as ours, how once upon a time Phaethon, son of Helios, yoked his fathers chariot, and, because he was unable to drive it along the course taken by his father, burnt up all that was upon the earth and himself perished in a thunderbolt - that story, as it is told, has the fashion of a legend, but the truth of it lies in the occurrence of a shifting of the bodies in the heavens which move around the earth, and a destruction of things on the earth...'.

Notice these myths on the other side of the planet had no sun ->

Sahagun - The Spanish savant who came to America a generation Columbus and gathered the traditions of the natives, wrote that at the time of one cosmic catastrophe the sun rose only a little way over the horizon and remained there without moving: the moon also stood still.

The Andeans record a myth-story that the sun stayed away for twenty hours. This event is said to have occurred under the reign of Yupanqui Pachacuti II, the fifteenth ruler of the old time.

In the Mexican 'Annals of Cuauhtitlan' or 'Codex Chimpalpopoca' - the history of the empire in Culhuacan and Mexico, written in Nahua-Indian in the sixteenth century - it is related that during a cosmic catastrophe that occurred in the remote past, the night did not end for an extended period of time.

Immanuel Velikovsky’s “Worlds in Collision.” If Joshua’s long day (not “missing” day) occurred—and of course I believe that it did—then we would expect its effects to show up in the historical records of other nations, and that is exactly what we find.

http://www.ancient-w...m#sunstoodfirst
http://israelite.inf...-mythology.html
http://bible.org/que...-scientifically

There is a entire "world" of myth out there

Not sure how reliable Wikipedia is, I have often seen it ridiculed on this forum for its bias towards the main-stream but was looking for a chronology of catastrophic events - some interesting stuff on floods...

Beginning with the Sumerian creation myth, the epic of Gilamesh, Noah's flood... (are these different interpretations of the same event because I thought I Noah's flood happened around 4500BC???)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

So... from an EU point of view, what would have caused the earth to stop spinning - I assume the earth would have stopped spinning for one side of the planet to be in an elongated period of darkness, or was it that the sun was extinguished for a period of time?

That would have been totally nuts!!!

JJ

[mrjacquel]

Hi JaJa (first off, sorry for the delayed response),

On this I agree. I have to get past the boundaries of Immanuel Kant as well as my own self-imposed limitations in order to transcend subjectively and objectively set perceptions and conceptions. I don’t think the Mind is incapable of experiencing knowledge of the ultimate reality, I believe we dip in and out of it all the time. When I consider this experience of reality I consider there to be two states-of-Mind based on a simple principle.

We have to be choosey about our words here. You're absolutely on the right track, though. I don't think the mind is incapable of experiencing knowledge of ultimate reality, either. I do, however, believe that the mind is incapable of graspining intellectually the nature of ultimate reality. It is very important to emphasize that word. According to Dr. Pierre Grimes, metaphysics is a study of rendering intelligible a realm beyond ordinary experience. It's my position that intelligibility only extends to a certain point, after which we can only experience ultimate reality (in the most unadulterated sense) but not have any comprehensible, intelligible understanding of it that can be directly (indirectly yes, directly no) referenced or communicated to our fellow seekers and inquirers. Once again I'm trying to be very picky about my words here. As an aside, I think that being clear about what we think and say helps to avoid unneccessary misinterpretations and debate which is why I find it so important. I like to use my time wisely.

This is where ALL ideas, thoughts and inspirations come from imho, this universal sea of everything, perhaps this explains why we resonate so much with each others thoughts and ideas, because they are unfolding from the same source. We all have ideas, we all think, we all have moments of inspiration. I can look at that and say this happens to me seperately from everyone else, or I can look at that and say I am rooted in one universal subconscious from which all thought and inspiration unfolds.

Very nice. It's the religious and the spiritualists and "new agers" who project amateurish and elementary spiritual ideas onto this ultimate, unknowable realm, populating it with endless divinities - angels, demons, gods, goddesses. It seems they just never left us once they emerged in the premature stages of the philosophizing of our species.

[mrjacquel]

I will add too that what we need in this world are more thinkers like yourself - who, without necessarily renouncing some kind of greater, ultimate reality or realm - do reject personifications of forces and invented personal deities as what they are: immature forms of false consolation and projections of human-like will and intent; conscious beings that think, make decisions and interfere with natural affairs. Even the Buddha was skeptical of the existence of these things, adding that if they did exist, they were subject to the same sorts of delusions, attachments and sufferings of us mere mortals - much like the temperamental Olympian gods.

[JohnMT]

Hi JJ,

I don't mind to keep going on (as time allows)

Thanks for those interesting quotes and links.

Beginning with the Sumerian creation myth, the epic of Gilamesh, Noah's flood... (are these different interpretations of the same event because I thought I Noah's flood happened around 4500BC???)

In short and IMO, you are right on all counts.

I have a book 'The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications' by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris (1961) which contains lot of convincing info that says the Flood did actually occur and that it was a world-wide phenomenon.
From my angle, I wonder as to where all that water came from.
The depths of the Earth or a 'flare-up' of Saturn?

That the Flood or Deluge occurred around 4,500 BC is about right in my view.

So... from an EU point of view, what would have caused the earth to stop spinning - I assume the earth would have stopped spinning for one side of the planet to be in an elongated period of darkness, or was it that the sun was extinguished for a period of time?

I am not too sure what the official EU point of view might be on this question.

Anyway, I have yet another book 'The Reversing Earth' by Peter Warlow (and he signed my copy)
There is a lot of good info contained within particularly as Peter Warlow is a Research Physicist.

In an excerpt from the 'Summary' of his book he writes:

"If a large body, of comparable mass to the Earth itself, sails past within a reasonable distance, it will exert a gravitational pull on the Earth. Because the Earth is not perfectly round, that pull will be uneven and it will exert a torque - a turning force - which can tilt the body of the Earth, and under some circumstances it could cause the Earth to turn over completely. Whilst this action is occurring, the spin of the Earth continues and, throughout an inversion, it continues in the same direction. Examination of the consequences of this action shows that this particular action satisfies all of the requirements. The Earth is turned upside down - which produces an apparent inversion of the stars; the geographic poles are changed, but the geomagnetic remain where they were - which produces the apparent reversal of the magnetic field; and the combination of an upside down body with an unchanged spin produces the apparent reversal of the motionn of the Sun."

So, as Warlow says, the spin of the Earth is unaffected.

Of course there is much more, but that is the gist of it.

For further info on this subject, you might find time to read Chap 4 from 'The Lately Tortured Earth' by Alfred de Grazia ref http://www.grazian-archive.com/quantavo ... rth_04.htm.

Again as I said in an earlier post, this is a Big subject.

Happy reading,

Cheers.

[GaryN]

So, as Warlow says, the spin of the Earth is unaffected.

That seems logical, you can't just stop the Earth spinning, it would have
to tear itself apart to account for the inertial energy. Miles Mathis
has the answer with his charge field (new paper at http://milesmathis.com/charge3.html)
equations. I'd need a globe to try and reproduce the motion, maintaining the spin
and applying tilt over the time period deduced from legend. Inertial sloshing of
the oceans would cause the floods, while I believe the water for the rains was produced
electrically.

From my angle, I wonder as to where all that water came from.

In South Africa I was witness to a tiny, toroidal cloud, in an otherwise
empty, clear blue sky, produce the most amazingly heavy rain and bolts of lightning.
I'm hoping I can find the 2 images I did manage to capture of the event in my old
35mm slide collection, will get them scanned if I do.
The 4500 BC estimate is probably correct, but that to me is quite worrying, for if
my belief in 4 such events over the 26,000 year great year is true, then we are due
for another such event any time now.
I'll check out the de Grazia link, maybe I should have read it before replying to
your post?

[flyingcloud]

actually bacteria is

From a fractal perspective flyingcloud aren't we bacteria?

JJ

some of us

[JaJa]

Hi Flyingcloud

some of us

Is that some of us are fractals... or some of us are bacteria

JJ