…Uhm…British Scientists Are Looking For WHAT In…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 9, 2017

If you’ve been following the strangeness in Antarctica, you can add some more strangeness, and this ranges from a completely unsubstantiated rumor, which we’ll get to in a moment, to something that is a little more than… well, creepy, which will be the subject of our trademark High Octane Speculation de jour.

So let’s look at the unsubstantiated rumor. When Ms. K.F. sent this to me, I looked at the subject header, and said out loud to my empty office, “You’ve got to be kidding!” I clicked on the link and found this:

Now, I have no idea where this story is coming from, and in the limited time I’ve had to do various searches for it, I’ve not been able to find exactly where – if anywhere – this is coming from. So, I’m filing this in the “Unsubstantiated But Definitely Interesting Rumor” file. Normally I wouldn’t even mention something like this, other than for the fact that of all the strange, and on occasion weird, people on the “People Associated with Antarctica List,” Newt Gingrich would certainly fit right in there with Rudolf Hess, Hermann Goering, Richard Byrd, King Juan Carlos, Prince Harry, Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin, Secretary of State John Kerry, and the Patriarch of Moscow, Kiril III. (Our only advice to Mr. Gingrich is that if he really is intending to go look at penguins and study climate change, that he take Nancy Pelosi and John McCain with him, and leave them there.)  But seriously, even if this is unsubstantiated rumor, consider only what this very bizarre list adds up to:

1)  The Reichsleiter of the Nazi Party until 1941 (Hess);

2) The founder and head of the Luftwaffe and founder of the Gestapo (Goering);

3) An American admiral and arctic explorer;

4) The King of Spain;

5) A British Prince;

6) The chief diplomat of the USA in the final months of the Obama administration;

7) A Christian hierarch and head of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Add Mr. Gingrich and one has “Former Speaker of the American House of Representatives” and former candidate for President.

(And this is all supposed to be about climate change? Sorry, I’m not getting the connection between Hermann Goering, Rudolf Hess and climate change, thank you very much.)

Boil that list down and you have representatives of (1) militaries (2) intelligence agencies (3) royalty (4) politics (5) International diplomacy (6) space programs and (7) religion. Hmmm…

Turning from the “Unsubstantiated But Definitely Interesting Rumor” file to something much more substantial (and shared by many here), we discover that scientists in Great Britain want to go there to…. well, read it for yourself:

FROZEN IN TIME British scientists to lead hunt for fragments of ‘dead planets’ hidden in Antarctica

After I picked my jaw up off the floor after having read this, my first thought was, “Gee, isn’t it interesting what people will do once they vote to BREXIT and get out from underneath Mad Madame Merkel’s thumb and are free to do their own thing?” Why, the first thing they want to do is go to Antarctica to look for “the remains of these ancient proto-planets (which) will allow us to understand conditions in the early years of our Solar System.” Now, these are all perfectly respectable British scientists, and there is of course a perfectly respectable British and typically scientific  “low key” explanation for all this:

Mathematician Dr Geoffrey Evatt will lead the expedition, which will set off in 2020.

He believes Antarctica could be hiding vast numbers of “missing iron meteorites”.

He said: “We now have the opportunity to commence on a truly exciting scientific adventure. If successful, our expeditions will help scientists to decode the origins of the Solar System and cement the UK as a leader in meteoritics and planetary science.”

Wot!?!? You mean the United Kingdom is not a leader in meteoritics?!?

Now the reader probably detected a heavy note of sarcasm in my remarks (unless of course, they’re a recent product of the American educational system, where the word “sarcasm” will remain a deep, profound, and Inscrutable Mystery). And that brings me to my high octane speculation de jour, for it sounds an awfully lot like what these British scientists might be looking for is confirmation of the late 18th-early 19th century astronomical theory that the asteroid belt is the remains of an exploded planet that blew up aeons ago, a theory which was revived by the late US Naval astronomer Dr. Tom Van Flandern. Now the interesting thing about Dr. Van Flandern, if you’ve read his book (Dark Matter, Missing Planets, and New Comets), or if you’ve read my summary of it in my book (The Cosmic War: Interplanetary Warfare, Modern Physics, and Ancient Texts), is that he proposed a number of models as to why that missing planet suddenly blew up. One of his proposals was that a sort of natural fission reactor in the core of the planet -and yes there are such things as natural fission reactors, or at least, scientists think there could be – suddenly went critical, and kablooey, the planet blew up. But in reading Dr. Van Flandern’s book, you can tell that he isn’t very taken with that idea. After all, that would require a very BIG natural fission reactor, and that’s problematic for a whole host of reasons we don’t have time to get into here. Then he proposed another natural model: suppose, he said, there was a great accumulation of anti-matter somehow in the core of the planet, that was contained, but that the containment broke down, the anti-matter came into contact with matter and, again, kablooey, it blew up. That too, you can tell he was not to thrilled with, because, as a scientist, he knew that the matter/anti-matter anisotropy phenomenon was hugely problematic, as was the idea that somehow, a natural containment was fashioned to contain enough anti-matter to cause a planet to blow up, not to mention the idea that, once having proposed such a natural containment mechanism, it then somehow broke down. The natural explanations had too many ifs, and he wasn’t considering too carefully that idea of collisions with other celestial bodies, because that too had its problematic elements.

So then Dr. Van Flandern came – somewhat reluctantly – to the idea that it was caused by some sort of “technological accident”, say, perhaps (though he does not say this) that they built their large hadron collider just a little too big, and slammed one too many God particles into one too many anti-God particles. And then, finally, he comes right out and says what I suspect he may have been thinking all along, or at least entertaining the idea for the sake of “completeness” in hypotheses, namely, that the planet was blown up  – in his words – by “deliberate action,” in other words, in an act of war. And that, of course, implies a technology of weapons of mass destruction capable of doing so. And of course, if one is blowing up planets with such technologies in an act of war, then that implies that the planet itself may have been home to intelligent life, was a belligerent in that war, and at a similar pitch of technological and warmaking capability.

…and that implies that maybe, just maybe, by dint of some fluke of chance, or by dint of that very high pitch of technological development itself, that some sliver or slivers of that technology might have survived, to be recognizeable and recoverable in meteorites…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

NASA, Trump & Space Exploration

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
November 17, 2016

As I’ve noted over the past few days, sorting through all the stories and op-ed pieces out there about what the policies of President-elect Trump’s administration might look like has been immensely difficult. Many of these have had to do with geopolitical implications, and indeed, I’ve been focused on some of these the past few days, both in blogs and in interviews and videos.

However, there’s one very significant story that I’ve not heard mentioned very much, and that concerns Mr. Trump’s place and leanings for space, and given that space is one of the things we concentrate on here, I would be remiss not to address it. This very important story was found by Mr. V.T., who shared it with us:

Trump’s NASA Transition Team: “Goal is Human Exploration of Our Entire Solar System”

Consider the implications of these paragraphs from the article:

Donald Trump’s space advisers want his space program to focus more on human deep space exploration and less on researching the Earth and climate science. And the emerging commercial spaceflight industry will play a significant role in space policy moving forward.

In a recent op-ed in Space News, written by Robert S. Walker, former chairman of the House Science Committee and Peter Navarro, an economist and public policy expert suggested that “NASA should be focused primarily on deep space activities rather than Earth-centric work that is better handled by other agencies. Human exploration of our entire Solar System by the end of this century should be NASA’s focus and goal.”“We laid out our vision to have human exploration of the entire Solar System by the end of the century,” Walker told The Verge. “That certainly includes the Moon and Mars and well beyond most of those.”

Walker, who wrote Trump’s proposed space policy, says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association should take over all of NASA’s satellite missions that are used to research Earth and its climate.

“The science that is being doing is essentially Earth-based science,” Walker told The Verge. “It relates to weather; it relates to Earth-based needs. And so NOAA is probably a more appropriate place for that to be done.”

This policy move could restructure NASA’s Earth Science division, which has seen a relatively steady increase in funding under the Obama administration.

Walker and Navarro made it clear that strong public-private partnerships like that with SpaceX, tasked with ferrying people and cargo to and from the International Space Station, will continue, and that they will seek to turn the International Space Station into a “quasi-public facility” — something NASA has expressed interest in doing for some time. (Emphasis added)

So in other words, during a Trump administration, one can look for (1) a restructuring of NASA, spinning off Earth-climate sciences to other agencies, leaving NASA free to pursue deep space missions, (2) an increase and expansion of cooperation and development of space technologies and assets between NASA and private corporations, and (3) perhaps an official declaration from Trump of some sort of “Mars by-such-and-such a date” statement, similar to President Kennedy’s announcement of landing on the Moon and safely returning humans from it, as part of a public declaration of focus or vision for the space agency to concentrate on manned deep space missions.

So where’s the high octane speculation in all of this? For some time I’ve been arguing that the decentralizing political movements that we see emerging on Earth might lead Mr. Globaloney to change strategy, from imposing a top down solution on Earth from Earth, to basing that operation in space itself. To this end, I’ve also argued for some time that as part of those post-World War Two era financial deals that established a large system of hidden finance, that the major financial powers and banks were talked into this arrangement perhaps by the secret collateralization of space assets, including whatever “ancient technologies” might be found out there. I’ve argued that the current pushing of the meme of space “commercialization” tends to support my prior analysis in this respect.

Similarly, I’ve advanced the notion that one might see the re-emergence of the “sovereign corporations” of colonial development of yesteryear, space-based versions – as it were – of the Dutch or British East India Companies. My reasons for advancing this on-the-surface wild hypothesis is not only that this would fulfill the obligations of that possible secret collateralization of space that I’ve been arguing, but also because these companies undertook the obligation to defend their commercial interests, and indeed, were expected to do so. This led to the British and Dutch East India Companies in effect having their own militaries, their own soldiers, forts, cannons, and warships. Doing this in a kind of “Space Indies Company” would apparently circumvent existing space treaties prohibiting the militarization of space by the signatory powers. But the last time I looked…

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
______________________________________________________________

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

This Ancient Sumerian Cylinder Seal is said to depict 12 planets in our Solar System

VA243
Source: Ancient-Code.com
August 22, 2016

One of the most controversial seals ever discovered and discussed among scholars is dubbed VA/243 and seems to depict –accoridng to many—12 planets within our Solar System with the Sun at its center.

The Seal which dates back –at least- from the third millennium B.C. can be found at the State Museum in Easter Berlin and is cataloged as VA/243.

According to numerous researchers, this ancient Akkadian Cylinder Seal is one of the most ancient cylinder seals ever discovered and appears to be one of the most mysterious as well.

The reason? Well, it allegedly depicts the entire family of our Solar System and a rogue planet identified by authors such as Sitchin as Planet X, or Nibiru, home planet of the Ancient Anunnaki.

Zecharia Sitchin discusses the cylinder seal with great detail in his book the 12th Planet.

According to Sitchin, the cylinder seal undoubtedly depicts our solar system with the numerous heavenly bodies and their relative size.

There are nine planets we know of today, –if of course you still think Pluto should be a planet and not a dwarf planet— our moon, the Sun, and a rogue planet commonly referred to as Nibiru.

This interpretation by Sitchin has led towards a great number of criticism and as Michael S. Heiser indicates, the symbol depicted on the cylinder seal Va/234 is not the sun but a star.

According to Heiser, the alleged planets identified by Sitchin are not planets but other stars.

Heiser further argues that there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the Sumerians had knowledge of more than five planets in out solar system.


Heiser indicates three main things in his study:

1)  The inscription on the seal says nothing about astronomy, Nibiru, or planets.

2)  The alleged “sun” symbol on the seal is not the sun.  We know this for sure because it does not conform to the consistent depiction / symbology of the sun on hundreds of other cylinder seals, monuments, and pieces of Summer-Mesopotamian art.

3)  There is not a single text in any extant Summer-Mesopotamian text that says the Sumerians or Mesopotamians knew of more than five planets.  There are a number of cuneiform tablets that deal with astronomy, all of which have been compiled and published.  These sources are accessible to the reader but at varying levels of difficulty.


Now this has made me think about both sides of the story, what Sitchin offers as an explanation and what a scholar like Michael S. Heiser has to say.

First of all, I am not saying that I believe any of them is correct in their interpretations, I am just forming my own little opinion.

The curious depictions on the Sumerian cylinder seal are fascinating. I find it extremely interesting that the creator of the seal decided to place a huge star (which resembles the sun) at the center, surrounded by other celestial bodies.

Even though Heiser argues that the star in the middle inst our star, but another star, I wonder why the creator of the seal did not depict the other stars (according to Heiser) just as he depicted the one in the middle?

Also, I wonder why the size of the star in the middle is represented as a larger body compared to the other celestial bodies.

Also, if all of the celestial bodies are stars as Heiser indicates, then why is the one in the middle depicted differently with characteristics eerily reminiscent of rays coming out of it?

Are these characteristics just another coincidence?

Or is it possible that we are missing something in this story?

However, if the mysterious objects depicted on the cylinder seal are in fact planets, how is it possible that the ancient Sumerians knew about our complete solar system in the 3rd millennium BC?

Not only that but how did they know their approximate size?

This leads to other questions like… where did the Sumerians obtain this knowledge from?

Did they develop it independently?

Or is it possible as many ancient cultures suggest, that some of that knowledge was passed on to them by ‘gods’ who came down from heaven and brought vast knowledge to man?

Does this ancient Sumerian Cylinder Seal depict the Solar System with all of its planets including Nibiru as Sitchin indicates?

Or is it possible that authors such as Michael S. Heiser are correct, and that the cylinder seal does not have any astronomical value and DOES NOT depict our solar system, planets, the moon, nor the sun?

There are other questions which must be raised when looking at the cylinder seal. For example, would a cylinder seal be the ‘appropriate’ medium by which someone —4,5000 years ago— would transmit such important astronomical knowledge?

What do you think?

Read More At: Ancient-Code.com


Source:

http://www.sitchin.com/teapot.htm

http://www.michaelsheiser.com/va_243%20page.htm

__________________________________________________________________

Ivan
Ivan is a freelance writer, editor-in-chief of ancient-code.com, he also writes for EWAO, Share Knowledge, Svemir Online and Ancient Origins.

History, Archaeology, Space and world’s mysteries are some of the topics he writes about.

New Planet? Planet 9 – Secret, dark world could be hiding in our solar system

Source: Independent.co.uk
Andrew Griffin
January 20, 2016

A huge planet might be sitting at the edge of our solar system without ever being seen.

The world — which could be about ten times as massive as Earth — would be large enough to become the ninth planet of our solar system.

The planet hasn’t yet been seen by scientists. Instead, they have found it by watching the way that dwarf planets and other objects in the outer solar system move — their orbits seem to be disturbed by something huge but hidden sitting out there.

“If there’s going to be another planet in the solar system, I think this is it,” Greg Laughlin of the University of California, Santa Cruz told National Geographic. “It would be quite extraordinary if we had one. Fingers crossed. It would be amazing.”

If the planet exists, it is thought to be about ten times as massive or three times as large as Earth. That sort of sized planet occurs throughout the universe — but has been an obvious omission from our own.

“This would be a real ninth planet,” says Brown, the Richard and Barbara Rosenberg Professor of Planetary Astronomy. “There have only been two true planets discovered since ancient times, and this would be a third. It’s a pretty substantial chunk of our solar system that’s still out there to be found, which is pretty exciting.”

It would be around 200 to 300 times as far away from the sun is when it gets closest to the star, scientists say. It will spend some of its time as much as four times as far away as that, and an entire orbit of the sun probably takes about 20,000 years.

Continue Reading Independent.co.uk