CATASTROPHISM AND ANCIENT HISTORY
VOLUME XIII Part 1
A Journal Of Interdisciplinary Study
Marvin Arnold Luckerman
(A Crustal Deformation Theory) by
DONALD W. PATTEN and SAMUEL R. WINDSOR
Astronomers, geographers, geologists and others search for theory that addresses the causation of mountains. Mountain ranges, mountain systems, mountain cycles, volcanoes, and basaltic outflows all cast shadows over a culture unable to explain their existence. The origin of mountain ranges, mountain systems, volcanoes, etc., comes under the general term “crustal deformation”. Other like terms are “mountain uplifts,” and “orogeny ”
Most of the ideas suggested for crustal deformation over the last 150 years offer explanation for only one type of deformation They cannot address the variety on our planet These crustal deformations include upthrust, shear, stress, compression, tension, tilting, dip or slip, and riding. Even of greater importance is the basic underlying question, “What is the source of the energy and force causing change?”
The following ideas have been advanced over the years, sometimes only tentatively, other times with more conviction (alphabetically):
Convection currents of magma;
Planetary Contraction (and crustal shortening);
Planetary Expansion (and crustal stretching);
Polar wandering (and Equator bulge relocation)
Each of the above theories assumes the presence of only one important planetary gravitational field, the Earth’s. Of course, there is the Moon, which creates a twice daily crustal tide of up to 1.5 inches in addition, the Sun creates a twice daily crustal life of up to 1. 5 inches But the Moon is too small and the Sun is too distant to explain mountain uplifting. When working together they can create a crustal tide of only 4. 5 inches
A Common feature of these theories is their dependence upon “gradualism. ” In the parlance of geology, the dogma of gradualism is called “Uniformitarianism. ” This eight syllable word embraces the idea of millions of years for accomplishing anything involving crustal deformation. Explanations based on gradualism always omit rigorous force and stress analysis.
Close flybys of the planet Mars created on the Earth the following phenomena:
IMMENSE SUBCRUSTAL TIDES OF MAGMA (of 6 hour duration);
Immense oceanic tides, flooding continents;
Earth spin axis “precessions” causing spin axis shifts;
Recharges of the Earth’s geomagnetic field strength;
Paleomagnetic polarity reversals;
Orbit perturbations or ”warps” for both Earth and Mars;
Meteor-type impacts on Earth (since Mars had a rocky ring system, of which only Deimos and Phobos survive).
This essay addresses primarily the first topic above, immense Subcrustal Tides of 6 hour Duration. Geographically, the primary zone of action (and damage) was hemispheric, that is, the side of the Earth facing Mars, although other secondary effects were global in scope.
Our model of the Mars-Earth Wars extends geographical techniques to astronomical scenes, well beyond the Earth’s surface, including to the orbit and to the surface of Mars. Figure I illustrates our model in astronomy.
1. Mass of Mars. Mars is 11 percent of Earth’s mass.
2. Geometry and Harmony. In our model, Mars, when close, always made an ”inside flyby,” that is, it followed a path between the Earth and the Sun . The Moon was always at or near full, and it was away from the path of Mars. (Inside flybys by an outer planet, in celestial mechanics, result in orbit warps for both planets that tend to be mutually self perpetuating .)
3. Relative velocity. Mars approached and passed the Earth-Moon system at a velocity of 28,000 mph. (This means that flyby upthrusts and general damage occurred in a timeframe of under 250 minutes, not tens of millions of years.)
4. Orbit crossroads placed in space. Each flyby distance of Mars varied, because the planets Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune warped the orbit of Mars in various directions and amounts from flyby to flyby. Thus, these three planets altered the place in space where the two orbits intersected. They could alter the orbit crossing place and the flyby distance by an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 miles.
5. Resonance slot. In the Catastrophic Era, the Earth had a 92.25-million mile orbit radius, not today’s 93.0 million miles. (This “slot” in space puts the Earth’s orbit in a 12:1 orbit timing resonance with Jupiter and a 30:1 resonance with Saturn, also 85:1 with Uranus. This explains the 360 day (not 365 day) ancient year and ancient calendar; 360 day calendars were the norm in ancient societies.
6. Orbit Hot Spot. The closest point in a planet’s orbit to the Sun is its “perihelion” (Greek, peri = near, helios = Sun). Mars had a perihelion of 66 million miles in our model, and thus its perihelion was well inside Venus’ orbit space.
7. Orbit Cold Spot. The remotest point in a planet’s orbit to the Sun is its ”aphelion”
(Greek, ap = far from). Mars had a 225-million mile aphelion and when there, Mars penetrated well into the region of asteroids.
8. Paired Orbit intersections. Since the orbits of Mars and the Earth are, and were, coplanar, there were two orbit intersection locations, not one. One orbit enossroads was October 24 and the other was March 21, the historic Passover of Judaism. Early Romans of the 5th century B.C. called March 21 their ”tubulustrium” (day of trouble), and they called October 24 their “armilustrium” (day of alarms). The early Hebrews called October 24 “The Day of the Lord,” very much dreaded, like their Passover.
9. Mars Orbit Period. The orbit of Mars required 720 days, while one orbit of the Earth required 360 days in the Catastrophic Era. In addition, the Moon’s orbit at that time was 30 days, not the modern 29.54 days. This means the Moon, too, was in orbital resonance with Mars at 24:1.
10. Alternating Geometries. Close Mars flybys alternated between the ascending intersection (October 24) and the descending (March 20-21) crossroads. Close flybys rocked back and forth in 108-year cycles, like a rocking chair. This has several implications, one of which is that Mars, in sequential flybys, tortured the Earth’s Eastern and Western Hemispheres alternately.
Figure I illustrates our model of the catastrophic orbit of Mars. Mars began a rounding-out process, and Mars achieved its modern orbit in a few decades. The Earth’s orbit changed, or expanded, from a 360 day to a 365.25-day regime. The orbit of Mars contracted from a 720-day orbit to the modern 687 day orbit. Reciprocally, the Earth’s orbit expanded. Energy was conserved, as was angular momentum. Nevertheless, both Venus and Jupiter were involved in the energy/angular momentum exchanges.1
We cite the observations and conclusions of two elder statesmen of the last generation, Richard Hartshorne, a geographer, and Adrian Shheidegger, a geophysicist.
To sum up, it is almost inevitable to admit that the physiographic evidence regarding features on the Earth’s surface is such that it must be assumed that some parts of the Earth’s crust have been subject to compression (crustal shortening), others have been subject to tensions (mid ocean rifts) and yet others to shearing (fracture zones) 2
Most theories have been proposed for the purpose of explaining only one of these features and are therefore inadequate with regard to the others. A theory of orogenesis to be acceptable must be flexible enough to allow for compression tension and shear of sufficient magnitude to be produced in the Earth’s crust. . . 3 [emphasis added]
Is one to understand that minimal progress has been made over the last 150 years in arriving at an understanding of why mountain systems have been upthrust? To be certain we have caught Hartshorne’s appraisal, we quote him again: 4
To the extent that the geomorphologist is primarily concerned to use landforms as the means of studying geologic processes or determining stages in geologic history, his explanatory description, as Kesseli notes, is often “an explanation lacking a description. ” Russell as well as Kesseli concludes that a century of geomorphology, dominated by the purpose of explaining genesis, has failed to produce comprehensive representations of land forms for most areas of the world. Emphasis added]
These are strong words. These and similar protestations that geographers have registered for more than a generation appear to run into a blank wall of dogma. 5 Another elder statesman, this time in geophysics, has some interesting and similar conclusions:
Thus, if the “deformation theory” applying to the Earth were properly defined, it would be, in principle, a straight-forward (though not necessarily an easy) matter to calculate the stresses from the (known) strains and then to look for causes of the latter. Unfortunately, it is a fact that the deformation theory applying to The Earth is not known, thus leaving the matter of finding the causes of its present-day appearance wide open to speculation. 6
More harsh words, but possibly they are an open door for new theory; Scheidegger continues:
It is therefore neeessary to re-examine all theories of orogenesis that have ever been invented, in order to determine what can be saved of them in the light of presently available facts. If this is done, it becomes immediately obvious that something fundamental is wrong with each and every one of the theories . . .7 [emphasis added]
It appears, therefore, that the problem of finding causes of the various geodynamic features must be regarded as still unsolved. 8
In the 1790’s, James Hutton, following Swedenborg and Kant, came up with the idea of gradualism, or “uniformity” in geology. Opposing catastrophism, he wrote:
No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle.
In great error, Hutton viewed the Earth in isolation from the rest of the solar system. In this sense he was an Earth isolationist. He was not concerned with either astronomical data or with catastrophic heritages contained in ancient literatures.
In the 1830’s Charles Lyell popularized the dogma of Hutton. Lyell’s, and Huxley’s, popular “one-liner” became ”The present is the key to the past.” In his Principles of Geology Lyell attempted to define geology as the following:
. . . Principles of geology, being an attempt to explain the former changes of the earth’s surface by reference to causes now in operation. 9 [emphasis added]
Even as early as the 1730’s, in the celestial realm, gradualism, or uniformitarianism, was spawned in the mind of Immanuel Swedenborg, although the term “uniformitarianism” was coined later. Swedenborg’s idea of the nebular hypothesis was accepted and was popularized by Emanuel Kant in 1754. Their concept was that the Sun somehow extruded a cometary tail from which gases cooled and condensed, with the condensation forming the planets, satellites (moons), meteor streams, etc.
Today we know the nebular hypothesis to be theoretically impossible. Further, space missions provide evidence of capture rather than homogeneous formation. We view the planets as ”recent captives,” or as a newly adopted family of the Sun, arriving with pre-existent spin rates, craters, etc. The flaws of the Swedenborg-Kant nebular hypothesis are what we must ultimately confront; our thesis on this subject, “The Catastrophic Origin of the Solar System,” was published in Aeon in 1989. 10
All of the planets are seen as “recent captives,” or an adopted family, of the Sun. The Sun ripped them away, all in one flyby (and all on one ecliptic flyby plane) from another nearby passing body, a dark star. The dark star may be 10 percent as massive as the Sun. Capture of the planets was recent, as astronomical time is measured. We model that among that milieu of planetary captives was Mars, then with an orbit eccentricity (a measure of roundness) of about .55. Its modern roundness is .09 (a circle is .00).
Already possessing a long, narrow orbit, Mars then experienced one more little bump before it fell into its Catastrophic Era orbit, modeled in Fig. I. Once there, in a long, narrow 720-day orbit, Mars made many “inside flybys” and finally executed one “outside flyby,” the Final Flyby. That final event was in the recent past, after which Mars began to assume its modern orbit, a result of the ”slingshot effect” of that outside flyby.
We reject the idea of uniformity in astronomy as well as in geology. The great pioneers of geology like Cuvier, Werner, Agassiz, were catastrophists, They were on the nght track. The gradualists (uniformitarians) are in error. However, the gradualists have come, via Hutton and Lyell, to prevail by political processes, and have succeeded in “selling” the dogma of gradualism for Earth history to scientists as if it were scientific.
The ultimate question here is “Did Mars formerly have an orbit as described in Fig. I or not?” If it did, how close did it come to the Earth? And how often? How cyclic were those occasions? When did the Mars-Earth Wars commence, and when did they cease? Moreover, in performing close flybys, what kind of stamp or imprint would Mars flybys leave on the Earth’s crust? And of further interest, what kind of imprint did flybys of the Earth leave on the crust of Mars?chains of mountains? Volcanic cones? Basaltic outflows? Rift cleavages?
A Great Circle is the name given to a straight line that crosses our planet which ignores both longitude and latitude lines. There are two types of Great Circle patterns: one is formed by pathways that are near at hand, an intercontinental air flight, perhaps. The other involves trajectories that are of astronomical distances and motions.
The most familiar Great Circle pattern for earthlings is the pattern of an airplane flight, perhaps a polar flight such as from Seattle via Greenland to Copenhagen. In this case the body in flight is an airplane, insignificant in mass. It is constantly hovering 5 or 6 miles above the Earth’s surface (except when taking otf and landing). A similar Great Cirele is made by a line of spots on the Earth (the ”subpoints “) directly under the Moon as our planet rotates and as the Moon revolves.
A less familiar Great Circle pattern is one drawn by a series of spots, the series of subpoints directly under a speeding, passing astronomical body, such as the ancient Mars or by a meteor. This type involves several matters, such as (I) the pathway of the astronomical body, in our case the pathway of Mars, (2) its velocity in space, and (3) the Earth’s spin rate during the time span of the flyby. A meteor making a close flyby has insignificant mass, but Mars, with 11 percent of the Earth’s mass, would inflict sudden damage on a global scale.
In a Great Circle pattern made by the subpoints on the Earth directly under Mars, Mars is at first distant, beyond the Moon. Within a few hours the visiting body comes near?perhaps very near. And finally, it recedes back beyond the Moon’s orbit into space. In the case of Mars, its mass was significant. However, its distance was variable, whereas the path of an airplane in flight tends to be constant. Varying distances mean widely varying intensities of damage on the Great Circle paths.
Figure 2 illustrates the belt pattern of the Earth’s two major zones, or belts, of mountain systems. One belt is called the Circum-Pacific Cycle and the other is known as the Alpine-Himalayan Cycle. The Circum-Pacific Cycle could be comprised of uplifts during several close Mars flybys. Those series of mountain uplifts tend to “tail in” to each other, forming one very long string.
But most, if not all of the Alpine Himalayan Cycle is the product of just one Mars flyby, horribly close?the closest of them all?at 14,500 to 15,000 miles distant. Measurement is planet center to center. (Mars has a radius of 2,100 miles and the Earth’s is 3,950 miles.)
Thus, when Mars was that close, the closest surfaces of the two planets would have been 14,500 minus 6,000 miles, or some 8,500 to 9,000 milcs apart. It was a frightening sight?recorded in the flood story of the Epic of Gilgamesh, an Assyrian record on clay tablets discovered in the 19th century.
A series of examples will illustrate the effects involved.
Our first example concerns the nature of bulging on the Earth’s hemisphere facing Mars during the very closest Mars flyby, one with a perigee of 15,000 miles (core to core). Our illustration uses a pear: flat bottom, bulging round middle, and roughly pointed top. The pear shape portrays crustal expansion during a close Mars flyby; Figs. 3 and 4, allowing for exaggeration, illustrate the shape the Earth would assume, very briefly, during a flyby event.
1. The Flat Side. A flat side formed on the dark side of Earth, opposite to both Mars and the Sun. First, during a close flyby the opposite hemisphere would be pulled generally in the direction of the Earth’s core by both the Earth and the visiting Mars on the other side. The crust directly opposite, away from Mars, would be pulled (downward) to the Earth’s core at a force of 100.1047 percent of normal gravitational pull, according to our calculations. Thus the Earth’s bottom side would flatten while its sides would bulge somewhat, much like the pear.
2. On the other hand, the sun-lit ”Facing Hemisphere,” facing both Mars and the Sun, would be pulled inward toward the center of the Earth minus the effect of the gravity of Mars. Mars of course was pulling in the opposite direction of the Earth’s center.
The ”N” and ”U” factors refer to the planets Neplune and Uranus. The orbit of the Earth in the Catastrophic Era was 92.25 million miles in radius. The modern orbit is 93.0 million. As we model it, the orbit of the Earth was 92.25 million miles in radius not the modern 93 million. The ancient year for the Earth was 360 days, not 365 or 365.25. All ancient calendars were based on a 360-day year, calling for the obvious 92.5-million mile Earth orbit radius.
In this ancient orbit the Earth circled the Sun in 12: 1 resonance with Jupiter, in 30:1 resonance with Saturn, and in 85:1 resonance with Uranus. Mars had an orbit of 720 days, in 1:2 resonance with Earth’s orbit. It was a symphony of motion. These ratios also mean the orbit of Mars was in 6:1 resonance with Jupiter and 15:1 resonance with Saturn.
In such a system, orbit warps rocked, back and forth; these warps in astronomy are called perturbations. These oscillating Earth and Mars orbit motions occurred in cycles, much as a rocking chair oscillates back and forth in a rhythm.
Ancient literatures describe close Mars flybys as occurring faithfully at both the October 24 and the March 20-21 locations, with clock-like regularity. Our research includes a precision dating of a series of flybys, catastrophes chronicled in the Old Testament. Our study calls for Mars flybys in 108-year cycles.” However, not all flybys were equally close. Analysis shows that just one in every five flybys (once every 540 years) there was an especially close flyby for each case (March, October).
Thc research of Santillana and Von Deschend agree with our conclusions. They find the numbers “108” and “540” reappear repeatedly in the Vedas of India, in the Germanic Grimnismal, in Egypt, in Angkor of Southeast Asia.
Five hundred gates and forty more are in the mighty building of Walhalla. Shall one add Angkor to the list? It has five gates, and each of them has a road, bridging over that water ditch which surrounds the whole place. Each of these roads is bordered by a row of huge stone figures, 108 per avenue, 54 on each side, altogether 540 statues of Deva and Asura, and each row carries. a huge Naga serpent with nine heads. Only, they do not “carry” that serpent, they are shown to ”pull” it, which indicates that these 540 statues are churning the Milky Way…12
Nine was the number of orbits of Jupiter in the 108-year cycle of catastrophism. Five was the number of close Mars flybys of either case (October or March) in a 540-year great cycle of megacatastrophism. 108 was the number of Earth years between same case events; 54 was the number of years between either case events. 540, the number of Earth years between megacycles, was “the great year” to the ancients.
Again, when one finds numbers like 108, or 9 x 13, reappearing under several multiples in the Vedas, in the temples of Angkor, in Babylon, in Heraclitus’ dark utterances, and in the Norse Valhalla, it is not accidental. 13
That Ogygian Kronos is unmistakably the planet Saturn is not to be overlooked by anyone who reads Plutarch. He describes the “servants” of Kronos who?every 30 years, when Saturn is in Taurus?sail to Ogygia to remain there in service for thirty years. . .14
And just as the Persian Shahs held their royal jubilee festival, after having reigned thirty years (which is the Saturnian revolution), so the Egyptian Pharaoh also celebrated his jubilee after 30 years, true to the “inventor” of this festival, Ptah, who is the Egyptian Saturn. 15
The number 108 is also detected in the Rig Veda with 10,800 stanzas and in the 10,800 bricks of the Indian fire altar, Agnicayana. 16
The modern orbit of Saturn is 29.46 years, not 30. However, if the Earth had an ancient 360 day year, 30 would be the correct year count for Saturn’s orbit. Plutarch’s account, along with Persian and Egyptian festivals for Saturn, specified 30 years, not 29.46 or 29.5 which would be right today. The ancients could count very well.
The orbit of Jupiter is 11.86 years, not 12; however, if the Earth had a 360 day year in ancient times, and a 92.25-million mile radius, 12 years would have been correct for the Jupiter year. Folklorists including James Frazer have recorded tribal traces of Jupiter worship dating back to ancient times involving twelve-year rites. Frazer, for instance, found ancient tribes of India that had?and have?Jupiter festivals every twelfth year.
Saturn, if in a 30: 1 resonance with Earth’s orbit, would have been found in one or the other of only five zodiacal zones during ancient flyby years. Those zones would have been Scorpio, Pisces, Leo, Gemini, and Capricorn, and no others. We know also that in the October flybys the giant Jupiter, in 12:1 resonance, was always in Cancer. When Saturn was 180 degrees opposite from Jupiter, in Capricorn, the two giants caused the maximum warping of Mars’ orbit.
Saturn in Capricorn could warp the Mars orbit 30,000 miles closer to the Earth than Mars’ average pathway (our estimate). This provides a basis for understanding ancient cosmic fears and their tracking of Saturn which is, after all, a rather remote, tiny point of light in the heavens. This 360-day Earth orbit also provides a rationale for tracking Jupiter as well, plus the tracking of Mars across the Milky Way, Moreover, this scenario allows us to understand the reason ancient astrology developed such a widespread grip on ancient cultures.
The perturbing effects of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune on Mars’ orbit varied according to the mass of each planet divided by its distance squared times the time that each planet was in any zodiacal zone. Saturn, for example, was in each zodiac zone 2.5 years (multiply its effect by 2.5). Uranus was in each zodiacal zone For 7. 1 years, and Neptune for 13.5 years. For their influence on Mars, multiply by 7.1 and 13. 5 respectively .
Thus the effect of Uranus was 7.1 times what one would normally expect if merely considering its mass and distance from the ancient catastrophic Mars orbit. Moreover the Neptune effect was 13.5 times what otherwise might be expected. Surprisingly, both planets were significant: it appears that Uranus had 10 percent of the warping potential of Saturn, and Neptune was 9.5 percent as significant a factor as Saturn, even though both may have been nearly invisible for the ancient Chaldeans and Sumerians.
One begins an investigation supposing the orbit-warping effects of Uranus and Neptune can be disregarded, because of their remoteness. The time factor, however, makes them rather significant; one must not make the mistake of figuring orbit warping over just a one-year period.
Add to this the interesting vignette that the ancient Hebrews named their calendar month, roughly our October, “Marchesvan,” for Mars. November was named Kislev (or Kheciyl) for Jupiter. And their December was named Tebat for “the ringed one.” Like the Phoenicians, the Hebrews derived their calendar month names from the Chaldeans. Interestingly, Saturn’s rings are visible only with a telescope (and both the Sumerians and Chaldeans are known to have ground glass for lenses, possibly for astronomical use).
Saturn by itself, could move Mars as much as 30,000 miles to either side of the centerline of its pathway. We view the pathways of the Earth and Mars as roads, and the centerline of the road was the average, not the individual flyby case. Either extreme shoulder of the road could be 30,000 miles from the average.
Similarly, Uranus could shift the orbit of Mars an additional 3,000 miles to either side of the centerline. Neptune could shift Mars’ orbit an additional 2,850 miles if working in alliance with Saturn. Working together, they could potentially shift Mars 5,850 miles in addition to the 30,000 mile Saturn shift.
Saturn was positioned in Capricorn, 180 degrees opposite to Jupiter, in a Mars flyby only once every 540 years. The result was that Mars’ flybys were about 20,000 miles distant, instead of the 50,000 mile average. At 20,000 miles Mars flybys were dangerously close to the threshold of 19,000 to-19,500 miles for crustal bulge ballooning.
Sometimes, Uranus was in alliance with Saturn in Capricorn in a catastrophic flyby year, or perhaps it was in a nearby zone, say Sagittarius or Aquarius, in partial alliance. This happened in 25 percent of the Mars flybys. At other times Neptune was in alliance or partial alliance with Saturn or near Capricorn. If all three (Saturn, Uranus, Neptune) were in Capricorn during a flyby year, the cumulative warping might make Mars’ flyby 5,850 miles even closer than 20,000. Such is the potential in our model as illustrated in Fig. 1.
In 2484 B C., a flyby year, it happens that (a) Saturn, (b) Uranus, and (c) Neptune were in alliance, all in (d) Capricorn, while (e) Jupiter was 180 degrees opposing in (f) Cancer. This combination could occur once every 77,760 (540 x 12 x 12) years. We have made the calculations, using an ephemeris and converting to a 360-day year in 701 B.C. We have also adjusted for the four-year error made by medieval monks in sequencing years. It turns out that the year 2484 B.C. was not only a flyby year, it was a triple alliance year as well.
We suspect, therefore, that the year 2484 B.C. involved the closest flyby ever made by Mars. It was the time when Mars was 15,000 miles from the Earth?conservatively. It might have been the beginning of the end for the Catastrophic Era of the Mars-Earth Wars.
How long did this entire catastrophic scenario last? First, we are not sure; one’s analysis is no better than are his assumptions. An assumption on which there is some consensus is that there were some 170 paleomagnetic polarity reversals, as recorded by ancient suboceanic basaltic outflows. “170”- may or may not be correct, but it will suffice for the present. 17
Our second assumption is that close Mars flybys were the dynamo that created the Earth’s geomagnetic field. We know the geomagnetic field strength in our modern, uniformitarian era is decaying. That decay rate has a half life of 1350 years, a rapid rate by uniformitarian
standards. 18 By deduction then, with Mars’ flybys functioning as ancient generator of the Earth’s geomagnetic field, we can explain the presence of geomagnetism that otherwise would have decayed completely millions of years ago.
Our third assumption is that in the Catastrophic Era Mars had a planetary magnetic field with a strength of about .3 Gauss. Today, the Earth’s geomagnetic field strength has decayed to .3 Gauss and is declining 4 percent per century. This rate should shock a uniformitarian. However, the Earth’s field strength (as mentioned above) is decaying at a rapid pace.
Thus our planet’s magnetic field strength, now .3 Gauss, in 700 B.C., then, was 1.2 Gauss (.3 x 2 x 2). Moreover, our field strength in 4700 A.D. will be .075 Gauss, providing there are no further planet wars. The Earth’s geomagnetic field is its “umbrella, ” a protective plasma against the Sun’s alpha particles. (Some of the Earth’s geomagnetic field?we estimate .01 Gauss?obtains from ongoing lunar and solar tides.)
Geographically, we are certain that during close Mars flybys of the October case, in nearby space the Earth’s Magnetic North Pole united, or coupled, with the Martian South Pole. The result was that for a brief four- or five hour penod there was a tripole field. That tripole field included (a) the Earth’s Magnetic South Pole, (b) the coupled field, Earth’s North and the Martian South “sandwiched” in the middle, and (c) the Martian Magnetic North Pole field on the other outside. (During the March cases the opposite geometrics held.)
In such a scenario in space it is easy to conceive how the Earth’s coupled magnetic field was wrapped and twisted around our planet by Mars as it whipped by at its 28,000 mph velocity. The swishing electrical havoc caused the two magnetic poles to reverse (both planets). Mars flybys were the cause of ancient paleomagnetic polarity reversals, which were cyclic. They alternated, even as the Mars flybys were cyclic and alternated between March and October cases. (This explains how Etruscan pottery can appear to have been fired “south” of the equator.)
The gradualists allege that there were paleomagnetic polarity reversals for “unknown reasons,” averaging one about every 1.5 million years: that is, 250 million years for 170 reversals. They do not understand the unscientific shortcomings of their theory.
What we are not sure of, however, is the strength (and hence the spread in space), the dimensions, and the intensity of the Martian planetary field during the Catastrophic Era. (Our guess is Mars had a planetary field stnength of .3 Gauss.) It could be that a paleomagnetic polarity reversal occurred only when Mars came within 30,000 miles of the Earth, rather than our preferred 90,000 miles. If so, polarity reversals would occur only twice in the 540-year cycle. In that case, the Catastrophic Era would have lasted 46,000 years, rather than 9,200 years. Perhaps polarity reversals occurred just once every 270 years.
Mars has 91 percent of its craters on one side. In addition, its ancient aphelion was c. 225,000,000 miles from the Sun, according to our model, where the asteroids roam. It is easy to speculate as to why Mars dropped into the catastrophic orbit described in Fig l. Near its ancient ”cold spot” (its aphelion) Mars encountered a smaller planet, smaller than the Moon, as close as its Roche Limit. For Mars the Roche Limit is 5,200 miles from its core and 3,100 miles above its surface. The tiny planetary visitor fragmented.
Those fragments that hit Mars?tens of thousands of them?especially the larger ones, slowed Mars down a little and caused an energy drop in its orbit. We suggest from the evidence of the fragmentation that the tiny planet (which should be called Astra, since it produced the asteroids) was the “bump” to Mars’ orbit that started it all.
We point to the “N-U’ effect as causing Mars to penetrate the 19,OOO-mile elasticity-plasticity threshold, where crustal deformation starts to bulge and then balloon. Saturn by itself could cause gigantic Mars-generated oceanic tides, but it was not sufficient alone to trigger balooning bulges. Alone, Saturn could not warp Mars’ orbit within the critical 19,000-to-19,500 mile zone. However, on those occasions when Salurn was in Cancer, and when either Uranus or Neptune was also involved, Mars did come sufficiently close to create a ballooning bulge. On the one occasion when both Neptune and Uranus were in critical alliance, it was devastating.
The “Nu ‘ effect has overtones that are cultural. In the Egyptian Book of the Dead the name of the builder of the Ark and the leading survivor of the blood was “Nu. ” in the Vedas of India his name was “Manu,” the great “Nu.” In the Epic of Gilgamesh the Ark’s builder was “Na,” with a few prefixes and surtaxes?”Utnapishtim.” The Hebrew account calls him “Noach,” today’s ”Noah.”
The remains of Noah’s Ark have been identified at a formation two miles from the Iranian border, barely inside Turkey, at the 6,300-foot level. The site is 19 miles south of the famed Mt. Ararat. Several explorers have reached the ruins, including David Pasold who with metal detection equipment in 1985 and 19S6 established the presence of iron apparently ship fittings. l9 Thus there was a “N-U effect” (Neptune and Uranus) and there was a “Nu” factor, in this closest of all Mars flybys. It was in year 2484 B.C.
Figure 5 is a diagram of the alignment of the mountain arcs of Eastern Asia Many of them are partially submerged mountain chains. They align, as J. Tuzo Wilson pointed out, like sausages on a string, like several strings of sausages hung or strung out across the Eastern Pacific.
One string is the Ryukyu Arc. Another is the Japanese Arc, followed by the Kurile Arc, the Kamchatka Arc, the Aleutian Arc, etc. These arcs in series are merely deformed and reformed Earth crust, like sausages of reformed meat. It took one or more close Mars flybys, penetrating the Earth’s elastic-plastic threshold at 19,000 miles, to string out thesc arcs. It is easy to understand.
Earlier, we noted that mountain systems lie in patterns along great circles that are flyby pathways. But the development of ballooning bulges requires Mars to be within 19,000 miles. During occasional catastrophic days, Mars was indeed that close, but only for short timespans, sometimes only 10 or 20 minutes (up to 50 minutes on the closer occasions). it was a short period, but very damaging.
The advancement of the subpoint on the Earth’s crust, directly under Mars, where the bulging and ballooning occurred, was the sum of two factors. One was a combination of Mars’ trajectory and velocity; the second was the Earth’s rotation, spinning at 1037.6 mph at the equator.
The rotational factor in the ballooning bulge’s “velocity advancement package” is the easiest to calculate. It is 1037.5 mph divided by 60 (for minutes), resulting in mph; it was 17.3 mph at the equator. Adjusted to the 30th latitude, which we consider was opposite to Mars, the subpoint advanced at a velocity of about 14 to 15 mph, due to Earth rotation.
The changing angle of Mars to the Earth, and Mars’ velocity, also resulted in an advancement of the subpoint directly under Mars, and hence the ballooning bulge. This factor ranged from 40 to 60 mph when Mars was making a close flyby. The rotational velocity factor and the trajectory velocity factor add, for a combination of roughly 55 to 75 miles per minute. In miles per second the advancement was about one mile per second across the Earth’s surface.
In one hour, the ballooning bulge would have moved across the Earth’s face a distance of about 3,500 miles. The echelon of the East Asian arcs, in Fig. 4, is almost 3,500 miles long from Taiwan through Kamchatka. We calculate that this particular cycle of mountains was uplifted in about 60 minutes. The uplifting of arcs in the Japanese main island of Honshu occurred in the middle, when Mars was closest (in perigee).
Then there occurred the collapse of the bulge, during the next few hours, as the planet radius contracted and “normalcy” resumed. To maintain that this cycle of mountains, or any such cycle, required 50 to 100 millions of years to be uplifted is a display of nonsense and a failure of objective analysis. Honshu, the largest and most central of Japan’s islands, 800 miles long, was uplifted in perhaps 800 seconds?14 or 15 minutes, or 20, to be generous
This information allows us to understand the time needed to uplift the mighty Himalayas, the Earth’s highest. With its parallel range, the Trans Himalayas in Tibet, the Himalayas comprise a beautiful arc about 1,700 miles long, a sector of a circle. The chain was uplifted during the closest of all flybys, requiring 25 to 30 minutes, or perhaps 35 minutes.
In Fig. 1 the general pathway of the Alpine-Himalayan cycle was portrayed . In 1917 Alfred Wegener, the “uncle” if not the father of Continental Drift claimed that this pathway was the dividing line between “Laurasia” and “Gondwanaland,” his two protocontinents before continental drift. But this is not so. This line describes the pathway of Mars during its passage. Wegener was looking in the wrong direction.
Wegener thought in terms of a single gravity (Earth’s only); we think in terms of a pair of gravities, one whizzing by the other. Wegener thought in terms of millions of years; we think in terms of thousands. Wegener thought horizontally; we think vertically. Wegener thought of drift–inches per year for tens of millions of years; we think in terms of 25,000 to 30,000 ton-acres of uplift per second. Wegener was a gradualist; we are planetary catastrophists.
Observe in Fig. 4 that most individual mountain ranges are 100 to 150 miles long, yet all fall into one grand great-cycle pattern. These are essentially wrinkles, a result of a few minutes of local but severe subcrustal bulging, produced by sudden subcrustal up-welling, ballooning tides of magma. The collapse followed rapidly.
Further, observe in Fig. 4 that there are some 69 or 70 of these individual mountain ranges in this single cycle. Nine, or 15 percent, are convex-shaped. About 50 percent of the individual ranges are concave-shaped, with reference to the centerline of the pathway.
All the convex mountain ranges happen to be north of the centerline and all of the concave ranges happen to be south of the centerline.
Perhaps this bulge pathway was between the 30 degrees north to 35 degrees north of an ancient equator. Within the Earth’s crust 20 percent of the Earth’s mass is north of the 30th latitude north “slice”, and 80 percent of the Earth’s magma mass is south of the 30th latitude north. The convex versus concave ranges arc respectively proportional to the position of the uplift between spin axis poles. This is significant only to a two gravity theory of mountain building. Such is due not to chance but to distribution of the Earth’s subcrustal mass and upwelling magma.
These patterns of convex and concave mountain ranges recur in North America, in South America,in Europe, in the mid-Pacific drowned ranges, in Indonesia, in Southern Asia, in Melanesia, and in Antarctica. Taking a global view, this convex-concave pattern recurs both across continents and across ocean bottoms. Convex arcs occur above the pathway and concave arcs below, to the equatorial side This principle is world-wide in mountain building; it is merely a reflection of many Mars flybys.
We discussed the pathway and centerline of a string of sausages?actually a string of mountain uplifts draped across Eastern Asia. Now, if we examine this series and other series elsewhere, we discover that the mountain systems are both higher, wider, and more rugged in the central region than they are toward either of the ends. Toward the ends mountain ranges taper in width as they diminish in height. They also become straighter, that is, less curved, less “arcuate.”
When Mars approached, its distance (unlike the airplane, whose altitude is somewhat constant) changed radically and rapidly. At 20,000 miles Mars caused eight times the damage as at 40,000 miles. At 15,000 miles, however, Mars caused perhaps 15 times the damage at 19,500, because the elastic-plastic threshold was crossed at about 19,000. Thus most of the deformation (by far) occurred in the central portion of the pathway.
Those mountain ranges located toward the ends of the cycle are lower, narrower, and straighter than those in the central zone. Moreover, those ranges in the central part of an uplift zone somtimes take a sudden change in direction, a shift always toward the southwest. This is because there occurs a spin axis precession that includes a sudden relocation of the spin axis.
The spin axis tries to tilt perpendicularly to the path of Mars. Perpendicular is the most restful angle; 45 degrees is the most violent angle for a torque on a gyroscope If one extends the shoulder-to-elbow part of his right arm straight west, and then bends the elbow, the elbow-to-wrist direction is to the southwest. This is the same angle that the mountain ranges shift when a Mars flyby was close enough to cause a spin axis shift.
The Andes are an outstanding example of this right-arm elbow-bend observation. Bolivia is at the center zone of the Andes uplift. Antarctica and Chile represent the sunrise, or easterly wing of the zone (as directions were at that time). The Peruvian and Colombian Andes represent the westerly, or sunset wing. Observe on a map the shift in direction.
Notice that at the center zone there is a sudden shift in direction, a shift of some 30 degrees to the southwest. This is again a right-arm elbow-bend. It was caused by a gyroscopic procession during the height of a flyby, a close one. The spin axis shifted and seemingly was relocated, virtually in 15 or 20 minutes (The Earth rotated axially.) The Andes involved one of Ihe closest of all flybys, perhaps at 16,500 miles.
In the heart of the “Bolivian Knot” of mountains, surrounded by ranges on all sides is Lake Titicaca, at 12,506 feet above sea level. It is large?3,261 square miles. It contains sea horses, suggesting that this region or its water were once below sea level. On the mountain sides abutting Lake Titicaca are terraces of ancient corn fields going up to 17,000 feet. Yet corn will not germinate above 11,500 feet! Thus the Andes must be the product of at least two uplift eras, one on top of the other.
Another right-arm elbow-bend can be seen in Alaska’s Range. Yet a third shift in direction?a most radical shift amid the uplifting process?can be seen in the Burma-Tibet sector. This is the pivot portion of the Alpine-Himalayan cycle, a right-arm elbow-bend once again. The uplift belt seems to have been located in the 30 degree to 35 degree latitude zone above an ancient equator position at the time they were raised.
A third right-arm elbow-bend occurs in thc Alpine-Himalayan cycle of mountains where Burma and India meet and where the Himalayas begin. See Fig. 6.
Three right-arm elbow-bends have been cited, reflecting three major spin axis shifts. A fourth citation of a minor spin axis shift occurs after the observation of the final flyby recorded in Isaiah (chapters 38, 39). The shadow of the sundial, an Egyptian obelisk perhaps 80 feet tall, relocated (shortened) about 10 handspans?perhaps 70 inches. Thus Jerusalem moved closer to the equator perhaps 1 to 2 degrees.
During a close Mars flyby many processes occurred simultaneously: oceanic deformation and continental flooding, crustal deformation and mountain uplifting, electrical generation (recharging) and paleomagnetic polarity reversing, gyroscopic precession, and spin axis relocation.
In addition, there was orbital warping or perturbation occurring to the orbits of both planets. Thus it takes very little imagination to understand why the ancients who lived in the Catastrophic Era feared the flybys, pleaded with the gods, trembled with the tremors, honored the planets with fire worship, idol worship, and cosmic themes, and in general quaked with apprehension.
Astrologer-astronomers made a good living; they sat next to kings and emperors as exceptionally high caste characters who might have some influence with the planetary deities. Ancient literatures, folklores, calendars, archilectural sundials, five-avenue cities with 108 idols per avenue, etc., widely attest to periodic celestial catastrophes.
Our model of Mars catastrophism has the orbit of Mars in its hot spot (perihelion) at 65 million miles, slightly inside Venusian orbit space. Mars may well have made many Venus flybys also. Recent information from the Maggellan probe indicates that mountains on Venus are rugged and recent-looking. Our model suggests that the Venus mountains should be found in long, lineal ranges with patterns in great circles, similar in height, breadth, and age to the Earth. After all, Venus is very similar to the Earth in mass, crustal, and subcrustal composition.
In addition, the winds on Venus, though only about 5 mph, are so forceful they rival the Earth’s hurricane winds. Moore and Hunt indicate the surface atmospheric pressure on Venus to be about 90 times the pressure on Earth. 20 One would think that such hurricane-type pressures, in one or two million years, would erode mountains down to mere sand dunes. We propose that Venusian mountains were formed by the same mechanism as the Earth’s?close Mars flybys. Moreover, large lava flows are reported uncratered and recent, just like lava flows on Mars.
One might expect mountain systems on Mars to be even more numerous and higher than mountain systems on the Earth. After all, didn’t Mars come 15,000 miles above Earth, and isn’t Earth’s mass 9.3 times greater than Mars’ capable of churning up massive tides of Mars’ magma?
A review of Mars’ geography reveals that the planet has a high density of craters of all sizes up to 990 miles in diameter. Moreover, 91 percent of the Martian craters are in one hemisphere, centered at 45 degrees south latitude. Mars has rifts and two bulges, the latter opposite the huge Hellas and Isidis craters. Mars has dry river beds indicating that the planet, with a thin atmosphere, nevertheless once had running water a hemispheric flood. Some of its rivers were 400 miles long and gushed along at speeds of 20, 25, and 30 mph. 21
Without clouds or water vapor, or even an atmosphere, Mars has nevertheless had a flood, more recent than its acquisition of craters (rivers ran into the craters and out the other side). These rivers were not meanders; they were torrents, and judging by their speed, they raced for 15 to 20 hours before cooling and icing over. The surface of Mars is 170 degrees F. in a 12-hour 19-minute day. Mars’ period of rotation, at 24 hours 37 minutes, resembles the Earth’s spin.
However, one looks in vain for as much as a single mountain system on Mars. Why? Mars may have a much thicker crust than the Earth’s, and during the flybys only one sixth or one seventh as much magma to experience tidal motion. Too, Mars’ crust is made of lighter stuff; the density of the Earth is 5.52, of Mars, 3.93. Because it is farther from the Sun, Mars is colder than the Earth. Many other physical features, which we know with some reliability but cannot introduce here, also have a bearing. Nevertheless, during close Earth flybys Mars logically must have suffered immense internal magma tides and consequent upthrust pressures. Volcanoes may explain the puzzle.
Olympus Mons is the largest of the Martian volcanoes. It has a caldera 50 miles in diameter, almost 2,000 square miles in area. The volcano’s base is 360 miles in diameter, covering 102,000 square miles, and its altitude is 16.2 miles. Kilimanjaro, Africa’s largest volcano, contains perhaps 1,100 cubic miles of basalt lava Olympus Mons contains 500 times as much.
In addition, on Mars are Arsis Mons, Ascria Mons, and Pavonis Mons plus eleven other volcanoes, smaller but still larger than anything on Earth. Each of these largest three is about half as high as Olympic Mons The four largest ones vented a total of almost 800,000 cubic miles of basalt, lava, ejecta, and vapors, if not more. It becomes clear that internal stresses on Mars were relieved exclusively by volcanism rather than crustal deformation.
All in all, our model encompasses the evidence. To the uniformitarian, of course, such matters are unthinkable. James Hutton, Lyell’s mentor, had written: “No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle”. It is unfortunate that Hutton and Lyell had to limit their thinking to nineteenth-century Earth science; that they chose to ignore the great catastrophic themes of the world’s literatures
In the early 1800’s two groups of thought in geology were the “Neptunists,” who believed massive, watery upheavals were the primary agent sculpturing our planet, and the “Plutonists.” who thought that basaltic outflows with volcanism were the pnmary agent. (These schools of thought were named after the Greek deities; the planets were not discovered until 1846 and 1930.)
It appears that both schools had some validity. Massive tides of oceans swept across continents and massive upthrusting bulges of magma littered the landscape. While their concepts were mostly figurative, they were luckily pertinent. But where does the Lyell-Hutton school of thought fit in? Nowhere. The sooner it is discarded, the better.
Dictionaries define “relic” as an object or custom that has survived wholly or partially from the past; something that has historic interest because of its age and associations with the past. Relics of the Catastrophic Era, the Mars-Earth Wars, are numerous, and they are systematic and patterned. In understanding them we will better appreciate our cultural roots and ongins, the conditions under which early man lived, and why he thought as revealed (often not without confusion) in ancient literatures as he did .
Relic No. 1. The Earth’s Two Perihelions. The Earth’s perihelion, the hot spot in a planet’s orbit, where it is closest to the Sun, in the Catastrophic Era was halfway between the October 24 and the March 20-21 intersections. Using the old 360-day calendar, this was early in the day of January 7. In the modern era the perihelion is on January 4, clearly a result of the Mars-Earth Wars,
Relic No. 2. The Ancient 360 day Calendar. The ancient calendar derives from the ancient orbit radius, 92.25 million miles; the modern figure is 93.0 million miles. The orbit of Mars contracted from 720 to 687 days, and at the same time the Earth’s orbit expanded from 360 to 365.25 days.
Relic No. 3. The Moon’s Ancient 30-day Orbit. Ancient calendars reveal nothing of a 29.53 day Moon orbit. They count the Moon orbit as 30 days. Hence we believe the Moon’s orbit radius was about 241,100 miles in the Catastrophic Era. Today it is 238,900 miles.
Relic No. 4. The Perpendicular Alignnment of Jupiter. When orbits are in resonance the long axes align geometrically. Earth’s long axis, parallel to Mars, was perpendicular to the long axis of Jupiter’s orbit; both axes were perpendicular. Today, the Jovian axis is at a celestial longitude of 13.6 degrees, its perihelion location. The Earth’s long axis is at 102.2 degrees (the January 4 position); the difference is 88.6 degrees. The modern geometry of Jupiter-Earth is virtually perpendicular (perfect perpendicular geometry is 90 degrees). What the gradualists would call “chance” is really a relic of the Catastrophic Era when the relationship was a perfect 90 degrees.
Relic No. 5.- The Twin Spin Axis Tilts of Mars and Earth. Once again, gradualists suppose the Earth’s spin axis tilt of 23.44 degrees and Mars’ of 23.98 degrees is “coincidence.” When flybys occur repeatedly at the same orbit location a planet will try to align its spin axis to the perpendicular of the ongoing torque applied by the approaching body. After a long series of encounters, the two planets achieved the above spin axis tilts. They are not chance; they are relics of the Mars-Earth Wars.
Relic No. 6: The Location of Earth’s Vernal Equinox. On the vernal equinox (the first day of spring for the Earth’s northern hemisphere) both hemispheres have days and nights of 12 hours each; this is March 21 (except leap years). This date was also the Hebrew Passover, the Roman “Tubulustrium,” and the “First point of Aries” a famous ancient constellation. The spin axis aligned on this catastrophic site, in all probability, because the first Mars-Earth Wars skirmish occurred here.
Relic No. 7. The Relocation of the Martian Perihelion and Autumnal Equinox. In 701 B.C. Mars went out of resonance, taking a new location for its perihelion at the celestial longitude of 335.2 degrees; the old perihelion was at 105 degrees This difference was 230 degrees (measured counterclockwise from Polaris). We can place the Mars autumnal equinox, during the Mars-earth Wars, at the same site as the Earth’s vernal equinox, but today the autumnal equinox is at the 49th celestial longitude. But calculating counterclockwise, the 49th longitude is also the 409th (adding 360 degrees). Subtracting 179, the result is 230, strangely the same for both bodies.
Relic No. 8. The Volcanoes of Mars. The magnificent volcanoes of Mars are evidence of great internal distress; they are relics of the Mars-Earth Wars and Mars-Venus flybys.
Relic No. 9: Mountain Ranges and Patterns on Earth. These mountain ranges were uplifted relics of the Mars-Earth Wars scenarios, as indicated by their distribution and pattern .
Relic No. 10: The Earth’s Volcanoes. Volcanoes on the Earth are not nearly as numerous or as high as the mountain ranges, although they are found among the mountain ranges where the Earth’s crust cracked and rifted, allowing the escape of magma. They too are relics of the Catastrophic Era.
Relic No. 11: The Sidewise Slipping Stars. Before understanding this relic we must discuss a somewhat similar problem, “The Case of the Half-filled Bathtub.”
A sleuth knocked at the door of a residence at precisely 2:30 p.m. one afternoon. Nobody
was home, yet he heard running water. He entered and found the house empty, but the bathtub’s spigot was full on and the drainplug was in place The tub’s overflow drain was 20 inches above bottom. The water was 10 inches high, and rising.
The sleuth sensed that someone just minutes earlier had left without turning off the water.
He found identifiable fingerprints.. He calculated how fast the tub was filling: one inch per minute, and concluded that someone had turned the spigot within 30 seconds of 2:20 p.m.
Next, the fingerprints were identified as “Momma’s”; she had been there as recently as
2:20. Checking the neighborhood, he found another house had caught fire about 2:15. He now had the who, what, when, and why: Momma had turned on the water at 2:20 but ran to the nearby fire.
Our sleuth now turns to “The Case of the Sidewise-Shifting Stars.” He knows that the fixed stars all appear to be moving in unison in a circle that takes 25,800 years to complete. This appanent rotation (called precession) equals 1 degree every 71.67 years. He turns to Bowditch 22 to read that the Earth’s equinoxes slipped backwards (clockwise) in their orbit precisely 50.27 seconds of an arc in 1958, as it does every year.
There are 3600 seconds in a degree of celestial longitude (60 x 60), just as there are 3600
seconds in an hour of time. 86,400 seconds (60 x 60 x 24) complete a day, but 1,296,000
seconds (60 x 60 x 360) are needed to complete a 360-degree circle. This is achieved in
25,780 years. The early Sumerians divided the circle into 360 degrees and into 1,296,000
seconds; the reflected the 360-day year of that age. The Sumerians also divided the fixed
stars into 12 distinct zones (or houses), each, with their constellations, given names like Aries the ram, Taurus the bull, Cancer the crab, Leo the lion, etc. From this collection of life forms came the Greek word zoo, the root of “zodiac ”
Our sleuth notes that a certain fixed star, Mesartim, in ancient times was found consistently on the horizon at dawn on the vernal equinox, March 21( Bowditch): “When the names were assigned more than 2,000 years ago, the Sun entered Aries at the vernal equinox even though this is no longer true because of the precession of the equinoxes ” Our sleuth wondered why Mesartim is no longer on the horuzon at dawn of the vernal equinox; more importantly. he wondered how far (in degrees) it had “slipped sideways. ”
Mesartim is a relatively dim star and for that reason is not listed in Bowditch. It is actually a double star but appears as one to the naked eye. It is part of a six-star constellation named “Aries ” on the edge of the 30 degree zone also named “Aries ” The Sumerians had made Aries the ram the first of their twelve houses, because it rose at the dawn of the spring equinox.
Our sleuth finds that Hamal, a brighter star (and hence more useful for navigators), just 3 degrees away from Mesartim, was at celestial longitude 329 degrees in 1958. This tells him that Mesartim was at 326, and indicates that Hamal’s sidewise slippage (precession) was 31 degrees (360-329) and Mesartim’s, 34 degrees (31 + 3) He deduces (after reading Patten and Windsor) that the modern perihelion on January 4 is 3 degrees offset, or slipped backward, from the ancient perihelion of January 7. This 3 degrees must be added to the 34 degrees already calculated for Mesartim (“Mesartim” comes from an Arabic word for “the sign”; it was the “First point of Aries “) it had slipped 37 degrees.
As the fixed stars appear to slip 50.27 arc-seconds per year, our sleuth concludes that estimating the length time Mesartim has been slipping should be no more difficult than estimating how long it took to fill the bathtub to 10 inches. 37 degrees x 3600 (the number of arc-seconds in degree) = 133,200 seconds of slippage. 133,200 divided by the annual rate, 50.27, is 2649.7 years. From 1958 (Bowditch) our sleuth subtracts 2649.7 (and an additional 4 years for medieval errors), to get 695.7 B. C, or roughly 700 B. C.
Our sleuth now recognizes that some event “turned on” precession about 700 B. C. Here is the why of the case: it was the path, a unique “outside” or “nightside” or “dark side” geometry of that final flyby. The wrong-side flyby led to the circularization of Mars’ orbit. It meant the end of the Mars-Earth Wars era.
Astronomers have often wondered why precession has been so limited. One need only resort to planetary catastrophism. Continuous precession before the Mars-Earth Wars era could not have occurred. Mesartim was always the First point of Aries before 700 B. C. Precession was consumed (or negated) amidst the general planetary chaos involving resonance and close flybys at a pair of orbit locations.
The limited precession of Mesartim is thus another relic of catastrophism. The Greeks were right after all. Zeus-pater (Jupiter) was indeed the controller of the cosmos in that era in Greek mythology, Aries was the ram with the Golden Fleece. From our view as planetary catastrophists Aries was the zodiacal zone featuring interplanetary electrical displays golden celestial fireworks. Mars’ evaporating ices furthermore produced a cometary tail of golden, fluffy, fleecy splendor.
Relic No. 12: The Astronomical Zodiac of the Sumerians. The Sumerian zodiac is a relic of the Catastrophic Era (The Chinese had a similar zodiac with 24 zones and a 360-degree circle; when the year shined to 365 days they changed both calendar and circle to 365 in the 6th or 7th century B. C. ). Showing Mesartim as the First point of Aries and once in alignment with the vernal equinox, the zodiac is also a relic of the catastrophism described here.
A variety of unigravitational (one gravity) concepts have developed over the last 150 years in geology. All have fallen very short of explaining the massive manipulation of the Earth’s surface, as Hartshorne, Scheidegger, and others have commented.
Further unfolding evidence of recent catastrophism is arriving almost daily from the various space probes now speeding toward the ends of the universe, from sophisticated computer modeling once thought impossible, and from archaeological and geological discoveries around the world. Readers are urged to follow these exciting developments.
The two-gravity hypothesis presented above has been jointly conceived and created by Samuel R. Windsor, a marine engineer, and Donald W. Patten, a geographer and businessman. The cultural impact of the ancient Mars flybys, in particular, has been set forth in the latter’s Catastrophism and the Old Testament (Seattle: Pacific Meridian Publishing Company, 1988).
I . For an analysis of angular momentum exchanges and simultaneous energy exchanges, see “A Special Debate The Mars-Earth Wars Theory, ” by C. Elroy Ellenberger, Donald W. Patten, and Ronald R. Hatch. C&AH, XII:l (January 1990), pp. 79-90.
2. Richard Hartshorne, A Perspective on the Nature of Geography. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1959, p. 106.
4. Ibid., p. 9t.
5. Ibid. pp. 91-92.
6. Adrian E. Scheidegger, Principles of Geodynamics. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1963, p. 148.
7. Ibid., p. 289.
8. Ibid., p. 291.
9. A. Hallum, Great Geological Controversies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1983, p. 48.
10. Donald W. Patten and Samuel R. Windsor, “The Catastrophic Origin of the Solar System.” Aeon, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 77-88; Vol. 1, No. 5, pp. 97-114.
11. Donald W. Patten, “The 108-Year Cyclicism of Ancient Catastrophes.” Aeon, Vol. II, No. 2, pp. 82-107.
12. Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill. Boston: Gambit, 1969, pp. 162-63.
13. Ibid., p. 7,
14. IPbid., p. 419, citing Plutarch, Oelaric qute in orbs lunae apparel Y41.
15. Ibid., p. 129.
16. Ibid., p. 162.
17. Ronald T. Merrill and Michael W. McElhinny, The Earth’s Magnetic Field. London: Academic Press, 1983, p. 153.
18. Donald W. Patten and Samuel R. Windsor, “The Origin and Dccay of the Earth’s Geomagnetic Field.” C&AH, IX:2, p. 98.
19. David Fasold, The Ark of Noah. New York: Wynwood Press, 1988, pp. 312-19.
20. Patrick Moore and Garry Hunt, Atlas of the Solar System. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1983, p. 104.
21. Ibid., 212-13, 224-25.
22. U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office, Bowditch’s American Practical Navigator. Washington: 1966, pp. 373, 774.
Articles from Catastrophism And Ancient History
are brought to you by The Thule Foundation