Modern Geology changed in the sixties and seventies. Plate tectonics is now the favoured theory, according to which the lithosphere of the Earth is divided into about a dozen moving plates. The movement of the plates is driven by convection in the mantle, and there are three types of plate boundaries: divergent boundaries, convergent boundaries, and transform faults. Since the surface of the earth is regarded as more or less constant in this doctrine, large-scale geological phenomena (transformations) are bound to plate boundaries, such as elongated mountain ranges, volcanoes, and earthquake zones. Changes are thus believed to take place very slowly and gradually over millions or billions of years, save for the occasional earthquake or volcanic eruption. Predictably, this prevailing theory also relies on that most famous of free variables - time. The clock can be put back as and when required.
Catastrophism, by contrast, acknowledges the fact that many changes take place very quickly. Furthermore, some of these events occurred within the last few thousand years, and were witnessed and testified by our ancestors. These upheavels were driven principally by electrical disturbances. See the catastrophism and mythology sections of this web site.
Consensus science basically explains most geological formations like so: The plates move, there is probably some volcanic activity, some magic happens, there is some water erosion, then some more magic happens, the timescales are put back if necessary and, hey presto...
Forget everything you know about conventional geology. It's provably wrong.
"There is no longer any need to hide in the consensus."
"If, occasionally, historical
evidence does not square with formulated laws, it should be remembered that a law is but a deduction from experience and experiment, and therefore laws must conform with historical facts, not facts with laws." Immanual Velikovsky
Distinguished geologist Robert Schoch is perhaps most famous for his work on the Sphinx, which he dates back close to the end of the last Ice Age. Needless to say, this contradicts conventional 'wisdom' in respect of the pyramids and pharaohs, and Schoch has suffered no little vitriol for daring to question the standard timeline. Egyptologists, like certain other disciplines, can be very precious about their ideas, and resent interdisciplinary interference.
Schoch has spoken at an Electric Universe conference. He recognises that a lot of ancient rock art records plasma phenonema, as witnessed in the skies by our ancestors. He has discussed these matters with plasma physicists Anthony Peratt and CJ Ransom, who is mentioned below, and also comparative mythologist, Rens van der Sluijs. In this fascinating YouTube interview with Mind the Shift, Schoch covers a lot of ground in a clear and concise manner. At 36 mins he talks about some traditions which have it that the Sphinx was even struck by a thunderbolt in antiquity.
Schoch accepts the Sun is less than stable, and that major solar events pose a bigger risk than generally accepted. The ancients appear to have been more aware of this fact. Schoch explains that while a lot of people might not be interested in ancient civilizations, the real question is about the events that devastated them. Another Carrington event (September 1859 was the last major one) could wreak havoc here on planet Earth, especially given our heavy reliance on electricity and technology today.
"If our ancestors could predict eclipses, track the movement of celestial bodies, build pyramids (could we build them today to the same degree of accuracy?), and develop most of modern math, perhaps we should listen when they describe what they saw in the sky."
"Perhaps the Hebrews described it best. They were a literate people, so we should probably listen to what they had to say. They seem to have the most accurate descriptions of these things." Michael Steinbacher
do not cease to exist because they are ignored."
Electrical planetary scarring in the laboratory
Billy Yelverton, amongst others, has been able to recreate many geological formations — by electrical means — in the laboratory, albeit on a much smaller scale. It must be remembered, of course, that electrical phenomena are scalable over many orders of magnitiude. It is often said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Well, this is now at hand. This theory is not only the most simple and economical, but also consistent and reproducible. I have highlighted the last word as this is supposed to be a foundational principal of science. Furthermore, it seems that some of these phenomena, and especially most craters, can only be reproduced by this method!
We are witnessing the beginning of a paradigm shift.
"Men are born ignorant, not stupid. They are made stupid by education." Bertrand Russell
Conventional geology cites volcanic activity as responsible for so many of the spectacular natural features we see the world over. The trouble is, most of the volcanoes are missing! They disappeared! Where did they go? They are supposed to have been far bigger and more spectacular than anything seen in recent millennia.
"I would like to start a charity for missing volcanoes."
Mind you, is it possible that volcanoes might also be driven by electrical forces? Telluric currents (electric currents in the ground) are not easy to measure, but volcanic eruptions are generally accompanied by violent electrical storms.
The age of rocks is indeterminate, so any aging hypotheses thus rely on related organic matter. The trouble is, intense EM phenomena are known to produce randomn results in this respect. Typically, objects that do not fit the accepted time scale are considered to have been soiled and discounted by consensus science.
Mysterious lights in the sky have long been considered
precursors of earthquakes, although this idea is not
taken seriously by mainstream science. There were several reports of celestial sightings
above Lincolnshire in the days before the earthquake,
which had its epicentre near Market Rasen when it struck
on February 27, 2008. It raises the question: Did people
see 'earthquake lights'?
These are almost certainly electro-magnetic discharges,
and come as little surprise to EU advocates.
EM disturbances probably also explain the numerous
reports of animals behaving strangely before earthquakes.
Such behaviour is too well documented to be dismissed
out of hand, but EM forces are also largely ignored
in geology, which like most sciences takes its lead
The limitations of a thermally driven model
of the earth
paper examines the limitations of a thermally driven model
of the earth, and outlines an alternative solid-plastic-planet
model, possibly expanding, and driven by electromagnetic
forces. The paper
is technical but approachable. External link: https://www.scientificexploration.org/
Introduction: FT Freund, in his paper ‘‘Rocks that Crack and Spark and Glow: Strange Pre-Earthquake Phenomena’’ (JSE, 17, 37–71), very successfully showed how erroneous results in rock conductivity measurements become part of mainstream science. We think this is a side effect of a wider problem; mainstream science progressively turns into an ideological system of belief in theories, and as such, it tends to ignore the implications of logic and observations, when these contradict their predicated mental abstractions.
Younger Dryas event
It is difficult to be precise about the date of the last round of catastrophes to devastate planet Earth. A time scale of roughly around 12,500 years ago is emerging as probable, however. Younger Dryas refers to the period just after the last 'ice age'.
The following peer-reviewed paper (published online 13th March 2019) provides a thorough and fascinating analysis of the evidence. The cause was almost certainly cometary in nature. Perhaps it was Venus entering and settling into our Solar System? So much myth and legend attests to this, and Velikovsky was viciously attacked for pointing out as much in his famous book, Worlds In Collision. Again, see the mythology and catastrophism pages of this web site for theories about the role of Venus in myth and legend. The paper posits an impact scenario, but there can be little doubt that close encounters with a large body like Venus could produce the same effects.
“I conceive of nothing, in religion, science or philosophy, that is more than the proper thing to wear, for a while.” Charles Fort
The Grand Canyon
Could the Grand Canyon have been created by a gigantic lightning strike, aka a thunderbolt? No doubt the idea seems ridiculous to anyone educated within the limited gradualist paradigm. It is nonetheless the more simple and economical explanation, and one that doesn't rely on ever changing, complex, and often contradictory mechanisms.
Geologists are certainly struggling to explain the canyon by conventional means. Just for starters: How did water erosion manage to cut so cleanly through numerous difffering types and layers of rock, hard and soft, without changing course? Why did it often take the path of greatest resistance, cutting through higher areas of tougher rock? Could wind erosion, as claimed, really acccount for some of the huge trench, even where it demonstrates identical features to that produced by alleged water erosion? Where did all the debris go? There is no large delta at the mouth of the Colorado River, as would be expected by conventional theory. Why are there so many huge lumps of rock scattered around the edges of the canyon, far from the path of the water, as if picked up and tossed aside by a giant? Many of these rocks weigh many tons! Why does it look just like a lightning strike, albeit on a huge scale, from space? See pictures right. Needless to say, geologists often resort to that most famous of free variables - time. They keep putting the clock back to account for the many anomalous features that the Colorado River alone could not have produced on the high plateau.
Local native Americans venerate lightning, and have done for as far back as they can remember. Perhaps geologists should likewise pay more respect to this particular force of nature.
Let us not forget, conventional wisdom usually owes at least as much to convention as wisdom.
The Great Unconformity
"In 1869 geologists noted missing layer of rock in the Grand Canyon. Samples showed a layer dating back 540 million years, and directly below it, a layer that was dated to 1 billion years ago. What happened in-between? ... The researchers suggest that the large erosion event was the development of what has been termed "Snowball Earth" — a period when the entire planet was completely covered with ice. They believe that as the ice receded, it took a whole layer of the crust with it, dumping it into the sea. If that was the case, logic suggests, testing the seafloor should show a large layer of rock from that time period. But no such layer has been found..."
In mythology, Medusa (Venus) is said to have petrified her victims? Petrify means more than just to frighten, of course, and especially in this context. She is said to have literally turned her victims to stone. Peter Mungo Jupp, an Australian archaeologist, argues that powerful electrical discharges can result in the instant petrification of organisms on Earth. The planet Venus almost certainly played a central role in catastrophic events here on Earth, and it seems that many fossils were created very quickly; not over thousands of years as gradualists believe.
Peter Mungo Jupp on instant fossilization.
A picture can say a thousand words
Laboratory plasma discharges vis-à-vis geological formations. Well, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... See also EDM.
Consensus science will generally try to explain away many of these electrical features as visual conincidences. The trouble is, the coincidences are overwhelming, and the same formations lack any coherent explanation in mainstream thought.
Credits CJ Ransom and B Yelverton
"Let us not forget, conventional wisdom usually owes at least as much to convention as wisdom." David D.
"It's written in rock! That's how the universe rolls." David D.
Erratic Boulders - The Key to a Violent Past? So many of these boulders, many of them huge, are difficult to explain using traditional glacial or tidal wave hypotheses.