Our timeline could be much shorter than we think...

Sonofabor · Nov 23, 2023

I thought the video interesting. However, when Tristan started talking with such simple-minded authority that "this or that" was built in "such and such" year, I thought: Hasn't he been to SH?

There's a lot more mystery in the history than the weird certainty suggested by a bifocal historical record. Might such an obvious omission suggest that that trickster of our times, controlled opposition, has appreared yet again?

Silveryou · Nov 23, 2023

Sonofabor said:
I thought the video interesting. However, when Tristan started talking with such simple-minded authority that "this or that" was built in "such and such" year, I thought: Hasn't he been to SH?

I like to reverse the question, for you and anybody who reads sh articles: have sh readers ever read Fomenko?

The reason of my question is that most of chronological issues are built upon his work and still I fail to see people who are conscious about that or even worse I've seen people launching accusations based upon petty arguments and still talking of Tartaria as if the topic comes out of the magician's hat.
Once sh readers will have read Fomenko they will propbably understand the "simple-minded authority" used by Tristan, which is entirely based on the premise of the knowledge of Fomenko's work talked about at the beginning of the video.

https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2n031-EN.pdf
https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2N031a-EN.pdf
https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2N032-EN.pdf

awarewolf · Nov 23, 2023

Silveryou said:
I like to reverse the question, for you and anybody who reads sh articles: have sh readers ever read Fomenko?

The reason of my question is that most of chronological issues are built upon his work and still I fail to see people who are conscious about that or even worse I've seen people launching accusations based upon petty arguments and still talking of Tartaria as if the topic comes out of the magician's hat.
Once sh readers will have read Fomenko they will propbably understand the "simple-minded authority" used by Tristan, which is entirely based on the premise of the knowledge of Fomenko's work talked about at the beginning of the video.

https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2n031-EN.pdf
https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2N031a-EN.pdf
https://chronologia.org/en/chronologia2/2N032-EN.pdf

I think the issue is that Fomenko and thereby Tristan seem to think that some of the "more recent" events (1300s+) to be "legitimate versions of the copies sent backwards", whereas a lot of SH threads and researchers (myself included) have come to the conclusion that there was a cataclysmic event, reset, or other huge coverup that occurred after that period, and there is not sufficient evidence that events around or before that time occurred the way they are told, either. Even the chronology of later centuries seems muddled.

I agree with you that more should read Fomenko, (myself included; I'm very behind), but I also find him to be guilty of the same mistake he accuses Morozov of, albeit later epochs.

Quote from Fomenko's site:

During the period from 1907 to 1932 N.A.Morozov published his main books about revision of the ancient history [542]-[544]. But by mistake he considered that the chronology after VI century C. E. is more or less correct.

Silveryou · Nov 24, 2023

awarewolf said:
I think the issue is that Fomenko and thereby Tristan seem to think that some of the "more recent" events (1300s+) to be "legitimate versions of the copies sent backwards", whereas a lot of SH threads and researchers (myself included) have come to the conclusion that there was a cataclysmic event, reset, or other huge coverup that occurred after that period, and there is not sufficient evidence that events around or before that time occurred the way they are told, either. Even the chronology of later centuries seems muddled.

I agree with you that more should read Fomenko, (myself included; I'm very behind), but I also find him to be guilty of the same mistake he accuses Morozov of, albeit later epochs.

Quote from Fomenko's site:

Ok, but where is the contradiction between an eventual cathaclism and the positioning of "classic" events during the medieval period? Do they mutually exclude each other? And when it comes to what happened before the eventual cathaclism (or event) and the subsequent confusion it's already stated by Fomenko in his books (and attributed to a major coup d'etat). This is why he has tried to reconstruct what from his point of view is a more correct history admitting it's a difficult task and always being specific that it's an hypothesis, even if he is very confident.

But what many people don't seem to understand is that one thing is the de-construction he does of the narrative (part of which is the "accusation" towards Morozov) and another totally different matter is the rec-onstruction based on the new astronomical calculations he has found. This entire thread was based on an attempt to reconstruct things based on Fomenko's astronomical findings. The critics moved towards Morozov are based upon astronomical calculations that Morozov decided to not considered based upon his disbelief, while Fomenko clearly states that history becomes "normal" from a chronological point of view only starting from the 17th century. And if someone wants to say the chrono is wrong even after that period I'm gonna ask them where's the proof such as Fomenko has provided.

And yes it's cool to imagine entirely new histories filling them with our many biases but in the end I'm not a mathematician so I wonder how it's possible for people to go completely out of the established path without any hint to the methods used, given that few lines are not enough since Fomenko worked on his thing for 10 years!

This is why I suggest people to read the actual books, otherwise it's also impossible to understand Tristan, who is not a mathematician and has simply taken for granted Fomenko's work finding more clues of its correctness... maybe... since I've not read his book yet!

P.S. sorry for the grammar etc. It depends on the day I write

Sonofabor · Nov 24, 2023

I have friends with 40+ years experience in building large, high-rise commercial structures. We've looked closely at the remnants of the old age--built of sandstone, granite and copper-- in my current locale. I'm told by them that these structures could be 6 thousand years old. I also see newspaper reports of complete and successful city rebuilds after 19th century fires-- rebuilds that defy credulity.

Astrologers report that the contemporary zodiac appeared only around 0 AD. Prior to that, it was another system.

All this information indicates to me a vastly more mysterious situation than presented by Tristan. For, as I noted above, Tristan anchors his phantom history according to dates that are official. I think this should be obvious to any reader of SH.

Silveryou · Nov 24, 2023

Sonofabor said:
I have friends with 40+ years experience in building large, high-rise commercial structures. We've looked closely at the remnants of the old age--built of sandstone, granite and copper-- in my current locale. I'm told by them that these structures could be 6 thousand years old. I also see newspaper reports of complete and successful city rebuilds after 19th century fires-- rebuilds that defy credulity.

Astrologers report that the contemporary zodiac appeared only around 0 AD. Prior to that, it was another system.

All this information indicates to me a vastly more mysterious situation than presented by Tristan. For, as I noted above, Tristan anchors his phantom history according to dates that are official. I think this should be obvious to any reader of SH.

Well, I'm a reader of sh and still what you say doesn't make much sense. You talk about things discussed in a book of more than 700 pages which is the foundation for the research done by Tristan. The book in question is called 'History: Fiction or Science vol.3' by Anatholy Fomenko.
Astronomical methods as applied to chronology. Ptolemy's Almagest. Tycho Brahe. Copernicus. The Egyptian zodiacs. History: fiction or science? Volume 3.

It's hard to have discussions with people who don't know what's been discussed...

But let's go on without further nonsense

ViniciusB · Nov 24, 2023

Sonofabor said:
We've looked closely at the remnants of the old age--built of sandstone, granite and copper-- in my current locale. I'm told by them that these structures could be 6 thousand years old.

How and why your friends came to this conclusion? Like, it's safe to say that when it comes to verifiable sources, anything pre 1780-1800 is on the dubious side (the mainstream timeline for this period is batshit crazy with so much going on), so this affirmation from your friends sounds preposterous tbh...

Sonofabor · Nov 24, 2023

My friends do real work, with real plans, with real technologies, and with a vast array of contractors and sub-contractors. They know how things of gigantic proportions are built. They've done it multiple times, up and down the American west coast.

I'll let them know your skepticism.

In any case, I've also written long scholarly papers on an array of subjects related to Chinese civilization and culture. Chinese always, to this very day-- at least in Taiwan-- credit the ancients with being the greatest of people. To be honest, as an American, I thought what they said was preposterous. But, I now know I was wrong-- at least in my basic presumptions.

As for Fomenko, he too was/is an academic who was funded by the state. (I know from personal experience how this effects one's research). Despite his very long (and tiresome) list of slights he received by other scholars in his first book (referenced above), he still holds his state-funded chair, does he not? For all these reasons, though I have learned much from him, I consider the work of KD and others to be dramatic advancement.

ViniciusB · Nov 24, 2023

Sonofabor said:
My friends do real work, with real plans, with real technologies, and with a vast array of contractors and sub-contractors. They know how things of gigantic proportions are built. They've done it multiple times, up and down the American west coast.

That much i get it, my question was about how do they know is 6000 years

Sonofabor said:
I'll let them know your skepticism.

In any case, I've also written long scholarly papers on an array of subjects related to Chinese civilization and culture. Chinese always, to this very day-- at least in Taiwan-- credit the ancients with being the greatest of people.

Taiwan appart, mainland China has a decades old supremacy complex as for propaganda purposes by the communist government. According to state sponsored academics, all of the major achievements of "antiquity" are from China! What are the odds......

Sonofabor said:
For all these reasons, though I have learned much from him, I consider the work of KD and others to be dramatic advancement.

On this i agree, i see Fomenko as an excellent and solid starting point for research, KD i would say is my inspiration, it's thanks to him that i came to this journey into alternative history

Sonofabor · Nov 24, 2023

ViniciusB said:
That much i get it, my question was about how do they know is 6000 years

Sonofabor said:
I'm told by them that these structures could be 6 thousand years old.

6,000 being the the standard Biblical reference for the origin our world.

ViniciusB said:
Taiwan appart, mainland China has a decades old supremacy complex as for propaganda purposes by the communist government. According to state sponsored academics, all of the major achievements of "antiquity" are from China! What are the odds......

Yes, this was the cause of my skepticism. I knew well that "China" as-such was as an early 20th century concoction. However, local cultures have gods and writings and certain linguistic particularities that were never completely overturned by the Nationalist and Communists and (earlier) Jesuits, who (with the Manchus/Tartars) invented Confucianism. These aspects of culture point repeatedly and without much doubt in the minds of most people that their ancient ancestors had much greater spiritual and physical capabilities than people of contemporary times.

Silveryou · Nov 24, 2023

... and as always the thread has been hijacked by utter nonsense.

KorbenDallas said:
I do understand that there are those, who fundamentally disagree with Fomenko's findings. To disagree, one would have to verify his calculations, and point out where this Ph. D. in mathematics was wrong.

BusyBaci · Nov 29, 2023

Fomenko is fine for chronology revision even though some times his method is hit and miss, by and large though it should be okay for revisioning antiquity because that's the goal but it lacks sometimes in regards to the stories of Homer regarding Troy or the Bible. He identifies at least 4-5 different locations for Troy with his mathematical comparative method. Math is supportive of reality but in some of the Fomenko's cases is a second tier type of evidence which adds to the first tier evidence additional credibility and he's well aware of it but sometimes he brakes he's own rules for the sake of research integrity and puts statistical results as a first tier evidence of his thesis. You have to evaluate his claims of historical carbon copies case by case because some are totally off.

One case on top of my mind is when Fomenko identifies Phillip the 2-nd as Sulltan Mehmet the 2-nd, more likely it was Pirro of Epirus in the robes of Phillip the 2-nd than him, because he had an extensive military activity in conquering the so called ancient Greece and it fits the geography of his reign even though he is considered ancient too, but most likely he was an early medieval king in Epirus like the rest of Antiquity.

In Tristan's video for me it's highly unlikely that he positively identified Alexander the Great with Gjergj Kastrioti in Albania. Even though the names might be similar their military campaign and lives differ greatly in scope and magnitude. Alexander is believed to conquer much of northern Egypt, Greece, Macedonia, Anatolia, Persia (Iran, Irak) up to India. In comparison Skenderbej was under the Ottoman Empire and fought for them only in Asia Minor until he broke out from their control and became a ruler of Arberia (Albania).

So you have to look at these claims in detail of what really happened when someone takes these comparisons for granted without further investigation, risking creating distorted views of the timeline even more.

Silveryou · Nov 30, 2023

BusyBaci said:
Fomenko is fine for chronology revision even though some times his method is hit and miss, by and large though it should be okay for revisioning antiquity because that's the goal but it lacks sometimes in regards to the stories of Homer regarding Troy or the Bible. He identifies at least 4-5 different locations for Troy with his mathematical comparative method. Math is supportive of reality but in some of the Fomenko's cases is a second tier type of evidence which adds to the first tier evidence additional credibility and he's well aware of it but sometimes he brakes he's own rules for the sake of research integrity and puts statistical results as a first tier evidence of his thesis. You have to evaluate his claims of historical carbon copies case by case because some are totally off.

One case on top of my mind is when Fomenko identifies Phillip the 2-nd as Sulltan Mehmet the 2-nd, more likely it was Pirro of Epirus in the robes of Phillip the 2-nd than him, because he had an extensive military activity in conquering the so called ancient Greece and it fits the geography of his reign even though he is considered ancient too, but most likely he was an early medieval king in Epirus like the rest of Antiquity.

In Tristan's video for me it's highly unlikely that he positively identified Alexander the Great with Gjergj Kastrioti in Albania. Even though the names might be similar their military campaign and lives differ greatly in scope and magnitude. Alexander is believed to conquer much of northern Egypt, Greece, Macedonia, Anatolia, Persia (Iran, Irak) up to India. In comparison Skenderbej was under the Ottoman Empire and fought for them only in Asia Minor until he broke out from their control and became a ruler of Arberia (Albania).

So you have to look at these claims in detail of what really happened when someone takes these comparisons for granted without further investigation, risking creating distorted views of the timeline even more.

I agree with every word you say. The problem is that Alexander of Macedon falls exactly where Skanderbeg is positioned in our chronology when seen through the statistics provided by Fomenko. So it's not wrong to say that the two are the same, provided that, as suggested by Tristan, we look at the bigger picture rather than the details. The suggested explanation is that details were added later, possibly in the time period between the epoch of Skanderbeg and "modern times". Is it possible that various attributes of a more ancient character were given to a more recent one and this "dress" ended up as being part of his persona? After this was done the entire character "felt" too ancient for the time when he lived and somebody thought it was all about the ancient character, therefore stripping the more modern one of his main attributes.

I was surprised some months ago when a friend of mine introduced me to Ferdowsi's Shahnameh. In that opus it is explicitely said that after Alexander the Great took over the ancient world a series of monarchs took over whose names are totally those of the Sasanians, with a historical "jump" of about 450 years. This shows that the Alexander he was talking about, named a "Roman" in his books, was none other than Alexander Severus, as weird as it is. So there you go with another Alexander and in my opinion those two stories share something even though it's hard to put the pieces back together.

What is certain is that Alexander the Great had a father called Philip and supposedly cut the Gordian knot. If we move these few aspects in the time period of Alexander Severus we discover that he was succeeded in a short time by Philip "the Arab" (called "the Christian" in a not so distant past), the only Philip in "Roman" history and almost contemporary of the Gordian emperors, the only ones with that name. I wonder how many chances are these names are systematically repeated after a 450 years hiatus. Not only that but in between Alexander Severus and Philip there was an emperor called Maximinus Thrax, famous for his enormous height. But it happens that Anna Comnena remembers the "Roman" Philip as the guy with an extraordianry massive built figure, which could be a hint to some more confusion and/or duplicates.

Now I don't know if all of this should be transfered to the XV century. My opinion is that we should not do it. Maybe Skanderbeg was "dressed" with the attributes of that "Roman" Alexander simply by a confusion of their names. Or maybe when he was alive he was given attributes of the ancient one because of his historical significance and charisma. Who knows!

BusyBaci · Nov 30, 2023

Silveryou said:
I agree with every word you say. The problem is that Alexander of Macedon falls exactly where Skanderbeg is positioned in our chronology when seen through the statistics provided by Fomenko. So it's not wrong to say that the two are the same, provided that, as suggested by Tristan, we look at the bigger picture rather than the details. The suggested explanation is that details were added later, possibly in the time period between the epoch of Skanderbeg and "modern times". Is it possible that various attributes of a more ancient character were given to a more recent one and this "dress" ended up as being part of his persona? After this was done the entire character "felt" too ancient for the time when he lived and somebody thought it was all about the ancient character, therefore stripping the more modern one of his main attributes.

I was surprised some months ago when a friend of mine introduced me to Ferdowsi's Shahnameh. In that opus it is explicitely said that after Alexander the Great took over the ancient world a series of monarchs took over whose names are totally those of the Sasanians, with a historical "jump" of about 450 years. This shows that the Alexander he was talking about, named a "Roman" in his books, was none other than Alexander Severus, as weird as it is. So there you go with another Alexander and in my opinion those two stories share something even though it's hard to put the pieces back together.

What is certain is that Alexander the Great had a father called Philip and supposedly cut the Gordian knot. If we move these few aspects in the time period of Alexander Severus we discover that he was succeeded in a short time by Philip "the Arab" (called "the Christian" in a not so distant past), the only Philip in "Roman" history and almost contemporary of the Gordian emperors, the only ones with that name. I wonder how many chances are these names are systematically repeated after a 450 years hiatus. Not only that but in between Alexander Severus and Philip there was an emperor called Maximinus Thrax, famous for his enormous height. But it happens that Anna Comnena remembers the "Roman" Philip as the guy with an extraordianry massive built figure, which could be a hint to some more confusion and/or duplicates.

Now I don't know if all of this should be transfered to the XV century. My opinion is that we should not do it. Maybe Skanderbeg was "dressed" with the attributes of that "Roman" Alexander simply by a confusion of their names. Or maybe when he was alive he was given attributes of the ancient one because of his historical significance and charisma. Who knows!

It's hard to say things with certainty when dealing with Fomenko's views, maybe you're right, maybe Alexander Severus, Skenderbej and some other persona of early medieval history is part of what made Alexander the Great a composite ancient character of Antiquity. Many times Fomenko himself uses this combination of deeds accomplished by many historical figures to distinguish a composite single glorious character one in order to reflect it as a phantom creation into 1820 or so years into the past from the time of his root origin real personas.

The combinations are indeed endless, but attributing an ancient character's accomplishments and history towards their medieval counterparts just because they have similar names, I think it's the opposite of what Fomenko says. Because we're not sure of their existence yet to begin with.

I don't know, for many Fomenkos claims I find myself having to read a lot of medieval history of Europe just so I could catch up to his thoughts and it's really hard because from European history I remember only the basics from elementary and high school. I'm very confident about modern history though, which is from 1780 to this very day because I learned to great extent in University, but beyond that I do have to reopen the books including Antiquity and recheck everything in Fomenko's light.

I know an expert medieval historian in my country and he specialized a lot by consulting Vatican's library information for a couple of years. He went in Firenze's and Milan's medieval archives also. He knows a lot about the last millennium. I'll send him an e-mail and see if I can make him read a bit of Fomenko and ask his opinion, if somehow he'll be able to entertain alternative history views. Chances are that he's going to block and ban me but, I have hopes so wish me luck. lol

Silveryou · Nov 30, 2023

BusyBaci said:
The combinations are indeed endless, but attributing an ancient character's accomplishments and history towards their medieval counterparts just because they have similar names, I think it's the opposite of what Fomenko says. Because we're not sure of their existence yet to begin with.

I personally try to keep from Fomenko only the general method of finding strings of succeeding events with similarities, because otherwise I should simply repeat what he says in his reconstruction. When it comes to the who's who game he generally says the attributes of the ancient character are basically those of the more recent one who was "deprived" of them leaving us with meagre stories such the ones of the middle-ages. It certainly works fine until it doesn't work anymore. In my opinion the red line is the Renaissance, but I will not say it's this or that since personal opinions are generally just that... opinions.

awarewolf · Dec 2, 2023

One issue I have with Fomenko is that from his conclusions, it feels like he hasn't read the works of a historian and author that he himself promotes on his website. Edwin Johnson came to the conclusion that English and Irish (and French?) culture was fabricated by Benedictine monks in the "14/1500s", and the "Middle Ages" didn't even exist. He focuses greatly on the epoch of the invention (or reintroduction) of the printing press, and the "Revival" of Letters.

I highly recommend this book of his (that I haven't finished yet): The rise of English culture : Johnson, E. (Edwin), 1842-1901 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

(link to Fomenko's site where I first heard of Edwin Johnson: THE HISTORY OF NEW CHRONOLOGY)

Silveryou said:
In my opinion the red line is the Renaissance, but I will not say it's this or that since personal opinions are generally just that... opinions.

My red line opinion right now is the "Discovery of the New Orb" occuring in 1492 (or 1592, or whenever it occurred). My hypotheses are that that was when this realm was either discovered and seeded, or conquered and colonized, or began recovering from a cataclysmic event while rediscovering lands previously owned or known.

Silveryou · Dec 3, 2023

awarewolf said:
One issue I have with Fomenko is that from his conclusions, it feels like he hasn't read the works of a historian and author that he himself promotes on his website. Edwin Johnson came to the conclusion that English and Irish (and French?) culture was fabricated by Benedictine monks in the "14/1500s", and the "Middle Ages" didn't even exist. He focuses greatly on the epoch of the invention (or reintroduction) of the printing press, and the "Revival" of Letters.

It is certainly interesting, even though it's also good to remember that Johnson took a lot of his anti-Benedectine narrative from two Jesuits: Jean Hardouin and Barthélémy Germon. So, with all due respect, it 's also a bit laughable to hear people complaining about the eeevil Russian mathematician and then completely entrusting someone who took the views of the Jesuits!

That said you are falling on the good side with me since I judge the content before the author.

awarewolf said:
My red line opinion right now is the "Discovery of the New Orb" occuring in 1492 (or 1592, or whenever it occurred).

Not to mention what I think is the most important detail, which is that the year 1492 was also the year 7000 of the "Byzantine" calendar, a sort of a sacred number since it is claimed that one day for God is like a thousand years for us humans, and the seventh day is when God completes his creation and finally rests. Which opens up various points of view and possibly even more:

it was all casual that it was the year 7000... and it's better not to tell anybody... which is the common opinion;
it all happened that year and the "discovery" was a sort of disclosure to the public for whatever reason;
it didn't happen that year and we have a chrono problem.

awarewolf · Dec 3, 2023

Silveryou said:
So, with all due respect, it 's also a bit laughable to hear people complaining about the eeevil Russian mathematician and then completely entrusting someone who took the views of the Jesuits!

I think you are projecting a bit there; I know there are some that view Fomenko in that light but I am not one of them. I find his work to be pretty valuable, even though I think he might have been a few centuries off in terms of where "true history" begins when he wrote his main series of books on the subject of chronology.

I also am not "completely entrusting" Edwin Johnson (I certainly don't agree with him on a lot of his assumptions about Greece

), but I'd say that many of his views and the evidence he puts forth with regards to the establishment of English (and Christian) chronology makes a lot of sense to me when I take into account a lot of my own research and hypotheses this year. I don't agree with *all* of his opinions, but I do think his insights and discoveries are important for making sense of stolen history.

I'd also like to add that quite a few Jesuits disagreed with each other... While they're generally viewed as one body, (and I certainly don't trust them as a rule), they are also individuals, and some, like Jean Hardouin, were publicly critical about established chronology.

Silveryou said:
That said you are falling on the good side with me since I judge the content before the author.

100% judge the content before the author, I very much agree with you there. I like to do my best to verify things with my own online research while reading. Still got many questions and a lot of personal research to go..

Silveryou said:
Not to mention what I think is the most important detail, which is that the year 1492 was also the year 7000 of the "Byzantine" calendar, a sort of a sacred number since it is claimed that one day for God is like a thousand years for us humans, and the seventh day is when God completes his creation and finally rests. Which opens up various points of view and possibly even more:

it was all casual that it was the year 7000... and it's better not to tell anybody... which is the common opinion;

it all happened that year and the "discovery" was a sort of disclosure to the public for whatever reason;

it didn't happen that year and we have a chrono problem.

Interesting. I was unfamiliar with the Byzantine calendar before, and am looking into it a bit now, so thank you for mentioning it. Explains the old Russian calendar I learned about a few months ago.

Edwin Johnson also makes mention of "one day for God is like a thousand years for humans" in one of the early chapters of the book I linked, too. He attributes its origins to "the Mohammedans", keeping in line with his assertion that Christianity came after, and not before.

This is something I have not fact-checked yet myself, and honestly feel I'd need to learn Arabic or find someone that does, in order to get to an accurate assessment of the truth, so I'm not sure where I lean on that point.

If 1492 really lines up with year 7000 Byzantine as you say, that's kind of phenomenal. Synchronicity here has me thinking that you're right to note that as an important detail.

Interesting, just found this in a footnote on the wikipedia page about the Byzantine Calendar:

This is the cited source for that information: Felipe Fernández-Armesto. 1492: The Year Our World Began. A&C Black, 2011. p. 148.
^ the title of that book... "1492: the year our world began"... The more I read about stolen history, the more it feels like that's true.

Sparrow · Dec 28, 2023

Hey @KorbenDallas, this is an understatement but it's amazing to see how much you can pull together on one concept.. In response to this incredible OP and your other post which discusses similar matters, I just wanted to point out a few details for your consideration potentially relevant to your topic and other things brought up in this thread - as usual please take with a grain of salt. Sorry I know I tend to explain somewhat verbose, I think this was nurtured into me as in my own little universe of personal connections if I make simple statements people usually look at me like I have three heads lol..

Note before we begin: I know I say this often, but the Va tican Library is probably where the genuine copies of everything are. Why would they allow the conquered slaves who they literally consider as mere animals access to legitimately sacred things? Even if the real copies were accessible people would still find a way to say they are fake lol. And of course nearly every writing of any kind can be claimed to be false or unreliable depending on whoever's perspective for some of which no evidence will ever be enough; Unfortunately we can only work with what we have access to and it's either we try with what we have or just give up since "everything is fake anyway;" I'm sure most of us based on the incredible depths of the responses here are going with the former. The best way to verify any information is seeing to what degree of what any writing aligns with the physical reality as it is the manifestation of the underlying spirit. Right now, the rule of emotion, chaos, and death appears to be.. very present.

Well, here we go.
Astrology: "Jesus", at least the Identity in the Scriptures, was Not a Sagittarius Nor a Capricorn.
Now I am not necessarily negating your point though as per the verses where it states that "there will be many false prophets who come in my name," it is quite possible there were false versions of "Jesus" who came on the scene throughout time, but this does not automatically rule out the genuine didn't exist. If we are staying consistent with the Scriptural details concerning the identity of this Person, as many Hebrew researchers are coming to realize, He is likely of the sign of Libra as He would have fittingly been born during the Feast of Tabernacles - which usually occurs at the end of September/beginning of October, it just appears to shift because of the contrast between two different calendars. Tabernacles is the ultimate Feast in the Hebrew spectrum, a week long party and signifies the celebration of the coming to fruition of everything planted through the year hence also likely would have fittingly been symbolic of the promise of His coming to fruition as well.

Concerning the calendar we all currently use, being that the astrological sign change occurs during the 21st or so, the "Jesus" figure the world focuses on December 25 could have also potentially been born during Capricorn - the Goat, ie Baphomet. The holidays the world celebrates are not the holidays of Scripture - so the concept that "he was born during Christmas" likely does indeed apply to an individual actually representative of the pagan religions/traditions as the one or others who would come in His name, but this does not mean they were the same identity Scripture describes. Here is a small comparison:

Astrologically it would make sense if the Scripture Identity was a Libra - its symbol being the weighted scales representing justice as he was sent to balance the scales to give humanity the second chance at redemption. Libra being a cardinal (leader) air sign is one of the most logical signs and will tend to keep their heads even during an emotional barrage. Think about how hard it is to grasp the wind or make it stop, despite it being seemingly harmless air has the ability to make fire and water (emotional signs) and sometimes even earth element submit to it. Libra is one of the most emotionally stable signs and very logical (order) at least when it comes to men. Libra is the one sign in which leader males of all other signs have no problem being subordinate to as Libra is essentially the "leader of leaders", every man in the group willingly giving him this position as the Libra tends to also include/value underdogs as a meaningful part of pack. I have actually seen this dynamic in person, a particular friend being a healthy Libra - it is amazing to see how all other men naturally not mind him being "leader of the pack" without any spoken agreement, it just happens. Even men born of other signs who are naturally good leaders will likely have Libra influence somewhere within their chart. And note, I am just detailing general traits of the signs, there are many other factors that could make up a person's character so this isn't to fault anyone born of any other sign, not to worry we all still have a purpose.

Pisces just to mention here since it came up concerning the ages, is mutable (changeable), represents the ocean, deep emotions subject to change, its symbol 2 fishes cycling showing their proneness to changing minds fairly easily, change being its only constant, emotion (chaos) rules over logic. Seeing the reality around us for the moment one could make the argument we are still in the age of Pisces as it definitely somewhat feels like being cast at sea with no solid ground anywhere as feelings/emotions are regarded over facts/logic. Emotion has it's place, like a fire within a fireplace it can cook your food, warm up the whole house, and help you survive the winter, however if that fire is placed anywhere else it will burn your house down; or, having in-house water is great, but if you have no pipes for the water to run it will ruin the house from the inside-out; same concept pattern with logic(order) and emotion(chaos) - once logic is out the door and emotions have no boundaries it is a free for all system meltdown.

But see here is what I struggle with concerning the age thing: how do these ages exist or even matter if our timeline is so short? As Banta mentioned I have echoed this thought in the past - while fun to contemplate what does it matter if we can't even figure out what happened 150 years ago? It probably matters in some way of course, it just sounds like level 100 vs level 3 (not you, me lol).

We'll jump off the deep end here soon, but first things first.

The Mist of the Tropic Lines
As much as it is taught to us as gospel that these lines exist, no one is ever going to physically find them, the only place they seem to exist is in our programmed minds and Mercator based maps; it appears that no one seems to know who exactly thought up/"discovered" the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, no citation of any kind - just an echo chamber of "2000 years ago." The mappa mundi maps are the oldest style of world map, one that would actually fit a circular face of the earth; the Ravenna, the Dover, and the Hereford clock in at 650 AD, 1200 AD, and 1300 AD.
(Imaged below from left to right: Dover, Ravenna, Hereford - had this montage from previous posts so just used the same sorry. These are way too detailed to see here anyway we'd be better off looking up higher resolution images to read the fancy Latin print, I have linked them to the names of the maps above.)

"Why am I obsessed with the mappa mundi?" It just took one influencer going out of his way to make the mappa mundi sound ridiculous to make me look into it, same with Obama's constant mockery of flat earthers - a "thou dost protest too much" signal if you will. Anyhow, all three maps above are well within the "2000 years ago" window, however we have yet to find a mappa mundi that labels the tropic lines or even the equator for that matter. I've tried to get the lines to work with the mappa mundi and there isn't as much consistency as I'd hoped, only "1st world" Europe (Japheth) and Asia/North America (Shem) ends up being consistent. I will get into this more detailed on the next chapter post for the mappa mundi. Is it possible that "they" thought up the lines as a means to section the earth into social-economic classes? As you notice while most of Europe and "North America"/Asia/Russia/Japan are well outside the bounds of the tropic lines almost entirely, notice most countries between the lower division lines are typically "2nd/3rd world" when it comes to standard of living.. Just what are the odds. Or thinking of it in terms of Tartaria, notice most of Tartarian territory would have been above the Tropic of Cancer, which is also kind of odd.

Is it possible that the zodiac is not solely celestial? that even earth has astrological geological reference points? For example there being a Taurus Mountains in Turkey, and other old maps will list the zodiac on the map as if it's somehow relevant for reading the map. Perhaps the ancient people's architectures also give us a clue as to where these astrological match-up points are on the earth? Why would the tropics, if they even exist, have to change at all if they are earth traits?

Recent Cataclysm
It is state in the Book of the Rolls that at the center of the earth there is a section that will open and this is where Adam was buried, ie Jerusalem where Yahusha was crucified as illustrated in some mappa mundis. The Book of Mormon (BOM) states when this occurred there were some places destroyed with fire, earthquakes, and storms such as the earth had never seen. Perhaps this could explain ancient architectures containing varying destroyed traits and perhaps explain the mudflood phenomenon? The word 'tempest' definitions are as follows: a violent windstorm, frequently accompanied by rain, snow, or hail. Furious agitation, commotion, or tumult; an uproar. A very violent storm; an extensive current of wind, rushing with great velocity and violence, and commonly attended with rain, hail, or snow; a furious gale; a hurricane.

It also says that some high places were brought low while valleys were brought high, some places were swallowed up beneath the sea. The BOM also states that after these disasters there were three days of darkness with darkness so thick no candle or flame could even penetrate - during which many people perished. Naturally there needs to be a second witness but definitely interesting to say the least.

Quick sidebar Since I Mentioned It: Book of Mormon Unmasked for those Interested.
We have it programmed into our minds that Joseph Smith translated these writings so somehow he is automatically credited as being the representative of the BOM; however after having read it cover to cover twice at this point, the ancient portion of this book has nothing to do with him whatsoever and I seriously doubt Mr. Smith really had much to do with the foundation of this book either. This is opinion of course. He was likely propped in place by "them" as a puppet for the cult of Mormonism - which actually has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon whatsoever. "How can I claim that?" Because, Fact: the Book of Mormon is one of the most anti-polygamy books out there that will tell you verbatim that a man is to have one wife and concubines he must have none! Here's one of the proofs:

Book of Mormon is Anti-Polygamy, Jacob Ch 2:

Seeing this and knowing what the Mormonism cult is famous for... Being that even Joseph Smith nearly had 50 wives he failed being anyone of righteous significance whatsoever based on the very criteria in the BOM. Definitely a fun one to chew on, and yes the anti-polygamy idea is consistent all throughout the book. People in general just have a tendency to take the say-so of the puppet gatekeepers' word and only read bits and pieces on their own, never actually making sure for themselves what even their own religious writings say as a whole; just as my past self, most Christians haven't even actually read most of the Scriptures - could it be that Mormons don't actually read their entire foundational book either? Not to mention another disqualification fact for Joseph Smith: the BOM is anti-secret society all throughout it, saying that if we let them take control we're essentially doomed. It is of course sketchy that the original manuscript is supposedly missing, but being that Joseph Smith was connected to the Freemasons who were connected to the Templars who were connected to the Va tican.. they could have easily just given it to him through one of the fallen ones masquerading/ shapeshifting as angels of light to put the work out there and then just locked it away again. "Why?" Because they need to allow the bare minimum of legitimate information to be accessible or the game isn't fair. "Is it gospel?" Not necessarily saying that but it definitely adds vital context concerning what historically happened to a critical tribe of Israel (Joseph ie Ephraim) before and after Jerusalem's destruction. They are essentially telling us the truth hidden in plain sight by utilizing a "Joseph Smith" to be the cover person for the BOM, similar to "John Doe", the name "Smith" is a common name that could also mean "made by", so they are essentially telling us that the descendants of Joseph wrote the book. End sidebar.

"Tartarian" Architecture: Was it "Solomonian"
There is a potential that the elaborate architecture found around the world assumed to be "Tartarian" may have been created during Solomon's Era using Solomon's key(as in frequency). In the Book of the Two Pearls it states that he used a ring which can enslave demons of many ranks to create the elaborate architectures perhaps this concept could potentially explain the incredibly complex details and the too-perfect symmetry within the Tartarian designs impossible to have been achieved by hammer and chisel.

Book of the Two Pearls Ch. 17

(Honorable mention: The book also speaks of a peculiar instance where two demons get trapped in the sky with a column, stating that the demons that were carrying it are invisible but the column can be seen.... Black Knight Satellite?) Anyhow, rumor has it that there was a time Solomon ruled, or at least was in good report with, all the kingdoms of the earth. In trying to condense the timeline, could Solomon's influence have been a potential source of everything people conclude as being Tartarian architecture? Built by the same person with the same style? Did he build in other countries/lands on behalf of his many wives and their families? Were some daughters given to him as payment? Could he have eventually taught others how to do it? Especially being that this architecture appears to also have existed beyond the scope of the Tartarian Empire which was typically Asia, also having been seen in European and African continents as well. Solomon being the source of this concept would fit fairly well Scripturally as he eventually fell away from the worship of YHWH and began to worship the other fallen ones, hence the many statues all over the Tartarian diaspora would not have been a surprise even under Solomon's influence. The idea that the Millennial Kingdom already happened is somewhat popular even within my own circles, stating the majestic buildings are surely the aftermath of that reign - however the one detail they forget to consider: as inundated as Tartarian architecture is with graven images ie statues, many of them being pagan deities, it is highly unlikely it was a kingdom belonging to the genuine Yahusha as it is doubtful He would have allowed so many statues/idols to inundate everything. Most like to only focus on part 2 which is "do not bow down and worship them" but part 1 of that says "do not make for yourselves any graven image." It's actually acknowledged by even lesser spiritually focused people such as authors on Ancient Origins stating that it is usually difficult to trace down the actual Hebrews compared to other cultures as they generally avoided making statues/carved images except for absolutely sacred items. Subsequently any discovery or proof of Israelites based on especially pagan carved images indicates it was during their falling away condition, which was unfortunately more common than their originally intended condition, just as corruption is more common than purity.

Year Calculation and the Calendars: The Five and a Half Great Days.
In the Apocryphal Book of Adam and Eve, and the Book of the Rolls, it states that salvation will come in "five and a half great days." Following in suite that "a great day is a thousand years" would mean that the Messiah the Scriptures describe was potentially born 5500 years from Adam's time:

Combining the five and a half great days of 5500 assuming He came right on the dot, with the years stated to us now being potentially -1000 years assuming there aren't more missing years, so 2023 being really 1023, adding this to 5500 would be 6523, sounds kinda good but the main problem here being we are combining numbers of 2 different (AM + AD) calendar methods. Everything in Scripture happens in patterns, so the Sabbath Day rest in the great days pattern the Millennial Reign should begin at around the 7th day, however Scripture states that the full length of time before this will be cut short for the elect's sake before their flesh also is ruined by the corruption. Cut short by how much? Who knows - but it is likely this wild card that warrants the statement He will come back at an hour we think not. It is after the Sabbath the new week begins.

While there is a potential that we could jointly use the i/j/AD calendar method as a reference point, it is probably better to keep the old method of calendar when counting, or at least try to stick to the same one. That being said...

Our Timeline Could Be Much Shorter than We Think: Let's Play With a Wild Concept
"No Graves Before 1700s?" Ok maybe I've just lost a marble but I can't find who in the thread was saying something like this, I know I saw it cuz for a second I was like say what? lol. Not sure if this comment was meant for worldwide or just America, but let's play with this for a moment.. This is a bit wild but here we go. If in the Hebrew calendar, assuming it's closer to being accurate, counting from creation it is right now the year 5784, and if He came exactly at 5500, then perhaps He was here approximately 300 years ago or so - which would ironically fit the claims of the New Earth channel that some archaeologists state Roman architecture can't be much older than 200-300 years, and also would match the supposed fact it is rare to find a tombstone older than 1700s, apparently worldwide - though I somewhat doubt this is true for Japan and China. Edit to add after perusing at findagrave.com there are graves purportedly around from the 1100s-1300s in the UK and also Japan, some with curious details though for example some stating "burial details unknown", or one stating that even though the person was buried 1300s the body was moved to so and so location in 1824... Assuming all reports are legit, some questions: Are there even real remains within? Who'd even be allowed to excavate to check? How much of modern history of every country is the "theme park version"? Particular to note on the generally older tombstones of historical figures, one must wonder if most of these are "theater props" on the Giant Theme Park World, similar to how one might find Disney character props/significant locations at Disney World...

Continuing, regardless of the variance mentioned above, it does somewhat appear that at least for America, despite it having likely been a more ancient location than we are told, seem to rarely have tombs older than the 1700s. And if America really being part of Asia was really the land of Canaan which was really the location of Israel later, keeping in mind of His coming at 5500 and it being 5784 now... What if there aren't many graves older than the 1700s in America/Canaan/Israel because all/most of the graves were opened at Yahusha's death via the first resurrection? While it is somewhat common knowledge that the righteous were raised, there is a potential the unrighteous were also raised "to everlasting (can mean irreversible) shame and contempt". Both groups are to be resurrected during the second resurrection according to 2 Baruch 50-51 and 2 Esdras 7 - the righteous into their glorified state pretty much superhero-like, the unrighteous will rise exactly as they were buried - so in step, if this is to happen the second time, why wouldn't this have happened the first time? This potentially may be an answer to the Rake creature (not skinwalkers those are something else) phenomenon, which is apparently such a problem the US military recruit dogmen (cynocephaly) to hunt/get rid of them, here are the accounts 1 and 2 that talks about this; somewhat fitting in the sense that both creatures are mostly encountered in the US, at least from what I know at this point in time. Crazy yes, perhaps an understatement that truth may indeed be stranger than fiction.

Naturally of course the "it happened 300 years or less ago" is somewhat of a hard concept to accept because this substantially ups the BS meter even more from where it's at and we would have to absolutely reconfigure everything else we know, but perhaps it's what we should be doing anyway.

Giant Clock: What Time Is It?
In Jubilees 6 it speaks that after the Israelites fall away and are taken into captivity they will forget the true reading of times, which is probably the stage we are still at, but surely recovery can be made somehow. The book of Enoch is unpopular typically because it "seems to promote a flat earth", but seeing the consistent order amongst the stars and the fact that sailors used to navigate via the stars, if the NASA version were even remotely accurate the stars in the sky wouldn't look pretty much THE SAME every night so that pretty much settles it. The book of Enoch gets into the coarses of the sun and moon, the reason why the sun appears to rise/set at different points throughout the year is because it does: there are essentially 6 gates it goes through throughout the year, and it says he runs his coarse like a groomsman ready to run a race. The moon has a track too but it's way more complicated than the sun, similar to the male vs female in general. While the sun doesn't need the moon he enjoys her company, but the moon despite being equal in size her very ability to shine is absolutely dependent on the sun - in the same pattern, for women to believe they don't need men is absolutely ridiculous, likely a recipe for the death of a society. In pattern the sun, a "he", stays simple and he is the foundation, the moon, a "she", varies in cycles and marks special times, changes her appearance often and over the coarse of time her path looks like a flower around the sun's stem - despite the strong and the weak dynamic, together their dance creates life following the paternal(spiritual) and maternal(physical) micro-macro pattern. Notice too how the center of the earth somewhat appears like the cogs within a clock?

The micro to macro pattern seems to apply even when it comes to the enigma of the clock.. Perhaps we are all obsessed with time because we are actually living within a giant living time piece. Seeing that potentially the sun could be the second's hand measuring days/weeks, the moon could be the minute's hand measuring months/seasons, the stars could be for the hours of the zodiac measuring years/great days... Maybe "all we need to do" is just refigure out how to read the time of this Giant Clock we live on.

Anyway "that's all", hopefully it made sense, if anyone made it this far thanks for reading. Just some chips to put on the table with a few cents, it doesn't have to be anything more or less. I will also start to incorporate more mental mind to this Giant Clock concept in trying to understand a shorter timeline potential, Thank you

YnotCurious · Dec 29, 2023

Yes well because of the re-writing of the true history we plebs have to sift through the BS and that causes a fragmented response by us, which then causes a sort of stalling in the momentum of discovery.
I have wrote about the 2nd Sun before and I don’t mean to pound it into you fellows but… even though it is a daunting eye opener it explains a lot about the re-written history business.
If you are able to grasp the idea of the occurrence of the 2nd Sun’s 666 year cycle and give allowance for the unknown factors surrounding the aftermath, it may help you to sift through the BS.
The cycle of the 2nd Sun is the BIGGEST secret of the controllers… next would be that Human Aliens have been coming and going to Earth for a very long time… AND… there are millions that live here among us and always have been…. I was told by a consulate level fellow that you cannot tell them from normal people.
I did hear a rumour that the PTB are going to cause some sort of scare about this and then try to do some other vacks trick to ‘flush them out’ or… select people that don’t follow their social control program and say that they are Aliens. (Whatever?)

So a little bit more about the 2nd Sun.
Years ago while writing and responding to others in a blog site a few of us managed to come up with a theory about the cyclical return of the 2nd Sun … as we persisted in our endeavours of ducking and weaving the BS, we finally come to the conclusion that the last 2nd Sun visitation was 1365 AD as I said before here… the main evidence that we came up with was:-
1. The Great Famine of 1315 AD ( where we had worked out that the date had been changed from the real date which I later worked out to be 1365 AD)
2. One of our blogging group was insanely clever and good on the computer found records of the Chinese and Polynesian stories about the event where they had named the event in both cases… since then, the internet seems to be void of this info… maybe an AI upgrade has caused that ?
3. Among our discoveries of physical evidence that we found up and down the east coast of Australia, the 650 year old European Oak tree was a clincher that was associated with a substantial river estuary that been moved 8 klms north of where it was originally… The Oak planted by Portuguese explorers when they got stranded in the original estuary because they had been in the mouth of the river when the massive storms reshaped the east coast of Australia back in 1365.

Now if I am correct with this theory, then you could search history for sort of blank and confusing records around the aftermath of each cycle going back about 2666 years starting with Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad and the 1365 event.
of course the cycle goes back for many millennia but its up to your search criteria or curiosity. (The Noah event was one)

From what I have seen you fellows reveal here in this blog, there seems to be major time distortions within the historical records that may not be just the PTB interfering … and that made me wonder… Do these events shift the pace of time as well as ‘melt’ the earth and rock (as in seperate/loosen the molecules slightly so that hammers etc. can be found fused into coal seams or rock) coz it may be possible that time is sped up during these events… that would explain a lot. … I am starting to think that that is the case….
For example:-
I been to inspect the ‘Gosford Glyphs’ and the PTB story made up is there is that the old fellow that used to live near the site and he was a nutter that carved the glyphs… BUT … the soil to fill in the burial chamber within the large crevice where the glyphs are would be hundreds of tons that had to be carried there by someone … and the top of the rise above the crevice is bare of soil for about 100 metres… that a lot of work for one little old eccentric. So the old fellow story is Bullshit!! … the glyphs are covered in Lichens that are hundreds of years old… But anyway… the pharaoh that died there was from the early dynasty, and at the time, looking at all of the evidence, I had a feeling that there was some sort of time anomaly associated with that…. Now it makes more sense.
Here is a wiki link that debunks ITESLF with BS coz they say that some people witnessed new glyphs had been carved into the rock there… yeah right… then how did the lichen grow over them ???
Gosford Glyphs - Wikipedia

I visited the site about 25 years ago and there is and probably still is very old lichen growing allover the glyphs… lichen that was probably 500 + years old… there was over 100 glyphs there, plus a buried chamber/cave in the middle… ‘we’ were not allowed to excavate the infilled cave (which would have taken 10 men about ten days) No was the answer from the local PTB.

TRY this for pics:-

gosford glyphs nsw - Google Search

For those who haven't read my other post on this subject see ‘Year 2030 : what are they hiding’.
(Plus my other posts for other stuff… I don’t mind if you believe me or not… I’m just putting it out there)

Link:- Great Famine of 1315–1317 - Wikipedia

In the picture the painting explains the the Sun caused death because it got so hot that it caused a famine and it seems to show that it happened when the tail of the 2nd Sun was caught up by the Sun… (which is known as ‘The Wedding’)
PS… Usually depictions of Dragons in times gone by represent COMETS…. Sometimes snakes are used by the old people of India.

Here is a picture of the ‘Toowoomba Rock’ that is difficult To get a high res pic of now… The interpretation of the symbols on the rock was either misrepresented (BS) or mistaken… the symbols say “The Sun Serpent came twice… once in one direction and once in the opposite”
The Sun symbol centre ‘Foo Face‘ looking symbol is the pattern on the back of the head of a Spectacle Cobra… this was carved by Sri Lankan or Indian gem hunters that frequented Australia for Diamonds and Rubies etc., and were caught up in the extremely bad weather during this occasion…. No doubt ships were lost on the Australian coast… as were many Chinese ships of the massive Chineses fleet. (the Chinese fleet was said to have been disbanded due to the lack of interest by the then sitting Emperor. (more BS)

So if we read the info about the ‘decoy’ comet C/2014 UN271 … I believe it’s a decoy, so that we don’t get wind of the 2nd Sun’s return until its to late… We will find that ” It’s OK folks… it’s only a comet with a 2000 year cycle/orbit”.
Some info here:-

Comet C/2014 UN271 (Bernardinelli-Bernstein) | TheSkyLive

If you are open minded and don’t shit yourself easily then read my other posts coz I think it is important for the future well being of yourself, family and friends… I personally would like this subject to go ballistic in the very near future.
And lets face it… if I am incorrect about all of this, then it doesn’t matter… just treat it like a short story if you like.
There is a good ‘short story‘ that I sent KD entitled ‘The Ghosts of Mars’ that might interest you all… but he may not have posted it because it’s a bit ‘out there’. (although he could post it under ’Weird’) its about what the Controllers are and how ‘they’ work.

I strongly advise you all to read the book ‘Worlds in Collision‘ by Immanuel Velikovsky ISBN 0-89966-785-6.
The book is copyright 1950.(edited and re- released 1956 I believe)

Velikovsky was a high ranking Rabbi that seemed to have access to the ‘hidden library’ it seems.
It appears to have been severely edited after its initial release… I think that the Council of Rabbi’s (or what ever its called) pulled the original writings and format of the book because it revealed to much information about the 2nd Sun and it’s cycle.

Anyway… The book covers history from ‘The beginning of time’ and includes information from all over the world.

Topics such as Venus was originally a comet that was captured by the Sun and became the Morning Star… he covers many of the solar system‘s events during some massive catastrophic planetary re-alignment… referencing many ancient culture’s writings like Vedic etc.

If you read the book be aware that the topic of the 2nd Sun being cyclical is totally avoided (edited) but is replaced by ‘comets’… so you have to fill in the blanks there.

The title of the book is not an exaggeration…

There are many references to catastrophes, that happened through history from massive earthquakes To ’fire and brimstone’ from the heavens etc… even the giant hail, floods and heavenly plasma discharges that covered one third of the sky etc.

My mother suggested that I read the book way back in the 70’s but I didn't read it until the 90’s after my mother passed and I found her copy…But I read the with a casual curiosity of whatever instead of a specific curiosity regarding hidden history. … So now I have to read it again.
Here is a snapshot of some pages:-

So if you read the book please be aware that a lot of the written history from millennia ago would have been from eye witness reports of what was seen in the sky/heavens way back then… Things like Venus being ejected from Jupiter was most likely either a moon of Jupiter or Saturn etc, or a large Ort type object that was dragged into the inner solar system by the 2nd Sun during one of it’s cyclical visits.
And please remember that these catastrophic events have been less severe as time goes by… So fear not.

I am expecting a ‘dramatic’ but non destructive event this coming time… as I have said before… I expect this next one to cause a total shift in the energy of our planet, as in a shift from the limited physical to a more free flowing energy of the realm we occupy… ie. … as you may know our 5 senses only reveal about .001 % of environment… that means only a slight increase in our abilities and reality would result in a complete new type of existence. … that lion laying down with the lamb is not wishful thinking… if we shift to ‘the next level’ we won’t need to eat or kill other living things because we will absorb 100% of our needs from the environment in the form of pure energy… At the moment we absorb about 80% of our needs from our environment in the form of energy with 20% being from the food we eat and drink… the 20% being a ‘trigger’ to initiate the energy ‘download’ and conversion within our physical bodies…. Sounds like ‘high science’ because it is… the plasma that makes up everything in the universes is basically made up from the thought of the Creator and from a scientific point of view is made up of different flow and mixture of gravitational and electromagnetic energy… I am trying to stay on subject of Stolen History but there are a few ’side-subjects’ that needs to be addressed because they can help explain the ’unexplainable’. … like the mysterious “Time in History“ that seems to have missing parts/time-gaps, and or where time seemed sped up… this sort of stuff needs to be allowed for when searching for our true history because if you suspect that you have come across one of these ‘Time Event’ areas in our history, it’s best not to search around and around to fill in the gap…. Saves time.

Anyway…
If you are able to grasp what I am proposing here with the cycles of the 2nd Sun, then it becomes easier to grasp the Stolen History scenario.
PS. I am good with science because my first occupation was as a trainee laboratory technician in the National Laboratory system, which is a worldwide Lab system with Labs in most countries of the world participating… Los Alamos is just one of them.

Our timeline could be much shorter than we think...

Active member

Member

New member

Member

Active member

Member

New member

Active member

New member

Active member

Member

New member

Member

New member

Member

New member

Member

New member

SH Author

New member