Theos-Talk Archives (August 2002 Message tt00231)

Aug 24 2002

Re Ice Age, Glaciation, dates and estimates

Dear Friends:

Geological periods were calculated and recorded by the
ancients: S D II 66-7, 145,149, 262-3, 273, 329, 486,
709 - 730, 785-7. A diagram is to be found on (S D II 710),
where H P B shows the estimates made by geologists in her
time. ( S D II 66, 72, 696 )

Those ESTIMATES have been revised since.

====================================================
Name of
GEOLOGICAL AGE	HPB's S D DATES	MODERN DATES
===============	===============	================

PRIMORDIAL	321,000,000 10,000,000,000 +
[SD II 711-2]

PALEOZOIC
Laurentian	.	.	.	1 billion (+/-)
Cambrian	.	.	.	590,000,000
Ordovician	.	.	.	505,000,000
Silurian	.	.	.	.	438,000,000

PRIMARY	.	150,000,000
[SD II 712]
Devonian	.	.	.	408,000,000
Carboniferous	.	.	.	360,000,000
Permian	.	.	.	280,000,000

SECONDARY	.	45,000,000
[SD II 713-4]

MESOZOIC
Triassic	.	.	.	248,000,000
Jurassic	.	.	.	213,000,000
Cretaceous	.	.	.	144,000,000

TERTIARY	9,000,000
[SD II 714]

CENOZOIC
Paleocene	.	.	.	65,000,000
Eocene	.	.	.	55,000,000
Oligocene	.	.	.	38,000,000
Miocene	.	.	.	25,000,000
Pliocene	.	.	.	5,000,000

QUATERNARY	1,600,000
[SD II 715]
Paleolithic	.	.	. 4,000,000
Pleistocene	.	.	.	2,000,000
Neolithic	.	.	.
Holocene	.	.	.	100,000
Historical	.	.	.	10,000

PRESENT DAY
===================================

The last large island of Atlantis named Poseidonis is said
to have sunk 9,375 years before 2002. S D II 406, 535.

Ice Ages are mentioned in the S D ( S D II 71, 726, 738fn,

Axial disturbance of the Earth caused the Ice age S D II
274,

There have been numerous deluges and ice ages S D II 141,

Atlanteans (Paleolithic man) emigrated prior to the ice age
S D II 740

European men witnessed the last Ice Age S D II 254, 677-8,
750fn, 751,

Scientists at H P B's time mention Ice ages and estimated:
S D II 141, 778-9.


The SECRET DOCTRINE makes statements culled from the records
of the adepts. It does not try to fit those with the
present day estimates of our Science -- which is always
moving these foreword and back.

It is science which in terms of the past is making
estimates. The RECORDS of the Adepts do not alter. They
were observations.


Best wishes,

Dallas

=======================


-----Original Message-----
From: Reed Carson
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 3:06 PM
To: study@blavatsky.net
Subject: Re: Atlantis - when did it sink.

L ,
You certainly are jolting me out of the sequence in which I
would have
presented things. But then I suppose that is always to the
good.

Larry, I think you are completely right in noting the
closeness and
suggestive connection between the end of the ice age "around
10,000" BC
and, what I will now call, the Theosophical date for the
submergence of
Poseidonis, in 9,564 BC. Exactly what the connection might
be is another
matter.

Also it is important, I think, to explore your statement
"scientific
community argues against the existence of Atlantis in
general". Of course
you are completely correct in that.

The possibly surprising thing is that there is currently a
modern
scientific view that gives a date for the sinking of
Atlantis that is
nearly a bullseye confirmation of Theosophy's date. I think
this view is
presented in a very clear-headed way. Wouldn't that be nice
to have
Theosophy so closely confirmed and on such an important
point?

But there is a catch. We need to discuss the ice age.

The pleistocene epoch is the scientific name for the "ice
age". Science
says it lasted 2.5 million years, and as you say, ended in
about 10,000
BC. I have also seen dates that reach as recent as possibly
8,000 BC but
the predominate date is definitely the 10,000 BC that you
gave.

Now the book that I am liking says in addition that there
was no
Pleistocene epoch. That's right. It didn't happen.

Now that leaves two questions. First does HPB assert that
according to
occultism the ice age did exist?

Here is the quote from HPB that you first offered: "Anyway,
that quote was
from SD II : 141 "The "Deluge" is undeniably an
UNIVERSAL TRADITION. "Glacial periods " were numerous, and
so were the
"Deluges," for various reasons. Stockwell and Croll
enumurate some half
dozen Glacial Periods and subsequent Deluges-- the earliest
of all being
dated by them 850,000, and the last about 100,000 years
ago."

So you know, what she is saying was the established view on
glacial periods
that existed in her time. Is she simply taking it as true
and reaching out
to existing sources to explain and validate her other facts
or is she
asserting the occult teaching when she speaks above?

Do we reject the scientific findings that seem to confirm
the Theosophical
dating to a near bullseye?

Then we should also ask: "Could the scientific view on the
pliestocene
epoch that was regarded as true in the 19th, 20th, and now
in the 21th
century possibly be wrong?" Could an overhaul of that
magnitude possibly
be necessary in our time? How could it possibly be? Are
there any reasons
why the notion of the Pliestocene age is obviously garbage?

Larry, if I think you are inverting my natural order, Bill
is totally
blowing my cover. So I guess I must write to him next.

CUT