Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00856)

I am also very interested in this subject Krsanna, if you would please cc it to me.
Thanks
Cass

krsanna <timestar@timestar.org> wrote: Muck believed the meteors set off volcanic eruptions along the 
mountain range that extends down the mid-Atlantic.  Volcanic gases 
were so nasty that they could have gotten caught up in prevailing 
winds and affected the upper atmosphere, thus the entire planet.  
Damage done to the upper atmosphere could have allowed in greater 
solar radiation that affected many conditions of life, and 
particularly in Europe.  Muck suggested that mutations occurred in 
areas across what is now Europe and that the White European is a 
mutant.  

The Rh positive blood factor is a mutation that appeared in Europe 
10,000-12,000 years ago.  That information is from a geneticist who 
published on this in "The Alabama Journal of Medicine."  

Ozone damage had not yet been discovered at the time that Muck's 
book was published.  Scientists didn't even talk about the 
possibility of ozone damage until the 1970's.  Muck's consideration 
of this was a good call.  

Damage to the ozone layer that is now allowing higher levels of 
solar radiation is capable of causing genetic mutations, and may 
explain many of the mutations observed in the last 20 years.  I have 
a strange story from Bolivia of an elderly woman who is now 
developing internally the equivalent of gills.  These are present 
during embryonic development, but disappear in later gestation.  I 
cannot verify the story, but her story is so detailed in medical 
terminology that it was certainly not a casual invention. 

Higher levels of cancer, particularly skin cancer among Whites, and 
brain disorders have corresponded with the increasing levels of 
radiation from ozone damage.  

I'll try to get some scans made of the chapters we discussed and 
email them to you.

Best regards,
Krsanna


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins  
wrote:
>
> Dear Krsanna,
> 
> I can indeed imagine the Soviet having a field day with that 
American.  
> Obviously the American scientist had a moment of confusion where 
he 
> merged Biblical mythology into scientific methodology.   I don't 
whether 
> to laugh or be terrible embarrassed for the poor man.  Should like 
he 
> should have been a minister instead. 
> 
> I think a little background would put things into a better 
perspective.  
> The Continental Drift hypothesis was actually the product of a 
couple of 
> British scientists.  The Idea quickly gained respect in GB, but 
when the 
> two Brits came to the US in the 60s to present their theory and 
its 
> supporting evidence, they were laughed out of the room.   Since 
your 
> Soviet book was published in 1970, this American's comment had to 
have 
> been made during the period when the theory was pretty much 
ignored by 
> American scientists.  It took about ten years (mid 70s) before the 
idea 
> began to take hold in the US.  As it was taking hold, American 
> Scientists changed the name to Plate Tectonics.  My guess is that 
they 
> probably would have left the name alone if the theory originated 
here.  
> Anyway, the theory did go through a lot of modifications since 
1970.
> 
> This reminds me of a trip I took around '69 or '70 to Crater Lake 
in 
> Oregon.  I stayed close to the rangers and absorbed every word 
they said 
> about the geological history of the area.  When I revisited the 
area 
> around '84, I talked to one of the rangers and repeated back what 
the 
> previous ranger told me fifteen years earlier.  The ranger 
said, "oh no, 
> that is all wrong."  I was momentarily shocked that I could have 
> remembered it wrong.  Then he explained that what the ranger told 
me was 
> the correct theory for then, but it has completely changed since. 
> 
> I googled Otto Muck.  Interesting man. I'll have to see if I can 
pick up 
> a used copy of his book.  Or I may already have it in some 
unopened box 
> somewhere.
> He may have indeed intuited some things, and his data isn't likely 
to 
> change.  However, any scientific views he might have brought in 
are 
> going to be hopelessly outdated. 
> 
> I'm not surprised about the existence of a meteor field along the 
coast 
> of So. Carolina, but I can't imagine how a meteor could sink a 
continent 
> without destroying the planet.  Massive explosions, earthquakes, 
tidal 
> waves: yes.  But anything powerful enough to sink a continent--
even a 
> small one, would also create a massive extermination of life on 
the 
> planet. Perhaps, not everything, but it would be a major event.  
The 
> global distribution of plant and animal life has been a subject of 
study 
> since the mid nineteenth century. Donnelly made extensive used of 
this 
> material in his classic work.  I recognize the Bashfor-Snell 
hypothesis 
> from some cable channel program on Atlantis.  I wasn't too 
impressed 
> either.
> 
> I think some of the best hints about Atlantis are in the SD.  But 
HPB 
> discusses the subject from several different angles, and if one 
doesn't 
> recognize that,  or doesn't keep them straight, it all ends in a 
> confused mess.  As I understand it, Lemuria and Atlantis are first 
of 
> all references to the planet in general during the 3rd and 4th 
> evolutionary periods (i.e. "root races.").  Ruta and Daitya are 
> references to the end of the Atlantian cycle which coincides with 
the 
> midpoint of the present cycle.  Poseidonis is a reference to a 
> relatively local disaster that wiped out a people who had a 
> relationship  to the Atlantian period.   A last /Remnant, so to 
speak.  
> Plato's Atlantis, more of a moral tale than history,  appears to 
include 
> a distant memory of Posidonis.  However, the more current argument 
that 
> Thera was Plato's Atlantis has a ring of at least partial truth. 
> 
> Best
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> krsanna wrote:
> 
> >Jerry -- On continental formation theories, Americans believe (or 
> >did) that the oceans have always existed.  The Soviet author 
quoted 
> >an American scientist, who, speaking at a conference, essentially 
> >said, "The oceans are where God created them, right where they've 
> >been since the beginning."  (My paraphrase.)  You can imagine the 
> >Soviet had a field day with that American theory.  The volcanic 
> >eruptions, according to the Soviet theory, was an intermediate 
> >event, but not the initial creational cause.
> >
> >Otto Muck a German engineer whose hobby was Atlantology, and his 
> >family published the book after his death.  The Soviet author 
refers 
> >to Muck's research, by the way.
> >
> >Muck found much evidence for the existence and subsidence of 
> >Atlantis.  At the moment, I can't recall if Muck talked about 
> >anomalies of marine vegetation and eels on America's east coast.  
> >But, anomalies in these are factual.  
> >
> >Muck believed that Atlantis' sinking was associated with meteor 
> >hits, and demonstrated evidence of what looks like a massive 
> >meteorite field along the coast of South Carolina.  This was 
fairly 
> >compelling because he was using aerial photos. He believed that 
> >parts of America's east coast recently sank while other parts 
rose 
> >as a result of the meteor hits and Atlantis sinking.
> >
> >THE ANDES
> >
> >"Atlantis: The Andes Solution" (John Bashford-Snell) is another 
book 
> >that has great photographic evidence, but I believe the author's 
> >interpretation is way off base.  He located a site in the Andes 
> >using satellite photographs -- he had worked in aerial 
intelligence 
> >in the Army.  In the satellite photos concentric circles and 
canals 
> >cover an area approximately the size of Poseidon, as described by 
> >Plato.  When the authohr visited the site, the canals looked like 
> >little valleys.  In the satellite photos, however, the regular 
> >positioning and sizes of the concentric circles are apparent.  He 
> >believed that the sinking of Atlantis had caused the Andes to 
rise.  
> >
> >Assuming that a global culture anciently existed, as I believe it 
> >did, the similarity between one large center and another would 
not 
> >be surprising.  The Andes as an ancient center for "The Brothers" 
> >would be a good candidate for a city of that nature.  I believe 
> >Plato's description was pretty good for several reasons.
> >
> >ANTARCTIC
> >
> >Another location that can be plausibly interpreted as man-made 
> >construction because of regularity of concentric circles 
separated 
> >by canals is beneath the ice in the Antarctic.  I can't remember 
> >precisely how it was identified, but it involved a study of the 
> >Antarctic.
> >
> >It is feasible that a global culture could have used signature 
> >design in large centers during the early part of the fourth 
round, 
> >which an advanced culture lived among humans on earth. Zecharia 
> >Sitchin locates a scientific base at the Antarctic in his Earth 
> >Chronicles.
> >
> >The Antarctic site is south of Easter Island, and that's another 
> >interesting feature.  My TimeStar geometry identifies Easter 
Island 
> >by latitude and longitude.  
> >
> >Thar ya go.  
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >-- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins  wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Dear Krsanna,
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I should mention that the Soviet writer believes that what is 
now 
> >>>the Atlantic Ocean was once a land mass, transfigured to become 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >an 
> >  
> >
> >>>ocean. 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Interesting idea.  The problem is that the Atlantic ocean floor 
> >>    
> >>
> >itself 
> >  
> >
> >>(under the sediments) is made up of the volcanic matter that 
came 
> >>    
> >>
> >from 
> >  
> >
> >>the mid Atlantic ridge.  Cores have been made on either side of 
> >>    
> >>
> >the 
> >  
> >
> >>ridge and oceanographers have found that the volcanic matter 
gets 
> >>    
> >>
> >older 
> >  
> >
> >>at they get further from the ridge.  According to current dating 
> >>methods, the volcanic matter nearest the Eastern and Western 
> >>    
> >>
> >shores of 
> >  
> >
> >>the Atlantic date to about 180,000 years. 
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>As I said, and what is so interesting, is that the Soviet 
> >>>theories seemed to embrace the idea of metamorphosis as an 
> >>>evolutionary process, rather the mechanical pulling and 
shifting 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >of 
> >  
> >
> >>>the continental drift theory. 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>I think there is room for both.  The absorption and recreation 
of 
> >>continents through subduction and volcanism strikes me as a kind 
> >>    
> >>
> >of 
> >  
> >
> >>metamorphosis.  Though, it seems that your Soviet writer had a 
> >>    
> >>
> >different 
> >  
> >
> >>idea about it.  
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>If I get a chance, I'll see if I can scan from the Soviet book 
> >>>chapters dealing with the core samples and inhabitants living 
on 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >the 
> >  
> >
> >>>Canary Islands at the time of modern contact.  
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Yes, please. I am especially interested in those Canary island 
> >>    
> >>
> >inhabitants.
> >  
> >
> >>>Have you read Otto Muck's book on Atlantis?  His research on 
> >>>America's Atlantic coast was good.
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>No, I'm afraid I haven't.  What is his conclusions on Atlantis?
> >>
> >>Best,
> >>Jerry
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>krsanna wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Jerry -- The copy that I have is in English.  Isn't that 
> >>>interesting.  It was written in English but was never published 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >in 
> >  
> >
> >>>America.  So much for Cold War politics.  The author used the 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >term 
> >  
> >
> >>>rock "DNA," by which I surmised he meant the mineral 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >composition.  I 
> >  
> >
> >>>searched the internet and found a copy in Ireland.  I believe 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >there 
> >  
> >
> >>>were copies in England as well.
> >>>
> >>>I should mention that the Soviet writer believes that what is 
now 
> >>>the Atlantic Ocean was once a land mass, transfigured to become 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >an 
> >  
> >
> >>>ocean.  As I said, and what is so interesting, is that the 
Soviet 
> >>>theories seemed to embrace the idea of metamorphosis as an 
> >>>evolutionary process, rather the mechanical pulling and 
shifting 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >of 
> >  
> >
> >>>the continental drift theory.  
> >>>
> >>>And yet, continental drift has become tectonic plate theory.  
> >>>      
> >>>
> >I've 
> >  
> >
> >>>been reading "A Crack In The Edge Of The Earth," by Simon 
> >>>Winchester, but, unfortunately got sidetracked.  With what?  
More 
> >>>HPB.  Winchester is a good popular science writer.  I read his 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >book 
> >  
> >
> >>>on Krakatoa.  He frames geology with his human experience of it.
> >>>
> >>>Research that has found identical rock in Siberia and the 
Western 
> >>>U.S. in being done at The University of Montana.  I have not 
seen 
> >>>anything definitive published on it, and have seen just 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >interviews 
> >  
> >
> >>>with the researcher, Dr. Sears.  
> >>>
> >>>If I get a chance, I'll see if I can scan from the Soviet book 
> >>>chapters dealing with the core samples and inhabitants living 
on 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >the 
> >  
> >
> >>>Canary Islands at the time of modern contact.  
> >>>
> >>>Have you read Otto Muck's book on Atlantis?  His research on 
> >>>America's Atlantic coast was good.
> >>>
> >>>Best regards,
> >>>Krsanna
> >>>
> >>>-- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins  
wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Dear Krsanna,
> >>>>
> >>>>Thank you for this interesting post.  I would appreciate any 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>references 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>you have to an English translation of the 1970 work, or 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >summaries 
> >  
> >
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>of 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>it.  Of course they, and you, are right about something like a 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>continent 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>leaving marks.  Then again, the theory has changed remarkably  
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>since 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Fritz's '64 address and since '70 also.  The new data and 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>consequently 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>the ideas have changed so much that the oceanographers changed 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >the 
> >  
> >
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>name 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>of the theory to "plate tectonics."  They now understand that 
it 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>is not 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>the continents that move, but the plates which the continents 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >sit 
> >  
> >
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>upon 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>glide over a very hot intermediary layer between the plates 
and 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>the 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>core.  They understand the mid-Atlantic ridge to be evidence 
for 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>ocean 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>floor spreading and the "ring of fire" around the Pacific 
basin 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >as 
> >  
> >
> >>>>"subduction zones" where the continental plates return to the 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>bowels of 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>the earth, only to be reformed again through volcanic 
activity.  
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Other 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>evidence of plate movement is the island arcs most commonly 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >found 
> >  
> >
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>in the 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Pacific.  The Hawaiian island chain is the best known 
example.  
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>They now 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>understand that island arcs are formed by the motion of the 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>continental 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>plates over "hot spots."  The overall theory seems to be 
pretty 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>tight at 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>the moment. That is, the main observations are accounted for.
> >>>>
> >>>>Still, the Soviet finding of a land mass with 12,000 year old 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>fresh 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>water vegetation is a fascinating discovery, though, depending 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>upon its 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>exact location, could be accounted for by the last major ice 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>age.   The 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>world's ocean depth, because of ice age cycles, vary by some 
350 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>feet.  
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>They are near maximum right now.   Also, the continents do 
rise 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>and sink 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>to a certain extent by other actions: the weight of  glaciers, 
a 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>strange 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>"bulge" that has its own motion, and, in a more localized 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >extent, 
> >  
> >
> >>>>earthquake activity.
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm interested in knowing what you mean by rock "DNA."  But 
the 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>canary 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Islands and Iceland would have been part of a single land mass 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>about 180 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>to 200 million years ago.  There have been a lot of matches 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>already made 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>between the rocks on the Eastern coast of the Americans and 
the 
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Western 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>coast of Europe and Africa. 
> >>>>
> >>>>Best
> >>>>Jerry
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>krsanna wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>I hope it's okay to interject into this discussion 
information 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>about 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>the mountain range that extends from Iceland in the north 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>southerly 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>through the mid-Atlantic.  I've found some great Soviet 
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >research 
> >  
> >
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>in 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>that identifies between Iceland and the Canary Islands a land 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>mass 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>with fresh water vegetation carbon dated to about 10,000 
BCE.  
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>This 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>book was first printed in Moscow in 1970.  Further, the 
Soviets 
> >>>>>found identical rock "DNA" in the sunken area as that found 
in 
> >>>>>Iceland.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The Soviet theory of continental formation was very different 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>than 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>the American theory of continental drift.  (Perhaps some of 
the 
> >>>>>Russian members can provide more information on this.)  The 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>Soviet 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>theory involved a metamorphosis of elements and believed that 
> >>>>>something as large as a continent "drifting" would leave 
marks 
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >of 
> >  
> >
> >>>>>some kind.  (It makes sense to me.)  I'm not convinced that 
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >drift 
> >  
> >
> >>>>>adequately explains the phenomena of continental drift.  
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >Research 
> >  
> >
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>on 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>continental formation currently in process in the U.S. may 
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >still 
> >  
> >
> >>>>>rewrite text books.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>As a Soviet publication, the book was never published in the 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>U.S.  I 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>found it by searching on the internet:  "Atlantis," by N.F. 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>Zhirov.  
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>Soviet sciences were more open than America's, because they 
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>didn't 
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>>have to seek approval of Christian voters.  The result if 

=== message truncated ===

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Travel
 Find  great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]