Re: [allplanets-hollow] Vertical plate movement
···
(Dean wrote) Dick,
I'm curious. What is Churchward's take on vertical plate movement? It seems that if the continent of Mu sank, then vertical movement might have been involved. Of course, it can probably be justified through continental drift. Both theories, for example, could account for marine fossils high in the Andes.
Dean.... I find it frustrating. I read ALL of your posts. But apparently you have read very little of the voluminous stuff I've sent you priorly that should have answered, or made unnecessary, your question above. Note the following JPEG from one of Churchward's "Cosmic Forces of MU" books, showing an ISOLATED gas chamber upholding land above water level....
MU and Atlantis (Atlantis probably represented by the JPEG above), Ancient Ceylon, the European land bridge and other minor areas persisted above water level long into history. ** They were areas supported by ISOLATED gas chambers** . By "ISOLATED" is meant the giant gas pockets upholding them were cut off for many hundreds of thousands of years, isolated - not being fed ADDITIONAL gases being worked upward by Earth's centrifugal force. If they had not been "isolated," quite like all the other gas chambers near Earth's surface, they too would have long ago become overcompressed and blown out. And there would have been no Atlantis or MU.
- Dick,
- For such a weight, i.e., and continent to he held up, that would have to be quite a gas chamber- Given all the weight above, the tendency would be for an outgassing to occur early on.
** In the above, C is the isolated gas chamber holding the surface above water. D is a giant GAS BELT forged laterally many miles deeper** . Churchward said the gas belts formed because many miles deep of the upper crust, over countless millions of years, had become too solidly compacted and compressed to easily be vertically punctured by the gases.
- Compressed? This is suggestive of Newtonian gravity, the mass above becomes heavier and heavier. In the scheme of gravity as an electromagnetic radiation, the tendency is for gravity to diminish in proportion to depth.
The blowouts and fall of chamber roofs over those millions of years had made the upper crust thickly compacted with all earlier sizeable gas pockets collapsed, for MANY miles deep. The exception were a few ISOLATED gas chambers.
E in the above JPEG are additional lower gas chambers being fed from below and then "feeding" more gases into the forming GAS BELT (D) above them.
** Under enormous pressure, the super hot gases in a "gas belt"** (connected lateral chambers) ** will move laterally until they find a WEAK spot in the rocks above through which they can move upward, puncture the surface (a volcanic cone) and empty into the atmosphere** . The forging of the gas belts indicated a cessation of chambers being blown out around the Earth - with the exception of a few isolated ones . ALL earlier sizeable pockets in the crust had been blown out over millions of years and the upper crust, for many miles deep, was now thickly compacted by layers of solid granite and sedimentary rock. ** When the forging gas belts opened weak spots or cracks leading into the ISOLATED chambers, those chambers too became overcompressed, volcanos opened and they blew out.** When the hot gases met oxygen in the atmosphere they also burst into flames as the chamber roofs collapsed. With MU, flames ignited skyward around the edges of the chamber roofs as they collapsed into the (3) gas pockets holding up MU in the Pacific.
During the period the bulk of the deeper gas belts were developing (between only 15,000 and 12,000 years past if Churchward was correct) ** the overcompressed gas belts moving laterally could only LIFT, but not puncture, the rocks slabs above them for distances** . Those uplifted compacted slabs fell back together forming "triangles" and stayed upright. ** They are our MOUNTAINS and MOUNTAIN RANGES, uplifted between 15,000 and 12,000 years past.**
- In spite of my comment about gravity, the overall theory intrigues me. But wouldn't gases finda way before they poked through enough to raise mountains as longas the Rockies and Andes, all along a continous line like that? Continental drift could uplift the slabs as you describe
The present volcanic craters on top of mountains, were or are today's ESCAPE VALVES (Safety valves) for new volumes of gases accumulating in the gas belts. If the walls or roofs of a belt cave in temporarily blocking the subsequent passage of new gases, the gases either FORCE through or around - or MELT through the block. The vibrating shock of that subterranean effort is felt on the surface. We call it an EARTHQUAKE . I'm afraid the author of Etidorpha lacked any real knowledge about Volcanos and Earthquakes. More silly putty.
- Ouch! I still think that the ultimate source of heat for this process is soft particle penetration- they break up further down and release the heat-giving hard particle to drive geo processes. Otherwise, what is the source of heat for these processes? Anything molten would have cooled long before a lot of the mountains which we see were formed- the Earth is millions of years old. So what would heat the gses in Churchward's model? And these mountains aren't from the initial formation of this planet, erosion has participated in sculpting the face of the Earth many times, I'm sure.
- Here are some comments from Cater from my article about HE geo processes in regards to earthquakes and volcanoes, it's not too long. To tell you the truth, it is a matter of the forces, the heating, which produce the upheavals, which is the most important point. Whether the process was continental drift or an uplifting from below kind of plays second fiddle.
“ Geologists and geophysicists are a bit vague when they discuss the forces producing Earth upheavals and the folding of strata to produce mountain ranges. Their explanations for the forces causing continental drift are equally tenuous, if they exist at all. This is understandable since they are dealing with pheonmena completely beyond the scope of present-day theoretical physicists. It is apparent that tremendous tensional and lateral forces are involved. There are high concentrations of primarily soft, negative particles in adjacent particles in adjacent strata and fault lines.
The concentration or negative charges, resulting from the penetration of soft particles from the Sun, and the radiation of the matter inside Earth combine to produce tensional forces. Such forces at work in the Earth's crust cause fractures and the sliding and folding of strata over each other. The gravitational forces holding the Earth in its orbit also produce stresses in the crust, adding to these lateral forces.
The origin of earthquakes is now apparent. There are times when the concentration of charges reaches a critical state. A condenserlike discharge of particles then occurs. The sudden discharge of hard electrons when this happens produces an explosion. Since the hard particles are partially confined, tremendous forces are released causing the Earth to shake. A similar phenomenon produces lightening. Many of the discharged particles find their way back to the surface. Some of them break up their constituent photons and produce color effects, sometimes preceeding a quake. Animal and sensitive people can sense these energies. These discharges could be a means for predicting earthquakes.
- Mr. Cater attributes the heat which accounts for volcanic activity to the soft particles which penetrate the Earth much easier than regular photons. He tells us:
' This process [ redistribution/penetration of low frequency particles ] continues as the radiation from the Sun penetrates the Earth's crust. The lower frequencies are readily transformed into infrared radiations which produce increases in temperature. ... Most of the soft particles that disintegrate during this interval are comprised of photons below the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum.' As we have just mentioned in relation to earthquakes, it is the soft particles concentrated along plates and fault lines which act as condensers, i.e., build up and store electricity/heat. This then, is one mechanism which contributes to the heating of rock and the production of lava. Also, the book Etidorhpa explains that large deposits of sodium, which interact with water which overflows from underground lakes, are a major cause of volcanic activity."
Dick,
** The forces described above could account for the type of uplifting described below. I'll read the expanding planet part a little bit later.**
DD
** The simplified JPEG sketch below should illustrate the general principle how mountains form. Faling against each other, the rock slabs form an apex at top, OVER the gas tunnel below.** (Darwin noted the similar, approaching vertical, condition of many of the rock slabs forming the highest mountains of the Andes)
** If Churchward was right about HOW Earth first began (I'm convinced he was)** - ** and HOW it subsequently geologically developed** - (the blowing out of many miles deep of upper gas pockets in the primary granite until the upper granite crust is now solidly compacted), ** theories of huge, rubbery "tectonic plates," moving sideways - OR up and down - like silly putty - or "cantaloupe" - on that theoretical global "Vaseline" (as my wife calls it)** - ** are IMAGINARY and without any real geologic PROOFS, in my opinion** . Our space probes have found no indication of such "plates" elsewhere. Isn't that strange? Even Pratt (in part one of his latest piece), backed up with evidence, doubts the existence of such "plates."
EXPANDING EARTH?
I'm sorry if this offends, but after going to the given main URL site in Australia, proposing that ** EXPANDING earth theory** , I find that theory ridiculous. The "proofs" given about that theory are not proofs, just their attempt to "prove" with carefully selected formulas and equations, THEIR THEORY. Of course their mathematics are meaningless UNLESS one FIRST accepts their ridiculous concept that the continents were once ALL jammed together (with a little water around them) on a TINY (and I mean TINY) little earth!
** Go and LOOK at their enlarging illustrated globes..** . According to their imaginations, earth in JURASSIC times was only 1/3rd size of today's earth. ** But go EARLIER in time** , and they show earth as a tiny globe (yet fully developed) and (it seems like) about 1/20th of earth's size today!!!
Their "proofs," thickly couched in technical terms even Einstein would probably choke on, "prove" nothing to any reasoning mind. Yet these people seem serious. Somehow, in their sloppy science fiction imaginations, they conceive of the earth (somehow first mysteriously formed earlier in some way they do not understand) ** gradually INFLATING like a basketball - over and over and over again - until it has swollen to the size of our earth today!** They have some strange "metaphysical" explanation for HOW and from WHERE ALL THE ADDITIONAL MATTER CAME FROM. Challenge them to provide reasonable PROOFS for their theory! I am and do so again right here. "Tectonic plates" seems to have MORE "evidence" than anything supporting an EXPANDING earth fantasy, in my opinion.
I suspect these people find nothing wrong with Sitchin's concept that, after giant, fully developed planet, TIAMAT, was busted "INTO HALVES" by passing Nibiru's moon, one half (mysteriously) "reformed" to become our planet Earth! Afterall if Sitchin can conceive that with his "silly putty," why couldn't their "silly putty" then INFLATE as they conceive?
Taking Churchward out of context isn't ideal,
but the except below is useful. As well as being (in my opinion) one of the greatest unrecognized scientists about GEOLOGY... ** he was equally one of the greatest about earth's BIOLOGICAL past.** In his eyes Earh's biological past meshes with its geological past. For example...
CHURCHWARD:
" It is without doubt appreciated by all scientists, and among most laymen that have given the subject a thought, that in the beginning there was no organic matter out of which life could be formed. For eons of time there was no life on this earth, because all was in a state called inorganic. It must also be appreciated that it was nature alone that changed matter from its inorganic state into organic. How was this done? Nature used her tools - her forces. What is organic matter? Organic matter is composed of elements out of which the seeds of life, cosmic eggs, may be formed.
** In the beginning, as the earth's crust cooled from fusion, it was a single solid rock, too solid, and of too compact a character, from which to form the seeds of life.**
The volcanic gases which had been placed in the granite rock and retained in the earth's center, broke asunder the outer surfaces of the granite rock, and lifted them up, and crashed them down, over and over again. Through these liftings and crashing downs, the rocks were broken up and pulverized; oxidation, the work of an earthly force, followed, and was continuous on the surface rocks. These oxidations brought the elements down to a point, fine enough, where another earthly force was enabled to combine certain proportions of elementary matter into an intimate or chemical compound. When these elementary compounds were brought together, chemically joined, and in such proportions and percentages one to the other, ** also being capable of being balanced by a volume of the life force** . Inorganic matter becomes not only organic matter, but also a seed of life, a cosmic egg.
In this manner nature formed her first life germs, seeds of life, out of which sprang life itself.
The life germ of today was the cosmic egg of the ancients of the earth's first great civilization." end of excerpt)
** The above is just a hint, an excerpt out of context** , but may whet some curiosity for more. But note that in the above he works in HOW the GEOLOGICAL composition of Earth's crust, led to the surface development of Earth's first biological life forms. ** The Life Force is a compound of many Forces, one being the Heat Force** (Earth's own generated Heat Force, NOT something coming second hand from the Sun).
** Temperature is a gauge of the VOLUME of the Life Force in the atmosphere, from Archaen times until now**.
Here's a law of Nature you can agree or disagree about. But Churchward claims it is a law of Nature: ** The parts and chemical composition (DNA?) of SIMPLE LIFE FORMS require a large volume of the Life Force to "balance" their parts into movement** . As Earth gradually cooled, the volume of the Life Force in the atmosphere decreased. The volume of Life Force (measured by temperature) became too low to "balance" the chemical parts of the SIMPLER life forms and they gradually died out.
** NEW life forms were created from the dead debris, some bearing ONLY a resemblance to the former.** (not "evolution" which implies chemical changes in a living organism). ** Nature also added new elements which made them MORE COMPLEX, able to be "balanced" by a lower current of the Life Force.**
As the Earth continued to cool, the Life Force volume lowering in the atmosphere, less complex forms of life died out (including Carbonic era dinosaurs)... and were completely replaced by MORE COMPLEX forms. Jurassic dinosaurs, for example, were MORE COMPLEX chemically than their Permian predecessors. The volume of Life Force in the atmosphere of the Carbonic Era was too high to "balance" the Jurassic dinosaur chemical parts. And the Jurassic atmosphere's Life Force was too low a volume to "balance" the chemical parts of Carbonic life forms (like the Dimetrodon and the Mastodonsaurus Amphibian).
** Currently Orthodox scientists look at these past seemingly sudden mass "die offs" of many ancient species and try to EXPLAIN them as catastrophic METEOR crashes that (several times) wiped out "90% of all lives."** That's one claim I've heard recently. They never explain HOW subsequently NEW life developed and entirely encompassed the world once more, each time.
Note that the last "die off" of the (then more complex than earlier) dinosaurs of the late Cretaceous is ALSO "explained" by a theoretical METEOR crash.
** CHURCHWARD, disagreeing, wrote that the volume of the Life Force in the atmosphere became too low to 'balance" the chemical parts, especially the reproductive fluids, of the Cretaceous dinosaurs** . To put it simply, **THEIR EGGS FAILED TO HATCH** . Coupled with that was the fact that their natural homes, the SWAMPS were emptying and drying out. The great monstrosities gradually (quickly to history) died out. It wasn't some silly putty meteor.
** And then over another immense length of time, MORE COMPLEX life forms began to appear... the little MAMMALS of the Eocene, when the Life Force current in the atmosphere became low enough to "balance" their more complex chemical parts.** Almost all of the Eocene life started out small, about the size of dogs, with long toes like today's wading birds to travel over the spongy ground of the Eocene period. ** From that point in time, according to Churchward, the Life Force (and the general temperatures) came into balance. No new life forms will arise.** The Eocene horse, for example is basically the same today chemically as the modern horse. He has not evolved to become more complex. Only "modifications" (allowed by Nature) have occurred, increasing his size and altering his earlier wading toe feet suited to the soft ground of the Eocene, to the hoof of today to travel over hard ground.
The LIFE FORCE
mentioned above that permeates our entire atmosphere and how it has functioned in BIOLOGY from Archaen times to the present, is apparently a subject ** out of the reach** of the author of Etidorpha, Cater, Van Flandrin and just about every other scientific researcher today. But such overall understanding was standard to the ancient scientists.. and also understood and explained by James Churchward throughout his books. ** And at every step Churchward provides reasonable - real universe (not metaphysical) - PROOFS for his every assertion no matter the subject.**
None of the theorists today, orthodox or unorthodox like theorist Cater, cover the length and breadth of every facet like Churchward. In his eyes our universe and this planet's history and its lives are interconnected. ** Biological and Geological changes are all ONE STORY, connected and understandable to any reasoning mind** . Yet he never claimed to be the ORIGINATOR. All that he presented was known to people 25,000 to 50,000 years back and recorded on the ancient stone tablets that his Rishi mentor and he translated in the late 1800s. He was only "reminding" the rest of us about this unified knowledge our world had forgotten. Get ALL his books and judge for yourselves. - Dick Fojut
Dean also wrote:) Members, Vertical movement can be understood by the idea of cutting a cantalope in slices. If you push down on one slice, another one pops up in response. In Etipdorhpa, it is explained that cavern cavities contain soft particle atmospheres which are similar in frequency to the gravity-inducing frequency without being gravity-inducing radiation. but they aresimilar enough to block the penetration of the gravity-inducing radiation. In this way giant caverns exist, and huge continents can be sustained above them. The Guide explains to The Man about a parallel " lake " 150 miles beneath the ocean " which covers an area of many thousands of square miles, and which has an average depth of five miles." He explains that " part of the water of the ocean is being transferred through this stratum [ intervening stratum above ] to the underground cavity [ lake ]." I wonder- if a different frequency were introduced in a cavern below, could this induce a cavern to collapse and sink the land mass above it? Maybe this happened below what is now the Pacific, and maybe it happened in the Gulf of Mexico. This would explain archaeological artifacts on the ocean floors. This could even be done artificially by an enemy culture. I'm just wondering at this point, but learn Etidorhpa.` To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]`
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the [Yahoo! Terms of Service](http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).
