Re: Re Mike: Mr TLONH aka Matthew
Taylor
Mathew Taylor's reply to Mike's reply...
Mike,
There is a very interesting book by Stephen Hurrell called 'Dinosaurs
and
the Expanding Earth' you can download his book for free from his
website:
http://www.dinox.freeserve.co.uk/ What Stephen sets out to prove is
that an
expanding Earth has changed it's surface level of gravitational
attraction
as it has expanded and increased in mass. A smaller Earth with less
mass and
thus less gravity has alowed life to become larger in the past such
is the
case with dinosaurs. I strongly recommend you read this book, it is
very
interesting and it goes into great detail.
What Stephen doesn't do convincingly is provide a mechinism for
Earth
expansion. That is where I believe our book 'The Land of No Horizon'
is
different. We set out to prove that the Earth has naturally become
hollow as
it has expanded while remaining the same mass. In doing so, an
expanding
Earth slowing down in rotation indirectly reduces the level of
surface
gravity. This is due to centrifugal force (which makes us lighter on
the
equator) reducing in strength, this is explained in great detail in
our
book.
It is the combination of an expanding Earth, a hollow Earth and the
fact
that gravity was lower in the past which has attributed to the
dinosaurs,
other larger life forms and also the confusing past of humanity.
It's hard to explain everything nicely here in such a short email
because
there are a lot of factors all taking an effect at the same time and
they
are all influencing each other, but I hope I have shed a bit more
light on
our book.
Matthew Taylor,
http://www.tlonh.com
My Email....
Mathew,
I'll have to get your book AND Mike's to fully
understand the premises of both you guys. (I did download Hurrell's
book for later reading).
Will I have to go to your book for specific
evidence about the Earth EXPANDING? That theory is brand new to me,
especially since orthodox geologists have long thought the Earth was
now some 20 miles LESS in diameter than it was when the first crust
solidified. Gravity is LESS today? That one I need proof of.
Col. James Churchward asserted
that in the ancient past (including during the LONG period when
Dinosaurs roamed), while the atmosphere was super tropical in
temperature (certainly nothing like the present) most of Earth's
surface was covered with dense, dull Ferns and other growth. It was
nearly an endless SWAMP.
One of the proofs he provided was that in that
ancient past, no evidence has been brought forth finding MOUNTAIN
life and MOUNTAIN vegetation, ONLY SWAMP growth and SWAMP
"animal" life (including lizards). Also, he claimed, Dinosaur
life began small (in the swamps) and over an immensely long time,
grew to the giant sizes that roamed and ruled most of the world's
swamps.
In fact he went went much further,
writing that during Earth's long geological history, it wasn't until
the period between 20,000 (uplifting beginning as low hills) and
10,000 years back, that ANY mountains or mountain ranges were
uplifted. (Archaen rocks from earth's primary granite crust were
volcanically shoved upward THROUGH the upper rocks and Gneisses.
Orthodox scientists have mistakenly ASSUMED that the primary granite
rocks found on mountain tops have been there for millions of years.
They have only the fuzziest theories HOW mountains came to be, so
they bury the cause in a theoretical past. Was Churchward
mistaken about any of the preceding paragraphs? Appreciate
comments by yourself or anyone else who has contrary
evidence.
Fundamental to Churchward's beliefs
about the geological past, is his assertion that the Earth's crust
(the center is Hollow, he agreed) cooled by fusion from the highest
possible temperature.... slowly cooling over the millions of years
without a backstep. And no sudden mythical "ice age" freezes! And
then an "unfreeze." About an "ice age," did the Sun
temporarily abandon PART of Earth for thousands of years? I say
"PART" because Churchward, also a world explorer, was with an
expedition to northern Asia in the 1800s. They found NO evidence of a
glacier having existed anywhere in Asia almost to the poles. Yet most
of the north polar area was supposed to be under thousands of feet -
no, miles - of ice which lasted for thousands of years. But not a
trace on the Asian side. (Like a movie set with an outdoor scene on
the facing side only wooden struts holding the illusion up). At
the same latitudes as the "ice cap" on our side, there was
temperate weather. It is no wonder university "professors" of his
time, refused to debate him and have his proof. reported. (Isn't that
also happening today with Lamprecht, Cater and others?)
A MAGNETIC CATACLYSM ABOUT 17,000 YEARS
BACK?
What Churchward and the expedition did find was
abundant evidence that when the glacier was supposed to have existed,
great waves of WATER WITHOUT ICE, poured north from the Pacific,
drowning all the land in their path, generally following the Lena
Valley depression (and creating LLAKOFF'S island just off shore of
the Lena river.)
As Churchward explained it, the Earth's
super-magnetized north polar area had LURCHED free of the Sun's
magnetic grip which had pulled it out of mean. The pole (and rest of
the globe) whipped away from the Sun but the loose waters continued
in the other direction. The great waves from the south picked up
(suddenly) the abundant animal life roaming the MOUNTAINLESS plains
and deposited them in bulk at Llakoff's island. While there was
supposed to have existed a FROZEN glacier, freezing cold over most of
the North and South, the mastodons and other animals at Llakoff, were
found with FRESH TEMPERATE VEGETABLE GROWTH in their mouths and
stomachs, just eaten on the plains from where they suddenly were
swept northward.
How could the plains of Northern Asia (and the
Gobi) have vast areas of TEMPERATE vegetation? (Please don't someone
say they came out of the Polar opening. In this case it is not
necessary) That the waters contained no ice is proven by the intact,
frozen condition of many of these animals. Had ice accompanied the
waves, they would (like animal and human life in Canada and the upper
United States) also have been ground to a pulp, mixed with mud
without trace as fertilizer.
The waves continued north, picking up rocks and
the accumulated ice at the north pole, joined the waves of the Arctic
down onto Canada (sweeping free all top soil down to the bedrock) and
plunged onto the United States (another part of it sweeping down on
parts of Northern Europe. ) The impetus of the waves began to peter
out to mostly water as far South as New Mexico. The largest rocks
(rounded to boulders, some hundreds of tons in size) were first
dropped on the plains. More ice and smaller boulders dropped off
later. Then lighter gravel and soil. (the "drift' lines) In
Churchward's imagination he pictured the (again MOUNTAINLESS) plains
of North America as one vast sea of MUD, for thousands of miles, with
here and there mounds of soil and large boulders showing above the
mud.
Later, when subterranean "gas belts" formed,
uplifting the land into mountains and mountain ranges above them, the
boulders on the plains (and those originating further back up north),
went up with them to where geologists find them today. Churchward was
convinced (from evidence in Asia) that the "MAGNETIC CATACLYSM"
causing the pole to "lurch," happened about 17,000 years back. At
that time the UIGHER empire occupied the then verdant Gobi. He wrote
of a Russian explorer who had dug 50 feet down under gravel in the
Gobi desert and discovered the Uigher capital city, KARA KOTA. He ran
out of funds after that, and unless he is listed in Russian
archaeological history, his find went unreported in the West. From
the preceding (and more not mentioned here), Churchward was convinced
that the mythical ice age is completely misunderstood. Instead of
being an event that lasted for thousands of years, it was a
catastrophe lasting probably just days.
WHY DID THE MONSTROUS DINOSAURS
VANISH?...
I've digressed from the fate of the giant
Dinosaurs, according to Churchward. As Earth's crustal rocks
continued to cool and the ground begin hardening more, the SWAMPS
(that were nearly everywhere) began to dry out, turn to marshes with
dry ridges on their edges.
The SWAMPS where the Dinosaurs lay their
eggs began to disappear. But most of all as Churchward explained, the
atmospheric temperatures dropped BELOW the optimum temperature needed
to hatch their eggs!
Reason? All life on Earth began as SIMPLE
organisms, vegetable and animal. There is a "LIFE" Force,
Churchward explained. It was a COMPOUND Force composed partly of
Earth's HEAT Force. The "Life" Force was decreed by the Creator
to BALANCE all the chemical parts and elements of life forms. The
Force HEAT played a great role and the amount of Life Force in the
atmosphere could be roughly determined by past temperatures on
Earth.
It may seem strange, but Churchward said a
SIMPLE organism needed a LARGE volume of Life Force to
"balance" its parts and put them into motion. Too much Life Force
and the organism would be over-powered and die. Too little Life Force
and the organism would also die, not enough power to some parts,
especially the GENERATIVE parts and fluids. The Dinosaurs (if
Churchward was correct) were already the "fag" end of their
line. The gradual lowering of Heat in the atmosphere (and thus in the
Life Force) was becoming insufficient to balance the simple chemical
elements in their bodies. Too little power to some parts, too much to
others resulting in the incredible (and often useless) appendages
found in late dinosaurs. They were chemically UNBALANCED, on their
way out as a species. But Churchward remarks, one scientist he named,
found that the Dinosaurs in warmer South America died out much LATER
than those further north.
That should put the juvenile theory that an
ASTEROID or METEOR struck off the coast of Mexico and its "dust"
or whatever, somehow circled the globe killing off all the Dinosaurs
(Their high heads got choked?)... along with (I've read now) most of
other life on Earth.
If such an impact did that so close to South America, why
didn't those South American Dinosaurs die off first - or at least at
the same time as the Dinosaurs in Europe and North America? But we
must not question orthodox "scientists" no matter how
stupid and unfounded are some of their theories and
conclusions.
Churchward points out that as the last of the
Dinosaurs (whose eggs wouldn't hatch) disappeared, they were
"suddenly" replaced by new life forms, the MAMMALS. Many distinct
species appeared, all about the size of small dogs... with long toes
like today's wading birds, because the marshes, now also drying out,
were being replaced by mostly soft, spongy ground.
Chemically and in all their parts they were MORE
COMPLEX than the Dinosaurs and other simple creatures that preceded
them. A LESSER volume of Life Force (and contained Heat Force) was
needed to "balance" their parts into action. From that Eocene
time, Churchward insisted, all present mammal animal life forms were
established, including the Eocene Horse, chemically the same as
today's horse. The only major change in today's larger horse being,
not "evolution" but MODIFICATIONS only to its hooves to enable it
to flee from its pursuers over HARD GROUND. The soft ground on
Earth's surface had gradually dried out and hardened.
Your contention that the Earth has expanded may or
may not be based on fact. But I personally frown on the theory that
there are continental plates, slipping and sliding on "magna" (or
is it molten lead now?) miles thick bending like plastic and
disappearing into the earth at 45 degrees... then new plates emerging
elsewhere, again at 45 degree angles . (Those are the detailed
illustration in a book I have by Jastrow and Thompson. Vertical
"fault" cracks opened everywhere in the cooling primary granite
of early earth. They are superficial, and though they can be
shifted around by the hot volcanic gases being moved through gas
belts 10 to 15 miles deep, they are not the cause of earthquakes...
or indicators of "plate tectonics." Just a secondary effect.
I recall reading a scientific journal space
probes article over ten years back that said how surprised scientists
were because the space probes had found NO EVIDENCE of tectonic
plates elsewhere aside from earth. The writer expressed his opinion
that Earth may be very unique.
In my saved 1952 issue of LIFE magazine (wish i
could locate it)... they made many elaborate color illustrations of
the 1952 GEOPHYSICAL YEAR. The oceans were mapped with radar. Even
today we still hear some "scientists" saying that plate movement
is proved by "fitting together" Africa, South America and
America. They seem to FIT together is the claim. But look at the
ocean bottoms shown by the maps in that Life magazine and you see
that the SHAPE of the North Atlantic ridge on either side, could also
roughly fit around edges of the continents on both sides! And for a
fact, it has been established for many decades that parts of the
North Atlantic ridge were once above water for extended periods of
time! How could those continents split apart if there was another
hunk of solid real estate in the middle. Are there any scientists
still alive today who remember those Life magazine maps about the
Geophysical year? Apparently not.
Were any of you aware that as recent as the 1950s
the theory of continental plates was being laughed at in many leading
universities? It was at the Univ of Washington when my wife was a
student there. That doesn't prove it was mistaken, but it was doubted
by some.
I really feel like a spoilsport having brought up
all the preceding. But unless you (or any reader) can provide me with
solid evidence to knock the pins out from under Churchward's ideas, I
remain skeptical about some of your basic contentions that I read in
Emails and websites. I look forward to hearing from some more expert
than myself to put reasonable doubt on Churchward's assertions. I'm
sure he must have errors somewhere in his writing. (I've myself found
a few I have doubts about) But in the main the guy seems to me to
have a better overall grasp about the geology of the Earth than
anyone I've yet read. And they have never read his books.
