Comets or Asteroids?

A January 24, 2008 article in the National Geographic News reports that ‘the chemical analysis of material returned to Earth from comet Wild 2 is causing astronomers to reconsider what comets actually are.’ Hope Ishii of LLNL who led the analysis stated, “The first surprise was that we found inner solar system materials and the second surprise was that we didn’t find outer solar system materials.” It is unfortunate that the astrophysicists haven’t read my first books, Firmament and Chaos, which have been available for ten years now, or they would know why this is true. In the same article, another establishment astrophysicist, Don Brownlee, principal Stardust investigator ‘explains’ that “there is no doubt that it is a comet” and therefore came from the outer solar system, in spite of its composition, because at the rate it is disintegrating, it could not have survived to this day in the inner solar system.

These interpretations of the data are reminiscent of many other space missions, which NASA engineers so successfully conduct, and the astronomers/astrophysicists proceed to trash. The data from every space mission has been completely mis-interpreted due to the poisonous assumption that the solar system has been in its current state for billions of years. These ‘comets’ are near-surface rocks ejected from the no-longer-intact planet, which I call priori-Mars, during the Bronze and Iron Ages, at which times it orbited the Earth. When the orbiting pair passed through alignments with the Sun and Moon, great convulsions occurred within this planet ejecting Mt. Everest-sized, hot, glowing bodies from deep in the interior. These are today the Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs). The near-surface rocks that they pushed ahead of them contain aquifers, and it is from these aquifers that water vapor is shot into space causing them to be called comets. In fact, all of these bodies in the inner solar system are from priori-Mars and were ejected into space within the last 6,000 years. That includes all meteorites, which, because they came from deeper and deeper inside the planet represent its entire geologic section, carbonaceous surface rocks, mantle rocks, rocks from the mantle-core boundary and pure nickel-iron rocks from its liquid core. I also explain how the north pole of (the mantle) of this planet remained facing the Earth during each (yes EACH) encounter, resulting in the seven kilometer deficit of rock in the northern third of Mars today. Just in case you have not gleaned it from my earlier blogs, or my website, firmament-chaos.com, what is thought to be a complete planet, Mars, is actually the former mantle of the planet (and some of its liquid core) which orbited the Earth as recently as 2690 years ago. It escaped the vicinity of the Earth in a very clever way. The solid iron core exited priori-Mars through the 4000 km ‘canyon,’ now called the Valles Marineris and after ‘consorting’ with Venus for a couple hundred years, settled into its orbit close to Sun, where it is now thought to be the ‘complete’ planet Mercury.

As explained in my books, these events were observed by the first one-hundred generations of mankind and recorded in the ancient myth of every culture that existed at that time. The Vedic people referred to the hot rocks as sura (glowing), and to the comets as asura (having breaths). They watched as the ejected bodies arced outward from priori-Mars, initially appearing “like sparks from a burning log,” often a series in rapid-fire succession, called ambhamsi (streams). The myths contain exquisite detail concerning the astronomical events of that period when the solar system was in a completely different mode. Hundreds of ‘ancient mysteries’ are explained in my books – and along with them all the mysteries of the solar system. These books contain more information than a thousand NASA missions scratching the surface of the distant planets ever will, and its free.

See: firmament-chaos.com

~ by Angiras on January 29, 2008.

2 Responses to “Comets or Asteroids?”

  1. Lee,
    I am famaliar with Louis Franks house-sized comets. In fact, I emailed him more than a year ago to explain my take on the comets, but as you mentioned, he was already under the guns of the ‘establishment’ and obviously didn’t want to provoke them by associating himself with my catastrophism.
    There is some stuff in the paper that you forwarded to me (thanks) http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/preslectures/frank99/page2.html
    that made me rethink the question. According to the paper, there is a definite seasonal effect that seems to be closely associated with meteor showers. This definitely points to the comets being associated with priori-Mars. I’m not sure why the figure only covers three months. I aslo wonder how accurate his size and mass estimates are. Water evaporated into space by convulsions in priori-Mars would not become compressed into rock-like ice in the weightlessness of space, but would agglomerate loosely, so I would expect these are fluffy bodies, not like the rocky comets discussed in my blog. I think he suggests they are fluffy.
    One claim in Frank’s paper doesn’t make sense. He claims that the velocities of the small comets would carry them out to Jupiter’s orbit. If they are associated with meteor showers they cannot have such high velocities.
    I have always wondered how so much salt apparently fell to Earth from priori-Mars, as evidenced by the large salt deposits in the Tibeten basins. Accordimg to Frank, the small fluffy bodies he is seeing do not contain much sodium. This makes sense if they comprise water evaporated from priori-Mars. To me this implies that such large quantities of water were blasted directly from priori-Mars to the Earth, causing the deluges during the Bronze and Iron Ages, that it remained in a liquid or solid state (ice) and therefore included the salt that was in the oceans on priori-Mars.

  2. Dr Louis A. Frank published a book a few years ago “The Big Splash” in which he describes his discovery and 10 year defense of the theory of “Small Comets.” His book and the data available on the web is compelling and it seems growing acceptance is moving the theory into mainstream. Essentially, he discovered that house sized (and bigger) snow/ice bodies are falling into our atmosphere and onto the moon at a very large rate. Though their existence is now accepted their origin is still a big mystery. Naturally, the uniformity based notion of their originating 4 billion+ years ago is assumed. Are you familiar with the Small Comet phenomena? Could the snow/ice bodies have originated from priori-Mars or would they have come from the initial collision at Jupiter’s GRS and the expulsion of priori-Venus? Dr Frank also is showing the small comets as the origin of a large diffuse hydrogen cloud within the orbits of the inner planets.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: