Here's some of my old links of information and short stories by others
that's much like NASA loosing those 700 boxes of there own Apollo data,
whereas instead our planetology and historcal archives also seems to
have lost track of any records depicting an early existance of our moon,
and that's without my having involved any of Velikovsky's "Worlds in
Collision" nor having extracted from any other portions of his research
and subsequent writings.

Immanuel Velikovsky (banished for his being honest)
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/recent_papers.html
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/papers/fvenuspaper.pdf

Oldest petroglyphics(pecked art) of our moon? (not actually very old,
unless you'd consider that which had transpired since 12,000 BC as being
sufficiently classified as astronomically old), and to think that
12,000~14,000 years isn't hardly a drop in the evolutionary bucket of
intelligent life as we know it.

However, where's our moon depicted as of whatever's much older than
10,500 BC, and especially of anything that's 12,000 or forbid 15,000+ BC
is entirely without moon via such early depictions that's in any way is
remotely suggestive of being moon like. Yet those were artistically
intelligent humans with terrific cognitive skills as good as if not
better then myself, that had obviously been surviving for thousands of
years prior to 15,000 BC (were they all a species of blind souls, or
were they simply afraid to go outside their caves by night or even by
day?)

Was there an early evolutionary glitch in humanity's ability that would
have prevented their depicting our moon? Or, was Earth's environment of
such a thick and dense atmosphere that was continually clouded over and
thereby masking the sun, our moon and stars as being visually unknown to
such an early species of humanity? (I don't think so)

At best we have a little better than 10,500 years BC that'll contribute
as to our global environment having shared a moon as depicted within
such ancient petroglyphics/pictographics. Otherwise, as of anything
previously recorded or otherwise recorded seems w/o moon, whereas the
likes of pre 12,000 BC Earth seems as though entirely without offering
any appreciation of that nearby and otherwise of what should have been
an extremely extra earthshine illuminated moon, whereas most certainly
not all of mother Earth had been frozen solid. At least +/- 20 degrees
(tropic of Cancer/Capricorn) near the equator remained as extensively
ice free, although winter snow coverage may have reached a bit further,
therefore the albedo of mother Earth had to have been 0.75 if not
greater, and that's a simply a substantial amount of moon illuminating
earthshine.

Via the Dropas/Dzopas and of those nifty CD like stone disks of their
micro inscribed format of recorded history, and of the graphics upon
their 10,000 BC cave habitats which do establish the moon as being a
part of Earth's thawing environment, which thus far according to modern
science wasn't at the time transpiring all that much differently than
the many ice age cycles before. Although there's a few thousand years
worth of somewhat unual thermal hovering rather than merely peaking
within the latest latest period of thaw, which clearly remains as an
ongoing and fairly rapid overshoot, which leaves us with a great deal to
learn of what actually transpired as of those first indications of
having Earth's new and improved environment obtaining a working moon as
of roughly 10,500 BC.

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dropas.html
"In the years since the discovery of the first disc, archeologists and
anthropologists had learned more about the isolated Bayan-Kara-Ula area.
And much of the information seemed to corroborate the bizarre story
recorded on the discs."

"Legend still preserved in the area spoke of small, gaunt, yellow faced
men who 'came from the clouds, long, long ago'. The men had huge,
bulging heads and puny bodies and were so ugly and repellent that they
were hounded down by local tribesmen on horseback. Strangely, the
description of the 'invaders' tallied with the skeletons orginally
discovered in the caves by Professor Chi Pu Tei. On the walls of the
caves themselves archeologists had uncovered crude pictures of the
rising Sun, the Moon, unidentifiable stars and the Earth... all joined
together by lines of pea-sized dots. Along with the discs, the cave
drawings had been dated around 12,000 years old."

So, what's there to behold that's established prior to 10,500 BC, as
having depicted our environment along with such an impressive moon?

Lascaux cave paintings / 15,000 BC w/o moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascaux
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/arcnat/lascaux/en/
These and of so many other similar and quite possibly of older drawings
around the globe simply fail to depict nor otherwise having suggested
anything as to any such extremely nearby moon. I wonder why that is?

Was our moon so gosh darn nearby and perhaps so much more so reflective,
in that they'd considered it our second sun, or was it merely invisible?

For it's apparent size and especially of having been closer in, plus
receiving an extra special amount of earthshine, and especially if that
moon had been still hosting a surface layer of it's orginal salty ice,
as such it would have been appearing as though looking nearly as bright
as the sun.

If these 15,000+BC folks of Lascaux were so good as they were at
artistically depicting such 3D depth and of proper physiological
dimentions of terrain, plants and animals, then why are there other
depictions around the globe as having offered so many images of
extremely weird looking humans, as though looking so ET and/or of
somewhat as though 50/50 human+animal ET looking?

And, why not of similar detailed images or other depictions of
themselves, or were they all Muslim?

Other much older graphics are equally without moon.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/dawn.html
"Australian rock art may be as old as human occupation of that
continent, up to 60,000 years old and perhaps far older. Hundreds of
Australian sites may predate the cave art of Europe (Bednarik). In
Tanzania rock art sites date back about 50,000 years (Karoma). Painted
and engraved images of animals on stone slabs have been excavated and
dated to 28,000 years ago in Namibia (Feder and Park). The oldest known
example of rock art in Europe is an arrangement of eighteen cup marks on
a rock slab over a child's burial in a French cave. Radiocarbon dates
for European paintings range back to more than 32,000 years (Gould). By
this time art traditions are known to have existed in southern Africa,
the Levant, eastern Europe, India and Australia (Bednarik). A California
rock art site has been dated to about 20,000 years ago, based on
analysis of mineral varnish covering a pictograph (Bower 96a)."

"The most sophisticated techniques, shading, outlining and
representation of movement, are now known to have existed in the
earliest Paleolithic art in Europe, more than 30,000 years ago."

Now I'm further wondering as to when exacly did such rock nifty art or
other formats of petroglyphics/pictographics start to include our moon,
that you'd have to think was rather unavoidably impressive?

Of fairly modern depictions on behalf of Earth having two suns, or
perhaps most likely intended to represent that of the sun and of our
extremely nearby icy moon are those depictions as having been
contributed since the end of the last ice age era (8000~10500 BC), and
thus representing a somewhat recent planetology w/moon timeline of a
fairly modern day version of our evolutionary history.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/chelly.html
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/images/narbonae.jpg
This seems to suggest that earlier humans were either quite terribly
dumb and dumber heathens that were afraid of their own shadows, or that
perhaps they were a species of physiologically impaired sight or perhaps
that of actually being blind. Either that or perhaps they never once
stuck their proto-human heads outside of their caves for an honest
look-see at whatever had to have been rather nicely illuminating their
snowy cold and clear nighttime.

I believe this item offers a rather unusually large depiction of our
early moon:
Sedona Back Country - Sun or Moon Pictograph
http://gosw.about.com/od/bestdaytrip...onahike_10.htm
http://z.about.com/d/gosw/1/5/v/Pictograph1.jpg

I interpret this next one is just that of our moon and sun (unless that
second sun is that representing Sirius), thereby proving that as of
somewhat recent though of primitive humans could in fact draw a good
number of such items, including the capability of their having no
apparent problems with having depicted our extremely nearby moon within
somewhat proper proportion to that of our sun.
http://www.hao.ucar.edu/Public/image...es/slide20.png

Unfortunately, I'm obviously not nearly smart enough because, I'm still
looking for those of ice age and/or of whatever's pre ice age or at
least as to appreciating whatever's the earliest versions of these
depictions that'll so happen to include our moon. Thus far we're not
seeing all that much, are we, or am I the only fool on Earth that's
thinking outside the mainstream status quo box.

Here's what's depicted as seeming very ET and otherwise depicting as a
rather unusually large moon in relationship to our human stature and
that of our sun, and otherwise of Earth as clearly having two suns.
There's also a few interesting looking aircraft/spacecraft items, and
all of this again transpiring from a time well after the peak of the
last ice age cycle, such as when Earth was nearly 50% frozen solid
and/or covered in those much longer lasting winter seasons of thick
snow...
http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientastronauts.html
So, once again man's artistic realm should have had no intellectual nor
apparent physiological problems in having depicted that moon of ours,
yet as of much earlier depictions of having demonstrated much greater
artistic expertise than necessary (including a good deal of 3D depth of
perspective view) failed to share or otherwise having included any such
highly illuminated moon.

This by rights interprets as though all available terrestrial evidence
by way of our own kind has more than depicted our early planetary
history as having been without moon, thereby indicating that our moon is
actually that of a fairly recent arrival, and perhaps that same analogy
might as well go for the planet Venus that should otherwise have been
unavoidably and thus easily included within such early (peak ice age or
pre ice age) notations.

Perhaps this next item is within the timeline of the arrival of our
moon, or possibly it's merely that of our having received a rather
significant multi-teratonne worth of a moon iceberg, such as having
created the arctic ocean basin as of roughly 10500~11000 BC.
http://mirrorh.com/timeline1.html (11,000 B.C. - 9,000 B.C.)
"The northern regions of Alaska and Siberia appear to have been the
worst hit by the murderous upheavals between 13,000 and 11,000 years
ago. In a great swathe of death around the edge of the Artic Circle the
remains of uncountable numbers of large animals have been found -
including many carcases with the flesh still intact, and astonishing
quantities of perfectly preserved mammoth tusks. Indeed, in both
regions, mammoth carcases have been thawed to feed to sled dogs and
mammoth steaks have featured on restaurant menus in Fairbanks. One
authority has commented, 'Hundreds of thousands of individuals must have
been frozen immediately after death and remained frozen, otherwise the
meat and the ivory would have spoiled ... Some powerful general force
was certainly at work to bring the catastrophe about.' " [Graham
Hancock, Fingerprints Of The Gods, p. 212-213]

Somewhere around the timeline of 10,500 ~ 11,000 BC, Earth received
quite a substantial booty of advanced tools and intellectual expertise,
as though it all just fell out of the sky. Seemingly there were also a
variety of new species introduced, as though having somewhat God like
arrived and/or materialized out of nowhere. Older than 10,500 BC
depictions of our moon seem to be as stealth as any Iraqi WMD, although
much other and older artistic expertise seems as though quite good
enough and even somewhat impressive looking, except w/o moon.

Everything which includes our moon or Venus seems to have been depicted
as though transpiroring from the beginning of our lasrt thaw
(10000~12000 BC) away from the most recent ice age, and there's lots
more as having been telling us this very same story over and over.
http://home.earthlink.net/~pcstef/venus_stone_age.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character
Even China that was perhaps the most intellectually, technologically and
artistically advance species, whereas even their pictophonetics is
coming up a little short at merely 6500 BC, of which those little
Dropa/Dzopa ETs of China having previously arrived along with having
engraved those CD like stone disks seem to offer the most advanced
skills as of their 10,000 BC arrival, are of what's essentially
sequestered as much as possible, perhaps because of whom they were and
of where they may have come from. The only folks not telling us this
honest story are the NASA/Apollo rusemasters and of their loyal borg
like collective of apparently incest cloned Third Reich collaborating
minions that have essentially everything you can imagine to lose if they
so much as give an inch.

Obviously others and I could be wrong (certainly wouldn't be the first
time), in which case you folks that insist our moon is nearly as old as
and essentially made of Earth can easily point out all of those pre ice
age pictographics of what had to have been our extremely nearby and
extra reflective moon, that which should have been downright if not
extremely impressive, especially at colder times when considering the
mostly snow and ice covered Earth that included our icy and snowy
environment as far south as Cuba as having contributed to a nearly 75%
albedo worth of earthshine, which should have been unavoidably
illuminating upon that rather nearby and thus rather enormous looking
pre-ice-age moon of ours, that is if in fact such ever existed.

Of course with Henry Kroll's and those of my ongoing research and of
subsequent thoughts, of our previously not having such nifty worth of
tidal energy for physically causing such horrific amounts of inside and
out friction, or that of having been contributing an extra share of
secondary IR energy, and of thereby having extensively kept our
geothermal and solar influx of our terrestrial thermal energy better
distributed, chances are that the previous ice ages w/o moon would have
been much worse off (which I believe science has since proven they
were), with only the latest thaw as having been contributed and
therefore affected by way of having those lunar tidal forces and extra
IR energy influx at play, is most likely why we'll never see another
deep ice age or even a mini-freeze since having contributed so much of
our biological and industrial byproducts and waste, along with our
unmitigated arrogance is what's going to continually see to the
elimination of any significant chance in hell, of our ever obtaining
greater snow coverage along with glacial and/or sea-ice improvements.

As a direct result of humanity and via a little secondary factor of
whatever our moon contributes, snow and ice are gradually becoming yet
another thing of the past, which isn't entirely a bad thing if you can
afford the necessary time and resources in order to deal with such
changes. Of course, the poor and those indifferent the truth may
literally have to appreciate the task of outrunning vast storms,
swimming for their lives and otherwise of how to go jellyfish (meaning
ocean dead zones of mostly jellyfish will have to become their new and
improved resource of seafood).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG