It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do You Think It's Possible,The Universe Is Only 6000 Years Old

page: 15
17
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2019 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

THere is also something with this whole story of the Bible that makes me think that Adam is actually Jesus. Only Adam could tell us what Heaven (Eden) was like.... Adam/Jesus did not explain Gods actual heaven but Adam/Jesus talked about Lord Gods Garden of Eden and Lord God.


In the "Lost Gospel of Judas" Judas says


"I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you."

JESUS SPEAKS TO JUDAS PRIVATELY

Knowing that Judas was reflecting upon something that was exalted, Jesus said to him,

"Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom. It is possible for you to reach it, but you will grieve a great deal. [36] For someone else will replace you, in order that the twelve [disciples] may again come to completion with their god."

Judas said to him, "When will you tell me these things, and [when] will the great day of light dawn for the generation?"

But when he said this, Jesus left him.


"It is possible for you to reach it". As I translate that to mean, its a physical place, not spiritual.
The Lost Gospel of Judas

So, what is, or more importantly, where is Barbelo.


Barbelo is a region that he describes as being where the light is


The Region of Barbelo



Jesus appears to the disciples again. The next morning, after this happened, Jesus [appeared] to his disciples again.
"TTiey said to him,

"Master, where did you go and what did you do when you left us?" Jesus said to them, "I went to another great and holy generation." His disciples said to him, "Lord, what is the great generation that is superior to us and holier than us, that is not now in these realms?"

When Jesus heard this, he laughed and said to them, "Why are you thinking in your hearts about the strong and holy generation? [37] Truly [I] say to you, no one bom [of] this aeon will see
that [generation], and no host of angels of the stars will rule over that generation, and no person of mortal birth can associate with it, because that generation does not come from [. . .] which has become [...]. "me generation of people among [you] is from the generation of humanity [. . .] power, which [. . . the] other powers [. . .] by [which] you rule."


Obviously Jesus, or by another name, Apollonius of Tyana, knew the inhabitant's of Barbelo, the "strong and holy" generation. What his relationship with them is questionable. Was he a go between, or, one of that generation with a special mission.

The Holy Royal generation. Jesus made it clear, they wanted nothing to do with us mortals. The location of that region is one of the secrets Enki commanded would not be shared with mankind. Did Jesus get in trouble for almost revealing that region "Where the light is"?


When the New Jerusalem comes Down to Earth


I already know, its one boat ride I won't be taking, if I have any say in it!




posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 03:06 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

The I/eye that is all seeing is full of the light that is always present.

There is no escape from the light yet it is assumed to be elsewhere..... there is no elsewhere!

Are you ready to lose yourself in order to find the true self?



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain


there is no elsewhere!


So you say, so you say.



Are you ready to lose yourself in order to find the true self?
I'm not quite ready to "Kick off" this old Geode, just yet. If you are referring to a symbolic stripping of ones ego by some ritualistic secret society, then the answer is no thank you, regardless of any rewards that may be offered.

You are correct though, the "Light" is quite real, whether it is spiritual, or physical. And everything, has its own place, and time. And, the light of truth shall shine where it hasn't shined in a very long time. Nothing, hides from the "Light".


the light that is always present.
Agreed, even if we can't see it with our materialistic eyes.....



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Back on topic - I don't suppose you have had those rocks of yours checked out by a geologist?



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

or even a simple acid test ??

hydrocloric acid [ if you has access to it ] , spirit vinegar if not

if it bubbles and liberates a gas [ CO2 ]

the answer is , its ........................



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 05:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

OK, I'm thick. What does that mean?



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

appologies - my snarkiness = direct at the OP who seems to be willfully oblivious to any replies that conflict his delusions

the acid test - indicates near certainty that it is limestone



posted on Apr, 24 2019 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

Thanks. You would think that the OP would be interested in getting his "space rocks" checked out rather than spouting off about theology but there you go.



posted on Apr, 25 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Back on topic - I don't suppose you have had those rocks of yours checked out by a geologist?
Nope.

I'm taking my time to decide the right course, the right contact.

But in the mean time a bit of info.

These concretions are found in red clay. Red clay is produced by weak acids and water seeping though iron rich rocks, hence, the red color. So, if they were created in place, they should have been covered in a mountain containing a lot of iron, of course, millions of years ago. Except for, they do not appear to contain any iron minerals. Analysis will determine that, of course.

While reading up on concretions I stumbled a cross this research paper. Something very interesting popped up.


Subsamples from the concretions were found to be more similar to each other in their sulfide and organic carbon contents than to the host sediments.


Translated means the environment changed considerably since they were created, or, they were not created where they were found. Interesting for sure.

A preliminary study of the geochemical and microbiol.ogical characteristics of modern sedimentary concretions



posted on Apr, 26 2019 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye




So, if they were created in place, they should have been covered in a mountain containing a lot of iron, of course, millions of years ago.


No, that does not follow at all.



Translated means the environment changed considerably since they were created, or, they were not created where they were found.


What is surprising about the environment changing or them not being "created" where they were found?

Come back when you have had them checked out by someone that knows about such things. Anyway, why are you quoting from research papers when you don't believe in the science?



posted on Apr, 26 2019 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

in the event of being created elsewhere they are probably in a flood plain and all that deposit there is silt and they were carried from the mountain rich in iron down into the valleys!



posted on Apr, 26 2019 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Red Planet Report

Iron rich clay is found on Mars;



A new ovoid structure discovered in the Nakhla Martian meteorite is made of nanocrystalline iron-rich clay, contains a variety of minerals, and shows evidence of undergoing a past shock event from impact, with resulting melting of the permafrost and mixing


So perhaps not only your "Space rocks" but also the clay they are contained in came from Mars?




posted on Apr, 26 2019 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

No need for a mountain rich in iron - iron oxide is pretty ubiquitous on Earth.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Red Planet Report

Iron rich clay is found on Mars;



A new ovoid structure discovered in the Nakhla Martian meteorite is made of nanocrystalline iron-rich clay, contains a variety of minerals, and shows evidence of undergoing a past shock event from impact, with resulting melting of the permafrost and mixing


So perhaps not only your "Space rocks" but also the clay they are contained in came from Mars?



I'm not making the claim "Red Clay" comes from mars. It actually amazes me that science can determine a "Meteorite" came from mars, without first analyzing the martian soil, in depth. Or that matter, any other planet. One question, how do they know it came from mars???

We Human beings have such a narrow view point that is based on 2000 years or so of knowledge. Its shocking the things we dispel as "not possible". Could a "Meteorite" from mars land on earth? Yes, very possible. Could the remnants of a failed planet in our solar system, or another, land on earth? Just as possible!

What we think, or accept as fact, may not in fact, be fact. We "assume" what is found on earth originated on earth, when it is quite possible, from another solar system, planet, from another galaxy, billions of years ago.

The concept of "Space Dust" might be too limited in scope, and volumes. In other words, dust, is the last bit to settle. Take a shovel full of dirt and throw it into the air. The larger parts are first to fall, followed by smaller bits, and the dust follows the air current and settles downwind afterwards, or, stays in orbit, for ever.

Now consider this.


NASA recently reported that a cloud of dust was surrounding Mars high above its atmosphere. The authors of the study ruled out Mars itself and its moons Phobos and Deimos as the sources of the dust and concluded that it must come from a larger dust cloud floating around between the planets in our solar system.

What is space dust, and can it create life?

I don't understand why they would rule out Mars as the originator of the dust. After all, Mars is very dusty planet in nature. But none the less, the dust is there, and it hasn't settled yet. I would be interested in knowing, if it is radio active. That would support the theory there were Nuclear explosions on the planet. And if so, where did all the other "dust" go? Maybe, some to Earth.

The article is attempting to say it came from somewhere else(Tiamat?), and that is at the heart of my position. It has been proven materials from one planet can make its way to another planet (questionable assumption). But from where? Logically one might start in our own back yard, our solar system, then, our galaxy, then, deep space. But why limit these materials, to just dust?

What if more than just dust came into our atmosphere, what would it do, what would it look like, and what would the results be? No one has left any written materials about such a event. So if it happened, maybe multiple times, what would we expect to discover? And if such a event happened, how could one tell how old the materials really are? Where they created on a planet, 5 million, 500 billion years ago, came to earth, contaminated the original soil here? At the very least dating anything accurately would be out of the question.

Biological, chemical, and mineral processes should, should, be similar in our solar system from one planet to another, given the same circumstances of weather, temperature, and atmospheric conditions, or other solar systems with planets in the same Habitable Zone from their sun. Gold, is gold, and water, is water. And red clay, is red clay.

So in reality, sure, our very own red clay could have come from another planet, as dust, or in chunks, or in amounts too vast to comprehend. But don't limit it to red clay, geodes, concretions, could have come as well, mixed in with any number of possibilities. Or, created right here. Or, a combination of both. How could one ever prove or disprove that possibility?

Now for Science. You still don't understand my position so I will briefly explain, again.

One word, "Integrity". Or more to the point, lack of integrity.

This is not a indictment for all scientists. Probably most have great amounts of integrity. But none the less when science is based in grant money and peer review (Peer Pressure), integrity is soon lost. That is only one reason, the other, is politics, old religious politics. Certain religious views are not allowed and considered blaspheme to even encroach the subject. And that in itself, is mind control, whether its in the realm of science, or, politics/ religion.

Its all about the observation. Not, the theory! Its about facts, not assumptions. But, they all have their proper place, and proper time. Subduction is a theory, not a fact. The earth is filled with molten lava is a theory, not a fact. The formation of the asteroid belt is a theory, not, a fact.

I love science that is free of corruption, mind control, and manipulation for dubious reasons. Do I really need to prove corruption exists within the scientific community? Especially, when it comes to Geology (Geodeology)!



posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 03:41 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye





I'm not making the claim "Red Clay" comes from mars.


Oh dear. I'll just make a quick note:

"This poster has zero sense of humour".
edit on 29-4-2019 by oldcarpy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 03:49 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye




Do I really need to prove corruption exists within the scientific community? Especially, when it comes to Geology (Geodeology)!


Yes, you do.



posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye




The earth is filled with molten lava is a theory, not a fact.


I think it is actually a bit more complicated than that.



posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Here's the problem. You don't read or research. What the Rover discovered confirmed analyses which were done since the 1970's on meteorites that probably came from Mars. If you read some of that research you would understand how and why that conclusion was drawn. Stop arguing and do some homework.




I'm not making the claim "Red Clay" comes from mars. It actually amazes me that science can determine a "Meteorite" came from mars, without first analyzing the martian soil, in depth. Or that matter, any other planet. One question, how do they know it came from mars??? We Human beings have such a narrow view point that is based on 2000 years or so of knowledge. Its shocking the things we dispel as "not possible". Could a "Meteorite" from mars land on earth? Yes, very possible. Could the remnants of a failed planet in our solar system, or another, land on earth? Just as possible!





Weighing Molecules on Mars

The plot on the left shows new results from the Sample Analysis at Mars, or SAM, instrument on NASA's Curiosity rover. The instrument measured levels of different gas isotopes in the atmosphere. Isotopes are variations of atoms weighing different amounts. As seen on the plot, SAM detected about 2,000 times as much argon-40 as argon-36, which weighs less. This result is the most precise measurement yet of argon isotope ratios on Mars, and confirms the connection between Mars and Martian meteorites found on Earth, an example of which is shown at the right. The dark blobs in the meteorite are areas where atmospheric gases were trapped when the meteorite was ejected from Mars, and they include argon with the same ratio of argon-40 to argon-36 as SAM has measured in Gale Crater. The data at left also show peaks for carbon dioxide containing different isotopes of carbon and oxygen. The carbon dioxide at mass 44 contains the most abundant isotopes of both carbon and oxygen, so it has the largest signal, with its peak being higher than the top of the chart shown here. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/JSC





posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye




Its all about the observation. Not, the theory! Its about facts, not assumptions. But, they all have their proper place, and proper time. Subduction is a theory, not a fact.


Indeed. But subduction is a theory supported by lots and lots of observations, measurements and a huge amount of data from all those observations, studies and measurements which tend to support that theory.

Whereas you have: your beliefs. Which, if you don't mind me saying so, are a little....odd.



posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Aye these may well be theories but the fact , those theories are already built upon objective facts about our world
which then go together to produce the theory as a logical answer to the original question proposed by the theory!

As for martian rocks or rocks from other planets, we know they are from there based on their chemical make up
martian rocks have tiny amounts of martian gas trapped in tiny pockets within the rocks layers from the martian atmosphere when the rocks were forming

also chemical elements have different isotopes and these can often be found in specific regions
so there are definitely ways for geologists to identify what type of rock or meteorite they are looking at.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join