The Ancient Lemurians

I was reading about Dulce Base and also this UFO base that exists beneath Mt. Ranier(supposedly) and it said there are vaults in Ranier containing records of the ancient Lemurians. I was wondering if anyone has any finfo on them? I searched Google and didnt really find anything that helped, though I saw some stuff on Atlantis when looking for them. Are they an ancient people or a society?

Originally posted by PennKen2009
I was reading about Dulce Base and also this UFO base that exists beneath Mt. Ranier(supposedly) and it said there are vaults in Ranier containing records of the ancient Lemurians. I was wondering if anyone has any finfo on them? I searched Google and didnt really find anything that helped, though I saw some stuff on Atlantis when looking for them. Are they an ancient people or a society?

The Lemurians are most probably fictional, being inventions of Madame Blavatsky. The Atlantis myth is a little older, and originated with Plato.

Lemuria isn't a real place. It was a theory by a biologist who was trying to think of a reason why lemur fossils were found in both Madagascar and India, so he postulated that there used to be a land bridge between them and called it LEMURia.

en.wikipedia.org...(continent)

Lemuria isn't the same thing as Atlantis. I personally don't think Atlantis ever existed, either, but I think that modern science can say for 100% sure that there is no such thing as Lemuria. They can't say with the same certainty that there was no Atlantis, although it is very likely there wasn't one, either.

A little bit of context is required to understand lemuria.

If you look at the distribution of certain organisms geographically (this is called "biogeography"), you can see that there are some odd distributions. There are, for examples, fossils of a reptile, called Mesosaurus in the coasts of africa, and the coasts of South America, however the animal, while aquatic, isn't of the type that could've swam across the open oceans.
www.calstatela.edu...


Similarly, if you look at the fossil record, you find that organisms, despite starting in one continent, likesay the whole of the old world, that they eventually spread to isolated continents, like the americas, or australia, how's that happen?

More specifically, if you look at the distribution of Lemurs, you find that they live in madagascar, and india, but not in between.

How do you explain this distribution?

Before Plate Tectonics was accepted by geologists, people supposed that great masses of land periodically rose and sank, thus forming land bridges. So you had a land bridge that formed between South and North America, leading to an exchange of animals, or land bridges that permited organisms to make it to Australia.

And, specifically, you'd have a land mass in the indian ocean, that was a habitat for Lemurs. Most of it sank, leaving lemurs in madagascar and India. This land mass was called "Lemuria".

Fast forward some time, and you have Helena Blatvasky, a mystic who claimed to be in contact with super advanced spirits from 'beyond'. I don't know if she started this movement, or picked up on it, but the set of ideas that she popularized was called "Theosophy", a mix of pesudo-philosophical ideas and ' Ultimately and generally, she proposed that there had been, in the past, a series of 'root races' of 'man', each more advanced than the next, and the more early ones being extremely inhuman.

She said that Atlantis was the Homeland to one of the "root races", and that "Lemuria" was home to another intelligent "root race" of sub-humans.

Mt. Shasta is a place that has, for a long time, had a lot of 'mystical' things said about it, strange lights, strange beings, etc. I don't know if its directly connected to the Theosophical societies (ie, if they are the some of the ones making claims about it), BUT I have heard it claimed that the 'ancient seers' of "Lemuria" have secret facilities within Mt. Shasta.


Big problem with all this, there IS no Lemuria, there never was any continent connecting madagascar and india; there is no submerged/sunken continental crust there. Same with Atlantis. Rather than submerging continents, the the biogeographical data is explained by Plate Tectonics, the land was once connected, and then rifted apart the outlines even match!

Continental crust can't sink into ocean crust, because its lighter, it'd be like trying to get a rubber ducky to sink into the bath water (doesn't everyone here take a rubber ducky into the bath?).
So, Lemuria, its Quackery!
j.b5z.net...

Or you could just study "The Secret Doctrine".


Lemuria is said to have been the era of the actual "Fall of Man" as symbolically described in Genesis of the Torah.


An excerpt on Gnostic Anthropology.


A book of the same name:

Originally posted by Nygdan
Fast forward some time, and you have Helena Blatvasky, a mystic who claimed to be in contact with super advanced spirits from 'beyond'. I don't know if she started this movement, or picked up on it, but the set of ideas that she popularized was called "Theosophy", a mix of pesudo-philosophical ideas and ' Ultimately and generally, she proposed that there had been, in the past, a series of 'root races' of 'man', each more advanced than the next, and the more early ones being extremely inhuman.

It is, of course, open to debate as to whether or not she added things to(or revealed, depending on your perspective) the original Secret Doctrine of the Philosophers.

However, from reading her works, it is at least very apparent that she was familiar with, if not an Adept of authentic Philosophy.


[edit on 28-4-2006 by Tamahu]

On more thing Nygdan, about your quote I just responded to, regarding the First Root Races being "inhuman".

"The Omeyocan is the Lord of the Night, the Black Tezcatlipoca who when denying himself, bursts into light and the universe (that fecundates, that drives Quetzalcoatl, the Solar Logos) is born.

"The First Root Race was gigantic and black in color, however it was very civilized. This was an androgynous Root Race, asexual, semi-physical, and semi-ethereal. These Individuals could reduce their size to the normal size of a person of this present Aryan Root Race. The rituals and wisdom of the First Root Race were marvelous. Temples and constructions were portentous. Barbarism did not exist in that epoch. Such a Divine Root Race was devoured by the tigers of wisdom. The regent of that Root Race was the Aztec God Tezcatlipoca. Each individual was a true Master of Wisdom. Reproduction was performed by the fissiparous act; this is similar to the reproduction system of the organic cells by cellular division. This is how the organism of the Father-Mother was divided into two. The androgynous child suspended itself for a while from the Father-Mother. The First Root Race lived on the Sacred Island situated on the polar cap of the North. Such an Island still exists, but in Jinn State."

- Samael Aun Weor

Even H.P. Blavatsky herself wrote that, even though the earlier Root Races were less developed in some ways, they were more spiritually advanced in others.




[edit on 29-4-2006 by Tamahu]

Originally posted by Tamahu
Even H.P. Blavatsky herself wrote that, even though the earlier Root Races were less developed in some ways, they were more spiritually advanced in others.

Yes, but they were freaks. The Lemurians walked backwards and had the heels of their feet extended tremendously for this (or just had backwards feet, which, apparently, is something out of russian/slavic folklore). They were 'montrosities', in the classical sense, thats all I meant.

What do you think about the issue of Lemuria starting as a theory in geology, but being rejected because of plate tectonics? If there is no Lemuria as a continent between africa and india, then doesn't the whole thing have a serious credibility issue?

[edit on 28-4-2006 by Nygdan]

I'm not exactly sure what she said about the Lemurians in detail(as I've only used "The Secret Doctrine" for reference thus far).

But being "monstrous" or "freaks"(according to our standards) or whatever they may have been; I would much rather be one of them, than live in the barbaric and animalistic state(despite our prideful intellect) that we currently find ourselves in.

Hercolubus "An unusual event is going to accelerate the process of swift change to the axis of the planet Earth. I am referring to the planet Hercolubus. This planet is six times bigger than the planet Jupiter. The planet Hercolubus belongs to the distant solar system of Tylo. The solar system of Tylo is rapidly approaching our solar system, and Hercolubus is rapidly approaching Earth. Modern Astronomers have before their sight the planet Hercolubus, or as it is known by modern science, the Barnard star. This planet is a powerful giant that will pass through an angle of our solar system. When this happens, the revolution of the axis of the planet Earth will accelerate violently. Then the final catastrophe will occur. Some scientists believe that they will be able to push this monstrous planet away with nuclear explosions, but this will be useless. It will be impossible to push this tremendous mass of a planet out of the way with mere nuclear bombs. This same planet brought Atlantis to an end. Before Atlantis existed, it annihilated the existence of another continent. We know very well that the continent of Mu or Lemuria sank within the waters of the boisterous pacific ocean after 10,000 years of earthquakes and incessant volcanic eruptions." - The Aquarian Message

This may explain the Final Catastrophe of each Root Race, as the shifting of poles caused by such a tremendous gravitational pull, would indeed cause an upheavel large enough to nearly make whole continents "sink".





[edit on 29-4-2006 by Tamahu]

I would take that cited source with a lot of salt. There is no continent called Atlantis, Mu, Lemuria, or even Pan.

Mu, just like Lemuria, was posited to exist in order to explain the biogeographic distribution of organisms (including Man) on polynesian islands, the idea being that hte current islands were the mountain peaks of a lost submerged continent in the central Pacific. The problem, as with Lemuria, is that this was dreamt up before plate tectonics was understood, and plate tectonics nullifies the need to explain these factors as such. IOW, the basic premise behind them is completely wrong and has been refuted and superseeded.

I would also be careful of anything noting gigantic catastrophes, especially cycles of such catastrophes repeating throuhgout history and resulting in 'progressive improvements' of the 'stock races' on earth, as there is no evidence that any such catastrophes actually happened.

Also, clearly, there is no Herculabus or star system rapidly approaching earth. Nor has the axis of the earth passed through violent revolutions in the past, such as flipping upside down and the like. In fact, there are records going back very far, to before the evolution of man, that show the effects of 'normal' wobble of the axis and other astronomical factors (orbital eccentricty, etc), they are small, though important, changes, but not radical cata-strophes.

NM

[edit on 30-4-2006 by Tamahu]

I'd have to learn more about this subject before saying much else.


So, when were plate tectonics "discovered" by official science?

Nygdan:

"Also, clearly, there is no Herculabus or star system rapidly approaching earth."

How do you know?

Does official science(the Anti-Christ) know for sure?

And if they actually do know that said system is headed in our direction, how do we know they're not hiding it from us?


Both H.P. Blavatsky and Samael Aun Weor give some very intelligent arguements about the erroneous views of official science regarding "the evolution of man" in the following works, that are definitely worth noting.

Originally posted by Tamahu
Or you could just study "The Secret Doctrine".

Lemuria is said to have been the era of the actual "Fall of Man" as symbolically described in Genesis of the Torah.

An excerpt on Gnostic Anthropology.

A book of the same name:

For example; we should be able to see through the fossil records, an almost infinite amount of stages of subtle changes-as species are said to gradually evolve-considering the tools of measurement availible to them that could detect such subtle changes.

But they've only been able to show us maybe a dozen or so jumps, despite the possession of said tools that should be able to show and prove hundreds, if not thousands of subtle changes; as species are said to "evolve" a little each time through each generation.

But all the evidence they can show us, actually gives room for esoteric "theories" about there being a multi-dimensional factor in the evolution of species based on reincarnation and transmigration(i.e. the teachings of the Tree of Life).

In other words, I'm not denying evolution; just the materialistic dogma regarding it(i.e. that "man came from monkeys" ).





[edit on 30-4-2006 by Tamahu]

you could always go with what mr. sleeper says about Atlantis, it was the aliens living here and they destroyed it themselves so it wouldnt look as if they were here lol

Originally posted by Tamahu
So, when were plate tectonics "discovered" by official science?

The super-short answer is the 60s-70s.


I've got to question why you'd put discovered in quote marks, and not official. The story behind plate tectonics is actually quite interesting. Noted artic explorer, meteorologist, and adventurer, Alfred Wegener, came up the the basic theory quite some time ago, called "Continental Drift". However, it was derided and rejected, for many reasons, the primary one being that there was no driving mechanism. While this was a problem, his theory really did explain things a whole lot better than the 'accepted and official' theory, but people rejected it anyway. It wasn't until decades later that another few researchers came up with good driving mechanisms, and then the whole thing was reconsidered by the scientific community, and found to be a very solid theory.

How do you know?

Because there are no star charts or astronomical observations or data that confirm that it does exist. None that I have seen anyway.

And if they actually do know that said system is headed in our direction, how do we know they're not hiding it from us?

Because 'they' are just regular people. Scientists aren't part of some cabal, all connected to one anotehr and working towards the same sinister goal.


Both H.P. Blavatsky and Samael Aun Weor give some very intelligent arguements about the erroneous views of official science regarding "the evolution of man" in the following works, that are definitely worth noting.

Or you could just study "The Secret Doctrine".

The problem is, blatvatsky seems to have done nothing more than take some of the widely accepted science of the day for granted. Geologists talked about submerging and rising continents, she accepted it. Fact is, continental crust can't sink into the ocean, its lighter. Lemuria & Mu were suppositions based upon the science of the day. Science is imperfect, like so many things. Science was in error. Lemuria and Mu never existed.

we should be able to see through the fossil records, an almost infinite amount of stages of subtle changes-as species are said to gradually evolve-considering the tools of measurement availible to them that could detect such subtle changes.

See, thats thing, this is an older way of thinking about evolution. For lots of reasons, Darwin was very much commited ot the logic of evolution being incredibly slow and gradualistic, tiny tiny changes over great spans of time. His greatest supported, Huxley, was actually in dismay over this and felt that Darwin didn't need to rely upon such gradualness.
Regardless, the scientific understanding that Woer seems to be citing as being incorrect, its similar to the "Land Bridges" idea, its popular, but somewhat faulty, science.
Just because lots of people accept something, don't mean its true!

as species are said to "evolve" a little each time through each generation.

And infact what we do find when we use the more powerful tools at our disposal is that evolution is occuring with each generation. Its just that that evolution isn't allways so 'directed' or 'progressive' process, whereby the 'weak' become 'strong' or the 'savage' become 'civilized'.

actually gives room for esoteric "theories" about there being a multi-dimensional factor in the evolution of species

Not for nothing, but what wouldn't leave room for that?

pennken2009
you could always go with what mr. sleeper says about Atlantis

Did Cayce say anything about Lemuria though? I am not familiar.

Originally posted by PennKen2009
I was reading about Dulce Base and also this UFO base that exists beneath Mt. Ranier(supposedly) and it said there are vaults in Ranier containing records of the ancient Lemurians. I was wondering if anyone has any finfo on them? I searched Google and didnt really find anything that helped, though I saw some stuff on Atlantis when looking for them. Are they an ancient people or a society?

Managed to get hold of a book from the Library a few years ago, which was brought in from the west coast (3K away), and it dealt with Ancient Lemurians and Semurians and had the cloak and dagar inscriptions in it that was put in by unknown U.S. experts. I believe it was written in 1952. I have certain notations from the book in one of my more recent purchased items.

Could have been Sturrock who wrote it(?), anyway -- it's book but 9"x12" bined by wire ring.
And go's into Lemurian force fields and Force Cutters, etc.. It also talked about Arnold's sighting of the 9 semi-circular disks as being EBE in training and "Cutting the Lawn" the first of nine doing the driving and the other eight being electronically (??) chained.

Amazing stuff.

Dallas

[edit on 1-5-2006 by Dallas]

[edit on 1-5-2006 by Dallas]

For example; we should be able to see through the fossil records, an almost infinite amount of stages of subtle changes-as species are said to gradually evolve-considering the tools of measurement availible to them that could detect such subtle changes.

But they've only been able to show us maybe a dozen or so jumps, despite the possession of said tools that should be able to show and prove hundreds, if not thousands of subtle changes; as species are said to "evolve" a little each time through each generation.

No, you need to do some research, the fossil record does not show every organism that ever existed, to become a fossil a creature has to be covered in sediment quickly after death, ie: tar pits, sand dunes, landslides and then be exposed to heat and pressure over the millenia.

The fossil record only shows a fraction of a percent of dead species, that is why some dinosaur species only have one or two actual fossils in existence, and why new ones are being rediscovered all of the time. Some species are more likely to be turned into fossils than others due to their climate or geography in which they lived.

Before we go any further, I need to clarify that when I said...

For example; we should be able to see through the fossil records...

...I should have mentioned that I was expressing my own opinion, not necessarily that of H.P. Blavatsky or Samael Aun Weor.


And I'm not trying to refute evolution itself.

What I find to be absurd, is the materialistic theory of some "scientists", who claim that evolution evolves new species; such an ape into a man and whatnot(there's still no "missing link" to be found of course and never will).


As for the rest of the points brought up in this thread; I'll have to continue later...

You are all full of #.