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.

 

The Lightning-Scarred Planet Mars

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
The Thunderbolts team of physicists and mythologists brings us an alternative view of the Red Planet.

Plasma cosmologists have long surmised that the rock formations, canyons and “lake beds” that we see on the Martian surface were not created by flowing water, but were electrically excavated by massive planetary scale plasma discharges (basically huge lightning bolts).

The following series of videos presents evidence in support of their theory (which I fully agree with).

playlist



For a tutorial video that encapsulates the entire theory of plasma cosmology, watch this video.

For links to published peer reviewed papers that support their theory, read this.




edit on 14-2-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I only watched the first video (I hate videos, I think they are a waste of time, their messages can be transmitted much faster just with text and fixed images), but I have two three question, if you don't mind.

1 - do the proponents of the "lightning" theory have an explanation for the missing side effects of such large discharges?
2 - do they have any explanation for the source of the difference in potential that provoked the discharge?
3 - they show many tests in lab with metal, are there any videos showing the results of electric discharges on a surface similar to Mars' surface, like a silica based powder?

Thanks in advance.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


yes

yes

and yes.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Actually if you are interested in learning more about the theory, we can look at what is taking place on Io right now.

Electrical plasma plumes, created by the interaction with Jupiter's magnetosphere, are excavating surface material and even lofting some of that surface material into space.

The electrical excavation of Io pretty much sums up what occurred on Mars and where asteroids/comets come from.

Here's the theory:

www.thunderbolts.info...


The electric interpretation suggests that continuous electrical arcing has etched the surface of Io, creating flat plains and bluffs with scalloped edges. In much the same way, electric arcs are used in industry to machine metallic surfaces to a high level of precision. The most recent etching in this region has exposed the dark surface below the falling sulfur dioxide snow, and in the lower picture we see two bright spots where it appears that arcs are continuing to extend the excavated area in two directions.


Io's "volcanoes" don't look like normal volcanoes, because they aren't volcanoes, they are plasma discharges.

The basis for the above Thunderbolts article comes from Peratt and Dessler's work, which is published here:

Filamentation of Volcanic Plumes of the Jovian Satellite Io, Astrophysics and Space Science 144

Peratt also explains a bit more of it in Physics of the Plasma Universe QB462.7.P47 1991

More recent research supports the Peratt and Dessler theory of Io's volcanoes, however the research has the cause and effect inverted.

Here we can clearly see the tight coupling between Jupiter's magnetosphere and Io's volcanism, even though the cause and effect is inverted in the papers:

Volcanic Control of the Io Atmosphere and Neutral and Plasma Torus
Io's neutral clouds, plasma torus, and magnetospheric interaction

If you watched the videos, you can get a better understanding of what the plasma physicists are saying actually shaped the surface of mars by understanding the electrical processes involved in the Peratt and Dessler paper on Io's plasma plumes.

edit on 14-2-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I am totally behind plasma cosmology and EDM catastrophy.... but that guys voice just bugs the hell out of me..



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 05:36 AM
link   
In a disruption of planetary orbits Mars did battle with Venus in the ancient sky in a duel of cosmic thunderbolts. Mars the warrior came away scarred from his encounter, this is what resonates in mythology.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


ZEUS had played on MARS when he was a kidd



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I've been looking into this recently, in fact, I made a thread on it not too long ago.

Here.

My mind isn't quite made up on this yet, but I do think it makes for fascinating reading. Joseph P. Farrell goes into it in his book "The Cosmic War" and mentions the work of the creators of the videos and also Paul LaViolette.

Interesting stuff

edit on 15/2/2011 by LiveForever8 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


...but I have two three question, if you don't mind.

1 - do the proponents of the "lightning" theory have an explanation for the missing side effects of such large discharges?
2 - do they have any explanation for the source of the difference in potential that provoked the discharge?
3 - they show many tests in lab with metal, are there any videos showing the results of electric discharges on a surface similar to Mars' surface, like a silica based powder?
Thanks in advance.


NIBIRU approach?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


CAREFULL what you say!
You might angry Stereologist...
OR HE'S IN A BUNKER ALLREADY?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


Yeah you did a fantastic job putting that thread together. - Much applause to you!

If you have further questions on the subject, feel free to ask me.

I have been studying this for years and have loads of resources.

If you are looking for links to more scientific papers that support the theory, check out my Knol post here.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Thanks for the info


Slightly off topic - but I was wondering if you had any decent sources of information on Paul LaViolettes work, paying particular attention to his theory regarding Pulsars as possible communication beacons and their placement at specific points in the galaxy, more specifically - the galactic center.

I'm in no way scientifically minded and I have been trying to get to grips with this for a few weeks now
so any help would be greatly appreciated.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


No, but in briefly reviewing his work, it looks like he is hung up on gravitational theory like the rest of the mainstream.

If he was putting out correct theory, I'm sure I would have heard his name before.

Pulsars were explained by Healy and Peratt here.

A pulsar is nothing more than a really big version of a relaxation oscillator that we find in common science labs here on earth:
en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 15-2-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Thanks for the link



Paul LaViolette has developed a new theory of gravity that replaces the deeply flawed theory of general relativity. Predicted from subquantum kinetics, it accounts for the electrogravitic coupling phenomenon discovered by Townsend Brown and may explain the advanced aerospace propulsion technology utilized in the B-2 bomber.

Background




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


hmmmm....

Perhaps he's not as bad as I thought he was.

He's very very close to what is actually occurring with his subatomic work on Transmuting Ether theory.

www.etheric.com...

Very good stuff! He's so close to seeing the big picture.

It looks like his problem is that he doesn't understand the properties of astrophysical plasma correctly, which is a fairly common problem in modern academia.

He actually looks like a good guy with a fairly open mind.

He's not entirely right, but he's on the right track.

The basic premise of his theory that an aether exists and that it is the origin and sustaining force of physical matter is right on the money.

His basic premise that matter is entirely composed of a wave function within an aether is right on the money.

But beyond that he's not getting the larger picture of how electron creation in the deep vacuum between galaxies creates and sustains galaxies, from which all other types of matter comes into existence.


edit on 15-2-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Thanks for the information.


How does the theory explain a continuous arching of such power?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

I think the obvious question at this point would be what could have been the opposing pole to this electrical arching? If Mars was the anode then what was the cathode? (or vice versa if that be the case) Is this evidence in favor of Velikovsy's theory?

Another big question is could the same process be responsible for the creation of Earth's Grand Canyon? Or perhaps the odd formations called Carolina bays? Seems to me that there are many similarities between Mars and Earth concerning these formations. If these are due to an electrical phenomena, or if this is a natural geological process that has yet to be identified, than we should find evidence of such within terrestrial examples don't you think?



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join