Solar Mystery — What Happened to the Sun in 5480 BC?

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

The one I'm referring to would have plunged civilization into the dark except that the infrastructure wasn't in place yet.

So, if there hadn't been telegraphs wires, the only thing anyone would have noticed would have been the auroral activity?

That would seem to be similar to the event in the OP. Apart from a possible increase in cancer incidence for the generation at the time. Wow, that would be a fascinating point of inquiry.

Immanuel Velikovsky - The Bonds Of The Past is a eye opener and even Einstein prior to his passing passed on requests to consider Velikovsky's work .In the Doc.you get to hear what was happening and who was pushing back to the point of being ridiculous .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Yeah. The notion that Venus is a comet which came out of Jupiter and wandered randomly around the Solar System is pretty ridiculous.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

The one I'm referring to would have plunged civilization into the dark except that the infrastructure wasn't in place yet.

That would seem to be similar to the event in the OP. Apart from a possible increase in cancer incidence for the generation at the time. Wow, that would be a fascinating point of inquiry.

Fascinating inquiry phage? I must take note...something genuinely intrigues phage!

a reply to: Rosinitiate

Lots of things intrigue me.
For example, I'm intrigued by how people can think Trump is the "the only one" who can do what he said he can do.

But seriously and on topic, the idea that it might be (remotely) possible to correlate ancient cancer rates to a solar event is totally bitchin.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Lots of things intrigue me.
For example, I'm intrigued by how people can think Trump is the "the only one" who can do what he said he can do.

But seriously and on topic, the idea that it might be (remotely) possible to correlate ancient cancer rates to a solar event is totally bitchin.

I can relate and I can feel that also.

Trump isn't "the only one" because there is no one.

And I agree, I'd love to understand "ancient" cancer as apposed to current cancer, as I would attribute most cancers as directly related to our ignorance in "our" tech.

a reply to: Phage

The notion that Venus is a comet which came out of Jupiter and wandered randomly around the Solar System is pretty ridiculous.

Miss quote much ? Venus was Comet like according to him . Lets extend your train of thought out a bit and ask a question . What was the moon before it became a moon ? Or a planet before it became a planet ? Or a comet before it was birthed ? One might even ask what our sun was before it became a star .Now no doubt these questions have been asked by Main Stream Science and they have cleverly crafted a answer . Oh and they do change their answers ,we have a historic record of that . But was science correct before they changed their answer ? The answer is no because if they would of had it correct then there would have been no reason to change it .

This game of science writing the narrative and then rewriting it is a norm . What they wont answer is what they can't .Because they have a lot invested in the narrative and too much to loose and will go to great lengths to protect their sacred cow . Science is a religion ...and no small one either .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Miss quote much ?

No. Not really.
If you disagree, please state your version of what Velisovky claimed.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

I like this kind of thread...a mystery!!! someone mentioned ice cores as well...so interesting the history we find looking at ice core and tree rings....... in a simislar vibe,,,scientists were able to match records to the date of sodom and gamorrah. an asteroid impact in 3123 bc.......

a reply to: Phage

In his theory Venus was a comet . Now if we were to take a stroll around the block of science we might find quite a few theories about certain subjects that have not been resolved . Obviously they all cant be correct so one of them might be true and all of them might be wrong . How would we go about labeling any of them ridiculous ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

In his theory Venus was a comet .

... which came out of Jupiter and careened randomly about the Solar System.

How would we go about labeling any of them ridiculous ?

Some are feasible based on orbital mechanics.

a reply to: Phage

Some are feasible based on orbital mechanics.

And the ones that are not are considered ludicrous, or ridiculous ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1
Those ones do not violate orbital mechanics. For starters.

a reply to: Phage

Those ones do not violate orbital mechanics. For starters.

So there are others ? besides the "for starters"

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Yeah. The lunar capture hypothesis doesn't work out so good. For example.

But that's nothing compared to Venus flitting around the Solar System then settling into a stable orbit around the Sun.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Phage

In his theory Venus was a comet . Now if we were to take a stroll around the block of science we might find quite a few theories about certain subjects that have not been resolved . Obviously they all cant be correct so one of them might be true and all of them might be wrong . How would we go about labeling any of them ridiculous ?

Well if you think A PLANET IS JUST GOING TO POP OUT UF JUPITER YOUR CRAZY. vENUS WAS NEVER A COMET AND ANY IDEA BASED ON THIS IS INSANE.

a reply to: dragonridr

Einstein thought his work had merit because of what he had predicted that had been proven to be true which no one else in the scientific community did ,even Einstein himself .But because it was proven shortly before his death he made letters of recommendations and his family tried to fulfill his dying wishes but were ignored by the scientific community . Its in the Doc. I posted .

a reply to: Phage

Yeah. The lunar capture hypothesis doesn't work out so good

So you are saying that science hasn't put that one to bed yet ? The closest body to our earth ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Einstein thought his work had merit because of what he had predicted that had been proven to be true which no one else in the scientific community did ,even Einstein himself

Please provide a citation which supports the notion that Einstein supported Veliskovsky's hypothesis about Venus.

a reply to: Phage

Please provide a citation which supports the notion that Einstein supported Veliskovsky's hypothesis about Venus.

It was not his Venus data that but his Jupiter data that Einstein learned about prior to his death . Veliskovsky's prediction about Venus was confirmed after Einstein's death . So asking me to produce something that was not claimed means that you are not very familiar with the story or tried to bait me .