A question about dates (13,000 years ago, 3600 years cycle, etc.)


The Force is Strong With This One
Hi. A few days ago I read Pierre Lescaudron's articles about flash-frozen mammoths and south pole stealing water from Mars, and just loved them. This got me to purchase his book, that I just began reading.

However, after reading a few other articles, and reading about Nibiru by Sitchin (a few years ago, but I don't really believe in Nibiru per se), there is something I don't understand:

So there was this cosmic disaster about 13,000 years ago. Then, it is said that a swarm of meteors (one of these meteors having being Venus before it became a planet) passes close to us every 3600 years, and we are due another pass very soon, as attest the changes we begin to see on Earth. My very simple question is : 13,000 years ago, then 9400 ya, then 5800 ya, then 2200 ya... so next should be 1400 years into the future, not within a few years. :huh:


FOTCM Member
Well, the 3600 year cycle as we speculate here and Pierre in his latest article is based on what the C‘s have given us as a rough time estimate. The C‘s suggested that we are now roughly at another point of this comet cluster coming in. So If we calculate back in time from 2012, we arrive very accurately on the 14,400 year mark before present. The date Pierre investigates in his latest article and which happens to have been the most severe episode in global cooling, extinction and other markers in a very long time. See what I wrote in the thread for Pierres latest article:

I've started to read the article now for the first time while translating and right from the start there is something that peaked my interest and I guess is also one of the reasons Pierre got interested into looking into that possible cycle more closely.

The 14,400 BP event, which by the looks of it, was even more severe than the two following ones (at least in terms of temperature drop) is dead on the timeframe the C's gave us for the comet cluster cycle of about 3600 years. And I mean, dead on...

Here is a short list I wrote down a while ago in order to pay closer attention to information in and around those dates that might pop up in the scientific literature in terms of cataclysmic events and such. It is the 3600 years comet-cluster-cycle the C's suggested bombards earth dated back from the year 2012:

- 3,600 years BP (1,588 years B.C.)
- 7,200 years BP (5,188 years B.C.)
- 10,800 years BP (8,788 years B.C.)
- 14,400 years BP (12,388 years B.C.)
- 18,000 years BP (15,988 years B.C.)
- 21,600 years BP (19,588 years B.C.)

So, if we assume that the big drop we can see in the temperature record for the 14,400 year BP event has been primarily caused by the comet cluster the C's talked about, that raises a number of pretty interesting questions. We notice that the two following ones that preceded the younger drayas period (and are by now strongly associated with harsh global cosmic events) don't fit within that cycle the C's suggested. That raises the big question if those events actually happened pretty much in the cycle the C's suggested, but that the accuracy of dating got seriously screwed up? If the 14.400 event is indeed the event the C's suggested, it could potentially be used as an anker point to calibrate/correct dates of events afterwards in some way?

Also, if the 14,400 BP event is the event the C's talk about, the question arises how exactly it is possible that this date is dead on in terms of dating while the following (and maybe the previous) events seems to be off quite some margin in terms of dating? All pretty interesting thoughts to think about that could help us figure out more precisely what might have happened and how exactly timeframes got mixed up (or moved in time) and how to maybe readjust them to reflect what actually happened on which point.

Will read on now in Pierres article.

In part Pierre is trying to investigate in his latest article if the 3600 year cycle as suggested by the C’s holds water and can be detected in the record. As stated above, the 14.400 event certainly fits eerily excact into that given time frame of the C‘s. But the ones after that event seem to be off quite a bit.

As Pierre, Laura, Carlson and a number of scientists have been investigating a while now is the (by now) likely idea that time frames have been mixed up primarily due to those intruding catalysms themselves. For example, comet influx could seriously mess up the accuracy of dating methods like radiocarbon dating. Which means that a date derived by dating methods could very well be quite some time off to the actual date in which it happened.
Last edited:


The Force is Strong With This One
Another question : it seems there are also sub-cycles within this 3600 years cycle, that would explain events in the 17th century (during the Maunder glacial period), and 1500 years ago, etc.
Top Bottom