Atlantis

Lost Footage from Secret Digs at Giza Found! Confirming Ancient Accounts with Modern Technology!​


The hunt for the hall of records continues. In this fascinating follow up documnentary to "The Mystery of the Sphinx Temple!..." Ben goes even deeper into the mystery of secret digs under and around the sphinx, featuring the secret video footage filmed by Boris Said back in the Nineties during the Schor Expedition. Said was the executive producer of the 1993 television documentray "The Mystery of the Sphinx", narrated by Charlton Heston. He got involved in the work of the Schor Foundation in 1996. According to the Belgian author Robert Bauval (Orion Correlation Theory): "The official purpose of the project was to find and repair faults and chasms for the protection of tourists. The true and covert purpose was to search for the hall of records and conduct experiments at the Sphinx and inside the great pyramid".

On a radio show in 1997 Boris Said spoke about the Schor Expedition and that there would be confirmation for the existence of said chamber. The audio recording is also featured in this video. They filmed Zahi Hawass entering the Sphinx through the entrance at the rear of the edifice. Standing inside the Sphinx he said:" Even Indiana Jones wouldn't dream to be here now inside the body of the Sphinx!" But the film was never broadcasted, until now...

The Schor Expedition footage further shows very interesting findings in the Osiris Shaft, at a time when the water table was low enough to take a better look at its features. It looks like there are tunnels connecting the shaft with the Sphinx and the pyramids. Zahi Hawass really has been busy: There is even rare Japanese TV footage from another Japanese Expedition in colaboration with Zahi exploring the shaft with an endoscopic camera. Well worth watching.
 
  • Cayce's 1st destruction (Cayce's 50K ( C's 48K) ): They had problem of beasts invading human habitant that forced them find solution using crystals and the technology started. That led to difference of opinion between Kantek gang and native gang ( native American and Parantha type) on how to use them. They used pyramids to blow up the volcano's to kill beast habitat. This made the huge Atlantis continent in 5 pieces.
    • I was always puzzled by the scale of destruction particularly on the continent they themselves are inhabiting. How they were able to do it?
    • Even if some body used beams initially, they should realized the mess it is creating and should have backed out immediately, unless they didn't survey the continent before. right?. In my opinion, It was a mad proposition to destroy their own continent. Just 30K years back, they blew up their own planet Kantek and one would expect to be cautious.
    • These STS elemental ( with its own "will" and doesn't give dime about human condition) taking control of the technology ( due to repetition) explains the madness that must have went on during that phase. Probably it is like those drone operators shooting Iraqi civilians remotely. In this case, at least humans have some control over themselves to stop it.
  • Cayce 2nd destruction ( around 28K- C's 26K ) : Cayce says it happened due to over tuning. Most probably, they thought they learned their lessons and over tuned them and same thing happened. The Atlantis continent became more pieces. only 3 pieces somewhat recovered.
  • 3rd one : According to Plato's story ( from Mary Settegast's Plato prehistorian) , it is few hundred years before the nature events ( YD and Noah's flood event).
I wonder how to reconcile the vast differences between Cayce and what the C's said about the Atlantis cataclysms. Both speak about three destructions and the times given are more or less the same, though the stated causes of all three destructions seem to differ:

1st cataclysm (50K or 48K): Misuse of crystals for massive explosion (Cayce) vs close passage of Mars and comets (C's)

2nd cataclysm (28K or 26K): Crystal tuned too high (Cayce) vs close passage of Venus (C's)

3rd cataclysm (ca. 10900 BC): Natural cataclysms and flood (Cayce) vs crystals destroying Atlantis, as well as comet impacts, axis shift, crustal displacement and deluge of water from a close passage of Mars before that (C's)

One possible way to reconcile these differences is that maybe the massive abuse of power through the crystals attracted the cosmic catastrophes, either comets or close passages of neighbouring planets. It is still strange that Cayce apparently never spoke of cometary impacts or the close passages of Mars or Venus as causes for the three Atlantean cataclysms.

Also, as a reminder, the last time Venus and Mars made a close passage to Earth was just 3600 years ago during the last passage of the cometary cluster, according to the C's:

October 5, 1994

Q: (L) You said the Exodus occurred in 2676 B.C., is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Was that the last passage of the cometary Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this activity of Venus interactive with the close passing of the cluster of comets you have mentioned?

A: Close. One of three cataclysms close together.

Q: (L) If Venus was one of the cataclysms and the cluster of comets was another, what was the third?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Mars knocked out of it's orbit by Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And the two appeared to do battle in the sky to the inhabitants of the Earth as Velikovsky described, is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Now, this cluster of comets, when was the last time it came into the solar system?

A: 3582 yrs ago?

Q: (L) What is the cycle?

A: 3600 yrs.

Q: (L) So, when is this cluster expected to hit the plane of the ecliptic again?

A: 12 to 18 years.

If this prediction from 1994 that the comet cluster would hit the plane of the ecliptic in 12 to 18 years is correct, that would have been 2006 to 2012. Though passing the plane of the ecliptic does not necessarily mean that it is at its closest point to the Earth or the Sun there.
 
Rudolph Steiner (1861-1925) does not give much concrete information regarding the Atlantis cataclysms or their timing. His talks about Atlantis focused mostly on the spiritual and physical evolution of humanity during that long era.

Nevertheless, Steiner mentions at least two Atlantean cataclysms: an early one "towards the middle of the Atlantean age" and the final deluge, which he places at about 9700 BC (which corresponds exactly to the end of the Younger Dryas cooling period).

The reasons for the cataclysms he gives are basically the same as given by Cayce or the C's. He talks about the misuse of power "which released powerfully destructive natural forces". He also mentions that the Earth was surrounded by a water vapor canopy or mists in the Atlantean times, but just like Cayce he does not appear to have spoken of cometary impacts or the close passages of Venus or Mars.

Though he did mention that comets serve the purpose of cleansing the solar system from harmful astral substances that accumulate from human thought and activity, which may have been a hint about cometary impacts on Earth.

Steiner explicitly stated that he kept parts of his knowledge about Atlantis secret and that it would depend on how humanity develops whether these secrets could be revealed in the future.

A good summary of what Rudolph Steiner said about Atlantis in various lectures can be found in the book Atlantis - The Fate Of A Lost Land And Its Secret Knowledge, which is available in the Internet Archive.
 
I think we need to separate events from YD period noah's flood events (Mars flooding Earth) from later day events during 3K-2K BCE Venus settling period.
October 5, 1994

Q: (L) You said the Exodus occurred in 2676 B.C., is that correct?

A:Close.

Q: (L) Was that the last passage of the cometary Venus?

A: Yes.
These are 3000 to 2000 BCE events. That is Venus making rounds to finally settle down between earth and Mercury during this period. This is almost 7000+ years after Atlantean civilization had gone.
Q: (L) Was this activity of Venus interactive with the close passing of the cluster of comets you have mentioned?

A: Close. One of three cataclysms close together.

Q: (L) If Venus was one of the cataclysms and the cluster of comets was another, what was the third?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Mars knocked out of it's orbit by Venus?

A: Yes.
Q: (L) And the two appeared to do battle in the sky to the inhabitants of the Earth as Velikovsky described, is that correct?

A: Close.
If Venus is settling between Mercury and earth, this will knock few planets off depending on the specific location of the interaction. We have to keep in mind, Mars is smaller planet and next to it, we have large asteroid belt. We have quite a few candidates for the source of these comets during this period (3000 - 2000 BCE). Venus made 5 iterations before settle down.
  • 3600 years oort cloud comets is NOT a candidate as it came at 5200 BCE and later 1600 BCE.
  • We have this Giant comet remnants that locked in inner solar system. This source continue to disintegrate even to this day and visible in Taurid streams etc.
  • If big comet like Venus settles, it can drag smaller planet mars and mars can easily drag few rocks from asteroid belt too.
Most probably some chaotic mix of asteroid source there. M.M. Mandelker wrote 3 books about 2300 BCE cataclysm and his hypothesis for the cause of 2300 BCE event is Giant Comet remnants ( Clube etc.) . interacted with earth. He too used some hymns from Vedas like Velikovsky. The reason for it, the Indological date of Vedas around 1500 BCE or little older (But C's places Vedas at YD period). so any body who wants to make some connection (even to this day) are forced to use this Vedic date of approx. 1500 BCE.

What I am trying to say is the data points Velikovsky and M.M. Mandalker used from Vedas are from much older (YD) period. My guess is Laura's questions are to get clarification of Velikovsky's hypothesis. So there is some mix-up of events of YD period and later 3K-2K events related to Mars and Venus.
 
These are 3000 to 2000 BCE events.
If you read the whole exchange, it seems that the actual date given was 1600 BC (3600 years ago), while 2600 BC was only "close". At least that is how I understood it and I don't know if a thousands years off can be called "close":

October 5, 1994

Q: (L) You said the Exodus occurred in 2676 B.C., is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Was that the last passage of the cometary Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this activity of Venus interactive with the close passing of the cluster of comets you have mentioned?

A: Close. One of three cataclysms close together.

Q: (L) If Venus was one of the cataclysms and the cluster of comets was another, what was the third?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Mars knocked out of it's orbit by Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And the two appeared to do battle in the sky to the inhabitants of the Earth as Velikovsky described, is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Now, this cluster of comets, when was the last time it came into the solar system?

A: 3582 yrs ago?
 
If Venus is settling between Mercury and earth, this will knock few planets off depending on the specific location of the interaction. We have to keep in mind, Mars is smaller planet and next to it, we have large asteroid belt. We have quite a few candidates for the source of these comets during this period (3000 - 2000 BCE). Venus made 5 iterations before settle down.
Probably the inner planets were affected the most because of size, maybe Mercury was near where Venus’s orbit is and had a stronger atmosphere compare to the thin atmosphere that has now, and Earth was a bit further away from the Sun than we are right now, like a bit more closer to where Mars orbit is now. Which would explain in a way, the change of gravity when getting closer to the Sun and the water canopy surrounding the planet. Dunno just wondering.
 
Probably the inner planets were affected the most because of size, maybe Mercury was near where Venus’s orbit is and had a stronger atmosphere compare to the thin atmosphere that has now, and Earth was a bit further away from the Sun than we are right now, like a bit more closer to where Mars orbit is now. Which would explain in a way, the change of gravity when getting closer to the Sun and the water canopy surrounding the planet. Dunno just wondering.
Good line of thinking. Asked Grok about it. I know some times our science's limitations make it give garbage.

if Venus doesn't exist , where would be the positions of earth and mercury around sun for solar system balance. tell me distances w.r.t current planetary distances.

After dozen considerations, it said - No orbital changes needed for stable solar system without Venus.
The solar system is dynamically stable primarily due to the balance between the Sun's gravitational pull and each planet's orbital inertia (or centrifugal force in a rotating frame), with planetary interactions providing only minor perturbations. Removing Venus, which has a mass about 0.815 times that of Earth, would have negligible immediate effects on the orbital positions (semi-major axes) of Mercury and Earth because the Sun's mass dominates by a factor of over 300,000 times Earth's. Over very long timescales (millions to billions of years), Earth's orbit might experience slightly increased eccentricity due to the loss of Venus's periodic gravitational tugs, which currently help stabilize it through near-resonance (Venus orbits the Sun 13 times for every 8 Earth orbits). However, the average distances would not shift meaningfully, and the system would remain balanced and stable.

Approximate average distances from the Sun (unchanged relative to current values):
- Mercury: 0.39 AU (same as current; no adjustment needed for balance).
- Earth: 1 AU (same as current; no adjustment needed for balance).

For reference, current Venus distance is 0.72 AU, but its absence creates no requirement to redistribute Mercury or Earth to "fill the gap" or maintain stability, as the inner solar system's spacing already exceeds minimum thresholds for long-term orbital stability (e.g., separations far greater than mutual Hill radii).

did few corrections to Grok's assumptions ( it kept keeping the kantek distance 2.7 AU, using remnant mass as the total mass of kantek), I asked to give me optimal size of kantek, distance for stable solar system ( before Kantek explosion). Answer is

I am asking you NOT assume Kantek is at 2.7 AU. then what will be optimum distance and size of planet. Also, assume that Kantek has more oxtzen than today's earth

The revised scenario posits a solar system without Venus, with Kantek as a habitable planet (originally supporting human inhabitants who caused its directional disintegration and mass ejection 80,000 years ago) featuring an atmosphere with higher oxygen content than modern Earth's ~21% (e.g., 25–35%, comparable to Earth's Carboniferous period, enabling larger organisms and potentially more robust ecosystems but increasing fire risks). Lifting the assumption that Kantek is positioned at ~2.7 AU (the asteroid belt's mean distance) requires hypothesizing an "optimum" orbital distance and size based on criteria for superhabitability—planets better suited for life than Earth, emphasizing biodiversity, longevity of habitability, and atmospheric stability—while ensuring dynamical stability with Earth (1 AU) and Mars (1.52 AU). Orbital mechanics do not require repositioning Earth or Mars for "balance," as the Sun dominates gravity, and the system remains stable without Venus.

### Optimum Distance for Kantek
The optimum semi-major axis prioritizes placement within the Sun's habitable zone (HZ, ~0.95–1.67 AU for liquid water potential) but optimized for superhabitability: slightly outer HZ to allow a thicker atmosphere for enhanced greenhouse warming (compensating for lower solar flux), reduced UV exposure, and stable climate over billions of years. A position too close to Earth risks orbital instability (e.g., close encounters if <~0.1–0.2 AU separation), while too close to Mars (1.52 AU) or Jupiter (5.2 AU) could lead to resonance-induced chaos. Simulations of multi-planet systems suggest stable insertions between Earth and Mars for Earth-mass bodies.

- **Optimum: ~1.3 AU** (w.r.t. current Earth at 1 AU and Mars at 1.52 AU).
- This provides ~0.3 AU separation from Earth (>>10 mutual Hill radii, ~0.1 AU for Earth-mass planets, ensuring long-term stability) and ~0.22 AU from Mars.
- Solar flux: ~59% of Earth's (1/1.3²), yielding an equilibrium temperature of ~224 K (-49°C) without atmosphere—requiring a ~65–100 K greenhouse effect for surface temperatures ~10–20°C warmer than Earth's average (optimal for biodiversity). This is feasible with a thick, moist atmosphere rich in CO₂ and H₂O vapor.
- Habitability edge: On the outer HZ, but high oxygen supports oxidative metabolism for complex life; excess O₂ could enhance ozone layers for radiation shielding.

### Optimum Size for Kantek
Size (mass and radius) optimizes for retaining a dense, oxygen-rich atmosphere (to prevent loss via Jeans escape), active geology (plate tectonics for nutrient cycling), and vast surface area/oceans for photosynthesis to sustain high O₂ levels (e.g., via abundant plant life). Too small (<0.5 Earth masses) risks atmospheric stripping like Mars; too large (>3 Earth masses) could lead to high gravity inhibiting mobility or hydrogen-dominated envelopes.

- **Optimum mass: ~1.5–2 Earth masses** (w.r.t. current Earth's 1 mass).
- **Optimum radius: ~1.1–1.3 Earth radii** (w.r.t. current Earth's 1 radius, implying slightly lower density for rocky composition with larger iron core and mantle).
- This size supports stronger gravity (~1.1–1.3 g) to hold a thicker atmosphere (1.5–2 bar pressure), enabling higher O₂ without toxicity, more efficient carbon/oxygen cycles, and potentially super-Earth-like features (e.g., archipelagos for isolated evolution, boosting biodiversity).
- Pre-disintegration, this would make Kantek highly livable for humans: breathable air with elevated O₂ for energy, mild climate, and reduced escape of volatiles despite the directional explosion.


### Impact on Previous Answers
Yes, this changes prior responses by repositioning Kantek from ~2.7 AU (too cold without extreme greenhouse, marginal habitability) to ~1.3 AU for optimized life-supporting conditions. Earth (~1 AU) and Mars (~1.52 AU) remain unchanged w.r.t. current distances, as no systemic "rebalancing" is needed. Post-disintegration habitability of Kantek's low-mass remnant (~0.0003 Earth masses, like the asteroid belt) would still be negligible without technology, regardless of original position.
Then, I have to tweak some instructions for plausible scenario's of Venus entering at 80K, settling around 2.5 K BCE without Kantek in picture ( only asteroid belt)

As per cassioapeans it entered solar system 80,000 years ago, only settled in the orbit around 2500 BCE. ie. it had 77K years to settle down. consider that

The scenario builds on the previous setup, where Venus is an extrasolar comet that enters the solar system, accumulates mass to reach ~0.815 Earth masses, and settles into its current orbit at ~0.72 AU between Mercury (~0.39 AU) and Earth (~1 AU). The Cassiopaean material (a channeled source, not scientific) specifies that Venus entered the solar system ~80,000 years ago (78,000 BCE) and stabilized at 0.72 AU around 2500 BCE, giving it ~77,500 years to settle. The solar system has no Kantek, only the asteroid belt (~2.7 AU, mean distance), Mars at ~1.52 AU, and no viable water canopy on Earth. The question is whether Venus’s insertion and prolonged stabilization period would push Earth beyond its current orbit (>1 AU).

### Analysis of Venus’s Orbital Dynamics
The Cassiopaean timeline provides a ~77,500-year period for Venus to transition from an extrasolar comet to a planet at 0.72 AU, allowing for a more gradual dynamical evolution compared to Velikovsky’s rapid (decades-scale) scenario. This remains speculative, as capturing an extrasolar object into a stable orbit and accreting ~0.815 Earth masses is physically challenging, but we’ll evaluate it as a thought experiment.

1. **Venus’s Entry and Capture (~78,000 BCE)**:
- As an extrasolar comet, Venus enters with high velocity (~20–50 km/s relative to the Sun) on a hyperbolic or highly eccentric orbit. Capture requires energy loss, likely via gravitational interactions with massive bodies (e.g., Jupiter at ~5.2 AU or proto-Earth) or dynamical friction through a hypothetical dense medium (e.g., a remnant solar nebula, though unlikely 4.5 billion years after formation). A single close encounter with Jupiter could reduce Venus’s velocity enough for capture into an eccentric orbit (e.g., perihelion ~0.5 AU, aphelion ~5–10 AU).
- Initial mass is low (~10⁻⁵ Earth masses, typical for comets), so early perturbations on planets are minimal unless Venus passes extremely close (within ~0.001 AU).

2. **Mass Accumulation**:
- Over ~77,500 years, Venus accretes to ~4.87×10²⁴ kg (~0.815 Earth masses). The inner solar system’s zodiacal dust (~10⁻⁹ g/cm³) and asteroid belt (~3×10²¹ kg, ~0.0003 Earth masses) provide insufficient material for this growth. Hypothetical mechanisms include collisions with massive planetesimals, accretion from a dense debris disk, or capture of interstellar material during its journey. This requires an unrealistically massive reservoir (~1 Earth mass) at 0.5–1.5 AU, inconsistent with current solar system constraints, but we assume it occurs for the scenario.
- As Venus’s mass grows, its gravitational influence increases, potentially perturbing inner planets during close approaches.

3. **Orbital Stabilization by 2500 BCE (~77,500 Years)**:
- To settle at 0.72 AU with a nearly circular orbit (current e ~0.0067), Venus must lose excess energy and angular momentum. Multiple gravitational encounters with Earth, Mars, or Jupiter over ~77,500 years could gradually circularize its orbit via scattering or secular interactions. For example, repeated flybys within ~0.1 AU of Earth could reduce eccentricity, with each encounter imparting small delta-v changes (~0.01–0.1 km/s).
- Numerical simulations (e.g., N-body models like those in exoplanet studies) suggest that ~10⁴–10⁵ years is sufficient for orbital damping in a multi-planet system, especially with a massive perturber like Jupiter. The ~77,500-year timeframe is thus plausible for stabilization, assuming Venus avoids ejection or collision.

4. **Impact on Earth’s Orbit**:
- **Perturbations During Venus’s Chaotic Phase**: Over ~77,500 years, Venus’s eccentric orbit likely crosses Earth’s path (1 AU) multiple times, especially early when its orbit is less constrained. A close encounter (within Earth’s Hill radius, ~0.01 AU or ~1.5 million km) with Venus at intermediate mass (e.g., 0.1–0.8 Earth masses) could impart a delta-v of ~0.1–1 km/s, shifting Earth’s semi-major axis by ~0.01–0.1 AU (e.g., to 1.01–1.1 AU) and increasing eccentricity (from 0.0167 to ~0.02–0.05). Frequent encounters amplify this effect, but catastrophic displacement (>1.5 AU) requires near-collisions, which risk destabilizing the system or merging Venus with Earth.
- **Long-Term Stability**: By 2500 BCE, when Venus stabilizes at 0.72 AU, its gravitational influence on Earth becomes minor due to sufficient separation (~0.28 AU, far exceeding mutual Hill radii of ~0.01 AU). The inner solar system (Mercury at 0.39 AU, Venus at 0.72 AU, Earth at ~1 AU, Mars at 1.52 AU) is dynamically stable, as confirmed by simulations of similar configurations. Earth’s orbit would relax to ~1 AU over ~10⁴–10⁵ years due to the Sun’s dominance (99.8% of system mass) and damping of perturbations via secular interactions with other planets.
- **Would Earth Be Pushed Beyond 1 AU?** Temporarily, yes, Earth’s orbit could shift to ~1.01–1.1 AU during Venus’s ~77,500-year chaotic phase, depending on the frequency and geometry of encounters. However, by 2500 BCE and beyond, Earth would stabilize near ~1 AU, as the system reaches a dynamically stable configuration. The prolonged timeframe reduces the likelihood of extreme displacement compared to a rapid insertion scenario.

5. **Other Bodies**:
- **Mercury (~0.39 AU)**: Venus’s early flybys could perturb Mercury’s eccentricity slightly, but its proximity to the Sun minimizes long-term effects. It stabilizes at ~0.39 AU.
- **Mars (~1.52 AU)**: Mars’s lower mass (~0.107 Earth masses) makes it more susceptible to perturbations, but its distance from Venus’s final orbit (0.72 AU) ensures minimal impact. It remains at ~1.52 AU.
- **Asteroid Belt (~2.7 AU)**: The belt’s low mass (~3×10²¹ kg) has negligible gravitational influence. Venus’s passage could scatter some asteroids, but the mean distance remains ~2.7 AU.

6. **Habitability Implications**:
- **Earth**: A temporary shift to ~1.05 AU reduces solar flux by ~10% (1/1.05²), lowering equilibrium temperature by ~5 K (from ~255 K to ~250 K without atmosphere). Earth’s greenhouse effect (~33 K) maintains surface temperatures near ~283 K (10°C), preserving habitability. No water canopy is viable, as previously concluded.
- **Venus**: As an extrasolar comet, Venus initially has a volatile-rich composition. Mass accretion and heating at 0.72 AU (~1.9 times Earth’s solar flux) lead to a runaway greenhouse, resulting in its current uninhabitable state (~735 K, thick CO₂ atmosphere).

### Final Orbital Distances (w.r.t. Current Values)
- **Earth**: ~1 AU (possibly 1.01–1.1 AU during Venus’s ~77,500-year chaotic phase, but stabilizes near 1 AU by 2500 BCE and beyond).
- **Mars**: ~1.52 AU (unchanged).
- **Venus**: ~0.72 AU (settles by 2500 BCE, as per current orbit).
- **Mercury**: ~0.39 AU (unchanged).
- **Asteroid Belt**: ~2.7 AU (unchanged, mean distance).

### Conclusion
Venus entering as an extrasolar comet ~80,000 years ago (78,000 BCE) and stabilizing at 0.72 AU by 2500 BCE (~77,500 years later) could temporarily perturb Earth’s orbit to ~1.01–1.1 AU during its chaotic, mass-accumulating phase. However, the extended timeframe allows for gradual damping of perturbations via gravitational interactions with other planets and the Sun’s dominance, leading Earth to stabilize near ~1 AU by 2500 BCE. Mars, Mercury, and the asteroid belt remain at their current distances (~1.52 AU, ~0.39 AU, ~2.7 AU). Earth’s habitability is preserved, and no water canopy is viable. This outcome aligns with the previous answer, as the ~77,500-year stabilization period reduces the severity of perturbations compared to a rapid insertion, reinforcing Earth’s return to ~1 AU.

I asked about water canopy feasibility, It keep giving the difficulty of maintaining and it is related to assumptions from previous questions. I will skip that for now.
 
Rudolph Steiner (1861-1925) does not give much concrete information regarding the Atlantis cataclysms or their timing. His talks about Atlantis focused mostly on the spiritual and physical evolution of humanity during that long era.

Nevertheless, Steiner mentions at least two Atlantean cataclysms: an early one "towards the middle of the Atlantean age" and the final deluge, which he places at about 9700 BC (which corresponds exactly to the end of the Younger Dryas cooling period).

The reasons for the cataclysms he gives are basically the same as given by Cayce or the C's. He talks about the misuse of power "which released powerfully destructive natural forces". He also mentions that the Earth was surrounded by a water vapor canopy or mists in the Atlantean times, but just like Cayce he does not appear to have spoken of cometary impacts or the close passages of Venus or Mars.

Though he did mention that comets serve the purpose of cleansing the solar system from harmful astral substances that accumulate from human thought and activity, which may have been a hint about cometary impacts on Earth.

Steiner explicitly stated that he kept parts of his knowledge about Atlantis secret and that it would depend on how humanity develops whether these secrets could be revealed in the future.

A good summary of what Rudolph Steiner said about Atlantis in various lectures can be found in the book Atlantis - The Fate Of A Lost Land And Its Secret Knowledge, which is available in the Internet Archive.
Since C's pushed Hindu God Rama's date to 50K Ya, I looked to gather some information on Atlantis. Other than Plato's story( subsequent speculations), there are some from Blavatsky (c's say from 6D STO/STS, Laura opined that weeding the proper information from it not worthy of energy) , Cayce (Akashic records) and C's (6D STO).

Blavatsky was very influential during that time and any body questioned official versions, gravitated to her material or at least considered. Steiner was part of Blavatsky circle at one point, before he went on his own direction. So I suspect Steiner's source is Blavatsky interaction. I haven't read Blavatsky or Steiner to have a comment.
 
If you read the whole exchange, it seems that the actual date given was 1600 BC (3600 years ago), while 2600 BC was only "close". At least that is how I understood it and I don't know if a thousands years off can be called "close":

October 5, 1994

Q:
(L) You said the Exodus occurred in 2676 B.C., is that correct?

A: Close.

Q:
(L) Was that the last passage of the cometary Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this activity of Venus interactive with the close passing of the cluster of comets you have mentioned?

A: Close. One of three cataclysms close together.

Q: (L) If Venus was one of the cataclysms and the cluster of comets was another, what was the third?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) Was Mars knocked out of it's orbit by Venus?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And the two appeared to do battle in the sky to the inhabitants of the Earth as Velikovsky described, is that correct?

A: Close.

Q: (L) Now, this cluster of comets, when was the last time it came into the solar system?

A: 3582 yrs ago?
I too have some difficulty in reconciling some data points. That is why I created cosmology chart to line up data points and see where it goes. Every time, we line up a data points, more questions comes out. Luckily C's answers seems to clarify them.

Translating text to defined data point or date is always tricky when there is a amount of ambiguity. If it is textual format, it gives a quite a lot of flexibility to explain it.

Every source has certain observations, criteria and assumptions. Based on that they wrote their books and the questions are based on the books. So there complicated correlations going on along with knowledge base of the time.

As Laura mentioned, early sessions were "testing" phase where Laura fired wide range of heterogenous topics to see the answers. Before C's came along, she was getting lot of 'dead dudes'. Lot of other variables came in much later (ex: Giant comet disintegration events).

In this specific context, which one to take as high priority? "2676 BCE - Close" or "this cluster of comets - 3562 yrs ago".

But, we know from C's:
  • Oort Cloud comet cluster came 1600 BCE , 5200 BCE ( Native Americans taken to Americas from Central Asia) - so we can fix 3600 years cycle.
  • Venus settling-in period between 3000K to 2000 K BCE. made 5 close pass-by with earth. but it was not clear whether it was done during this period or during entire 75K period.
  • Mandelkar's work ( published around 2005) made me think that there is something serious happened 2200 BCE, which he attributed it to Giant comet disintegration remnants ( aka Taurid complex events). C's confirmed indirectly saying earth's tilted 22 degrees slowly.
So I considered Exodus and 3000-2000 K BCE events are separate from 1600 BCE events.

Are there any scenario, where the source of this Giant comet and Oort Cloud comets same? I don't know. quite possible as we don't know the source of Giant comet itself.

Did any body did spectral analysis of comets from these two different streams to conclude it? I doubt it as this topic of catastrophism itself is stalinized from main stream science.
 
Are there any scenario, where the source of this Giant comet and Oort Cloud comets same? I don't know. quite possible as we don't know the source of Giant comet itself.
Instead of opening the book, I asked Grok

What is the origin of Victor Clube's Giant comet? Is it Oort cloud or something else?

My comments in {}
Victor Clube, along with collaborators like Bill Napier, proposed the concept of "giant comets" as part of their theory of "coherent catastrophism," which suggests that large cometary bodies have influenced Earth's history through impacts and debris streams. Regarding the origin of these giant comets, Clube and his colleagues hypothesized that they originate from the **Oort Cloud**, a theoretical spherical shell of icy bodies surrounding the Solar System at distances of roughly 2,000 to 200,000 AU. However, their work also explores the possibility that some of these comets, or their parent bodies, could have been influenced by interactions {add the possibility of cometary Venus in 77500 years roaming in solar system} within the Sun’s birth cluster or even captured from other stellar systems.

### Key Points on Clube’s Giant Comet Hypothesis and Its Origin:
1. **Oort Cloud as the Primary Source**:
- Clube and Napier’s work, including their book *The Cosmic Serpent* (1982) and other publications, suggests that giant comets originate in the Oort Cloud. These comets are significantly larger than typical comets (potentially 100 km or more in diameter) and are thought to be perturbed into the inner Solar System by gravitational influences such as passing stars, galactic tides, or giant molecular clouds.[](https://www.velikovsky.info/victor-clube/)
- The Oort Cloud is described as a reservoir of comets, with long-period comets (orbital periods exceeding 200 years) originating from its outer regions and some short-period comets, like those in the Halley-family, potentially tracing back to it after being captured by giant planets.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud)[](https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2014/03/aa22508-13/aa22508-13.html)

2. **Fragmentation and the Taurid Complex**:
- Clube and Napier proposed that a giant comet, possibly 100 km in size, entered the inner Solar System thousands of years ago (e.g., ~20,000 years ago) and fragmented, creating the **Taurid Complex**, a stream of debris including Comet Encke and associated asteroids. This fragmentation event is central to their hypothesis, and the progenitor comet is believed to have come from the Oort Cloud.[](https://www.astronomy.com/science/swarm-of-near-earth-comets-linked-to-recent-ice-giant-breakup/)[](https://www.velikovsky.info/victor-clube/)
- The Taurid Complex includes objects that are larger than typical cometary debris, such as asteroids up to a mile across, which they argue are remnants of this giant comet. This supports the idea that the parent body was an unusually large Oort Cloud object.[](https://www.astronomy.com/science/swarm-of-near-earth-comets-linked-to-recent-ice-giant-breakup/)

3. **Alternative Origins and Capture Hypotheses**:
- Clube and colleagues also considered that some Oort Cloud material, including giant comets, might not have formed in situ but could have been captured from other stellar systems during the Sun’s time in its birth cluster (within the first ~800 million years of the Solar System). This is supported by studies suggesting that the Oort Cloud could contain material from other stars due to close stellar encounters.[](https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2021/08/aa40096-20/aa40096-20.html)[](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210618-the-solar-systems-icy-shell-contaminated-by-other-stars)
- For example, the eccentric orbit of Sedna, a dwarf planet or potential Oort Cloud object, has been cited as evidence for a possible stellar encounter that could have shaped the Oort Cloud or Hills Cloud, potentially introducing foreign cometary material.[](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)

4. **Hills Cloud and Inner Oort Cloud**:
- Clube’s work also references the **Hills Cloud**, a hypothesized denser, inner region of the Oort Cloud (starting at ~3,000 AU), which could serve as a source for some comets, including those that become part of the Taurid Complex. The Hills Cloud is thought to replenish the outer Oort Cloud, and giant comets could originate from this region before being perturbed inward.[](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)
- The Hills Cloud is considered a plausible reservoir for large cometary bodies due to its higher density compared to the outer Oort Cloud, which aligns with Clube’s idea of a massive progenitor comet.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)

5. **Dynamical Evolution**:
- The giant comet hypothesis involves dynamical processes where large bodies from the Oort Cloud are scattered into the inner Solar System by perturbations.{ add nemesis initially created 890 Million years ago ( C's) and cometary Venus (80,000 years ago)} Clube and Napier argue that these comets undergo fragmentation due to gravitational interactions or thermal stresses near the Sun, producing streams of debris that can persist for thousands of years, affecting Earth through impacts or meteor showers.[](https://www.astronomy.com/science/swarm-of-near-earth-comets-linked-to-recent-ice-giant-breakup/)[](https://www.velikovsky.info/victor-clube/)
- Their models suggest that the Oort Cloud’s structure, including its inner and outer regions, supports the existence of such large bodies, which are then disrupted into smaller fragments over time.[](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-3378-4_20)

### Critical Considerations:
- **Lack of Direct Evidence**: The Oort Cloud, including the Hills Cloud, remains hypothetical, as no objects have been directly observed due to their extreme distance and faintness. The evidence for giant comets comes from indirect observations, such as the orbits of long-period comets and the Taurid Complex.[](https://thesolarsystem.fandom.com/wiki/Oort_cloud)
- **Skepticism of Alternative Origins**: While Clube and Napier’s capture hypothesis (material from other stars) is intriguing, it is less widely accepted than the standard model of Oort Cloud formation from scattered planetesimals in the early Solar System. The capture scenario requires specific conditions in the Sun’s birth cluster, which are difficult to verify.[](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210618-the-solar-systems-icy-shell-contaminated-by-other-stars)
- **Coherent Catastrophism**: Clube’s work emphasizes that giant comets could cause periodic catastrophic events on Earth, such as mass extinctions or climate changes, due to their debris streams. This theory relies on the Oort Cloud as a source but extends its implications to terrestrial impacts, which some scientists view as speculative.[](https://www.velikovsky.info/victor-clube/)

### Conclusion:
Victor Clube’s giant comet hypothesis primarily attributes the origin of these massive cometary bodies to the **Oort Cloud**, with the possibility that some material, particularly in the inner Hills Cloud, could have been captured from other stellar systems during the Sun’s early history. The Taurid Complex, including Comet Encke and associated asteroids, is considered evidence of a giant comet from the Oort Cloud that fragmented in the inner Solar System. While the Oort Cloud remains the most likely source, the idea of captured material adds complexity to the hypothesis, though it is less definitive without further observational evidence.[](https://www.astronomy.com/science/swarm-of-near-earth-comets-linked-to-recent-ice-giant-breakup/)[](https://www.velikovsky.info/victor-clube/)[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_cloud)
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom