Cassiopaean Chronology/Cosmology

[seek10]

I updated cosmology site with latest information and made few minor changes.

• Based on the latest C's comments on the date of Atlantis destruction due to crystals becoming sentient. I ended Atlantis civilization period with 10 K BCE period ( before 8.5 K BCE).
  • Based on Pierre's YD SOTT article I moved YD date to 10.9 K BCE. Before I put it as a 10.6 K BCE. probably I took it from Main stream sources. After that C' gave few data points Göbekli Tepe (10.7 - 10/5 K BCE), Final war (aka crystal destruction) to 10.9 K BCE. Here few considerations are made:
    • Plato Prehistorian version also hints at final war before the flooding.
    • Final cleanup job is done by comets after the human drama is over (aka Athenians vs Atlantean) and that triggers migrations, though higher density tend to give advance warnings to the receptive folks.
• Some of the links are pointing to Forum session links, they are giving 'CORS' issues. So I moved them to display as different tab in the browser.
• As usual, created new downloadable pdf for the diagram and you can expand the image and see the hints. The mouse cursor doesn't change to hand from pointer due to some complexity. Hopefully, I will fix it later. Here is the site.

Cassiopaean Cosmology

Any feedback and suggestions are welcome.

 

[Mari]

Any feedback and suggestions are welcome.

You´re doing an awesome job! This timeline is super helpful! Thank you!

 

[Benjamin]

I love this chart. Really excellent work seek10!

For some reason I cannot download it. Nothing I do (signing out, signing into Google) has any effect. So I thought that this chart, with some reworking, could be made into a larger format poster. A Christmas donation goodie?

 

[seek10]

For some reason I cannot download it. Nothing I do (signing out, signing into Google) has any effect.

Thanks for letting me know. I forgot to change permissions when I changed the file day back. It should download without logging into google. Try now and let me know how it went.

So I thought that this chart, with some reworking, could be made into a larger format poster.

Yes, Needs to do some graphic work.

 

[Benjamin]

Try now and let me know how it went.

Works!

 

[axj]

There is one thing that may require adjustment:

If the comet cluster has a periodicity of about 3600 years and there were 400-500 phantom years added to our calendar in the 1st millenium, then the last visit of the comet cluster would have been around 1200 BC or 1100 BC (not 1600 BC). And this does coincide with the Bronze Age collapse around 1100 BC.

Earlier visits of the comet cluster probably also need to be adjusted by 400-500 years.

Another potential addition could be that the companion star may have made its closest approach to the inner solar system during the Maunder Minimum, as discussed here. Though this has not been confirmed by the C's, I think.

 

[palestine]

I updated cosmology site with latest information and made few minor changes.

• Based on the latest C's comments on the date of Atlantis destruction due to crystals becoming sentient. I ended Atlantis civilization period with 10 K BCE period ( before 8.5 K BCE).
  • Based on Pierre's YD SOTT article I moved YD date to 10.9 K BCE. Before I put it as a 10.6 K BCE. probably I took it from Main stream sources. After that C' gave few data points Göbekli Tepe (10.7 - 10/5 K BCE), Final war (aka crystal destruction) to 10.9 K BCE. Here few considerations are made:
    • Plato Prehistorian version also hints at final war before the flooding.
    • Final cleanup job is done by comets after the human drama is over (aka Athenians vs Atlantean) and that triggers migrations, though higher density tend to give advance warnings to the receptive folks.
• Some of the links are pointing to Forum session links, they are giving 'CORS' issues. So I moved them to display as different tab in the browser.
• As usual, created new downloadable pdf for the diagram and you can expand the image and see the hints. The mouse cursor doesn't change to hand from pointer due to some complexity. Hopefully, I will fix it later. Here is the site.

Cassiopaean Cosmology

Any feedback and suggestions are welcome.

Hey I just saw your chart - it's great!

I would suggest to tweak the colors a bit, ie:

- the dark brown frame does not serve anything else than circumventing the picture: could have something more neutral
- the gray boxes could work with a lighter gray

Overall, the brown frame, the dark gray, and the arrows going down, on the left, are all very colored. The arrows appear too heavy - but as those are important, I would lessen the importance of various elements around; this way, you would preserve the identities taught by the arrows (and their present colors).

You may decrease the emphasis of the markers (double circles): technically, what you would need here would just be "a tick" on the axis. I find it quite heavy and adding to the whole heavy impression. So, could be, a dot of some sort, or simply removing the double circle. if you would like to preserve the double circles, you may decrease the overall size of both, and have a lighter color.

Could be, the very last era (Christian), would make it with a lighter background; the purple is a bit dark, if you look, in comparison with the other era's.

Your chart is great and the above are suggestions. If you have a look at the above points, and decide it's improving the pic, that's cool.

 

[seek10]

I love this chart. Really excellent work seek10!

For some reason I cannot download it. Nothing I do (signing out, signing into Google) has any effect. So I thought that this chart, with some reworking, could be made into a larger format poster. A Christmas donation goodie?

I made some minor changes to the content of the site and created minimalist frame for the poster.

Cassiopaean Cosmology

I would suggest to tweak the colors a bit, ie:

- the dark brown frame does not serve anything else than circumventing the picture: could have something more neutral
- the gray boxes could work with a lighter gray

Overall, the brown frame, the dark gray, and the arrows going down, on the left, are all very colored. The arrows appear too heavy - but as those are important, I would lessen the importance of various elements around; this way, you would preserve the identities taught by the arrows (and their present colors).

You may decrease the emphasis of the markers (double circles): technically, what you would need here would just be "a tick" on the axis. I find it quite heavy and adding to the whole heavy impression. So, could be, a dot of some sort, or simply removing the double circle. if you would like to preserve the double circles, you may decrease the overall size of both, and have a lighter color.

Could be, the very last era (Christian), would make it with a lighter background; the purple is a bit dark, if you look, in comparison with the other era's.

I am not a professional with color sense or on posters. So any feedback is extremely helpful. I will make the change and post it.

A month back, I worked with forum member @Aliana about the possibility of changing colors and she suggested blue color and we worked on blue shades. Big Thank you to her spending time walking through the colors, shades etc.

I went to my local printer to get it printed in few sizes for my original colors and as well as blue. One feedback I received is, blue shades is good for the website and it may not be that great for printing( printer guy also hinted that). Here are the pictures of the posters.

Any

 

[seek10]

There is one thing that may require adjustment:

If the comet cluster has a periodicity of about 3600 years and there were 400-500 phantom years added to our calendar in the 1st millenium, then the last visit of the comet cluster would have been around 1200 BC or 1100 BC (not 1600 BC). And this does coincide with the Bronze Age collapse around 1100 BC.

Earlier visits of the comet cluster probably also need to be adjusted by 400-500 years.

This is very good point. But this timeline stuff is 'can of worms' due to few reasons. That's why i started with 'As Cs confirmed' mode.

• Gravity changes, its effect on carbon dating, which researcher used which data point to create their own timeline etc
• Many cometary players and their gravitational interactions, each changing others trajectory and periodicity.
  • Giant comet remnants ( initially entered 20K YA) and then disintegrated leaving debris, 3600 years Oort cloud visitors, Venus, Mars each influencing others. If our criteria is to measured remnants ( like carbon dating of what was found in Icelandic samples, tree ring data etc. ), we will not know which cometary player has contributed to what. Worse, we don't even know where did this 20K YA giant comet guy came from? - asteroid belt or Oort Cloud or some thing else like Venus style.
  • Authors like M.M.Mendelkar who wrote 2300 BCE books, hypothesized that Giant comet remnants stayed in the orbit to hit around 2300 BCE, but it might have came 400 years earlier. Probably he was using Clube and Napier's paper dates.
    • In any case, I will remove known 400-500 years and so see how other data points gets effected.
• Human players/controllers phantom years (intentional or not): Few non-main stream authors mentioned it, C's hinted at it. But, how many other times this happened?
• This project started as a little side direction to my other project of figuring out Indian history that was not fitting into C's data points. w.r.t Indian history, there are very old Vedas. It becomes little more complicated there due to too many kingdoms', their own choices of era's and later day colonial interpolations ( or cross mapping) of Christian era dates and so on.

Another potential addition could be that the companion star may have made its closest approach to the inner solar system during the Maunder Minimum, as discussed here. Though this has not been confirmed by the C's, I think.

Need to look into it.

 

[axj]

In any case, I will remove known 400-500 years and so see how other data points gets effected

Just realized that the 400-500 years actually need to be added to the dates, not subtracted. I saw that subtracting would put the comet cluster during the Bronze Age collapse (which made sense), but if these 400-500 years never happened, then 3600 years ago would be about 2000 BC or 2100 BC.

 

[Chu]

AMAZING, @seek10 !!! I love it! It will be very useful, thank you!!

 

[palestine]

I went to my local printer to get it printed in few sizes for my original colors and as well as blue. One feedback I received is, blue shades is good for the website and it may not be that great for printing

Yeah - the brown print looks really great and conveys much more! I must be used to artificial graphism stuffs, so my takes could be a bias. One day, may you have your poster on the Sott shop!

Gravity changes, its effect on carbon dating

like carbon dating of what was found in Icelandic samples, tree ring data etc.

I am currently studying the chemical markers - and all those ice core, tree rings, etc. I am plotting those to get some ideas, especially in regard of the Greek period.

Reading your words, it seems that some or many are not to be trusted - and that what I am doing is irrelevant.

I would be very eager to ask for your personal consideration, precisely if possible: ice cores, carbon dating, tree rings, etc... Is their studies even relevant? Are there markers which constitute an objective basis? Some? None? I guess that you see my interrogation - is it even worth studying those - and which ones. Please! Thank you in advance!

 

[Adobe]

I appreciate your work @seek10 Thank you!

 

[seek10]

Just realized that the 400-500 years actually need to be added to the dates, not subtracted. I saw that subtracting would put the comet cluster during the Bronze Age collapse (which made sense), but if these 400-500 years never happened, then 3600 years ago would be about 2000 BC or 2100 BC.

Addition and subtraction depends on How mainstream came to that date and how C's gave the date. The AD/BCE notation came up only mostly after 700 AD onwards (Vedveer Arya) , but the West was in dark ages until 1200/1300 AD. The wider acceptability of Date is after 1600 (Newton and co promoted it) . It spread to rest of the world through colonialism later.

We know that C's intent is to give clues in our research (at the time of asking and i think they know lot more than we can ever think of w.r.t effect the answer will have on the world), it is hard to say whether they added or deleted these ghost years. It is reasonable to say it is contextual. That is the 'can of worms' we are dealing with. Let's look at the the example of 1100 BCE.

• Bronze age destruction - 1177 Book. that is based on the hypothesis that tin supply to Middle East disrupted was disrupted. That is based on mainstream version where cometary events are prohibited. That is also attributed to 'Sea people' migration from where? Let's say from Europe, later that fed to Greek Myths. I need to look at the criteria they used for the dates. - probably varied sources and criteria's.
• Mohenjo Daro - C's did confirm it. Probably Carbon dating w.r.t MSS. that is matching with C's.
• Angkor Wat (C's) - They are based on vague inscriptions on the temple and MSS(mainstream science) places it at 1150 AD. So we can ignore that and take C's date. In any case, MSS will never say about people were moved to other planets. But there are local legends from Chinese traveler around 500 AD writing saying that is very old. When we asked C's about the Ramayan and Mahabharata etchings on the Angkor Wat, they say they are later day one.
• Victor Clube and Bill Napier says - 1100 BCE in their calculations. But, C's says they are correct to some extent. It is hard to know which one ( data points from 20K BCE to current or criteria etc.) - "Clube is correct to some extent about the breakup of a giant comet" Link
• End of “sound wave focusing” (Megalith technology). -C's . impossible for us to validate this as this is controversial subject.

Is 1100 BCE is same as 1600 BCE for some of the events? Probably? . If so, which events? What we know for sure from C's is "3600 years" cycle. - Does it mean is latest one is suggested as 1100 BCE or 1600 BCE or 2100 BCE? - Is it due to ?

• - 3600 years Oort cloud
• - Giant Comet remnants
• - Some thing else or some combinations?

Let's look at the events around that time and see how it fits in.

so much timelines were created on "wrong" foundation, it becomes very complicated to touch that. I think Laura wrote in one of her books, accuracy of the exact dates before 500 BCE or 600 BCE is very difficult. Well, you can say these phantom years after that also makes, the situation complicated even after that.

The point I am trying to make is 1100 BCE or 1600 or 2000 BCE , probably needs lot more finer data analysis, cross impact analysis w.r.t other data points before we can conclude. I tended to ignore few hundred years before 1100 BCE deviations (remember megalith technology stopped working after that means gravity changes, means carbon dating etc. can get skewed) and few thousand years as we go further backwards( ex: Mary settegast places Athenians vs Atlanteans to 9500 BCE as she is using 9000 before Plato time data point, but C's brought us to little nearer to 10.7 K BCE).

The way i see is it is the sequence of events ( keeping in mind the possibility of exact dates or year or century may vary) is more important as they trickled to us through millennia of "mythicization of history and historicization of myth" .

 

[palestine]

Session Date: Aug 27, 2022

(seek10) C’s mentioned that the Hindu epics Ramayan and Mahabharat are representations of cosmic events. Are they the same event or different events?

A: Multiple events!

Q: (seek10) Is Mahabharat event happened at 1100BC end of bronze age event? If no, what is the event date? If yes, is it related to Victor clube’s Enke disintegration event ( 1000 =/- 300 BC )?

A: Close enough. But the main event was the 12900 event.

I would tend to picture a 12900 year chunk, with sub-hierarchic climatic events. The -129000 as a big one, "starter", and Thera, comets, as "minor ones" (and dependent). Is it objective?