Cometary Encounters - Now available!

I finished the book!

And in record time that is - the book was for me extremely engaging, a real page turner! 2 days ago, I was literarily half asleep, looking at the clock how late it is - but couldn´t put the book down - one more chapter just to finish this or that... 😂
Your questions at the end of the chapters were the death for me, made me constantly wanting to read more... 😉

Was a bit lost in chapter about electric discharge. 😅
But in general, I really liked that there is so many references to scientific papers and researchers, so many images and graphs that one can get good picture of the topic being told and follow the links to specific article.
I especially liked that you included mythological side of the Venus and comparison to actual data.

Many things were already familiar to me, because of your articles on SOTT - but there was A LOT more information presented in the book.
With so many sources added in the book, it´s fascinating how this is not general knowledge!
I think it should belong to SHOTW series.

I probably wasn’t paying attention, or I forgot about that after reading the articles on SOTT, but I was really surprised that it took only 6 centuries for Venus to make her passes and stays in solar system. I thought it took more time, so that was an interesting fact.

Great job in collecting and presenting the data, all done with an understandable language and systematic coverage.
Your storytelling is like in pictures, I could put myself to being there in Siberia and see all those events.

Excellent book, excellent research and excellent storytelling!

Epilogue was spectacular and I can´t wait for your next book!

I just finished the book. Great one. I like it. :perfect:
I like the writing style. It is simple and packed with information. Easy to read and understand.

What fascinates me is that you used information and data that are available to everyone today.
The magic in this book is how you connected the dots into a story that can give the reader the general image of how comets play a huge role in planet climate and life. Climate changes, temperature drops, floods, droughts, CO2, and other gases emissions are just a part of the natural cycles. People should know that, and this book describes that in a simple and scientific way. This book exposes the lies and propaganda of the elites today about human-made global warming and greenhouse gas emissions.

The last part about viruses is also very fascinating. It can give us a clue about what is happening today, especially since the Covid madness started. It gives some kind of explanation why the elites are so obsessed with vaccination especially now when we are heading toward completion of another 3600-year cycle.

They want to play gods and interfere with the natural cycles of DNA upgrade, so to say with their own lab-created version of it. As we have seen through the history of this planet, and as you mentioned in your book, each destructive and cataclysmic cycle followed the period when a new species emerged.

Let's just hope that this cycle will bring a new and better reality.
@Pierre, I found a couple of possible errors in the text:

On page 7, the following is written:

Notice, however, that the overall cooling that occurred during the Younger Dryas was not and while some regions like Siberia, Europe, Greenland or Alaska experienced a marked cooling, other regions like Northern America, apart from Alaska, and the ‘Asian’ side of Antarctica experienced a relative warming.

Should "Antarctica" mean "Arctic" instead?

On page 2 the following is written:

Try to imagine the barely imaginable: millions of giant creatures inexplicably flash-frozen overnight.8

In the corresponding footnote 8, the following written:

8Along a 600-mile stretch of the Arctic coast were found more than half a million tons of mammoth tusks. Because the typical tusk weighs 100 pounds, this implies that about 5 million mammoths lived in this small region. See: Mark Krzos (2006), “Frozen Mammoths,” p. 12.

When I calculate the statement, I come up with a much higher number of mammoths. 500,000 Tons = 1,102,311,310.92 Pounds : 200 Pounds = 551,155,655 Mammoths.

Further down on page 2 the following is written:

So, in the following we will try to find explanations about how and why millions of woolly mammoths ended up flash-frozen overnight.

On page 3 the following is written:

To illustrate this point, between 1750 and 1917, trade in mammoth ivory prospered over a wide geographical region, yielding an estimated 96,000 mammoth tusks. 15 It is estimated that about 5 million mammoths lived in just a small portion of northern Siberia.

Then on page 7 the following is written :

Along with the drastic temperature drop, one of the major features of the Younger Dryas is a massive die-off: 35 mammals, among them mastodons, giant beavers, saber-toothed cats, giant sloths and woolly rhinoceroses, and 19 genera of birds, became extinct in a very short time period.3

It is estimated that as many as 40 million animals died in North America alone.37 In total, hundreds of thousands of mammoths were killed.

Am I missing something?
Last edited:
More on Mars
In the article: Did Earth 'Steal' Martian Water? --, there is this map of Valles Marineris, page 86 in the book.
From Global Topography of Mars one can see the differences in altitudes quite clearly.

From the same page, there is an image of the whole surface. Some areas appear more crater filled than others:
From List of quadrangles on Mars there is Phoenicis Lacus and this Coprates that covers the area of Valles Marineris On these maps and to my eyes what is low above appears as higher, anyway, Phoenicis Lacus shows:

If one looks at the image above of Phoenicis Lacus and finds Sinai Planum, there is a round structure called Oudemans crater. It has a diameter of 124 km and is near Valles Marineris:
About craters in general, the electrical universe people say some are electrical and some are impact:
Impact Craters vs. Electrical Discharge Craters | Space News
I looked more into the crater formation process, 124 km is a huge distance, if it had to be electrical.
In the middle there is an elevation. An article in Britannica mentions a central peak of uplift as a feature of a complex crater:
United States Meteorite Impact Craters - Chapter 7 - Crater morphology - simple and complex craters has a picture that shows both a simple and a complex crater:
And this article Understanding the Impact Cratering Process: a Simple Approach - ERNSTSON CLAUDIN IMPACT STRUCTURES - METEORITE CRATERS has this illustration:

This article illustrates the cratering process by shooting a high power air gun pellet into sand and photograph the process with a high speed camera. Interestingly enough, throwing a stone in water shows some of the same features initially. The difference is that since water is a liquid, the initial turbulence settles down, so the surface returns to where it was. Slow motion throwing rock into water
Other article which go more into the physics of the formation are: or or
As I was looking into Mars, I found the axis of rotation is more unstable than that of Earth:
Modern-day Mars experiences cyclical changes in climate and, consequently, ice distribution. Unlike Earth, the obliquity (or tilt) of Mars changes substantially on timescales of hundreds of thousands to millions of years. At present day obliquity of about 25-degree tilt on Mars' rotational axis, ice is present in relatively modest quantities at the north and south poles (top left). This schematic shows that ice builds up near the equator at high obliquities (top right) and the poles grow larger at very low obliquities (bottom) (References: Laskar et al., 2002; Head et al., 2003).
Was Mars more stable before it lost its water?
I finally got around to reading Cometary Encounters. It didn't take me long because I couldn't put it down, I even read it at work. So packed with information and presented so succinctly. I found it really easy to read, like Earth Changes, yet I could sense the huge amount of work and data behind it all. I will modify this into an Amazon review, I just wanted to say thanks here.

It's like the best ever whodunnit (where the victims are a whole LOAD of mammoths!)

Edit - I'm excited about reading the followup to this. It's reminded me of being a biology student, when we joked about the Venus flytrap arriving from space. How far we've come, that we can discuss how there may be some truth to such a wild concept as that! In truth though, it's no crazier than the idea that such a thing could arise from chance mutation. I used to grow flytraps and they are the weirdest, most baffling conundrum among the plants to me. If you study the precise mechanism behind the trap and what triggers/does not trigger it, it's mind blowing.
Last edited:
Edit - I'm excited about reading the followup to this.
I'm only two chapters away from the end of book 3: Comets, Viruses and Evolutionary Leaps. These 2 chapters are about 80% completed.
I finally got around to reading Cometary Encounters. It didn't take me long because I couldn't put it down, I even read it at work. So packed with information and presented so succinctly. I found it really easy to read, like Earth Changes, yet I could sense the huge amount of work and data behind it all. I will modify this into an Amazon review,
Thank you for the feedback and for the Amazon review. It is virtually our only advertising!
Thank you for the feedback and for the Amazon review. It is virtually our only advertising!
I'm going to post the Amazon link to another group I frequent. Hopefully there will be some interest. It really is an amazing book!

One thing I can't get my head around is the different geographical location of the Poles before the cometary bombardment and inundation. You estimated that they were separated by approx 300 years.

The ice cover caused by an Ice Age at that time, would be greatly different and Ice Age now, because the geographical Poles are in different places.

What would produce enough power to push the planets crust 30 degrees from where it was? Was maybe it's axis or tilt changed too because of other planetary interactions?
Yes. Planetary or cometary electro-gravitational interactions. A comet impact can also alter the tilt of our planet.
Wow! That's a mouthful and a lot going on. Huge forces at work. Completely beyond my comprehension.... I wonder if there's anything on youtube on how that works?

It just occured to me that you ought to do a book signing. :-D I don't know how these things work, maybe through the publisher? You might end up having to sign a mountain of books, though.
Thank you for the feedback and for the Amazon review. It is virtually our only advertising!
Have you or the group considered to start a Google Ads campaign or similar for your books or SOTT?

Or is it warned off for some kind of manipulation of free will?
Wow! That's a mouthful and a lot going on. Huge forces at work. Completely beyond my comprehension.... I wonder if there's anything on youtube on how that works?
Here is an excerpt of chapter 30 of "Earth Changes and the Human Cosmic Connection" that might shed some light on crustal slippage:

Geographic tilt and magnetic reversal​

The Earth has two kinds of poles: geographic and magnetic. The geographic poles define the axis around which the planet spins. The magnetic poles are the locations where the lines of Earth’s magnetic field are vertical.


Magnetic poles and geographic poles relative to the ecliptic. (©

As you can see in the above image, the magnetic poles and the geographic poles are set along two distinct axes. Neither of them is perpendicular to the ecliptic - the plane of the solar system (purple). Instead of being vertical (black dashed line), the geographic axis (green line) has a 23.5° tilt relative to the ecliptic, and the magnetic axis (black line) has an 11° tilt relative to the geographic axis.

If our planet had experienced an uniformitarian, eventless developmental history the geographic and magnetic poles should both be perfectly vertical:


Aligned magnetic and geographic poles. (©

Tilt of the geographic poles​

Let’s first focus on the geographic pole and its 23.5° tilt. As mentioned above, if our planet had been accreting matter to itself, rotating quietly within its solar system cradle with its fellow nursery mates for billions of years, which is the official theory, then its rotation axis should be vertical. Even classical mechanics – which doesn’t take into account the electric nature of our universe – shows that an external factor is necessary for the Earth’s rotation axis to change and not be vertical. The following was stated as early as 1878:

When a mass of matter is in rotation about an axis, it cannot be made to rotate about a new one except by external forces.[1]

Later on, scientists discovered the existence of an electric field in which our planet is embedded, which led to a better explanation for the tilt of the Earth’s geographic axis:

… the Earth’s field is tied up in some ways with the rotation of the planet. And this leads to a remarkable finding about the Earth’s rotation itself … The Earth’s axis of rotation has also changed. In other words, the Earth has rolled about, changing the location of its geographical poles[2]

Zoologist François de Sarre confirms that the rotation axis of the planet should be vertical and explains how the electric force generated by a highly charged comet passing close to Earth could easily interact with Earth and shift its rotation axis:

Armin Naudiet[3] noted that the attraction exerted by the Sun on the Earth gyroscope would cause, in a long run, its straightening [spinning axis perpendicular to the plane of the solar system], because our planet is not a perfect sphere. Geometrically speaking, it is an ellipsoid. Due to its own rotation and the existence of a higher centrifugal force at the equator, the Earth deforms: it is not spherical but slightly flattened at the poles. In other words, if, as astronomers admit, our planet rotates ‘quietly’ (that is to say without having been ‘shaken’) for billions of years around the Sun, there should be no axis inclination¼ and no seasons, since they result from the inclination (23 ° 26 ') of the Earth’s axis relative to the plane of the solar system.

In any case, the recent discovery near the poles of a fossil fauna (dinosaurs!) rather used to heat seem to support the thesis of an Earth without seasons during the Secondary era.[4] It was hot all over the globe!…

How to explain that there are now seasons (in our latitudes) and that the Earth ‘nods’ its head, oscillating around its tilted axis? Presumably it received a ‘big shock’. The asteroid that ended the saga of dinosaurs is now widely accepted in science – in terms of the impact and its immediate consequences. But not a word about the disruption that could result in the Earth’s rotation.

In his book[5], German engineer Hans-Joachim Zillmer thinks the current tilt of the Earth is due to a celestial body carrying a strong electric potential (a comet?), which, passing close to Earth, has tilted [it]¼

Suppose a close-passing comet has recurred here for a few thousand years. Exposed to the sudden presence of electrokinetic forces, the inclination of the axis of the Earth relative to the ecliptic could have increased sharply, up to 30 or 35 degrees¼ No, no danger that Earth would tip over; let us recall the image of the toy top!

Then the Earth began to recover slowly. This would explain the phenomenon of the precession of the equinoxes. Contrary to what astronomers usually think, it would not be constant, but be steadily declining, since the Earth returns to its original position, perpendicular to the plane of the solar ecliptic (despite the inertia of the system).[6]

As emphasized in the above excerpt, an external agent has to be factored in to explain the current tilt of the Earth’s rotation axis. A highly charged comet passing close enough to Earth could very well be the responsible agent, exerting massive electro-gravitational forces on the planet and ‘pulling’ the geographical axis away from its default vertical position. If this scenario is accurate, the Earth has been slowly returning to its default vertical position (because of the inertia of the gyroscope that is planet Earth).

However, for mainstream science Earth’s obliquity (i.e. its axial tilt angle) has always been there and is gently oscillating between 22°1 and 24°2 every 40,000 years, on average.[7] There are even pre-made formulae, like the Newcomb formula,[8] that calculate the Earth’s tilt one million years in the future or in the past. But all these figures about the past or future tilt of our planet are based on theoretical models that don’t even fit past observations.

George Dodwell[9] conducted an extensive study of ancient observations of the obliquity of Earth. He gathered 120 measurements[10] spanning the last four millennia, from 1100 BC up to the 20th Century.[11]

Obliquity of the ecliptic over the period 2345 BC–2000 AD. Newcomb theoretical formula (red) vs. Dodwell’s compiled observations (blue). (© Dodwell)

The graph above covers the period 2450 BC to 1960 AD. It shows the evolution of Earth obliquity (in degrees) according to the Newcomb theoretical model (red line) and the observations compiled by Dodwell (blue curve).

The observations compiled by Dodwell not only diverge from the theoretical model held by mainstream science, but also define an almost perfect logarithmic curve. This logarithmic curve – showing a sudden and pronounced change (at least several degrees) in obliquity c. 2345 BC – strongly suggests the occurrence of a major cosmic event that rolled the Earth over.

At this time, severe climatic, geological and archaeological changes occurred in which the great Bronze Age civilizations in Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece were wiped out. For example out of the 350 Early Bronze Age sites in ancient Greece, more than 300 were destroyed and many others were abandoned[12].

The scientific community generally agrees that a major disaster occurred at that time.[13] The discovery of half a dozen craters[14] which were formed within a century of 2350 BC including a massive (3.4 km diameter) one that was discovered in Iraq[15] confirmed the asteroid hypothesis promoted for years by several scientists.[16]

The Umm Al Binni Lake in the Al’Amarah marshes, Iraq (© NASA)

Dodwell supposed that a very strong cometary impact had been necessary to jolt the Earth from its default vertical position to its new tilt. However, only a very large body could account for a substantial change in tilt.[17] But, as described by François De Sarre, cometary bodies don’t necessarily have to impact Earth’s surface in order to alter its rotation. A highly charged comet passing close enough to our planet could even exert greater electro-gravitational forces, sufficient to tilt Earth’s rotation axis, than the mechanical consequences resulting from a direct impact.

Several researchers[18] have shown that meteors do not have to directly hit the Earth to have a devastating effect, including the creation of craters.[19][20] In 1908, an object exploded three miles above Tunguska, in Siberia, with the force of thousands of Hiroshima bombs, laying waste to over 1,250 square miles of land below[21]. The Tunguska overhead explosion might even have produced a crater. In 2007 Italian geologist Gasperini investigated Lake Cheko:

We report results from the investigation of Lake Cheko, located 8 km NNW of the inferred explosion epicenter. Its funnel-like bottom morphology and the structure of its sedimentary deposits, revealed by acoustic imagery and direct sampling, all suggest that the lake fills an impact crater.[22]

Lake Cheko in the Siberian region of Tunguska (© University of Bologna)

The asteroid-induced geographic tilt of the Earth hypothesis is also strongly supported by the numerous earthquakes our planet experienced around this time. Only a substantial and global crustal slippage could explain the disruption that affected the whole planet:

…the most significant aspect of the geological evidence is the crustal movements[23] that apparently began at about the same time around 2300 BC at many regions of the Earth[24]

As shown by Dodwell’s research, since 2345 BC the Earth’s tilt has decreased, quickly at first, since it was far away from its normal rotation axis, and then slower and slower, hence the logarithmic curve. Eventually the Earth’s rotation axis might reach its default vertical setting - assuming nothing happens in the meantime to interfere with this process.

The Earth behaves like a spinning top, rotating around its vertical axis, which is then jolted out of its default movement. The rotation axis of the top is tilted, and it wobbles because of this external disturbance. Then, because of its gyroscopic properties, which push it to keep its axis pointed always in the same direction, the top returns to its initial configuration.

This wobble of the Earth is also called ‘Chandler’s wobble’ or ‘nutation’. Such an instability is symptomatic of a flawed equilibrium: the Earth’s axis of rotation does not coincide with its center of inertia.[25] If the Earth’s current state was solely the result of an eventless linear evolution, its axis would be vertical and the wobble would be non-existent.

One of the few plausible explanations for such major disruption is a change in the orientation of the earth’s spinning axis induced by electromagnetic forces exerted by a nearby comet. In such a scenario:

1) The change in spinning axis would move the equatorial bulge from the previous equatorial region to the new one. That would amount to massive amounts of compression around the former equatorial region (decreased centrifugal forces) and massive extension forces around the new equatorial region (increased centrifugal forces).

2) A sudden change in spinning axis can induce ‘crustal slippage’. Because of the viscous properties of the mantle and core of our planet, only part of the torque exerted by the close fly-by of a comet can be transmitted to the inner region of the Earth. The solid crust rotates more than the more liquid mantle. The difference in rotation between the core and the crust is equal to the crustal slippage.

Geographic and magnetic axis before and after a cometary disturbance. (©

On the left of the drawing above the Earth is shown with its two vertical and aligned axis (magnetic and rotational). On the right, the effects of a nearby comet tilting the geographic axis 23.5° relative to the initial vertical axis and tilting the core by 12°, hence a 11.5° crustal slippage.

Notice that the effects of such a sudden slippage would be much more dramatic than the effects of the limited slippage due to the Earth’s minute slowdown described previously.[26]

[1] Hill, E., ‘On the possibility of changes in the Earth’s axis’, Geol Mag, Vol.V, pp 262-266
[2] Runcorn, S., ‘The Earth’s magnetism’, Scient Am, 1955, pp. 152-162
[3] Naudiet, A., ‘Das Geheimnis der Präzession’, Efodon Synesis n° 9, 17-23, 1995
[4] Among other sources, the presence of mid-latitude and tropical flora in the circumpolar region is confirmed by the findings described in: Kropotkin et al., ‘Baron Von Toll on New Siberia and the Circumpolar Tertiary Flora’, Geogr. J., Vol.XVI, pp. 95-98.
[5] Zillmer, R. Irrtümer der Erdgeschichte, Langen Müller, 2001
[6] De Sarre, F., Mais où est donc passé le Moyen Âge, p 39
[7] Berger, A., ‘Obliquity and Precession for the Last 5,000,000 Years’ ,Astronomy and Astrophysics, pp. 127–135
[8] Newcomb, S., Tables of the Four Inner Planets, 2nd ed., 1898
[9] George F. Dodwell (1879-1963), leading Australian astronomer.
[10] ‘Dodwell main chart’, Setterfield. See:
[11] Sources included Thales, about 558 BC; Eratosthenes, about 230 BC; Hipparchus, 135 BC; Ptolemy, 126 AD; and several medieval astronomers up to the time of Tycho Brahe, 1587 AD, and Wendelin, 1616 AD.
[12] Peiser Benny J., ‘collapse of early bronze age civilizations: has the smoking gun been found?’, Cambridge Conference Correspondance
[13] Ibid
[14] Rajeev Syal, ‘Meteor showers blotted out man's first civilisations’, The Sunday Times, 14 December 1997
[15] Master, S., ‘A possible Holocene impact structure in the Al 'Amarah marshes’ - Meteoritics & Planetary Science, vol.36, Supplement, p.A124; 2001.
[16] Courty 1997, 1998; Peiser 1997; Napier 1997; Bjorkman 1973, Weiss et al. 1993, Master 2001, 2002
[17] The impact of a body 640 km in diameter and travelling at 72 km/s would induce a 4°15 change in Earth’s tilt. See: Dachille, ‘Axis Changes in the Earth from Large Meteorite Collisions’, Nature, 198, 176, April 1963
[18] Peiser, B. J., ‘Catch a falling star’, Jewish Chronicle, 6 March 1998. See :
[19] Firestone et al. consider the Carolina Bays (more than 500,000 elliptical craters concentrated along the Atlantic seaboard) as remnants of overhead cometary explosions.
See: Firestone Richard, West Alan and Warwick Simon, The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes : How a Stone Age Comet Changed the Course of World Culture, 2006
[20] ‘In a near miss encounter between two bodies of different net charge, a discharge between them would be likely. The discharge if concentrated on the surface would leave a crater’
See: White, J., Pole Shift, p.177
[21] Bevan A., ‎De Laeter J., Meteorites: A Journey Through Space and Time, 2002, Page 183
[22] Gasperini L. et al., ‘Possible impact crater for the 1908 Tunguska Event’, Terra Nova, Volume 19, Issue 4, pages 245–251, August 2007
[23] Sea level changes, land uplift and land subsidence, volcanic eruptions, and earthquakes happened concomitantly in many places around the world
[24] Mandelkehr Moe M., ‘An Integrated Model for an Earthwide Event at 2300 BC’, Chronology & Catastrophism, Vol. X, 1988
[25] Allan, D. & Delair, J. Cataclysm!, Bear & Co, 1997, p.190
[26] See chapter 22 ‘The slowdown of the Earth’
A meteorite which landed in the UK last year was determined to have originated in the Mars-Jupiter asteroid belt. One of many studies being conducted on this specimen has been released and caught my eye.

A meteorite that crashed on the Gloucestershire town of Winchcombe last year contained water that was a near-perfect match for that on Earth.
This bolsters the idea rocks from space brought key chemical components, including water, to the planet early in its history, billions of years ago.
The meteorite is regarded as the most important recovered in the UK.

Water accounted for up to 11% of the meteorite's weight - and it contained a very similar ratio of hydrogen atoms to the water on Earth.
Some scientists say the young Earth was so hot it would have driven off much of its volatile content, including water.
For the Earth to have so much today - 70% of its surface is covered by ocean - suggests there must have been a later addition.
Some say this could have come from a bombardment of icy comets - but their chemistry is not a great match.
Carbonaceous chondrites, however - meteorites such as the Winchcombe one - most certainly are.
Top Bottom