Show #46: The Electric Universe - Wallace Thornhill Interview

#31
lilies said:
Until the books arrive from Amazon, I found some videos to digest.

The Electric Universe: Wallace Thornhill & David Talbott: 9780977285136: Amazon.com: Books
http://www.amazon.com/Electric-Universe-Wallace-Thornhill-Talbott/dp/0977285138/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1386081033&sr=8-2&keywords=thunderbolts+of+the+gods

Amazon.com: Buying Choices: Thunderbolts of the Gods + DVD
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0977285103/ref=dp_olp_all_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=all





Wallace Thornhill | The Interdisciplinary Story of the Electric Universe | Libertarian News
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxaP91FdijU

David Talbott: Exposing the Myths of "Settled Science" | NPA19 - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aLCWwLdelo

Gerald Pollack: The Fourth Phase of Water | NPA19 - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q33KyLkP_Rg&feature=c4-overview&list=UUvHqXK_Hz79tjqRosK4tWYA

Red Ice Radio - Wallace Thornhill - The Electric Universe
http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2010/03mar/RIR-100311.html

Thunderbolts of the Gods | Official Movie - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA&list=PLcb2H6IOvNxyMJLMzXKay_A8zf1ErToec&index=1

Symbols of an Alien Sky | Official Movie - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7EAlTcZFwY

David Talbott: Seeking the Third Story | EU2012 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSB93dGMGeg

A Plasma Universe ? part 1 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoIWv9Fuh7c

A Plasma Universe ? part 2 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NLARVxFbgU

A Plasma Universe ? part 3 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH5RKT1DQC4

A Plasma Universe ? part 4 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hiv9yT7BhA

A Plasma Universe ? part 5 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkAtXGxpUEk
Thanks Lilies.

I was very fascinated with Wal's take on gravity and it's near-instantaneous effect at a distance.
It turns out the person behind this idea is dr. Ralph Sansbury, as Wal mentioned in one of the Electric Universe videos.
Here are some videos I found where Raplh talks about gravity and light in more detail.

Gravity:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYXIc6F-pVc

Light speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agt6dpA_bzQ

And a big thank you to Joe, Niall and the entire crew for another riveting show. Very educational!

Edit : typing mistake.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#32
lilies said:
SeekinTruth said:
Listened to this earlier today. Wow, it was another really great show! I understand a few things about the Electric Universe Theory a bit better now. The brown dwarf being electrically captured by our sun was a really fascinating idea. Also, the almost instantaneous action of gravity was another. I'd like to listen to it again.

Some of the things the C's have said over the years seem to be confirmed by the Electric Universe Theory, too, such as gravity traveling faster than light (MUCH faster according to Thornhill). I have to listen to that part again.
It struck me instantly how Wallace's words matched what I remembered the C's were saying. Wow! Accompanying videos - artist representations - of the star veils and close encounters, planetary electrical interactions could be a hit with audio parts from this podcast.
Actually, there are a number of things the Thunderbolts gang say that are contradictory not only to the Cs, but to our own research AND some parts of pretty good mainstream science.

Thornhill doesn't really know what to do with gravity or Maxwell and their ideas about celestial mechanics are patently absurd, if you ask me.

I dealt with a number of these issues in "Comets and the Horns of Moses."
 

Pashalis

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#33
Laura said:
lilies said:
SeekinTruth said:
Listened to this earlier today. Wow, it was another really great show! I understand a few things about the Electric Universe Theory a bit better now. The brown dwarf being electrically captured by our sun was a really fascinating idea. Also, the almost instantaneous action of gravity was another. I'd like to listen to it again.

Some of the things the C's have said over the years seem to be confirmed by the Electric Universe Theory, too, such as gravity traveling faster than light (MUCH faster according to Thornhill). I have to listen to that part again.
It struck me instantly how Wallace's words matched what I remembered the C's were saying. Wow! Accompanying videos - artist representations - of the star veils and close encounters, planetary electrical interactions could be a hit with audio parts from this podcast.
Actually, there are a number of things the Thunderbolts gang say that are contradictory not only to the Cs, but to our own research AND some parts of pretty good mainstream science.

Thornhill doesn't really know what to do with gravity or Maxwell and their ideas about celestial mechanics are patently absurd, if you ask me.

I dealt with a number of these issues in "Comets and the Horns of Moses."
Yes, particularly the idea that some planets of our own solar system were on other orbits in the not very distant past and thus much closer to each other, to account for the electrical phenomenons observed by our ancestors. That supposedly should explain the electrical phenomenons our ancestors observed in the sky and depicted in art works on various parts of the world.

I also don't quite get how that should, or could even be possible because there are some serious celestial mechanics at play there which seem quite impossible.

Yes our ancestors seem to have observed electrical phenomenons in the sky independently from each other, which were depicted almost in the same manner all around the world. But the question is, if the source of those phenomenons were really planets that were close to each other and interacted electrically or comets that interacted with planets.
 

Scottie

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#34
Yup, I definitely don't think that they have the whole banana, so to speak.

For example, the topic of meteors and how sightings/reports have increased in recent years... That's pretty obvious if you're paying attention, and it's rather essential to the whole electric universe thing.

On the other hand, I think the books Thornhill et al have written are wonderful introductions to the EU theory for a more mainstream audience. For example, the analogy of gravity and the waving vs. pulling of a chain is excellent. Then again, does anybody even know what gravity is? Not really.

So, I'm still more questions than answers, and as with everything else, lots of digging is required.

Sometimes, I think that anything that gets people thinking in new ways is a good thing... as long as you don't take it as your "new religion" without questioning anything.

Not to worry though: I know of a new book on EU coming out soon, and we'll be interviewing the author, I think!
 

SeekinTruth

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#35
Yeah, I have more questions than answers myself (like a lot of other things) with it all. But like Mr. Scott also said, anything that gets people thinking in new and different ways is good as long as we keep things and our minds open - to new data.

I've wondered and had some problems with the celestial mechanics concerning the planets' orbits moving around the way they describe, but to be honest, I just don't have the knowledge to dispute that competently. I don't even know how close or off the mark the mainstream ideas of celestial mechanics are when taking some of the points Thornhill makes about electricity vs. gravity. The thing that has and did stick out though, is that they don't take into account the large amounts of evidence that the planet names were originally names of giant comets breaking up over time. Then, renaming the planets after those old comet names was a relatively late event, as Laura covered in HoM.

That, I think, is one of the weakest part of their ideas, which also reinforces the problem with the celestial mechanics - those were giant comets coming barreling through the inner solar system NOT the planets renamed later (including the gas giants - Jupiter and Saturn). But again I'm not versed well enough in the mainstream physics, the math involved, OR the electrical explanations of how such a thing could have happened with the planets to really make a coherent and competent rebuttal on the celestial mechanics. But I get the feeling that being stuck on "what 'Saturn' did a few thousand years ago" so to speak is making them, perhaps, claim things that may end up being impossible in terms of celestial mechanics/solar system orbits. They may also be falling into the common trap of "when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like nails," in that they try to explain EVERYTHING in terms of electricity and maybe some things need to take other forces/interactions into account to prevent serious mistakes. Again, if they become "unstuck" from the planets going haywire, and consider that giant comets (continually breaking up) played the role they're ascribing to the planets, all sorts of problems might be avoided.

Also, they don't seem to think there's anything really cyclical about the whole thing (comets, catastrophe's, etc.), which is rather odd, considering the mountains of evidence and that just about everything in astronomy IS cyclical/periodic. The only really hard part is getting the close to getting the period of such phenomena right.

Another thing that made me think, and raises more questions than gives answers, is that EU and the "standard model"/mainstream cosmology and astronomy agree that 99.999 % of matter in the Universe is in the plasma state. How could that be if interstellar space is supposed to be so cold and there's quite a lot of plasma IN that space, not just in concentrations of matter like "nebulae" / giant dust / gas clouds, etc., making it far from being a "vacuum." Do you know what I mean? The only thing I can think of is constant electrical interactions heating up the more sparsely distributed plasma in interstellar space? Don't know.

The thing I really like about the Electric Universe/Plasma cosmology is that they are scalable to be tested in lab experiments (you can scale up or down from galaxies to the science lab), making them much more in line with the scientific method. With "the standard model" so much of what is accepted can't be tested experimentally, so it kinda makes it "unscientific" in more ways than one. Or so I think.

And finally, Mr. Scott was that a hint about Mr. PL's upcoming book? :)
 

thinker

The Force is Strong With This One
#36
There's an interesting interview with Dwardu Cardona (link below). He's an author of books that describe ancient sky as seen by our ancestors. According to his theory (based on Velikovsky) over 10000 years ago Earth was part of Saturnian star system which was then captured by Sun. What's even more interesting he's saying that Earth was originally residing in Sagittarius galaxy which recently crashed with Milky Way and that's what caused all of those perturbations (which are still ongoing).

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3824&sid=b8b9abc2beb9369fa3246d65afcda0e6
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#37
SeekinTruth said:
I've wondered and had some problems with the celestial mechanics concerning the planets' orbits moving around the way they describe, but to be honest, I just don't have the knowledge to dispute that competently. I don't even know how close or off the mark the mainstream ideas of celestial mechanics are when taking some of the points Thornhill makes about electricity vs. gravity.
Well, if you consider the fact that the usual laws of celestial mechanics/gravity are used to "slingshot" space probes and thus save fuel, then it seems that they are fairly accurate and useful. They have good predictive power within certain parameters.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
#38
thinker said:
There's an interesting interview with Dwardu Cardona (link below). He's an author of books that describe ancient sky as seen by our ancestors. According to his theory (based on Velikovsky) over 10000 years ago Earth was part of Saturnian star system which was then captured by Sun. What's even more interesting he's saying that Earth was originally residing in Sagittarius galaxy which recently crashed with Milky Way and that's what caused all of those perturbations (which are still ongoing).

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3824&sid=b8b9abc2beb9369fa3246d65afcda0e6
Again, I think that the evidence collected by Victor Clube is more compelling. If earth was originally part of a Saturnian star system in another galaxy that crashed with our own, considering what is known about celestial mechanics, it would be likely that all life on earth would have perished in the collision and its ramifications.

This is the problem when science goes off the rails and does not do its job of using its own declared methods to explore and explain the order of the universe to the best of its ability. There is a huge gap of knowledge and there are plenty of half-baked ideas that get dumped into that gap and plenty of con-artists just waiting to take advantage of the deliberately induced ignorance of the masses. Mainstream science is corrupt and degraded, no doubt about it, but the scientific method, as formulated (but ignored nowadays by most scientists) is still the best approach to understanding our world that we have.
 

SeekinTruth

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#39
Laura said:
SeekinTruth said:
I've wondered and had some problems with the celestial mechanics concerning the planets' orbits moving around the way they describe, but to be honest, I just don't have the knowledge to dispute that competently. I don't even know how close or off the mark the mainstream ideas of celestial mechanics are when taking some of the points Thornhill makes about electricity vs. gravity.
Well, if you consider the fact that the usual laws of celestial mechanics/gravity are used to "slingshot" space probes and thus save fuel, then it seems that they are fairly accurate and useful. They have good predictive power within certain parameters.
Well, definitely, if we take everything from the mainstream at face value, they have been using these laws to great effect in the space age/space programs. But another question comes up: can we take everything claimed in the mainstream at face value? Knowing what we know about the corruption of science in general and how much NASA particularly hides and explains away. You see what I'm getting at? There's really no way for independent researchers with very small budgets to verify everything themselves of just how the celestial mechanics work.

What about the electrical forces that are ignored? Under what circumstances would those override the gravitational/tidal forces, etc. No one really seems to know much about any of this, much less me. If, as we suspect from the evidence, vast amounts of knowledge are kept secret from the public domain, how do we know what's known and what's not? I'm just asking what I hope are valid questions.

The major problem, again, with the Thunderbolts guys seems to be that they've ignored the evidence of the giant comet(s) coming into the inner solar system, breaking up over a period of time as Clube et al have shown very convincingly (even retro-calculated the orbits from the surviving streams and shown that those were originally part of the same body) and the evidence you've highlighted about the names given to those cometary bodies later being transferred to the planet names we know today. The question here is, why have they ignored all that? That, to me, is pretty strong additional evidence that their claims of planetary musical chairs DOES present real problems in terms of celestial mechanics, and they too have probably fallen into the problem of having tunnel vision and blind spots at the very least. And, after all, the work of Clube, Napier, et al DOES use those laws of celestial mechanics to go backward and recreate the original cometary body or bodies, right?

But the same problem exists all around, that ALL of this is INDIRECT evidence. Too much is out of reach for honest and competent scientists to verify DIRECTLY. I'm not a scientist nor mathematician. I think I understand vaguely the overall problems involved from the different points of view. But if mainstream "science" WASN'T so corrupt, engineers and theoretical scientists and astronomers, etc. could work together to test many of these things experimentally, besides observationally and mathematically. And then you add in the evidential data from yet other disciplines, and it should be possible to come very close to the truth about the relatively recent history of our solar system.

I mean, it seems to me that if the very-strong-evidence aspects of Electric Universe/Plasma cosmology theories were taken and reconciled with the gravitational models honestly and competently, we should be at least much closer to the oh so elusive "Unified Field Theory"/theory of everything. Rather than chasing "string theories" and other such pursuits for decades. But, somehow, there's always this mysterious missing link (or links) for each approach and each compartmentalized discipline, quite probably by DESIGN.

Laura said:
thinker said:
There's an interesting interview with Dwardu Cardona (link below). He's an author of books that describe ancient sky as seen by our ancestors. According to his theory (based on Velikovsky) over 10000 years ago Earth was part of Saturnian star system which was then captured by Sun. What's even more interesting he's saying that Earth was originally residing in Sagittarius galaxy which recently crashed with Milky Way and that's what caused all of those perturbations (which are still ongoing).

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3824&sid=b8b9abc2beb9369fa3246d65afcda0e6
Again, I think that the evidence collected by Victor Clube is more compelling. If earth was originally part of a Saturnian star system in another galaxy that crashed with our own, considering what is known about celestial mechanics, it would be likely that all life on earth would have perished in the collision and its ramifications.

This is the problem when science goes off the rails and does not do its job of using its own declared methods to explore and explain the order of the universe to the best of its ability. There is a huge gap of knowledge and there are plenty of half-baked ideas that get dumped into that gap and plenty of con-artists just waiting to take advantage of the deliberately induced ignorance of the masses. Mainstream science is corrupt and degraded, no doubt about it, but the scientific method, as formulated (but ignored nowadays by most scientists) is still the best approach to understanding our world that we have.
THAT'S the crux of the matter. It has all become more absurd than organized religion. The backbone of science IS the scientific method. That is the most valuable thing at least for understanding the material universe. And with a few adjustments it can be extended to the exploration of the non-material universe, so to speak, such as pure information. All that is needed is to apply the working hypothesis that in those areas we may not have the technology to measure and quantify things in the same way (or in the case of certain legitimate but "elusive" phenomena, it may not be possible to expect strict repeatability) but that there ARE real phenomena that CAN be studied using the essence of the scientific method. But all the enforced dogmas and thought policing and processes of "excommunication" by the institutions of science have made it possible to completely obfuscate the minimum standards to meet the scientific methodology.

There's absolutely no scientifically valid reason to forbid research into many of the subjects using the scientific method that are currently forbidden by using the claim that any such research IS by default "unscientific." No, the capricious forbidding of applying the scientific method to research is what's really unscientific, I think.

Anyway, I can go on and on, but I'm "preaching to the choir." It all comes down to the failings of organized religion and organized science - both corrupted to the max - that you've been pointing out in your work for so long. And the supreme irony of both enforcing a dumbed-down, oversimplified materialistic and mechanistic uniformatarianist dogma. Our ignorance is systematically enforced by the funding process of current "science" to retain the "legitimacy" and control of the Powers That Be, and nothing else. And the threat to our planet and species from this situation is thus kept tightly under wraps. For all their supposed opposition, the organized religions and official science are basically upholding the status quo by playing "good cop, bad cop" games with humanity.
 

c.a.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#40
SeekinTruth said:
The major problem, again, with the Thunderbolts guys seems to be that they've ignored the evidence of the giant comet(s) coming into the inner solar system,

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3824&sid=b8b9abc2beb9369fa3246d65afcda0e6
Or the suns sister star?? It's hard to understand why there was no acknowledging, or dialogue of this very important, and influencing heavenly body, by him as being one of the major influences contributing to the calamitous situations in the solar system, as well on earth. Not one peep.

Even the tv. press (as corrupt as it is, occasionally does some predictive programing, or conditioning) has produce some talk of the possible, (there words "possible") companion. _www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWKk8bQOpBE

And this one from Never A Straight Answerer gave recent report with this heading, THE IMPOSSIBLE PLANET - PLANET X DISCOVERED HAS ASTRONOMERS AND SCIENTISTS BAFFLED (_www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikmJgFzzc1w) even displaying a picture at the beginning of large planet next to what could be earth coming in. But the title is miss leading, and there really is no dialog of the title.

I would think this would be a bigger, and noticeable event in his electrical theory community. But i have not seen any talk of the subject, or it influences (as the C's have indicated as having at this time), on his channel, or website.

And there are very noticeable, as the C's never skip a beat to reality.
 

lilies

Jedi Council Member
#41
Pashalis said:
[..] Yes, particularly the idea that some planets of our own solar system were on other orbits in the not very distant past and thus much closer to each other, to account for the electrical phenomenons observed by our ancestors. That supposedly should explain the electrical phenomenons our ancestors observed in the sky and depicted in art works on various parts of the world.

I also don't quite get how that should, or could even be possible because there are some serious celestial mechanics at play there which seem quite impossible.

Yes our ancestors seem to have observed electrical phenomenons in the sky independently from each other, which were depicted almost in the same manner all around the world. But the question is, if the source of those phenomenons were really planets that were close to each other and interacted electrically or comets that interacted with planets.
Kantek was named as a destroyed planet, its element falling out of the electric circuit of our solar system ought to have caused orbital changes by the other members.
940930:
Q: (L) Is the cluster of fragments in between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter the remains of a planet?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What was that planet known as?
A: Kantek.
Q: (L) When did that planet break apart into the asteroid belt.
A: 79 thousand years ago approximately.
I noticed couple of strange elements during the show:
- Wallace said a similar thing McCanney always boasts about: "My prediction was right."
- "There is no such thing as black holes." - Wallace, if not on the show then in one of the videos I linked above.

I may be confusing terms, but this sounds like moral arrogance?

However: If independent scientists do not have access to the best telescopes and equipment - including top secret tech - currently operating in space, they really can't be blamed for bitterly being forced to speculate without access to the best data available. Then there are the hyperdimensional overlords herding this cattle, not allowing important advances, keeping scientists in the dark or killing them.

I can't really blame independent scientists, after thinking about the situation.
 

Voyageur

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
#42
The interview, as others discuss, left a number of things hanging, like they are inconvenient, osit. To me, as explained, and if remembered correctly in THoM, was that our system of planets is considered a relatively historical stable procession, electrically influenced, yet a type of mechanical precision of revolving inter-planetary spheres at defined distances moving through space with its core nucleus sun. Velikovsky added Venus as a historical marker that came in to war with Mars/Earth..., and perhaps Venus is something not of the original procession. Nevertheless, the interlopers described in history, with their now broken remnants cycling back from time to time, were describe as these massive comet events (veiled with planetary names), with their unfathomable interaction with planets as they passed; discharging, raining, exploding, and some comet events described as splitting into twins and assigned said godly names, as the veils we know today. This seems to have perhaps been the sparks and thunders that are described (like chaos) upon our planet, including what could be observed of other planets within our mythologies. Thornhill did not delve deeply into this, although, he discussed the sun’s possible twin at some long ago time that is a long gone influence, if recalled. The Oort system of rubble was not discussed (or i don't remember), which could well account for the influence of interlopers caused by the sun’s twin, if it exists. Thornhill did discuss a fellow researcher who has written a particular book on historical things (i think concerning mythological events and early writings), which I did not jot down the name of, and mean to make further inquiry.

This is all one very fascinating system we exists in to try and understand and the electrical aspect makes sense on things that don't fit.

As a vignette that sticks in my mind, here is an excellent video produced by SoTT and Laura; 'Something Wicked This Way Comes' about the Oort Cloud, which could well be considered as a likely influence that may have brought into being the effects once observed upon our system of planets from past accounts and geological records:


https://youtu.be/_CnGRnz9Fi4?feature=player_embedded
 

thinker

The Force is Strong With This One
#43
voyageur said:
The Oort system of rubble was not discussed (or i don't remember), which could well account for the influence of interlopers caused by the sun’s twin, if it exists.
The Oort cloud was a theory that was needed to explain the origin of comets in dirty snowball comet theory. I don't think it was ever confirmed by observation and electrical theory doesn't really need it for anything.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/special_edition/100116_se_teu1.htm

There's always a Kuiper belt though that Pluto is part of, but this is much closer to Sun than theorized Oort cloud.
 

Pashalis

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
#44
thinker said:
voyageur said:
The Oort system of rubble was not discussed (or i don't remember), which could well account for the influence of interlopers caused by the sun’s twin, if it exists.
The Oort cloud was a theory that was needed to explain the origin of comets in dirty snowball comet theory. I don't think it was ever confirmed by observation and electrical theory doesn't really need it for anything.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/special_edition/100116_se_teu1.htm

There's always a Kuiper belt though that Pluto is part of, but this is much closer to Sun than theorized Oort cloud.
That is also my understanding regarding the hypothesized Oort cloud...

Also from my limited understanding (I'm not a scientist and thus can't really confirm any of it myself) it seems that black holes as well as the big bang, dark matter, expanding universe, super massive black holes etc.(the list goes on I think) are all mostly theoretically calculated constructs derived out of the common gravity based cosmology with not much observable data to support them.

It seems to me, every time those mainstream scientist encounter data that contradicts one of their theories they invent/calculate a new hypothetical force into the equation to make it fit somehow.

From where I sit it looks like most of them have gone astray from the actual scientific method to explore our reality, ever since Einstein and his way of mostly theoretical scientific exploration started.

I could be wrong though...
 

lilies

Jedi Council Member
#45
It was spelled out the people of Kantek were of such a psychic power they were able to destroy a planet. Thinking gruesome things.. - C's said "your thoughts" are penetrating all existence if my memory is correct and thoughts have terrible power.

Think about this for a moment. Laura wrote in her book about an attraction phenomenon, humans ignoring even their ignorance, living in mental chaos and (from the viewpoint of objective universal mind) live in insanity attracting big stones from space.

If the Kantekkian way of thinking represented a statistically accurate majority of Thinking Fashion in our solar system before and during the time these ancient drawings were made, a psychically empowered, mentally enhanced, artificially strengthened human thought could easily have caused a mayhem on solar system level making the planets do a Crazy Pool Table number. Effect of great wars at higher densities could have spilled through exacerbating the problem.
 
Top Bottom