Where Troy Once Stood

My next question is about Alexander the Great (356-323 BC), who's teacher, Aristotle (384-322 BC) gave him an annotated copy of The Iliad. It is also reported that he had a copy of The Odessey as well, but The Iliad was his favourite. He was the one who gave Pharohic Egypt it's official name that we know it by now, when it became a Greek colony in 332 BC. He was accordingly VERY familiar with Homer's works.

My question is was he a reincarnation of one of the participants of the Trojan war? And was it Achilles? They both seemed to be precociously adept at warfare. I've just seen that his mother, Olympias of Epirus was the daughter of Neoptolemus I.... who claimed to be a decendant of Achilles and King Lycomendes... from that time....
 
At least a part of the Yucatan is kind of lacy and might be quite fragile in the event of a major shake. There are cenotes all over, and no telling how deep some of them go. I did some diving there, with a guide of course. The water is cold and fresh.
Wow! You went diving in part of that big impact crater. (The one that killed the dinosaurs). It must have been impressive! I believe it was the cenotes that provided the clue as to where the impact site was.

 
Hello @Ruth ,

FYI there is a minor mistake here :
According to the internet, Bronze Age Britain occured between 2500 (approx) - 800 BC/BCE. BC and BCE are the same, but one is more 'politically correct' i.e. not associated with Christianity. So that means 4500 (approx) - 2825 BP. Which is "Before Present", or total years ago.
Conventionally, the reference date for "BP" is January 1st, 1950. Cf.

So 2500 (approx.) - 800 BC(E) would rather be 4450 (approx.) - 2750 BP.

My two (euro)cents.
 
Conventionally, the reference date for "BP" is January 1st, 1950. Cf.
Holy Smoke! Present Time was before I was born! Luckily I don't have to be 'carbon dated' to find out my age. 🤣🤣🤣 I wonder if the C's use 1 Jan 1950 as 'present day'? Perhaps not, if they're not a big fan of the accuracy of the proceedure. Maybe it's particularly useful for the VERY long periods of time ago? Kind of like dinosaur lengths of time in the past....
 
Last edited:
Wow! You went diving in part of that big impact crater. (The one that killed the dinosaurs). It must have been impressive! I believe it was the cenotes that provided the clue as to where the impact site was.

Not in one that big or deep. There are lots of those formations everywhere I visited. I was around Tulum and Playa del Carmen mostly. In some places you can ride in these little rivers (that come up and go under ground) right out into the sea.
 
Hello.
Tonight, I stumbled upon this video (published in 2021), titled "The Trojan War: The Reality - England vs. France", by S. E. Robbins :
Just had a thought, you could interview this guy if you had a mind to - or someone associated with Cassiopaea or SOTT might be able to. Unfortunately, Iman Wilkens passed in 2018. I wonder who has the "rights" to publish this book? Maybe I'll ask the publishers....
 
Right, so we don't really have it clear when the cataclysm that the Iliad and Odyssey describe actually happened. So more questions are needed I think.

Yeah, its tricky. It could be a composition from different places and events over time. This is what they said about Scheria, the land of the Phaecians recently:

(L) So they were real. So where was the island located?

A: Not an island. Was a confused memory of an area around present day St. Petersburg.

A confused memory. This implies the composer(s) of the Odyssey collected tales and accounts from other time, perhaps far into the past. But how far?

The C's said the the part about the abduction of Helen in the Iliad references the Nefertiti/Sarah and "Abraham" saga, around 1629-1627 BC, so that part is not that old.

But, the Odyssey specially is so broad and fantastic in the world it describes that it could be that incorporates bits from ancient tales, going back as far as Atlantis.
 
Things were weird in the past, and in theory, would be again.

I suspect that this ancient civilization is alluded in The Odyssey and its remains are pictured above.

Fascinating. A whole new can of worms. According to this theory, State 2 window could last up to 400 years (as per Grok). And archeologists and historians have struggled with the direction of the winds described in the tales (A north wind, a south wind, and so on). So perhaps they allude to a time when the cardinal points were different.

1761024292680.png


This is what the world looks like while in State 2.
 
But, the Odyssey specially is so broad and fantastic in the world it describes that it could be that incorporates bits from ancient tales, going back as far as Atlantis.
This is precisely the impression that I get.

I'm almost done with Cailleaux and Wilkens, reading both books at the same time. They are very complementary. Wilkens has more precision for locations, and Cailleaux is also very talented in linguistics, "green language" and had access to celtic literature of earlier centuries. The impression is that Cailleaux deciphers stories that go way back to Atlantis. Wilkens, is more firmly rooted in location and relatively recent past (Bronze Age), and quotes Cailleaux's linguistic abilities often enough in the book Where Troy Once Stood.

A whole new can of worms. According to this theory, State 2 window could last up to 400 years (as per Grok). And archeologists and historians have struggled with the direction of the winds described in the tales (A north wind, a south wind, and so on). So perhaps they allude to a time when the cardinal points were different.
Cailleaux brings up a point that there's a part in the Odyssey where it says that they don't know where the sun sets or rises, so let's go to Circe to help clarify t (words to that effect). Ok, I found it. It's here:


“Thus through the livelong day to the going down of the sun we stayed
there eating and drinking our fill, but when the sun went down and it
came on dark, we camped upon the sea shore. When the child of morning,
rosy-fingered Dawn, appeared, I called a council and said, ‘My friends,
we are in very great difficulties; listen therefore to me. We have no
idea where the sun either sets or rises,85 so that we do not even know
East from West. I see no way out of it; nevertheless, we must try and
find one.
We are certainly on an island, for I went as high as I could
this morning, and saw the sea reaching all round it to the horizon; it
lies low, but towards the middle I saw smoke rising from out of a thick
forest of trees.’

Cailleaux claims that it was due to the foggy nature of the place and how the current arrived to Circe's island. Though, one wonders... Pole shift in the ancient past? Then there's this one:

In this time they said that the sun had moved four times from his accustomed place of rising, and where he now sets he had thence twice had his rising, and in the place from whence he now rises he had twice had his setting. -Herodotus, an Account of Egypt
 
Though, one wonders... Pole shift in the ancient past? Then there's this one:

In this time they said that the sun had moved four times from his accustomed place of rising, and where he now sets he had thence twice had his rising, and in the place from whence he now rises he had twice had his setting. -Herodotus, an Account of Egypt

In the CatHoM, this specific text was associated with comets and cometary interactions as viewed from the surface of the Earth, not a hypothetical pole shift.
FWIW.
 
Fascinating. A whole new can of worms. According to this theory, State 2 window could last up to 400 years (as per Grok). And archeologists and historians have struggled with the direction of the winds described in the tales (A north wind, a south wind, and so on). So perhaps they allude to a time when the cardinal points were different.

View attachment 112903

This is what the world looks like while in State 2.
Geomagnetic field these days is more or less 'fixed' to the planet and rotates together with the Earth (observations confirming that presented in this post).

If it got decoupled from the Earth's surface during the polar wander event and its polarity remained as it was before the geographic poles shifted their positions, then according to the image above both geomagnetic poles would have been in newly established equatorial zone of the planet. In that case, Earth would have been basically completely open (on its equator) to all kinds of influences from space, from solar wind and radiation to cosmic rays, with barely any protection keeping its atmosphere from being blown away and ripped apart. This would have had devastating consequences for all life on the planet.

If the geomagnetic field, on the other hand, would have followed the change of Earth's rotational axis and geomagnetic poles would have kept their relative positions to geographic poles, then there would have been a significant change in positions of geomagnetic poles in respect to their previous locations as seen on the planetary surface. IOW, new magnetic pole of the planet would have been somewhere around the South of Africa according to that image. In that case there would have been a geomagnetic field reversal or at least a significant shift in its polarity that would have left its trace or footprint in the rocks and soil on the planetary surface, i.e. there would be some kind of physical evidence that something like that happened.

As it's usually said in hard core sciences; extraordinary claims ask for extraordinary evidence; and this claim about rotational axis of the Earth flipping in not so distant planetary past certainly seems like an extraordinary one to be taken seriously enough on just face value without at least some credible corroborating factual proofs.

Edit: As Ark noted on his blog some time ago, paraphrasing, math and theory can give us wonders, but the real question is how much of that wonderful stuff is actually based on reality and how much is just sweet dreams somewhere in the clouds.
 
Last edited:
If the geomagnetic field, on the other hand, would have followed the change of Earth's rotational axis and geomagnetic poles would have kept their relative positions to geographic poles, then there would have been a significant change in positions of geomagnetic poles in respect to their previous locations as seen on the planetary surface.
When the rotational axis moves, the magnetic poles will likely move together with the whole planet (and everything inside it). It is different in the case of crustal displacement where only the crust moves while everything inside the planet stays in the same place.

As it's usually said in hard core sciences; extraordinary claims ask for extraordinary evidence; and this claim about rotational axis of the Earth flipping in not so distant planetary past certainly seems like an extraordinary one to be taken seriously enough on just face value without at least some credible corroborating factual proofs.
The Green Sahara period happened almost exactly between the two proposed axis tilting events in the recent past (around 10,700 BC and 2600 BC).

Such axis tilts will not necessarily be seen in the geological and archaeological records, except maybe large tsunamis and earthquakes in the case of a quick axis tilt. Sudden climate shifts could be seen though and some legends and myths also hold clues about the sun rising and setting in unfamiliar locations.
 
Last edited:
When the rotational axis moves, the magnetic poles will likely move together with the whole planet (and everything inside it). It is different in the case of crustal displacement where only the crust moves while everything inside the planet stays in the same place.
According to the C's, in the session of October 31 2001 that Nienna posted in the other thread, rotational axis will basically straighten up restoring perpendicularity to the ecliptic, not flipping over to other side of the globe, and that shift or tilt will come together with magnetic reversal. That obviously means that geomagnetic poles in that case won't follow the movement of geographic poles, but will 'continue' to move to the other side of the planet on their own.

From little that I understood about Dzhanibekov effect (Wikipedia link; there's also a nice short oldish YT video on Ark's YT channel) and what Gaby said in relation to hypothetical axis flip with North pole moving to the South of Africa, it won't be that the whole Earth as a compact solid body would be flipping, but only outer planetary layers like mantle for example (analogy of rotten avocado was used by Gaby for the purpose of visualization). In that case geomagnetic field might in principle decouple itself from the surface of the planet.

In that context, I'm looking for consistent explanations behind magnetic reversals, in case of the Earth and Sun as well as solar magnetic field reversals happen much more frequently, every cca 11 years, than geomagnetic ones, which might shed additional light on the whole axis shift or tilt business.

Another interesting possible data point in that axis tilt story came from Posidonius' calculation of the Earth's circumference, where he got the value extraordinarly close to modern one, although he assumed wrongly that Rhodes and Alexandria were on the same meridian, and that their latitudinal distance was 7.5 degrees instead of what's nowadays closer to 5 degrees.

Assuming that he would have known better than to make such mistakes, these things might suggest that perhaps Earth was spinning a bit differently then in first century BC than it is now, in the sense that Rhodes and Alexandria then might have actually really been on or close to the same meridian in which case their distance in latitude would also have increased compared to what we see today, in such a way explaining rather large discrepancy between these figures as used by Posidonius and obtained from modern day observations.

From Wikipedia:

Earth's circumference​

Posidonius calculated the Earth's circumference by the arc measurement method, by reference to the position of the star Canopus. As explained by Cleomedes, Posidonius observed Canopus on but never above the horizon at Rhodes, while at Alexandria he saw it ascend as far as 7½ degrees above the horizon (the meridian arc between the latitude of the two locales is actually 5 degrees 14 minutes). Since he thought Rhodes was 5,000 stadia due north of Alexandria, and the difference in the star's elevation indicated the distance between the two locales was 1/48 of the circle, he multiplied 5,000 stadia by 48 to arrive at a figure of 240,000 stadia for the circumference of the Earth.

His estimate of the latitude difference of these two points, 360 degrees/48=7.5 degrees, is rather erroneous. (The modern value is approximately 5 degrees.) In addition, they are not quite on the same meridian as they were assumed to be. The longitude difference of the points, slightly less than 2 degrees, is not negligible compared with the latitude difference.

Translating stadia into modern units of distance can be problematic, but it is generally thought that the stadion used by Posidonius was almost exactly 1/10 of a modern statute mile. Thus Posidonius's measure of 240,000 stadia translates to 24,000 mi (39,000 km) compared to the actual circumference of 24,901 mi (40,074 km).

In principle, the above does not necessarily imply that the axial tilt was different then than it is now, but only that the axis itself was different, i.e. that the geographic North pole was in (slightly) different location or position than it is now.
 
Back
Top Bottom