Thunderbolts Forum --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6073#p6073>by *shrunkensimon <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=306>* on Sun May 25, 2008 5:52 pm Forgive me if this has been posted already, or if this does not seem appropriate for this thread (delete if need be), but i found this website today that has quite alot of detail on the Saturn idea and Plasma based explanations for some of history. I think its relevant to this discussion, and others may find some interesting stuff in there. Note, the website does infact referrence you David, aswell as the EU theory in general :) http://saturniancosmology.org/ Hope its of some use to everyone :D --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6320#p6320>by *Faderbaby <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=318>* on Wed May 28, 2008 12:02 pm Forgive me if this has been posted already, or if this does not seem appropriate for this thread (delete if need be), but i found this website today that has quite alot of detail on the Saturn idea and Plasma based explanations for some of history Fantastic site for the novice (like me)! Thanks for the link. Because all of this has huge implications for mankind, I'm looking for any hidden agendas in all of this. That's the major concern for me. Who wants what? All of this is so sweeping in scope that the most important factor is the motivation behind the material (if any). I think it's a huge question mark (but I'm new to the topic so I have no current opinion). --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6327#p6327>by *Plasmatic <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=56>* on Wed May 28, 2008 1:13 pm The above saturninan site is full of rampant speculation and quite misleading in many ways. The Comaparative Method does not support most of his speculations. --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6333#p6333>by *shrunkensimon <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=306>* on Wed May 28, 2008 2:03 pm Plasmatic wrote:The above saturninan site is full of rampant speculation and quite misleading in many ways. The Comaparative Method does not support most of his speculations. Can you elaborate on what parts are misleading? Unforunately i only know as much about the Saturn theory as Dave Talbotts work has permitted on the internet (i don't have his book :cry: ). Sorry if i've posted a total duff website.. it was not my intention. --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6336#p6336>by *Faderbaby <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=318>* on Wed May 28, 2008 2:28 pm The site "Recovering The Lost World" states that all of this is speculation. It's a great overview. If everything is speculation then great overviews are what is needed. The EU and plasma theory are the main thrust of the book (it's actually more a book than a website). The only disagreements I would see, as a layman, are what I would call minor details (though scientific types are all about just those kind of details). Broadly, the site seems to be agreeing with EU and plasma theory. --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6355#p6355>by *nick c <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=62>* on Wed May 28, 2008 5:02 pm Shrunkensimon: Plasmatic wrote: The above saturninan site is full of rampant speculation and quite misleading in many ways. The Comaparative Method does not support most of his speculations. Shrunkensimon wrote: Can you elaborate on what parts are misleading? Unforunately i only know as much about the Saturn theory as Dave Talbotts work has permitted on the internet (i don't have his book ). Sorry if i've posted a total duff website.. it was not my intention. I have to agree with Plasmatic, that the linked site has a lot of details that are not supported in any way. The thing that makes me cringe is the chronology, I don't know how he arrives at dating these events. He seems to be combining Cardonna, Talbott, Velikovsky, and others and coming up with his own speculative scenario. How does he arrive at so many very precise dates? Ancient chronology is a mess, in my opinion the mainstream ancient history was totally demolished by Velikovsky in the appendix to Peoples of the Sea however, his replacement chronology is not by any means satisfactory. And since then there have been any number of patches to, and radical revisions of, by various scholars, and no one revision established with certainty. Before recorded history, what dates can be relied upon? Radiometric dating, estimates of sedimentary deposits, ice cores, etc have all been challenged and shown to be based on uniformitarian assumptions. So I don't know how he arrives at most of his dates. Basically, certainly some parts may be correct, how can we know which? You could read worse things, but take it with a grain of salt. If your looking for a good assortment of on line catastrophic and EU reading material go to Thoth newsletter: http://www.kronia.com/thoth.html I like Talbott's installments on "Velikovsky's Comet Venus." --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6357#p6357>by *shrunkensimon <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=306>* on Wed May 28, 2008 5:15 pm You make some fair points about the radiometric dating etc definitely. I must confess, "history" is not my strong point by any means, or the science behind history such as radiometric dating. I probably should have spent a bit more time looking over the website as a whole though. I just came across it and thought it seemed to contain some interesting information.. Thanks for the insights though, appreciated :) --------------------------------------- New post <./viewtopic.php?p=6360#p6360>by *David Talbott <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=58>* on Wed May 28, 2008 5:58 pm About the "Saturnian Cosmology" site: My own recommendation to folks is to stay with fundamentals. Generally, that means principles which, on investigation, inspire a high level of confidence. Plasmatic is right in saying that the site is filled with speculation, and Nick is correct that the material provides no basis for determining what is substantial and what is not. The problem is that a heap of guesses, when placed alongside foundational levels of the Saturn hypothesis, will only convince people that no bedrock is available to us. And that is far from the truth. The other side of this two-edged sword is that Jno Cook has devoted much time to producing an interdisciplinary "reconstruction." Occasional worthy fragments are embedded in the work, if someone could just find a way to recognize them before wasting too much time. :) David Talbott (end)