Wednesday, April 14, 2021

Independent Confirmation of the Design (and Peer Review Indicted)

Fifteen years ago -- before this blog was created -- I wrote the following article, of an independent confirmation, of my discovery of the Great Design of the "gods", and put it on a site, where I was then trying to sell my book, "The End of the Mystery". I later abandoned that site, when I re-presented my book in two volumes, on and through them I only just discovered the article has been deleted from, and so I re-publish it here:

The author’s book The End of the Mystery reveals that the Earth and solar system were re-formed, according to a great design, less than 20,000 years ago (between 20,000 and 10,000 years ago, roughly). This amazing discovery immediately answers many problems in current science that have simply not been noticed, or not appreciated as critical problems, until now.

Imagine, for example, that I had come forth a hundred years ago with the claim that the "gods" of ancient myth were real, and had remade the surface of the Earth, thus moving whole continents to enable a great design. Scientists could, and would, have laughed, and pointed out with derision that there was not the slightest evidence of a grand past movement of the continents over the Earth, as required by my claim. But surprise, surprise, in the ensuing hundred years the idea of just such wholesale continental movement was in fact brought forward, as early as 1912, along with serious, objective evidence in support of it. The idea was so outlandish, even without claims of design, that it took fifty years for science to finally embrace it, and call it one of the greatest discoveries ever made in science. The idea was slow in acceptance because the geophysicists for long could agree on no physical cause for such movements; even today, with the theory of plate tectonics hailed as the linchpin of all the earth sciences, there are fundamental questions about the real cause of the observed continental rifting. There is a minor revolution going on now (see among those who claim that the deep mantle magma plumes crucial to the present theory do not exist, and that there must be rather a "top-down" cause, originating in the upper crust itself, for the many igneous "hot spots" observed or inferred on our globe. In the context of such fundamental disagreement, my discovery of a verifiable design shows that no chance-produced and complex physical mechanism--either of continuously cycling interior magma currents or of mysterious "top-down" mechanisms (one of which will be mentioned shortly here)--is needed.

In the course of my research into the design, many famous ancient mysteries have been unexpectedly and authoritatively answered. One of these is the ancient belief in the dodecahedral design of the Earth, mentioned by Socrates and taught by Pythagoras. This is the first of my findings I have found to have been independently confirmed by other professional research scientists, although they have thus far failed to recognize it as a deliberate design, instead calling it a "self-organization" of the Earth's crust. Modern science has invented many euphemistic terms to avoid recognizing design in the natural world, and "self-organization" is one of the leading such euphemisms.

Scientific verification of the dodecahedron design of Earth's landmasses can be found in the article ""Truncated-icosahedral breakup of Laurasia and Gondwana and anorogenic magmatism" (by James W. Sears, Gregory M. St. George & J. Chris Winne, University of Montana, Missoula MT 59812), available on the internet at EarthTess1. On that site, a small image resembling a soccer ball, with the caption "Self-Organization," links to another page with a further link to this article.

The abstract, or introductory summary, of this paper, reads:

"The large-scale rift systems that broke apart the Laurasian and Gondwanan supercontinents conform to the precise dimensions of a truncated-icosahedral tessellation of the Earth's surface, with triple junctions separated by 23° along great-circle arcs, and rift segments intersecting at 120° and 108°. The rift tessellations provide a minimum edge-length and therefore a least-work configuration for the fracturing of a spherical shell. Anorogenic magmatic provinces, including flood basalts, anorthosite, and granite-rhyolite and some hotspots evolved along the rift edges, especially at triple junctions. The brittle fracture pattern favors a top-down tectonic origin for some large igneous outbreaks."

The "truncated-icosahedral" pattern these scientists found looks like this over the whole sphere:

It is a "truncated" form of the regular icosahedron, a solid with 20 facets and each facet an equilateral triangle. The truncated form has 20 hexagonal facets and 12 pentagonal ones, arranged in precise pattern. Below are images of the regular icosahedron, on the left drawn over the truncated form, and on the right by itself:

The regular icosahedron has 12 vertexes, where the truncated form has 12 pentagons (formed by the truncation of those vertexes). Both forms have the same basic symmetry, of 12 equivalent axes distributed over the whole sphere. They share this same symmetry with the dodecahedron, which is a 12-faceted regular solid, with each facet a regular pentagon:

The finding by Sears et al. of a precise truncated-icosahedral pattern in the breakup of the one-time supercontinents thus confirms the dodecahedral design of the Earth’s surface. As a matter of fact, although their findings deal with the positions of landmasses at the time of the breakup, their illustrations of the truncated-icosahedral tessellation they found agree well with the primary dodecahedron pattern I found from the Great Mapping of the “gods” and the present positions of the landmasses. Here is an illustration from my book of the dodecahedron design:

The Earth dodecahedron shows pentagons centered on the north and south poles, and on the South Atlantic and Indian oceans (as well as the Atlantic). The illustrations of Sears et al. in his two articles on the breakup of Laurasia and Gondwana specifically show pentagons on the South Atlantic and Indian oceans, as well as outlining Antarctica, centered on the south pole. So Sears et al. have found essentially the same dodecahedral pattern I found, the pattern that is observable and verifiable today. The deliberate design of the Earth I found has been confirmed by scientists who had no idea of my discoveries, and who do not even interpret their finding as evidence of design. The design is thus an objective fact, independent of the observer and of any supposed personal prejudice or subjective agenda.


Consensus scientists, including Sears et al., will insist that the precise tessellation of the Earth’s landmasses does not prove intentional design by some past superpower. Actually, such scientists as I have tried to inform of the design have not responded, or not confronted the idea and the overwhelming evidence for it. I first came upon the site, and the article by Sears et al. mentioned in the above text, in March 2005 (either March 19th or 20th, as I have a record of e-mailing the site on March 20th, after a quick reading of some of the material on the site). I attempted to communicate to three different e-mail addresses at this time. First, I e-mailed Dr. Sears, informing him of my prior finding of design and trying to explain why in fact his findings indicated a deliberate design rather than an undirected [i.e., not intelligently directed] breakup event. I wrote, in part:

“What would it take for you to be open to a serious consideration that the breakup of the Laurasian and Gondwanan supercontinents, according to a precise truncated-icosahedral tessellation, indicates nothing less than a deliberate design? It seems clear to me, for example, that there is a more obvious point to be made than that such a tessellation provides for a least-work fracturing of the Earth sphere, as you and your co-authors emphasize; it is that it must be very, very, very highly unlikely that an undirected natural process could deliver the proper blow to trigger such a precise, resonant breakup of the spherical crust, by what would have to be a pure icosahedral, or dodecahedral, normal mode vibration of the entire body of the Earth--for that is the only physical context in which a “least-work” argument can properly be raised: A single, complex, precise flexing of the entire surface. Furthermore, in any undirected scenario there were, and are, many fracturing events, and it is highly unlikely that such a perfect “bell-ringing” tessellation should stand out so clearly from the noisy background of the majority of fracturing episodes. Even further, the universal ancient testimony of mankind was that the world was deliberately designed, according to precise and sacred number and geometry--and the ancient mathematical tradition passed down by the Pythagoreans particularly claimed the Earth was made to a dodecahedron design, which has the same symmetry as the icosahedral tessellation you have recognized. In short, yours is but the latest revelation in precisely the same tradition as the ancient mystery traditions.

“That the continental breakup was due to deliberate design is not in fact even an arguable point, from my perspective, for I have already shown that the surface of the Earth was deliberately re-formed, less than 20,000 years ago (according to both ancient records and to the design itself, which tells a coherent ancient story, or history, and can be proved to have given rise to many of the world’s myths about the “gods” of old--and indeed, to have initiated all of the once-sacred ancient traditions that I have yet studied). I have also uncovered the dodecahedral design in the present configuration of the continents. There is far more to the design, and it is far better attested by every variety of evidence, than the tessellation you have recognized.

“Please note, I am not talking about “creation of the world” by “God,” I am talking about a re-formation of the continents by an advanced people attested to by ancient man, worldwide, as the “gods” who once ruled the Earth; the former may be outside the province of physical science, but the latter is not. I am a physicist, unbound and unmotivated by any dogma....”

I never got a response from Dr. Sears to this communication; I do not know if he even received it. When I decided to write this article, in late November or early December 2006, I revisited the site, and found a second article by Dr. Sears (at EarthTess2.html, in which he emphasized the tessellation he found as a “self-organization” of the Earth’s crust, and he gave examples of the icosahedron occurring in nature:

“Comparison of the Gondwanan tessellation with other natural examples of icosahedral arrangements provides insight into the Gondwanan fracture process. In nature, collections of particles commonly surface a sphere in icosahedral patterns. These include blastocysts, colloids, quasi-crystals, florets, and numerous icosahedral viruses, including wart, herpes, polio, and HIV....”

However, he failed to take note that in all of his examples, the icosahedral pattern was inherent in the development or formation of the body involved. This is not the case with the Earth, for which the pattern is specifically seen as appearing only with the breakup of a supercontinent. The Earth did not develop as a living organism (blastocysts, viruses), nor as a single supercrystal with icosahedral structure. Again, the Earth’s crust would only break apart in such a precise and complete geometric pattern if the causative force were such as to excite an icosahedral resonant mode of vibration in the crust, of sufficient strength to crack the entire spherical surface of the Earth, practically instantaneously (limited only by the speed of sound within the crustal material), into the complex icosahedral pattern. In other words, the Earth would have to have been rung like a bell, with a precise force precisely applied. Lacking such a precise blow, the crust could have been rifted into any number of pieces, making the argument of minimum edge-length irrelevant, for the total edge length of the tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron and icosahedron tessellations would each be less than that of the truncated icosahedron. The very great unlikelihood of a truncated-icosahedron-producing natural blow--totally swamping the effects of any and all previous and subsequent cosmic blows--occurring by chance alone, in itself indicates only design could be responsible for the breakup of the supercontinents. Sears envisions the force to be that of an expanding mantle beneath the crust, but that would not be sufficient to enforce a precise tessellation.

I also e-mailed the site, on March 20, 2005. I had read, among other articles on that site, an article by one Gillian Foulger, in which she made the strong point:

“The plume hypothesis as it is applied today requires that Earth dynamics is driven by two independent modes of convection -- plate tectonics and plumes. The former is driven by forces at plate boundaries..., and the other is driven by heat from the Earth’s core. The new theory suggests that only one of these is needed -- plate tectonics. ... The possibility of such a radical simplification alone is a strong hint that...something important may be going on here.”

After mentioning this statement and the icosahedral tessellation found by Sears et al., I wrote to the site:

“Ladies and gentlemen of science, the ‘top-down’ origin Sears et al. envision goes much higher, and far deeper, than they imagine. Books on earth science are fond of reminding the reader that continental drift was first envisioned by the simple observation that the Atlantic coasts of South America and Africa simply look like they once fitted together. But what generations now of earth scientists have failed to notice is that such apparent fitting-together is not the primary visual characteristic of the landmasses of the Earth. Rather (and of course you will not believe this, at first), a dispassionate consideration of those landmasses reveals that they exhibit an abundance of creature-like shapes, generally incomplete or otherwise ambiguous, but many quite stunning. But here is the kicker: There are a score or more of such images to be seen, in every continent and larger island, and save for one or two, they are all upright on the globe, with north defined as ‘up.’ If you turn the globe upside-down, all resemblance of the coastlines to creature shapes disappears. (The only exception is Australia, which, upside-down, looks like a sheep dog.) I am not claiming that the Earth’s surface was deliberately reformed, and continents broken up, moved, and reshaped by design, on the sole basis of the above--although I do insist, strongly, that the uniformly upright orientation of the creature-like images on the Earth does in fact prove that they were designed, not randomly formed. But even I did not come to that conclusion by simply observing those images. I first found a symmetric pattern among the stars surrounding the ecliptic north pole (which is in fact the approximate axis of the entire solar system, and can reasonably be taken to be that axis). I found that that pattern was of central, religious importance to the civilization of ancient Egypt, and that it was but the central element of a wider pattern that was the keystone in the most ancient traditions of peoples the world over. I found, in other words, the original sacred images of mankind, in the sky and on the Earth, the common source of all the so-called ‘ancient mysteries’.

“I found that the Earth’s landmasses had been reformed to enable the deliberate mapping of the celestial sphere onto the Earth sphere. The landmasses enabled not just one, but a series of such mappings...”

After a paragraph in which I described with clear, objective examples the design I found, I continued:

“The bottom line is this: Despite the current antipathy of the scientific consensus to the idea of large-scale design of the world, it is a fact, which I, an independent researcher for the last ten years, and a hard scientist with many years of research experience in both the academic and high-tech industrial sectors, have already proven. Until the scientific consensus confronts and accepts the new facts, it is, to put it bluntly, incompetent working at the front line of human knowledge. The discovery by Sears et al. of a rigorous tessellation of the Earth, the true importance of which they and other scientists have characteristically and utterly failed to appreciate, only underscores my amazing, epochal discoveries of the design of the Earth, and indeed of the entire solar system--the physical truth behind mankind’s defining history of religiously-held beliefs. Plate tectonics as you yet conceive it has been invalidated, and generations of earth scientists have been--with reference to Isaac Newton’s famous self-appraisal--like children, playing with pretty stones on the beach, while before them stretched the true ocean of knowledge, unplumbed, unsuspected, and even denied by them, when it is pointed out.”

I got no response from either.

Now my argument about the creature images is detailed in my book. I observed those images, in the context of the world design I had found, as early as the latter part of 1997, and wrote about them as early as 1998. In January 2003, after writing my book, I sent that argument in a letter to Science magazine to announce my discoveries. I got no response from them, nor from any of my repeated attempts to communicate my discoveries to the scientific community, and I have received no meaningful or competent response to date from any scientist I have contacted. (Alternative researchers have also avoided confronting my discoveries and the overwhelming evidence I have brought forward--I have not been able to get published in alternative publications like Atlantis Rising or Nexus, any more than in peer-reviewed science journals. The minds of all have been uniformly closed.)

As already mentioned, the dodecahedron and icosahedron have much the same symmetry, and there is an additional, and quite important, point to be made with that in mind. I also communicated, in late March 2005, with a theorist named Findlay, who puts forward (as do a few other independent researchers) an “expanding Earth” theory to explain the geological evidence of the Earth. I noted that he had written to the site, “In the face of the tantalising empirical evidence for expansion it makes no sense to ignore this conclusion even though a physical cause for it is not yet obvious. Hopefully, to a ‘prepared mind’ somewhere, it will be.”

I therefore e-mailed Mr. Findlay and informed him, in part: “I can tell you the cause of the global Earth changes, and indeed it is obvious, more obvious than any evidence I have seen anywhere, outside of my own research. No one wants to hear it, and I don’t expect the geologists to exhibit my comment to them on their site...”, and I sent him what I had communicated to the site concerning my discoveries of design, at the end of which I added: “ the new paradigm is not simply that the Earth is expanding, or even that it has expanded in the past; it is that the Earth was re-formed--designed--as a record of the ‘gods.’ I find it interesting that they may have ‘raised up’ (expanded) the Earth itself, as myths say they ‘raised up’ the sky. But design is the key.”

I got no response from Mr. Findlay either. Now my work is independent of any “expanding Earth” theory, nor have I looked into it at all, except for that one important point I mentioned: In his papers, Sears gave the single edge length exhibited in the truncated-icosahedral tessellation as 23.28 degrees. In the regular dodecahedron design of the Earth I found, the edge length is some 41.81 degrees. Now, in the context of a possible expansion of the Earth, the truncated-icosahedral pattern can be formed from the regular dodecahedron by an expansion of the surface, with the individual pentagons of the dodecahedron separating from one another on the expanding surface and coming into the truncated-icosahedral pattern, with the pentagons separated by hexagonal areas. In other words, if the expansion was done to deliberately transform a dodecahedron into a truncated-icosahedron--or to imply such a process--then the radius of the Earth would have been expanded from its initial value to 41.81/23.28 times that value, or 1.8 times its original value. Since the Earth radius is now some 3,963 miles, its original radius would have been some 2,200 miles.

2,200 miles is just the radius of the Earth’s core, as established by modern science.

So a deliberate world design, involving either a real or an implied expansion of the Earth to enable transforming a dodecahedron into a truncated icosahedron, explains the precise relative radii of the Earth and its core.

No comments:

Post a Comment