Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Camelot Forum > Project Camelot > Project Camelot General Discussion

Notices

Project Camelot General Discussion Reactions, feedback and suggestions on interviews, current events and experiences.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-27-2010, 06:06 AM   #926
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by eleni View Post
Abrax- what do you make of the UFO's orbiting the sun? Do you have any information pertaining to that?

http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19463
Aye Eleni!

There are a number of things, people should know.

1. The Sun in 3D harbours specific physical characteristics.
a) The Core Temperature is about 16 million Kelvin
b) The Surface Temperature is about 5800 Kelvin
c) The Corona Temperature increases from the (cool) surface to 2-5 million Kelvin

The physicist's explanation for the 'unexpectated' hot corona are magnetic vortices and 'fieldlines' inducting the energy via corona mass ejections and the sunspot cycles (two 11 year halfcycles). This is often termed 'Magnetic Reconnection', possibly linked to Alfven Waves.

2. The Sun in 4D (and higher) harbourts a Solar Black Hole 10 kilometers across at its core.
a) This Solar Black Hole communicates with the planetary Black Holes of the solar system including the golfball size Black Hole art the earth's center
b) The 4D solar energy interacts with the 3D solar energy via geometrical archetypes

The Thuban omni-science has discovered the reason for the sunspot cycles.

From the Thuban archives:

A local universe about a star forms a Black Hole-White Hole dyad of ellipsoidal focalisation of the Eps-Ess duality for 2 Chandrasekhar (White Dwarf Limit) masses of 6x10^30 kg=3 time Mass of the Sun. This ratio of 1.5 is important for the inner-outer penetration of the solar syrface to 2/3 depth and 3/2 coronal halo of the radius.
(The dyadic supermembrane as a soursesink modulates frequency as inverse time being a time constant).

The Solar Frequency Fsol=c/Wavelengthsol of the Star in three 120 degree sectors.
The isoceles triangle for this trisection so defines a Solar Chord of
Sqrt(3).Rsol adjacent to the two radii Rsol, as sin60deg=Halfchord/Rsol.

Then Fsol=lightspeed/(Sqrt(3)/2)=600 million seconds/1.732..~346,410,162 seconds or 4009.4 days or 10.98 civil years.
A halfchord so defines a 11 year sunspot cycle doubling to 22 years for the full chord with the size of the star a simple proportion of the Black Hole's Photonic Ergosphere (1.5 times from the event horizon), and where photons are 'forced by gravity' to travel in orbits around the sun.

So the 4D Sun ENCOMPASSES the 3D Sun and inducts the energy from the core to its coronal perimeter via the mass-magnetocurrent equivalence APPEARING in 3D as coronal ejections, the magnetic reconnections and the Alfven waves.

The sunspot cycles are like a 'heartbeat' or breathing of the solar entity, harbouring intersolar lifeforms as 4D sentiences also utilizing the sunspot magnetic current vortices as conduits from the solar core to the coronal perimeter.

The 'materializing' geometric shapes (one the Eagle of Thuban) derive from the 4D energy manifesting 3D shadows, independent on the temperature environment.
(Like a shadow cast onto a wall from a hot object is not itself as hot as the object casting the shadow).

A basic geometry is that of a corner in your room, joined by three perpendicular vectors, each of say unit length.
Now form a 3D tetrahedron in joining the three vectors to form an equilateral trianle.
The resulting Corner of your room is now 'sealed' by a socalled 'Right-Angled Tetrahedron'.
Note, this is NOT a 'Regular Tetrahedron' as one of the five Platonic Solids and where all four triangular faces are equilateral.

Summararily then, the UFOS around the Sun are from the Sun's Interior, but are 3D shadows of their 4D reality INTERDIMENSIONAL and encompassing the observed 3D (say by SOHO).

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:17 AM   #927
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by realitycorrodes View Post
abraxasinas

Thank you for your kind reply. I respect your effort , energy and attention.

Please accept my humility for I do not think I am worthy to talk to you.

You are as 'worthy' as anyone else. All souls have 'equal value' as shards of the World-Soul say.

Your reply to my questions was very generous. I was disappointed by the reply not because there was anything wrong with the answers you gave.

Personally I set myself up for an expectation of revealing new hitherto untold information.

I am sorry for not having been able to satify your thirst for unknown knowledge in regards to novelty drugs.

Your information was not new to me.

There is nothing new under the sun, as some saying goes.

In fact, in some areas I probably remain open to other possibilities, especially in regard to living without food. Mainly because I have met people who can do this!

I am skeptical in regards to biochemical reactors not being biochemical reactors.

In regard to techniques there are secrets about physical techniques that can access states of bliss. I am aware of some, but know people who claim to have others.

I wish you well to find your bliss any way you may find suitable on your path.

I was hoping you were going to reveal step by step some of these actual techniques that are still being kept secret by a hierarchy of gurus etc etc on whatever levels.

I am not a technician on anything really, I am more theoretical. I would be unable to design a simple lightbulb or knit a pullover.

Sitting meditating all day for years on end has proven itself to be a rather inefficient technique. Not many graduate with this technique - I know it works but very inefficiently - in terms of the number actually acheiving any results! Is'nt it about time some serious techniques were given out that work instantly.

I regard the 'secrets of the gurus and the hierarchies' to be similarly inefficient.
Your soul and inner guidance can give you any information withinj the context of your remembrances.

Wishing you energy to do what makes you happy!
I return your compliments to you.

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:25 AM   #928
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilsonericq7 View Post
I have been struggling with the concept of thought (stay with me...)

Questions arise as to the location of thought, which leads to questions of intent and purpose.

Mainstream thought (outside of my own head) holds co-creation as the goal...however the paradox of creating anything in a self-less manner seems tainted with ego.

Is thought imaginary at all? If not, what are we to make of dreams?

Dreams are like 4D reality.

If they are not imaginary, yet also not from our ego driven motives...what is the point?

Are we experiencing every thought...at the same time...seperately?

Thoughts are the 1st Order of manifestation. 2nd order are emotions. 3rd order are physicalities - subjectivity objectionalised. Thoughts are as REAL as objects andd subjects.


I have come to this: Attention on Intention...and find myself lost

I have read/heard/been told to:


1. Think with the Heart

2. Feel with the Mind

That's one of the 'secrets' - reflectivity between functionalities and utilities.


....and have come here for help....as at this time I am stuck with logic and reason.

Logic and Reason are a required foundation for progress of the soul.

Is there any hope for someone like me? I'm not sure (ego-mind) if my DNA is ready for ascension, but my heart yearns for it.

Only you can answer if there is hope for you in whatever context you are considering yourself to be in.


How can this be a true desire with out the ego?

There is nothing 'wrong' with desire. Prime Source DESIRES to share its energy with all things;those things recognising themselves as party of source. Then feedback occurs and progress and evolution ofr all systems eventuates.

Namaste
AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:40 AM   #929
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellie View Post
Okay, I am sorry but I cannot wade through 37 pages of a thread, so excuse me if this question has been posted before.

With all the esoteric information you obviously have at your disposal can you explain to me where it is stated ................."144,000 souls will be saved."

This is a stereotypical statement, often coloured by religious zealotry Ellie.
EVERYONE is the 144,000, but not many can conceptualise this and so search for something without, that is within.


Would this mean if 144,000 souls can be found on Gaia to be ready for ascension then that might mean Gaia's people will be saved from nuclear wars and taken out by Nibiru or does it mean that only the 144,000 souls will be saved.

As you stated, I have described this in detail a number of times here. Briefly, Nibiru IS Earth as a New StarPlanet. The 144,000 are a daycount as a Mayan baktun and it represents 12 starsigns/tribes of Jacob. So every human is a member of the nonpolitical-geographical ISRAEL. The question and differentiation and polarisation (between the 'sealed' and the 'unsealed') is one of being able to REMEMBER and UNDERSTAND the 'Story'.


If it is the latter to be the most right (only 144,000 souls will be saved) I find it wanting to say the least because with the billions of people on Gaia right now I know for a fact there are more than 144,000 good souls here who are more than enlightened IMHO.

Of course, you have misinterpreted the archetype. The 144,000 also become coupled to 200 million (aliens); all of whom again reside within you in the interdimensional sense.

Is this a question you can answer or not? I have read some prediction threads here and I really wouldn't like nuclear wars and starvation to befall the people, children and little babies of Gaia.

The answer to this is simple. The nuclear holocaust and mass annihilation has already been prevented; say from 1987 onwards, when the human groupmind experienced a 'quantum leap' in its potential group-consciousness (Harmonic Convergence, Berlin Wall Soviet Union. Tiannaman Square, Ayatollah Khomeini, South African apartheid etc. etc.).

Some 'natural' earth changes will occur and with the increasing planetary consciousness shared with the Gaian lifeforms; some people with access to warfare weapons might 'indeed go crazy' and start some devastating actions.
The main motto at this time is one word: SELF RESPONSIBILITY.
I advice you to NOT listen to the fear mongerings on any level; but to attempt to harmonize your emotions and at least to sometimes harbour a kind of 'peace of mind', that you are part of the creator of the universe and precious without comparison.



Thank you.
AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:42 AM   #930
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by carriblu View Post
seconded. i know a lot of people believe that those who are worthy (have a higher vibe) are the ones ascending.

under this view, is ascension some sort of a reward?
Dear carriblu!

The ascension is also a descension. What comes down also goes up.
Just throw a rock into the air and see what happens.

Otherwise my reply to Ellie, should answer your question too.

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:43 AM   #931
UncleJohn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Altos California
Posts: 112
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Hi Abrax,

Do most all ET's have an agreement or understanding that certain subjects will not be discussed humans?

Does this agreement or understanding need to be checked or enforced
by a particular ET group?

Is there much sharing of contract information among the various ET groups?

To what extent do the various ET groups share their art and literature with each other?

Thanks Uncle John
UncleJohn is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 06:47 AM   #932
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firstlook View Post
Hello Abraxas,

I hope things are well on your side of Earth.

I wonder if you could talk about any experience or knowledge you might have about the concept of blending our dream world 4D with our awake 3D experience by means of sleep deprivation. I know this is not a healthy endurance for our physical, but its always intrigued me as to why I cannot go longer periods without sleep (mentally speaking).

Thanks


peace

Dear firstlook!

Why do you sleep? You sleep because your soul finds the prolonged experience to be imprisoned in your 3D perceiving body intolerable for a lengthy period of linear time.

The dreamworld of 3D is programmed to become a refined experience of your waking consciousness in 4D.

So the 'need for sleep' will be greatly diminished and replaced by 'resting periods' in 4D, which you then can choose to 'materialise' as 3D sleeping.


joey
AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 07:09 AM   #933
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleJohn View Post
Hi Abrax,

Do most all ET's have an agreement or understanding that certain subjects will not be discussed humans?

Dear Uncle John!

You appear not to realise your power with the ETs.
There are many, as many as you can imagine, hierarchies or courts or whatever ETs within your field of consciousness.
Through your thoughts you project and IMAGE the collective human database about your personal exposes and preferences into the universe.
In the distant past, beginning so 20 million years ago an even earlier past dated at 2,200 million years ago became MOULDED on this planet in the lifeforms represented then in the planetary environment.

HigherD intelligences could begin to INTERACT with say the flora and fauna of the Miocene epoch.
Old World monkeys (with the separated thumb) especially became associated with particular hominid sentiences, based on an then not yet materialised genotype.

From this ancestral ET-hominid genotype the PHYSICAL evolution of the homo sapiens archetype proceeded and more and more ET associatons were formed between Gaian lifeforms and ET intelligences, the latter experiencing their full densified expression ONLY upon the planet earth.

Whatever ET liasons exist away from the Gaian environment; these alliances are NEVER independent from a common 'Gaian homeplanet' - in terms of the FULL physical selfexpression of the ETs.

The physicality of ALL ETs is COMPROMISED away from the planetary environment due to the lightspeed parameter inversion defining the Gaian quarantine to 2 million kilometers in radius from the earth center.
The ETs away from this 'Circle of Encompassment' are so NOT the same as they appear in the 3D space - they are 4D sentiences projecting their presence as 3D shadows into the Gaian environment.
The physicality of the universe (away from earth) is rather more PLASMIC than the solidity experienced on earth.




Does this agreement or understanding need to be checked or enforced
by a particular ET group?

No, the final 'authority' is the Logos of Creation (and Centered on Gaia); as this Logos encompasses the Universe as a Perimeter, acting like a spherical mirror.

Is there much sharing of contract information among the various ET groups?

Just ask the Pleiadeans within you to give you this data ...or the Andromedeans or the Alpha Draconians. They will answer you if your intent and integrity is true to your soul's understandings.

To what extent do the various ET groups share their art and literature with each other?

All of the artwork, music, paintings and so on found in the human database has ET components. Think of a Mandrill's artwork and compare it to a Rembrandt - there is your human-ET connection.


Thanks Uncle John
Your welcome!

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 07:21 AM   #934
ellie
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 183
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxasinas View Post
AA

You know, everything you said right there resonates with me, thank you for the time you took to answer me. I felt quite a peace reading your words.

Thank you again.

Ellie.

PS: I am praying for everyone, try to do it everyday.
ellie is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 08:02 AM   #935
orthodoxymoron
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lunar Base II
Posts: 3,093
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

This thread reminds me of one of my favorite Stargate SG-1 episodes. http://www.hulu.com/watch/68254/star...the-fifth-race

I have recently become particularly interested in the Archangels Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer. What type of beings are they? Are they in conflict with each other? If so...is the Human Race the central issue in this conflict? Is Michael really Jesus? Was Jesus the last Pharaoh? Is Mary a legitimate co-mediatrix with Jesus? Could Gabriel be identified with Zionism? Could Lucifer be identified with Teutonic Zionism? Could Michael be identified with the Andromedan perspective? Who is the God or Goddess of This World? Has corruption and sanity been a problem for this being? Are Satan and Lucifer two separate and distinct beings? Is there...or has there ever been...a God who was higher than Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer? If so...was this God destroyed in the War in Heaven? Is Satan one of these three? If so...which one? Did Lucifer instruct Charles Darwin? Would Human sovereignty in this Solar System be a good thing? Is a theocracy a good or a bad thing? Is Responsible Freedom fundamentally rebellious in nature? Can the Riemann Integral be applied to curved space? Is quantum physics valid...or would a modified classical physics provide a more secure foundation? What are the theological implications and ramifications of quantum physics? Why was Heisenberg uncertain? Can a particle really be influenced by observation?

Have you ever read 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen G. White? If so...what is your opinion? Have you heard of Dr. Desmond Ford? (An Adventist Theologian from Australia) What is the proper interpretation of, and relationship between, Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9:12? Should the Biblical Cannon have ended with the Acts of the Apostles? Is the so called Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan really a Human vs Reptilian conflict? Or is it really between two individual beings? What are the soteriological implications of the human nature of Jesus Christ? Is the substitutionary atonement...in the context of the Old Testamental sacrificial system...a theological milestone...or a historical necessity? Is theology at the center of disclosure? Is Christocentric Egyptological Science Fiction a valid theological foundation or expression in modernity? Would a Non-Penetential, Non-Sacrificial, Ecumenical Namaste Mass...based upon the Latin Mass be a valid focal point for a Minimalist, Humanistic Theocracy based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom? Is the All Seeing Eye at the Top of the Pyramid illuminated by the Dog Star Sirius? How important is Sirius? Is the God of This World the Prince of Sirius? Should the Protestant Reformation have been based upon the Teachings of Jesus? Are the Teachings of Jesus alone fundamental...and the rest of scripture merely contextual? Do Reptilian Beings hate Jesus Christ? If so...why? Is there a 'Heaven' in M-42 in Orion? What type of beings might be found in this portion of the heavens? Is there hope and redemption for all beings in the Universe? I want everyone to make it! Even the really evil beings...if this is possible. Some isolation and re-education might be necessary...and some might have to be eternally isolated. I don't know...but I do not wish harm or misery on any being...no matter who they are...what they look like...or what they have done. All of us may have some very filthy reincarnational baggage!

I could keep going for hours...but I'd better stop. You don't need to answer all or any of these questions. I just have lots and lots of questions. If I truly spoke my mind...I'd be in huge trouble. I think I'm in enough trouble already. Thank-you abraxasinas! I love that name! Do you work or live in Pine Gap? You don't have to answer that last question!

Namaste

Last edited by orthodoxymoron; 01-27-2010 at 02:29 PM.
orthodoxymoron is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 08:12 AM   #936
berathebrain
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 13
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Hi Abraxas.

I have always wondered how in the world does the Rodin coil achieves the effects it achieves. Like making a monopole magnet out of a steel bar when a pulsed direct current is running through the coil.
Also, there is this video with Rodin himself, Nassim Haramein and a guy named James (I think that is his name), where James shows how to make a speaker out of a Rodin coil and permanent magnet. What is producing the sound here?
Also, could this coil have something to do with free energy?

Have you heard of Steven Mark http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvLuQOKOVXQ and his motionless generator, where he somehow draws the energy from the vacuum or from all the electromagnetic frequencies that bombards the Earth all the time. Anyway, I was interested is that some kind of a hoax or it could really be done?

Thank you for your patience with this questions.
berathebrain is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 11:46 AM   #937
soapcrates
Avalon Senior Member
 
soapcrates's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 38
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Can I come to you and get help building a super new n improved magnet motor?
soapcrates is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 12:47 PM   #938
wilsonericq7
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 50
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxasinas View Post

1. Think with the Heart

2. Feel with the Mind

That's one of the 'secrets' - reflectivity between functionalities and utilities.AA
Good Morning,

I would like to learn/feel/love this 'secret' of refelctivity between functionalities and utilities. How do I start/continue to remember this?

This morning (Jan 27th) I turned 40 years old (at 5:23am EDT); I was wondering about the significance of cycles of 40 years in 3D...is there any?

What is the significance of the twin 'flame' (not soul) as undestood in 3D with regards to the Thuban council? Do I have a female 'reflection' trying to communicate with me of which I am unaware?

What is the significace of 9? 9 planets per solar system, etc.

What is the relevance and accuracy behind the story of Thiaoouba?

Thank you so much...for all of us...for everything.

Namaste
wilsonericq7 is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 02:19 PM   #939
truthseeker
Avalon Senior Member
 
truthseeker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Halifax, W. Yorks, England
Posts: 26
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Hi Abraxasinas,

Thanks for this fascinating thread. I can not claim to understand all the physics and mathematics that you have here presented, as I am no scientist myself, though I do sense some truth here in what you write and say. Whilst not a scientist myself, I have a great fascination with true science, as opposed to the scientism or pseudoscience that is so often presented as the real thing by many mainstream scientists (after all, they are only human too), those that fund them (the big corporations), those that repeat their claims to the wider world (the mainstream media) and those that pedal those same claims to support their own short-term agendas (the politicians).

I do not know whether the messages that you are transmitting from the Thuban Council are representative of the truth or not. However, I have the same lack of knowing with regard to other transmissions (e.g. the Wingmaker or Voyager materials) and channellings (e.g. the Ra, Seth or ‘Galactic Federation of Light’ materials) from alleged extraterrestrial, inter-dimensional, angelic or other sources. However, I do like it that you attempt to frame the Thuban transmissions within known science, whilst at the same time recognizing the limitations of the latter. Indeed, I find it quite refreshing to find someone here at Avalon presenting mainstream physics in a spiritual context; or, put another way, presenting deep spiritual truth within a framework of mainstream physics (both Newtonian and Quantum).

So here is my first set of questions, most of which of which relate to the science of astronomy: -

Question 1

Are you familiar with the Electrical Universe theory (see http://www.thunderbolts.info/home.htm plus this beautiful video, http://video.google.com.au/videoplay...90301316220374 from the same group)? This group suggest that black holes may not exist at all. They suggest that they are a creation of mainstream astronomers, along with dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars and much, much more. They argue that mainstream astronomers have invented a whole range of phenomena in an attempt to explain the many anomalies that exist, if a largely gravitational based universe is taken as fact. In contrast, the Electric Universe theorists propose electromagnetism, as opposed to gravitation, as the dominating force within our galaxy and universe. They suggest that these apparent anomalies can be explained electromagnetically, without reference to black holes, dark matter, etc. These theories also raise all sorts of other questions about the standard gravitational model of the universe, including well known theories such as the ‘Expanding Universe’ and the ‘Big Bang’. Even the very nature of our own Sun does not appear to fit the gravitational theory. The latter suggests that the Sun should be hotter at its core and cooler at its extremities. However, according to the Electric Universe theorists the opposite is true.

The physics and astronomy presented on this thread by your self and apparently supported by the Thuban Council seems largely to be mainstream in orientation and thus not supportive of the Electrical Universe theorists. Abraxas, what is your view (and that of the Thuban Council, if different) on the Electrical Universe theories?

Question 2

The maverick scientist, Paul LaViolette, also questions the existence of black holes at the centre of galaxies (see here, http://www.etheric.com/GalacticCenter/Gravity.html, for clarification on this). Within his own theories, he suggests that an enormous ‘Mother Star’, which is a very different proposition to a ‘Black Hole’, occupies the centre of our galaxy. He argues that something similar exists at the centre of all galaxies. According to LaViolette it is from our own central mother star (i.e. the Galactic Centre or GC) that cosmic ray particles are dispersed in major periodic galactic core outbursts, also referred to as ‘Superwaves’. These superwave events are believed to occur at relatively regular intervals that very roughly seem to correlate with the precessional cycle and its half-cycle, though their also appear to be smaller, and less catastrophic, interim core outbursts between the main events.

If such a precession-superwave correlation were precise it would suggest a major galactic core outburst every 26,000 or 13,000 years. On reading some of LaViolette’s work, I have not found a precise correlation between the two phenomena, only a very rough correlation. However, some writers seem to be trying to fit the two concepts together in a very precise and specific way. Thus they seem to suggest that, if the current precessional cycle is due to end on 21st December 2012, then it will be marked by the commencement of the next superwave outburst from our galactic core as it impacts us here on Earth. This would suggest that the last superwave occurred fairly precisely around either 13,000 or 26,000 years ago (i.e. 11,000 or 24,000 BCE). However, the truth of the matter appears to be that LaViolette’s theories (and yes, again they are theories, rather than facts) are not quite as simple or specific as that.

For clarity on all of LaViolette’s theories see his informative website (http://www.etheric.com/) or read some of his papers and books, many of which are available to be read or bought at his website?

So, Abraxas, what are your views on LaViolette’s mother star and superwave theories? Do they have any basis in truth according to the Thuban perspective?

Question 3

Many researchers imply or suggest that the Maya knew that there is in fact a black hole at the centre of our galaxy and that they referred to this as ‘Hunab Ku’. This, of course, may or may not be the case. However, even if there is not a black hole at the centre of our galaxy, as LaViolette and the Electric Universe theorists suggest, this does not necessarily make the Maya wrong. ‘Hunab Ku’ may simply refer to the very visible dark rift that descends into the central bulge of the Milky Way as it is seen in our night skies from here on Earth. The Maya see this dark rift, amongst other things, as the birth canal of the Milky Way. The lower end of this dark rift terminates just above the ecliptic which itself lies around 6° above the Galactic Centre, whether that be a black hole or a mother star.

Abraxas, do you and the Thuban Council, like John Major Jenkins (see http://alignment2012.com/ plus his books on the Mayan Long Count Calendar), maintain that the creators of the Long Count Calendar aimed the long count calendar to end when the dark rift and bulge of the Milky Way aligned with the December Solstice Sun?

Question 4

a) According to the Thuban perspective, who actually created the Long Count Calendar?

b) According to John Major Jenkins this 5125.325 year calendar was most probably created by the pre-classic Mayan peoples of Izapa in south-western Mexico somewhere between 400 and 36 BCE. Do you concur with this view or are the origins of the long-count calendar much older (e.g. Olmec or even Atlantean)?

c) Is the current 5125.325 year long count precisely one fifth of a precessional cycle (5,125.325 x 5 = 25,625.625 years) and thus the fifth and final age of the current precessional cycle?

d) Some Maya groups suggest that we are coming to the end of the 4th Age rather than the 5th. If this is the case does this invalidate the above proposed Mayan Long Count/Precessional Cycle correlation?

Question 5

What is the actual duration of a single precessional cycle? The period of time generally quoted for one Precessional Cycle falls somewhere between 25,000 and 26,000 years. The classic figure is 25,920 years (2,160 x 12), though more recently various authorities have suggested somewhere between 25,600and 25,800 years as the correct figure. My own researches suggest that all these figures are probably inaccurate, largely because they all assume a fixed rate of precession.

Estimations regarding the actual length of a single precessional cycle have largely been based on observations of the motion of stars and other astronomical bodies relative to the equinox and solstice points that are fixed to the seasons of the year, as we experience them here on Earth. In the current era (c. 2000) this rate is deemed to be about 50.29 arc seconds/year. This suggests a fixed precessional cycle of 25,770 years. Such an estimation on the actual length of the precessional cycle is based on that rate being an unchanging constant. However, in 1900 CE the rate was calculated at around 50.25 arc seconds/year. This latter figure suggests a precessional cycle that is twenty years longer than the current estimate (i.e. 25,790 years). Both of these rates appear to be correct for the eras concerned. Assuming this is so, the only conclusion one can draw from these figures is that the precessional rate is not constant at all. In fact, the precessional rate is clearly increasing at the present time. This does seem to explain, to some degree, the varying estimates on the length of the precessional cycle that I have come across over the years. My further researches have suggested to me that the precessional rate itself is also not a constant, and that it increases and decreases over much longer periods of time.

Abraxas, do you and the Thuban Council concur with my own findings here, which basically tell us that the precessional rate is both variable and not constant over larger periods of time?

Question 6

My own researches suggest two possible explanations for the variability in the precessional rate. These two explanations also suggest two very different theories of the actual mechanics behind precession. The first of these is the well known wobble explanation, also known as Lunisolar theory. This theory postulates that the precessional cycle exists as a result of a slow wobble in the Earth’s axis over long periods of time, which is believed to be caused by the gravitational effects upon the Earth from the Sun and, particularly, the Moon.

The explanation for precessional rate variability that seems to best fit the lunisolar theory can be found amongst the theories of Serbian astrophysicist, Milutin Milankovitch (1879-1958). He maintained that the Earth’s orbital cycle has modulations that lead to considerable fluctuations in its climate. Following the lunisolar theory, it would appear that at least one, possibly more, of these modulations, could effect the rate of precession, resulting in the increasing and decreasing motion suggested above. The three cycles, proposed by Milankovitch, that are deemed responsible for the modulations in the Earth’s orbital cycle are the Eccentricity Cycle (actually two generalized cycles of 100,000 and 400,000 years respectively), the Obliquity Cycle (approximately 41,000 years duration) and the Perihelion Cycle (a variable cycle of between 18,900 and 23,700 years in duration but averaging around 21,300 years).These three cycles, appear to have a more direct bearing on the Earth's climatic cycles than does the standard precessional cycle. The last statement assumes that both the Milankovitch cycles and the lunisolar theory of precession are correct, which, as we will see shortly, now appears to be open to question?

Of the three Milankovitch cycles – eccentricity, obliquity and perihelion – it appears to be the obliquity cycle that is the strongest candidate for creating the variable rate in the precessional cycle, according to lunisolar theory. This involves the changing tilt of the Earth’s equatorial plane relative to the ecliptic plane over a period of approximately 41,000 years. The tilt is presently at an angle of 23.45° (23°27’) and oscillates between extremes of 22.1° (22°06’) and 24.5° (24°30’). The angle is currently decreasing. The greater the angle between ecliptic and global axis the greater the seasonal differences between summer and winter on the one hand and the climatic differences of the northern and southern hemisphere on the other. According to this theory it would appear to be the case that, as the angle of obliquity decreases over an approximate 20,500 year period, the rate of precession increases; then as the angle of obliquity increases over the remaining 20,500 years of its cycle, the precessional rate decreases. Whether the eccentricity and perihelion cycles might also effect the precessional rate is not clear. However, it seems likely that both cycles might have some bearing on precession, if the lunisolar theory is accepted as the correct explanation.

Abraxas, it is this explanation of the precessional cycle and its variability that seems to most closely concur with that of your own and the Thuban Council. Do you concur with this statement?

Question 7

The second alternative theory for both the mechanics behind the precessional cycle and its variability in rate is known as the Binary theory of precession. It has been most eloquently proposed by Walter Cruttenden (see http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/.). He maintains that the so-called Lunisolar wobble of the Earth does not exist. He argues that precession is caused by the curved motion through space of our Sun, with its solar system, around a second star that is its binary companion. This Binary theory of precession suggests a completely different explanation for the decreasing-increasing rate of precession, to that described above for the Lunisolar theory.

However, before I attempt to describe that explanation for the variable precessional rate, I firstly need to summarize the basics of Cruttenden’s binary theory as a whole. Firstly, Cruttenden proposes a significantly shorter precessional cycle of about 24,000 years, as opposed to the usual 25,000 to 26,000 years described by proponents of the lunisolar theory. He bases this shorter period for precession on the writings of one Swami Sri Yukteswar. In 1894, Sri Yukteswar, one of the great Indian sages of that time, wrote his book, “The Holy Science”. Cruttenden argues, based on Yukteswar, that the precessional cycle is precisely the same cycle as that described by the Vedic civilization in India, as the Yuga Cycle. According to both Yukteswar and Cruttenden, the Yuga cycle comprises a 12,000 year Descending Phase, followed by a 12,000 year Ascending Phase. This results in a 24,000 year cycle in all, which both Yukteswar and Cruttenden correlate with the precessional cycle. Each phase is divided further into four Yugas each. In the descending phase these commence with a Satya Yuga (Golden Age) of 4,800 years, followed by a Treta Yuga (Silver Age) of 3,600 years, a Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) of 2,400 years and finally a Kali Yuga (Iron Age) of 1,200 years. The ascending phase then immediately follows with each Yuga repeated, but in reverse order, commencing with a 1,200 year Kali Yuga and ending with a 4,800 year Satya Yuga.

John Major Jenkins suggests a similar correlation between the yuga and precessional cycles. However, he appears to be unaware of the binary theory of precession. For this reason he attempts to explain the Yuga cycle in classic lunisolar theory terms (including the presumed 25,600 – 25,800 years which assume a constant and fixed motion for precession). However, Cruttenden and Jenkins also differ on a more important detail. This relates to the actual timing of the Yuga cycle. Jenkins suggests a chronology for the cycle with the low point between the descending Kali Yuga and the ascending Kali Yuga of the cycle based on the Mayan end date of 21st December 2012 CE. For Yukteswar and Cruttenden that low point occurred over 1,500 years earlier, in or around 499 CE. This difference is important as it raises the very significant issue of where we are now within the Yuga-Precessional cycle?

Sri Yukteswar maintained that the precession of the equinoxes and solstices is based on a forgotten cosmic motion of our Sun around another star. He provides an explanation for the misunderstanding of the length of the Yuga cycle in Divine Years as opposed to Solar Years. Here is a quote from his work: -

“The mistake crept into almanacs for the first time around 700 BC, during the reign of Raja Parik****, just after the completion of the last Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age). At that time, Maharaja Yudhisthira, noticing the appearance of the dark Kali Yuga (Iron Age), made over his throne to his grandson, the said Raja Parik****. Maharaja Yudhisthira, together with all the wise men of his court, retired to the Himalayan Mountains, the paradise of the world. Thus, there was none in the court of Raja Parik**** who could understand the principle of correctly calculating the ages of the several Yugas. Hence, after the completion of the 2,400 years of the then current [descending] Dwapara Yuga, no one dared make the introduction of the Kali Yuga more manifest by beginning to calculate it from its first year and to put an end to the number of Dwapara years.”

So here we see Sri Yukteswar offering his understanding of the origins of why measurement, definition and timing of the Yuga cycle has come down to us in such a confused manner in the present era. Yukteswar argued that the 24,000 divine years, each of 360 solar years each, as advocated by most current day Vedic scholars is an inaccurate interpretation of the ancient scriptures. This classic traditionalist version of the Yuga cycle suggests a very lengthy cycle of four descending ages; a 1,728,000 year Satya Yuga; a 1,296,000 year Treta Yuga; a 864,000 Dwapara Yuga; and a 432,000 Kali Yuga. Thus, the whole descending phase covers a period of 4.32 million years. According to this traditional dating of the Yuga cycle, the current Kali yuga commenced in 3102 BCE.

So, if Sri Yukteswar is correct and the lengthy classic traditionalist interpretation of the yuga cycle is in error, what is the basis for the decreasing-increasing rate of his proposed 24,000 year yuga-precessional cycle as defined by the proposed binary theory? Basically, the answer to this relates to the distance between our Sun and its proposed binary companion, which according to the binary theory changes over the 24,000 year cycle. This is basically due to both stars having elliptical, rather than circular, orbits around each of their separate centre points. According to the theory, our Sun is furthest from its binary companion at the low point between the descending and ascending Kali Yugas. It is also at that point in time when the precessional rate is at its slowest. At the high point between the ascending and descending Satya Yugas, the precessional rate will be at its fastest. At that point our binary companion will be at its closest proximity to our Sun and solar system.

Yukteswar, Cruttenden and Jenkins all propose that civilization is at its highest between the two Satya Yugas and at its lowest between the two Kali Yugas. However, as mentioned above, Jenkins believes we are at that low point right now, whereas Yukteswar and Cruttenden propose that the low point was in or around 499 CE. If this is so, then since about 1699 CE we have been in the ascending Dwapara (Bronze Age) phase of the Yuga cycle.

So, Abraxas, I would be really interested to hear your view on this alternative Binary theory of precession as presented by Sri Yukteswar and Walter Cruttenden, as it seems to contradict both your own view and that of the Thuban Council that you represent?

Question 8

a) John Major Jenkins has, to my mind, persuasively argued the idea that the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Sun and the Galactic Equator was the basic reason why the astronomically aware long count calendar creators (Maya or otherwise?) proposed that the end of their calendar would occur in the present era.

Do you concur with this?

b) Many have criticized Jenkins theory, stating that the alignment was actually closest at the December Solstice 1998, which is certainly true. However, Jenkins counters this, rightly in my view, with the fact that the December Solstice Sun in fact eclipses the galactic equator for a much longer period of time. He suggests a period of 36 years, from 1980 – 2016, on the basis that the Sun is 30’ of arc longitude in diameter. In fact, according to my Starry Night programme, the December Solstice Sun will eclipse the Galactic Equator for 43 years, from 1976 – 2019, as the actual diameter of the Sun at that time of the year, in the current era, is 33’ of arc longitude wide. The 2012 cycle ending date is well within this range and thus seems to support Jenkins’ arguments.

Do you and the Thuban Council concur with this view?

c) However, the question still remains as to why the long count creators specifically chose the 2012 December Solstice, as opposed any of the other 43 December Solstices’ between 1976 and 2019?

Do you have an explanation as to why 2012 in particular is so special?

d) From the Thuban perspective, is their anything that stands out for the more astronomically precise 1998 December Solstice alignment?

Was that year significant or is it the entire period from 1976 – 2019 that is of greatest importance here?

Question 9

Many alternative researchers and writers have, through some very sloppy research in my opinion, confused the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Sun and the Galactic Equator, as we view it from our location on Earth and as described above, with the very different phenomenon of our solar system periodically crossing the plane of our galaxy.

This latter phenomenon is believed to occur several times during our solar systems 225 – 250 Million year orbit of the Galactic Centre. Many alternative researchers claim that our solar system is now in the process of crossing the plane of our galaxy. Astralwalker, on his Nexus thread has stated this (see his second entry on the Nexus thread). Kerry Cassidy, and many others at Avalon, continually refer to this alleged phenomenon occurring in 2012, at the end of the Mayan Calendar. Here is the truth of the situation as far as I can currently understand it.

From what I can gather, no scientist can definitively say exactly where our solar system is in relation to the galactic plane. As far as mainstream astronomy is concerned, I have so far come across the following. Back in the mid-1980’s, as far as I can gather, certain astronomers were proposing the following theory. They suggest that our solar system is not currently crossing the galactic plane. The general thrust of this perspective seems to indicate that our solar system oscillates above and below the galactic plane in whole cycles of between 54 and 80 million years. The favourite seems to be a 66 million year cycle, with 33 million years below and 33 million years above the galactic plane. The indication from that research is that we are now above the plane and have been ascending away from it for about the last 3 million years.

However, in contradiction to the above, here are nine estimates (courtesy of one Zyzygyz), from various sources, of our distance above the galactic plane that I found on Geoff Stray’s website (see http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/idiot.html - see bottom of page). 1 parsec (pc) is equal to 3.26 light years (ly). The range is 14 ly (approx 4 pc) - 112.67 ly (approx 34.5 pc), with a median value of about 63 ly (approx 19.5 pc). The top of the wave has been estimated at 85 ly or 26 pc or (http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0507/0507655.pdf ). From this data, it would appear that are solar system is at or near the top of the sinusoidal wave. These figures seem to suggest that it is much longer than the 3 million years ago, mentioned earlier, that our solar system actually crossed the galactic plane.

Frankly, I do not know how to translate the number of parsecs or light years above the galactic plane into the number of years in time that have transpired since our solar system last crossed over? I guess there are various parameters to take into account, including the actual length of our solar systems transit around the galactic centre (estimates vary from 200 to 250 million years). Additionally one would need to know precisely how far above and below the galactic plane our solar system rises and falls in its oscillating journey around the GC. As the extremely variable figures for all of these parameters suggest in the explorations I have so far found above, then it is currently virtually impossible to state anything precise about the location of our solar system in relation to the galactic plane.

It appears then, that claims that our solar system is crossing the galactic plane now or on the 21st December 2012 are not as well founded as many here on this forum and elsewhere seem to believe.

It is fair to ask whether any of the scientific information and theory presented above is accurate or true? And yes, we are here definitely dealing with theory rather than fact. So the scientists and researchers might simply be wrong. They have been wrong before and they will undoubtedly be wrong again in the future. They can not even agree amongst themselves! However, we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Even if they are incorrect, the vastness of our galaxy and the very slow progress of our Solar System oscillation above and below the galactic plane, as suggested by all these theories and measurements, would make it virtually impossible to identify an exact date for it crossing the galactic plane. It would certainly seem unlikely that a specific day (such as 21st December 2012), year, decade, century or even millennium could be determined for the Solar Systems entrance into and exit out of the galactic plane? Indeed, how thick is the galactic plane and how long would it take our Solar System to pass through it? Would it take hundreds, thousands or even millions of years? Determining where our solar system is in relation to the imaginary line of the galactic equator is equally problematic. We simply do not have a precise enough knowledge on the size of our galaxy; how far we are from its centre; how long a single orbit around the centre takes; or how frequent our oscillation above and below the galactic equator is?

So, Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on the location of our solar system in relation to the galactic plane? I would imagine that the Thuban Council have accurate measurements for our galaxy and could tell us exactly where we are in relation to the galactic plane and the galactic centre. So, when did our solar system last cross the galactic plane? When will it next cross it? How long dose it actually take for the solar system to cross the galactic plane? How thick is it? What are the true dimensions of our galaxy in terms of width, depth, the true period of orbit of our solar system around galactic centre and our distance from same?



Question 10

It has been suggested by many new age and alternative researchers and also from various channeled and transmitted (including Ashayana Deane in her Voyagers 2 book) sources that our solar system is in a 26,000 year (generally believed to reflect the precessional cycle of the same length) orbit around Alcyone, the central star in the Pleiades Cluster. The latter is located in the shoulder area of the constellation of Taurus. Often associated with these sources is the suggestion that we are about to enter a 2000 year period of time within this cycle that takes us into an area of galactic space known as the Photon Band.

This reference, http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Disinformation.html, to LaViolette’s work is very interesting, as it deals with the confusion between LaViolette’s galactic superwave theory (mentioned earlier) and the new age concept of the photon belt, together with the idea that our solar system is orbiting Alcyone. For the record and hopefully to clear up further confusion, this short article from LaViolette is well worth a read. The article basically shows the photon band theory for what it is, which is a rather ludicrous piece of misinformation and/or disinformation, first published in the 1980’s. The Pleiades connection to the Mayan Calendar is both true and interesting. However, the photon band theory that suggests that our solar system is orbiting Alcyone is quite simply nonsensical. Whether one accepts LaViolette’s superwave theory or not (I remain open minded on that one), the above article clearly demonstrates to me that the Photon Band and Alcyone orbit theory is not based on any kind of rational observational astronomy.

So, Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on both the Photon Band concept and our solar system’s alleged 26,000 year orbit of Alcyone?

Question 11

What is your view on the idea presented by some alternative researchers that our solar system is originally from the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy and is not indigenous to the Milky Way Galaxy?

This perspective on our place in the galaxy, at first appears rather complicated. However, the complication seems to have been created by certain writers either misunderstanding or purposefully distorting the original article by Steven Majewski, a Professor of Astronomy at the University of Virginia. Basically, the original article proposes the presence of two galaxies, the Milky Way Galaxy (MWG) and the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy (SDG) crossing each other at a sharp angle of nearly 90°. The basic proposition is that the more massive of these two galaxies, our very own MWG, is slowly devouring (over billions of years) a less massive galaxy, the SDG. The following source (http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_030924.html), by Robert Roy Britt (2003) suggests that our solar system, within the MWG, is now passing close to (though not necessarily through) the cross-flow between the MWG and the SDG. There is no suggestion, in the original article or the report referred to above, that our Solar System ever originated anywhere other than within the MWG.

However, two non-scientific sources appear to have either misunderstood or distorted this information. These are at http://curezone.com/blogs/fm.asp?i=985423 and http://www.viewzone.com/milkyway.html respectively. Cliff High, among others, has also presented this view in a recent conversation with Michael St. Clair, which frankly leads me to question both High's and St. Clair's credibility as objective researchers. All of these sources claim that our solar system does not originate within the MWG at all. In fact, they seem to state rather categorically, that our home galaxy is the SDG. They suggest that our Solar System is now being drawn into the flow of the plane of the MWG, rather than continuing onward in its flow with SDG. The distorted versions of the theory also seem to be suggesting that the movement of our Solar System into the galactic plane of the Milky Way is the primary cause of the climate change that we are now experiencing on our planet and also elsewhere in our solar system.

I do believe man’s greedy, wasteful and consumerist activities are contributing to the problems we are seeing today and making the survival of this planets biodiversity (including ourselves) much less likely than would be the case had we taken better care of our planet. However, I do concur that this may not be the primary factor in climate change. However, there are other far less radical explanations for solar system climate change that do not require the distorted two galaxy explanation proposed here. For example, it is possible that we are simply entering a slightly more lively and energetic part of the MWG? Or, maybe our Sun is simply undergoing changes that are effecting the rest of the solar system? Or, maybe the two galaxy scenario is in part correct, but that rather than being swept out of the SDG flow and into the MWG stream, we are simply beginning to enter the cross-flow between our own (i.e. that of the MWG) galactic plane and that of the SDG?

Here is what appears to be a fairly accurate rebuttal of the more distorted sources of the MWG devouring the SDG (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...nother-galaxy/).

Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on this Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy origins view for our solar system?

Final Comment

That is it for now on the question front, though I do have a load of other questions, many of them ET related, that I may ask you in a future post. However, before I go I would just like to express the following thoughts and observations that this thread has initiated within me.

It seems to be difficult for many here at Avalon, and elsewhere within the alternative and conspiratorial communities, to grasp that science and spirit are one, and do not need to be continuously at odds with each other. However, it is just such a polarity between fixed beliefs and opinions that has become so evident within this and so many other threads here at Avalon. There are many diverse opinions and beliefs held here by the contributors to this forum, just as there are out their in the real world. We seem to have a need to find certainty within the scientific, philosophical, political, religious and spiritual frameworks that we come to adopt during the varying phases of our individual life-cycles. This is both natural and human. However, it becomes extremely hard for us to even begin to let go of a given perspective on truth and reality that has seemingly proven itself to us. We thus hang on to the old perspective and resist any new approaches for far longer than we need to.

Abraxas, you have clearly unsettled quite a few contributors here with your presentation from the Thuban Council combined with your own scientific understandings. Hence the defensiveness and hostility you have received here from many at Avalon. We all feel very uncomfortable when yet another perspective arrives to challenge the one we are currently adopting. We often then become defensive of our own presently adopted set of opinions and beliefs and hostile toward the new perspective being presented to us.

Personally, I take your message (and anybody else’s) at face value and have no reason to doubt that you truly believe this information is coming directly from the Thuban Council. Who am I to judge? I merely weigh what you say up against other things that I have learned, and think I know, and then try to use my discernment and discretion. Of course, I rarely, if ever, have a final answer!

I certainly do not feel that you are either a fraud or a disinformation agent, as some seem to believe. I sense that you are presenting your own wisdom as experienced and received. It is, of course, possible that some of this information has been distorted by either your own personality or by the Thuban Council itself. Indeed, the latter could have its own agenda, unbeknownst to you or anyone else. This is clearly what many here at Avalon seem to suspect. However, the same can be said for any other transmitted or channeled source, including that of Ashayana Deanne, which many here seem to hold in, what I believe to be, an unreasonably high regard. I fail to understand why folk are so willing to accept her work as pure and untainted and yet believe your own transmissions are so tainted. I guess it is all a matter of belief and opinion in the end? That is until such time as any one particular approach can be clearly shown to be true or false.

Others here might think you are simply deluded. However, such could equally be said of most of the personalities presented both at Camelot and Avalon. Whilst that might be the case with a few of the whistle blowers and witnesses interviewed by Kerry and Bill, in my humble opinion, I do not feel this is the case with either yourself or many others.

Anyway, I look forward to hearing your responses to my rather long-winded questions.

Best Wishes

Truthseeker (Andrew)
truthseeker is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 02:37 PM   #940
Firstlook
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 161
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

To the above post: Awesome.
Firstlook is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 02:59 PM   #941
hippihillbobbi
Avalon Senior Member
 
hippihillbobbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 120
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Abraxas --

Thanks for your answers to my last questions ..... and for all your Other Answers to us all as well!

New questions:

1) What do you mean exactly by the following, "Humanity is the focus point of the entire universal evolvement, not just galactic, not just supergalactic, but universal." ? Does this have anything to do with "the whole only being as strong as its weakest part?" Or the fact that this earth/consciousness-shift has been planned for so long by the Logos?

2) Since the concept of time is "illusionary," does this imply that polarity (good-bad, etc) exists throughout eternity?

3) Will every soul eventually be reunited with its source .... and if so, what do people mean when they say things like, "they will return to their source as space dust", seeming to imply an inferior state to other ways-of-being "joined to the Creator"?

4) Is John, the "beloved disciple," truly the author of Revelations?

Many thanks, AA!

hippihill
hippihillbobbi is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 04:46 PM   #942
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by orthodoxymoron View Post
This thread reminds me of one of my favorite Stargate SG-1 episodes. http://www.hulu.com/watch/68254/star...the-fifth-race

I have recently become particularly interested in the Archangels Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer. What type of beings are they?
4 principalities;linked to the elements as polarity emanations of 2nd Order.
Fire=Michael complementary with Gabriel=Air
Earth=Uriel complementary with Water=Raphael
Lucifer=1st order archetype responsible for allowing gravity to be born in the Big Bang Template to reharmonise the massless electromagnetic template
Are they in conflict with each other?
No!

If so...is the Human Race the central issue in this conflict?
Yes, the human race is the central issue, but not in conflict byt reharmonisations.

Is Michael really Jesus?
The Fire-aspect of Jesus is Michael, call it the Logos of the Fire.
Was Jesus the last Pharaoh?
There is no last pharaoh. Jesus encompasses all prophets, all pharaohs and all things period.

Is Mary a legitimate co-mediatrix with Jesus?
Another one of those labels. Mary as the universal womb gives birth to Jesus who then takes 'Her place, so SHE can reunite with her vcreator as the creation. This the focus point of humanity/Gaia, as Gaia is a hologram for the entire universe.

Could Gabriel be identified with Zionism?
Zion is a 'holy place' namely your own body. The political and ET agendas do not carry in the Thuban books.
Could Lucifer be identified with Teutonic Zionism?
Of course ands of course not. You like your labels of classifications don't you.

Could Michael be identified with the Andromedan perspective?
Of course and of course not. Andromeda is in a class with Perseus aka Milky Way.

Who is the God or Goddess of This World?
The Father and Mother, cosmically not biologically speaking of Jesus.

Has corruption and sanity been a problem for this being?
Nope.

Are Satan and Lucifer two separate and distinct beings?
Yes, Satan is the true manifestation of a fake image, called the Devil. Satan is the 'court prosecutor' of 'humanity' and Lucifer is the template for this collective humanity being prosecuted by Satan
Satan is the 'Kali' of Shakti as two sides of the one coin called God.
Satan is God and you are Lucifer in individuality. You can either 'play' a Christ White Lucifer look LUCIFER=74=JESUS=MESSIAH=CROSS=...or you can play a Dark Lucifer as an abssorber of the 'brought' light.

Is there...or has there ever been...a God who was higher than Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer?
Yes, this is the 1st Order of Abraxas aka Abrasax as the polarity unexpressed BUT contained within, like the Dark+White Lucifers as One or as Satan+God as One.

If so...was this God destroyed in the War in Heaven?
No, this 1st Order is omniness and above such polarity issues as a war in heaven on earth or otherplace.
.

Is Satan one of these three?
Satan is 1st Order, the archangels are 2nd order.

If so...which one? Did Lucifer instruct Charles Darwin?
Ask Charles Darwin.

Would Human sovereignty in this Solar System be a good thing?
Not yet, later perhaps.
Is a theocracy a good or a bad thing?
Your polarity issue.

Is Responsible Freedom fundamentally rebellious in nature?
No
Can the Riemann Integral be applied to curved space?
Yes.
Is quantum physics valid...
yes
or would a modified classical physics provide a more secure foundation?
more or less the same thing
What are the theological implications and ramifications of quantum physics?
There are many book you can read.
Why was Heisenberg uncertain?
He wasn't.
Can a particle really be influenced by observation?
Yes by quantum entanglement of observer with the particle.

Have you ever read 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen G. White? If so...what is your opinion?
As is common happenstance Ellen tuned into a correct archetype about the nature of God and attempted to describe this via her intuitions and visions. Her 'Great Controversy' so used biblical study and the SDA ideas to promulgate the 'correct' central focus on the Logos of Jesus.
Unless you really become familiar with the 1st order archetypes, the religious overtones will outmanouver the deeper meaning of the Logos.
This has occurred in all analyses, histotical skeptical, religious dogma based etc. etc.

Have you heard of Dr. Desmond Ford? (An Adventist Theologian from Australia) What is the proper interpretation of, and relationship between, Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9:12?
The 2300 days are added to the 370 days of the Genesis prophecy (count Noah's days in the flood archetype) for a total of 1670 days.
Half that and you have the 1335 days in Daniel.12.12 as the timeline of the Logos in mirror function.
The connection to Hebrews.9.12 is spurious; as the 'blood of Christ' means not the 'blood of the sacrifices', but the 'life force' in the triplicities. both 'agreeing as One'; say the spirit, the water and the blood as the witness on earth and the father, the word and the holy ghost (1John.4.6-9).sons

Should the Biblical Cannon have ended with the Acts of the Apostles?
No.
Is the so called Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan really a Human vs Reptilian conflict?
No
Or is it really between two individual beings?
No, its between the One being in controversy with itself.
What are the soteriological implications of the human nature of Jesus Christ?
The Logos incarnated as a unique oneness so this oneness could become a manyness at the fulfilment of the timeline as programmed by the logos.

Is the substitutionary atonement...in the context of the Old Testamental sacrificial system...a theological milestone...or a historical necessity?
It past its use by date. The lambs are Aries, the goats are Capricorns and the calves are Taurians as starsigns. The 'blood sacrifice' of the physical animal has become replaced by the ordering of 'birthrights' of the 12 signs/apostles/sons of Jacob etc - all of whom are within you - if you can handle THAT Story.

Is theology at the center of disclosure?
Yes.
Is Christocentric Egyptological Science Fiction a valid theological foundation or expression in modernity?
Another label attempting to describe the ubiquity of the logos.

Would a Non-Penetential, Non-Sacrificial, Ecumenical Namaste Mass...based upon the Latin Mass be a valid focal point for a Minimalist, Humanistic Theocracy based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom?
This kind of 'mass' does not concern the Thuban Council.

Is the All Seeing Eye at the Top of the Pyramid illuminated by the Dog Star Sirius?
One of many labels for the solar eye of Horus and the lunar eye of Thoth.

How important is Sirius?
First Contact Star.
Is the God of This World the Prince of Sirius?
Yes amongst all other 'princes'.

Should the Protestant Reformation have been based upon the Teachings of Jesus?
They were.

Are the Teachings of Jesus alone fundamental...and the rest of scripture merely contextual?
Yes, absolutely.

Do Reptilian Beings hate Jesus Christ?
No, they are like humans, some understand others do not.

If so...why? Is there a 'Heaven' in M-42 in Orion?
Heaven does not exist anyplace but your own mind.

What type of beings might be found in this portion of the heavens?
Whatever you can imagine and image.

Is there hope and redemption for all beings in the Universe?
All are already redeemed, without exception.

I want everyone to make it! Even the really evil beings...if this is possible. Some isolation and re-education might be necessary...and some might have to be eternally isolated. I don't know...but I do not wish harm or misery on any being...no matter who they are...what they look like...or what they have done. All of us may have some very filthy reincarnational baggage!

WE are all Individuations of the ONE, defined and programmed by the Logos as the Sentience of the ONE Energy Source.


I could keep going for hours...but I'd better stop.
Thanks for that.

You don't need to answer all or any of these questions. I just have lots and lots of questions. If I truly spoke my mind...I'd be in huge trouble. I think I'm in enough trouble already. Thank-you abraxasinas! I love that name! Do you work or live in Pine Gap?
No, but the Council knows what goes on there, being the spying center for the Southern Hemisphere and such. They can only go so far. The Logos got them covered.

You don't have to answer that last question!

Namaste
I just did.

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 05:04 PM   #943
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by berathebrain View Post
Hi Abraxas.

I have always wondered how in the world does the Rodin coil achieves the effects it achieves. Like making a monopole magnet out of a steel bar when a pulsed direct current is running through the coil.
Also, there is this video with Rodin himself, Nassim Haramein and a guy named James (I think that is his name), where James shows how to make a speaker out of a Rodin coil and permanent magnet. What is producing the sound here?
Also, could this coil have something to do with free energy?

Have you heard of Steven Mark http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvLuQOKOVXQ and his motionless generator, where he somehow draws the energy from the vacuum or from all the electromagnetic frequencies that bombards the Earth all the time. Anyway, I was interested is that some kind of a hoax or it could really be done?

Thank you for your patience with this questions.
Dear berathebrain!

I am not qualified to discuss experimental apparatus and so I am unable to state if this is a hoax or not.

I am familiar with the prerequisites for such devices to 'tap' the ZPE and so to 'work' as ZPE devices.

The powersource of the ZPE is a natural superconductive field inherent in space itself.
Here the current i=dq/dt of second order differential equation (say a RCL-Kirchhoff circuit) reduces to 1st order in replacing the electronflow q=Ne by a frequencyflow 2eNf=q. So the electron chargequantum 'e' becomes a constant coefficient in the equations reducing into linear applications.

Even more fundamental is the transformation of mass into a form of static monopolic electricity.
Here is a link: http://www.wbabin.net/science/bermanseder7.pdf and
http://www.wbabin.net/science/bermanseder9.pdf (Haramein-Rauscher critique).

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 05:13 PM   #944
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by soapcrates View Post
Can I come to you and get help building a super new n improved magnet motor?
Nope; as I wouldn't even able to build a simple lightbulb.
Sorry soapcrates, but you need to look elesewhere for your magnetic motor.

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 05:41 PM   #945
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilsonericq7 View Post
Good Morning,

I would like to learn/feel/love this 'secret' of refelctivity between functionalities and utilities. How do I start/continue to remember this?

'Let's Get PHYSICAL', wilson eric as Olivia Newton-John sings in 1981.

This morning (Jan 27th) I turned 40 years old (at 5:23am EDT); I was wondering about the significance of cycles of 40 years in 3D...is there any?

Happy birthday.

In 1997/1998 you experienced your first 'change of life' opportunity in adapting to your life hitherto dominated by a strong sense of family, which gave you physical security.
You then 'lost' physical connectivity to yourself in your 'growing up' and concentarted in body talk, the language of your selfexpression say as a dancer or artist to substitute your sense of 'physical aloofness'.

In 2006/2007 you found a spiritual connecteness supplementing your activities and you became a highly adept expressionist using the human bodyform in as stated uncommon and more artistic expression.
2008 you became even more family oriented and in 2009 you really began to 'think' and mediate on your new sense of Identity.
This birthday 2010 will allow you to finally manifest a Grounding Physicality, which you yet have to discover and implement within yourself.

Metaphorically, you know how to dance in selfexpression, before you know how to 'just walk'.
Your soul knows what I mean.


What is the significance of the twin 'flame' (not soul) as undestood in 3D with regards to the Thuban council? Do I have a female 'reflection' trying to communicate with me of which I am unaware?


As posted many times before; what you consider to be YOU is actually four souls in a soul complex; 2 male and 2 female. {YX1+YX2+X0X1+X0X2}. You are your very own 'Cosmic Twinship' - doubled.

What is the significace of 9? 9 planets per solar system, etc.

The Decad: {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9} repaeats in rootreductions:
10=1+0=1*; 11=1+1=2*;...;18=1+8=9*; 19=1+9=10*=1**; etc. etc. etc.


1=Red................Principle/Antiprinciple=Identity/AntiIdentity(7)
2=Orange............P/AP=Expansion/Contraction(8)
3=Yellow.............P/AP=Order/Entropy;Chaos(9)
4=Lime................P/AP=Symmetry/Distortion(10)
5=Green..............P/AP=Eternity;Divergence/Limit;Convergence(11)
6=Aquamarine......P/AP=Inversion;Reciprocity/Constancy(12)
7=Cyanazure.......P/AP=Reflection/Absorption(1)
8=Turquoise........P/No AP=Relativity(2 in 1)
9=Blue................P/No AP=Quantization(3 in 2 in 1)
10=Indigo............P/No AP=New ID in Unity [1-9] in (4 in 3 in 2 in 1)=1+O
11=Magenta........New ID in (5 in 1+O+1)=1+1=2
12=Purple...........New ID in (6=1+O+1+1)=1+1+1=1+2=3


What is the relevance and accuracy behind the story of Thiaoouba?

There are many such personal accounts of ET-contact and of having travelled to interdimensional places.
What resonates with you will have validity in your imaginations then becoming IMAGES of your mind and memory.

Thank you so much...for all of us...for everything.

Namaste
AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 09:22 PM   #946
abraxasinas
_
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Queanbeyan/Canberra; NSW, Australia
Posts: 635
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Hi Abraxasinas,

Thanks for this fascinating thread. I can not claim to understand all the physics and mathematics that you have here presented, as I am no scientist myself, though I do sense some truth here in what you write and say. Whilst not a scientist myself, I have a great fascination with true science, as opposed to the scientism or pseudoscience that is so often presented as the real thing by many mainstream scientists (after all, they are only human too), those that fund them (the big corporations), those that repeat their claims to the wider world (the mainstream media) and those that pedal those same claims to support their own short-term agendas (the politicians).

I do not know whether the messages that you are transmitting from the Thuban Council are representative of the truth or not. However, I have the same lack of knowing with regard to other transmissions (e.g. the Wingmaker or Voyager materials) and channellings (e.g. the Ra, Seth or ‘Galactic Federation of Light’ materials) from alleged extraterrestrial, inter-dimensional, angelic or other sources. However, I do like it that you attempt to frame the Thuban transmissions within known science, whilst at the same time recognizing the limitations of the latter. Indeed, I find it quite refreshing to find someone here at Avalon presenting mainstream physics in a spiritual context; or, put another way, presenting deep spiritual truth within a framework of mainstream physics (both Newtonian and Quantum).

So here is my first set of questions, most of which of which relate to the science of astronomy: -

Question 1

Are you familiar with the Electrical Universe theory (see http://www.thunderbolts.info/home.htm plus this beautiful video, http://video.google.com.au/videoplay...90301316220374 from the same group)? This group suggest that black holes may not exist at all. They suggest that they are a creation of mainstream astronomers, along with dark matter, dark energy, neutron stars and much, much more. They argue that mainstream astronomers have invented a whole range of phenomena in an attempt to explain the many anomalies that exist, if a largely gravitational based universe is taken as fact. In contrast, the Electric Universe theorists propose electromagnetism, as opposed to gravitation, as the dominating force within our galaxy and universe. They suggest that these apparent anomalies can be explained electromagnetically, without reference to black holes, dark matter, etc. These theories also raise all sorts of other questions about the standard gravitational model of the universe, including well known theories such as the ‘Expanding Universe’ and the ‘Big Bang’. Even the very nature of our own Sun does not appear to fit the gravitational theory. The latter suggests that the Sun should be hotter at its core and cooler at its extremities. However, according to the Electric Universe theorists the opposite is true.

The physics and astronomy presented on this thread by your self and apparently supported by the Thuban Council seems largely to be mainstream in orientation and thus not supportive of the Electrical Universe theorists. Abraxas, what is your view (and that of the Thuban Council, if different) on the Electrical Universe theories?

Hi Andrew!

There are aspects of the Hannes Alfven cosmology which are a definite part of the Thuban cosmology; such as the integalactic magnetic fields, plasma waves and the general ubiquosity of electric currents in the universe. The manifestation of those physical phenomena are however a consequence and emergent from the standard mainstream models and in no manner require abandonment of well founded topics such as neutron stars, Big Bang Cosmogenesis and the 'dark energy' 'missing mass' scenarios (also see later answers).

The 'Electric Universe' manifests via the actual emergence of inertia from a noninertial (you may term it electric in the permittivity of 'free space') pecursor, we call gravita.
This then becomes the reason for Einstein's Principle of Equivalence.

Here are some links as to the Nature of Mass/Inertia as Monopolic Electricity.

http://www.wbabin.net/science/bermanseder9.pdf

http://www.wbabin.net/science/bermanseder7.pdf


Question 2

The maverick scientist, Paul LaViolette, also questions the existence of black holes at the centre of galaxies (see here, http://www.etheric.com/GalacticCenter/Gravity.html, for clarification on this). Within his own theories, he suggests that an enormous ‘Mother Star’, which is a very different proposition to a ‘Black Hole’, occupies the centre of our galaxy. He argues that something similar exists at the centre of all galaxies. According to LaViolette it is from our own central mother star (i.e. the Galactic Centre or GC) that cosmic ray particles are dispersed in major periodic galactic core outbursts, also referred to as ‘Superwaves’. These superwave events are believed to occur at relatively regular intervals that very roughly seem to correlate with the precessional cycle and its half-cycle, though their also appear to be smaller, and less catastrophic, interim core outbursts between the main events.

If such a precession-superwave correlation were precise it would suggest a major galactic core outburst every 26,000 or 13,000 years. On reading some of LaViolette’s work, I have not found a precise correlation between the two phenomena, only a very rough correlation. However, some writers seem to be trying to fit the two concepts together in a very precise and specific way. Thus they seem to suggest that, if the current precessional cycle is due to end on 21st December 2012, then it will be marked by the commencement of the next superwave outburst from our galactic core as it impacts us here on Earth. This would suggest that the last superwave occurred fairly precisely around either 13,000 or 26,000 years ago (i.e. 11,000 or 24,000 BCE). However, the truth of the matter appears to be that LaViolette’s theories (and yes, again they are theories, rather than facts) are not quite as simple or specific as that.

For clarity on all of LaViolette’s theories see his informative website (http://www.etheric.com/) or read some of his papers and books, many of which are available to be read or bought at his website?

So, Abraxas, what are your views on LaViolette’s mother star and superwave theories? Do they have any basis in truth according to the Thuban perspective?

We would agree on the general idea of the cosmic rays as being emitted from the galactic center as a 'collective group consciousness' (see answers to later questions); but would not support the substitution of the Mother Black Hole by a Mother Star. The Thuban astrophysics is fully founded and based on the basic solution of Einstein's field equations of General Relativity in the Schwarzschild metric and so the Black Hole astrophysics of curved spacetime and gravitation on all levels.
The cosmic rays are actually a spectrum of high energy superstring classes as a remnant of the inflationary epoch preceeding the Big Bang Standard Cosmogenesis of a thermodynamic expansion of a Black Body Planck Radiator (following a de Broglie MatterWave Inflaton-Instanton).

So generally we do not support the LaViolette cosmology in its mainstream deviation.

Question 3

Many researchers imply or suggest that the Maya knew that there is in fact a black hole at the centre of our galaxy and that they referred to this as ‘Hunab Ku’. This, of course, may or may not be the case. However, even if there is not a black hole at the centre of our galaxy, as LaViolette and the Electric Universe theorists suggest, this does not necessarily make the Maya wrong. ‘Hunab Ku’ may simply refer to the very visible dark rift that descends into the central bulge of the Milky Way as it is seen in our night skies from here on Earth. The Maya see this dark rift, amongst other things, as the birth canal of the Milky Way. The lower end of this dark rift terminates just above the ecliptic which itself lies around 6° above the Galactic Centre, whether that be a black hole or a mother star.

Abraxas, do you and the Thuban Council, like John Major Jenkins (see http://alignment2012.com/ plus his books on the Mayan Long Count Calendar), maintain that the creators of the Long Count Calendar aimed the long count calendar to end when the dark rift and bulge of the Milky Way aligned with the December Solstice Sun?

Yes, this is an acceptable wording.

Question 4

a) According to the Thuban perspective, who actually created the Long Count Calendar?

The 8x8=64 Cycles of the Metamorphosis of the Human Chrysalis
with the link below in b)indicates an Afterthought in InSpaceTime creating the Chrysalis fom the Logos of the Forethought in NoSpaceTime.

b) According to John Major Jenkins this 5125.325 year calendar was most probably created by the pre-classic Mayan peoples of Izapa in south-western Mexico somewhere between 400 and 36 BCE. Do you concur with this view or are the origins of the long-count calendar much older (e.g. Olmec or even Atlantean)?

http://tonyb.freeyellow.com/id179.html

c) Is the current 5125.325 year long count precisely one fifth of a precessional cycle (5,125.325 x 5 = 25,625.625 years) and thus the fifth and final age of the current precessional cycle?
Yes, one fifth of 65 baktuns in 5x13x144,000=9,360,000 kin/days.

d) Some Maya groups suggest that we are coming to the end of the 4th Age rather than the 5th. If this is the case does this invalidate the above proposed Mayan Long Count/Precessional Cycle correlation?

Some Maya are free to carry different viewpoints from other Maya; just as is everyone else.
The Thuban perspective considers this the end of the 5th cycle.

Question 5

What is the actual duration of a single precessional cycle? The period of time generally quoted for one Precessional Cycle falls somewhere between 25,000 and 26,000 years. The classic figure is 25,920 years (2,160 x 12), though more recently various authorities have suggested somewhere between 25,600and 25,800 years as the correct figure. My own researches suggest that all these figures are probably inaccurate, largely because they all assume a fixed rate of precession.

Estimations regarding the actual length of a single precessional cycle have largely been based on observations of the motion of stars and other astronomical bodies relative to the equinox and solstice points that are fixed to the seasons of the year, as we experience them here on Earth. In the current era (c. 2000) this rate is deemed to be about 50.29 arc seconds/year. This suggests a fixed precessional cycle of 25,770 years. Such an estimation on the actual length of the precessional cycle is based on that rate being an unchanging constant. However, in 1900 CE the rate was calculated at around 50.25 arc seconds/year. This latter figure suggests a precessional cycle that is twenty years longer than the current estimate (i.e. 25,790 years). Both of these rates appear to be correct for the eras concerned. Assuming this is so, the only conclusion one can draw from these figures is that the precessional rate is not constant at all. In fact, the precessional rate is clearly increasing at the present time. This does seem to explain, to some degree, the varying estimates on the length of the precessional cycle that I have come across over the years. My further researches have suggested to me that the precessional rate itself is also not a constant, and that it increases and decreases over much longer periods of time.

Abraxas, do you and the Thuban Council concur with my own findings here, which basically tell us that the precessional rate is both variable and not constant over larger periods of time?

65 baktuns are 5x13x144,000=9,360,000 days for 25,626.8096 civil (Gregorian) years.
Yes, we agree with your statement, that the precessional rates are not constant over lengthy periods of time. That is why we term it THIS precessional Cycle of 65 baktuns and refrain from extrapolating this cycle onto earlier time periods.

Question 6

My own researches suggest two possible explanations for the variability in the precessional rate. These two explanations also suggest two very different theories of the actual mechanics behind precession. The first of these is the well known wobble explanation, also known as Lunisolar theory. This theory postulates that the precessional cycle exists as a result of a slow wobble in the Earth’s axis over long periods of time, which is believed to be caused by the gravitational effects upon the Earth from the Sun and, particularly, the Moon.

The explanation for precessional rate variability that seems to best fit the lunisolar theory can be found amongst the theories of Serbian astrophysicist, Milutin Milankovitch (1879-1958). He maintained that the Earth’s orbital cycle has modulations that lead to considerable fluctuations in its climate. Following the lunisolar theory, it would appear that at least one, possibly more, of these modulations, could effect the rate of precession, resulting in the increasing and decreasing motion suggested above. The three cycles, proposed by Milankovitch, that are deemed responsible for the modulations in the Earth’s orbital cycle are the Eccentricity Cycle (actually two generalized cycles of 100,000 and 400,000 years respectively), the Obliquity Cycle (approximately 41,000 years duration) and the Perihelion Cycle (a variable cycle of between 18,900 and 23,700 years in duration but averaging around 21,300 years).These three cycles, appear to have a more direct bearing on the Earth's climatic cycles than does the standard precessional cycle. The last statement assumes that both the Milankovitch cycles and the lunisolar theory of precession are correct, which, as we will see shortly, now appears to be open to question?

Of the three Milankovitch cycles – eccentricity, obliquity and perihelion – it appears to be the obliquity cycle that is the strongest candidate for creating the variable rate in the precessional cycle, according to lunisolar theory. This involves the changing tilt of the Earth’s equatorial plane relative to the ecliptic plane over a period of approximately 41,000 years. The tilt is presently at an angle of 23.45° (23°27’) and oscillates between extremes of 22.1° (22°06’) and 24.5° (24°30’). The angle is currently decreasing. The greater the angle between ecliptic and global axis the greater the seasonal differences between summer and winter on the one hand and the climatic differences of the northern and southern hemisphere on the other. According to this theory it would appear to be the case that, as the angle of obliquity decreases over an approximate 20,500 year period, the rate of precession increases; then as the angle of obliquity increases over the remaining 20,500 years of its cycle, the precessional rate decreases. Whether the eccentricity and perihelion cycles might also effect the precessional rate is not clear. However, it seems likely that both cycles might have some bearing on precession, if the lunisolar theory is accepted as the correct explanation.

Abraxas, it is this explanation of the precessional cycle and its variability that seems to most closely concur with that of your own and the Thuban Council. Do you concur with this statement?

We agree with your description and emphasize that BOTH and other cycles are relevant. That is why we term it THIS precessional Cysle of 65 baktuns and refrain from extrapolating this cycle onto earlier time periods. There are also 'Wandering Planets', such as Neptune, now becoming mainstreamed in the availability of better technology to track such orbital dynamics and deviations.


Question 7

The second alternative theory for both the mechanics behind the precessional cycle and its variability in rate is known as the Binary theory of precession. It has been most eloquently proposed by Walter Cruttenden (see http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/.). He maintains that the so-called Lunisolar wobble of the Earth does not exist. He argues that precession is caused by the curved motion through space of our Sun, with its solar system, around a second star that is its binary companion. This Binary theory of precession suggests a completely different explanation for the decreasing-increasing rate of precession, to that described above for the Lunisolar theory.

However, before I attempt to describe that explanation for the variable precessional rate, I firstly need to summarize the basics of Cruttenden’s binary theory as a whole. Firstly, Cruttenden proposes a significantly shorter precessional cycle of about 24,000 years, as opposed to the usual 25,000 to 26,000 years described by proponents of the lunisolar theory. He bases this shorter period for precession on the writings of one Swami Sri Yukteswar. In 1894, Sri Yukteswar, one of the great Indian sages of that time, wrote his book, “The Holy Science”. Cruttenden argues, based on Yukteswar, that the precessional cycle is precisely the same cycle as that described by the Vedic civilization in India, as the Yuga Cycle. According to both Yukteswar and Cruttenden, the Yuga cycle comprises a 12,000 year Descending Phase, followed by a 12,000 year Ascending Phase. This results in a 24,000 year cycle in all, which both Yukteswar and Cruttenden correlate with the precessional cycle. Each phase is divided further into four Yugas each. In the descending phase these commence with a Satya Yuga (Golden Age) of 4,800 years, followed by a Treta Yuga (Silver Age) of 3,600 years, a Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age) of 2,400 years and finally a Kali Yuga (Iron Age) of 1,200 years. The ascending phase then immediately follows with each Yuga repeated, but in reverse order, commencing with a 1,200 year Kali Yuga and ending with a 4,800 year Satya Yuga.

John Major Jenkins suggests a similar correlation between the yuga and precessional cycles. However, he appears to be unaware of the binary theory of precession. For this reason he attempts to explain the Yuga cycle in classic lunisolar theory terms (including the presumed 25,600 – 25,800 years which assume a constant and fixed motion for precession). However, Cruttenden and Jenkins also differ on a more important detail. This relates to the actual timing of the Yuga cycle. Jenkins suggests a chronology for the cycle with the low point between the descending Kali Yuga and the ascending Kali Yuga of the cycle based on the Mayan end date of 21st December 2012 CE. For Yukteswar and Cruttenden that low point occurred over 1,500 years earlier, in or around 499 CE. This difference is important as it raises the very significant issue of where we are now within the Yuga-Precessional cycle?

Sri Yukteswar maintained that the precession of the equinoxes and solstices is based on a forgotten cosmic motion of our Sun around another star. He provides an explanation for the misunderstanding of the length of the Yuga cycle in Divine Years as opposed to Solar Years. Here is a quote from his work: -

“The mistake crept into almanacs for the first time around 700 BC, during the reign of Raja Parik****, just after the completion of the last Dwapara Yuga (Bronze Age). At that time, Maharaja Yudhisthira, noticing the appearance of the dark Kali Yuga (Iron Age), made over his throne to his grandson, the said Raja Parik****. Maharaja Yudhisthira, together with all the wise men of his court, retired to the Himalayan Mountains, the paradise of the world. Thus, there was none in the court of Raja Parik**** who could understand the principle of correctly calculating the ages of the several Yugas. Hence, after the completion of the 2,400 years of the then current [descending] Dwapara Yuga, no one dared make the introduction of the Kali Yuga more manifest by beginning to calculate it from its first year and to put an end to the number of Dwapara years.”

So here we see Sri Yukteswar offering his understanding of the origins of why measurement, definition and timing of the Yuga cycle has come down to us in such a confused manner in the present era. Yukteswar argued that the 24,000 divine years, each of 360 solar years each, as advocated by most current day Vedic scholars is an inaccurate interpretation of the ancient scriptures. This classic traditionalist version of the Yuga cycle suggests a very lengthy cycle of four descending ages; a 1,728,000 year Satya Yuga; a 1,296,000 year Treta Yuga; a 864,000 Dwapara Yuga; and a 432,000 Kali Yuga. Thus, the whole descending phase covers a period of 4.32 million years. According to this traditional dating of the Yuga cycle, the current Kali yuga commenced in 3102 BCE.

So, if Sri Yukteswar is correct and the lengthy classic traditionalist interpretation of the yuga cycle is in error, what is the basis for the decreasing-increasing rate of his proposed 24,000 year yuga-precessional cycle as defined by the proposed binary theory? Basically, the answer to this relates to the distance between our Sun and its proposed binary companion, which according to the binary theory changes over the 24,000 year cycle. This is basically due to both stars having elliptical, rather than circular, orbits around each of their separate centre points. According to the theory, our Sun is furthest from its binary companion at the low point between the descending and ascending Kali Yugas. It is also at that point in time when the precessional rate is at its slowest. At the high point between the ascending and descending Satya Yugas, the precessional rate will be at its fastest. At that point our binary companion will be at its closest proximity to our Sun and solar system.

Yukteswar, Cruttenden and Jenkins all propose that civilization is at its highest between the two Satya Yugas and at its lowest between the two Kali Yugas. However, as mentioned above, Jenkins believes we are at that low point right now, whereas Yukteswar and Cruttenden propose that the low point was in or around 499 CE. If this is so, then since about 1699 CE we have been in the ascending Dwapara (Bronze Age) phase of the Yuga cycle.

So, Abraxas, I would be really interested to hear your view on this alternative Binary theory of precession as presented by Sri Yukteswar and Walter Cruttenden, as it seems to contradict both your own view and that of the Thuban Council that you represent?

Not as much contradiction, but perception and analysis in encompassments.


How did the Maya know the 'End of Time' and the ending of the Great Cycle of the human presence on Gaia?
Some of my discourse is a little technical, describing calendrical systems and such; but it is given to show how the Mayan Calendar is correlated with the Gregorian one, the latter being the scientifically accepted standard of today's timekeeping.

The Great Platonic Year utilises the change of 1 degree per 72 years or 50 arcseconds per year to specify a complete transversion of the Zodiac of the Milky Way in 72x360=25,920 years for a precessional cycle.
For comparison the angular sizes of the sun and the moon coincide at 0.5 a degree, so allowing the possibility of annular eclipses to occur.

But this precessional cycle changes, being constant in approximately 41,000 year periods and as an effect of the 'wobbling' of the earth's axis due to its deviation from exact sphericity.
Gaia as a planet is flattened at the poles to form the geometry of an oblate ellipsoid and this geoemetry results in precession of the polar axis, tracing out an ellipsoid about the celestial poles.

This precession then changes over great time periods in the interaction of the sun, the moon, other planets and the possible interaction with gravitating extrasolar bodies such as asteroids and comets.

The present calculated rate of precession is about 71.6 years per degree or 50.3 arcseconds per year and so for a reduced Platonic Year of 25,765 years.

Because the moon is receding from the earth due to tidal effects at about 38 millimeters per year or 38 kilometers per megayear, the precessional duration would increase substantially over timespans measured in millions of years. But this rate is halved to about 20 millimeters per year so 600 Million years ago, when a solar year was about 400 days for about 22 hours in a day.

The tracking of the celestial movements are the basis for cyclicities and the invention of calendars.
A Tropical Year of 365.24219 mean solar days (msd) describes the movement of the Earth in orbit about the sun relative to the vernal equinox and because of precession the Tropical Year is about 20 minutes shorter than the Sidereal Year of 365.25636 msd and which measures the earth's orbit relative to the 'fixed' stars.

Elliptical precession relative to the fixed stars requires about 112,000 years to complete a cycle and the Anomalistic Year of 365.25964 msd relative to the sun's perihelion adds another 21,000 years to 133,000 years to correlate the three different years.

An Eclipse Year of 346.62003 msd specifies the interval between successive passages of the sun through a given node of the moon's orbit and as the lunar nodes move westwards by over 19 degrees per year in regression, the Saros Cycle of just over 18 years and of 223 lunations or 6585.32 msd closely approximate 19 Eclipse Years of 6585.78 msd.

The difference of 0.46 of a msd then indicates the reoccurrence of the saros eclipses on a location shifted westwards by so 135 degrees.
The saros cycle was known to the Maya, the Babylonians and to the ancient astronomers of human prehistory.

Related to the Saros Cycle is the Metonic Cycle, known to Greek and Hebrew calendar makers and correlating the 19-year-cycle of lunations to 19 Tropical Years with 235 Synodic Months, each of 29.53059 msd to within 2 hours.

This then is compared to the Civil Year of 365.2425 mean solar days and based on the Julian Year of a Century of 100x365.2425=36,524.25 mean solar days.

But for the recent human history, a greater cycle of 133,000 years can now be used to specify this human evolvement to the present nexus point in linearly measured calendrical time.

About 130,000 years ago, complete Neanderthal characteristics are found in the archaeological fossil record and by 50,000 years ago, Neanderthal Man had largely disappeared from Asia and by 30,000 years ago slowly became extinct in Europe.
About 100,000 years ago existed the largest primate hitherto identified.
Gigantopithecus Blackii was over 3 meters tall and weighed up to 600 kilograms and fossils were found in Southeast Asia.

The earliest Homo Sapiens Sapiens characteristics are found in the fossil record at so 100,000 years ago and the cultural leap into cave paintings and art began so 30,000 years ago with the great change from hunter gatherer to farmer and domesticator coincides with the holocene era of 10,000 years ago.

Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam are the matrilineal and patrilineal most common recent ancestors for all living humans today, using genetic markers and molecular clocks to trace genetic variations back in time. Nuclear DNA is subject to variation, whilst the mitochondrial DNA of the ovum is relatively stable and the mutation rate on the Y-chromosome is relatively constant.
Mitochondrial Eve so is said to have lived about 140,000 years ago near Ethiopia in Africa.
Y-chromosomal Adam is said to be at least 30,000 years younger than Mitochondrial Eve and perhaps only 60,000 years old and also from Africa.
The oldest homo sapiens fossil dates to 160,000 years ago and as classified by the Herto find of 2003. It is also said, that the Neanderthals split from a common ancestry with the Homo sapiens genus about 300,000 years ago and that the genetic evidence points to a Homo Sapiens origin in the African savannah so 200,000 years ago.

The Mayan understanding now relates the evolutionary leap from Homo Sapiens from Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens Sapiens or 'Wise Man' to FIVE Great Ages and given in the recent precessional supercycle.

133,000 years become 129,600=5x25,920 Platonic Cycles using a precessional average of 1 degree per 72 years.

Twelve Platonic Cycles are 311,040 years and 311,040 years ago the DNA-architecture of what was to evolve into Modern Man became INDUCTED by what is mythologically called 'Lemurian Root-Soul-Energy' and also as the 'giants' and the 'Sons of God' impregnating the 'Daughters of Man', say as in your Genesis encodings Genesis.6.2-4.
You might now understand that this encoding describes something before the Noahic 'Great Flood' and something after the 'perfect ten Noahic generations' redefined the 'Age of Man' as 120 years from a previous 'longer lived' generation and bounded by Methuselah's 969 years as the 'oldest man' who ever lived.

So now some of you may understand the archetype of the 'Great Flood' as the nexus point in the human history, when a previous hominoid evolution became terminated and replaced with a new one.
The previous hominoid generation was Homo Erectus culminating in the Lemurian archetype and then continuing in a multifaceted fashion with concurrent homninoids like Homo Neanderthalensis and 'great apes' like Gigantopithecus and after having itself evolved from Homo Habilis and Australopithecine ancestors dating back so 12 Grand Cycles earlier to 12x311,040=3,732,480 years.
This then is the reason as to why the Gaian anthropologists date the emergence of the Australopithecine human ancestry to about 4 Million years -13 Grand Cycles are 4,043,520 years.


The Solar System was created 5 Billion years ago and it took until 130,000 years ago to evolve Modern Man from Gaia's primeval and elemental beginnings.
The Mayan so manipulates the archetypical matrix of time to specify the first Platonic cycle as the reformation of a cosmic identity in utitility of the 10 principalities of the cosmogenesis applicable to the univere and all its substructures, such as a planetary evolvement in self-consciousness.

Application of the 10th principle metamorphoses the Old Identity as the 1st principle into a New Identity using the 9 Timelords as the means for this transformation.

So the Maya calls the first Platonic cycle the Age of Capricorn, thus labeling the 10th element of a zodiacal identity as rootreduction 10=1+0=1 and as mapped in the starry constellations of the Mazzaroth and of the ancient understandings.

The Platonic Age of Capricorn so began, when historical man Homo Sapiens differentiated from his environment and first became 'different' from its homo relatives, like Homo Neanderthalensis.

This and all other Platonic cycles can then be compared to similar 'Great Years' such as the Yugas in the Hinduistic reckonings.

The Satya Yuga as the Spiritual Age of Gold and of Meditation (Dhyana) lasts 4800 years in descent and is followed by the Treta Yuga as the Mental Age of Silver and of Sacrifice (Yajna), lasting 3600 years in descent.
The Dvapara Yuga as the Emotional Age of Bronze and of Worship (Archana) lasts 2400 years in descent and is followed by the Kali Yuga as the Physical Age of Iron and of Alms (Daana), lasting 1200 years in descent into Materialism, before ascending again for a similar period of time.
The overall descent from Spiritual Understanding to Materialistic Knowledge so becomes 12,000 years followed by a matching ascent from the physical to the spiritual rebirth.

The 'Day of Brahman' is said to be about 1017 seconds, which is the Age of the Universe, 6x1017 seconds being 20 billion years.
The 'Age of Brahman' then relates this age of physical cosmic existence to spiritual preexistence in the factor 1022/1017=105 and where the light invariance c=wavelengthxfrequency specifies this factor in the inversion constant 1/c=1022/(3x1030)=1022x(3.33x10-31)=3.33x10-9 and so as 1022=Inverse Timeinstanton/c=Source-Frequency/c as the 'Age of Brahman'.




Question 8

a) John Major Jenkins has, to my mind, persuasively argued the idea that the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Sun and the Galactic Equator was the basic reason why the astronomically aware long count calendar creators (Maya or otherwise?) proposed that the end of their calendar would occur in the present era.

Do you concur with this?

Yes.

b) Many have criticized Jenkins theory, stating that the alignment was actually closest at the December Solstice 1998, which is certainly true. However, Jenkins counters this, rightly in my view, with the fact that the December Solstice Sun in fact eclipses the galactic equator for a much longer period of time. He suggests a period of 36 years, from 1980 – 2016, on the basis that the Sun is 30’ of arc longitude in diameter. In fact, according to my Starry Night programme, the December Solstice Sun will eclipse the Galactic Equator for 43 years, from 1976 – 2019, as the actual diameter of the Sun at that time of the year, in the current era, is 33’ of arc longitude wide. The 2012 cycle ending date is well within this range and thus seems to support Jenkins’ arguments.

Do you and the Thuban Council concur with this view?

The Mayan master timeline spans five great cycles of longcounts; each longcount being comprised of 13 baktuns, each baktun encompassing 144,000 kin or days,and as 20 katuns of 7,200 kin each.

It is the 65th and final baktun, which defines the 'birth of the starhuman' archetype to replace the older 'human' archetype initiated 5x13x144,000 kin or 9,360,000 days before the nexus date of December 21st, 2012.

As the sun's angular diameter is about 0.53 degrees, the Maya calculated the ending of their longcount in the last cycle of the winter-summer solstices as a function of the Mayan Precessional 'Great Platonic Year' of 25,626.81 kin (or civil Gregorian days).

A precessional degree then becomes 9,360,000/360=26,000=71.1856.x365.2425 days and so in the Mayan kin count, 71.1856 civil years specify a 1-degree precession and the galactic synchronisation at the winter solstice will be 71.1856x0.53=37.728 civil years for the solar transit across the galactic centre.

The Maya obtained the longcount from the 'hermetic' tradition (of the Plumed Serpent Melchizedek) of Kukulkan (or Quetzalcoatl in the Aztec parallel) and this 'prophecy' relates directly to a scripturally encoded 'day count' of 12,000+1,600=13,600 days in a 'furlong' count of measuring the 'inside' and the 'outside' of the 'great city' {John.2.21;Revelation.11.1-2;14.20;21.16} as the 'Temple of God'.

These 13,600 days from December 21st, 2012 will specify September 12th, 1975 as the beginning of the 37.728 civil year period of 13,780 days, then ending 180 days after that date on June 19-21, 2013, which is the following summer solstice in the 21-23 December, 2012 variation.
The midpoint is 18.864 civil years from either end and pinpoints 6,890 days from September 12th, 1975 on 24th July 1994.
The 'Beginning of the 'Age of Aquarius' is then scripturally determined within the last of the 20 katuns of 7,200 days or 19.713 civil years beginning on this April 5th, 1993 (20 civil years as 20x365+5=7,200+105 days and ending on April 6th, 2013.
This shall be further detailed in the timeline agenda, but engages the 105 days of 'Noah's daycount' (in Genesis) from the sending of the Raven of the Tarrying and the Dove of Peace to the Rainbow Covenant.


The 'Beginning of the Age of Aquarius' and as a 'Lower Bound' so is dated to the 'transition of the Sun from Capricorn into Aquarius on January 20th, 1998 and an exit from Aquarius on February 18th, 1998 and as 3.5 years from the midpoint date to specify a 7-year period archetypically characterising the galactic synchronisation scripturally and prophetically.

July 24th, 1994 plus 3.5x360=7x180=1260 days for January 5th, 1998 and a date to which are added 15 days as the encoded 'hour of the beast' in the proportion 1 day/24 hours=360days/15days and the dayyears encoded in Ezekiel.
This 'addition' then becomes 'natural' in the Gregorian calendar of 365.2425 days as compared to the Ancient calendar of 360 days in the 18 days as the differential between the two calendars (360x3.5+18=365x3.5+0.5) and the halfweek addition/subtraction of 3.5 days (see timeline agenda).
The 'Upper Bound' for the 'Beginning of the Age of Aquarius' must so engage the solar transit from Aquarius into Pisces in a mirror image for the 'Lower Bound' situated at the midpoint of the center of February 3rd, 2005 to assign this 'Upper Bound' the civil date February 19th, 2012 and so a 14-year superposition (2x7=14 proportionalises 2x18.864=37.728) for the 'Aquarian Transit' from 1998 to 2012 and as the galactic synchronisation of the galactic center 'Hunab Ku' with the Sun
'RahSol'.



Overall however, in the Mayan longcount September18th,1618 began this last baktun of 144,000 days. This is 25 years and 108 days or 9,239 kin before the birth of Isaac Newton on January 4th, 1643 as the onset of the 'Age of Reasoning' and science-based Enlightenment in the scientific methodology and a 'Renaissance of Rationality', say as instigated by Galileo Galilei (February15th,1564-January 8th,1642).


It would be this 'last' baktun or a 395-year period from 1618 to 2013, which would refine and finetune the human reasoning mind to gather enough data to 'finally' allow a full remembrance of its UnTimed
collective reality in nospacetime and where 391 years from 1618 define the Year of the beginning manifestation for the 'Trial of Humanity' in 1618+391=2009.





c) However, the question still remains as to why the long count creators specifically chose the 2012 December Solstice, as opposed any of the other 43 December Solstices’ between 1976 and 2019?

Do you have an explanation as to why 2012 in particular is so special?

Yes, additionally to the above; the timeline in the Great Pyramid also (from the so called Great Step) also points to the 2012/2013 period and most important from the Thuban perspective, the prophetic timelines in the Logos descriptive 'scriptures' converge and synthesize in a precise daycount of 1600 from August 4th, 2008 to December 21st, 2012.

d) From the Thuban perspective, is their anything that stands out for the more astronomically precise 1998 December Solstice alignment?

See above. The 'Age of Aquarius' can be said to begin January 20th, 1998 in the solar transit from Capricorn into Aquarius.

Was that year significant or is it the entire period from 1976 – 2019 that is of greatest importance here?

The 'Great prophetic timeline' began September 12th, 1975 and ends August 4th, 2013 for a 'weaning' of the StarHuman Baby, born on the Mayan solstice date.

Question 9

Many alternative researchers and writers have, through some very sloppy research in my opinion, confused the current galactic alignment between the December Solstice Sun and the Galactic Equator, as we view it from our location on Earth and as described above, with the very different phenomenon of our solar system periodically crossing the plane of our galaxy.

This latter phenomenon is believed to occur several times during our solar systems 225 – 250 Million year orbit of the Galactic Centre. Many alternative researchers claim that our solar system is now in the process of crossing the plane of our galaxy. Astralwalker, on his Nexus thread has stated this (see his second entry on the Nexus thread). Kerry Cassidy, and many others at Avalon, continually refer to this alleged phenomenon occurring in 2012, at the end of the Mayan Calendar. Here is the truth of the situation as far as I can currently understand it.

From what I can gather, no scientist can definitively say exactly where our solar system is in relation to the galactic plane. As far as mainstream astronomy is concerned, I have so far come across the following. Back in the mid-1980’s, as far as I can gather, certain astronomers were proposing the following theory. They suggest that our solar system is not currently crossing the galactic plane. The general thrust of this perspective seems to indicate that our solar system oscillates above and below the galactic plane in whole cycles of between 54 and 80 million years. The favourite seems to be a 66 million year cycle, with 33 million years below and 33 million years above the galactic plane. The indication from that research is that we are now above the plane and have been ascending away from it for about the last 3 million years.

However, in contradiction to the above, here are nine estimates (courtesy of one Zyzygyz), from various sources, of our distance above the galactic plane that I found on Geoff Stray’s website (see http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/idiot.html - see bottom of page). 1 parsec (pc) is equal to 3.26 light years (ly). The range is 14 ly (approx 4 pc) - 112.67 ly (approx 34.5 pc), with a median value of about 63 ly (approx 19.5 pc). The top of the wave has been estimated at 85 ly or 26 pc or (http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0507/0507655.pdf ). From this data, it would appear that are solar system is at or near the top of the sinusoidal wave. These figures seem to suggest that it is much longer than the 3 million years ago, mentioned earlier, that our solar system actually crossed the galactic plane.

Frankly, I do not know how to translate the number of parsecs or light years above the galactic plane into the number of years in time that have transpired since our solar system last crossed over? I guess there are various parameters to take into account, including the actual length of our solar systems transit around the galactic centre (estimates vary from 200 to 250 million years). Additionally one would need to know precisely how far above and below the galactic plane our solar system rises and falls in its oscillating journey around the GC. As the extremely variable figures for all of these parameters suggest in the explorations I have so far found above, then it is currently virtually impossible to state anything precise about the location of our solar system in relation to the galactic plane.

It appears then, that claims that our solar system is crossing the galactic plane now or on the 21st December 2012 are not as well founded as many here on this forum and elsewhere seem to believe.

It is fair to ask whether any of the scientific information and theory presented above is accurate or true? And yes, we are here definitely dealing with theory rather than fact. So the scientists and researchers might simply be wrong. They have been wrong before and they will undoubtedly be wrong again in the future. They can not even agree amongst themselves! However, we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Even if they are incorrect, the vastness of our galaxy and the very slow progress of our Solar System oscillation above and below the galactic plane, as suggested by all these theories and measurements, would make it virtually impossible to identify an exact date for it crossing the galactic plane. It would certainly seem unlikely that a specific day (such as 21st December 2012), year, decade, century or even millennium could be determined for the Solar Systems entrance into and exit out of the galactic plane? Indeed, how thick is the galactic plane and how long would it take our Solar System to pass through it? Would it take hundreds, thousands or even millions of years? Determining where our solar system is in relation to the imaginary line of the galactic equator is equally problematic. We simply do not have a precise enough knowledge on the size of our galaxy; how far we are from its centre; how long a single orbit around the centre takes; or how frequent our oscillation above and below the galactic equator is?

So, Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on the location of our solar system in relation to the galactic plane? I would imagine that the Thuban Council have accurate measurements for our galaxy and could tell us exactly where we are in relation to the galactic plane and the galactic centre. So, when did our solar system last cross the galactic plane? When will it next cross it? How long dose it actually take for the solar system to cross the galactic plane? How thick is it? What are the true dimensions of our galaxy in terms of width, depth, the true period of orbit of our solar system around galactic centre and our distance from same?

When the universe was 236.5 million years old at a cosmological redshift of 7.477; the universe was the scale of what today is known as a galactic suprcluster. A galactic supercluster has so a diameter of so 473 million lightyears and represents the gravitational interaction limit.
The Copernican Principle of Cosmology states, that the universe beyond this boundary scale will be isotripic and homogenous (looking the same in all directions and having the same texture or pixel structure say).

A massless universe can be described as a Mother-Black Hole with a curvature radius of 16.9 billion lightyears and so the Daughter-Black Hole of radius 236.5 million lightyears as a supercluster Black Hole equivalent willso carry 'missing mass' and 'dark energy' (actually a form of stationary 'auric' lightmatrix as a 'space filling' consciousness).

So to close the universe as a selfcontained unity, the massless mother BH interacts with the inertial daughter carrying the entire mass-seed of the creation (Big Bang) within it and characterizing the 236.5 million year marker.

This marker so is a template or blueprint for the later much expanded universe and holofractalises again in galactic subsystems from supercluster to group to galaxy to starsystem to platery system to continents etc. etc.

In particular the gravity bound holographs itself in a template galaxy like the MWG in the solar systems orbit fractalising the Period of the orbit as the cosmic time of the manifestation of the 'master template'. So period T=1/f=2pi/w=236.5 million years.

To give specific values for galactic parameters is unwarranted in the deeper sense, as the galaxies supplement their baryonic luminous parameters with nonluminous 'consciousness energy' or 'haloes'. So for example the MWG halo interacts peripherally with the halo of Andromeda, its approaching sister galaxy so 2.6 million lightyears away. Generally, the MWG is 100,000 lightyears across and 1,000 lightyears thick in the luminosity and the distance between the galactic center and the Sun is 9,360,000 lightdays as defined by the present precessional cycle.




Question 10

It has been suggested by many new age and alternative researchers and also from various channeled and transmitted (including Ashayana Deane in her Voyagers 2 book) sources that our solar system is in a 26,000 year (generally believed to reflect the precessional cycle of the same length) orbit around Alcyone, the central star in the Pleiades Cluster. The latter is located in the shoulder area of the constellation of Taurus. Often associated with these sources is the suggestion that we are about to enter a 2000 year period of time within this cycle that takes us into an area of galactic space known as the Photon Band.

This reference, http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Disinformation.html, to LaViolette’s work is very interesting, as it deals with the confusion between LaViolette’s galactic superwave theory (mentioned earlier) and the new age concept of the photon belt, together with the idea that our solar system is orbiting Alcyone. For the record and hopefully to clear up further confusion, this short article from LaViolette is well worth a read. The article basically shows the photon band theory for what it is, which is a rather ludicrous piece of misinformation and/or disinformation, first published in the 1980’s. The Pleiades connection to the Mayan Calendar is both true and interesting. However, the photon band theory that suggests that our solar system is orbiting Alcyone is quite simply nonsensical. Whether one accepts LaViolette’s superwave theory or not (I remain open minded on that one), the above article clearly demonstrates to me that the Photon Band and Alcyone orbit theory is not based on any kind of rational observational astronomy.

So, Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on both the Photon Band concept and our solar system’s alleged 26,000 year orbit of Alcyone?

Atlas-Pleione-Alcyone-.. are labels for a very potent archetype for the Seven Sisters. This archetype is a hologram which can be mapped and mirrored onto any consciousness able to acknowledge the manifesto of this symbol, say as the Pleiades. The photon-belt so is NOT a 3D physical phenomenon, but a consciousness, defined in the gauge physics of the coupling between the light parameters and the inertia parameters. We term it the RestMassPhoton or RMP as the 'Particle of Consciousness'.
Then the 'photion belt' energy is real in a 4D sense in terms of said RMPs, but is not in any way some physical or electromagnetic field interacting with rotating dynamical systems of astrophysics.

The Seven Sisters so can easily 'energize'; seven continents or seven oceans or seven chakras or seven somethings upon Gaia or any other place 'consciously' energized by RMPs.

Question 11

What is your view on the idea presented by some alternative researchers that our solar system is originally from the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy and is not indigenous to the Milky Way Galaxy?

This perspective on our place in the galaxy, at first appears rather complicated. However, the complication seems to have been created by certain writers either misunderstanding or purposefully distorting the original article by Steven Majewski, a Professor of Astronomy at the University of Virginia. Basically, the original article proposes the presence of two galaxies, the Milky Way Galaxy (MWG) and the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy (SDG) crossing each other at a sharp angle of nearly 90°. The basic proposition is that the more massive of these two galaxies, our very own MWG, is slowly devouring (over billions of years) a less massive galaxy, the SDG. The following source (http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_030924.html), by Robert Roy Britt (2003) suggests that our solar system, within the MWG, is now passing close to (though not necessarily through) the cross-flow between the MWG and the SDG. There is no suggestion, in the original article or the report referred to above, that our Solar System ever originated anywhere other than within the MWG.

However, two non-scientific sources appear to have either misunderstood or distorted this information. These are at http://curezone.com/blogs/fm.asp?i=985423 and http://www.viewzone.com/milkyway.html respectively. Cliff High, among others, has also presented this view in a recent conversation with Michael St. Clair, which frankly leads me to question both High's and St. Clair's credibility as objective researchers. All of these sources claim that our solar system does not originate within the MWG at all. In fact, they seem to state rather categorically, that our home galaxy is the SDG. They suggest that our Solar System is now being drawn into the flow of the plane of the MWG, rather than continuing onward in its flow with SDG. The distorted versions of the theory also seem to be suggesting that the movement of our Solar System into the galactic plane of the Milky Way is the primary cause of the climate change that we are now experiencing on our planet and also elsewhere in our solar system.

I do believe man’s greedy, wasteful and consumerist activities are contributing to the problems we are seeing today and making the survival of this planets biodiversity (including ourselves) much less likely than would be the case had we taken better care of our planet. However, I do concur that this may not be the primary factor in climate change. However, there are other far less radical explanations for solar system climate change that do not require the distorted two galaxy explanation proposed here. For example, it is possible that we are simply entering a slightly more lively and energetic part of the MWG? Or, maybe our Sun is simply undergoing changes that are effecting the rest of the solar system? Or, maybe the two galaxy scenario is in part correct, but that rather than being swept out of the SDG flow and into the MWG stream, we are simply beginning to enter the cross-flow between our own (i.e. that of the MWG) galactic plane and that of the SDG?

Here is what appears to be a fairly accurate rebuttal of the more distorted sources of the MWG devouring the SDG (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...nother-galaxy/).

Abraxas, what is the Thuban view on this Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy origins view for our solar system?

Just as the MWG is a template galaxy, so is the local Rahsol starsystem a blueprint Star System so is Gaia a template Planetary-Moon System. They are all holograms of each other and all have formed from the Galactic nebula labeled the MWG.

Final Comment

That is it for now on the question front, though I do have a load of other questions, many of them ET related, that I may ask you in a future post. However, before I go I would just like to express the following thoughts and observations that this thread has initiated within me.

It seems to be difficult for many here at Avalon, and elsewhere within the alternative and conspiratorial communities, to grasp that science and spirit are one, and do not need to be continuously at odds with each other. However, it is just such a polarity between fixed beliefs and opinions that has become so evident within this and so many other threads here at Avalon. There are many diverse opinions and beliefs held here by the contributors to this forum, just as there are out their in the real world. We seem to have a need to find certainty within the scientific, philosophical, political, religious and spiritual frameworks that we come to adopt during the varying phases of our individual life-cycles. This is both natural and human. However, it becomes extremely hard for us to even begin to let go of a given perspective on truth and reality that has seemingly proven itself to us. We thus hang on to the old perspective and resist any new approaches for far longer than we need to.

Abraxas, you have clearly unsettled quite a few contributors here with your presentation from the Thuban Council combined with your own scientific understandings. Hence the defensiveness and hostility you have received here from many at Avalon. We all feel very uncomfortable when yet another perspective arrives to challenge the one we are currently adopting. We often then become defensive of our own presently adopted set of opinions and beliefs and hostile toward the new perspective being presented to us.

Personally, I take your message (and anybody else’s) at face value and have no reason to doubt that you truly believe this information is coming directly from the Thuban Council. Who am I to judge? I merely weigh what you say up against other things that I have learned, and think I know, and then try to use my discernment and discretion. Of course, I rarely, if ever, have a final answer!

I certainly do not feel that you are either a fraud or a disinformation agent, as some seem to believe. I sense that you are presenting your own wisdom as experienced and received. It is, of course, possible that some of this information has been distorted by either your own personality or by the Thuban Council itself. Indeed, the latter could have its own agenda, unbeknownst to you or anyone else. This is clearly what many here at Avalon seem to suspect. However, the same can be said for any other transmitted or channeled source, including that of Ashayana Deanne, which many here seem to hold in, what I believe to be, an unreasonably high regard. I fail to understand why folk are so willing to accept her work as pure and untainted and yet believe your own transmissions are so tainted. I guess it is all a matter of belief and opinion in the end? That is until such time as any one particular approach can be clearly shown to be true or false.

Others here might think you are simply deluded. However, such could equally be said of most of the personalities presented both at Camelot and Avalon. Whilst that might be the case with a few of the whistle blowers and witnesses interviewed by Kerry and Bill, in my humble opinion, I do not feel this is the case with either yourself or many others.

Anyway, I look forward to hearing your responses to my rather long-winded questions.

Best Wishes

Truthseeker (Andrew)

Yes, I agree with your final comment and thank you for your efforts of asking such detailed questions, which I have tried to answer in similar style.

AA
abraxasinas is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 09:44 PM   #947
Malletzky
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: It doesn't matter any more
Posts: 534
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Abrax, dear friend, thanks for your last reply to my question...and thank you for your patience and devotedness to answer all other questions here. Indeed, the fact that I was allowed to experience and FEEL the concept of the unification few weeks ago, and "the coincidence" with your appearance here on this forum, surely helped me to understand more then ever that:

ALL that is, is within us, and not without. It is I/ME/YOU/WE... that matters.

It's I that need to recognise the Creator within ME, and it is ME that must recognise the Creator within I. It is simple as that!

Many sources, begining with Jesus and his teachings and as last, the concepts of Thuban presented here [and I don't care the labels (many will know what I really want to express here)...but I care the message and how this message resonates within me and with my whole being] trigered many, many hidden truths within my heart in the last 18 years. Not only as a confirmation to what I already "knew"...it's more than that.

But it really is that simple...if one would only accept that it is him/her that contains "both sides" of the coins within his/her heart...label it good/bad or light/dark or just...DUALITY. WE ARE BOTH....or better say...I am/we are all.

I must say that I feel gratitude to the one that do NOT feel, do NOT see and do NOT experience the way as I do.

I feel gratitude and compassion that YOU (and with YOU, I mean the other almost 7 billion brothers/sisters on this planet) choose some other path...and that I'm allowed to "tap in" in this "field" called human groupmind and feel and experience what YOU do! Without YOU, I would not be perfect...Thank YOU!

And I don't care which path you've taken...do you lie? do you murder? do you love? are you Satan? are you GOD? No matter what...it doesn't matter.
I forgive you to forgive me, I accept you as you are...as it is YOU and what YOU choose to do, be or feel...that makes me entire, it makes me I AM!

with and gratitude
malletzky

btw, I feel as I am only a "second" away from the bigest "personal enlightenment" ever. Let it BE.
Malletzky is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 10:47 PM   #948
orthodoxymoron
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lunar Base II
Posts: 3,093
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Thank-you for answering my many questions abraxasinas! No more questions!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edNMl1lqZmA

Namaste
orthodoxymoron is offline  
Old 01-27-2010, 11:49 PM   #949
Anchor
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 2,280
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraxasinas
Are the Teachings of Jesus alone fundamental...and the rest of scripture merely contextual?
Yes, absolutely.
Totally agree on this. In an odd fit of synchronicity I came to that conclusion (or very similar) earlier this year. I suddenly realised that the only parts of the bible I ever paid full attention to was parts that referred to the actual words of Jesus. Virtually every time I have ever quoted the NT in support of making some kind of contribution to a debate it has been a "Jesus said:" quote rather than anything else.

Its fun when I read things like the quoted exchange.

A..
Anchor is offline  
Old 01-28-2010, 03:42 AM   #950
halebox
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 61
Default Re: Thuban Q&A: (warning longer than normal posts here)

If dreamtime is 4d in reality then I need to work on that as I am sober in real life but I party like a maniac in my dreams and Ive done all kinds of bad stuff as well as good in my dreams. Also too many day to day work matrix dreams.

I mentioned the Greys, Pleadians, Annunaki being allies and you said yes despite the deceivers. Who might they be? What density are each of these groups? Is there a class system between these races where one is above the other?

Do the short Greys have souls or just organic robots? How about the tall Greys?

I have a very hard time with the bible stuff as I feel it is a means of control on earth. If the Thuban think we should follow the original teachings which have been altered how does one access unaltered versions of this?

It seems that lots of races lay claim to creating earth humans and Jesus just from what I've read on the net.

Dan Burisch claims that the Greys told him that they were future humans traveling back in time. Did you say that the Thuban are earth humans in the future as well?

Will the Thuban describe what the Annunaki look like to as it is a mystery to most here and I think we would all be open and accepting of them visually. I respect if its not time or none of my business as well.

Your view on why any visual assimilation or art depicting a reptilian is forbidden?

Is there any malevolent races earthlings should stay clear of?

Do you feel we are genetically programmed to ignore certain subjects or words?

The other night I was sleeping lightly dreaming and I felt almost like it was a computer program where I was flashing back and forth different background settings. Was I doing this or was I being uploaded?

Thanks Abrax

Last edited by halebox; 01-28-2010 at 04:45 AM.
halebox is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon