Welcome to Space News from the Electric Universe,
brought to you by The Thunderbolts Project™
at Thunderbolts.info
It's a notion that generations of astronomers
have agreed upon with nearly unanimous consent,
that the clockwork predictability we see in our solar system today
can be traced back over countless eons of time.
The planets and the Sun formed about a swirling disk of gas and dust
through a process of gravitational collapse and accretion
and for billions of years their respective orbits have remained undisturbed.
On our own planet, it's presumed that the geological processes we see on earth today
can be traced back over many millions of years
since a giant asteroid impact killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
This is the picture of our solar system's four-and-a-half billion year history,
sanctioned for publication in educational textbooks for many decades.
But this picture is incrementally changing
in the face of an ever-growing evidentiary crisis.
The belief that our solar system formed from a collapsing nebular cloud,
finds no parallel in the thousands of exoplanetary systems scientists have discovered,
including planets with bizarre retrograde orbits
and Jupiter-sized planets orbiting tiny parent stars
at a fraction of the distance separating the Earth from the Sun.
In fact, with increasing regularity, mainstream scientific literature
acknowledges that our solar system has undergone dramatic changes,
making it a very different place than it was after its formation.
Recently, scientists surveying nearly 1,000 exoplanets
in over 300 multi-planet systems, discovered an astonishing pattern.
Planets that share a star appear like "peas in a pod"
with planetary neighbors of consistently similar sizes and regular orbital spacing.
On the ramifications of these findings for an understanding of our own solar system;
a recent Phys.org reports states,
"...in our solar system, the inner planets have surprisingly large spacing and diverse sizes.
Abundant evidence in the solar system suggests that Jupiter and Saturn
disrupted our system's early structure,
resulting in the four widely-spaced terrestrial planets we have today."
As those who have followed the Thunderbolts project are aware,
for many decades our chief principals have proposed
such a disruption to our solar system structure
though not to billions of years in the past
and these catastrophes were not typified by random impacts
but by electrical discharges between planets.
Rocky planets and moons reveal bizarre cratering patterns
and other features that have been easily reproduced
in decades of laboratory experiments with electrical discharges.
Material removed from planetary surfaces
formed our solar system's comets, asteroids and meteoroids.
A "radical notion" to which scientific discovery lends increasing support.
Today, scientific research into arguably the most perplexing meteorite
ever found on earth is "rattling" the solar system's status quo,
challenging astronomers fundamental ideas
about our solar system's formation and history.
Since 2013, scientists on earth
have been studying fragments from the so called Hypatia stone,
a tiny meteorite found in the Libyan desert glass field in southwest Egypt.
In 2015, a number of research teams announced that the material
cannot be identified based on any known type of meteorite or comet.
As reported by phys.org in January of this year,
new scientific research by a team at the University of Johannesburg has,
"...provided unsettling answers that spiral away
from conventional views of the material our solar system was formed from."
The matrix of minerals composing the Hypatia stone has been described as a "fruitcake"
resembling no known meteorite or comet
and consisting of strange and never-before-seen combinations of minerals.
And the dust material found in the fragments
confounds the very core of the solar nebula hypothesis.
As described by phys.org,
"Generally, science says that our solar system's planets ultimately formed from a
huge, ancient cloud of interstellar dust (the solar nebula) in space.
The first part of that process would be much like
dust bunnies coagulating in an unswept room.
Science also holds that the solar nebula was homogeneous,
that is, the same kind of dust everywhere.
But Hypatia's chemistry tugs at this view."
Lead investigator, professor Jan Kramer states,
"For starters, there are no silicate minerals in Hypatia's matrix,
in contrast to chondritic meteorites (and planets like the Earth, Mars and Venus),
where silicates are dominant.
Then there are the exotic mineral inclusions.
If Hypatia itself is not presolar,
both features indicate that the solar nebula wasn't the same kind of dust everywhere -
which starts tugging at the generally accepted view of the formation of our solar system."
In part one of this two-part presentation,
Thunderbolts colleague Peter Mungo Jupp begins an examination of the Hypatia stone
as we explore the object's ramifications for the Electric Universe theory.
The Hypatia stone, was it a comet or a cosmic thunderbolt?
Now, the Hypatia stone is a chemically unique carbonaceous tektite
considered alien to earth.
In 1996, Egyptian geologist Ali Barakat
discovered a tiny one-ounce stone in the Eastern Sahara.
And ever since, scientists have been trying to figure out
where exactly the mysterious pebble originated.
Recently, research at Jan Kramer’s team from the University of Johannesburg
found its chemical composition doesn't resemble anything found on earth
or in the comets or meteorites they have studied.
They therefore concluded it was a deep-space extraterrestrial
from behind the Kuiper asteroid belt.
It was discovered amongst the supposedly
29 million years old Libyan desert glass-strewn field.
Jan's team proposed that the Hypatia stone
is a remnant of a cometary nucleus fragment
that impacted after incorporating gases from the atmosphere.
Its co-occurrence with Libyan desert glass suggests that this fragment
could have been part of a bolide
that broke up and exploded in the air burst that formed the glass.
Chemical analysis from the team suggests the fragment was a deep-space
extra-terrestrial from behind the Kuiper asteroid belt.
In normal chondritic meteorites,
we expect to see a small amount of carbon and a good amount of silica
but Hypatia's matrix has a massive amount of carbon
and an unusually small amount of silicon.
Even more unusual, the matrix contains a high amount of very specific carbon compounds
called poly(cyclic)aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs,
a major component of interstellar dust,
which existed, the team claims, even before our solar system was formed.
In another twist, most but not all, of the PAHs in the Hypatia matrix
has been transformed into diamonds smaller than 1 micrometer
which are thought to have been formed in the shock of impact
with the Earth's atmosphere or surface.
Carbon isotope data does not fit terrestrial coal or carbonaceous chondrites
as the source of the pebbles, due to the high carbon-13 content.
Carbon-12 is the norm for so-called fossil fuel surface deposits
containing vegetable and animal fossil inclusions.
But is there a better explanation?
I believe their conclusions, although possible, are not the only explanations.
I will build a questioning case against this controversial theory.
Some of the team's foundational paradigms, in my opinion, are suspect.
Now, firstly the claim that the pebble is 29 millions of years old
relies on dating procedures such as uranium, thorium and potassium argon
that demands a constant half-life of an isotope over eons of time.
I suspect this is a fallacy when applied all the catastrophic scenarios
that have revisited earth.
Synchrotron and many other forms of radiation may well order
the internal structure of atoms and thus their half-life.
Linear half-life is impossible to verify over eons of time
being merely an extrapolation based on a very narrow time sampling,
in other words the present-day.
Some indications are in strong denial of this proven scientific fact.
Now, for instance, Rick Firestone who I interviewed, a world expert in isotopes,
who ran the cyclotron at Berkeley National Laboratory, revealed as an example
that the same isotope of cobalt-60 can have dramatically different half-lives.
He couldn't explain why, other than to suggest internal changes in the nucleus.
Could cosmic discharge events be involved in altering stable isotopic half-lives?
Big question.
So, in other words, suspect dating methods were used by Jan's team
to support explanations using millions of years
to place the Hypatia pebble’s creation
as part of an assembly of unchanged pre-solar matter.
They claim this matter existed in space
before our Sun, the Earth and other planets in our solar system were formed.
But slow relentless change over millions of years is totally unproven
and more often dodges the real explanation.
This concept of uniformitarianism,
that is everything happens gradually and only as witnessed in our present world,
is at odds to the observed catastrophic events that have often driven periods
of extremely rapid change in the Earth's and solar system's development.
The result mass extinctions and planetary chaos
are but one example of radical chemical transformation.
Old Might Just be Young
Now, I was fascinated to talk to Louis Hissink,
a former diamond geologist with De Beers.
He enlightened me on his escape from the confines of classical geological theory.
His epiphany came when confronted with Aboriginal mythology
that explained recent diamond formation in the Australian Kimberley region.
This may also explain the presence of diamonds in the Hypatia stone.
Louis was expanding exploration from the famous Argyle diamond mines,
biggest in the world, to the alluvial plains near Kununurra some 150 kilometers away.
Alluvial diamonds were found in a nearby river
but the site was yet to be isolated.
A magnetic anomaly pointed to a concentration point.
Now once obtaining local approval from the Gija and Miriwung tribes,
a fascinating local legend came to light.
The verbal Australian Aboriginal legend stated that a giant, shining Barramundi,
that's a fish,
had jumped out of the ground at Argyle, where the diamond pipe was.
The magnetic anomaly site at distant Kununurra
was where the aboriginals insisted it dived back into the earth.
Both sites were rich in diamonds around their deep diamond pipes.
Was the Barramundi legend nonsense?
Or had these people witnessed perhaps a giant plasmoid causing transmutation of elements
and the creation of diamonds on a grand scale.
Now, regardless, Louis Hissink started to question
the crusted paradigms of modern geology
which, as its backbone, maintains that millions of years
are required to change the topography of Earth.
Foundational geologists Hutton and Lyell's, classical theories of the 19th century,
maintained that slow, erosional decay and gentle chemical change
is the steady tool of Earth's geological dynamics.
This theory of uniformity asserts that nothing has happened on Earth
that's not witnessed today.
Louis pondered that if these paradigms were correct,
how could historical aborigines witness a diamond creating event
supposedly millions of years old?
Louis Hissink concluded, and I quote,
"Some of the cherished geological theories we hold may be quite wrong!"
Our first objection to the University of Johannesburg's hypothesis is blunt.
The age of the Sahara Desert is nowhere near 28 million years old.
Insightful, as a witness, are the pictures by David Roberts, painted around the 1850s,
which show many ancient Egyptian destruction sites
such as the Kom Ombo temple; and the Sphinx, half buried under sand.
This deposition of sand and earthquake damage is obviously an historical event.
Even more direct evidence of the Sahara desert's relatively low age
is shown by Barth's 1850 discovery of drawings of herds of cattle
rendered by the desert's early dwellers.
The animals depicted no longer inhabit this area and many are generally extinct.
Neolithic implements, vessels and weapons have also been found near the drawings.
The drawings of the cattle contain disk on their horns
similar to Egyptian drawings of disk, circa 4 to 6,000 years old time frame.
Pictures of chariots, drawn by horses, are found in areas
where horses today couldn't possibly survive.
They've been revealed in both the eastern and western parts of the Sahara.
Men lived in these densely populated areas where cattle pastured,
but where today are enormous expanses of sand, stretched for thousands of miles.
Even the ancient document Papyrus Ipuwer describes a calamitous time
when the deserts of Egypt were created. Our quote is,
"The desert is throughout the land, the nomes are laid waste."
So it's, that's evidence that the creation of the sands
where the desert glass and the Hypatia stones were found, are only recent creations.
They're thousands of years old and not due to an episode 28 million years ago.
Stay tuned for part 2