Additional information, images, videos & links from LOR on June 17, 2024.
As usual, this is just my opinion, arrived at by personal research, come to by following mainstream clues.
As usual, no one has seemed to notice that I have long since solved the Holy Grail mystery.
Yes, all my genealogy work combined with my disinterment of the Phoenicians has put this one to rest as well.
Did you get it?
If not, I am here to connect the dots for you.
You should have realized that Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code was just the latest attempt to misdirect on this.
image.png
960 KB
View full-sizeDownload Daniel Gerhard Brown (born June 22, 1964) is an American author best known for his thriller novels, including the Robert Langdon novels Angels & Demons (2000), The Da Vinci Code (2003), The Lost Symbol (2009), Inferno (2013), and Origin (2017).
That is why they deny that famous people with the same names are related, though I have always been able to show you they are, getting the information straight from posted genealogies or from thepeerage.com.
They are all very closely related and most come from one or two very important lines.
For instance, I have shown you that all US Presidents and most Hollywood stars are closely related, and that they all come from the direct line of William the Conqueror and before that from Charlemagne.
Thomas Jeffrey Hanks (born July 9, 1956) is an American actor and filmmaker. Known for both his comedic and dramatic roles, he is one of the most popular and recognizable film stars worldwide and is regarded as an American cultural icon. Hanks's films have grossed more than $4.9 billion in North America and more than $9.96 billion worldwide, making him the fourth highest-grossing actor in North America.
They not only admit he is a third cousin of Abe Lincoln, but they also admit he comes in direct line from William the Conqueror and Charlemagne.
They always tell you Hanks is a distant cousin of Lincoln, but third cousin is not distant.
It is very close.
But let's take it back even further.
Charlemagne was a Carolingian.
Where did the Carolingian bloodlines come from?
From the earlier Merovingians.
Hmmm.
That name rings a recent bell, doesn't it?
It comes right out of The Matrix, where they dangle other clues right in front of our faces.
We see more proof of that from the admitted fact that Charlemagne was crowned emperor in 800AD wearing a Tyrian purple robe.
They all but admit he was a Phoenician.
To get you off those bloodlines, Dan Brown and his precursors waltz in and admit that San Greal, “Holy Grail”, should be Sang Real, “Royal Blood”, indicating not some stupid chalice, but an aristocratic bloodline.
So, he takes you close to the right answer, as they do, and then diverts you quickly right back out into the bushes, by making you think this has to do with the bloodline of Jesus.
Except for one very important fact:
Jesus wasn't royal or aristocratic.
He was supposed to be the son of a carpenter.
You will say his real father was God, which is as royal it gets, but that isn't what “royal” means.
And, as we saw with many other mysteries, including the fake JFK assassination, when lie #1 isn't working or is getting old, it is time to create lie #2.
They always back up the fake mainstream story with a second alternative story, and maybe a third and fourth one.
So, when people started questioning the grail story, they came up with a
“Body or tomb of Mary Magdalene”
story.
That was just sexy enough to do the job and do the job it did.
A lot of people bought it.
They brilliantly tied that into the bloodline story, since Jesus supposedly had a child with Magdalene, creating the Godly bloodline that exists to this day.
They also created a lot of symbology, numerology, and reading of puzzles in these new stories, apparently because they knew I would be using all of them to reach the correct answer.
Yes, even while Dan Brown was selling out books crammed with fake puzzles and mysteries, I was solving a series of even greater real puzzles, using:
symbology
numerology
bloodlines
fake photo reading
onomastics
anagrams
and every other trick in the book.
So, their only hope was to preempt my blockbuster with a sexier and brighter and louder one of their own.
Although my story was much better, and true, I didn't have Hollywood, the New York Times bestseller list, A-list stars, and a thousand TV channels to promote it.
I couldn't salt my solutions in with:
car chases
CGI, supermodels
evil albinos
and tours of Europe.
Just to be sure you are getting it, the big mystery of the Holy Grail never had anything to do with a cup or chalice.
Even Thomas Malory admitted that back in the 15th century.
Those complaining about how “boring” the genealogies are have been stepping right over the Holy Grail, missing it in their rush to see what I might say about Trump or Covid.
The Ark was just a box, probably long since rotted away, but we can be sure the contents survive in some form, being among the most sacred things on Earth.
We have discovered the Jews/Phoenicians take these bloodlines VERY seriously.
You will say they already have that, with the bloodlines in the Old Testament—all the begetting.
They were probably changed long ago to hide the real lines.
For instance, although we are now told the matrilineal lines are most important to the Jews, in the Biblical lists, all the women are unknown or hidden, which hides most of the main lines.
Even worse, Abraham's wife is given as Sarah, daughter of Terah.
So, Abraham married his sister?
Unlikely.
I have seen tortuous explanations for this, but the best explanation is that they don't want to tell you who his wife was, so they just throw his sister in there to fill a slot.
As in the current genealogies at Geni.com, they try to hide all the important stuff, or fudge it.
And why would these bloodlines be so important?
I can only guess, but the first of these lines—who I assume were not Adam and Eve—must have been extremely important.
I studied the question, and it turns out no other mammals need anything like as much water as we do.
Other primates drink far less water.
They are also far sturdier.
We are told that we are so delicate and weak compared to other primates because of civilization, which has pampered us, but human civilization isn't that old.
Uranus is more than twice as far away from the Sun as Saturn, so if Uranus' upper atmosphere can be 600C, anything goes for the surface of Saturn.
Cloud cover on Venus is supposed to cause a huge rise in temperature, via the greenhouse effect, so don't assume Saturn's clouds are reflecting all incoming heat.
Saturn proper is also much brighter than it should be, like Uranus, so Saturn's atmosphere must also be on fire.
What that indicates for its surface, no one knows.
Also remind yourself that science is run by Jews and always has been.
All the famous scientists of the 20th century were Jewish.
Why?
So that they can control this narrative and all others.
You know only what they want you to know.
Apparently, they don't want you to know anything about Saturn, except that it has pretty rings.
I will be told Saturn's mean density is less than water, and eight times less than the Earth, but that doesn't indicate anything about its surface density.
If its surface was far, far beneath its visible atmospheric surface, that would be explained; and there are many other ways to account for it.
So mainstream models are garbage and always have been.
We have no probe data for the surface of Saturn, although Cassini was allegedly crashed there in 2017.
That was suspicious in itself, since they chose to crash on the night side of Saturn with all cameras turned off.
Although the craft was allegedly collecting other data during the plunge, I could not find any of it.
All the announcements conspicuously fail to report any data.
Anyway, that was a bit of a diversion, but an interesting one, I think.
So, what does that have to do with the Phoenicians?
We are told that represents the sickle or scythe that the god Saturn carries.
But it doesn't look like a sickle at all, does it?
It very obviously contains the cross, for one thing.
What does that have to do with Saturn?
And it can't be the sickle because the symbol is just the symbol for Jupiter upside-down.
Did Jupiter carry a sickle upside-down?
No, we are told his symbol is the hieroglyph of an eagle.
Except that the hieroglyph for an eagle is. . . an eagle.
So, that is also misdirection.
Before we get more into that, I will show you something strange.
If you watch The Da Vinci Code closely, you will see that at the beginning, when Tom Hanks is first speaking on symbology at Harvard, they do a quick shot of his paper notebook, and the symbol of Saturn appears there prominently [min 3:20].
Even though he exhorts you to wake up and break your bonds, he gives you no idea how to do that.
If breaking Earthly bonds looks like a steep hill, what is breaking bonds from Saturn like?
But that is not what I am teaching you.
It never was and it isn't now.
The ruling families are here on this Earth and like you they cannot get off.
They cannot hide, though they try.
They cannot even hide their assets.
Their bank accounts may be offshore, but they are not off world.
In a revolution, those assets could easily be seized.
Beyond that, which is just a matter of things and money, you can throw off their power anytime you like, and it wouldn't require attacking Saturn or blocking radio waves from the Moon.
It would require doing things you are fully capable of doing right now, today, on a human and Earthly level, like SAYING NO.
Say no to:
masks
vaccines
fake events
taxes for nothing
media whores
Hollywood phonies
fake science
non-art
pretend poetry
fake history
and illegal governance.
The current system cannot proceed without your participation.
So don't participate.
Do not believe what you are told.
Do not do what you are told.
JUST DON'T DO IT.
Like Bartleby the Scrivener, you only need to know four words:
This is what Talbott was working on back in 1980, before he got involved in the Electrical Universe thing.
We know it is all another project just by looking at those involved, especially Alfred de Grazia, commanding officer of the psychological warfare propaganda team for the CIA.
De Grazia and his CIA buddies were also pushing the Saturn Myth, so we know it must be false.
The idea is that the Earth used to orbit Saturn in historical times, when Saturn was a star.
Saturn collapsed, ejecting the Earth into its present orbit.
All patently absurd.
There is absolutely no physical evidence for it, and lots of physical evidence against it, which is why Talbott, and these other frauds had to rely on squishy reports from mythology, trying to build a case from a few gathered comments about Saturn in old texts.
If you don't believe me, read The Saturn Myth for yourself.
It is complete garbage.
Ancient texts might be used as supporting evidence for a well-presented physical theory, but Talbott and the rest reverse that, using nebulous descriptions as a starting point, and only after the fact trying to cobble together some physics to support it.
This they utterly fail to do, and we must assume their failure is due to the fact they never thought of succeeding.
The project was a blackwash from the start, as you will see in a moment.
That said, the mainstream criticisms of The Saturn Myth are no better than the myth itself, as you can see here.
There, Leroy Ellenberger, whom I assume is also a spook playing the other side, quotes mainstream theory to the effect that Velikovsky's allusion to magnetic fields powerful enough to cushion planets during a near-collision, thereby avoiding
"An actual crushing collision of the lithospheres."
(Worlds in Collision, p. 382, and Velikovsky & Establishment Science, p. 30)
is ludicrous because planetary magnetic fields are simply too feeble.
Everyday experience with the effect of 100 gauss horseshoe magnets on iron filings is no reliable guide for what happens between planets with comparatively miniscule magnetic fields.
But we now know that is wrong due to Trojans and horseshoe orbits, among other things, in which magnetic fields (or more precisely the charge fields that cause them) do in fact “cushion” celestial bodies and prevent collisions.
In approach, these fields do increase in their power of repulsion, due to increasing densities of those meeting fields, and they are easily able to turn bodies in certain configurations, like the Trojans.
So, the critics of Talbott and Velikovsky are actually using outdated and disproved mainstream ideas.
They weren't disproved by Velikovsky or Talbott, but by me.
Only I have done the actual math and field theory.
Velikovsky only made the suggestion.
At any rate, though Talbott and Velikovsky were generally right about that, it doesn't even come close to saving the Saturn myth.
As perhaps the biggest clue this was another huge con job, just notice what Talbott chose to name his book: The Saturn Myth.
If you had written the book, would you have chosen that title?
I wouldn't.
You would call it the Saturn Theory, or the Saturn Hypothesis, or at worst the Saturn Revolution.
Calling it the Saturn Myth is to admit it is still no better than a myth:
that is, not true.
Our next clue is found in Talbott's chapter and subchapter list for the book, which you can see here.
You would expect him to lead with some historical evidence, then proceed to at least an outline of the physics.
But he never does, and you can see that just from his chapter headings.
In his conclusion, he is still repeating the same broad generalities of his preface:
he had made no progress in his argument in 306 pages.
For instance, to convince any real scientist that his theory had any merit at all, he would need to pretty quickly explain how a star could devolve into Saturn so quickly, where the extra mass went, where the heat went, why Saturn's other moons weren't affected, how the asteroid belt fits into this or how the Earth traversed it, how Jupiter fits in, and so on.
You would have expected Jupiter to be the second sun in this system, not Saturn, so where was Jupiter in the previous configuration?
Which sun was he circling?
A planet that size caught between two suns would be very conflicted, to say the least.
And since Saturn is so much like:
Jupiter
Uranus
Neptune
in current composition, those three must also have been stars recently.
Or if not, why not?
If Saturn was recently a star, why does he have so much unfused hydrogen and helium?
Why did he stop fusing and why does he not fit the profile of a dwarf?
A burnt-out star should be neutron rich, but we have no evidence Saturn fits that profile.
Also, the move from one star to another and from one orbiting position to another would actually be far more traumatic than what the Earth is known to have experienced in the recent past.
We can see that just from things like the ice core samples, which proceed like clockwork for millions of years.
We see no evidence of a total overhaul of the mechanisms there.
And that is just one example of thousands.
Occam's razor tells us that the myths and stories Talbott and Velikovsky quote are much more likely to be explained by:
comets
asteroids
volcanic eruptions
so why would they rush to hypothesize such outlandish things, upon so little evidence?
As far as the main contention of the Saturn myth, a first-time reader thinks up much better explanations without much effort:
if there was indeed a bright object at the pole assigned to the primary god of ancient peoples, it was probably a supernova or similar object, not Saturn.
After the object faded, it somehow got conflated with the planet Saturn.
But Talbott never considers other possibilities:
because these people called something at the pole a name we now associate with Saturn, he tells us the current planet must have been there.
We have never seen a faster or less logical rush to a conclusion.
Another theory Talbott ignores is this interesting one, which I haven't seen anywhere:
What if these ancient stories are actually retellings of stories from when our ancestors lived on Titan?
Maybe that is the golden age.
If you lived on Titan, Saturn would look more than eleven times larger than the Moon looks to us now.
And since Titan is in tidal lock, like our own Moon, if you lived on the Saturn side of Titan, Saturn would never set.
He would seem to hang in the sky, motionless.
From that near, the brightness of Saturn would be incredible, making him seem like a second star even though he wasn't.
This would explain Talbott's data, without moving Saturn at all.
Neither Saturn nor the Earth moved. . . WE DID.
It would also explain other ancient stories, like the ones concerning night.
Night would be very different depending on which side of Titan you lived on.
If you lived on the far side, away from Saturn, your night would be dependent on the Sun, and so would last about eight days.
If you lived on the near side, your night would be dependent on reflection from Saturn, so night would come only when the Sun was behind you and Saturn was in a new phase.
Since that is impossible, there would be no night on the near side.
We have even more data in favor of this hypothesis.
The mainstream now admits that Titan has liquid water oceans, though it thinks they are very cold.
Cassini confirmed liquid oceans with the reflection of ELFs.
According to the latest theories, this liquid ocean is supposed to be supercooled down to -97C by being mixed with ammonia, but they actually have no evidence for that.
That theory was created only to explain the cold they assume is there, based on old gravity-only models.
Those are the same models that can't explain the burning atmosphere of Uranus or the ice on the poles of Mercury.
But given a unified field, charge, and magnetic reconnection, we can explain much higher temperatures at the distance of Titan.
So, the temperature of the liquid ocean on Titan could be anything, including being warmer than the Earth's oceans.
In fact, I have shown the mechanism for that in my paper on the Moon, where I showed that the Moon has a denser charge field than the Earth, simply because it is smaller.
The charge field gets more compressed by moving through a smaller body.
Unlike Talbott or Velikovsky, I do the math there.
Since Titan is smaller than the Earth, there is a straightforward mechanism for charge compression, and therefore for heat generation.
Plus, Titan is recycling charge from both the Sun and a very near Saturn, while the Earth is only recycling charge from the Sun (and very distant planets).
Raising Titan's charge profile again.
And since Titan is also known to have a heavy atmosphere of 1.5 bars, 50% higher than on the Earth, we have a mechanism for heat trapping.
This indicates the mainstream theory of a thick layer of ice on the surface of Titan is probably wrong.
In fact, composite pictures of Titan in infrared from NASA do not confirm it.
A layer of surface ice 62 miles thick would look nothing like that, in false color or not.
I would say the choice to use white as their main false color is suspicious, since it automatically pushes you to seeing snow or ice there.
But they had no physical reason to choose white or orange and could have just as easily used blue and brown like the earth.
Why didn't they?
That would be bit revelatory, wouldn't it?
Cassini also found significant shifting of those surface features, indicating the continents on Titan are moving.
In other words, they are floating freely in the oceans, unconnected to the mantle.
That would explain other curious comments in the ancient stories.
NASA also admits mountains and volcanoes exist on Titan.
What?
On a surface of miles-thick ice?
Also a few impact craters?
Impact craters on a shifting surface of ice?
We seem to have a lot of contradictions there.
Like the CIA, NASA needs to hire a continuity editor.
Or, to deal with me, maybe a large team of continuity editors.
And at Wikipedia, we actually find this astonishing admission, taken straight from NASA:
The climate—including wind and rain—creates surface features similar to those of Earth, such as dunes, rivers, lakes, seas (probably of liquid methane and ethane), and deltas, and is dominated by seasonal weather patterns as on Earth.
With its liquids (both surface and subsurface) and robust nitrogen atmosphere, Titan's methane cycle bears a striking similarity to Earth's water cycle.
If the seas are liquid methane, what are the dunes made of?
What are the continents made of?
And if the atmosphere is robustly nitrogen, like here on Earth, with huge amounts of oxygen (in the form of water) present, why do they go out of their way to hide any oxygen in the atmosphere?
I think you know.
A reader also pointed out that there is a hexagon on Titan, though not at the pole.
But he was wrong:
there are actually two.
Blow that last image up and you will see a larger one in the inset at 4 o'clock, and another smaller one in the inset at 6'clock.
But I will be told, if Titan's atmosphere is so thick, inhabitants couldn't have seen out at all.
Saturn itself would have been invisible.
Yes, assuming that atmosphere was there, thousands of years ago.
But if we assume the atmosphere was created by environmental degradation of the sort currently happening on the Earth, that too is answered.
That atmosphere is precisely why our ancestors had to leave.
Not coincidentally, Titan's orange smog is hydrocarbons, just like you see in Los Angeles.
We are told it is caused by methane being broken up by sunlight, but that is ridiculous.
It is much more likely that it was created in the way it is created here, by pollution from industry.
That pollution then somehow destroyed the oxygen content of the atmosphere, making the place uninhabitable for us.
The atmosphere of Titan provides many clues of this, including the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, created by the burning of coal or oil deposits.
Even the high levels of methane on Titan are a clue, since if the hydrocarbons were created by decomposing methane, sunlight would have long since decomposed all the methane.
Indicating the methane is also residual from just a few thousand years ago.
Meaning it too was released by the inhabitants somehow.
We may assume it wasn't from farting cows, so again it was probably from burning fossil fuels.
This prevents any and all discussion of real theory.
Anyone can see I have almost nothing in common with these people.
My output alone should tell you that.
I have published over 10,000 pages on my science site alone.
That's 33 volumes of groundbreaking research.
And my papers are dense with math and page-by-page, line-by-line critiques of mainstream theories and equations.
I show specific cheats and mistakes in math by:
Feynman
Einstein
Gell-Mann
Weinberg
Maxwell
Bohr
Newton
Keppler
Landau
and dozens of current and living physicists.
This is something:
Talbott
Velikovsky
Icke
and all the rest have never done.
My critics dismiss me as they dismiss Velikovsky:
neither of us have the right degrees, the right framed papers on our walls.
So, they don't have to respond to my line-by-line mathematical destructions of Landau, Feynman, or anyone else.
These destructions PROVE I am a better mathematician than these famous mathematicians, but my critics are paid to say that because I don't have a PhD in math or physics, I can't possibly be either a mathematician or a physicist.
Argument by misdirection.
Notice that they dodge me far more fully than they dodge Velikovsky.
Lots of people have responded directly to his arguments, but no one has ever responded to mine.
Yes, they respond, but only by ad hominem or other misdirection.
I have never once seen a sensible response to my mathematical critiques of:
Bohr
Feynman
Landau
Maxwell
or anyone else.
Just total radio silence.
This while my papers are ranking on the front page of the search engines, sometimes above Wikipedia.
And, like the Grail Myth, the Saturn Myth misdirects by taking you close to the truth but then dodging you back out into the bushes.
As I said, I do think there is something going on with Saturn.
The ancients were telling us something about Saturn, but nothing like what:
Talbott
Icke
Velikovsky
would have you believe.
I don't know exactly what that something is yet, but it is much more likely to be a colonizing or a genetic experiment than Worlds in Collision.
Assuming we can already send probes to Saturn, it wouldn't take much of a technological advance to transport live beings back and forth.
It doesn't take near-light speeds or time-dilation or hibernation—a la Planet of the Apes or Alien— to imagine travel from here to there.
It would only be a matter of months.
Plus, travelling toward the Sun should be much easier than travelling away from it, since we can use its gravity to move toward it.
Everything not in orbit will move directly at the Sun and accelerate while doing it.
So, travel from Titan to the Earth would have been a lot easier than travel from the Earth to Titan.
And, as I said above, the high temperatures we are discovering on planets far from the Sun make this all the easier to propose.
Life on the moons of Saturn was pretty hard to sell a few years ago, when we thought it was necessarily bitter cold out there.
But now that we know more about how heat can be generated by planets and moons, via my charge field, the possibility of life goes way, way up.
Anyone claiming I have jumped the shark or outed myself with this paper is immediately suspect, in my opinion.
My enemies have been chomping at the bit for any new reason to dismiss me, and we see them pissing themselves in elation over this one.
But I have bad news for them:
the attempts to blackwash me will fail like all the ones before.
At this point, I couldn't jump a shark if I tried.
What's done is done, and my work up to now is unassailable.
Even if I lost my mind tomorrow and began publishing absolute gibberish, it wouldn't matter.
People do get old, and they often do lose their minds (especially these days, in the time of fluoride, aluminum, and glyphosate), but that doesn't justify jettisoning their life's work.
or a thousand other things are far more controversial than Saturn or aliens.
If I were worried about saving my physical theories from knee-jerk dismissal, I would have kept quiet about any number of things.
But that isn't my way.
In the future, it will be appreciated how all my revolutions hang together, but for now that is hard to see, I know.
As this has unfolded, we have seen something droll.
My peanut gallery and opposition really should have kept their mouths shut here.
That was their only hope.
Every little peep from them only made me look at this longer and harder, which was the last thing they wanted.
We have seen that same progression play out over and over, so I don't know why they can't learn that lesson. * Saturn looks the same size as the Earth, from the Sun, so it captures the same cross section of charge, despite being so much larger. ** The hexagon and the music are linked, since both the shape and the radio waves follow the same period of 10.6 hours. † They tell us Jesus was of the line of David through Joseph, but Jesus got no blood from Joseph.
We are told Joseph was legally the father of Jesus by Jewish law, but this isn't a matter of law, it is a matter of nature.
Jesus got no genetic material from Joseph.
Mary was not in the line of David.
You will say she was in the line of Levi and Aaron, but that's all as maybe, and even if she were, that line hadn't been noble for a long, long time.
One of the points of the gospels is that Jesus wasn't a priest or noble of any other kind, being of lowly birth.
Which is why his statements were so shocking.
Being a carpenter, he wasn't supposed to be questioning anything.
And besides, the ones pushing Jesus in the line of David hardest are Jews.
Just do a Google search on it if you don't believe me.
Jewish sites come up first.
It is as if they are claiming Jesus, which, given history, is pretty odd.
