http://shop.atlantisrising.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Category_Code=Subscriptions

ANCIENTMYSTERIES

FUTURE SCIENCE

UNEXPLAINEDANOMALIES

PUBLISHER & EDITORJ. Douglas Kenyon

CONTRIBUTORSScott CreightonMichael Cremo

Thomas DietrichBeverly Jaegers

Frank JosephErwin LazloJulie Loar

Susan Martinez, Ph.D.Marsha OaksTodd Prescott

Robert M. Schoch, Ph.D.Steven Sora

William B. StoeckerCarly Svamvour

COVER DESIGNRandy Haragan

GRAPHICSRyan Hammer

Randy HaraganDenis Ouellette

ATLANTIS RISING®(ISSN #1541-5031)

published bi-monthly(6 times a year)

by Atlantis Rising, LLC521 S. 8th St., Ste. A

P.O. Box 441Livingston, MT 59047

Copyright 2017 & 2018ATLANTIS RISING

No part of this publicationmay be reproduced withoutwritten permission from the

publisher.

Periodicals Postage Paid atLivingston, MT and

at additional post offices.USPS Number: 024-631

U.S. Subscription priceis $29.95 (6 issues)

POSTMASTER:Send Address Changes to

Atlantis RisingPO Box 441

Livingston, MT 59047

®

Order BOOKS, DVDs & MORE: Shop.AtlantisRising.com

10

45

46

39

4232

CONTENTSJanuary / February 2018

127

7 Letters

10 AlternativeNews

17 DissentingOpinion

19 Michael Cremo

23 Global Weirding CatastrophicWeather andGlobal Warming

24 The WOW!SignalReconsidered Was ET Evidence

Rejected TooHastily?

42Pole Shift &the PyramidsGiza Alignments &

Ancient Disaster

45The Very LongJourney ofOmm SetyThe Amazing Tale

of a Reincarnated

Egyptian Priestess

46A ‘Heretic’s’Complaint

48Astrology

50DVD

57 Puzzle

29 The ThinkingUniverseReality May NotBe What WeThought it Was

32 SasquatchThe ‘Myth’ that

Won’t Go Extinct

35 The Religionsof AtlantisDo We Know What

the Natives Believed?

39 In Searchof Tarshish

40 Egypt & Turin’s‘Golden’ Rule

25 23

Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!10 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 127

ALTERNATIVE NEWS

SpaceX Unveils Rocket for MarsArtist’s conjecture of what a colonialcity on Mars might look like

For those who believe that an-cient Mars was once home to

a technological civilization, theodds of proving it in our lifetimehave just gotten shorter. In fact,much shorter. Elon Musk,founder and president of SpaceX,announced in September hiscompany plans to build a com-pletely reusable rocket and space-craft capable of ferrying, not only,“millions” of colonists to the redplanet—beginning in less than 10years—and establishing/servicing amoon base but also of carryingpassengers on Earth to any otherspot on Earth in less than an hour. Whilemany may scoff, Musk has already demon-strated that when he says he will do some-thing, it is not smart to bet against him.

His giant new rocket is now affection-ately called BFR (the letters stand for either‘Big Falcon Rocket’ or something else—yourcall). Though somewhat smaller than the In-terplanetary Transportation System (ITS) thatMusk unveiled a year ago, it will still be thebiggest rocket ever built on Earth, by a longshot. For comparison, the Saturn 5 whichtook astronauts to the moon in the 1960s and’70s would be dwarfed. Millions of space fans(including Atlantis Rising editor DougKenyon) present at those Saturn launches stillrecall watching, awestruck, from many milesaway as that 65-story monster machine rosebrilliantly into the night sky, shaking theground like an earthquake. For these, the au-dacity of Musk’s plan is inescapable.Doubters, however, must reckon with therecord of SpaceX, which has apparently mas-tered the elusive technology of makingreusable spacecraft. By press time, the com-

pany had launched, and recovered, over 17 or-bital-class rockets.

Announcing his new plan on September29 at the 68th International AstronauticalCongress in Adelaide, Australia, Musk pro-vided plenty of sensational news. The newSpaceX rocket is set to replace the FalconHeavy, planned for initial launch by the endof 2017 (when you read this, you will know ifhe succeeded). Unlike the previous SpaceXrockets, the BFR will be fully reusable, andcapable of refueling in space, an essential ca-pability for missions like resupplying the In-ternational Space Station (ISS), landing onthe moon, and sending missions to Mars by2022. By refueling in space, the BFR will beable to make trips to the moon without need-ing to re-fuel there. That should make “MoonBase Alpha” doable.

The new BFR will be 106-meters tall and9 meters in diameter, somewhat less than the122-meter height and 17-meter diameter laidout in 2016 for the ITS. The booster stage willuse 31 Raptor engines (instead of 42), andthere will be six Raptor engines on the space-

craft itself (not nine). The changes will makeit cheaper and help SpaceX pay for it. SpaceXstill plans to build up enough of the com-pany’s previous Falcon rockets to serve itssatellite launching business and for resupply-ing the ISS. That will make it possible tofocus fully on one rocket to serve all of itsapplications, the BFR.

With space for 150 tons of cargo, com-pared to Falcon Heavy’s 30 tons, the BFR willstill be fully reusable. Its nose is big enough,Musk said, to launch a mirror that has tentimes the surface area of the current Hubbletelescope without folding it at all. With mul-tiple engines, it’s designed to be as reliable asa 747, capable of landing even if it loses anengine. Unlike the current Falcon 9, theBFR’s control will be so precise that no land-ing legs will be needed.

Musk has often said his goal is to makehumanity a two-planet species, but just incase such a thing has already been accom-plished in the forgotten eons of the past, itwill certainly be worth our while to finallylearn the truth.

BFR (l.) &Saturn 5

BFR docks witha space station(artist’s concept)

Number 127 • ATLANTIS RISING 11Shop.AtlantisRising.com or See Our 8-Page Catalog—Page 74

The late Zecharia Sichin, au-thor of The Twelfth Planet and

other best-selling books in hisEarth Chronicles series, whereverhe is, is probably cheering thesedays. In October, 2017, NASApublicly conceded that, in alllikelihood the Solar System has aninth planet. Sitchin’s scenarioof a planet Nibiru making peri-odic returns to Earth’s neighbor-hood to tinker with humanhistory, may not quite fit withNASA’s view of a massive bodyon a vast orbital path, as yet un-tracked. Yet, still, many of the el-ements Sitchin said he haddecoded from ancient Sumeriancuneiform texts seem to be pres-ent in the now favored ninth-planet theory. Sitchin’s hypo-thetical Nibiru, for instance, followed a 3,600-year-long orbitaround the sun, making it virtu-ally invisible from Earth for mostof the time.

The ninth planet whichNASA now calls “likely” proba-bly has a mass ten times that ofEarth and may be twenty timesas far from the sun as Neptune.

NASA Concedes:Planet 9 ProbablyReal

Paths ofthe various

objectsthat orbit

our sun(NASA)

Planet 9

No one has spotted it yet, butastrophysicists say it is the onlyway to explain all the quirks inthe orbits of a number of solar-system objects, planetary andotherwise. Konstantin Batyginand colleague Mike Brown whocame up with the hypothesis arenow using the Subaru Telescopeat Hawaii’s Mauna Kea Obser-vatory to search for a missinggiant, rocky planet.

If the kind of physical inf lu-ence postulated by Sitchin canbe ruled out by the immensegravitational factors involved,could there still be forces of an-other kind at work? The eigh-teenth century Swedish savantEmanuel Swedenborg, origina-tor of nebular theory—the mostwidely accepted cosmogonicmodel explaining the formationand evolution of the Solar Sys-tem—believed that the majorityof worlds in the universe are in-habited, though not necessarilyin the same dimension as Earth.He believed their inf luence onEarth was primarily spiritual innature.

Do extraterrestrial (ET) intelligentaliens really exist “out there”? Theserious Search for ExtraterrestrialIntelligence (SETI) has been ongo-

ing for six decades, primarily utilizing radiotelescopes (which detect electromagnetic ra-diation in the radio wave range; optical tele-scopes use light, another form ofelectromagnetic radiation). The basic idea isthat a technologically sophisticated extrater-restrial civilization will utilize radio waves forcommunication, perhaps even purposefullysending a message into space to announcetheir presence. The ETs might be curious toknow if they are alone in the universe.

Many skeptics assert that thus far SETIhas come

up short; no evidence ofETs has been found, they claim. However,this might not be true. Among the commu-nity of SETI researchers, as well as the generalpublic, perhaps the most famous possible ev-idence of technologically advanced ETs “outthere” is the so-called Wow! signal detectedon 15 August 1977 by the Big Ear radio tele-scope, at the time operated by Ohio StateUniversity as part of the SETI project. Thesignal received its name when astronomerJerry R. Ehman, analyzing the data on a com-puter printout, used a red pen to circle theanomaly and wrote next to it “Wow!”

On the computer printout the Wow! sig-nal consists of a string of numbers and letters

reading “6EQUJ5”. This has often been mis-interpreted as a message, but in fact the lettersused are simply number equivalents above 9,where A = 10 (or actually 10 to just under 11),and so forth. Thus the signal reads “6, 14, 26,30, 19, 5”. These numbers refer to the inten-sity of the signal in terms of its strength rela-tive to background noise; therefore, at its“peak” the signal was about 30 to 31 timesstronger than the background noise (see J. R.Ehman, 2007/2010, “The Big Ear Wow! Signal(30th Anniversary Report)”). The signal wasdetected for 72 seconds, but this does notmean it lasted for only 72 seconds, or eventhat the actual signal got stronger, peaked,and then weakened over 72 seconds. Theradio telescope could only be adjusted forheight above the horizon; to make

measurements of different parts ofthe sky, it had to wait until a certain portionof the sky came into view as Earth rotates onits axis, and it could only view a certain partof the sky for 72 seconds due to the width ofthe telescope’s “window.” The increase anddecrease in the detected strength of the Wow!signal was probably a function of the targetcoming into view of the telescope and thengoing out of view again.

The Wow! signal came from the regionof space marked by the constellation Sagittar-ius, and the actual signal had a frequency thatwas calculated to be either 1420.356 MHz(megahertz) or 1420.4556 MHz (A. Paris andE. Davies, Winter 2015, Journal of the Washing-ton Academy of Sciences), both of which corre-

spond to a wavelength of just over 21 cen-timeters. These values are very close to the hy-drogen line of 1420.40575177 MHz (awavelength of approximately 21.106 cm),which is the radiation given off by neutral hy-drogen atoms during an electron transitionbetween two levels in the atom. This is a verysignificant frequency and wavelength for acouple of reasons.

It is common in the known universe,but this “commonness” also makes it “uni-versal.” In a 1959 paper that is widely re-garded as launching the SETI radioastronomy efforts, Giuseppe Cocconi andPhilip Morrison (both at Cornell University)suggested this range of frequency and wave-length as the optimal

signal thatan ET might utilize and, therefore, we shouldfocus on (C. Cocconi and P. Morrison, 1959,Nature, vol. 184, no. 4690). And it was thisrange of frequency and wavelength that as-tronomer Frank D. Drake focused on forsome of the earliest SETI searches in 1960. Inthis respect, the strong Wow! signal matchedthe predicted signature of an ET signal. Asdiscussed further below, arguing against thepossibility that the Wow! signal originatedfrom Earth (perhaps ref lected off of a pieceof space debris into the telescope), ratherthan deep space, is the fact that the 1420MHz frequency range falls within a spectrumof electromagnetic signals that is reserved forastronomical purposes—terrestrial transmittersare not allowed to operate in this range (and

THE

SIGNALRRECONSIDERED

Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!24 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 127

THE ET FACTOR

Continued on Page 26

• BY ROBERT M. SCHOCH, Ph.D.

Was Evidence ofET Technology Detected

in 1977, Dismissed too Hastily?

Number 127 • ATLANTIS RISING 29Shop.AtlantisRising.com or See Our 8-Page Catalog—Page 74

CONSCIOUSNESS

Continued on Page 31

Who are we? And why are wehere? Despite their apparentsimplicity, these are perhaps themost important and challeng-

ing questions ever asked. “Know thyself,” saidthe oracle at Delphi, and thinking peoplehave been trying to do so for millennia.Today, at the cutting edge where modern sci-ence meets timeless spirituality, we can giveanswers that are more trustworthy than anyof the answers oracles and humans could givebefore.

We need to start with the basics. Whoare we? Are we part of the world in which welive, or are we beings apart from and perhapsabove the world? We may possess uniquequalities and features, but science assumesthat we, as all living things, are part of theworld in which we came to be. But what isthe true nature of that world? If we are toknow who we are, we need to know what theworld is. Remarkably, the answer to this queryis becoming well-founded and reliable—eventhough it is very different from what mostpeople think it is.

A New Concept of the World The world, according to cutting-edge sci-

ence, is not an ensemble of bits and pieces ofmatter. As astrophysicist James Jeans said overa hundred years ago, the world is more like abig thought than like a big rock.

The concept of a thoughtlike world is fa-miliar from the history of speculation on fun-damental questions. Today, more and morephilosophers, scientists, and intuitive peoplein all walks of life question that the worldwould be just what is presented to our senses.They realize that the classical answer—that theuniverse would be the arena for the motionof insensible matter in passive space and in-differently f lowing time—is not the last word.The old concept, based on Newton’s classicalmechanics, has run its course. There is a newconcept of what the world truly is. It is notan ensemble of separate bits of matter movingin accordance with mechanistic laws, but anintrinsically whole system where all things areconnected in ways that transcend the previ-ously known bounds of space and time.

In the new concept, the things that fur-nish the world are not pieces of matter. Sur-prisingly (or perhaps not so surprisingly,because this has been an age-old intuition)they are basically vibration. The vibrationsthat make up the world we observe are notrandom but highly ordered: they are coherent.Their order and coherence tell us that theyare not the result of mere chance. To use aterm suggested by physicist David Bohm, thevibrations are “in-formed.” (Bohm used thisterm to explain how the deep dimension ofthe cosmos beyond space and time—he calledit “the implicate order”—affects the perceiveddimension in space and in time (the “expli-cate order”.) Everything in the world is spon-taneously and effectively in-formed by a deep

dimension, ourselves and our brain and mindincluded. In the last count, we are in-formedclusters of vibration in space and time, inter-acting and coevolving with other clustersboth locally, here and now, and nonlocally,throughout the universe.

In one form or another, the concept ofthe world as in-formed vibration has beenpart of the wisdom of the great spiritual tra-ditions. It was present in the Sanskrit conceptof Akasha, where it meant the fifth, and deep-est, dimension or element of the world, be-yond yet encompassing the four elementaldimensions of earth, air, fire, and water. It wassometimes used in the sense of “sky” or “at-mosphere.” Later it came to be seen as anethereal field underlying the observed world.

The intuition of the Akasha was presentin the Vedic texts of India as early as 5,000BCE. In the Vedas its function was identifiedwith shabda, the first vibration, the first ripplethat makes up our universe, and also withspanda, described as “vibration/movement ofconsciousness.” The contemporary Indian

scholar I. K. Taimni wrote, “There is . . . amysterious integrated state of vibration fromwhich all possible kinds of vibrations can bederived by a process of differentiation. Thatis called N.da in Sanskrit. It is a vibration ina medium . . . which may be translated as“space” in English. But . . . it is not mereempty space but space which, though appar-ently empty, contains within itself an infiniteamount of potential energy.”

This formerly esoteric notion is now sus-tained and substantiated in science. In quan-tum physics, observations and calculationsreveal that at the ultrasmall dimension, spaceis not empty and smooth. It is “grainy,” filledwith waves and vibrations. When physicistsdescend to the ultrasmall dimension, they donot find anything that could be called matter.What they find are waves and clusters ofstanding or propagating vibrations.

Previously, scientists assumed that it ismatter that vibrates. There is a ground sub-

TTheThinkingUniverse

Reality Might NotBe What WeThought It Was

• BY ERVIN LASZLO

Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!

THE UNEXPLAINED• BY TODD PRESCOTT

Dr. John Bindernagel, retired wildlife biologist,

investigates purportedsasquatch rock pit. (Photo by J. Green)

Bob Titmus withsasquatch footprint

casts. (Photo J. Green)

Shot from 1967 Patterson/Gimlin film

ArgosymagazineFeb. 1968

Of all the so-calledmyths in the world—unicorns, mermaids,trolls, dragons, et al.—

sasquatch is the most persistent.The subject matter is also regu-larly cited in the pages of variousprint media: books, magazines,newspapers. The Internet isf looded with numerous web-sites/pages and forums devotedto the subject. Skeptics readilydismiss the tall, hirsute and

mostly docile ape/man-like creaturesas the product ofmisidentif ication,vivid imagination,or hoaxing. Butno matter howyou cut it, big-foot just keepsrearing its uglyhead, leavingcountless wit-

nesses and common folkmore than a little perplexed.Even some scientists express be-fuddlement.

No one knows when orwhere the subject ofsasquatch/bigfoot arose in thefirst place. Although bothnames—sasquatch and bigfoot—originated in North America,sightings of some same or similarcreatures have been reportedworldwide. Suffice it to say, thesubject of hairy, man-like mon-sters may have been here forever.

When Europeans arrived inNorth America, they quicklylearned of Native beliefs in thepresence of another bipedhominoid (aside from humans)traipsing around in the woods.Soon, some of the new arrivalswere also claiming sightings ofthese creatures. But it didn’tend there. Nearly all NorthAmerican indigenous peopleshave a word or two referenc-ing what we now callsasquatch or bigfoot: theLummi—C’amek’wes (“hairyman”), the Hopi—Chavcyu(“giant”), the Haida—Gagiit(“wild man that lives in thewoods”), the Sioux—Iktomi(“the trickster or doubleface”), the Coast Salish—Sasahevas (“wild man ofthe woods”), and on andon and on . . .

Hairy giants, how-ever, didn’t make a big

splash on New-World maps until1958, when press wires eruptedwith accounts from a Jerry Crewof Sayler, California. Mr. Crewproduced a cast of an alleged big-foot print from the Bluff Creekarea of ‘The Golden State.’Crew’s photos were plastered onnewspapers across North Amer-ica and elsewhere. Predating thebigfoot hoopla of 1958, however,ever-quiet Canada had producedits own piece of media coverageon the subject. In 1927, reporterJohn W. Burns wrote that‘sasquatch’ was a Chehalis wordfor the creatures. Arguably thefirst-ever sasquatch researcher,Burns’ writings about the crea-ture found their way into TheChilliwack Progress (a British Co-lumbia newspaper), Canada’s Lib-erty magazine (not to be confusedwith the U.S. publication of thesame name), and various pulpmagazines including The WideWorld and SIR!. In 1929 Canada’sMaclean’s published Burns’ firstknown magazine article, andfunny enough, the date was April1. Burns’ article, however, wasnot a joke—far from it. Titled,“Introducing B.C.’s Hairy Gi-ants,” the article predated bynearly 30 years bigfoots’s U.S.coming out party, and it re-counted Chehalis sightings andencounters near Harrison HotSprings, British Columbia. Burnshad been employed on theChehalis Indian Reserve as an ed-ucator since 1925, and in hisspare time, authored articles fora few B.C. newspapers on localhistory and, sometimes, aboutwild-man reports from the area.

Even Burns, though, wasnot the first to write of wild-manreports. One of the earliest news-papers accounts describing acreature resembling bigfoot waspublished July 21, 1818—surpris-ingly not in the western portionof the U.S. (where it seems thevast majority of sightings were oc-curring) but in the eastern U.S.The following brief notice in TheEdinburgh Advertiser cites TheApalachicola Gazette stating, “thatthe habituation of some un-known animal has just been dis-covered in the upper part of thatcity [Apalachicola], which hasgiven rise to many strange conjec-tures. The animal at the time ofthe discovery was in it, but madeits scape. It is said by those whosaw it to resemble somewhat the

SASQUATCHThe ‘Myth’ that Won’t Go Extinct

Number 127 • ATLANTIS RISING 39Shop.AtlantisRising.com or See Our 8-Page Catalog—Page 74

LOST HISTORY

Continued on Page 66

• BY STEVEN SORA

Akingdom once existed in WesternEurope that has been described assemi-legendary and even mythical.Several historians make reference to

it, but archaeologists have never found it. Itis said to have had at one time one of thelargest navies in the world. The kingdom isTartessus. The director of the Anglo-Spanish-American School of Archeology has madethe claim that Tartessus was nothing short ofAtlantis in Spain.

The first mention we often hear of thisnation is from the Bible. One passenger on aTartessian ship was the biblical Jonah. Ac-cording to the Book of Jonah, he was told byGod to preach in the city of Nineveh, whichwas in the land of Assyria. In biblical times itwas a dangerous place; today it is Mosul, andstill dangerous. The citizens of Nineveh wor-shipped the goddess Ishtar, and Jonah wastold to bring his male-centric God to the peo-ple. He knew it was unlikely that he wouldbe welcomed. So instead of heading east, hewent to Joppa and boarded a ship headingwest to what the Bible calls ‘Tarshish.’ A greatstorm threatened to capsize the ship so thesailors decided it was Jonah who had causedsuch bad luck. They threw him overboardand he was swallowed by a great fish. He re-pented and escaped the fish and eventuallyfollowed God’s command.

Tarshish is the biblical name for Tartes-sus, which may simply be an Aramaic transla-tion of the name.

The Jonah story was one of the earliestrecords of this lost civilization, but it is be-lieved that Tartessian ships carried goodsfrom the west to Israel during the reign ofKing Solomon. Silver, gold, and copper aswell as Barbary Apes were imported. Spainwas rich in silver, and the Gibraltar area is fa-mous for the Barbary Apes, so this was a hintat just where Tartessus was located. Some havesaid that the entire country of Spain wasTartessus; others believe it is the area knownas Andalucia.

Who Were the Tartessians?It may be the Tartessians were an off-

shoot of the Iberian peoples. The two groupsare described as having much in common.Both had a language that remained undeci-pherable until recently. And the translationsare based on the incorporation of the Phoeni-cian language that took place around 1200BC. The language of the Basque peoples, theEtruscan language, and the Tartessian lan-guage are representations of the handful ofnon-Indo-European languages in Europe. Theextinct Etruscan language is described asunique.

The Iberian people were known in Spainfrom ancient times. Some believe they arrivedfrom Northern Africa, and linguist Barry Fellclaims they shared a writing system. He alsorecognized Basque words as related. The word

When Jonah Met the Whale,Was He Heading for Atlantis?

‘Arano’ means “eagle” in both languages.Gaelic tradition asserts that the Irish wereoriginally from Iberia. The oldest Gaelic namefor Ireland is Ibheriu.

From the Bible we know the Tartessianswere ruled by kings and mentioned withprinces of the isles—very likely islands likeCorsica and the Balearics.

Their merchants were famed for theirwealth and were known to sail into the At-lantic where the “east wind” mentioned inPsalm 48 could drive sailors out into the At-lantic. Ezekial also mentions them as bringingall sorts of riches to the markets of the east,especially to the port city of Tyre. These in-cluded silver, iron, lead, and tin. The tone ofIsaiah makes it seem that the Semites regardedtheir trading partners as a necessary evil. ThePhoenicians would go after the Tartessian mo-nopoly of metals.

Where Were Their cities?It was said the capital of Tartessus was a

city of the same name, but no one has everfound just where that city might be. Theplace considered most likely is at the mouthof the Guadalquivir River, which f lows intothe sea from Seville. A triangle exists fromSeville to Huelva and down to the mouth ofthe Guadalquivir River. Niebla, outside ofmodern Huelva, was once a source of silverand today is a rich source for archeologicalfinds. It is at the mouth of the Rio Tinto and,again, a source for silver mined nearby andupriver. Once called Ilipla, it was settled byIberians long before 1200 BC, when Phoeni-cians arrived. It is believed Iberian peoplewere trading with Libyans (of North Africa)for thousands of years.

Jonah and the Whale (Gustav Doré)

42 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 127

ANCIENT SCIENCE

In the early 1960s, American as-tronomer, Dr. Virginia Trimble, madean interesting observation about theGreat Pyramid of Giza, calculating that

the 45º inclination of the so-called ‘star-shaft’through the pyramid from the southern sideof the King’s Chamber would have targetedthe center of the Belt stars of the Orion con-stellation around 2500 BC. This informationwas then seized upon by Egyptologists asconfirmation of the pyramid’s age and, sincehe is believed to have ruled Egypt at thistime, proof that the Great Pyramid was builtby King Khufu in that remote era.

In 1994, Robert Bauval’s The Orion Mys-tery was published in which he consolidatedthis star-pyramid association by showing thatthe layout of the three main pyramids at Gizareplicated the pattern (asterism) of the threeBelt stars.

However, there was a problem. Thestar-pyramid correlation had been placedon the ground at Giza at an angle of 44degrees (from north) while the Belt starsin 2500 BC were pivoted at around 73degrees—a clear mismatch between skyand ground.

In an attempt to explain this mis-match, Bauval suggested that the pyra-mids, although, in his opinion, built ca.2500 BC (as per Trimble’s star-shaftalignment), were laid on the ground atGiza in such a manner as to ‘memorial-ize’ a much earlier epoch, the ancientEgyptian’s Zep Tepi or ‘First Time’ (ofcreation), hence why, in Bauval’s opin-ion, the structures were rotated on theground at the 44º angle and not the 73ºangle the Belt was tilted at 2500 BC.

• BY SCOTT CREIGHTON

Are Strange Alignments onEgypt’s Giza Plateau Clues

to Ancient Catastrophe?

Orion-GizaCorrelation

In ca.2,500 BC the Gizapyramids demonstrate a‘pivot’ of 44º while the

Belt stars at that timepresent a pivot of 73º.

Number 127 • ATLANTIS RISING 43Shop.AtlantisRising.com or See Our 8-Page Catalog—Page 74

Continued on Page 69

The angular difference between the Beltstars is around 4 degrees. In placing G2 onthe ground at Giza slightly offset from itstrue Belt star position, the builders effectivelycreated an angular difference between thepyramid structures of 6 degrees. But why wouldthe builders have increased this angle from 4to 6 degrees? What purpose might be servedby doing this?

If we further consider the star-shafts ofthe Great Pyramid, we notice that there aretwo southern shafts and two northern shafts.An analysis of these shafts shows that the an-gular difference of each set is offset by around5.4 degrees and that the trajectories of thenorthern shafts present a ‘crossover point’while the southern ones do not. What we alsonotice is that the Great Pyramid consists ofthree chambers. If we consider that these threechambers are symbolic of the three Belt starsthen the middle chamber (Queen’s Chamber)will represent the middle Belt star, Al Nilam.

We can immediately observe from themiddle chamber’s northern and southernstar-shafts that they have the same inclinationof 39.6 degrees. This would indicate a timewhen the heavens were in a stable, balancedstate. The star-shafts of the highest chamber,however, seem to indicate a time when theheavens were out of balance and had rapidlychanged, when the middle Belt star, Al Nilam,moved from its normal place, rising quicklyfrom 39.6 degrees to around 45 degrees. Atthe same time, the ‘mirror point’ in thenorthern sky would have descended by anequivalent amount, from 39.6 degrees toaround 34.2 degrees.

The designers of Giza ‘offset’ the middlepyramid (G2) from its natural Belt positionon the ground at Giza

45°

39.6°

39.6°

34.2°

CrossoverPoint

The Great Pyramid’s four ‘star shafts’ and theirinclinations. The 3 chambers of the GreatPyramid may be symbolic of the 3 Belt stars.

The Great Pyramid’s four ‘star shafts’ and

inclinations. The 3 Great Pyramidchambers may represent the 3 Belt stars.

In checking star-mapping software,we find in the remote epoch of 11,750 BCthat the Belt asterism, as a result of earth’sslow precessional motion, was indeed piv-oted in the heavens at an angle of 44º (asviewed on the southern meridian).

While Bauval’s suggestion is possible,there are, however, clues at Giza, featureswithin the design, that suggest anotherquite different and more controversial ex-planation for this stellar mismatch betweenBelt altitude and Belt pivot. This alternativeexplanation arises from asking a simplequestion: Was there ever a past time when theBelt stars were pivoted at 44º while, at the verysame time, the center of the Belt had reached analtitude of 45º to be targeted by the pyramid’sstar-shaft? If so, then how far back must weturn the skies for earth’s precessional mo-tion to simultaneously meet both of thesestellar alignments? And, of course, if such acondition could be found, then how oldmight this make the Giza complex?

In consideration of this question, ananalysis of the precessional motion of theBelt stars over several hundred thousand yearswas made and, strangely, revealed that therewas never a time when the Belt stars simulta-neously reached an altitude of 45º with apivot of 44º. Beyond this vast amount of timethe Belt stars, as a result of their proper mo-tion in space, lose their familiar pattern, be-coming quite unrecognizable and far removedfrom the pattern we find in the pyramids atGiza. So, if this stellar arrangement of Belt al-titude (at 45º) and Belt pivot (at 44º) cannotbe found at any time in the past, how thenare we to explain this stellar mismatchenigma?

One of the longstanding criticisms ofthe Orion Correlation Theory (OCT) is thatthe Giza pyramid layout does not present aperfect, point-for-point match with the Beltstars. It seems that the middle pyramid (G2)is slightly ‘offset’ from its true Belt starground position.

This mismatch between sky and groundof G2 has always been regarded as an errormade by the builders in matching the Beltstar asterism. However, it may in fact be thatthis slight offset between sky and ground wasactually a deliberate action of the builders and,furthermore, that it may present a clue to-wards answering the greater stellar riddle ofthe pyramid’s two ages.

The ‘crossover point’ indicates to us thedirection of this shift of the heavens. Were AlNilam to have fallen from 45º to 39.6º thenwe would have found the ‘crossover point’ inthe trajectories of the southern shafts as op-posed to the northern shafts. What we thenhave with the two sets of star-shafts is one setshowing Al Nilam’s altitude (and northernmirror point) before a sudden change and anupper second set of shafts showing AlNilam’s altitude (and northern mirror point)after the heavens had shifted. By including thenorthern shafts with their ‘crossover point’permits us to determine the direction of thesky shift—the southern stars appeared to in-crease in altitude while the stars of the north-ern sky decreased in altitude.

And so, if we accept that the designersof Giza present the two altitudes of the starAl Nilam (before and after it suddenlychanged), might not it be reasonable to ex-pect that the designers of Giza also built intotheir design the pivot of the Belt stars beforeand after it changed? Is this perhaps why thedesigners slightly offset the middle pyramid(G2 / Al Nilam) from its true ground posi-tion, to demonstrate that, as the altitude ofAl Nilam shifted from 39.6º up to 45º, theBelt itself pivoted from 38º to 44º?

This would make sense since if the Beltstars did suddenly change their altitude byaround 5.4 degrees, it is likely that the pivotof the stars would also have been altered si-multaneously. And so, with this deeper un-derstanding of the Belt star motions, we nowhave additional information to try and ex-plain the dual age enigma of the Great Pyra-mid—it seems to be related to a shift of theheavens.

In the remoteepoch of11,750 BC, theBelt stars werepivoted at 44º

Angular difference between Belt stars is 4 degrees while Giza’s pyramids present an angular difference of 6 degrees. Someconsidered this a mistake by Giza’s builders.

Subscribe or Order Books, DVDs and Much More!46 ATLANTIS RISING • Number 127

VOICES ON TRIAL

• BY WILLIAM B. STOECKER

In recent decades we have seen the emer-gence of a very militant and vociferousgroup of people, many of them in posi-tions of inf luence in the media and ac-

ademia, who call themselves “skeptics.”Claiming that science is under assault byhordes of ignorant, superstitious peasantswho are so credulous that they actually takeseriously things like the existence of asupreme being and a spiritual realm, orUFOs, cryptids, and government conspira-cies, the “skeptics,” really debunkers, regularlydenounce such silly superstitions. They re-semble the militant atheists (in fact, most ofthem are militant atheists) who go to greatlengths to attack religions, especially Christi-anity, pretending that it is a growing andmalevolent inf luence in our society. In fact,every poll shows the opposite to be true: theinf luence of Christianity is waning, alongwith church attendance. This raises a ques-tion—if religion is mere childish nonsense andthe power of the churches is declining, whydo the atheists care? Why are they so ob-sessed that they spend a great deal of timeand money attacking it? And the same holdstrue for the debunkers. Why do they care ifa few people believe in, say, UFOs?

When someone reports a UFO, a cryp-tid, or a paranormal experience the de-bunkers often claim that there must be some“logical” explanation. They are being dishon-est—they mean a conventional explanation,one that does not challenge the status quoand its reigning paradigm. The conventional

explanation may or may not be logical. Andthey are fond of saying that “extraordinaryclaims require extraordinary evidence.” In re-ality, any claim of any kind requires evidenceto prove or disprove it. And who decides whatconstitutes an extraordinary claim? Who getsto decide what evidence is extraordinary? Ob-viously, the debunkers feel that they are theones who have this authority, and any claimcounter to the reigning paradigm is “extraor-dinary.” Judging by the debunkers’ reactionto UFO reports, no amount of evidence issufficient to class as “extraordinary,” for theexistence of UFOs has been proven beyondall doubt by astronaut and pilot reports, pho-tos and videos, and by the lights at Marfa,Texas; Brown Mountain, North Carolina; andHessdalen Valley, Norway. We just don’tknow what they are…which is why they arecalled “unidentified f lying objects.”

So militant and so organized are theskeptics that they have their own magazines.One such is the Skeptical Inquirer, the officialjournal of the Committee for Skeptical In-quiry, supported at least in part by dona-tions—for $25 a year a skeptic can become asupporting member, for $240 a year a fullmember, and for a mere $100,000 a memberof the President’s Circle. The donations aretax deductible. The editor of the magazine isone Ken Frazier, with a degree in journalism.

Then there is Skeptic magazine, the jour-nal of the Skeptics Society. This is anotherAmerican magazine, and the British havetheir own Skeptic magazine.

Looking through the articles in recent is-sues of these magazines, we can get a clearpicture of the debunkers’ viewpoint on vari-ous issues. A December 2014 issue of Skepti-cal Inquirer included a letter denouncingglobal warming “deniers,” meaning peoplewho dare to be skeptical of the man-causedglobal warming theory. The letter was signedby a long list of prominent debunkers, includ-ing Bill Nye, Joe Nickel, Jill Tarter, atheistRichard Dawkins, Susan Blackmore, and SethShostak. Skeptical Inquirer has also publishedarticles on “Statin Denialism,” attacking thosewho suspect (based on some very real studies)that statin drugs do more harm than good.The magazine has also accused those who sus-pect a link between vaccines and autism ofusing a “pseudoscience tactic.” One recent ar-ticle denounced “conspiracy theorists” whodare to suggest that 9/11 may have been aninside job or that Barack Hussein Obamamay not have been born in the U.S. Skepticmagazine also promotes the global warmingtheory, and attacks JFK assassination conspir-acy researchers and claims of alternative can-cer treatments.

Prominent debunkers appear regularlyon television. One of these is Joe Nickel, whois not a scientist at all (he has a Ph.D. in Eng-lish Literature). He has worked as a stage ma-gician and a private detective. Bear in mindthat, like all of us, he has a right to his opin-ion on scientific matters—after all, many of uswho write for Atlantis Rising and similar pub-lications and websites do not have degrees in

Galileo Galilei athis trial by the

Inquisition inRome in 1633.Galileo pushes

away the Bible.

A ‘Heretic’s’ ComplaintJust Who Put ‘Skeptics’ inCharge of ‘Science’ Anyway?

http://shop.atlantisrising.com/2002-2015-complete-set.html