Dark Energy and Dark Matter

 
Home and Introduction
The Accelerating Expanding Universe Anomaly
The Galaxy Halo Anomaly
Dark Matter
The Movements of Planets
 
The Laws
Doug Lowe
Some Other Anomalies
Contact

 

 

Some Other Anomalies

I was struck early on in my quest for knowledge how debunkers pervade our society and control the 'truth' and pervert the course of discovery and knowledge.  .

 Upon analysis, they always come from an elite and powerful group of people who have a financial and professional interest in maintaining the status quo.  They feel secure in their reinforced closed boxes.  Outside of their safe prisons the rest of the thinking world carries on thinking and discovering.  Debunking does not stop the questioning.  It does not stop determined people from continuing to ask why there are so many artifacts on Mars that cannot be explained by 'natural causes';  why the elongated or different but extremely large capacity ancient skulls do not fit the parameters defined for 'ordinary' humans;  how giant megalithic buildings were engineered and manufactured from precision cutting out of hard rock to transporting over long distances to lifting those 1200 ton blocks without sophisticated machinery.  It is high time the debunkers were debunked.  I suppose they already are as nobody takes much notice of them except when they need money for research.  Unfortunately they seem always to be in control of the bulk of the money - enough said.

So what are some of the anomalies.

Insect and Spider Anomalies

The first is the fly family.  I include the bumble bee although it is not a fly as it has 4 wings, but it isn't supposed to be able to fly or hover because of a relatively small wing area.  The anomaly is this: According to the laws of evolution, a creature will evolve qualities by natural selection to out compete competitors and predators.  The reward is survival.  Originally along with most other flying insects, the fly evolved 4 wings.  But for an unexplained reason, the fly family then tossed away the advantage of 4 wings in favour of 2.  The second pair of wings the halteres were then down graded and atrophied to act as stabilizers (according to scientists) Not only that but the halteres are a minute fraction of the size of a wing. The haltere (the knob on the end) of a fast flying large house fly measures 0.2 mm diameter whereas a wing measures 10mm x 3mm.  This is 150x smaller in cross section than a wing.  My question is this:  Why would nature cause a pair of wings, almost universal to flying insects, to degenerate into a pair of tiny stabilizers unless there is an evolutionary advantage in doing so?  Surely, merely to act as stabilizers is not a good enough explanation?  In the case of the bumble bee, why would it evolve seemingly less effective smaller wings if they do not improve survival and effectiveness in foraging?  There is another anomaly:  A fast flying house fly has a shield over the halteres.  Many other slower movers e.g. the crane fly in the fly family don't have a shield.  Again to explain it as a protective shield is not good enough.  Why would a large shield over the haltere be developed unless it had a significant purpose?  I think the reason is to amplify the vibrations from the haltere to enhance the neutralisation of gravity.

I removed the halteres from a crane fly.  It was perfectly able to maintain stable flight and to navigate to where it wanted to go except at a much slower speed.  I concluded that halteres were not essential for stable flight or directional control. I furthermore concluded that they had a much more profound function.  I concluded that they are neutralising gravity by the generation of vibrational energy.  If this is the case then the 2  rremaining wings will drive propulsion without the burden of counteracting gravity.  In spite of only having 2 wings to propel it, the modern house fly can take off in any direction it pleases including hard backwards in order to escape an aggressor.  My thinking regarding 'neutralising of gravity' has been enhanced through the study of the transport of the giant megalithic stones used in ancient megalithic buildings

I carried out my first experiment in the science lab using an electrostatic machine at Witwatersrand University when I was still 18. I failed to continue my studies there in civil Engineering as the maths tutor refused to answer my questions regarding the fundamental principles behind calculus.  He said he was not prepared to hold back the entire syllabus for the year to answer my questions..  My job as a student was to learn parrot fashion and not to ask challenging questions.  I needed to know not just how to do the maths, I also needed to know the why of it.  I should have been born 200 years ago and had a private maths tutor.  I might then have made progress in the subject.

At that time, I was convinced that the fly was using antigravity (as against neutralising gravity - a crucial difference) to enhance its flight and so I determined to invent an antigravity machine. I think I built my first machine when I was 25.  It comprised a number of driven gyroscopes. It was very basic but it used up the last few pounds out of our budget.  I say our budget because I had just got married to my wife Gwen.  But I passionately thought that it would work and the future would take care of itself.   I was wrong and not for the first time.   Each new theoretical idea begot another machine and each machine failed.  And the last series of experiments I did last year also failed. It is not quite the end of the line with those experiments

The second anomaly is the orb web of the orb web spider.  I have never had the patience to experiment with an orb web spider to see if it can spin an orb web when there is no wind at all to enable it to establish the anchoring threads. But it seems to me to be contrary to logic that without self propulsion an orb web spider can make an orb web merely by floating thread to an anchoring point.  For a start, how does the end of the thread anchor to the designated point without the specific action of the spider to do the anchoring?  The thread has to be taken to the anchor point!

 

Ancient Megalithic Structures Anomalies

The 3rd and 4th and 5th anomalies relate to the giant megalithic blocks of stone which are scattered around the Globe. Mainstream science doggedly refuses to accept that an unexplained technology was used to cut out the giant blocks from solid granite or sandstone.  Not only that, the technology used for transporting 70 ton to 1200 ton solid blocks of stone over many kilometres of rough terrain without the most advanced equipment available today, cannot be explained by mainstream conventional science.  By studying the gouge marks made during excavation it seems that the stone was softened during the process to enable easy extraction.   Have a look at http://lost-origins.com/the-ancient-site-of-saksaywaman/  Saksaywaman.  The giant building blocks have rounded corners and fit together like a 3D jigsaw puzzle.  This construction could only have been effected by moulding softened rock into the shapes needed.  It is surely conceivable that there were very advanced ancient technologies which were catastrophically lost as a result of world wide almost totally destructive cataclysms.  This belief is buried in ancient histories on all of the continents

  Another most famous megalithic site is Baalbek.  The1000 ton precision cut building blocks were brought from a quarry about a kilometre away then were lifted into place and positioned with great precision.  What kind of precision lifting and positioning gear do we have on our planet now to do this?  Have we even got that kind of equipment for use on land? We have no roads on our planet that could take this kind of load.  I have seen North Sea oil rig modules of a similar weight built on land and moved onto a barge at the harbour side.  The hydraulically propelled vehicle that moved it had something like 100 to 200 wheels and moved at about 100 feet an hour.  So how do you think our ancestors move their blocks?  There is a lot of argument about how old the original Baalbek site is but there are references in ancient history going back to long before the greek civilisation.  2500 to 3000 bc is considered to be possible. 

There are many examples around the world of giant megalithic building stones having been cut or moulded with such high precision that we today would be hard put if not quite unable to match the engineering skills employed.  Not only have they been cut to great precision and sometimes also had complex shapes machined into them but they were then transported in some cases hundreds of miles to the construction site. Then they were built into a structure with such great precision that a razor blade can't be pushed into the joint.  The engineering of and building of the Great Pyramid of Giza encapsulates what I am saying.  And if you think you can explain that engineering achievement with 21st century technology, you have to think again.  Engineers not scientists have also studied this edifice and they conclude that it contains technology some of which has not been equaled in modern times.  Read the books by Christopher Dunn, in particular The Giza Power Plant: http://www.gizapower.com/.  He points out the technical achievement of precisely cutting out 70 ton blocks of granite at a quarry which was 500 miles away, transporting all 17 of them over land and possibly on the Nile then overland again to the Giza pyramid.  They then had to be hoisted up to the Kings chamber and precisely positioned in place.  I also remind you that the Giza pyramid is still by far heavier than anything built in modern times. 

Our civilization smugly believes that the evolution of civilization has been progressive.  It was thought that there can't have been a civilization on Earth more advanced than ours. But the evidence is there that they are wrong.

 

The Martian Anomaly  

The Martian anomaly is a good one.  Some writers on ancient history assert that Mars virtually collided with Earth in the very recent past possibly around 1500 BCE and also at the time of the last great extinction which was around 9000 BCE, causing two of the greatest human cataclysms at the beginning of recorded history.  Well... if that happened, what would have happened to Mars' oceans and atmosphere considering that Mars' gravity is only one third of Earth's.  It is quite easy to speculate that we (Earth) stripped Mars of both its atmosphere and water. That could explain how in the DELUGE (not flood) rain came FROM Heaven for 40 days and 40 nights. Then will be vindicated those who are convinced that there are clearly visible on Mars the remains of a civilization which might even have been able to survive their even greater cataclysm than ours.  And if this is true, Mars was habitable with a breathable atmosphere and huge oceans a mere 4350 years ago.  Surely evidence of flowing water millions (or more rediculous - billions) of years ago would long since have been obliterated by the well known planet wide Martian wind storms.  

 

The Elongated Human Skull Anomaly.

I like this one as it demonstrates just how determined conventional science is to prove that homo sapiens is and always has been supreme.  It is a sad reflection on the pathetic insecurity that pervades the mainstream scientific world.  The determination of the mainstream to stamp out and to ridicule dissent from their dead end, cherished, scientific beliefs is desperately unfortunate as so much could be achieved if they were prepared to spend some of their billions outside of their boxes.

One of the many sites which examine the elongated sculls is:  Paracas Skulls  This is where the details about the Paracas skulls gets interesting. The Paracas skulls are anything but ordinary. The cranium of the Paracas skulls is at least 25 % larger and up to 60% heavier than the skulls of regular human beings.  Researchers firmly believe that these traits could not have been achieved through head bindings as some scientists suggest because ordinary bound human heads simply do not magically elongate their volume to the extent that would be required to achieve the cranial volume necessary.  They are much shorter in elongation.  There are many photos online to demonstrate this.  Not only are they different in weight, the Paracas skulls are also structurally different and only have one parietal plate while ordinary humans have two.   One or 2 freaks could be medically explained but not collections of skulls from around the world or was there a cranial skull elongation, parietal plate fusing, pandemic 4000 years ago? 

On the other side of the world on the island of Malta, similar skulls are found: Maltese Temple Skulls  These have been withdrawn from the view of the general public but have the same characteristics of the Paracas skulls, notably that they have only one parietal plate.  And there are many other examples of similar skulls from around the world, some with extremely large cranial volumes like over 2000cc.  Get Googling and start with this Spanish site which speaks volumes and you don't have to speak Spanish (I don't speak Spanish): SOME VERY STRANGE SKULLS  A quick look at some of the skulls will show that there are 3 distinctly different species:  a very broad faced very large cranial capacity skull; a very elongated skull like the Paracas skull but with strange deep indentations on either side of the eye sockets and 3rdly a skull from Asia with minimal indentations on either side of the eye sockets.  The Author also compares normal human skulls with the huge cranial capacity skulls having very large eye sockets.  He then compares contemporary ordinary human elongated skulls with the hugely exaggerated Paracas skulls. Only a blind person (those who will not see) would not see the difference.  So when are these artefacts going to be taken seriously by the mainstream and properly investigated?