Were the planets closer to Earth once?

In historical times, when the planets were described (in mythology) as gods, were they closer to Earth than they are now? Were they described as being at war with one another, because of the terrible exchanges of lightning which reportedly took place? Was this how propitiation of the planets began?

Does this explain the commonality of the pantheons of gods to which all humans paid homage, except that the names of the gods reflected differences in language? Presumably, travellers and mystics contributed to some inter-tribal (inter-cultural) learning; that is, to the diffusion of belief about the Cosmos.

I instance the spread of Hindu beliefs, texts, and practices all the way from India to the South China Sea, and as far as the island of Bali in Indonesia. Even after the spread of Islam to Indonesia, Hinduism’s Ramayana, a most-durable epic, continues to be celebrated (as I discovered) in Bali – and in Buddhist Thailand. Perhaps matters human override matters religious in the realm of guidance for living – as the gods seemed to be at war with one another.

The only way our planets could have been closer to one another is through being pulled out of their normal orbits by a very, very huge intruder from space passing through our solar system. As I wrote in an earlier post, a remnant of a supernova has been held to have been responsible for a number of inconsistent aspects of this system:

  • Pluto, one of Neptune’s moons, pulled into a planetary orbit
  • the ‘equatorial alignment’ of Uranus changed, and its moon damaged
  • Saturn’s moon Chiron pulled away
  • Tiamat, a planet similar to Jupiter and Saturn, with an orbit between these two, believed to have been destroyed by Marduk/Phaeton (the supernova remnant), resulting in an asteroid belt in its place
  • Mars – orbit changed
  • Phaeton ‘rampaged near Earth only some 11,500 years ago’
  • Venus – its rotational spin reversed

(refer Allan & Delair in ‘Cataclysm,’ who relied on ‘Sumerian texts and recent astronomical data’)

This scenario does not, however, imply that the planets were once closer to Earth (as I have read elsewhere). Such proximity could only have occurred during the formative years of the solar system. But then there would have been no humans around. How then did this mythology develop?

The simpler explanation lies in errors in interpretation of ancient mythology. As well, the Sumerians’ writings are far too recent. Another explanation would be that nearby extra-terrestrials (on a Sirius planet?) were witness to this ‘war’.

Phaeton’s passage through the settled solar system is the most likely source of the claim of a celestial war. From our point of view, this event, believed to have occurred at about 11,500 years ago, seems to have coincided with the universal flood. This is believed to have occurred between 11,500 and 13,000 years ago. Phaeton’s rampage would explain this flood too (refer my earlier post).

Another major cosmic catastrophe is expected relatively soon by a barrage of expert researchers – from a variety of causes. We will not be taking our wealth, or theological differences, or any right to rule others, with us; only our soul memories.


Former Spanish colonies


(From Wikipedia)






















It is interesting to see the changing face of European colonialism.  First, Portugal breaks out as a new State from Spain; then goes on the rampage all over the world – only to be cutback by other marauders (sorry, explorers and traders), especially Spain – all of whom pray to the same god.  The planets have no respect for our insubstantial god, do they?

Then, other marauders, especially England and the Netherlands, rob Spanish carriers of loot from the Americas.  Without this loot, Europe would not have been able to finance its trade and economic development, especially through the money changers authorised by the Pope.

So much misgotten wealth, leading to so much suffering by the ‘natives everywhere,’ who were  overcome by such superior white fellows, and their arrogant and misdirected priests.          


Former colonies of Portugal

In Africa

Portuguese presence in Africa started in 1415 with the conquest of Ceuta and is generally viewed as ending in 1975, with the independence of its later colonies, although the present autonomous region of Madeira is located in the African Plate, some 650 km (360 mi) off the North African coast, Madeira belongs and has always belonged ethnically, culturally, economically and politically to Europe, some 955 km (583 mi) from the European mainland.

  • Angola/Portuguese West Africa: colony (1575–1589); crown colony (1589–1951); overseas province (1951–1971); state (1971–1975). Independence in 1975.
  • Arguin/Arguim: (1455–1633)
  • Accra: (1557–1578)
  • Cabinda: protectorate (1883–1887); Congo district (1887–1921); intendancy subordinate to Maquela (1921–1922); dependency of Zaire district (1922–1930); Intendacy of Zaire and Cabinda (1930–1932); intendancy under Portuguese Angola (1932–1934); dependency under Angola (1934–1945); restored as District (1946–1975). Controlled by Frente Nacional para a Libertação de Angola (National Liberation Front of Angola) as part of independent Angola in 1975. Declared Cabinda a Republic in 1975, but not recognized by Portugal nor Angola.
  • Cabo Verde/Cape Verde: settlements (1462–1495); dominion of crown colonies (1495–1587); crown colony (1587–1951); overseas province (1951–1974); autonomous republic (1974–1975). Independence in 1975.
  • Ceuta: possession (1415–1640). Ceded to Spain in 1668.
  • Elmina: possession (1482–1637). Captured by the Dutch West Indies Company.
  • Fernando Pó and Annobón: colonies (1474–1778). Ceded to Spain in 1778.
  • Portuguese Gold Coast: (1482–1642), ceded to Dutch Gold Coast in 1642
  • Guiné Portuguesa/Portuguese Guinea: colony (1879–1951); overseas province (1951–1974). Unilateral independence declared in 1973, recognized by Portugal in 1974.
    • Cacheu: captaincy (1640–1879). United with Bissau in 1879.
    • Bissau: settlement under Cacheu (1687–1696); captaincy (1696–1707); abandoned (1707–1753); separate colony under Cape Verde (1753–1879). United with Cacheu in 1879.
  • Madagascar: southern part (1496–1550)
  • Madeira: possession (1418–1420); colony (1420–1580); crown colony (1580–1834); autonomous district (1834–1976). Made an autonomous region in 1976.
  • Mascarene Islands: fortified post (1498–1540)
  • Malindi: occupation (1500–1630)
  • Mombassa: occupation (1593–1638); colony subordinate to Goa, capital of Portuguese India (1638–1698; 1728–1729). Under Omani sovereignty in 1729.
  • Morocco enclaves
    • Aguz/Souira Guedima (1506–1525)
    • Alcácer Ceguer/El Qsar es Seghir (1458–1550)
    • Arzila/Asilah (1471–1550; 1577–1589). Restored to Morocco in 1589.
    • Azamor/Azemmour (1513–1541). City restored to Morocco in 1541.
    • Mazagan/El Jadida (1485–1550); possession (1506–1769). Incorporation into Morocco in 1769.
    • Mogador/Essaouira (1506–1510)
    • Safim/Safi (1488–1541)
    • Santa Cruz do Cabo de Gué/Agadir (1505–1541)
  • Moçambique/Portuguese East Africa: possession (1498–1501); subordinate to Goa (1501–1569); captaincy-general (1569–1609); colony subordinate to Goa (1609–1752); colony (1752–1951); overseas province (1951–1971); state (1971–1974); local transitional administration (1974–1975). Independence in 1975.
  • Ouadane (1487)
  • Quíloa (1505–1512)
  • São João Baptista de Ajudá: colonial fort (1680-c.1700); fort subordinate to the Portuguese colony of Brazil (1721–1730); fort administered by colonial governor (1730-1858) subordinate to Portuguese São Tomé and Príncipe (1865–1869). Fort re-established under separate administration (1872-1961). Annexed by Dahomey in 1961.
  • São Tomé and Príncipe/São Tomé e Príncipe: crown colony (1753–1951); overseas province (1951–1971); local administration (1971–1975). Independence in 1975.
    • São Tomé: possession (1470–1485); colony (1485–1522); crown colony (1522–1641); administration under Dutch occupation (1641–1648). French occupation in 1648.
    • Príncipe: colony (1471–1753). United with São Tomé in 1753.
  • Tangier: possession (1471–1662). Ceded to England in 1662.
  • Zanzibar: possession (1503–1698). Became part of Oman in 1698.
  • Ziguinchor: possession (1645–1888). Ceded to France in 1888.

North Atlantic and North America

The Azores were discovered early in the Discovery Ages. Labrador and Corte-Real brothers later explored and claimed Greenland and eastern modern Canada from 1499 to 1502.

In Central and South America

Brazil was explored and claimed in 1500, and become independent in 1822. Unlike the Spanish, the Portuguese did not divide its possession in South America in several vice-royalties.

  • Barbados: Possession known as Os Barbados, discovered by Pedro Campos in 1536 being an exile post for Brazilian Jews. The only Caribbean possession the Portuguese held for eighty-four years until Portugal abandoned the island to continue exploring nearby Brazil.
  • Brazil: possession known as Ilha de Santa Cruz, later Terra de Vera Cruz (1500–1530); colony (1530–1714); vice-kingdom (1714–1815); kingdom united with the Kingdom of Portugal (1815–1822), independence in 1822.
  • Cisplatina (Uruguay): occupation (1808–1822). Captaincy in 1817 (of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves). Adhered as a province of the new Empire of Brazil in 1822. Became independent 1827, changing its name to Uruguay.
  • French Guiana: occupation (1809–1817). Restored to France in 1817.
  • Nova Colónia do Sacramento: colony in present Uruguay (1680; 1683–1705; 1715–1777). Ceded to the Spanish Empire in 1777.

In Asia and Oceania

India was reached by the Portuguese in 1498 by Vasco da Gama. Macau was the last possession in Asia and was handed over to the People’s Republic of China in 1999.

(From Wikipedia)

Portugal seems to have been the first European ‘cab off the rank’ to bully its way to ownership of lands occupied by coloured peoples all over the world.  How the mighty have fallen! The cyclical movement of our planets may explain the rise and fall of unwarranted ambitions.


Crustal displacements and ice-caps

“Crustal displacements are thought to have taken place on other planets. In the December 1985 issue of ‘Scientific American,’ Peter H. Schultz drew attention to meteorite impact craters visible on the Martian surface. … Outside the present polar circles of Mars, Schultz found two other such areas. ‘These zones are antipodal, they are on opposite faces of the planet. The deposits show many of the processes and characteristics of today’s poles, but they lie near the present-day equator …’

What would have caused this effect? Judging from the evidence, Schultz put forward the theory that the mechanism appeared to have been ‘the movement of the entire lithosphere, the solid outer portion of the planet as one plate … (This movement seems to have taken place) in rapid spurts followed by long pauses.’

If crustal displacements can happen on Mars, why not on earth? And if they don’t happen on earth, how do we account for the otherwise awkward fact that not a single one of these ice-caps built up around the world during previous ice ages seems to have occurred at – or even near – either of the present poles. On the contrary, land areas bearing the marks of former glaciations are very widely distributed. If we cannot assume crustal shifts, we must find some other way to explain why the ice-caps appear to have reached sea level within the tropics on three continents: Asia, Africa and Australia.

Charles Hapgood’s solution to this problem is simple, extremely elegant and does not affront commonsense:
‘The only ice age that is adequately explained is the present ice age in Antarctica. This is adequately explained. It exists, quite obviously, because Antarctica is at the pole, and for no other reason. No variation of the sun’s heat, no galactic dust, no volcanism, no subcrustal currents, and no arrangements of land elevations or sea currents account for the fact. We may conclude that the best theory to account for an ice age is that the area concerned was at the pole. We thus account for the Indian and African ice sheets, though the areas once occupied by them are now in the tropics. We account for all ice sheets of continental size in the same way.’

The logic is close to inescapable. Either we accept that the Antarctic ice cap is the first continent-sized ice sheet ever to have been situated at a pole – which seems improbable – or we are obliged to suppose that earth-crust displacement, or a similar mechanism, must have been at work.”

The above extracts are from Graham Hancock’s ‘Fingerprints of the gods: the quest continues.’

The Cosmic Event and its aftermath

A large fragment of supernova Vela, ‘composed of pure stellar-matter’ and ‘very dense and atomic … sub-lunar in size’ entered the solar system. Phaeton, ‘pulled sunwards’ when it encountered Neptune, dislodged one of Neptune’s moons; this became planet Pluto. It then dislodged the moons of Uranus. Saturn’s moon Chiron also became a planet. Jupiter and Mercury, being on ‘the other side of the sun’ avoided contact with Phaeton. Phaeton then destroyed Tiamat, the presumed planet between Jupiter and Mars. The asteroid belt between these two planets would seem to be the remains of Tiamat.

Dragging the remains of Tiamat and its moon Kingu, Phaeton slowed Mars’ rotation. The ‘two rapidly spinning moons’ of Mars may be fragments of Tiamat.

‘Charging through the emptiness between Earth and the Moon,’ Phaeton ‘stretched the Moon’s orbit’ while causing the Earth to tilt. ‘The swarm of planetary debris accompanying Phaeton’ (inluding Kingu, Tiamat’s moon) exploded, showering Earth with a ‘celestial blizzard of rocks, stones and dust.’ ‘The Earth’s crust shifted and plunged it into upheaval.’ Folk memories from all over the globe attest to these terrifying events.

Passing Venus, Phaeton ‘flipped’ it over, ‘sending it into a rotation opposite to that of the other planets.’ It then disappeared into the sun.

The extracts above are from Flem-Ath’s summary in Allan & Delair’s ‘Cataclysm.’ The latter also point out that the Phaeton event was exceptional. Yet, have there not been cosmic impacts since?

However, following the celestial disorder and the terrestrial chaos, including conflagration, darkness, and flood (the Deluge), there followed a sudden extended period of glacial conditions. Does this not suggest that Earth’s trajectory had taken it away from the sun as a consequence of Phaeton’s impact?

Since Allan & Delair challenge the theory of ice ages, could recurring glacial conditions on Earth reflect repeated movements of Earth away from the sun as it moves through space?

Uplift of lands offsetting subsidence

When portions of the Earth’s crust sink in one place, other portions tend to rise in compensation. So say Allan & Delair in ‘Cataclysm’. (See previous post about subsidence of vast landmasses.)

“… coeval evidence from the Philippines, various parts of Indonesia, the Pacific generally, and Australia so suffice here to assert that much of the topography of all these regions came into being a mere 11,500 years or so ago.”

“Much the same can be said of the present Alpine scenery in Europe. Not so long ago, geologically speaking, they were little more than a chain of hills.” (What a fascinating thought!)

“The geographical modernity of folded mountains in many parts of Asia was recognised early this century … confirmed by studies of mountain ranges in China … Similar youthfulness characterises the ranges bordering the Western Gobi desert … a large internal sea … occupied the Gobi basin … there is every indication that it was uplifted simultaneously not only with the Pamirs and the great ranges of western China, but also with the Tibetan Plateau … the draining away of the water … must have been a truly devastating event.”

I certainly remember reading that a Chinese emperor had appointed someone (Yu?) to drain the extensive waters inundating the land. Another memory – someone in China was sent to work out the cardinal points of Earth, such was the extended gloom.

“Among the ranges … were the Cordilleran systems in both North and South America, the Caucasus and many others.” “Not only were the Himalayas and their satellites affected by this gigantic crustal uplift, but so also were the Pamirs, Hindu Kush, Karakoram and Kailas ranges, the Kun-lun mountains and the Altai and Tien Shan mountains.”
Further evidence of mountain building is to be found in the Americas. Allegedly, it all happened 11,500 years ago.

This relatively small ball of molten material contained by a relatively thin and permeable crust must have been a delightful but boring pace for millions of years. Then Lord Marduk (or Phaeton) came to re-structure the place to make it suitable for the most voracious and destructive member of the faunal kingdom.

A possible re-alignment of the continents

Drawing upon a massive number of researchers, Allan & Delair in ‘Cataclysm: Compelling evidence of a cosmic collision in 9500 B.C.,’ published in 1995 their attempted explanation of the terrible global conflagration, which was followed by heavy rains and the Universal Deluge. They dated this cataclysm at 11,500 years ago. These alleged events destroyed almost all of life on Earth.

This book was published a decade before the presentation by Firestone et al of their attempted explanation of what they refer to as the Event. This began with an apparent supernova explosion about 41,000 years ago, and culminated (with a suspected additional involvement of a comet) about 13,000 years ago.

The circumstances at end point of both scenarios were comparable.

Since Sitchin, relying upon Sumerian records, dated the Deluge at about 13,000 years ago, one might accept that the Event, however caused, occurred about 13,000 years ago, or a little later.

Allan & Delair rejected comets, asteroids, satellites (moons), and even planets as the cause of the cataclysm, in favour of a substantial fragment of the supernova Vela. Their presentation of the path followed by this interstellar intruder, named Phaeton, include events which seem plausible. These include the destruction of planet Tiamat, located between Mars and Jupiter. Sumerian writings interpreted by Sitchin support this occurrence.

Phaeton is claimed to have also had a wide range of other impacts on the solar system on its way to the sun. Of all these, the possibility of a significant tilt of Earth, and its consequences for the placement of continents, are interesting.

A progressive tilt of Earth, caused by Phaeton moving along by its side, reaching to about 90 degrees from the vertical, would result in continents in the west moving to the south; and continents to the east moving north. No continental drift, no tectonic plate movements, and no significant changes to the circulation of magma below the crust and mantle of Earth would need to be involved as possible causes. The axis of rotation would presumably remain as it was; why should it be affected?

That the coastline of frozen Antarctica and its mountains are already known suggests that it was elsewhere once. This view has reportedly been accepted. Is this indicative evidence of a north-south shift of continents previously aligned west-east? That chilly Siberia and the northern lands of today were once known to be tropical also suggest this re-alignment.

Then there is the issue of the axis of rotation. Allegedly, it was near-vertical before the cataclysm. Could that be true? What caused it to shift to the present axis?

An interstellar Lothario kisses Earth

This is not a scenario of seduction. It is a (plausible) story of a brute forcing his prolonged kisses on a sedate maiden, causing mayhem.

An interstellar object enters the solar system, and gets close to Earth. Its path to Earth can be ignored for the moment. What is its relationship to Earth? As Immanuel Velikovsky wrote in the early 1950s about worlds in collision, and thereby frightened the horses in large numbers of hitherto quiescent stables, two electrically-charged objects closing together in space will exchange electrical discharges, accompanied by powerful groans and roars. Nature can apparently be extremely noisy.

When the gravitational attraction of the intruder exceeds that of Earth to a significant extent, two events can occur. As the intruder moves adjacent to Earth, it could pull the water in the seas and oceans towards the intruder. This would result in that standing wall of water, described in folklore as sky high. Would that wall of water then have moved to follow the path of the intruder alongside Earth? For how long would that happened?

The second, and more significant effect, would be to tilt Earth progressively, if the intruder were to remain close to Earth over a period of time.

Had it moved alongside Earth in a trajectory which took it between Earth and its moon, it could have driven the moon from Earth onto a new, wider path around Earth. Had it brought with it a moon it had captured in its path through the solar system towards Earth, this moon could have, on entering Earth’s protective space, shattered over Earth. The debris fall over Earth would have been horrendous.

The intruder’s path of power could also have pulled Earth into an orbit much further from the sun. This would have chilled the planet.

As the intruder moved away from Earth on its way to the clasp of the sun, the accumulated waters would have been released. They would have filled all the ground spaces available, in an event now known as the Universal Deluge. The result would have been new seas and oceans, depending on the configuration of the land after the catastrophe.

That is, had Earth tilted through the pull of the intruder, the tilt increasing the longer the pull continued, and had it reached nearly 90 degrees, the continents previously aligned East-West would have become re-aligned North-South. Antarctica at the Equator would have become the southern continent at the new South Pole. The eastern lands, such as Siberia, would have become northern – moving from the tropics to the new North Pole region.

This story seems plausible.

A possible explanation of a cataclysm

‘The cycle of cosmic catastrophes: flood, fire and famine in the history of civilisation’ by Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith offers a very detailed scenario to explain the cosmic event which culminated about 13,000 years ago. The authors postulate a supernova explosion – which is apparently probable.

The sequence of events presented in this book is as follows: an initial radiation wave, affecting mainly Southeast Asia and Australia, about 41,000 years ago; the first shock wave, “unnoticed by those on Earth” about 34,000 years ago; the second shock wave about 16,000 years ago; and a most destructive debris wave about 13,000 years ago. It was this wave which caused the horrendous damage experienced by all on Earth; and it seemed to have impacted on other parts of the solar system as well.

“Much of the human race perished in or near Southeast Asia” from the first radiation wave. However, “Human genetic mutation led to a larger brain size, fostering art, music, and a burst of creativity.” There were, overall, significantly adverse water-and-ice effects, as well as climate-related effects and biosystem effects – all pretty horrible – from the bombardments. The survivors among Native American tribes provided evidence of their experience of the terrible events which culminated about 13,000 years ago. These are quoted in the book.

Yet, about 45,000 to 30,000 years ago, Cro-Magnon humans, who were “like human people,” “appeared suddenly,” and Neanderthal humans “began to disappear or assimilate.”

One nearby supernova explosion led to all that? What was the alternative – total annihilation of all forms of life on Earth? Except possibly the ubiquitous bacterium!

Tracking Phaeton through our planetary system

In a previous post, I wrote about the entry into our planetary system of a fragment of a supernova named Vela. This fragment was named Phaeton by the classical Greeks. A Foreward by Rand Flem-Ath to Allan & Delair’s book ‘Cataclysm: compelling evidence of a cosmic catastrophe in 9500 BC’ reported that Phaeton had pulled one of Neptune’s moons from its orbit to become the planet Pluto (recently it has lost that status).

I quote Flem-Ath further. “Phaeton continued its chaotic journey. Hurtling past Uranus, its gravitational pull dislocated the moons of Uranus. As the deadly foreign invader drew near Saturn, one of the ringed planet’s moons, Chiron, was also forced out of orbit. Chiron bounced into a path circling the sun to become the solar system’s smallest planet.

Jupiter and Mercury avoided the chaos because their orbits had carried them far from Phaeton’s destructive course. It was at this point on its reckless journey that Phaeton electromagnetically demolished a planet that existed between Jupiter and Mars.” The asteroid belt in the ‘vacant orbit’ between Jupiter and Mars (discovered in 1801) may be the remnants of the destroyed planet (what a terrifying thought!) named Tiamat by the ancient Akkadians (in the northern half of Babylonia).

“Three more planets still stood in Phaeton’s reckless path: Mars, Earth and Venus. As the stellar marauder, dragging the remnants of the shattered Tiamat and its moon, Kingu, with it, catapulted past Mars, the red planet’s rotation was slowed by their combined gravitational pull. Mars’ two rapidly spinning moons may well be fragments of Tiamat it acquired then.

After leaving its mark on Mars, Phaeton was on a collision course with Earth, charging through the emptiness between Earth and the Moon. Phaeton’s pull stretched the Moon’s orbit and the Earth’s tilt was altered, condemning Earth to a worldwide catastrophe.” (Flem-Ath) See my previous post ‘What Phaeton did to Earth.’

“Phaeton continued its unstoppable flight. Venus ‘flipped ‘ over, sending it into a rotation opposite to that of the other planets. Finally, Phaeton disappeared into the inferno of the Sun.” (Flem-Ath)