One of the more contentious claims made in Saturn Theory is that the Earth’s polar regions were originally ice-free due to the warming influence of a sub-brown dwarf star situated in Earth’s celestial north. It’s hypothesised that this sub-brown dwarf star suffered a series of catastrophic electro-static encounters with the Sun and later migrated to the outer edges of our current solar system where it became the planet Saturn. However, during Saturn’s previous reign in the celestial north, this star once bathed Earth in a warm energy that kept the Arctic region ice-free and perfectly habitable for an incredibly diverse array of semi-tropical plant life and mega-fauna such as mammoths and other large and now extinct herbivores.
Today, with the loss of Saturn as a warming influence, the catastrophic icing over of the Arctic regions hides the fact that the Arctic sea is one of the most organically ‘mucky’ oceans on the planet, a condition that would be expected had the Arctic once been a semi-tropical paradise and not always the desolate wasteland we see today. Now scientists are discovering vast amounts of ocean-born algae in the one place they least expected it – you guessed it; the Arctic Ocean. . .
An illustration that appears in Saturn Death Cult shows an ice-free warm Arctic region bathed in the northerly light of Saturn and connected by a vast Birkeland current that was known in ancient times as the fabled Axis Mundi, or Ladder to Heaven.
A ring of ice-covered lands encircles this region where it is postulated that a dark and dusty auroral cloud induced the glacial ice sheets that have become known as the ice ages, while the more northerly latitudes remained ice-free and showing little evidence of glaciations — a fact born out by the evidence in stark contrast to the perceived history of the region.
In one internet forum I have discussed the vast evidence for an ice-free Arctic in Earth’s ancient past, a requirement of Saturn Theory cosmology (this is reproduced later in this blog). With the recently released results of studies into the Arctic Ocean’s ecology I feel more confident that this ice-free condition is the Arctic Ocean’s legacy of its direct contact with Saturn’s warming influence from a time when that planet resided above our north pole.
In an article entitled “Huge algae blooms discovered beneath Arctic ice”:
A NASA mission to study the tiny algae vital to the ocean’s food chain has turned up a massive amount of phytoplankton where scientists least expected it — under the Arctic ice.
Not only does the above statement confirm that the Arctic is anything but an ice-ridden desert, but it also points to a flaw in the thinking that the sun’s light is absolutely essential to growth of flora. Commenting on this supposition, the mission’s leader, one Kevin Arrigo, outlined the surprise this discovery of vast amounts of phytoplankton under the Arctic ice poses to mainstream thinking:
“We were astonished. It was completely unexpected. It was literally the most intense phytoplankton bloom I have ever seen in my 25 years of doing this type of research,” said Arrigo, a scientist at Stanford University in California.
“Just like the tomatoes in your garden, these and all phytoplankton require light and they require nutrients to grow,” Arrigo explained.
“It has been presumed that there was very little light under the ice and we didn’t expect to see much.”
However, those who have read Saturn Death Cult know that, under the influence of Saturn as a sub-brown dwarf star, the Earth’s flora would receive more energy than light, and that it is this energy that is the key to plant life. In such an environment, flora would flourish in a perpetual gloom where little bright light is needed.
Having adapted to this environment over millennia it makes sense that such algae could still flourish in the harsh conditions found under the Arctic Ocean’s inhospitable icecap, especially since they could harvest all the nutrients they needed from the decomposed biomass left over from a semi-tropical ice-free Arctic era. All they would need is the ‘energy’ radiated by the sun, not its direct light. In fact, the ice covering the ocean would possibly act as a filter, thus reproducing the same twilight-like energy-rich conditions hypothesised for life under a sub-brown dwarf star.
This phytoplankton biomass discovered under the Arctic ice produced an almost pea soup effect, according to the scientists who discovered it. In fact, the article concludes that the phytoplankton biomass was “extremely high, about fourfold greater than in open water.”
The article further comments:
Arrigo said the discovery caused “a fundamental shift in our understanding of the Arctic ecosystem,” which was previously believed to be cold and desolate.
Before, the tiny single-celled plants were not believed to grow until the ice melted.
“If you rank all the phytoplankton blooms anywhere in the world by the amount of phytoplankton that is contained in them, the under-ice bloom that we saw during ICESCAPE would finish at the very top of the list,” he added.
“And it was growing beneath a layer of sea ice as thick as a five-year-old child is tall.”
Below are some of my comments on a forum relating to the evidence for an ice-free Arctic region in ancient times:
A Closer Look at the Ice Ages – part 1
Because we have been taught by mainstream education that the solar system has maintained its present orderly form for billions of years, it’s only natural to believe the sun’s warming rays have struck the Earth in the same manner throughout this time. This assumes that the tropics have always enjoyed the bulk of the sun’s radiated warmth where the sun’s rays strike the Earth full on, while the higher latitudes and poles receive less warmth due to sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface at more oblique angles. For the observer today, this is the obvious explanation for why the Earth has ice covered polar caps while the tropics virtually enjoy a single warm season.
However, there is also almost conclusive evidence for extreme bouts of climate change in the Earth’s distant past in the form of what are called ice ages. We have identified at least five, if not up to nine separate major ice ages, each one interspersed by warm periods called interglacials. Each of these separate ice ages are said to have lasted thousands of years, with some lasting hundreds of thousands of years.
To date, while we can reasonably ascertain that there were actual ice ages, there is very little consensus as to what caused these ice ages, or what caused them to recede. Yet, one would forgive your average school pupil from believing that our scientific masters have all but solved the riddle of the cause and ending of the ice ages, especially when one reads assertions like the following quotes, both reproduced from Dwardu Cardona’s ‘Primordial Star’, page 261:
“Scientists have known since the 1970s that three predictable variations in the Earth’s orbit around the sun have exerted the dominant control over the long-term global climate for millions of years. . . Over the past three million years, these regular changes in the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface have produced a long sequence of ice ages. . .” (W.F. Ruddiman, “How Did Humans First Alter Global Climate?” Scientific American (March 2005), p. 48)
“It has long been speculated, and recently calculated, that known changes in orbital geometry could alter the amount of sunlight coming in between winter and summer by about 10 percent or so and could be responsible for initiating or ending ice ages.” (CJ Allegre & SH Schneider, “The Evolution of Earth,” Scientific American (Sept. 26, 2005 special edition), p. 11.)
Cardona sums up the above quoted attitudes best:
“Fair enough, “long been speculated” is closer to the truth than “scientists have known.” But the “recently calculated” bit is hard to swallow when the same authorities additionally admit that the “precise causes of the longer intervals between the warm and cold periods are not yet sorted out.” And this concerns a problem that has even trapped iconoclasts such as the one who felt “reasonably certain that somehow the Sun has been ultimately responsible for the mammoth cold snaps.” [see FB Jueneman, “Raptures of the Deep”, p. 127 as quoted by Cardona]
“It is not that these authorities should be blamed since the Sun is the only known source of terrestrial heat and, therefore, the only cause that can be claimed for the lessening of that heat. But, as the British phycicist John Tyndall noted back in 1883, here is where the dilemma lies, for in order for an ice age to develop, an awful amount of precipitation is required. Precipitation of such vastness, however, would have required immense evaporation and this, in turn, would have necessitated a great amount of heat. As others have also noted, under present thinking, what is required in effect is for Earth to have warmed up considerably. But if Earth heated up, how could it have been cold enough for an ice age to develop?” (Dwardu Cardona, “Primordial Star,” pp. 261 – 262)
Suffice to say, for the sake of space, that the myriads of theories claiming to have solved the causes and endings of the ice ages all make one seemingly obvious assumption: That the influence of the Sun is, and always has been, the major factor in the causes of the various ice ages.
These theories include:
(1)Milankovitch cycles and the many other solar-based theories that point to fluctuations in orbital relationships between Earth and the Sun.
(2)Snowball Earth hypothesis and its reliance on greenhouse gases interacting with the Sun’s influence as a cause for global cooling and the ice ages.
(3)Sunspot cycles and the Maunder Minimum in which the Sun’s radiation output varies over vast amounts of time.
(4)Supernovae and cosmic rays resulting in enhanced cloud cover – and therefore global cooling.
Then there are the more terrestrial theories such as:
(1)Volcanism and asteroid impacts leading to a natural ‘nuclear winter’ effect.
(2)Fluctuations in the oceans’ currents leading to a global cooling effect.
(3)Tibetan plateau uplift causing extreme change to global weather patterns.
(4)Crustal displacement and polar wandering (more on this particular theory in a later post).
There are many more theories and variations on the above noted themes, far too many to discuss at length here. What they do demonstrate though, is that there is far from a consensus in scientific circles as to what caused the ice ages, much less as to what ended them. Each theory to date has significant flaws that only serve to prolong the debates surrounding the subject.
However, what they all share is a common assumption that Earth’s position within the current solar system has always been as it is, with little drastic variation, and that the answer must surely lie in Earth’s ancient, unbroken and ongoing relationship to the Sun.
But herein lays the problem most pertinent to this thread; because, if we accept that Earth’s relationship to the Sun has always been roughly the same, with only gradual 10 percent variations interrupting the Sun’s output or occasional cosmic ray bombardments, then it only makes sense that the ice ages would have always first originated at the earth’s coldest points, the poles, and then spread from there to lower latitudes. This seems so obvious according to today’s thinking that virtually all popular visualisations of an ice age depicts the poles as under thick ice caps much as they are today. To think otherwise seems counterintuitive –even blasphemous.
This, however, is not what the evidence suggests.
Ice-free Arctic and Ice-shy Latitudes
Curiously, more and more evidence of mankind having inhabited the Arctic at the height of the last ice age (Nat. Geographic, Aug 2001, p.110) continues to accumulate, yet, that the Arctic once bathed in subtropical-like warmth has actually been written about since the 1700s.
On the subject of evidence for the assumed vast sheets of ice that would have covered the northern latitudes during an ice age, R.F. Griggs commented in the journal Science that:
“The islands of the Arctic Archipelago were never glaciated. Neither was the interior of Alaska.”
Hmmm? Really? Alaska remained largely ice-free during the ice age?
J.B. Dana once wrote that:
“It is a remarkable fact that no ice mass covered the lowlands of northern Siberia any more than those of Alaska.” (as quoted in Cardona)
Cardona also quotes the catastrophists DS Allen and JB Delair (see their work Cataclysm, p. 39) in making a case for an ice-free Arctic:
“Today, the world’s coldest known land region is north-eastern Siberia. There, if anywhere, we might expect huge ice-sheets to have developed if the Ice Age theory possessed validity. Yet comparatively very few areas of Siberia exhibit signs of significant glaciation, either past or present. . .
“Interestingly, as in neighbouring Alaska to the East, thin rock pinnacles still stand unglaciated at several Siberian localities which thick ice, had it once existed, would unquestionably have ground down and demolished.”
Even National Geographic has finally noted that:
“Ice held most of the northern latitudes in its grip 18,000 years ago – with important exceptions. In the last ice age glaciers never completely covered eastern Siberia, Alaska, and the Yukon.” (as quoted by Cardona: “Plant that Beat the Ice Age,” National Geographic, March 2001)
It might be noted that eastern Siberia, Alaska and Yukon account for a fair proportion of the land mass found in the Arctic circle. Bear that in mind the next time you see an artist’s impression depicting the whole northern part of the planet locked in a giant ice cap in what is supposed to represent the Pleistocene epoch.
Then from the famous DYE-3 ice-core drilling site in Greenland we have biological evidence dated to 450,000 years ago proving that at the bottom of the ice sheet there is a sludge containing the remains of “. . .grain, pine, yew, and alder, together with traces of insects such as butterflies, moths, flies, and beetles.
“Analysis of fossil DNA from these vestiges indicated “a biological environment, which is completely different to what we see today.” Dated to 450,000 years ago, before the onslaught of the last Ice Age, these results are “direct proof that there was forest in southern Greenland which must have had “a relatively mild climate.”
(Cardona in Primoridal Star quoting “Oldest DNA Ever Recovered Suggests Earth Was Warmer,” PHYSORG.com, 2007)
So, . . . the oldest DNA evidence of life on Earth, life forms that would have needed warmth to exist, happens to prove they once flourished in what is today the coldest region of the Earth, its high northern latitudes. Makes you think. . .
Derek Allan wrote on the subject that:
“At many places north of the present Arctic Circle, remnants of [temperate zone] vegetation still lie in situ… Significantly, none of these plants can now flourish ther. It is, therefore, difficult to imagine a frozen Arctic Ocean existing alongside such temperate flora.
“Evidence of this ancient flora has been discovered, often in great abundance, on islands which now lie closest to the present North Pole. . .” (as quoted by Cardona in Flare Star, p. 87)
And since this thread was started on the subject of frozen mammoths, it bears noting what Dolph Hooker wrote concerning the changes from a warm Arctic to a frozen nightmare:
“There is evidence that at a time when temperate climate conditions extended even into polar regions, the world, teeming with warmth-loving species of floral and animal life, was overwhelmed by a fall of snow, ice and rain, so violent, so sudden, so chilling, that great numbers of creatures were forthwith destroyed; so vast, so violent that it brought to an abrupt end one geologic age and ushered in another.” (Those Astounding Ice Ages, p.48)
Which gets us right back to the crux of this thread: Are perfectly preserved frozen mammoth carcases evidence that a brown dwarf star once existed as a sun at Earth’s celestial north and that it’s demise from that position created a cataclysm responsible for the extinction of whole species while plunging the polar regions into a frozen hell? (see post #10 on this thread for the mythological evidence placing Saturn at Earth’s celestial north in ancient times)
As for the Arctic Ocean itself, now locked under a semi-permanent ice cap, its current soup of organic materials (making it the ‘muckiest’ ocean in the world) stands as probably the best evidence that the far north once enjoyed a warm temperate climate chock-full of forested land and teeming plains.
What we can deduce from the above (and much more that cannot be covered here), is that most of the northern latitude land masses that remained ice-free during the last ice age all happen to be inside the Arctic Circle. When analysed closely, one gets the impression that preceding ice ages were not caps of ice starting at the poles and then spreading to lower latitudes, but that they were glacial phenomenon bestriding more southerly latitudes like a frozen ribbon circling the earth. From there these glaciers travelled both north and south, but never made it into the furthest parts of the north.
But more of this in a later post where I will discuss:
Would you believe. . . Polar Dinosaurs!?!
A Closer Look at the Ice Ages – part 2
Would you believe. . . Polar Dinosaurs!?!
The discovery that dinosaurs once thrived in what is today one of the coldest regions on Earth (i.e. the Arctic Circle) was a major setback in to the theory that an asteroid impact and its resultant ‘nuclear winter’ caused the extinction of the dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs are generally considered to have been cold-blooded, and therefore not particularly well adapted for life in the frozen Arctic regions. So why are we finding their remains not just on Alaska’s North Slope, but in both polar regions? Mainstream science’s explanation is that somehow they must have ‘adapted’ to their cold environment – and therefore actually survived the extinction event cause by the proposed asteroid strike.
(see B. Rensberger, “A Fiery Extinction,” Science Digest, Jan. 1986, p. 22. Also, regarding South Pole dinosaurs, the 1999 Symposium of Antarctic Earth Sciences reported dinosaur finds on Seymour Island just off the Antarctic Peninsula)
Once again we see current environmental conditions at the poles become the de facto assumption in visualising the environment enjoyed by these long dead creatures.
“William Clemens, one of the discoverers of these Arctic dinosaurs, on the other hand, came up with a different solution. His reason was that the Alaskan members [dinosaurs] survived the extinction event because they had long become adapted to the cold and long dark winters of the region. But even he could not help mentioning that the “nearby Arctic Ocean, warm in those tropical days, would have sufficiently moderated the climate.” (Cardona, Primordial Star, p. 251)
Of course, here is precisely the problem. If the Arctic Ocean was warm enough (ice-fee?) in “those tropical days”, enough to moderate the Alaskan North Slope land environment for dinosaur habitation (then it had to have been ice-free), then we can assume Alaska was not the frozen waste it is today. This once again speaks to the argument that the polar regions had been far warmer in the primordial past than our current understanding of global and solar weather patterns permits.
Of course, there is a trend amongst dinosaur experts questioning their cold-blooded status. Some, like Tom Rich, have asserted that some dinosaur species were in fact warm-blooded. But then, so too were the mammoths, whose remains are now found in an environment that would not have supported their food needs had the Arctic Circle always been a frozen waste.
Curiously, like the mammoth remains, the Arctic dinosaurs show signs of having suffered violent deaths, but not due to predation. Their remains have not been fossilised and are described as being ‘almost like modern bone’. (a distinct anomaly considering they vastly pre-date the mammoths – see New Scientist, Aug 22, 1985, p.18)
On this thread we have been concerned with the question as to the cause of the extinction of the mammoths whose frozen carcasses, complete with undigested sub-tropical food in their stomachs, have been found in high in the Arctic Circle. It’s been postulated that Saturn Theory can account for this anomaly in that a primordial version of the planet Saturn as a brown dwarf star once sat atop Earth’s North Pole where it shone as a sun in its own right.
A Brief Overview of Ice Ages under a Saturnian Sun
In the Saturn Theory (polar configuration) scheme of things, the above discussed Arctic dinosaurs are still believed to have existed in a prior age to that of the mammoths. Before the Saturnian system of planets came into contact with the current solar system, Earth was bathed in Saturn’s primoridal dim purple light for millions of years. This light was reflected uniformly back onto Earth from Saturn’s plasma sheath, effectively blocking out all outside star light – yet the earth’s northern polar region enjoyed additional direct radiated warmth from the Saturn.
When the electromagnetic balance between Earth and Saturn was periodically disrupted, dense and dusty auroral rings formed for long geologic periods around both the Arctic and Antarctic circles casting a cooling shadow band at these latitudes. Glaciation occurred within the shadows during these times, while the North Pole remained ice-free, continually warmed by Saturn’s radiated light.
(The below image also takes into account the expansion of the Earth during its primordial period under Saturn)
Once gradual electric equalisation occurred between Earth and Saturn, these auroral rings dissipated, resulting in what we call the Interglacial periods. We are in agreement with mainstream science in claiming that there have been at least five such fluctuations during the earth’s geologic history. The onset and dissipation of these ice age-inducing auroral rings would have been punctuated with global cataclysms resulting in various extinction events at different times in the earth’s history.
Again in agreement with mainstream science, the evidence for glaciation in the tropical regions during the more ancient ice ages is accounted for by continental drift, a geologic phenomenon augmented by plasma cosmology’s expanding earth hypothesis. (The expanding mass of the earth over time – not its volume – also accounts for the extinction of gigantic species of flora and fauna that could not adjust to a heavier gravity caused by the changes in Earth’s electrical relationship to Saturn and to the Sun). During the Pangaea and Gondwana ice ages, areas of land now found in the tropics would have been situated at latitudes corresponding to these auroral rings.
The Cause and End of the Pleistocene Ice Age
The issue of the extinction of the mammoths is tied to the last great ice age, referred to as the Pleistocene Ice Age. It’s postulated by this writer that in the 150,000 years before the Saturnian system’s catastrophic direct contact with the current sun’s heliosphere, an electrical imbalance between Earth and Saturn had already been accumulating during their approach towards the Sun. The auroral rings once again manifested and the Pleistocene Ice Age was born.
Upon the Saturnian system’s extremely violent capture by the Sun, the auroral rings dissipated causing the end of the Pleistocene. Saturn continued to shine at Earth’s celestial north for a period of time called the Golden Age, but eventually fell away, leaving the earth’s northern polar region without its radiated warmth – the North Pole quickly froze over. (the South Pole had succumbed to ice much sooner – possibly as much as 50,000 years previously)
Saturn Theory accounts for the growing evidence that points to the northern polar region as having once enjoyed a temperate, if not sub-tropical environment. Now we can add to the Arctic Circle mix dinosaur habitation, along with Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens and vast selection of gigantic mammal species. Increasingly, it’s looking as if the Arctic Circle interior was, for vast spans of geologic time, a pretty descent place to live – not like today.