Crater Chains

[Norval]

So many images without a source, is this some kind of game?

Good question ArMaP, , , , , ask Zorgon, , ,

I aint sure what he is attempting to do, , ,

[Norval]

How about these?



In the above photo you can clearly see many of the CS (Concise Systematic) type crater chains with the characteristics we think show obvious intelligence as to cause. Of note are the three and possibly four time frames of occurrence. The predominant CS chain near the center running lower left to upper right appears to be the cleanest and so is probably the newest. Notice the CS chains just above and left of the dominant one. Now they appear to have been covered by dust debris, or possibly silt flow, and that gives us three time frames. Chains, material deposit, then another chain.

Sorry, this image is from Mars, somewhere around Olympus Mons.

[zorgon]

So many images without a source, is this some kind of game?

Source is irrelevant when just going for visual impression and comparison

The last one I posted is electric welding arc craters in sand

Y

[zorgon]

I aint sure what he is attempting to do, , ,

A simple visual comparison of craters that look like those on the Moon Mars and Mercury but are in fact on Earth  all traced to plasma discharge

The point being to show that all the craters out there are not simple impact but are either tremendous bolts of space lightning or left over scars of energy weapons from a war long ago

[Amaterasu]

While I agree with You that many features on the bodies are features of electrical events, I also believe the chains are too precise, evenly spaced, straight.  I still say some of the features We see in these crater chains are energy weapon use.  Many stories around the globe tell of wars in the skies...

Just sayin'.

(Edited for clarity)

[Norval]

Why jump to the war idea so quickly?
Maybe ET was just tossing these asteroids down in such a precise fashion to get our attention? To say hello, yer not alone. They do far exceed S.E.T.I.'s mandate as a "signal". Maybe not in a radio band, but in a visual one they sure do.

Yes, there are many ancient documents that mention wars of the so called "gods". They mention weapons that are like lightening bolts. What else would people have back then to compare them to? Today we know about atomic weapons and energy beam weapons.

Why is it that some surfaces of moons show little or no signs of cratering, yet others are completely devastated? And, why do you think these are all ancient signs of war? Mars used to have straight lines on it and NO big crack before the 1920's. Do your research. 

[zorgon]

Why jump to the war idea so quickly?

35 plus years of research is hardly jumping quickly 

The crater chains are great evidence for either energy weapons of old or space plasma stikes

Our Books of Myth tell us of Ancient Wars using such weapons.  I have more LOL

Maybe ET was just tossing these asteroids down in such a precise fashion to get our attention? To say hello, yer not alone. They do far exceed S.E.T.I.'s mandate as a "signal". Maybe not in a radio band, but in a visual one they sure do.

If that were true, why hit all the other moons and planets with such a barrage when there was no one around to witness it?

Yes, there are many ancient documents that mention wars of the so called "gods". They mention weapons that are like lightening bolts. What else would people have back then to compare them to? Today we know about atomic weapons and energy beam weapons.

Yes Shiva Nova  comes to mind 

Why is it that some surfaces of moons show little or no signs of cratering, yet others are completely devastated? And, why do you think these are all ancient signs of war? Mars used to have straight lines on it and NO big crack before the 1920's. Do your research. 

I actually have a very good explaination for that but you will have to wait

[Amaterasu]

Why jump to the war idea so quickly?
Maybe ET was just tossing these asteroids down in such a precise fashion to get our attention? To say hello, yer not alone. They do far exceed S.E.T.I.'s mandate as a "signal". Maybe not in a radio band, but in a visual one they sure do.

Yes, there are many ancient documents that mention wars of the so called "gods". They mention weapons that are like lightening bolts. What else would people have back then to compare them to? Today we know about atomic weapons and energy beam weapons.

Why is it that some surfaces of moons show little or no signs of cratering, yet others are completely devastated? And, why do you think these are all ancient signs of war? Mars used to have straight lines on it and NO big crack before the 1920's. Do your research. 

I'm not jumping to it.  [smile]  I contemplate how well such a weapon would provide that result and giving fairly high probability that that was the cause.    Is that illogical?  Is it not something I might put out there and get Others' evaluation of the likelihood?  [smile]

[Amaterasu]

I actually have a very good explaination for that but you will have to wait

I await with bated breath!  [smile]

[Lunica]

More craters with centers

I like to know the scale of these craters. Do you have them?
Yes they have centers. But my crater with center has some extra features.

The ancient wars I have read of course a lot about. But not in detail since I thought it was a little of a stretch to prove. Not that I dont believe it.

BUT IT IS IN PLAIN SIGHT! 

[ArMaP]

Source is irrelevant when just going for visual impression and comparison

Well, source is relevant when you post photos of something unrelated to the real topic, crater chains.

The last one I posted is electric welding arc craters in sand

I know, I remember those photos, and to me they look nothing like the craters on celestial bodies.

[Pimander]

These do not look like craters to me.  That is sand isn't it?  I could be wrong but it looks a lot like something created in a lab - probably to simulate a volcanic eruption.

I remember reading a book called "The Electric Universe" or something similar.  Actually it might have been this one.


The Electric Sky Perfect Paperback – November 30, 2006
by Donald E. Scott (Author)


SOURCE: http://www.amazon.com/Electric-Universe-Wallace-Thornhill-Talbott/dp/0977285138/ref=pd_sim_b_6?ie=UTF8&refRID=0BYQ81ZP0SYBD8G6AR4S

Here's a reader review from Amazon.

Simply indispensable
By Mr. Louis Bloison 18 January 2008
Verified Purchase
Having studied astronomy and having followed the A to Z of it for decades, I must say that I have never encountered anything as original, sweeping, and compelling as the ideas presented in Thornhill and Talbott's "Electric Universe".

Mainstream astronomy offers a wealth of extravagant theories but with a paucity of observable evidence to back them up. "Electric Universe" points up these glaring absences and contradictions and presents a set of far more plausible plasma-oriented interpretations.

Thornhill and Talbott point to mainstream astronomy's naive assumption that space is electrically neutral everywhere. Plasma physics, as has been demonstrated in numerous laboratory experiments, offers a more viable explanatory model than the gravitation-based theories that have dominated 20th Century astronomy. The fact that the electric force is 39 orders of magnitudes stronger than the gravitational force is reason enough for it to be included, at least considered, as a significant influence in shaping the course of the universe. I am astonished that the electric force-based ideas as presented in this book are being systematically overlooked by mainstream astronomers, and even by popular trade magazines. You may well join me in asking, What has happened to science as an open dialogue and a selection of theories that best fits the evidence?

For decades astronomy has based most of its ideas on a single interpretation of the evidence: for example, the red shift being seen only as a distance marker; an abiding belief that the 3-degree background radiation represents an echo of the big bang; redoubtable propositions about dark matter and dark energy to support gravity-based explanations of galactic motion; and likewise that solar energy is produced at the center of the sun and transported to the surface by slow convection processes; and so forth. Is there room in this vast universe for alternative views? Thornhill and Talbott point to the disturbing evidence that cast doubt on these time-worn theories. For example, the statistical occurrence of quasars in the vicinity of nearby galactic clusters makes problematic the yardstick view of the red shift; the infamous solar neutrino deficiency should have long ago led to new modes of thought about solar energy production. The authors not only describe the many observed contradictions, they offer their own stunningly original theories based on an electrically active universe.

Rather than shunning their plasma-based theories, astronomers should welcome the appearance of a new set of plausible alternatives to their held-fast ideas. Science should be a dialogue of competing ideas. It should not be a religion with a single explanation of phenomena that is to be taken as orthodox fact. But that is what the science of astronomy has become, unfortunately. That's why I am so grateful for and so enthusiastic about this book, which I feel gives us an important glimpse into a new astronomy for the 21st Century. For its provocative challenges to standard astronomical thought and for offering a most engaging and plausible set of alternatives, "The Electric Universe" is simply indispensable.

http://www.amazon.com/Electric-Universe-Wallace-Thornhill-Talbott/product-reviews/0977285138/ref=cm_cr_dp_text?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=byRankDescending#R1YUIFNK00LJ17


If that is the book then the writer describes how many Craters are likely created by Electricity.  Of course they might have been plasma weapons but also possibly created by a highly charged early Solar system and Universe.

[Pimander]

Here is a lecture by Donald E Scott at Goddard, NASA.  It is amazing how little known his work is to be fair.



I started a thread on his work here: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=7256

[Norval]

Amaterasu
I agree, they sure look way to straight, precise, evenly spaced, to be "natural" events. And, I doubt that ET tossed rocks down to make them. War weapons are the most probable cause to me also. 

I also highly doubt that some electrical arc caused them. 

Here is another one, the inset image is about 8 miles across, making each of those craters in the chain about 5 miles big.

[ArMaP]

It's interesting to see that, at the bottom of the main image, we can see several craters aligned, although not in a "chain".