Earth is special

Our scientists are unable to explain where we are, who we are, where we came from, why we are here and what is the purpose of life. In fact, according to modern science, today everything is relative, i.e. meaningless. Earth is in no special location, somewhere in some random milky way arm, there are billions of planets like this and billions of other suns just like ours. We have just somehow evolved here randomly and without a reason because that`s just what happens after an unintelligent, chaotic big bang explosion. We are not much better than primates and have derived from apes and as consequence our lives have no value and we are just human trash on a worthless planet.

At the same time, a lot of things underlines the fact that there is much more to life on Earth than what we can perceive with our limited senses. These things are like huge billboard signs pointing at a greater truth. And this seems to be a truth that we once knew but which we have forgotten in our time.
  • Most sacred texts describe how Earth was created first and everything else followed.
  • There are highly intelligent mathematical formulas behind all processes in the universe, and so far we have only been able to discover some of these
  • We are able to "dive" into matter endlessly, the structures only get tinier and tinier and the structures are mathematically organized and self-similar (meaningful chaos fractals)
  • Hermeticism teaches us that our physical body is a reflection of the zodiac (ecliptic crossing with equator defines the two equinox points)
  • There is a missing link between the animal kingdom and humans and despite a lot of efforts to conjure up imaginary ape-human hybrids, the missing link remains undeniable
  • There is evidence surfacing everywhere on the planet of human life dating back to the time when the continental drift started, this includes similar pyramids on all continents
  • Modern physics confirms that light comes in both waves and particles, and the structure changes, depending on whether we observe it or not, which means that physical matter reacts to our consciousness. The rice experiment is an easy experiment anyone can do at home, which proves that human consciousness directly affects organic matter
  • Water in particular has been scientifically proven to have a memory
  • In certain situations, human beings are able to bend the laws of physics
  • Many people are born with spiritual gifts 
  • Our brain anatomy contains mechanisms that can be activated by spiritual practices and our DNA is only partially activated
Below is the most ancient symbol used for our home, planet Earth:

Circle = Spirit (energy)
Cross = Matter (mass)

According to this very simple, beautiful, incorruptible symbol, Spirit (this refers to energy, also called life energy, Prana, Chi, Ra, holy ghost, kundalini, etc) is crossed with Matter (this refers to physical substance, which is a physically proven illusion of our very own senses). In other words, life energy is crossified, or crucified on the cross of material substance. Sounds familiar yet, dear Christians? The symbol implies that this planet is a peculiar, very special meeting point of energy and matter. The two crucifixations of Christ Jesus, according to the NT, take place at the two equinox points.

This "Phos Zoe" cross is used in the Orthodox Church; the letters make up the Greek words for “light" and "life” - at least this is the exoteric meaning. The esoteric meaning is the same as the astrological symbol of planet Earth, because light is nothing but energy and life takes place in dense matter.

Next, we note that early last century, a man appeared who was said to be the greatest genius of our times. Albert Einstein postulated his famous formula:

This formula is actually repeating what the two ancient symbols above show much better, secondly the formula uses something that contradicts Einstein`s very own theories. But before we take this theory apart and prove Einstein wrong, let`s take the time, and define what a theory is:

From Middle French théorie, from Late Latin theōria, from Ancient Greek θεωρία (theōría, “contemplation, speculation, a looking at, things looked at”), from θεωρέω (theōréō, “I look at, view, consider, examine”), from θεωρός (theōrós, “spectator”), from θέα (théa, “a view”) + ὁράω (horáō, “I see,look”).

According to this official etymology - which, as usual, is very limited, because official etymology is omitting phonetic roots from African symbol languages, e.g. Egyptian hieroglyphs - a theory is a point of view. Well, we all have a unique point of view, that is legitimate. What etymology casually skips is:

Strong`s Greek 2316 theós (of unknown origin) – properly, God, the Creator and owner of all things (Jn 1:3; Gen 1 - 3).

According to my understanding a "theary" would be a point of view, but a theory falls into the domain of religion. Such a point of view is a belief system, a belief in a religious point of view. Belief always means lack of knowledge. In the case of Einstein`s theory, it was the belief in atheistic science, the determination to explain the world and universe with the explicit pre-set intention of omitting anything that would have to do with an intelligent creation. Modern science ("separation of knowledge") is the ongoing effort since nearly 500 years to see the world purely through the eyes of the scientific method, a way of observing the world which is destined to be 50% blind.

Mystical Francis Bacon's work was instrumental in the historical development of the scientific method. His technique bears a resemblance to the modern formulation of the scientific method in the sense that it is centered on experimental research, which is verified by observable results, a method that is bound to support only a very narrow world view, because our senses as human beings are very limited. Bacon also played "Shakespeare" and redesigned the English language. Note the Masonic twin pillars Boaz and Jachin on the book cover.

E = M means Energy = Mass. Per definition, matter is something that has mass and mass is a measure of matter, so for simplification purposes it can be said that both are really talking about the same thing: physical substance that can be perceived by our senses and that shows reaction to physical laws, e.g. inertia. So far the formula is the same as the above astrological symbols. c is the speed of light, which according to all of Einstein`s very own theories is defined as absolute, meaning that it must be constant and that it has a maximum that cannot be surpassed. How then could c be squared? I am aware that math serves as abstraction from reality in order to explain the latter - but if such abstractions are by definition not allowed in the very theory they are supposed to explain, then this becomes a self-contradicting definition.

During the middle ages people had no access to books and had to rely on the rubbish that greedy priests and ruthless leaders could spoon feed them. These people invented all sorts of nonsense and re-wrote and censored their ancient books so many times that by today they have become a torso. If you study anything else than the Hebrew original of the OT, for example, you are bound to fail to understand the meaning.

Copernicus and his heliocentric (sun centered) model of the solar system

In the 16th century Nicolaus Copernicus overturned the Christian world and this marked a distinct change in the history of western (Caucasian) thinking. Before Copernicus, everything was argued purely in terms of faith and inner convictions, natural philosophy and cosmology, while physical science was only a side show of little importance. It was impossible to question the authority of the RCC without running the risk of torture or even death. After Copernicus, thinking was inverted to the exact opposite: a system of purely physical, 5-senses based argumentation. Science emancipated itself from theology and has ignored it ever since. What Copernicus brought forth however, was nothing scientific at all, he simply made a metaphysical assumption, and the implication of this assumption was that neither planet Earth nor the Sun were in a central, specially favored position in the universe. This is referred today as the Copernican Principle and it remains an unproven theory to this day.

Tycho Brahe`s model is just as valid as the heliocentric model

In the following centuries after Copernicus paved the way, a plethora of unproven opinions followed, Johannes Kepler further argued for the heliocentric view and he actually stole the notes of Tycho Brahe, whom he had assisted between 1600-1601 before Brahe`s death. Brahe had observed the stars for over 30 years and he proposed a geo-heliocentric hybrid model (see above). Galileo, "father of modern science", made some observations which he interpreted to prove the heliocentric view. As a result of his discoveries (mainly the Venus phases and Jupiter Moons) the great majority of astronomers converted to one of the various geo-heliocentric planetary models early in the 17th century.  End of the 17th century, Isaac Newton came along and seemingly removed the last doubts about the validity of the heliocentric model. He also made some very convincing arguments about a force called "gravity", a theory which quickly reached religious status in the scientific community.

The author of this book has been labelled "anti-semitic" 
because he dared to expose Einstein as fraud

More than 200 years later Max Planck introduced Quantum Physics and wiped Newton off the table and finally early in the 20th century appeared Einstein with his Special Relativity, which was the final result of 300 years of failed, one-eye blind science. The real inventor of relativity however was Henri Poincaré, and Einstein's first paper on relativity was published three months after Poincaré's short paper. Poincaré never acknowledged Einstein's work on special relativity.

German publishing houses, which were (and are!) to the largest part under Jewish controlling influence and ownership, made Einstein a Jewish superstar. Even the rules of the Nobel Prize were changed for Einstein, because before Relativity, the prize was never issued for theories (belief systems). Einstein is one of several celebrated Jewish-Zionist "geniuses", all of whom were not only wrong, but who served to distract human endeavors from discovering truth. Among these were Karl Marx, who reduced human beings to labor capital, Sigmund Freud, who reduced human beings to sexuality and of course Einstein, who taught us that everything is meaningless and that we are too stupid to understand his complicated formulas.

One important aspect in cosmology has been the 5th element Aether (or Ether), which was constituted by ancient scientists as medium for light waves, a concept that has been dismissed by modern scientists, most likely because it has been causing the biggest headache in the history of science. In the Ether based approach, space is not nothing, so it must have a minimal friction that can be measured when passing something through it. In fact, if planet Earth was to move around the sun at 30 km/s then it would have to be possible to measure an Ether effect that shows precisely 30 km/s.

The Michelson Interferometer was designed to measure precisely such "fringe shifts" and experiments were carried out in 1881, 1887 and 1897, expecting 30 km/s, but got only 3-8 km/s (frequently quoted as zero, but it was not zero). This left scientists only two bad choices:
a) no Ether existed (then what produced the 3-8 km/s?)
b) Earth did not move around the sun - a terrifying option

Along came savior Lorentz who claimed the measuring apparatus itself was compressed by the Ether through a "length contraction" (Lorentz Transform), of course exactly in the required amount so that it would save the heliocentric model. As this explanation was so idiotic that not even the scientific crowd could buy into it, Einstein played a scientific wild card and check mated everybody by claiming that it was not the length that was contracted, but that time had been contracted, that time shrinks, which is a killer argument, because nobody could disprove this and even if they could, anything that would be measured would be "relative" anyway....or in other words meaningless. If nothing has a reference, as Einstein proposed, science eats itself.

Einstein and his mentor, Jesuit priest Lemaitre.

Jesuit Lemaitre then introduced the theory of an expanding universe and in 1929 Hubble was somewhat shocked to find that he could observe a red shift in the universe in all direction that he looked - which confirmed an expanding universe, but unfortunately one that was expanding from Earth as the center. This could of course not be possible. According to the Big Bang Theory (a Jesuit created theory = god belief, the big mind f...), the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background, discovered in 1964, Nobel Prize 1978), defined as thermal radiation left over from the "Big Bang", must be the same (homogeneous, isotropic) in all directions ("cosmological principle").

In the late 20th century the plot thickens! Three multi-billion dollar satellites are launched by space agencies to save the day and finally prove that the Earth moves around the sun and that Earth is nothing special and that the universe is the same everywhere. What these satellites came back with is data that shocked scientists in such a way that the term "Axis of evil" was invented. The data had to be evil! It could not be......but lets see:

1989: The Cobe shock: "Explorer 66" comes back with data that proves that the universe is not isotropic (everywhere the same), in fact there is "anisotropy"

Anisotropy follows the equinox points of planet Earth

2001: The WMAP shock: The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe again measures the CMB, the supposed big bang leftover, unfortunately not just confirming Cobe`s data, but bearing an even greater shock: in some modes, the CMB appeared to have an alignment with each other and with both the ecliptic plane and equinoxes of planet Earth, an alignment sometimes referred to as the axis of evil, a term shortly after also used in a speech by G. Bush Jr. The CMP Dipole pointed to the equator of the Earth.

This meant that the 23,5º angle between the ecliptic and the Earth axis was build into the entire cosmos! This also meant that the Big Bang Theory was reduced to ash. This also meant that Special Relativity was proven wrong. This meant that the whole universe was in fact oriented according to planet Earth.

Please compare this image to the astrological symbol for Planet Earth at the beginning of this text
Perhaps somebody knew something in the ancient world?

2013: The final Planck shock: yet another satellite was launched to save "modern" (fashionable) science and billion dollar research monies and it came back with - guess what?- data, that was even more affirmative of the previous finds. In the data release this was called "anomalities" along with a vague commentary, but implications were not explained. There is obviously a lid on these results, because there is too much money and prestige at stake.

Funny enough, Aether friction is being programmed into GPS satellites in the form of the Sagnac Effect (1913) but scientists do not like to talk about this, either. Satellites need to be programmed this way, because Aether is real and Aether movement suggests that planet Earth has only one single movement: the 24h cycle on its axis. The 1925 Michelson-Gale experiment measured 23h 56m 40s, scientists do not like to talk about this, either.

In my view it is time for us to acknowledge the satellite data for what it is and get rid of the following fantasy science:
- Kopernikan principle: WRONG
- Einstein: WRONG
- Steven Hawking hyperspace nonsense: WRONG

and while we are at it, the two most intelligent scientists of the modern aera were N. Tesla and Walther Russell and both have proven
- Newton`s gravity: WRONG

The modern findings generated by billion dollar NASA projects underline the validity of the highest science we have ever had and this is astrology, a science that describes in breathtaking accuracy the effects of the divisions of the ecliptic (zodiac signs) upon life on Earth.

Geocentrists like Ptolemy (2nd century ACE), Aristotele (4th century BCE) and Anaximander (6th century BCE) might have been right after all. The NASA data suggests that they are.

I don`t suggest that we all become Geocentrists, but I suggest we become more careful about what we claim as truth. I also suggest we stop inventing fantasy science to explain away the real data. What is the point of collecting data if we then don`t accept it? What is the point of creating theories that can only be proven in mathematical hieroglyphs?

suggested research links:
Jesuit fraud Einstein debunked by Nikola Tesla (Part 1)
Geocentrism - The Coming Scientific Revolution - 2 - Delano
Geocentrism - The Coming Scientific Revolution - 3
Rick DeLano, The Principle
Dr Robert Sungenis - Geocentrism Geocentric Cosmology

There is of course also an apologetic counter-view available (debunking the debunkers), in my view this crowd has very poor arguments, but you be the judge yourself: http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/


  1. I was wondering if you will be doing a blog about people who have been attacked for telling certain truths.theres a guy called rik clay who people think was taken out just for explaining the symbology and the agenda of the 2012 olympics.I have a few questions to ask you is there anywhere you can be reached

    1. Hello there! I was not planning to do such a blog entry. I am aware about Rik Clay, but I am not so much interested in personalities. People get eliminated when they reach a certain popularity, gain traction on social media and too many people listen to them. This is one of the reasons why I dont promote this blog here and keep myself out of it. It does not really matter who I am. I only write here to express myself. Feel free to ask questions right here on the blog.

    2. Hi Barca, I've been following you for a while and Iam glad you caught up to the fact that there are disputes between where relativity really came from. As for myself, I use to be a big bang, string theory, strict quantum theory advocate. But then I realized after convulted mathematical theory after convoluted mathematical theory that many of these "Theoretical Physicists" were more in love with fantasy mathematics then they were with reality and experimentation. I was dishearteded to learn that many of these high priests of physics (e.g. Michio Kaku) seem more about the fame, oblique mathematical fantasies and money then they were about pursuing the truth.

      Over the years I stumbled upon a interesting fella in Australia (Geoff Haselhurst) and I came upon the Wave Structure of Matter theory. It's much more simple, elegant and actually much, much more intuitive then the 10, 12, 26, and 50,000 dimensions spaghetti non-sense of string theory. I also discovered that another MIT physicist by the name of Milo Wolff, whom also independently discovered the WSM theory but was immediately ostracized by the scientifc community.

      In short do a google search about the Wave Structure of Matter theory and Iam curious to see what you think. For me personally I think this theory is dead on accurate in terms of explaining "spooky" quantum behaviour. And it is also much more intuitive as it makes the "Aether" the medium of exchange for "sub-atomic" information. Supporting Schrödinger's theory that "things and forces" in the universe don't happen IN space but are actually phoenomeon MADE UP of space itself.

      WSM also supports the modality of the "Electric universe" where Electro-Magnetism NOT gravity is the main engine of creation for cosmological phoenomeon.

      Anyways I'd be curious to see what you think about all of this?


    3. Hi Bioman! thanks for the nice input, it looks like this model has some sanity in it. I advise that we all go back to African high knowledge and mythology. The Nancy spider myth and Dogon cosmology are the same thing as "string theory" (spider web strings), but explained in a way that a 5-year old can understand. Our science today are moreover meaningless glyphs and formulas. I dont think there is anything Europe can truly contribute to cosmology. Cosmology requires a sciento-spiritual or spirito-scientific approach and currently I dont see many professors who even understand astrology. We must work our logical argumentation from the below to the above. So, concerning WSM this may be accurate but I dont see it suited to educate the broad masses about who they are and where they are and what their nature is. And if this is not possible, to explain something to a child, than it is too complicated and not practical. Read Dogon cosmology, there is a good book by Laird Scranton - you be amazed what they know.

  2. Dieser Kommentar wurde vom Autor entfernt.