THE DIVINE PLAN VOL. 1

REC #3 HATONN

WED., JUNE 10, 1992 10:21 A.M. YEAR 5, DAY 299

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 1992

MORE ON MESSENGERS

Halley’s Comet is not alone in having an orbit markedly inclined to the ecliptic (a feature measured as an angle of Declination) and a retrograde direction. Nonperiodic comets—comets whose paths form not ellipses but parabolas or even hyperbolas and whose orbits are so vast and whose limits are so far away they cannot even be calculated—have marked declinations, and about half of them move in a retrograde direction. Of about 600 periodic comets (which are now given the letter “P” in front of their name) that have been classified and catalogued, about 500 have orbital periods longer than 200 years; they all have declinations more akin to that of Halley’s than to the greater declinations of the nonperiodic comets, and more than half of them course in retrograde motion. Comets with medium orbital periods (between 200 and 20 years) and short periods (under 20 years) have a mean declination of 18 degrees, and some, like Halley’s, have retained the retrograde motion in spite of the immense gravitational effects of Jupiter. It is noteworthy that of recently discovered comets, the one designated P/Hartley-IRAS (1983v) has an orbital period of 21 years, and its orbit is both retrograde and inclined to the ecliptic.

Where do comets come from, and what causes their odd orbits, of which the retrograde direction is the oddest in astronomers’ eyes? In the 1820’s the Marquis Pierre-Simon de Laplace believed that comets were made of ice and that their glowing head (“coma”) and tail that formed as they neared the Sun, were both made of vaporized ice. This concept was replaced after the discovery of the extent and nature of the asteroid belt, and theories developed that comets were “flying sandbanks”—pieces of rock that might be the remains of a disintegrated planet. The thinking changed again in the 1950’s mainly because of two hypotheses: Fred L. Whipple (then of Harvard) suggested that comets were “dirty snowballs” of ice (mainly water ice) mixed with darker specks of sand-like material; and Jan Oort, a Dutch astronomer, proposed that long-period comets come from a vast reservoir halfway between the Sun and the nearer stars. Because comets appear from all directions (traveling prograde, or anticlockwise; retrograde; and at different declinations), the reservoir of comets—billions of them—is not a belt or ring like the asteroid belt or the rings of Saturn but a sphere that surrounds the Solar System. This “Oort Cloud”, as the concept came to be named, settled at a mean distance, Oort calculated, of 100,000 astronomical units (AU) from the Sun, one AU being the average distance (93 million miles) of the Earth from the Sun. Well, perhaps God just keeps them lined up ready to fling off in the direction of planets needing discipline?

COMETS ARE “WILD CARDS”

Because of perturbations and intercometal collisions, some of the cometary horde may have come closer, to only 50,000 AU from the Sun (which is still ten thousand times the distance of Jupiter from the Sun). Passing stars occasionally perturb these comets and send them flying toward the Sun. Some, under the gravitational influence of the planets, mainly Jupiter, become medium- or short-period comets; some, especially influenced by the mass of Jupiter, are forced into reversing their course. This, briefly, is how the Oort Cloud concept is usually stated. This however, is not correct. Comets are the one starcraft “system” that can be totally controlled without consideration of any of those planetary restrictions. Until you can come into the realization of this fact you cannot realize the changes destined to occur in your upcoming near future.

But let us continue to look at that which is recognized in scientific circles. Since the 1950’s the number of observed comets has increased by more than 50 percent, and computer technology has made possible the projection backward of cometary motions to determine their source. This is proof enough that science is full of “it”. How could comets have “increased” by more than 50 percent? What has changed?

One team at the Harvard-Smithsonian Observatory under Brian G. Marsden has shown that of 200 observed comets with periods of 250 years or more, no more than 10 percent could have entered the Solar System from outer space; 90 percent have always been bound to the Sun as the focus of their orbits. This is total hogwash—”garbage in—garbage out”! But then Whipple covered the assets a bit by saying, “If we are really seeing comets coming from the void, we should expect them to fly by much faster than just 0.8 kilometers per second,” which they do not. In other words—you don’t really know a confounded thing about it—FOR SURE!

OORT QUESTIONED

Now comes the next bug-in-the-boo: During the past few years, astronomers have questioned the simple view of Oort’s Cloud—some still believe that the cloud exists, but the new results demand that they reconsider its size and shape. What are YOU to believe? I suggest that you start by considering “possibilities” of facts unknown to you or your scientists and check out every messenger that is allowed to pass your way.

The interesting aspect of the “reconsideration” of the Oort Cloud notion is new data suggesting that comets, by and large, have always been part of the Solar System and not just outsiders occasionally thrust into it.

What makes this Oort worthy of note? Not his solution to the problem of parabolic and hyperbolic cometal orbits and not the theory he had developed regarding other aspects of orbits. What was important was his consideration that they were “thrust out to there” and not “born” there. You know, sort of “flung off” as with a slingshot.

So maybe he warms up a bit in his suggestion that “The main process now is the inverse one, that of a slow transfer of comets from a large cloud into short-period orbits. But at the epoch at which the minor planets (asteroids) were formed...the trend must have been the opposite, many more objects being transferred from the asteroid region to the comet cloud. It appears far more probable that instead of having originated in the faraway regions, comets were born among the planets. It is natural to think in the first place of a relation with the minor planets (asteroids). There are indications that the two classes of objects”—comets and asteroids—belong to the same ‘species’. Summing up his study, Oort put it this way: It seems reasonable to assume that the comets originated together with the minor planets.”“The existence of the huge cloud of comets finds a natural explanation if comets (and meteorites) are considered as minor planets escaped, at an early stage of the planetary system, from the ring of asteroids.”

Does this not all begin to sound like the Enuma elish....?

The principle conclusion of these suppositions is that the comets originated in a sort-of breakup event in the inner solar system. In all probability, it is speculated from your groups of wiser thinkers, that it was the same event which gave rise to the asteroid belt and which produced most of the meteors now being visualized. Why? Well, they don’t say so but would it not appear that the same “other” bodies would be cycling at about the same “time”?

It was speculated that it was less certain that the same “breakup event” may have also given birth to the satellites of Mars and the outer satellites of Jupiter, and it was then estimated that the “breakup event” occurred some five million or so years ago. There didn’t seem to be doubt however, that the “breakup event” took place “in the asteroid belt”. Physical, chemical, and dynamic properties of the resulting celestial bodies would indicate that a large planet did disintegrate where the asteroid belt is today located.

But what caused such a large planet to disintegrate? The most frequently asked questions about this scenario is how can a planet just blow up? Your people simply don’t have any answers!

Ah but the Sumerians have one: the tale of Tiamat and Nibiru/Marduk, the Celestial Battle, the breakup of half of Tiamat, the annihilation of its moon (except for “Kingu”), and the forcing of their remains into a retrograde orbit.

EARTH, JUPITER—BANG, BANG

As to the ”destroyed-planet” theory there always comes a key criticism: the whereabouts of the planet’s matter; when astronomers estimate the total mass of the known asteroids and comets it adds up to only a fraction of the estimated mass of the broken-up planet. This is especially true if one estimate of the planet with a mass ninety times that of Earth is used in the calculations—which must be. Such criticism has only had response that the missing mass was “probably swept up by Jupiter”. This called for an increase in the mass of Jupiter by as much as 130 Earth-masses as a result of the capture of asteroids, including Jupiter’s several retrograde moons. To allow for the discrepancy between the mass (ninety times that of Earth) of the broken-up planet and the accretion of 130 Earth-sized masses to Jupiter then Jupiter’s mass can’t hold true since other studies concluded that Jupiter’s mass had decreased some time in its past, and there simply is a lack of mathematical “adding up”.

Rather than to first inflate the size of Jupiter and then shrink it back, a better scenario might be to shrink the estimated size of the destroyed planet. That is what the Sumerian texts have put forth. IF Earth is the remaining half of Tiamat, then Tiamat was roughly twice the size of Earth, not ninety times. Studies of the asteroid belt reveal not only capture by Jupiter but a dispersion of the asteroids from their assumed original site at about 2.8 AU to a zone so wide that it occupies the space between 1.8 AU and 4 AU. Some asteroids are found between Jupiter and Saturn; a recently discovered one (2060 Chiron) is located between Saturn and Uranus at 13.6 AU. The smashup of the destroyed planet must have been, therefore, extremely forceful—as in a catastrophic collision!

HOW TO BACK IT UP?

What do you have to scientifically back this up? Not a bunch, but some. In addition to the voids between groups of asteroids, astronomers discern gaps within the clusters of asteroids. The latest theories seem to hold that there had been asteroids in the gaps but they were ejected, all the way to outer space except for those that may have been captured on the way by the gravitational forces of the outer planets; also, the asteroids that used to be in the “gaps” were probably destroyed by catastrophic collisions—at least that takes care of having to locate them. In the absence of valid explanations for such ejections and catastrophic collisions, the only plausible theory is that offered by the Sumerian texts, WHICH DESCRIBE THE ORBIT OF NIBIRU/MARDUK AS A VAST, ELLIPTICAL PATH THAT BRINGS IT PERIODICALLY (EVERY 3,600 EARTH YEARS [BY SOME CALCULATIONS]) BACK INTO THE ASTEROID BELT. The conclusions drawn from the ancient texts were that Nibiru/Marduk passed by Tiamat on her outer, or Jupiter, side; repeated returns to that celestial zone can account for the size of the “gap” there. It is the periodic return of Nibiru/Marduk that causes the “ejecting” and “sweeping”.

By the acknowledgement of the existence of Nibiru and its periodic return to the Place of the Battle, the puzzle of the “missing matter” also finds a solution. It also addresses the theories that place the accretions of mass by Jupiter at a relatively recent time (millions, not billions, of years ago). Depending on where Jupiter was at the times of Nibiru’s perihelion, the accretions might have occurred during various passages of Nibiru and not necessarily as a one-and-only event at the time of the catastrophic breakup of Tiamat. Indeed, spectrographic studies of asteroids reveal that some of them “were heated within the first few hundred million years after the origin of the solar system” by heat so intense as to melt them; “iron sank to their centers, forming strong stony-iron cores, while basaltic lavas floated to their surface, producing minor planets like Vesta”. This according to McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Astronomy. The projected time of the catastrophe is the very time indicated in other writings, some 500 million years after the formation of the Solar System—based on the Sumerian information.

WATER: A CRUCIAL ROLE

It IS improving, however, as recent scientific advances in astronomy and astrophysics go beyond corroborating the Sumerian cosmogony in regard to the celestial collision as the common origin of the comets and the asteroids, the site of the collision (where the remains of the asteroid belt still orbit), or even the time of the catastrophic event, some 4 billion years ago. They also corroborate the ancient texts in the vital matter of water.

The presence of water, the mingling of waters, the separation of waters—all somehow played an important role in the tale of Tiamat, Nibiru/Marduk, and the Celestial Battle and its aftermath. Part of the puzzle was already answered when we showed that the ancient notion of the asteroid belt as a divider of the waters “above” and the water “below” is corroborated by modern science. But there was more to this preoccupation with water. Tiamat was described as a “watery monster”, and the Mesopotamian texts speak of the handling of her waters by Nibiru/Marduk:

Half of her he stretched as a ceiling to be Sky,

As a bar at the Place of Crossing he posted it to guard;

Not to allow her waters to escape was its command.

The concept of an asteroid belt not only as a divider between the waters of the planets above and below it but also as a “guardian” of Tiamat’s own waters is echoed in the biblical verses of Genesis, where the explanation is given that the “Hammered-out bracelet” was also called Shama’im, the place “where the waters were”. References to the waters where the Celestial Battle and the creation of the Earth and the Shama’im took place are frequent in the Old Testament, indicating millennia-old familiarity with Sumerian cosmogony even at the time of the Prophets and Judean kings. An example is found in Psalm 104, which depicts the Creator as the Lord

Who has stretched out the Shama’im as a curtain,

Who in the waters for His ascents put a ceiling.

These verses are almost a word-for-word copy of the verses in Enuma elish; in both instances, the placing of the asteroid belt “where the waters were” followed the earlier acts of the splitting up of Tiamat and having the invader’s “wind” thrust the half that became Earth into a new orbit. The waters of Earth would explain the whereabouts of some or most of Tiamat’s waters. But what about the remains of her other part and of her satellites? If the asteroids and comets are those remains, should they not also contain water?

VARIED WATERY OCCURRENCE

What would have been a preposterous suggestion when these objects were deemed “chunks of debris” and “flying sandbanks” has turned out, as the result of recent discoveries, to be not so preposterous: the asteroids are celestial objects in which water—yes, water—is a major component.

Most asteroids belong to two classes as you can recognize them. About 15 percent belong to the S type, which have reddish surfaces made up of silicates and metallic iron. About 75 percent are the C type: they are carbonaceous (containing carbon), and it is these that have been found to contain water. The water discovered in such asteroids through spectrographic studies is not in liquid form; since asteroids have no “atmospheres”, any water on their surface would quickly dissipate. But the presence of water molecules in the surface materials indicates that the minerals that make up the asteroid have captured water and combined with it. Direct confirmation of this finding was observed in August 1982, when a small asteroid that came too close to Earth plunged into the Earth’s atmosphere and disintegrated; it was seen as “a rainbow with a long tail going across the sky”. A rainbow appears when sunlight falls on a collection of water drops, such as rain, fog, or spray.

When the asteroid is more like what its name originally implied, “minor planet”, actual water in liquid form could well be present. Examination of the infrared spectrum of the largest and first-to-be-discovered asteroid Ceres shows an extra dip in the spectral readings that is the result of free water rather than water bound to minerals. Since free water even on Ceres will quickly evaporate, the astronomers surmise that Ceres must have a constant source of water welling up from its interior.

The celestial body designated 2060 Chiron, interesting in many ways, also confirms the presence of water in the remnants of the Celestial Battle. When Charles Kowal of the Hale Observatories on Mount Palomar, California, (where the Photon secret studies are going on), discovered it in November 1977, he was not certain what it was. He simply referred to it as a planetoid, named it temporarily “O-K” for ”Object Kowal”, and opined that it might be a wayward satellite of either Saturn or Uranus. Several weeks of follow-up studies revealed an orbit much more elliptical than that of planets or planetoids, one closer to that of comets. By 1981 the object was determined to be an asteroid, perhaps one of others to be found reaching as far out as Uranus, Neptune or beyond, and was given the designation 2060 Chiron. However, by 1989, further observations by astronomers at Kitt Peak National Observatory (Arizona) detected an extended atmosphere of carbon dioxide and dust around Chiron, suggesting that it is more comet-like. The latest observations have also established that Chiron “is essentially a dirty snowball composed of water, dust and carbon-dioxide ice.”

If Chiron proves to be more a comet than an asteroid, it will only serve as further evidence that both classes of these remnants of the Genesis event contain water.

When a comet is far away from the Sun, it appears as a dark and invisible object. As it nears the Sun, the Sun’s radiation brings the comet’s nucleus to life. It develops a gaseous head (the coma) and then a tail made up of gases and dust ejected by the nucleus as it heats up—or at least this is the way it appears and is thus accepted as good data. It is the observation of these assumed emissions that has by and largely confirmed views that comets are sometimes ”dirty snowballs”. Spectroscopic analysis of the emissions have shown the presence of the compound water.

The presence of water in comets has been definitely established in recent years through enhanced examination of arriving comets. Comet Kohoutek (1974) was studied not only from Earth but also with rockets, from orbiting manned spacecraft (Skylab) but more especially from Soviet craft. Subsequent cometary observations have confirmed these findings to great extent. However NONE of these studies, accomplished with a variety of instruments, match the intensity with which Halley’s Comet was probed in 1986. The Halley findings established unequivocally (at least for earth-scientists’ comfort) that the comet was a watery celestial body.

This 1986 comet was met by many unmanned spacecraft; Soviet, Japanese and the European Space Agency all launched craft. This seemed to give some credence to the speculation that the Star of Bethlehem in the tale of the birth of Christ was, indeed, the comet. NO, it was NOT. However, the flowing “tail” of the Star at Bethlehem indicated celestial “manipulation” of some sort.

WHY THESE SPECULATIONS?

Intensive observations began when Halley’s Comet developed its coma and tail in November 1985. Developed its tail and coma???—this is worthy of thought for would it not ALWAYS have its coma and tail? Astronomers at the Kitt Peak Observatory tracking the comet with telescopes reported it was certain “that the comet’s dominant constituent is water ice, and that much of the tenuous 360,000-mile-wide cloud surrounding it consisted of water vapor”. Other claims were that “this was the first strong evidence that water ice was prevalent,” and other equally ridiculous assumptions. This does not indicate anything of the such necessarily but those telescopic observations were augmented in January 1986 by infrared observations from high-altitude aircraft, whereupon a team made up of NASA scientists and astronomers from several American universities announced “direct confirmation that water was a major constituent of Hal ley’s comet”. It was also then when it was discovered that there would be an inescapable passage into a Photon Belt accompanied by “different” waves of radiation and the increased hype upon hype about the so-called ozone depletion.

By January 1986, Halley’s Comet had developed an immense tail and a halo of hydrogen gas that measured 12.5 million miles across—fifteen times bigger than the diameter of the Sun. How could all this prediction of “development” have been speculated? Does a comet or heavenly cosmic body “develop” things just because they come within your vision allowance? Why would the loss of water be increased as it neared perihelion on March 6th? It was noted that the comet was losing 12 tons of water per second. That water loss was speculated to increase enormously—first to 30 tons a second and then on to 70 tons a second. Boy, you were saved from dissolution of the orb itself by an assurance of the scientists to the press that “even at this rate Halley’s Comet had enough water ice to last thousands of more orbits.” Whew, for a minute I thought the “messenger” might vanish.

I guess this is enough on Halley’s Comet but the point of this was to assure you that as the Sumerian texts have told you—there was water everywhere on these “Messengers of Genesis”!

I would guess that what this actually tells you is that you really don’t know very much of anything about “out-there” and “what is out there”. For instance, let us look briefly at the

CELESTIAL SEEING-EYES

When the Anunnaki’s Mission Earth reached its full complement, there were six hundred of them on Earth, while three hundred remained in orbit, servicing the shuttle craft. The Sumerian term for the latter was IGI.GI, literally “Those who observe and see.”

Archaeologists have found in Mesopotamia many objects they call “eye idols”, as well as shrines dedicated to these “gods”. Texts refer to devices used by the Anunnaki to “scan the Earth from end to end”. These texts and depictions imply the use by the Anunnaki of Earth-orbiting, celestial “seeing eyes”—satellites that “observe and see”. How interesting!

Would you believe, the coincidence is that some of the Earth-scanning, and especially fixed-position communications satellites launched in your own modern times look very much like these millennia-old depictions. So, who might be deceiving who as regards historical facts about your origins and early travels? Why has not “religion” integrated the information? I think we ALL KNOW THAT ANSWER!

Hatonn to clear.