[A]ny theory of cosmology to be taken seriously must be in harmony with celestial mechanics.
Donald Patten, From the Preface, The Mars-Earth Wars, Pacific Meridian Publishing Company, Seattle, WA. USA.1996, 2003.
The brightness of the Sun shall fade at the amber of Mercury, and horror shall seize the beholders.
From Prophecy 88, The Prophecies of Merlin, as quoted in Merlin, High Priest of the Holy Grail, Stivers, 2011.
Author’s Note: The reader must understand that the following material is based upon celestial mechanics. This author is not competent to work with celestial mechanics. Celestial mechanics concerns itself with the movement of the heavenly bodies as they interact with each other in terms of the classical laws of physics: gravity, mass, momentum, etc. However, one is invited to consult Donald Patten’s works cited here. He walks through the math with the reader. It is possible that he has made a mistake, but it is unlikely. His work was developed over the period of decades. Men who are not hasty to publish their calculations usually have thoroughly tested them .
Donald Patten: An Important Voice from the Past
Donald W. Patten (1929-2014) was a traditional Baptist Christian who promoted the idea of Earth catastrophism as an explanation for the geological record and the story of Noah’s Flood. He was not a six-day creationist but his material was so valuable in debunking uniformitarianism in science that it had to be included in the creationism.org website.
Donald Patten believed that our Sun has experienced a nova-outburst sometime within the last 25,000 years. He believed it was caused by a close encounter with a non-luminous planet 42 times the size of Jupiter. He believed that the aberrant rotations of the solar atmosphere represent the remnant effects of this encounter. The gyroscopic torque of the close-flyby caused the Sun’s atmosphere to accelerate at its equator, remnants of which continue to be manifested to this day. He believed that science has inadequately considered the force of liquid gyroscopic effects as it differs from a solid gyroscope. The density of the Sun’s atmosphere acts like a liquid, and may actually be a liquid: see Professor Pierre-Marie Robitaille on the “metallic liquid hydrogen theory of the solar atmosphere” at SkyScholar: https://youtu.be/LuVMIm0qYbk or https://2046ad.org/for-st-patricks-day-2022/.
Patten was a geographer and an expert analyst of topographical features, not only of Earth, but also of the respective planets and moons of the solar system. He published his book The Recent Organization of the Solar System in 1996 as Volume I of a trilogy in anticipation of an updated version of Catastrophism & the Old Testament: Mars-Earth Conflicts (Augsburg Fortress, 1988) as Volume II, and then a revision of The Biblical Flood & the Ice Epoch (Baker, 1966) as Volume III. With the help of co-author Samuel Windsor, a mechanical engineer who became an expert in celestial mechanics and because of his career in building ships, he was a competent commentator on the structural seaworthiness of Noah’s Ark. Along with Patten, Windsor was part of the team which visited the alleged site of Noah’s Ark on Mt. Ararat in Turkey. He was able to establish the authenticity of the wreckage as one which fits the profile of Noah’s Ark.
Together they republished an updated edition of Mars-Earth Conflicts in 2003. Then, in 2020 after Patten’s death, Windsor published it yet again with Steve Quale as Mars-Earth Conflicts & the Destruction of Lucifer’s Planet. This author has not read the most recently published edition. Volume III was never updated and published. Patten died in 2014.
The Recent Organization of the Solar System first appeared about the time of the famous Comet Hale-Bopp as it was making its approach to the inner solar system which gave rise to the “Planet X” panic and the catapulting of cometary experts, such as James McCanney, to public acclaim. The celebrated Art Bell’s nationally syndicated overnight talk radio program, Coast-to-Coast, was the first to break the story on Comet Hale-Bopp.
Patten’s and Windsor’s book, however, was based upon much older research. As noted above, Patten published his book The Biblical Flood & the Ice Epoch in 1966. In the interim of three decades, he continued his research and published various articles and white papers through his Pacific Meridian Publishing and The Creationist Symposium.
Even though he was vaguely aware of nascent “electric universe” theories and actually introduced the notion of “electric flux tubes” which can form between moons and planets with magnetic fields (e.g. Io and Jupiter) and used this phenomenon to explain some aspects of the Mars-Earth “wars” in biblical and nonbiblical mythologies (e.g. the pillar of fire of the Exodus story), he was, nevertheless, still thoroughly Newtonian. He explained Earth’s topography, as did Velikovsky, from tidal forces caused by close planetary encounters. His research and calculations are solid and convincing that Venus and Earth were once companions deep in space (1,000 ~ A.U.) and that they both captured Mercury, Mars and the Moon as satellites which they shared in a barycenter orbit. He also believed that most of the cratering to these planets occurred in that region of space beyond the Kuiper Belt where there is dense debris. However, certainly not all, because orbits are slow in that region of the solar system and the velocity of asteroids might be lacking. The size and depth of the craters would have had to be the result of velocities from collisions induced by gravity. But this can also explain why the Voyager missions have avoided dangerous collisions with these objects: those satellites are too small to create gravitational attraction.
“Little Brother”
Patten also believed that this super-sized planet which he called “Little Brother” (L.B.) was a delivery system bringing new planets into the solar system in its wake. Earth, Venus, Mercury, Mars, and the Moon were temporarily captured by L.B. and were brought into the inner solar system. This would be after these planets – except for Mercury – as comets had completed a long process of accretion (McCanney), involving perhaps millions of years.
Evidence of this delivery system would be suggested in the pairing of the planets: Jupiter with Saturn, Neptune with Uranus, and Earth with Mars. These planets share almost identical tilt and rotation rates with its twin.
It seems that Saturn is a water-rich, mini-solar system. It is probable that both Earth and Mars must have spent some time in Saturn’s region of control, perhaps in its atmosphere from a near flyby or in its rings. Venus, on the other hand, has a lot of sulfur and Jupiter is a sulfur-rich planet. These characteristics suggest an epoch of chaotic and eccentric orbits not accounted for in Patten’s model. But he has made a good start.
Mercury is currently too close to the Sun to have an atmosphere, but its deep craters indicate the presence of water in the form of polar ice (as does Earth’s moon according to recent reports), and because Mercury is a solid without a molten core, it is still frozen deep inside. This fact suggests that Mercury did not spend time as a comet and has not been traveling so close to the Sun very long, at least as measured in astronomical terms. As Patten summarizes,
In this last capture process, for the sticky quintet, first the Sun separated Mars from the Earth. Shortly, perhaps within days, the Earth was divorced from its co-orbiting partner, spinless Venus. Within a couple of weeks more, as “L. B.” inexorably approached the Sun, little spinless Mercury was stripped from Venus. Venus, was deposited on the brink of Hell’s Kitchen, and the other, Mercury, as it was separated, was sent into an orbit inside Hell’s Kitchen itself where temperatures rise to 700° and 800° F. Only the Earth-Moon system had survived the process of dismemberment and realignment around the Sun.
From Chapter 6
[Quotes from Patten’s works come from an Internet source which lacks pagination. Use the Search function on the respective website to find these citations: https://creationism.org/patten .]
The Nova as “Hell’s Kitchen”
The Recent Organization of the Solar System, Patten, et al
If our evidence and analysis is sound, it can be said that neither Ovenden nor Van Flandern understand the genesis of novas. They alleged that the nova exploded; novas do not explode. They merely rise rapidly to a maximum brilliancy in 40 or 50 hours. They suspect the debris of the nova is the genesis of the asteroids. They equate a nova with an explosion, which a nova is not.
There is only one known asteroid within the orbit of Mercury. In the absence of asteroids, Patten did not believe that Mercury’s craters came from asteroids within its current orbit – nor judging from the statement above, did he believe that Mercury was pocked from the explosion of a solar nova, as he did not believe that novas represent an explosion which would have expelled large enough debris to have formed the craters.
Patten did not know if there was evidence of more than one nova event. He did not profess to know if there would be another, or what the return date for Little Brother might be.
According to Vogt and also Davidson, the last true nova on our Sun occurred roughly 12,000 years ago. Vogt believes it was the result of a cosmic-wide internal clock cycle which resets the universe everywhere. This is based upon his Theory of Multi-Dimensional Reality. In contrast, Davidson believes that the periodicity comes from the rhythmic fluctuations of the galactic current sheet which emanates in waves from the galactic center. He has now been discussing smaller, mini-nova outbursts which occur within shorter and more frequent cycles. Solar science is still in its infancy.
Patten’s analysis is convincing that the last nova occurred because of or concurrent with a binary-type encounter with a celestial body large enough to induce an outburst from the Sun. It would have occurred before the presence of life on Earth, because it caused a long period of temperatures in excess of 300 to perhaps 700 degrees F. No known life-form can exist in such elevated temperatures.
We have discussed the solar flaring caused by sun-diving comets (Survival Praxis #23). Certainly, a close encounter of such a super-planet, especially if it temporarily and briefly approached the Roche Limit with the Sun, should be expected to produce a solar outburst and perhaps break-off chunks from the approaching planet, just as we witnessed with Comet Ison’s approach in 2012.
Patten’s calculations are based upon extrapolations from current orbital anomalies and synchronicities which compel the belief that much of the Earth’s current topography is the result of tidal forces from encounters with these or similar celestial bodies. As an explanation of Earth’s topography, his analysis of celestial mechanics is a superior explanation than Davidson’s crustal displacement theory or Vogt’s Theory of Multi-Dimensional Reality. While crustal uplift, buckling and Birkeland scarring can contribute startling effects to Earth’s topography, Patten’s (and McCanney’s) science of cometary and planetary encounters still remains the best explanation that can be offered by celestial mechanics.
The Oblate Earth
An example can be found in Earth’s oblateness from the centrifugal force of its rotation. Patten has spent much time explaining the effects of the Earth’s oblateness on crustal tearing and mountain-building. Neither Davidson nor Vogt has scarcely acknowledged its relevance to Earth’s topography:
In such a circumstance, another condition also would necessarily follow. It involves the Earth’s oblateness, which is due to its centrifugal motion (rotation). The Earth’s equatorial diameter is 7927 miles, whereas its polar diameter is only 7900 miles, a difference of 27 miles. A change in the location of the Earth’s poles implies a change in the location of the Earth’s equatorial zones. A consequence then would be a shift in the Earth’s oblateness to the new equatorial zone. This in turn would be facilitated by a splitting or a cleavage, a perpendicular tear in the Earth’s crust, astride the equator, which would allow for the necessary expansion. Such a cleavage, due to a new equatorial zone of oblateness, could be expected to be not only perpendicular to the equatorial zone, but could also be expected to be broadest and more complex in breaching in the equatorial zone.
Patten, Mars-Earth Conflicts, op cit
From this analysis, we are justified to infer a crustal displacement per Charles Hapgood, Chan Thomas, and Ben Davidson, but not a 90 degree tilt, and certainly not a 180 degree flip. A very great force would be necessary to overcome the Earth’s oblateness. Even if the viscosity of the mantle were to unlock the crust for movement, it still would be going “uphill,” as it were to overcome 27 miles of crustal mass. 30 to 40 degrees, as evidenced from the last crustal shift seems more likely, and sufficient to place the frigid landscape of the Arctic and Antarctic back into what was once sub-tropical conditions when the Earth’s orbit was closer to the Sun.
The Nice Nova
Radiation, like gravity, follows the principle of the inverse of the distance squared.
The Recent Organization of the Solar System, Chapter 7
Patten describes the last solar nova scenario involving Little Brother as one which was much milder in its effects than the Vogt or Davidson models, even salutary. He called it a “moderate-sized nova.” He did not believe that Earth’s exposure was as severe, such that the oceans were steamed-off. Instead, they were warmed just enough to release their carbon dioxide and create the world of the dinosaurs. More below.
Temperatures on Mercury reached 3000 to 12,000 degrees. Using the inverse of the distance squared, Earth’s temperatures would have been 1/9th of that or 300 to 1300 degrees F., assuming that Earth was at its current distance from the Sun.
Had the last nova produced sustained temperatures in excess of 3000 degrees F on Earth as required by Vogt’s model – enough to evaporate 450 ft. to 750 ft. of the world’s oceans to expose the continental shelves, Mercury would no longer exist and probably Venus. It would seem that the planet Mercury is too close to the Sun to have been a separate planet present at the last nova. The current orbits of Mercury, Venus, and Earth on the inside of the asteroid belt suggest that they were delivered to the inner solar system at the last nova. It does not seem possible that Mercury could have survived the last nova. Yet, according to Patten, it displays clear evidence of the cratering and melting which would occur from exposure to a solar nova . . . meaning that it was a much milder nova.
Mercury evidences terracing in its melted craters, which would require multiple lesser nova outbursts. Major Maynard White’s initial discoveries in the Arctic immediately following World War 2 – cited by Davidson (The Next End of the World), on this website (Survival Praxis #8), and classified by the U.S. military (World in Peril https://archive.org/details/worldinperiltheorigin/mode/2up) – revealed that the Earth has rocked back and forth several times in its geological past, which left layers of fossil-debris alternating between sub-tropical and glacial conditions. Also, Vogt’s claim that deep-sea river canyons indicate multiple inundations must be accounted for. The presence of tektites on Earth and the Moon can establish at least one nova catastrophe with relativistic temperatures.
In the alternative, if, as the Thunderbolts Group http://thunderbolts.info/ believes, Earth was once a moon of Saturn and received sufficient infrared radiation to sustain life, the passage of Little Brother could have disrupted the orbital patterns of its moons. Mars would have , as well. Patten has recreated a scenario in which Mars was Earth’s larger moon and its nemesis, circling in a highly eccentric orbit with a close perigee. Venus could have been spun off from Saturn or Jupiter later as suggested by Velikovsky and McCanney. But this scenario is based strictly upon ancient myths, not an extrapolation of orbital patterns using celestial mechanics. I tend to favor Patten’s scenario.
It is probably true that Earth has far more water in its oceans than it once had. Perhaps, the continental shelves were exposed for that reason. However, we must not forget the submarine river canyons. They are a testament to multiple inundations and run-offs of cataclysmic proportions. Patten, too, believed that Earth has had multiple inundations:
The Earth has had a flood, and in fact many floods. The sources were gigantic tides rising out of our planet’s oceans.
Ibid, Chapter 7
Vogt is not the only one who has come to this conclusion.
The Greater Nova
The question arises: If the causation of a solar nova differs, would the scale and effects differ also?
If as suggested above, the previous nova was a lesser one which preserved the mass of Mercury, it was because the size of Little Brother made it so. If now we are facing a nova from other causes – the turbulence of a galactic current sheet or the sudden influx of an astral river of hydrogen, or if according to standard theories, the normal solar process of accretion of heavy isotopes and neutrons that must be expelled by the force of nuclear and thermonuclear explosions – then it is reasonable to expect that the next nova will be the greater nova.
Left to itself, a star will nova from the process of accretion. Perhaps, this is reflected in the 12,000 year cycle in our Sun as identified by Vogt. Novas caused by random external factors will cause chaotic interference with the normal cycle. The timing of those novas (novae) would be difficult to predict, as would their intensity.
The nova of Genesis 1:2 ff would have been the lesser one caused by Little Brother. Later, the solar outburst of Noah’s Flood would have been an even smaller one accompanied by planetary collisions or near collisions which tore the Earth’s crust. This would have been the residual effects of the eccentric orbits of Venus, Mars, the Moon, and perhaps a yet unidentified planet.
[Patten spends considerable time discussing a hypothetical planet he calls “Astra,” which was broken up to become the current asteroid belt. This was for a time, in part, Van Flandern’s theory. This is another avenue for consideration, especially if we are trying to determine the source of Earth’s most recent ice age.]
So then, the nova of Genesis 1:2 (not the one of Genesis 1:1) was a mild one which resulted in global warming and a greenhouse atmosphere for the Earth. Citing Patten at length,
The toasting of the Earth’s surface will produce a hot crust and warm oceans. The warmed oceans will be the primary depository of the Earth’s surplus heat. In being warmed, the oceans will release large volumes of dissolved carbon dioxide to Earth atmosphere. It will help restore a “greenhouse type climate.” The ancients in the Middle East called the Earth first era, when CO-2 was abundant, the “age of gold.” Subsequent ages, silver, bronze and iron, were viewed by them as clearly inferior.Today the oceans have 55 times as much carbon dioxide as does the atmosphere. Thoroughly warmed oceans will rectify this situation and produce another greenhouse effect for our planet. Plants, if they survive, will love the new climate with enriched carbon dioxide. So will out planet’s fauna for another set of biochemical reasons. Perhaps a futuristic ratio of carbon dioxide in the oceans versus atmosphere will be 10:1 instead of the contemporary rarefied rate of 55:1 . . .
Enhanced carbon dioxide in mammals produces carbonic acid in the blood – the union of a molecule of water, H2-O, with a molecule of carbon dioxide – C-O2. The result of such a union is H2-CO3, carbonic acid.
We expect to demonstrate by scientific experiment that this atmospheric change alters the mineral balance in the systems of mammals. Further, this change, we expect to prove, delays maturation, enhances body size and growth, and increases vigor and longevity. This condition, sometimes called hypercapnia, or enhanced CO-2, increases system zinc retention, enhances calcium retention and other good things.
Such a condition happened on our planet once and could recur.
Ibid, Chapter 9, “Story 18” Emphasis added
Obviously, Patten indulges the hope that novas can be beneficial, even though initially catastrophic. Felix, Vogt and Davidson, too, are hopeful of “evolutionary leaps” from the gene-altering radiation.
The nova of Genesis 1:1 created a lifeless condition on Earth. It required a process of special creation by the Deity to terraform the Earth and create new life. However, atmospheric conditions were conducive to abundance as claimed by Patten above.
The nova of the Genesis Flood had opposite effects: it resulted in an ice age. It was a milder one which blew off the ice field of either Mars or this hypothetical Astra and deposited it on the Earth in a precipitous inundation. The air was thinner and colder.
Note: The Exodus catastrophe was the result of a flyby of Venus as a comet. It was “the Destroyer” identified in the Kolbrin (McCanney). There was no nova. The future nova will not be caused by Little Brother and may represent a larger event from the Sun’s normal 12,000 year cycle. In other words, it may be a nova which matches the results of Genesis 1:1.
[It should be added that Earth’s upper atmosphere also experiences a process of accretion, mostly of water in the form of ice. I have already offered the suggestion, that given enough time between cataclysms, Earth can build up an ice shell which under certain conditions can precipitate in a sudden deluge on portions of the Earth’s surface (see Survival Praxis #17, etc.).]
Accretion & The Triple Convergence
The bombardment [from the nova] will transition from plasma to dust and other molecules as the second component of the wave arrives, which will have the isotopes of heavy elements in the nova attached to the dust, and which will present itself in vastly non-homogenous ways.
The Next End of the World, Davidson, p. 46
The factors involved with a solar nova are so many that it is difficult to summarize. Davidson does a good job, as does Vogt. The development of the science is ongoing, and the following is offered, not in a way of criticism, but as an attempt to develop the subject matter further.
The radiation from heavy isotopes has not been sufficiently discussed in the “2046” literary genre. I hope to add some useful points here.
X-rays and gamma rays are produced from nuclear explosions involving elements containing neutrons. The normal radiance from the Sun is fueled by hydrogen which contains one proton and one electron, and to a lesser extent, helium, which contains two protons, two neutrons, and two electrons. But as the chart below indicates, most of the radiance of the Sun comes from the nuclear burn of iron. Even though iron constitutes only a fraction of the Sun’s mass and atmospheric composition, because it is a heavy metal, it’s fission process (and fusion) creates the greater burn.
The Role of the Various Elements in Solar Radiation
Element …………..No. of Electrons … Electrons Squared … Percent of Sun’s Mass … % of Radiation
IRON ……………………………52…………………………. 2704……………………….. .16%…………………………………..38%
OXYGEN………………………16…………………………… 256………………………… .77………………………………………17
HELIUM ………………………. 2……………………………. 4……………………….. 24.85……………………………………….9
HYDROGEN………………….1……………………………….. 1………………………. 73.46……………………………………… 6
Silicon ……………………….. 28………………………….. 784 …………………….. .09………………………………………. 6
Neon …………………………. 20 ………………………….. 400 …………………………. .12 …………………………………….. 4
Carbon ………………………. 12 ………………………….. 144 ………………………. .29 ……………………………………….4
Sulphur ……………………….32 ………………………….. 1024 ………………………. .04 …………………………………….. 4
Magnesium ………………..24 …………………………. 576 ……………………… .05 …………………………………….. 3
Nitrogen ……………………..14 ……………………………..196 ……………………….. .09 ……………………………………… 2
Other ………………………….. 10 ……………………………. 8 ……………………..,.. est.
Table from The Recent Organization of the Solar System
[Note 12/16/22: the following represents corrected statements in anticipation of a fuller discussion on radiation in Survival Praxis #29]
Much of the solar wind consists of electrons, which because of their smaller size, easily escape the solar atmosphere when released. Much radiation comes from the activity of electrons, but not all, of course. [corrected paragraph. Reference to McCanney has been omitted pending a more complete discussion in SP #29]
Protons escape as well, but travel at much slower speeds, and of course are separated into streams creating a negative polarity in one stream (electrons) and a positive polarity (protons) in the other.
[In terms of an electrical charge], the heliosphere represents a continuous stream of these electrons and protons in all directions which create an overloading effect characteristic of a capacitor. It is ball shaped or more properly, toroid shaped, as this flux of charges flow back to the Sun’s respective poles.
These subatomic particles never truly escape the heliosphere as they are captured by 1) the Sun’s return currents (DC not AC), 2) its gravitational force, and 3) passing comets during their perihelion. Constant solar forcing would have a direct current effect like the charging of a car battery. Overcharging will force the energy to dissipate in heat (a melting battery) or kinetic energy (boom).
Davidson has suggested that the Sun’s pulsations and reversals in polarity might indicate an alternating current. If there is a “dance” between the proton and electron streams, it might be possible to identify these alternating currents. But we do not have enough information or the ability to watch these streams in real time to come to any certain conclusion.
As for neutrons (which have a neutral polarity and have a heavier mass), while some escape to form various kinds of cosmic radiation, most of the neutrons never leave the solar atmosphere and collapse to the solar surface to re-combine and form ever heavier isotopes. This process strengthens Vogt’s argument that stars must nova on a clock-cycle, although his paradigm’s nomenclature will explain it differently (the subject of a future study). Regardless, the failure of neutrons and the heavy isotopes to achieve escape velocity gradually “clogs” the Sun’s access to burnable material. It would seem that an explosion of some kind would be required to “clean out the ducts”, so to speak, which would expel the heavier elements to restore the Sun to a clean thermonuclear burn. With this kind of scenario, the binary model would be unnecessary as a trigger, but also Davidson’s model of the intrusion of a dirty galactic current sheet would be unnecessary. Given enough time, a star must nova from the inefficiency of its internal processes.
However, the presence of the galactic sheet in the heliosphere has been confirmed and suggests that it will be the existential cause of the next nova (see Survival Praxis #17 & #18). Considering the implications of combining two factors in a simultaneous event – the galactic current sheet and this process of solar accretion of the heavier isotopes – it might be that this nova will be bigger than the last one. If we add a third factor, the approach of the mysterious Comet Bernardinelli-Bernstein circa. 2030-2032 AD, especially if it were to cause Saturn to nova (Survival Praxis #23), the solar nova, in turn, could be more explosive. If this comet is as big as NASA’s original claims of “a thousand times more massive” than any seen before, then the prospects of an interference with the solar wind or a debris field in its wake could create an “action at a distance” and trigger the next nova.
Distance: Earth’s Saving Grace
Patten believed that Earth’s distance at its first capture was 92,250,000 miles or roughly 0.8% closer than its current orbit of 92,960,000 miles. It is a difference of 710,000 miles or almost three times the distance to the Moon. It changed Earth’s orbit from 360 days to our current 365.25 days. In terms of radiant heat, that distance is not so important. The distance is still within the range of the ellipses. Earth’s tilt and barometric pressure control temperatures more than anything. After the last nova, Earth’s climate changed more from the loss of atmosphere than from what it gained in distance.
But in terms of the blast wave and debris field – or “impacters” as Davidson puts it – that increased distance will be significant.
Contrary to Patten and perhaps Vogt who believed that novas do not represent “explosions,” as I have said before, it depends upon the nomenclature. Since Patten penned these words a generation ago, astronomical observations have improved and the study of stellar novas has grown from mere dozens to now a number measured in the thousands: and their variety is significant, with at least nine separate classifications so far. Obviously, the Sun’s past novas known to history were of the non-combustible kind. The planets were not destroyed, just heated. However, we do not yet know if combined factors will create an explosive effect. Standard science tells us that solar accretion should take many millions of years, if not billions. But 18th and 19th Century scientists were catastrophists who believed the Sun had a much shorter fuse. The Gradualists are standing on their shoulders, a fact which should temper their cavalier indifference.
If the next solar nova begins with an explosion, then the force of it will impact the orbital paths of the planets. The scenario described in the Prophecies of Merlin (https://2046ad.org/articles/merlin-part-3-of-3/ ) involving a solar system in chaos lends itself to Velikovsky’s thesis of “Worlds in Collision” – another scenario to be discussed.
Regardless, great or small, a nova creates an extended period of radiation bombardment of not only the Earth’s atmosphere, but also of its crust. Radiation from heavy isotopes can be propagated in a transient transference which makes the crust itself radioactive, down to various depths depending upon the length and intensity of the forcing. Some areas of the Earth will experience devastating levels of this radiation, perhaps penetrating a mile deep into the crust. Other areas, perhaps not much at all, especially if they are underwater. However, you do not want to be underwater. If it involves a continental-scale inundation as experienced in the Flood of Noah, the water could conceivably be a mile deep. The weight and scouring effect would destroy any underground bunker. The efficacy of even military-style deep bunkers must be questioned, especially if the water experiences a flash freeze.
The Prophecies of Merlin suggest a knowledge among the ancients of what to expect at the next nova:
The brightness of the Sun shall fade at the amber of Mercury, and horror shall seize the beholders.
We will know the Sun is about to nova when its brightness fades from its clogged dust shell and Mercury turns yellow in the night sky. Instead of being like a bright star that it is now, it will amber in color. When that happens, we will know what happens next.
James Wesley Stivers, 12/4/22
Survival Praxis is published bi-weekly only to the 2046AD.org website.
Copyright (c) reserved 2020-2022.
