Upcoming Interview: Hybrid Humans: Scientific Evidence of Our 800,000-Year-Old Alien Legacy by Daniella Fenton and Bruce R. Fenton

It is interesting to hear that dating might be significantly incorrect. Valerie and both think Moldavite and Australite are part of the alien story, we just do not find a way to reach agreement on exactly their relationship and whether they can be from the same set of events in the period focussed upon. It would be quite amazing if it could be shown that both dated to the same time (or might possibly do so) as there was a large ship destroyed but also many smaller ones. There is no absolute barrier to there being two locations with associated debris from these crystalline crafts.
Actually they would be aluminum crafts. :)
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I don't know if I should have kept the shamanic time travel experiences in the book (they are in both Hybrid Humans & Exogenesis), because they are very obviously a deal-breaker for most people. However, they are real events, and I don't like to feel I should edit reality too much (I have left out some very weird stuff).
I'm so so glad you did it the way you did. you're bold honesty is not only refreshing, but probably the best chance we have of breaking free from the controlled narrative.

for example, contrast your approach to ttsa hall of mirrors political psyop game where everything leads back to 5-sided building.

BTW I'm thinking we may want to break this interview into two parts... one with the science-y stuff and one with you and Daniella about the extended consciousness stuff. what do you think?
 
I would suggest that this is exactly the point. The 'high sea' is our duty, regardless of the irony of its fathomlessness.

Both materialist nihilism and existential theism are ways of sidestepping the question. Both are cul-de-sacs of psuedo-theory. Postulating something which explains everything, anything and nothing, all at the same time.

These two propositions are equal in their ignorance - as they both are founded upon a claim to expertise in God:

1. God poofed the universe into creation. - God is a specific person
2. The universe poofed itself into existence. - God is an empty set

Both positions make specific expertise claims as to knowing the definition, mind and practices of God. Empty set is an expert definition of God, just as in the case of theism.

One does not have to accept this false dilemma. I think that is where you are headed with your sentiment. That is to where my comment pertained. :)
Who do you think is making these proposition? The average person on the street or academic scholars? If you are referring to academic scholars could you please name a few?

Thanks
 
Who do you think is making these proposition? The average person on the street or academic scholars? If you are referring to academic scholars could you please name a few?

Thanks
1. God poofed the universe into creation. - God is a specific person

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1​

"The biblical age of the earth is determined by adding up the genealogies from Adam ...to Christ. This is about 4000 years...Christ lived about 2000 years ago, so this gives us about 6000 years as the biblical age of the earth." Ken Ham, How Do We Know the Bible is True?


2. The universe poofed itself into existence. - God is an empty set


"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing," Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time
"The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice." Richard Dawkins, The Scotsman
 
I'm so so glad you did it the way you did. you're bold honesty is not only refreshing, but probably the best chance we have of breaking free from the controlled narrative.

for example, contrast your approach to ttsa hall of mirrors political psyop game where everything leads back to 5-sided building.

BTW I'm thinking we may want to break this interview into two parts... one with the science-y stuff and one with you and Daniella about the extended consciousness stuff. what do you think?
Thank you, I am very glad to hear the approach is not completely misguided! I have tried to offer a 'middle way' of sorts so that anyone with a genuinely open-minded interest in the included topics can take a walk through the science and the high strangeness, in equal measure. We are offering something quite different to the other notable 'efforts' (if all can be called that) such as Greer's CE5 team, Tom Delonge's TTSA, Goode & co's cosmic disclosure and others I may be overlooking.

These well organised teams all have a few things in common, enormous community support, media reach and solid funding resources, yet fairly little to show for the amount of energy focused upon them. In there own way I suppose they have opened some minds, DeLongue and Greer have managed to get some level of 'partial disclosure' from perceived authority, and TTSA has modified media discussions in a way that is potentially useful for everyone (we shall see).

Daniella and myself certainly lack significant community support, we are self funded (read broke), and have very little media reach (almost all our sharing is through online radio and a few personal websites). I am featured a couple of times in the current season of Ancient Aliens which may open some doors to other media I hope. Despite the handicaps, I feel we offer a fast-track to a meaningful & honest ETI revelation which is superior to any wishy-washy or hard-to-believe form of government disclosure. We bridge high strangeness and mundane scientific requirements, as best as anyone can, with objective evidence wherever it is possible to do so. It seems to me that the ETI wanted someone to put their seeded puzzle pieces together and that is what we have done - as best we are able. That seems to be their chosen method of contact, a multifaceted, long term, widely distributed engagement which targets people that they perceive to have an affinity/past relationship with them. They are aliens and it should be no surprise that they are very weird and do things in an obtuse and confusing way that takes little notice of time and space as barriers.

My position now is finding ways to overcome our limitations, with twenty years of solid research under my belt I am well equipped to discuss all kinds of strange things, but have not built much of a media platform and given little focus to creating a following. This now reveals itself as a huge problem for me, because all the groups mentioned above have been able to create documentaries, TV shows, conferences etc. I really need to convert my material into a visual format but have no way to start this and I lack the funds to pay PR people or anyone that could connect me with mainstream media and so far no production companies have expressed interest (my literary agent approached a small number that he has dealt with in the past). It is hard to see how a book will make the impact needed in an age where most people are focused on other forms of media and TV/video reaches even those not actively looking for a topic (unlike books).

Really, I need help and advice from people who are good at all the things I am not gifted with, PR, marketing, media, fundraising because I know people have uncovered amazing things which have gone nowhere (in fact I know several such people) due to similar logistical reasons. It does not matter what one has if you can't bring it to the public in a way that begins the process of social change.

Sorry if I have rambled from one subject to another, but I know there are many smart people here and I would like to take advantage of any advice they might offer. Many thanks!
 
one of the things Bruce does a nice job of, and I'd like to capture during this interview, is examining Bruce's theories versus accepted scientific theories re the same phenomenon. Maybe we could hash out a little geology / non vertebrate paleontology:

TEKTITES
“To anyone who has worked with them, tektites are probably the most frustrating stones ever found on earth.” – Henry Faul, 1966.

Faul’s description of tektites still holds true even today. While more data has been collected and theories on the origin of tektites have been reduced, these small, glassy objects still provide many questions for current tektite researchers. Let us begin our discussion with a brief history lesson.

What is a tektite?

Australite button
Tektites are rounded, pitted bodies of silicate glass, nonvolcanic in origin, most likely derived by large hypervelocity meteorite collisions with terrestrial rocks. Commonly about the size of a walnut, tektites can vary from sand grain sized microtektites, weighing grams, to large, blocky, Muong Nong-type specimens weighing up to 12.8 kg (28 pounds). Tektites can differ in both color and age, depending on where they are found. Commonly black color, tektites can also vary from light green to greenish yellow. Ages vary from ~35.5 million to ~750,000 years old. Chemically, tektites are uniquely characterized by extremely high silica contents ranging from ~70% in Australasian tektites to ~98% in Libyan Desert Glass. See some examples from the NPL collections.

Current Thinking
Most current scientists theorize that tektites are formed by the rapid heating and subsequent cooling of quartz-rich soils and rocks. The impact of large meteorites with the surface of the Earth provides enough energy to melt soils and rocks and disperse the molten ejecta of these impacts great distances, forming tektites. Mixtures of shale and quartz sandstone or certain igneous rocks, possess similar compositions to that of the tektites, leading researchers to believe that these rocks may be the “parent” or “source” rock of tektites. Additionally, terrestrial soils, which cover almost the entire globe, have been found to also possess the proper chemical compositions, to create tektites. Produced by the erosion of many different source rocks, these soils would be a potential source of tektite-melt material. Before we begin discussing in depth the process of tektite formation, perhaps we should consider why the meteorite impact theory has gained favor with modern-day researchers.

Alternative Hypotheses

Obsidian
With tektites closely resembling obsidian, many early researchers believed that they were indeed products of terrestrial volcanic eruptions. Their various shapes were theorized to result from abrasion by wind-blown sand or shaping by water.

Chemical properties and the subsequent determination that tektite surfaces were ablated NOT abraded, later disproved this theory. At first glance, abrasion can look similar to ablation. Here’s how they differ: Abrasion is the mechanical wearing or grinding away of rock surfaces by the friction and impact of rock particles transported by wind, ice, waves, running water, or gravity. Ablation is the removal and reshaping of molten surface layers of meteorites and tektites by vaporization during flight through the Earth’s atmosphere. (definitions from Bates and Jackson (1984)). Obsidian is found in nature as a black glass, a product of the ash trapped within the crystal, the presence of the green and yellowish-green moldavites and Libyan Glass, as seen below, provides an easy example of why this theory can be discounted.


Tektite (Muong Nong-type)
Many other theories were developed to try to explain the existence of tektites, some of these included:

The suggestion that tektites were actually man-made objects, created during the smelting process of ancient civilizations.

However, the chemical and physical property of tektites, as well as the stratigraphic ages of their localities completely discounts this theory. (Humans developed rudimentary smelting techniques as early as 6000 B.C., however, the youngest tektites are around 100,000 years old.)

The idea that natural fires such as forest fires or ground fires igniting coal seams could be a source of tektites.

Although these fires may reach very high temperatures, the presence of ablation shapes and other unique chemical properties in tektites discounted this theory.

Another proposed alternative for tektite formation was the fusing of silica-rich surface soil and dust by lightning.

These forms, called fulgurites, while having attained high enough temperatures to have melted the silica, do not have the same appearance as tektites, often occurring as soda-straw shaped tubes, as seen here, and possess none of the unique chemical and physical properties that set tektites apart from other naturally occurring glasses. In addition, the nature and scale of tektite occurrence discounts this theory as well. Lightning strikes occur thousands of times each day. If this theory held true, tektites would be found throughout the world, in great abundance.


Moldavite
Theories suggesting that tektites were material ejected from lunar volcanoes or that tektites were formed by the impact of meteorites with the Moon gained wide acceptance during the 1950’s and 60’s. However, some scientists doubted these theories, suggesting that tektites were actually formed on Earth by meteorite and/or comet impacts.

After the Apollo Moon landings scientists studied and compared the chemical composition of lunar rocks to tektites. Their conclusions showed that there was little to no similarity between tektites and lunar materials, shedding doubt on the lunar origin of tektites, and adding credit to the terrestrial impact theory that is now widely accepted.

==== now from Bruce's new book Exogenesis

- Tektite glass does not form every time our planet is impacted, in fact, there are only four identified tektite strewn fields despite the many cosmic impact events during geological history. These tektite strewn-fields in order of age are; North American (34 million years), Central European (14 million years), Ivory Coast (1 million years) and Australasian (0.78 million years).

- Australasian tektites (see button image at top of this post) are known as australites, and they really are in a division of their own. The first significant fact about australite is that despite being produced recently (in geological terms) and being exceptionally widely dispersed (associated microtektites reached over 10% of the Earth’s surface), there is no associated crater.

- Australite has an additional form which is not known among other tektites, the ‘flanged button’ which involved a unique double melting process...


One NASA report has this to say about the nature of the fragments:
“Experiment and analysis indicate that the button-type australites were derived from glassy spheres which entered or re-entered the atmosphere as cold solid bodies; in case of average-size specimens, the entry direction was nearly horizontal and the entry speed between 6.5 and 11.2 km/sec. Terrestrial origin of such spheres is impossible because of extremely high deceleration rates at low altitudes.”
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Moldavite is extraordinarily different than other tektites in that its genesis involves the combustion of aluminum with free oxygen. Moreover, the strewn pattern is relatively small, focused and elliptical (not acorn-shaped and large from an impact as in the case of australite, but rather an 'air burst') - no other tektites (that I am aware of) bear this anomalous feature set.
 
Last edited:
Moldavite is extraordinarily different than other tektites in that its genesis involves the combustion of aluminum with free oxygen. Moreover, the strewn pattern is relatively small, focused and elliptical (not acorn-shaped and large from an impact as in the case of australite, but rather an 'air burst') - no other tektites (that I am aware of) bear this anomalous feature set.
Australite buttons are definitively not from an impact event, they can only be the product of an explosion in space this is very well established in teh scientific research. The australites that are found in Northern Australia and beyond are the result of aerial bursts, this has now been conclusively shown by one of the fanatical geological researchers with a passion for the material. It was long considered a mystery why australites (not the button form) were found in very tight clusters on the ground, additionally there are several conundrums that relate to the Muong Nong material which is also from the same event. What has now been shown is that the clusters are the result of aerial bursts as larger chunks entered the atmosphere. Muong Nong provided the final death blow to the impact hypothesis, a very unique piece was found in one of the largest collections, it showed that molten material had ended up on an already cooling chunk and become fused, i.e. a second burst arrived several hours later and by amazing luck part of the molten material landed on debris from a previous explosion.

Obviously there was always a great deal of head scratching over the lack of a crater, which should have been enormous, very young geologically, and had to be close to the Muong Nong material (as it includes chunks over 20kg). Now we know why there is no crater...because there was no impact. This meshes precisely with the NASA studies which posited the source was a large 1km object in orbit around Earth that exploded in space creating a swarm of debris.
 
Climate change, despite my being a climate change proponent, suffers from these three forms of pseudo-science in inference for example.
I wasn't going to wade into these waters but :)

actually, it might be a good topic to kick around because it's relevant to bruce's work and the final chapter of his new book

first off, I wonder if yr really a "climate change proponent." of course, I get what you mean, but I also think phrasing / language / meme control is a big part of what's going on here.

For example, consider the move from "global warming" to "climate change." I think it's hard for any reasonable, fair-minded person to see this as anything other than calculated attempt to move away from data that was no longer friendly to the CO2 driven globalist global warming alarmist terror message.

... but that's just the beginning because I challenge the idea that any of us really care about "climate change." ultimately, what we care about is policy. if the planet is catastrophically heating up because my daughter drives her hand-me-down explorer too much then I want to know what we're going to do about it. on the other hand, if the planet is heating up because of some internal dyno-ball grinding that happens every couple hundred thousands of years and ends with a magnetic pole shift ( by the way this is a theory I heard from a Skeptiko listener and it's become my go-to-favorite-although-yet-to-be-substantiated theory) then I wanta know what we're gonna do about that.

Finally, I would maintain that the only thing we know for certain about global warming / climate change is that it represents the worst hijacking of science of the modern era. climategate 1, 2 and 3 are unprecedented examples of the corruption of modern science by forces that are unseen / unknown.

again, this is not to say that there isn't real science mixed in with the fake science... and it's not to say there isn't a human component to global warming / climate change. I'm just being a real stickler about the data and pointing out that the lies and misrepresentations around this topic are easily and plainly demonstrated by looking at fake science.
 
... but that's just the beginning because I challenge the idea that any of us really care about "climate change." ultimately, what we care about is policy. if the planet is catastrophically heating up because my daughter drives her hand-me-down explorer too much then I want to know what we're going to do about it. on the other hand, if the planet is heating up because of some internal dyno-ball grinding that happens every couple hundred thousands of years and ends with a magnetic pole shift ( by the way this is a theory I heard from a Skeptiko listener and it's become my go-to-favorite-although-yet-to-be-substantiated theory) then I wanta know what we're gonna do about that.
This is fair Alex - and I understand your reason to challenge me on this.

When our first baby was born, we were scolded by nurses and mothers alike because we both bottle fed and breast fed. "What camp are you in??" they would ask.

Both.

I am both in the camp that man is contributing to greenhouse inducing water/crude oil aromatics/carbon into the atmosphere AND that the Earth is in a exothermic inner-core cycle which is heating the deep oceans and tectonic crude oil formations and releasing methane and aromatics at a rate which neither man's econimic nor mobile activity can substantiate. This is clear in the data - the Mauna Loa PPM carbon curve is ACCELERATING (orange curve in graph below), and man's activity is NOT ACCELERATING. This is mathematically impossible, unless there is another contributor. The slope can be shallow or high, and follow an economic inertia curve, and be cumulative - However in order to be convex (orange curve below) - this requires and follows a square law - which requires multiple contributors in order to create. One must lie in order to avoid this issue.

To substantiate my commitment to man's contribution however, my team has run economic analyses which cite the resolution to man's contribution to be resolved through the following four actions - action speaks more loudly than does political hatred. Accordingly, this is where I am placing my money and business activity:

A. Conversion of Class III IPW, animal manure and MSW waste classes into electrical power​
B. Reforestation of the planet back to a green footprint equivalent to 1850 ad​
C. Redistribution of manufacturing from its locus in Asia (China) back to regional manufacturing hubs, reducing enormous shipping/travel distances and factory unaccountability, and​
D. Elimination of industrial farming which ex-gasses carbon from the soil, relies upon natural gas injection, must ship methanogenic-pig waste long distances, and requires all product be shipped long distances before consumption​
These four things will COMPLETELY neutralize man's growth-contribution to the curve below. However, it will not, and can not - stop it entirely. A cycle is underway which is not allowed for study. If crude aromatics are rising, the atmosphere will exhibit one style taper curve wrt to complex hydrocarbons. If man is the source of methane alone, then the atmosphere will exhibit a dramatically different hydrocarbon taper curve among the 16 aromatic constituents. Why do we not study this? - Because we think we had it all figured out in 1972, and must adhere to our epistemic anchoring.

Just like every single other embargoed topic - the same old shtick with which we are all familiar now. It is an inner core exothermic cycle which is embargoed for study by the bottle feeding cadre of enforcers.

This is my group's data through April 2019.

Global CO2 and Temperature Increase thru 2019.png
 
Last edited:
Australite buttons are definitively not from an impact event, they can only be the product of an explosion in space this is very well established in teh scientific research. The australites that are found in Northern Australia and beyond are the result of aerial bursts, this has now been conclusively shown by one of the fanatical geological researchers with a passion for the material. It was long considered a mystery why australites (not the button form) were found in very tight clusters on the ground, additionally there are several conundrums that relate to the Muong Nong material which is also from the same event. What has now been shown is that the clusters are the result of aerial bursts as larger chunks entered the atmosphere. Muong Nong provided the final death blow to the impact hypothesis, a very unique piece was found in one of the largest collections, it showed that molten material had ended up on an already cooling chunk and become fused, i.e. a second burst arrived several hours later and by amazing luck part of the molten material landed on debris from a previous explosion.

Obviously there was always a great deal of head scratching over the lack of a crater, which should have been enormous, very young geologically, and had to be close to the Muong Nong material (as it includes chunks over 20kg). Now we know why there is no crater...because there was no impact. This meshes precisely with the NASA studies which posited the source was a large 1km object in orbit around Earth that exploded in space creating a swarm of debris.
Actually I apologize as I was in error - I did not know they had a suspect crater for Moldavites. Per below from EarthSci.org

 
This is fair Alex - and I understand your reason to challenge me on this.

When our first baby was born, we were scolded by nurses and mothers alike because we both bottle fed and breast fed. "What camp are you in??" they would ask.

Both.

I am both in the camp that man is contributing to greenhouse inducing water/crude oil aromatics/carbon into the atmosphere AND that the Earth is in a exothermic inner-core cycle which is heating the deep oceans and tectonic crude oil formations and releasing methane and aromatics at a rate which man's econimic nor mobile activity cannot substantiate. This is clear in the data - the Mauna Loa PPM carbon curve is ACCELERATING (orange curve in graph below), and man's activity is NOT ACCELERATING. This is mathematically impossible, unless there is another contributor.

To substantiate my commitment to man's contribution however, my team has run economic analyses which cite the resolution to man's contribution to be resolved through the following four actions - action speaks more loudly than does political hatred. Accordingly, this is where I am placing my money and business activity:

A. Conversion of Class III IPW, manure and MSW waste to electrical power​
B. Reforestation of the planet back to a green footprint equivalent to 1850 ad​
C. Redistribution of manufacturing from its locus in Asia (China) back to regional manufacturing hubs, reducing enormous shipping/travel distances and factory unaccountability, and​
D. Elimination of industrial farming which ex-gasses carbon from the soil, relies upon natural gas injection, must ship methanogenic-pig waste long distances, and requires all product be shipped long distances before consumption​
These four things will COMPLETELY neutralize man's contribution to the curve below. However, it will not, and can not - stop it entirely. A cycle is underway which is not allowed for study. If crude aromatics are rising, the atmosphere will exhibit one style taper curve. If man is the source of methane alone, then the atmosphere will exhibit a dramatically different taper curve among the 16 aromatic constituents. Why do we not study this? - Becasue we think we have it all figured out.

It is an inner core exothermic cycle which is embargoed for study by the bottle feeding cadre of enforcers.

This is my group's data through April 2019.

View attachment 1260

TES,
Does your modeling take in account gains from a warmer earth? Most warmists only look at the worst case losses. You know there definitely are gains for many people in many regions. So the projected losses need to be offset by those gains (something that in my opinion makes global warming - to the extent that there is even such a thing and at such an extent to be concerned about - a much less significant trend in terms of economic harm).

Of course we must be careful about what we attribute to global warming. It has become an event of mythical proportions. It can be invoked to explain anything and everything! I'm with Alex. I think the development of this mythical power is more important (i.e. useful) to some people than any true concern about warming and impacts (note Obama's $15 million home purchase right on the shore).

Why, it's even a good reason to resort to cannibalism! Richard Dawkins is even looking forward to global warming to remove the taboo against cannibalism. A soilent green new deal!

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/20...xK67pqMnfM-YM0dXKP_svAuMSCUSn-Rk1eEysAXg7ZsKA
 
TES,
Does your modeling take in account gains from a warmer earth? Most warmists only look at the worst case losses. You know there definitely are gains for many people in many regions. So the projected losses need to be offset by those gains (something that in my opinion makes global warming - to the extent that there is even such a thing and at such an extent to be concerned about - a much less significant trend in terms of economic harm).

Of course we must be careful about what we attribute to global warming. It has become an event of mythical proportions. It can be invoked to explain anything and everything! I'm with Alex. I think the development of this mythical power is more important (i.e. useful) to some people than any true concern about warming and impacts (note Obama's $15 million home purchase right on the shore).

Why, it's even a good reason to resort to cannibalism! Richard Dawkins is even looking forward to global warming to remove the taboo against cannibalism. A soilent green new deal!

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/20...xK67pqMnfM-YM0dXKP_svAuMSCUSn-Rk1eEysAXg7ZsKA
Eric,

We don't. But that does not serve to invalidate your point however. I remain concerned about man's contribution to the above curve and feel that - in the balance, returning to a more 1950's era level of PPM would be advantageous - if such can be reached. It is inside the plurality of hypothesis now, that such a level cannot now be re-established, no matter what man does.

I read about the euthanasia and soylent green scenarios proposed by the elites recently... Aggh!!
 
Actually I apologize as I was in error - I did not know they had a suspect crater for Moldavites. Per below from EarthSci.org

Yes, the only strewn field with a missing crater is that of the Australites. I am glad you posted this map as I was intending to do that next. We can clearly see here that all the other fields not only have a crater site but the material is spread in a way that makes sense in reference to the suggested impact event. We can see there is fairly tight clustering of the ejecta, even though the fields are very large. Even a cursory glance at the Australite strewn field tells us something is very wrong with the impact claim, it is simply too large, debris has traveled way to far to be the result of any conceivable object that did not function as a planet killer. The strewn-field dwarfs all the others combined and does not have the clustering observed in all the others that follows direction. It is an anomaly among anomalies.
 
BTW I'm thinking we may want to break this interview into two parts... one with the science-y stuff and one with you and Daniella about the extended consciousness stuff. what do you think?
It would be great to split this into two interviews, as we can also then maybe tackle a bit from the Forgotten Exodus in the first sciency show, as that material connects on and tells the story of what happened to these early humans and how the official narrative on that is also wildly wrong. The second show would give us a chance to discuss the high strangeness and share additional supernormal events not in the book but useful for expanding the conversation. Daniella's experiences throughout life are nothing short of epic, even if also quite traumatic at times - she is certainly one of the only people you will have on that is not only a lifelong psychic but also developed shamanic skills for several years in Ecuador and has a government required shaman's licence to provide traditional healing services in Peru!
 
It is inside the plurality of hypothesis now, that such a level cannot now be re-established, no matter what man does.
I would suggest it's about as close to certain as you could get... i.e. no way to turn back the clock... no way to get our greatest geopolitical threat/enemy to dance to our music... no way to avoid the hijacking of the green movement by above-government globalists who see this as nothing more than the ultimate power grab opportunity.

IMO it's not even remotely close to ever happening... and that's where all the really interesting worst-case policy issue come into play.

also, I'm gonna keep pushing the climategate conspiracy thing because it's provable... just follow the data... and doesn't really fit with yr telling of the story. i.e. in 2009 when they did the hide-the-decline climategate science scam no one knew how all this would play out (not that we now know)... so who made the call the rig the data... and why?
 
Last edited:
It would be great to split this into two interviews, as we can also then maybe tackle a bit from the Forgotten Exodus in the first sciency show, as that material connects on and tells the story of what happened to these early humans and how the official narrative on that is also wildly wrong. The second show would give us a chance to discuss the high strangeness and share additional supernormal events not in the book but useful for expanding the conversation. Daniella's experiences throughout life are nothing short of epic, even if also quite traumatic at times - she is certainly one of the only people you will have on that is not only a lifelong psychic but also developed shamanic skills for several years in Ecuador and has a government required shaman's licence to provide traditional healing services in Peru!
great. I'm blown away by the yr work/experience in Ecuador.
 
Yes, the only strewn field with a missing crater is that of the Australites. I am glad you posted this map as I was intending to do that next. We can clearly see here that all the other fields not only have a crater site but the material is spread in a way that makes sense in reference to the suggested impact event. We can see there is fairly tight clustering of the ejecta, even though the fields are very large. Even a cursory glance at the Australite strewn field tells us something is very wrong with the impact claim, it is simply too large, debris has traveled way to far to be the result of any conceivable object that did not function as a planet killer. The strewn-field dwarfs all the others combined and does not have the clustering observed in all the others that follows direction. It is an anomaly among anomalies.
... and I think yr point about the bigger chunks (I seem to remember them landing in SE Asia) are amazing as well.
 
Top