from:
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/ancatomicwar1.html
Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.nexusmagazine.com/ancatomicwar1.html">Ancient
Atomic Warfare? Pt.1</A>
-----
-- The Evidence for --
Ancient Atomic Warfare
Religious texts and geological evidence suggest that several parts of the
world have experienced destructive atomic blasts in ages past.
Part 1 of 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 7, Number 5 (August-September 2000) or
September-October 2000 in the USA only.
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
>From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com
� 2000 by David Hatcher Childress
Extracted from Chapter 6 of his book
Technology of the Gods: The Incredible Sciences of the Ancients
Published by Adventures Unlimited Press
Box 74, Kempton, Illinois, USA
TollFree # 1-800-718-4514
Website: www.adventuresunlimited.co.nz
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following item appeared in the New York Herald Tribune on February 16,
1947 (and was repeated by Ivan T. Sanderson in the January 1970 issue of his
magazine, Pursuit):
When the first atomic bomb exploded in New Mexico, the desert sand turned to
fused green glass. This fact, according to the magazine Free World, has given
certain archaeologists a turn. They have been digging in the ancient
Euphrates Valley and have uncovered a layer of agrarian culture 8,000 years
old, and a layer of herdsman culture much older, and a still older caveman
culture. Recently, they reached another layer�of fused green glass.
It is well known that atomic detonations on or above a sandy desert will melt
the silicon in the sand and turn the surface of the Earth into a sheet of
glass. But if sheets of ancient desert glass can be found in various parts of
the world, does it mean that atomic wars were fought in the ancient past or,
at the very least, that atomic testing occurred in the dim ages of history?
This is a startling theory, but one that is not lacking in evidence, as such
ancient sheets of desert glass are a geological fact. Lightning strikes can
sometimes fuse sand, meteorologists contend, but this is always in a
distinctive root-like pattern. These strange geological oddities are called fu
lgurites and manifest as branched tubular forms rather than as flat sheets of
fused sand. Therefore, lightning is largely ruled out as the cause of such
finds by geologists, who prefer to hold onto the theory of a meteor or comet
strike as the cause. The problem with this theory is that there is usually no
crater associated with these anomalous sheets of glass.
Brad Steiger and Ron Calais report in their book, Mysteries of Time and Space,
1 that Albion W. Hart, one of the first engineers to graduate from
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was assigned an engineering project in
the interior of Africa. While he and his men were travelling to an almost
inaccessible region, they first had to cross a great expanse of desert.
"At the time he was puzzled and quite unable to explain a large expanse of
greenish glass which covered the sands as far as he could see," writes
Margarethe Casson in an article on Hart's life in the magazine Rocks and
Minerals (no. 396, 1972). She then goes on to mention: "Later on, during his
life�he passed by the White Sands area after the first atomic explosion
there, and he recognized the same type of silica fusion which he had seen
fifty years earlier in the African desert."2
Tektites: A Terrestrial Explanation?
Large desert areas strewn with mysterious globules of "glass"--known as tektit
es--are occasionally discussed in geological literature. These blobs of
"hardened glass" (glass is a liquid, in fact) are thought to come from
meteorite impacts in most instances, but the evidence shows that in many
cases there is no impact crater.
Another explanation is that tektites have a terrestrial explanation--one that
includes atomic war or high-tech weapons capable of melting sand. The tektite
debate was summed up in an article entitled "The Tektite Problem", by John
O'Keefe, published in the August 1978 edition of Scientific American. Said
O'Keefe:
If tektites are terrestrial, it means that some process exists by which soil
or common rocks can be converted in an instant into homogeneous, water-free,
bubble-free glass and be propelled thousands of miles above the atmosphere.
If tektites come from the Moon, it seems to follow that there is at least one
powerful volcano somewhere on the Moon that has erupted at least as recently
as 750,000 years ago. Neither possibility is easy to accept. Yet one of them
must be accepted, and I believe it is feasible to pick the more reasonable
one by rejecting the more unlikely.
The key to solving the tektite problem is an insistence on a physically
reasonable hypothesis and a resolute refusal to be impressed by mere
numerical coincidences such as the similarity of terrestrial sediments to
tektite material. I believe that the lunar volcanism hypothesis is the only
one physically possible, and that we have to accept it. If it leads to
unexpected but not impossible conclusions, that is precisely its utility.
To cite just one example of the utility, the lunar origin of tektites
strongly supports the idea that the Moon was formed by fission of the Earth.
Tektites are indeed much more like terrestrial rocks than one would expect of
a chance assemblage. If tektites come from a lunar magma, then deep inside
the Moon there must be material that is very much like the mantle of the
Earth--more like the mantle than it is like the shallower parts of the Moon
from which the lunar surface basalts have originated. If the Moon was formed
by fission of the Earth, the object that became the Moon would have been
heated intensely and from the outside, and would have lost most of its
original mass and in particular the more volatile elements. The lavas
constituting most of the Moon's present surface were erupted early in the
Moon's history, when its heat was concentrated in the shallow depleted zone
quite near the surface. During the recent periods represented by tektite
falls, the sources of lunar volcanism have necessarily been much deeper, so
that any volcanoes responsible for tektites have drawn on the lunar material
that suffered least during the period of ablation and is therefore most like
unaltered terrestrial mantle material. Ironically, that would explain why
tektites are in some ways more like terrestrial rocks than they are like the
rocks of the lunar surface.
Mysterious Glass in the Egyptian Sahara
One of the strangest mysteries of ancient Egypt is that of the great glass
sheets that were only discovered in 1932. In December of that year, Patrick
Clayton, a surveyor for the Egyptian Geological Survey, was driving among the
dunes of the Great Sand Sea near the Saad Plateau in the virtually
uninhabited area just north of the southwestern corner of Egypt, when he
heard his tyres crunch on something that wasn't sand. It turned out to be
large pieces of marvellously clear, yellow-green glass.
In fact, this wasn't just any ordinary glass, but ultra-pure glass that was
an astonishing 98 per cent silica. Clayton wasn't the first person to come
across this field of glass, as various 'prehistoric' hunters and nomads had
obviously also found the now-famous Libyan Desert Glass (LDG). The glass had
been used in the past to make knives and sharp-edged tools as well as other
objects. A carved scarab of LDG was even found in Tutankhamen's tomb,
indicating that the glass was sometimes used for jewellery.
An article by Giles Wright in the British science magazine New Scientist (July
10, 1999), entitled "The Riddle of the Sands", says that LDG is the purest
natural silica glass ever found. Over a thousand tonnes of it are strewn
across hundreds of kilometres of bleak desert. Some of the chunks weigh 26
kilograms, but most LDG exists in smaller, angular pieces--looking like
shards left when a giant green bottle was smashed by colossal forces.
According to the article, LDG, pure as it is, does contain tiny bubbles,
white wisps and inky black swirls. The whitish inclusions consist of
refractory minerals such as cristobalite. The ink-like swirls, though, are
rich in iridium, which is diagnostic of an extraterrestrial impact such as a
meteorite or comet, according to conventional wisdom. The general theory is
that the glass was created by the searing, sand-melting impact of a cosmic
projectile.
However, there are serious problems with this theory, says Wright, and many
mysteries concerning this stretch of desert containing the pure glass. The
main problem: Where did this immense amount of widely dispersed glass shards
come from? There is no evidence of an impact crater of any kind; the surface
of the Great Sand Sea shows no sign of a giant crater, and neither do
microwave probes made deep into the sand by satellite radar.
Furthermore, LDG seems to be too pure to be derived from a messy cosmic
collision. Wright mentions that known impact craters, such as the one at
Wabar in Saudi Arabia, are littered with bits of iron and other meteorite
debris. This is not the case with the Libyan Desert Glass site. What is more,
LDG is concentrated in two areas, rather than one. One area is oval-shaped;
the other is a circular ring, six kilometres wide and 21 kilometres in
diameter. The ring's wide centre is devoid of the glass.
One theory is that there was a soft projectile impact: a meteorite, perhaps
30 metres in diameter, may have detonated about 10 kilometres or so above the
Great Sand Sea, the searing blast of hot air melting the sand beneath. Such a
craterless impact is thought to have occurred in the 1908 Tunguska event in
Siberia--at least as far as mainstream science is concerned. That event, like
the pure desert glass, remains a mystery.
Another theory has a meteorite glancing off the desert surface, leaving a
glassy crust and a shallow crater that was soon filled in. But there are two
known areas of LDG. Were there two cosmic projectiles in tandem?
Alternatively, is it possible that the vitrified desert is the result of
atomic war in the ancient past? Could a Tesla-type beam weapon have melted
the desert, perhaps in a test?
An article entitled "Dating the Libyan Desert Silica-Glass" appeared in the
British journal Nature (no. 170) in 1952. Said the author, Kenneth Oakley:3
Pieces of natural silica-glass up to 16 lb in weight occur scattered sparsely
in an oval area, measuring 130 km north to south and 53 km from east to west,
in the Sand Sea of the Libyan Desert. This remarkable material, which is
almost pure (97 per cent silica), relatively light (sp. gin. 2.21), clear and
yellowish-green in colour, has the qualities of a gemstone. It was discovered
by the Egyptian Survey Expedition under Mr P.A. Clayton in 1932, and was
thoroughly investigated by Dr L.J. Spencer, who joined a special expedition
of the Survey for this purpose in 1934.
The pieces are found in sand-free corridors between north-south dune ridges,
about 100 m high and 2&endash5 km apart. These corridors or "streets" have a
rubbly surface, rather like that of a "speedway" track, formed by angular
gravel and red loamy weathering debris overlying Nubian sandstone. The pieces
of glass lie on this surface or partly embedded in it. Only a few small
fragments were found below the surface, and none deeper than about one metre.
All the pieces on the surface have been pitted or smoothed by sand-blast. The
distribution of the glass is patchy�
While undoubtedly natural, the origin of the Libyan silica-glass is
uncertain. In its constitution it resembles the tektites of supposed cosmic
origin, but these are much smaller. Tektites are usually black, although one
variety found in Bohemia and Moravia and known as moldavite is clear
deep-green. The Libyan silica-glass has also been compared with the glass
formed by the fusion of sand in the heat generated by the fall of a great
meteorite; for example, at Wabar in Arabia and at Henbury in central
Australia.
Reporting the findings of his expedition, Dr Spencer said that he had not
been able to trace the Libyan glass to any source; no fragments of meteorites
or indications of meteorite craters could be found in the area of its
distribution. He said: "It seemed easier to assume that it had simply fallen
from the sky."
It would be of considerable interest if the time of origin or arrival of the
silica-glass in the Sand Sea could be determined geologically or
archaeologically. Its restriction to the surface or top layer of a
superficial deposit suggests that it is not of great antiquity from the
geological point of view. On the other hand, it has clearly been there since
prehistoric times. Some of the flakes were submitted to Egyptologists in
Cairo, who regarded them as "late Neolithic or pre-dynastic". In spite of a
careful search by Dr Spencer and the late Mr A. Lucas, no objects of
silica-glass could be found in the collections from Tut-Ankh-Amen's tomb or
from any of the other dynastic tombs. No potsherds were encountered in the
silica-glass area, but in the neighbourhood of the flakings some "crude
spear-points of glass" were found; also some quartzite implements,
"quernstones" and ostrich-shell fragments.
Oakley is apparently incorrect when he says that LDG was not found in
Tutankhamen's tomb, as according to Wright a piece was found.
At any rate, the vitrified areas of the Libyan Desert are yet to be
explained. Are they evidence of an ancient war--a war that may have turned
North Africa and Arabia into the desert that it is today?
The Vitrified Forts of Scotland
One of the great mysteries of classical archaeology is the existence of many
vitrified forts in Scotland. Are they also evidence of some ancient atomic
war? Maybe, but maybe not.
There are said to be at least 60 such forts throughout Scotland. Among the
most well-known are Tap o'Noth, Dunnideer, Craig Phadraig (near Inverness),
Abernathy (near Perth), Dun Lagaidh (in Ross), Cromarty, Arka-Unskel, Eilean
na Goar, and Bute-Dunagoil on the Sound of Bute off Arran Island. Another
well-known vitrified fort is the Cauadale hill-fort in Argyll, West Scotland.
One of the best examples of a vitrified fort is Tap o'Noth, which is near the
village of Rhynie in northeastern Scotland. This massive fort from prehistory
is on the summit of a mountain of the same name which, being 1,859 feet (560
metres) high, commands an impressive view of the Aberdeenshire countryside.
At first glance it seems that the walls are made of a rubble of stones, but
on closer look it is apparent that they are made not of dry stones but of
melted rocks! What were once individual stones are now black and cindery
masses, fused together by heat that must have been so intense that molten
rivers of rock once ran down the walls.
Reports on vitrified forts were made as far back as 1880 when Edward Hamilton
wrote an article entitled "Vitrified Forts on the West Coast of Scotland" in
the Archaeological Journal (no. 37, 1880, pp. 227&endash243). In his article,
Hamilton describes several sites in detail, including Arka-Unskel:4
At the point where Loch na Nuagh begins to narrow, where the opposite shore
is about one-and-a-half to two miles distant, is a small promontory connected
with the mainland by a narrow strip of sand and grass, which evidently at one
time was submerged by the rising tide. On the flat summit of this promontory
are the ruins of a vitrified fort, the proper name for which is Arka-Unskel.
The rocks on which this fort are placed are metamorphic gneiss, covered with
grass and ferns, and rise on three sides almost perpendicular for about 110
feet from the sea level. The smooth surface on the top is divided by a slight
depression into two portions. On the largest, with precipitous sides to the
sea, the chief portion of the fort is situated, and occupies the whole of the
flat surface. It is of somewhat oval form. The circumference is about 200
feet, and the vitrified walls can be traced in its entire length� We dug
under the vitrified mass, and there found what was extremely interesting, as
throwing some light on the manner in which the fire was applied for the
purpose of vitrification. The internal part of the upper or vitrified wall
for about a foot or a foot-and-a-half was untouched by the fire, except that
some of the flat stones were slightly agglutinated together, and that the
stones, all feldspatic, were placed in layers one upon another.
It was evident, therefore, that a rude foundation of boulder stones was first
formed upon the original rock, and then a thick layer of loose, mostly flat
stones of feldspatic sand, and of a different kind from those found in the
immediate neighborhood, were placed on this foundation, and then vitrified by
heat applied externally. This foundation of loose stones is found also in the
vitrified fort of Dun Mac Snuichan, on Loch Etive.
Hamilton describes another vitrified fort that is much larger, situated on
the island at the entrance of Loch Ailort.
This island, locally termed Eilean na Goar, is the most eastern and is
bounded on all sides by precipitous gneiss rocks; it is the abode and nesting
place of numerous sea birds. The flat surface on the top is 120 feet from the
sea level, and the remains of the vitrified fort are situated on this, oblong
in form, with a continuous rampart of vitrified wall five feet thick,
attached at the SW end to a large upright rock of gneiss. The space enclosed
by this wall is 420 feet in circumference and 70 feet in width. The rampart
is continuous and about five feet in thickness. At the eastern end is a great
mass of wall in situ, vitrified on both sides. In the centre of the enclosed
space is a deep depression in which are masses of the vitrified wall strewed
about, evidently detached from their original site.
Hamilton naturally asks a few obvious questions about the forts. Were these
structures built as a means of defence? Was the vitrification the result of
design or accident? How was the vitrification produced?
In this vitrification process, huge blocks of stones have been fused with
smaller rubble to form a hard, glassy mass. Explanations for the
vitrification are few and far between, and none of them is universally
accepted.
One early theory was that these forts are located on ancient volcanoes (or
the remains of them) and that the people used molten stone ejected from
eruptions to build their settlements.
This idea was replaced with the theory that the builders of the walls had
designed the forts in such a way that the vitrification was purposeful in
order to strengthen the walls. This theory postulated that fires had been lit
and flammable material added to produce walls strong enough to resist the
dampness of the local climate or the invading armies of the enemy. It is an
interesting theory, but one that presents several problems. For starters,
there is really no indication that such vitrification actually strengthens
the walls of the fortress; rather, it seems to weaken them. In many cases,
the walls of the forts seem to have collapsed because of the fires. Also,
since the walls of many Scottish forts are only partially vitrified, this
would hardly have proved an effective building method.
Julius Caesar described a type of wood and stone fortress, known as a murus
gallicus, in his account of the Gallic Wars. This was interesting to those
seeking solutions to the vitrified fort mystery because these forts were made
of a stone wall filled with rubble, with wooden logs inside for stability. It
seemed logical to suggest that perhaps the burning of such a wood-filled wall
might create the phenomenon of vitrification.
Some researchers are sure that the builders of the forts caused the
vitrification. Arthur C. Clarke quotes one team of chemists from the Natural
History Museum in London who were studying the many forts:5
Considering the high temperatures which have to be produced, and the fact
that possibly sixty or so vitrified forts are to be seen in a limited
geographical area of Scotland, we do not believe that this type of structure
is the result of accidental fires. Careful planning and construction were
needed.
However, one Scottish archaeologist, Helen Nisbet, believes that the
vitrification was not done on purpose by the builders of the forts. In a
thorough analysis of rock types used, she reveals that most of the forts were
built of stone easily available at the chosen site and not chosen for their
property of vitrification.6
The vitrification process itself, even if purposely set, is quite a mystery.
A team of chemists on Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World subjected rock
samples from 11 forts to rigorous chemical analysis, and stated that the
temperatures needed to produce the vitrification were so intense--up to
1,100�C--that a simple burning of walls with wood interlaced with stone could
not have achieved such temperatures.7
Nevertheless, experiments carried out in the 1930s by the famous
archaeologist V. Gordon Childe and his colleague Wallace Thorneycroft showed
that forts could be set on fire and generate enough heat to vitrify the
stone.8 In 1934, these two designed a test wall that was 12 feet long, six
feet wide and six feet high, which was built for them at Plean Colliery in
Stirlingshire. They used old fireclay bricks for the faces and pit props as
timber, and filled the cavity between the walls with small cubes of basalt
rubble. They covered the top with turf and then piled about four tons of
scrap timber and brushwood against the walls and set fire to them. Because of
a snowstorm in progress, a strong wind fanned the blazing mixture of wood and
stone so that the inner core did attain some vitrification of the rock.
In June 1937, Childe and Thorneycroft duplicated their test vitrification at
the ancient fort of Rahoy, in Argyllshire, using rocks found at the site.
Their experiments did not resolve any of the questions surrounding vitrified
forts, however, because they had only proven that it was theoretically
possible to pile enough wood and brush on top of a mixture of wood and stone
to vitrify the mass of stone. One criticism of Childe is that he seems to
have used a larger proportion of wood to stone than many historians believe
made up the ancient wood and stone fortresses.
An important part of Childe's theory was that it was invaders, not the
builders, who were assaulting the forts and then setting fire to the walls
with piles of brush and wood; however, it is hard to understand why people
would have repeatedly built defences that invaders could destroy with fire,
when great ramparts of solid stone would have survived unscathed.
Critics of the assault theory point out that in order to generate enough heat
by a natural fire, the walls would have to have been specially constructed to
create the heat necessary. It seems unreasonable to suggest the builders
would specifically create forts to be burned or that such a great effort
would be made by invaders to create the kind of fire it would take to vitrify
the walls--at least with traditional techniques.
One problem with all the many theories is their assumption of a primitive
state of culture associated with ancient Scotland.
It is astonishing to think of how large and well coordinated the population
or army must have been that built and inhabited these ancient structures.
Janet and Colin Bord in their book, Mysterious Britain,9 speak of Maiden
Castle to give an idea of the vast extent of this marvel of prehistoric
engineering.
It covers an area of 120 acres, with an average width of 1,500 feet and
length of 3,000 feet. The inner circumference is about 11�2 miles round, and
it has been estimated...that it would require 250,000 men to defend it! It is
hard, therefore, to believe that this construction was intended to be a
defensive position.
A great puzzle to archaeologists has always been the multiple and
labyrinthine east and west entrances at each end of the enclosure. Originally
they may have been built as a way for processional entry by people of the
Neolithic era. Later, when warriors of the Iron Age were using the site as a
fortress, they probably found them useful as a means of confusing the
attacking force trying to gain entry. The fact that so many of these
"hill-forts" have two entrances--one north of east and the other south of
west--also suggests some form of Sun ceremonial.
With 250,000 men defending a fort, we are talking about a huge army in a very
organised society. This is not a bunch of fur-wearing Picts with spears
defending a fort from marauding bands of hunter-gatherers. The questions
remain, though. What huge army might have occupied these cliffside forts by
the sea or lake entrances? And what massive maritime power were these people
unsuccessfully defending themselves against?
The forts on the western coast of Scotland are reminiscent of the mysterious
clifftop forts in the Aran Islands on the west coast of Ireland. Here we
truly have shades of the Atlantis story, with a powerful naval fleet
attacking and conquering its neighbours in a terrible war. It has been
theorised that the terrible battles of the Atlantis story took place in
Wales, Scotland, Ireland and England--however, in the case of the Scottish
vitrified forts it looks as if these were the losers of a war, not the
victors. And defeat can be seen across the land: the war dykes in Sussex, the
vitrified forts of Scotland, the utter collapse and disappearance of the
civilisation that built these things. What long-ago Armageddon destroyed
ancient Scotland?
In ancient times there was a substance known through writings as Greek fire.
This was some sort of ancient napalm bomb that was hurled by catapult and
could not be put out. Some forms of Greek fire were even said to burn under
water and were therefore used in naval battles. (The actual composition of
Greek fire is unknown, but it must have contained chemicals such as
phosphorus, pitch, sulphur or other flammable chemicals.)
Could a form of Greek fire have been responsible for the vitrification? While
ancient astronaut theorists may believe that extraterrestrials with their
atomic weapons vitrified these walls, it seems more likely that they are the
result of a man-made apocalypse of a chemical nature. With siege machines,
battleships and Greek fire, did a vast flotilla storm the huge forts and
eventually burn them down in a hellish blaze?
The evidence of the vitrified forts is clear: some hugely successful and
organised civilisation was living in Scotland, England and Wales in
prehistoric times, circa 1000 BC or more, and was building gigantic
structures including forts. This apparently was a maritime civilisation that
prepared itself for naval warfare as well as other forms of attack.
Vitrified Ruins in France, Turkey and the Middle East
Vitrified ruins can also be found in France, Turkey and some areas of the
Middle East.
Vitrified forts in France are discussed in the American Journal of Science (vo
l. 3, no. 22, 1881, pp. 150-151) in an article entitled "On the Substances
Obtained from Some 'Forts Vitrifi�s' in France", by M. Daubr�e. The author
mentions several forts in Brittany and northern France whose granite blocks
have been vitrified. He cites the "partially fused granitic rocks from the
forts of Ch�teau-vieux and of Puy de Gaudy (Creuse), also from the
neighbourhood of Saint Brieuc (C�tes-du-Nord)".10 Daubr�e, understandably,
could not readily find an explanation for the vitrification.
Similarly, the ruins of Hattusas in central Turkey, an ancient Hittite city,
are partially vitrified. The Hittites are said to be the inventors of the
chariot, and horses were of great importance to them. It is on the ancient
Hittite stelae that we first see a depiction of the chariot in use. However,
it seems unlikely that horsemanship and wheeled chariots were invented by the
Hittites; it is highly likely that chariots were in use in ancient China at
the same time.
The Hittites were also linked to the world of ancient India. Proto-Indic
writing has been found at Hattusas, and scholars now admit that the
civilisation of India, as the ancient Indian texts like the Ramayana have
said, goes back many millennia.
In his 1965 book, The Bible as History,11 German historian Werner Keller
cites some of the mysteries concerning the Hittites. According to Keller, the
Hittites are first mentioned in the Bible (in Genesis 23) in connection with
the biblical patriarch Abraham who acquired from the Hittites a burial place
in Hebron for his wife Sarah. Conservative classical scholar Keller is
confused by this, because the time period of Abraham was circa
2000&endash1800 BC, while the Hittites are traditionally said to have
appeared in the 16th century BC.
Even more confusing to Keller is the biblical statement (in Numbers 13:29-30)
that the Hittites were the founders of Jerusalem. This is a fascinating
statement, as it would mean that the Hittites also occupied Ba'albek, which
lies between their realm and Jerusalem. The Temple Mount at Jerusalem is
built on a foundation of huge ashlars, as is Ba'albek. The Hittites
definitely used the gigantic megalithic construction known as cyclopean--huge,
odd-shaped polygonal blocks, perfectly fitted together. The massive walls
and gates of Hattusas are eerily similar in construction to those in the high
Andes and other megalithic sites around the world. The difference at Hattusas
is that parts of the city are vitrified, and the walls of rock have been
partly melted. If the Hittites were the builders of Jerusalem, it would mean
that the ancient Hittite Empire existed for several thousand years and had
frontiers with Egypt. Indeed, the Hittite hieroglyphic script is undeniably
similar to Egyptian hieroglyphs, probably more so than any other language.
Just as Egypt goes back many thousands of years BC and is ultimately
connected to Atlantis, so does the ancient Hittite Empire. Like the
Egyptians, the Hittites carved massive granite sphinxes, built on a cyclopean
scale and worshipped the Sun. The Hittites also used the common motif of a
winged disc for their Sun god, just as the Egyptians did. The Hittites were
well known in the ancient world because they were the main manufacturers of
iron and bronze goods. The Hittites were metallurgists and seafarers. Their
winged discs may in fact have been representations of vimanas--flying
machines.
Some of the ancient ziggurats of Iran and Iraq also contain vitrified
material, sometimes thought by archaeologists to be caused by the Greek fire.
For instance, the vitrified remains of the ziggurat at Birs Nimrod
(Borsippa), south of Hillah, were once confused with the Tower of Babel. The
ruins are crowned by a mass of vitrified brickwork--actual clay bricks fused
together by intense heat. This may be due to the horrific ancient wars
described in the Ramayana and Mahabharata, although early archaeologists
attributed the effect to lightning.
Greek Fire, Plasma Guns and Atomic Warfare
If one were to believe the great Indian epic of the Mahabharata, fantastic
battles were fought in the past with airships, particle beams, chemical
warfare and presumably atomic weapons. Just as battles in the 20th century
have been fought with incredibly devastating weapons, it may well be that
battles in the latter days of Atlantis were fought with highly sophisticated,
high-tech weapons.
The mysterious Greek fire was a "chemical fireball". Incendiary mixtures go
back at least to the 5th century BC, when Aineias the Tactician wrote a book
called On the Defence of Fortified Positions. Said he:12
And fire itself, which is to be powerful and quite inextinguishable, is to be
prepared as follows. Pitch, sulphur, tow, granulated frankincense, and pine
sawdust in sacks you should ignite if you wish to set any of the enemy's
works on fire.
L. Sprague de Camp mentions in his book, The Ancient Engineers,13 that at
some point it was found that petroleum, which seeps out of the ground in Iraq
and elsewhere, made an ideal base for incendiary mixtures because it could be
squirted from syringes of the sort then used in fighting fires. Other
substances were added to it, such as sulphur, olive oil, rosin, bitumen, salt
and quicklime.
Some of these additives may have helped--sulphur at least made a fine
stench--but others did not, although it was thought that they did. Salt, for
instance, may have been added because the sodium in it gave the flame a
bright orange colour. The ancients, supposing that a brighter flame was
necessarily a hotter flame, mistakenly believed that salt made the fire burn
more fiercely. Such mixtures were put in thin wooden casks and thrown from
catapults at hostile ships and at wooden siege engines and defence works.
According to de Camp, in AD 673 the architect Kallinikos fled ahead of Arab
invaders from Helipolis-Ba'albek to Constantinople. There he revealed to
Emperor Constantine IV an improved formula for a liquid incendiary. This
could not only be squirted at the foe but could also be used with great
effect at sea, because it caught fire when it touched the water and floated,
flaming on the waves.
De Camp says that Byzantine galleys were armed with a flame-throwing
apparatus in the bow, consisting of a tank of this mixture, a pump and a
nozzle. With the help of this compound, the Byzantines broke the Arab sieges
of AD 674&endash76 and AD 715&endash18, and also beat off the Russian attacks
of AD 941 and 1043. The incendiary liquid wrought immense havoc; of 800 Arab
ships which attacked Constantinople in 716 AD, only a handful returned home.
The formula for the wet version of Greek fire has never been discovered. Says
de Camp:
By careful security precautions, the Byzantine Emperors succeeded in keeping
the secret of this substance, called "wet fire" or "wild fire", so dark that
it never did become generally known. When asked about it, they blandly
replied that an angel had revealed the formula to the first Constantine.
We can, therefore, only guess the nature of the mixture. According to one
disputed theory, wet fire was petroleum with an admixture of calcium
phosphide, which can be made from lime, bones and urine. Perhaps Kallinikos
stumbled across this substance in the course of alchemical experiments.
Vitrification of brick, rock and sand may have been caused by any number of
high-tech means. New Zealand author Robin Collyns suggests in his book, Ancien
t Astronauts: A Time Reversal?,14 that there are five methods by which the
ancients or "ancient astronauts" might have waged war on various societies on
planet Earth. He outlines how these methods are again on the rise in modern
society. The five methods are: plasma guns, fusion torches, holes punched in
the ozone layer, manipulation of weather processes and the release of immense
energy, such as with an atomic blast. As Collyns's book was published in
Britain in 1976, the mentions of holes in the ozone layer and weather warfare
seem strangely prophetic.
Explaining the plasma gun, Collyns says:
The plasma gun has already been developed experimentally for peaceful
purposes: Ukrainian scientists from the Geotechnical Mechanics Institute have
experimentally drilled tunnels in iron ore mines by using a plasmatron, i.e.,
a plasma gas jet which delivers a temperature of 6,000�C.
A plasma, in this case, is an electrified gas. Electrified gases are also
featured in the Vymaanika-Shaastra,15 the ancient book from India on vimanas,
which cryptically talks of using for fuel the liquid metal mercury, which
could be a plasma if electrified.
Collyns goes on to describe a fusion torch:
This is still another possible method of warfare used by spacemen, or ancient
advanced civilisations on Earth. Perhaps the solar mirrors of antiquity
really were fusion torches? The fusion torch is basically a further
development of the plasma jet. In 1970 a theory to develop a fusion torch was
presented at the New York aerospace science meeting by Drs Bernard J.
Eastlund and William C. Cough. The basic idea is to generate a fantastic heat
of at least fifty million degrees Celsius which could be contained and
controlled. That is, the energy released could be used for many peaceful
applications with zero radioactive waste products to avoid contaminating the
environment, or zero production of radioactive elements which would be highly
dangerous, such as plutonium which is the most deadly substance known to man.
Thermonuclear fusion occurs naturally in stellar processes, and unnaturally
in man-made H-bomb explosions.
The fusion of a deuterium nucleus (a heavy hydrogen isotope which can be
easily extracted from sea water) with another deuterium nucleus, or with
tritium (another isotope of hydrogen) or with helium, could be used. The
actual fusion torch would be an ionised plasma jet which would vaporise
anything and everything that the jet was directed at--if...used for harmful
purposes--while for peaceful applications, one use of the torch could be to
reclaim basic elements from junk metals.
University of Texas scientists announced in 1974 that they had actually
developed the first experimental fusion torch which gave an incredible heat
output of ninety-three degrees Celsius. This is five times the previous
hottest temperature for a contained gas and is twice the minimum heat needed
for fusion, but it was held only for one fifty-millionth of a second instead
of the one full second which would be required.
It is curious to note here that Dr Bernard Eastlund is the patent holder of
another unusual device--one that is associated with the High-frequency Active
Auroral Research Program (HAARP), based at Gakona, Alaska. HAARP is allegedly
linked to weather manipulation--one of the ways in which Collyns thinks the
ancients waged warfare.
As far as holes in the ozone layer and weather manipulation go, Collyns says:
Soviet scientists have discussed and proposed at the United Nations a ban on
developing new warfare ideas such as creating holes or "windows" in the ozone
layer to bombard specific areas of the Earth with increased natural
ultra-violet radiation, which would kill all life-forms and turn the land
into barren desert.
Other ideas discussed at the meeting were the use of "infrasound" to demolish
ships by creating acoustic fields on the sea, and hurling a huge chunk of
rock into the sea with a cheap atomic device. The resultant tidal wave could
demolish the coastal fringe of a country. Other tidal waves could be created
by detonating nuclear devices at the frozen poles. Controlled floods,
hurricanes, earthquakes and droughts directed towards specific targets and
cities are other possibilities.
Finally, although not a new method of warfare, incendiary weapons are now
being developed to the point where "chemical fireballs" will be produced
which radiated thermal energy similar to that of an atomic bomb.
Vitrified Ruins in California's Death Valley: Evidence of Atomic War?
In Secrets of the Lost Races,16 Rene Noorbergen discusses the evidence for a
cataclysmic war in the remote past that included the use of airships and
weapons that vitrified stone cities.
The most numerous vitrified remains in the New World are located in the
western United States. In 1850 the American explorer Captain Ives William
Walker was the first to view some of these ruins, situated in Death Valley.
He discovered a city about a mile long, with the lines of the streets and the
positions of the buildings still visible. At the center he found a huge rock,
between 20 to 30 feet high, with the remains of an enormous structure atop
it. The southern side of both the rock and the building was melted and
vitrified. Walker assumed that a volcano had been responsible for this
phenomenon, but there is no volcano in the area. In addition, tectonic heat
could not have caused such a liquefication of the rock surface.
An associate of Captain Walker who followed up his initial exploration
commented: "The whole region between the rivers Gila and San Juan is covered
with remains. The ruins of cities are to be found there which must be most
extensive, and they are burnt out and vitrified in part, full of fused stones
and craters caused by fires which were hot enough to liquefy rock or metal.
There are paving stones and houses torn with monstrous cracks� [as though
they had] been attacked by a giant's fire-plough."
These vitrified ruins in Death Valley sound fascinating--but do they really
exist? There certainly is evidence of ancient civilisations in the area. In
Titus Canyon, petroglyphs and inscriptions have been scratched into the walls
by unknown prehistoric hands. Some experts think the graffiti might have been
made by people who lived here long before the Indians we know of, because
extant Indians know nothing of the glyphs and, indeed, regard them with
superstitious awe.
Says Jim Brandon in Weird America:17
Piute legends tell of a city beneath Death Valley that they call Shin-au-av.
Tom Wilson, an Indian guide in the 1920s, claimed that his grandfather had
rediscovered the place by wandering into a miles-long labyrinth of caves
beneath the valley floor.
Eventually the Indian came to an underworld city where the people spoke an
incomprehensible language and wore clothing made of leather.
Wilson told this story after a prospector named White claimed he had fallen
through the floor of an abandoned mine at Wingate Pass and into an unknown
tunnel. White followed this into a series of rooms, where he found hundreds
of leather-clad humanoid mummies. Gold bars were stacked like bricks and
piled in bins.
White claimed he had explored the caverns on three occasions. On one, his
wife accompanied him; and on another, his partner, Fred Thomason. However,
none of them [was] able to relocate the opening to the cavern when they tried
to take a group of archaeologists on a tour of the place.
To be continued next issue...
Endnotes:
1. Steiger, Brad and Ron Calais, Mysteries of Time & Space, Prentice Hall,
New Jersey, 1974.
2. ibid.
3. Corliss, William, Geological Anomalies, The Sourcebook Project, Glen Arm,
Maryland, 1974.
4. Corliss, William, Ancient Man: A Handbook of Puzzling Artifacts, The
Sourcebook Project, Glen Arm, Maryland, 1978.
5. Welfare, Simon and John Fairley, Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World, Wm
Collins & Sons, London, 1980.
6. ibid.
7. ibid.
8. ibid.
9. Bord, Janet and Colin Bord, Mysterious Britain, Granada Publishing,
London, 1972.
10. Edwards, Frank, Strangest of All, Ace Books, New York, 1956.
11. Keller, Werner, The Bible As History, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1956.
12. Sprague de Camp, L., The Ancient Engineers, Ballantine Books, New York,
1960.
13. ibid.
14. Collyns, Robin, Ancient Astronauts: A Time Reversal?, Sphere Books,
London, 1976.
15. Bharadwaaja, Maharshi, Vymaanika-Shaastra, translated and published by
G.R. Josyer, Mysore, India, 1979.
16. Noorbergen, Rene, Secrets of the Lost Races, Barnes & Noble Publishers,
New York, 1977.
17. Brandon, Jim, Weird America, E.P. Dutton, New York, 1978.
About the Author:
David Hatcher Childress is an explorer, publisher and author of more than 15
books on lost civilisations and science, as well as on free energy,
antigravity and UFOs. He is a regular speaker on the conference circuit and a
sought-after guest on US radio talk shows and TV specials. His new book, Techn
ology of the Gods, is reviewed in this issue of NEXUS Magazine (Volume 7,
Number 5).
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
All My Relations.
Omnia Bona Bonis,
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
