January 21, 2019

Showing 17 comments
  • kplusu

    I love the extra stuff. So worth the money. Thank you all of SO, SW, QW, MO, PF, and all other affiliates. I love you and keep going.

  • kplusu

    The landing site is also where the moon’s gravity is strongest.

  • Don Zabcik

    Could the high concentration be the backwash of the dust shell wrapping around the moon an coalescing at the rear of the impact? Extream heat can also break down magnetic alignment…

  • Lois Rasmussen

    Further to Don’s comment, a battering of magnetic materials while in a strong magnetic or electromagnetic field can induce a magnetic residue in the materials/substrate. This is an interesting area..I wish I had paid more attention in my Physics classes. Please share this Ben, your eggs feel right and need to be discussed, I will be an interested auditor.

  • Tony Stone

    Fascinating theory Ben and worth

    • Tony Stone

      Further investigation !
      Keep up the good work !

  • wchi

    auroral ghost volcanoes =D…interesting!…..sure does look like the same alignment

  • 000fm000

    . . The aurora anomalies that we’re seeing on Mars in this video would seem appropriate when taking in the account of all of the magnetic anomalies that exists on Mars. I can imagine the auroras would even be more prevalent when ever Mars passes through one of the sun’s magnetic tsunamis.
    The 3 magnetic ‘footprints’ that was positioned almost parallel with those 3 ginormous anode blisters is very interesting to say the least, and also would seem appropriate when considering that the 3 great Mons of Mars are, or once were, electrodes.
    .. Definitely further investigation and discussions on this observation seems highly warranted.

    … also, this is my first post at this site, so i would like to say “thank you, Ben!”, for all of your relentless and meticulous efforts and accomplishments in bringing all of these fields of cosmological studies and observations into the light for all to see, to learn from, and to even be a participant! ….. Very cool indeed.

  • Calvin

    crustal shift rather than displacement? Yes publish as part of a broader chaos geology sampling~


    great 0bservation Ben, many thanks for sharing it

  • Billy Rogers

    Ben maybe we should include what happens when magnetically material has a huge change in the field that charged it. To get a super clear understanding of your material a new series on magnetism the centrapedial convergence, divergence and the difference in electromagnetic field variability from current input, materials and so on. It certainly helps visualize the affects the fields have on the jet stream and how it split from the magnetic boundaries. U have seen your series on cloud formation from solar forcing and Doc Eyauns dry ice demo it is cool as well but the magnetism and attributes are great foundational info for this course. Thanks Ben. Shared here first Have a great day S0s everywhere where.

  • Dirk Mullikin

    I question the timescale involved with the subject of Micronova and magnetic pole reversal. Most of the research and latest news regarding these topics have referred to a timing that is different, as in the magnetic pole reversal occurs approximately every 750,000 years determined by Carbon 14 dating of geological digs of Fe minerals that were polarized by the negative or positive charge of the poles. Fe molecules orientation to or against magnetic north is the argument for when the magnetic poles changed. The other question is the 12,500 yrs event of the last change when something else occurred in Greenland, a impact crater was discovered , link provided; https://watchers.news/2018/11/16/hiawatha-impact-crater-greenland/. This impact is dated very close to the same time period of your estimate of the frequency of magnetic polar reversal. A micronova does explain the archaeological finds and legends of prehistory and would also explain some of the complex ruins found through out the world as to what happened to those civilizations. Great work bringing together the people who have found the evidence and have brought it to the public’s attention, but I would like more information as to the historical timing. I believe in the interest of all on this site and those who are not subscribers you should open this to the public on U-tube for the fun of debate and learning, excluding the off remarks of the not so informed. Thanks.

    • S0

      The impact crater is discussed a lot in the series… did you miss some episodes?

  • RebeccasArt

    Interesting and very bold new findings continue, keep up the great work, thanks.

  • JayGow

    Dirk’s comment prompted me to voice a few thoughts, so here goes. I may be way off here, but…………….

    Maybe the 12,500 year timeline of the impact crater is not so much an alternative event, but possibly directly related………
    If the sun did nova, I would think it perfectly reasonable to assume that some of the ejected media would be quite large in size, probably cooling enough on the way here to form nice big solid impactors (which I think would be almost perfectly spherical as I believe that’s what happens to a liquid in space?)
    This also brings up another thought I’ve had lately.
    I feel that it is entirely possible, in fact quite likely, that planets and moons originated from the sun itself, that they are the ejected matter from solar nova events.
    I only have one reason why I feel this is a fairly reasonable assumption. They are spherical. Why?
    I find it very difficult to see how they could be formed by any process that doesn’t start out with them being a liquid.
    Smaller space objects and debris tend to be rough and odd shaped, which I believe is obvious evidence that they are the result of collisions or ejected from larger bodies as a result of massive electric arc discharge.
    But planets (and moons) are these big, near perfect balls in space.
    And for my entire life, I have never been able to accept this idea that planets are formed from smaller random particles floating around in space, which bump into each other and magically stick together to form a huge ball of, umm………….dust maybe? Yeah, ok.
    On the other hand, mainstream wants us to believe that the odd double lobed shape of meteors is from two smaller ones fusing together? Haha! Since when did rocks fuse together? EU explanation makes much more sense here.
    Anyway, love your work and commitment Ben. Thanks to SO, my eyes have been opened.
    And a shout out to your wife. With the amount of time and effort you put in to SO I’m sure there’s plenty she does behind the scenes.

  • Jose Silveira

    Jay, I think you’re quite right about the spherical form of the planets, but this also applies to stars. How did they form? If we accept Vogt’s idea that quasars are the creators of stars (forget about the multidimensional part of his theory), that also matches Arp’s considerations that quasars are close to galaxies , despite the blatantly different red-shift (which only means red-shift is not a valid measure of velocity), then why not planets being formed also in that manufacturing stream?

  • Mashu2you

    whoa nice catch somebody!
    was that you Mr Diligence? aka Ben
    gives the impression the crust coming unlocked from the mantel and “adjusting” itself could also be a reality on other planets

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.