Evidence Reconsidered

Writing to Atlantis Rising via postal mail to P.O. Box 441, Livingston, Montana 59047 is a good way to make your views known to our readers. There are also Forums on the Atlantis Rising website: Go to www.AtlantisRising.com and select “Discussions.” E-mail us at: jdkenyon@atlantisrising.com.


Underwater Structures

I found the article “Enormous Ancient Structure Discovered in Deep-Sea Bermuda Triangle,” in Alternative News (AR 132), to be very interesting. If this is in fact physical evidence of an ancient extraterrestrial visit to Earth, it may explain the advanced technology of Atlantis.

Many years ago, there was published by the United States Hydrographic Office Notices to Mariners (August 22, 1948), No. 32 (4352) and No. 42 (5592), Atlantic latitude 46· 23’ N, longitude 37° 20’ w. Supposedly, a large landmass was pushed to the surface that was covered in white quartz sand beneath ancient white marble buildings and statues. This description came from a captain who stopped to investigate but was on a tight schedule. He said the route was along the New Orleans to London shipping lane that crosses Antonio Leone’s Island site. This land mass soon after submerged beneath the ocean. I have always wondered about this incident, and what really is at this location.

Ray Hightower, Jr., Abilene, TX


Martian Evidence

I was really pleased to read “Subglacial-Water Lake Found on Mars” (Alternative News, AR #132). Though Immanuel Velikovsky deduced from ancient legends that Mars had strayed from its normal orbit (due to meteoric impacts), he didn’t piece together that Typhon, spoken of in the legends of myriad groups around the world, was in fact the result of the gravitational pull of these planets (Earth and Mars) from close proximity to each other. Your magazine had previously said Earth had received a literal hailstorm of Martian rock at some time in the past, and another story had indicated that a large chunk of Martian surface crust was missing: all vindicating Velikovsky. But if Earth was pulling Martian rocks to the earth, then Mars had to be reciprocating and pulling something from Earth. And the easiest thing Mars (with its lesser gravity) could pull from us would be our water; which solves where the excess water from the Great Flood went.

Another gripping statement in your story was that clearly seen evidence of flowing water on the surface of Mars—despite its annual windstorms—should, by now, have eroded entirely away, especially if, millions of years ago, water disappeared from the Martian surface. This has to mean that water was still very much evident on the surface of Mars in the last 1,000 years or less! Conventional geology constantly pushes old dates on the masses, such as millions, or billions, of years for something that plainly has to have been much more recent, so that when you think it through, their deductions have to be a ridiculous overstatement intended to conform to geologic conventions.

Rick Pilotte, Author: Earth, Man, & Devolution, Victoria, BC


Einstein & Ether

Much confusion exists about the so-called ether. The closest approach in the article, “Einstein & the Quest for an Ether,” by Charles Shahar, AR #132, is the Rosicrucian. There are four ethers, they say: chemical, life, light, and reflecting ether. The ‘reflecting’ ether is nonexistent. We have the ‘warmth’ ether instead. All ethers are not physical matter at all. All can be grasped if you know how the ether world works science-wise. The ancients knew how to grasp them and called it ‘transubstantiation.’ The ancients always connected life and the chemical ether with matter. These are the two most important ones for humans. The ‘life’ ether, representing the sun, makes for extended physical fire. The Zoroastrians had sacred fires. The ‘chemical’ ether represented the moon and water. Christ later did his miracles with the chemical ether, water-into-wine; and life ether, loaves-and-fishes, extended burn. The food fed more than expected. See the lecture, “Apocalypse” by Rudolf Steiner on the on-line Steiner archive.

Steiner also gives hints as to how the ether world works. For humans, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. For the ethers, this is not the case. The straightest distance between to points is a curve or wavy line, like the wave in the two-slit experiment. A few hundred years ago, the ether was still known. The painting, Triumph of Death by Traini, Steiner explains in his lecture, shows how the spiritual world projects into physical existence. The painting is dismal—death everywhere—but there is a story here. The ‘skeleton’ is the physical body. The worm-eaten corpse is the etheric body, where Christ did his first miracles. The freshly dead young woman would represent the astral or desire world, also known as the nitrogen world, and is not ether. Fritz Haber entered into this world with his ammonia-from-air process. Nitrogen is essential for life. To grasp the ethers is known esoterically as breaking the veil of nature. Here is where more confusion arises. The ancients knew the difference between inorganic and organic chemistry. Consider the almost miracle of turning inorganic stones into organic, bread.

So we have several worlds always in play, the inorganic world and the organic world—where the two ethers we want, work—and the astral world. Each can be proven to exist. The inorganic world has one veil to break and you are in. The organic world has two veils to break. If you do not break the veil or veils, the ethers remain in a non-interacting state, like the Michaelson/Morley experiment proved. If mere motion—no breaking of the veil—made for an etheric wind, chaos would result. Since physicists are not occultists (except for me) they will never break the veil. CERN (the European Organization for Nuclear Research, and operator of the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland) does not break the veil and never will. Since occultists are not real scientists and have never worked in a lab, we have a huge split. I am a chemist by trade and worked in a chemistry lab. Most occultists do not believe in atoms, but atoms are real. A hydrogen-making plant is real. Hydrogen is stripped off methane, CH4, and we get hydrogen and carbon. The carbon is burnt to make CO2 for carbonated drinks. Since occultists believe matter to be maya [illusion], they have made a huge mistake. Since physicists believe the occult to be a fairy tale, they also have made a mistake. If you know the science mentioned by Rudolf Steiner, and if you know how machines operate, you can understand what is common to all machines in the world today, and you can break the veils of nature.

Tom Batorski, Angola, NY


Shakespearean Authorship

I was very happy to see the article on the Shakespeare Authorship mystery (“The Men & the Woman Who Put Shakespeare Together,” by Steven Sora, AR #131) and thought his points on the shortcomings of the orthodox attribution were very strong. Unfortunately, I found the rest of the article to be quite superficial. I will not go into the numerous reasons why Bacon, Marlowe, Mary Sidney, or our old friend “collaboration” are simply not plausible candidates. I do, however, want to add some facts about the Earl of Oxford, which make him the best and indeed most obvious choice.

While the author mentioned that Oxford studied law at Gray’s Inn, he did not mention the fact that he was placed as a royal ward in the household of William Cecil, First Baron Burghley, where he received the most comprehensive education in literature and history that any individual could have received in all of England at that time, having had access to the vast Cecil library and the renowned scholar, Sir Thomas Smith.

What was also perplexingly left out was any mention of the fact that de Vere was a recognized poet and playwright who was singled out by Francis Meres in his 1598 book Palladis Tamia as being “best for comedy.”  Oxford is the only playwright Meres names whose plays are unknown (at least under his own name), and for whom not even a title survives. George Puttenham in The Arte of English Poesie (1589) wrote that there were many courtiers writing under an assumed name including the Earl of Oxford.

Even more importantly, there is an extensive similarity between the facts of Oxford’s biography and the settings, characters and actions in the plays. For example, there is a great deal of similarity between the life of Oxford and the young prince in Hamlet as well as many other examples. De Vere was closely involved with the theatre; he held a lease on the Blackfriars Theatre and had his own group of players, The Lord Oxford’s Men. The records show Lord Oxford’s Men performing in the Boar’s Head tavern in Eastcheap (referred to in Henry IV, Part 1). Many believe that the William Shakespeare listed as an actor with the Lord Chamberlain’s Men was in fact Oxford who called himself in his Sonnets “a motley to the view.”

Also, in 1609, 154 of Shakespeare’s Sonnets were published under the title Shakespeare’s Sonnets and dedicated to “our ever living author,” suggesting that the author had already died by 1609. The Sonnets indicate that the writer was a senior both in rank and age, depicting an older, lame aristocrat who is in some sort of disgrace. Perhaps most relevant are those sonnets in which the author says, “My name be buried where my body is,” and “Your name from hence immortal life shall have, / Though I, once gone, to all the world must die: / The earth can yield me but a common grave, / When you entombed in men’s eyes shall lie.” (72 and 81) In these sonnets, the author himself says that he neither wants, nor expects, his name to be remembered. Authorship doubters contend that this is, in fact, what has happened.

As far as the The Tempest is concerned, the author’s reference to a 1611 shipwreck is incorrect. The first performance of the play is alleged to have been in 1611, but the shipwreck in the play refers to one that occurred in Bermuda in 1609, far removed from the Mediterranean setting of the play. William Strachey’s account of the wreck of the Sea Venture in 1609, off the coast of Bermuda, and Ariel’s reference to the “still-vex’d Bermoothes” (I.ii. 229) are not connected. Strachey’s letter, supposedly from July 15, 1610, was not published until 1625, and the wreck in The Tempest bears no resemblance to the one in Strachey’s account. There are also many well-documented accounts of shipwrecks off Bermuda that stem from the 1580s and 1590s.

Howard Schumann, Vancouver, BC


Tempus Fugit

The article (“Is Time Speeding Up,” by Susan Martinez, AR #131) led me to remember an important book I read in college, which your readers, if the subject of Dr. Martinez’s excellent piece fascinates them, will find of great interest. The book is The Education of Samuel Adams, an autobiography by Henry Adams. Adams (1838–1918) was a well-educated historian, the son of Ambassador Charles Francis Adams, and grandson and great grandson of two U.S. presidents. He wrote it in his later years for private distribution; it was published commercially (Modern Library, 1919) after his death in 1918. It became a great popular success, was number one on Modern Library’s list, and won the Pulitzer Prize in 1919.

Adams presented many subjects in the book and was well aware and concerned with the subject of Dr. Martinez’s article. His thoughts about that subject are touched on throughout the book, but your readers, if they do not wish to read the whole book, should particularly read Chapter XXXIV, A Law of Acceleration (1904).  The book is available free on line here: http://www.bookwolf.com/Wolf/pdf/HenryAdams-he Education Of.pdf. The chapter in question starts at page 402.

Bob Freedman, New York, NY



Write to us at: Letters to the Editor, Atlantis Rising. Our postal address: P.O. Box 441, Livingston, MT 59047. By e-mail, write to: jdkenyon@atlantisrising.com.