Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 2, 2015 - Project Camelot

01:51:27

KEITH HUNTER : PHYSICS OF ARC : EQs, Nukes & the Sun

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Hello, everyone.
	It's good to be here.
	Okay.
	Hi, everyone.
	I'm Kerry Cassidy from Project Camelot, and I'm here with Keith Hunter.
	And we're going to be doing an interview with him today.
	And...
	He's a wonderful author as well as an investigator, and he's looking into earth changes, ancient megaliths and ley lines, as well as what's going on with the earthquakes, etc.
	So we're going to talk to Keith.
	This is an update of sorts with Keith because it's been a long time since we've reconnected, and so this is a great opportunity to do that.
	Welcome, Keith.
	I'm going to switch over quickly to the page here so that people can see on the website just a very short description.
	He's the author of Lost Age of High Knowledge, a book regarding ancient sites.
	Stargates, portals, and military installations worldwide, as well as nuclear reactors, and how they are purposely linked through sacred geometry, ley lines, and hyperdimensional physics, I have a link on the site and on the screen at the moment for people to also go to his website.
	So, Keith, it's great to have you on the show today.
	Sorry for the delay there.
	We were trying a few experiments behind the scene with technology that obviously didn't work.
	But here we are.
	Alright, so why don't you tell people a bit about yourself, just for an introduction.
	Yeah, just very briefly how I got into the whole alternative of everything, of history, of science, of everything.
	I was kind of a fan of the X-Files, it has to be said, in the 90s.
	So I was all interested in the whole issue of UFOs, extraterrestrial contact, that kind of thing.
	And because I also have an interest in astronomy, I was also very much interested in what is loosely referred to as astrology, and that is the idea that the positions of the planets can affect events on the Earth.
	Now, initially, I know a lot of people look at this in terms of how it affects personality and that kind of thing.
	But I was very interested in how the planets could affect changes on the Earth, especially in the form of natural disasters like earthquakes, and whether there was a real physics to this.
	Because I do think that there's...
	An aspect of this.
	It is a real science.
	There's an absolute physical foundation to it, a physics foundation.
	But we've lost that over time.
	And this, you know, the very title of my book is The Lost Age of High Knowledge.
	And I went and I looked at researchers like, such as Graham Hancock, His book Fingerprints of the Gods was quite an inspiration.
	And again, it's talking about how we've got these ancient cultures, we've got various remnants, especially megalithic structures, you know, hints at calendar systems, all of which...
	You know, strongly, basically screaming out to tell us that the ancients had a very high tech, you know, a very high understanding of science.
	But there's a certain foundation of the physics to their society, you know, their physical infrastructure looks amazingly primitive.
	But not only that, we've also got embedded into our geophysical record of the Earth.
	You know, disasters.
	We've got super volcanoes going off.
	We've got blips in such as the radio carbon calibration field indicating You know, the curve going backwards, that we've had massive meteor strikes.
	So we've got all of these, you know, instances as well where it appears disasters have occurred.
	And like Plato says in his famous work, the Timaeus, the philosopher Plato, he says, when these things happen, We have to begin again like children effectively.
	And so I was very interested in looking at some of this science and especially trying to reconstruct it with respect to astronomy.
	So my first venture into the whole thing was actually via a New Zealand researcher named Bruce Cathy.
	So he wrote quite a few books regarding not just Ancient measurement systems.
	I think he was one of the first people from the 1950s and onwards.
	He was an airline pilot.
	He was from New Zealand.
	And so he himself has had a few personal UFO experiences, especially as a result of this.
	But he also started to look at our system of angular measure, degrees, minutes and seconds of arc.
	In general, when we think about 360 degrees to the circle, There's this ancient belief that the Earth once had 360 days for one orbit around the Sun.
	And currently it's 365.24218, just a touch under 365 and a quarter.
	So where he was coming from was he was looking at this angular measure system, applying it to the Earth.
	And he actually was looking at this initially in his books.
	His books are The Harmonic Conquest of Space and The Energy Grid.
	And he found that UFOs seem to have directions.
	You know, he was looking at all these witness reports and sightings of them plotting their trajectory and their flight pattern.
	And he found in his local area of New Zealand that they appear to have a grid-like matrix, like parallel lines, north, south, east, west.
	The system of angular measures like every 30 minutes of arc or half a degree or every 7.5 minutes of arc, how they split it up.
	He was looking at this kind of thing and when I looked at his work, some of the areas he was looking at was very inspirational, but there were other areas that he was really failing to satisfy me.
	It was, as a result of looking at angular measures and how they apply to the Earth, I was looking for, did the ancients not just have, you know, exceptional calendar systems, did they have exceptional systems of measure in terms of feet?
	You know, we have feet, inches, you know, in the metric system there's meters and centimeters.
	So, What I was looking at was not just the significance of, say, angular spacing for such things as may explain, or at least give you some indication of the significance of UFO flight patterns, but I was looking also at the actual distance units.
	Because angles are just an abstraction in terms of an angular sweep, yeah?
	Distance units are arced curves, yeah?
	An arc length measure over the surface of the Earth, say.
	So, what I started to do was look at distance units.
	Initially, My major breakthrough in my book, this one here, Lost Days of High Knowledge, was looking at ancient measurement systems in terms of ideal frequencies for the planets.
	And I found that not just did the Earth once have 360 days precisely, the Moon have precisely 30 days for a month, We're even looking at the other planets and basically, through a series of, it's like an investigation, you're looking at some of the ancient myths out there which give you hints of what the ideal ratios are.
	I'll give you a few examples.
	There's a Hindu tradition that goes back which basically says the diameter of the sun fits into The distance from the Sun to the Earth, 108 times.
	Now 108 times 2 is 216, right?
	The Hindus then believed, they had rosemary, so, you know, like rosemary bee things, 108 little blobs on them, you know, from their traditions.
	And so this was all symbolized in their tradition.
	But if you look at modern science, right, It was only in the 17th century that critical calculations were done to actually work out an accurate measure for the distance between the Earth and the Sun, right?
	It's just under 93 million miles.
	But if you go back You know, not too far back in history then.
	You know, people thought the sky was barely like 10 miles above us, you know, with just pinprick dots for the stars.
	You know, so we didn't even know the true distances.
	But it turns out that if you do a modern calculation, you just get slightly under 108.
	You know, it's about 107 point something or other, yeah?
	In terms of the The division of the Earth's sun distance divided by the physical diameter of the sun.
	So, you know, they had this tradition here.
	So I looked at these ratios and through a process of decoding it came up with what I believe are the best critical breakthroughs in what the ideal measures are.
	Not only that, I came up with physical laws of proportion which directly transformed what are the present-day values back to these ideal standards and harmonized it.
	People out there may be familiar with Johannes Kepler.
	He's a big name in science, 1571 to 1630.
	That's when he lived.
	And he came up with a law of proportion that Basically united a change in the Earth's orbital period, how long it takes to go around the Sun, to a change in its distance from the Sun.
	And this is based upon ratios with a certain power.
	And I'll give you an example.
	The total orbital period of Mars around the Sun is 687.93 days.
	If you divide that by the Earth's orbital period, 365 and a quarter, say, yeah, You'll get 1.880 or so, yeah?
	If you square that, that is multiplied by itself, and then cube root it, return to the third root, you get 1.523.
	Well, if you take what is the Earth's orbital...
	the Earth's distance on the Sun, 93 million miles, and multiply by 1.53, you then get the distance that Mars is from the Sun, right?
	You can use any pairing of planets with Kepler's law based upon the ratio of change for the orbital period connecting the ratio of change for its distance on the Sun, and you've got these two powers, two and three.
	All I did was find that We could connect up associated changes to the physical circumference of the Earth, to the Earth-Moon distance, and these ratios could be connected via different combinations of powers.
	And this led me to back-transform very precisely and scientifically to the ideal set of...
	This is a little chart here, almost summarizing some of the...
	Things from my book.
	This chart just gives you an indication of some of the values.
	In green here, the ones I'm exceptionally confident about.
	In blue, not so much.
	So this is one of the charts.
	This information is in my book, and I explain exactly how I did it through mythological interpretations.
	It's a real investigation, but also very precise physics, and the values that I'm using for the orbital periods of the Earth.
	I'm getting them out of the most advanced scientific books we've got now.
	This is via the US Naval Observatory and the Astronomical Almanac supplement here.
	You know, this is a joint US-British venture.
	So, you're getting the most accurate values for the orbital periods, for the distances from the Sun, and showing how you can transform them.
	And you can show how the Earth could go back to 360 days per year, right, from its current value.
	And the Moon, currently it's 29.53 That can go up because there's an inverse relationship.
	It goes up to 30 days via a very, very precise law.
	In fact, it's based upon a combination of powers of 11 and 12.
	And again, this is just how it plays out.
	Again, this is explained in my book in more detail.
	But I even showed this to a few astronomers and they were amazed because when this law is applied, Using these advanced values, it's 30.000000 and then it starts to begin 354.
	The kind of precision in terms of back transformation to a harmonious solar system is absolutely incredible.
	I have to say that's one of my greatest discoveries.
	But not only that, it led me to think more about the distance measures because, just as an indication, I said the Earth had an ideal orbit, 360 days.
	What about an ideal circumference?
	Currently we use angular measures, you know, minutes of arc.
	One degree is equal to six minutes of arc, so there's 21,600 minutes of arc to the equator of the Earth, right?
	Well, each minute of arc is subtended by an arc distance of 6,087.25 feet, right?
	Now, that's very close to 6,000.
	It's so interesting, then, that if you take the ratio of change for the Earth's tropical year, current to an ideal of 360, which is 1.25, 01456 or so, and you apply that ratio to reduce 6087.25, you get 6000.
	So straight away, you're thinking, well, the Earth at an ideal circumference composed of units of 6000 feet, and I call this an ideal geographical mile because the geographical mile is the 6087.25, Okay, but Keith, what about the fact that the Earth, as they have said, has expanded?
	Oh, that's exactly what I'm saying.
	So, in other words, the difference between the 360 days and the circumference of the Earth being not quite, it's not 6,000, it's over 6,000 now, so it has expanded that far?
	Is that what you're trying to say?
	What I'm saying is, if you take the current tropical year, 365.242, whatever, Divide that by 360.
	you will get an answer on your calculator of, well, usually if it's stored actually, usually that calculator answer there.
	It's 1.0156, Now, if I basically take the number 6000 and multiply by that, I get this 6...
	You see that one there, yeah?
	Currently, one minute of arc swept out of the surface of the Earth at the equator, an equatorial plane, is that number of feet.
	So if I were to just reduce it back, I get 6,000.
	So basically, the Earth has expanded in direct proportion physically at the equator to the change in its tropical year.
	It's a direct one-to-one ratio, right?
	And if you were to, you know, If you take the distance between the Earth and the Moon, that distance divided by the radius of the Earth is practically 60.29.
	And again, it's one of those things that's just out of harmony.
	Ideally, it should be 60.
	So from that, you can deduce what the ideal radius of the Moon orbit is.
	And this is where we get our seconds of arc from.
	When you start with 360, multiply by 60, you get 21,600.
	That's the minutes of arc for the Earth's equator.
	Multiply that by 60, and it's 1.296 million, you know.
	Let me just show you.
	That's basically what we use for seconds of arc.
	That is also the circumference of the ideal moon orbit.
	So that's where we get them from.
	Okay.
	But I appreciate all of that, and that's quite extensive.
	But at this moment, what we want to do is sort of focus a little bit more on sort of what's going on now on the planet, if you don't mind.
	Trust me.
	Okay.
	I just needed to say that because...
	When I look at the ancient megalithic monuments, they are tied together by these ideal values and these ideal ratios, you see.
	And this is one of the things about how we can show, from looking at ancient megalithic monuments, They had to have been built by somebody that had an advanced understanding of the Earth's circumference in terms of its elliptical and ellipsoid forms.
	It's not a perfect circle.
	And elliptical geometry is like infinitely more complex than simple circular geometry, right?
	Because the Earth's rotating on its axis, it's compressed, and the axis of spin bulges out of the equator, right?
	Now, I was just banging on, if you will, about that ratio of change between the Earth's tropical year and And an ideal 360.
	That ratio, multiplied by 10, defined the placement of the Great Pyramid itself in Giza, north of the equator, right?
	Because if you take...
	I have got here...
	Prop!
	So we're here, Egypt.
	This is the equator, this line here, yeah?
	If you maintain yourself at the latitude of Egypt, where the Great Pyramid is, 29 degrees, 58 minutes, 51 seconds about north, and you worked out the circumference at the same plane as the equator, yeah?
	That small circle circumference of the Earth at the latitude of the pyramid, divided by the arc to the equator, Instead of being 1.01456, it's 10.1456.
	And it is such precision, the ratio, that whoever built the Great Pyramid, by our modern standards, by our most advanced model, they were literally 50 feet off the apex.
	If they were to move the Great Pyramid 50 feet to the north, That ratio between the circle of the circumference of the Earth, where the pyramid is, to the arc connecting to the equator, will be ten times the ratio to our most advanced measures of the Earth tropical year.
	So again, it's one of those things that points towards whoever built this structure was looking at these key ratios.
	And just to even go off on a little bit of a tangent, you know, Ken, you've looked at the pyramids on Mars, that kind of thing.
	There was a remote viewing test done of the five-sided pyramid of Mars.
	I read an article about this.
	I think his name was Lynn Buchanan, maybe?
	Okay, he's a remote viewer, yeah.
	Yeah, there was an article in Nexus magazine.
	And they gave the position of the actual Mars pyramid, right?
	And I have got it somewhere.
	Oh yes, here it is.
	40.893 degrees north on Mars, and I think it's 9.55 degrees west.
	I looked at the pure latitude.
	The ratio between the circumference of the Earth at that latitude, 40.893, and the circumference And if you just do a division sum, you get 0.71999775.
	So it's almost bang on 0.72 as a ratio.
	And again, you can see if you just half that, it's 0.36.
	Again, it's these ideal values that we're looking for, you see.
	So whoever placed that structure there, again...
	They are placed at certain points relative to the Earth specifically, you know, so they can tie into the Earth ratio-wise.
	And this is why when I was looking at a lot of these ancient megalithic structures, like with many people, I think it's almost a given, like the Great Pyramid was no tomb for a pharaoh.
	It was a device of some sort, an energetic device.
	And in order to be able to draw off energy, It has to have a relationship to the Earth in a harmonic sense.
	And I can even tell you, again, you know how obviously it's a square base, the Great Pyramid.
	Each side is just a touch under 756 feet, yeah?
	So you have a square base to it.
	If you actually take the circumference of the Earth at its latitude and divide it by that square base, The value you're looking at is 365.24.
	It's basically the Earth tropical year times 100.
	Instead of being 365.24, it's 36,524.
	All these values imply that You build the structure so that it harmonically fits into the earth a whole number of times in order to achieve resonance effects.
	And resonance, just briefly, is if you've got a target object and it's of certain physical dimensions and it's in a medium and you...
	Impinge upon this medium.
	And the classic example is glass and sound waves.
	You've heard the opera singers shatter the glass with sound waves, yeah?
	If you have the glass of certain dimensions, yeah, and you have frequencies, you disturb the air, that's what sound is, it's a propagating waveform.
	If the wavelength, you know, you're peak to peak, peak to peak or trough to trough, If the wavelength fits into the target structure a whole number of times, It internally reflects inside it and sets up this frozen standing wave pattern, right?
	And the target object goes into resonant agitation.
	It starts to shake.
	And if you input too much power into it, the target object literally fails.
	It will shatter like a glass shattering.
	So when you look at the Great Pyramid, for example, here you've got a structure which seems to have been built according to certain dimensions.
	In order to draw off energy from the Earth, obviously you'd want to control it.
	There's a researcher called Christopher Dunn, he wrote the book The Giza Power Plant, and he thinks that the Great Pyramid was set into motion vibrationally to draw off an aggregate of natural seismic activity around the Earth, yes?
	I think one of his chapters in his book is Meltdown.
	There's certain indications that things were compressed slightly as if the structure at some point went out of control and they drew up too much energy and it damaged it.
	And I think Great Mancock himself has said of the Great Pyramid, you know, when going in the Grand Gallery section, it's like a machine with all its internal components stripped out and all you've got is the stone that remains.
	But in the Grand Gallery section, you've got grooves all up the sides.
	And you can almost imagine a big cog-like thing going up and down.
	Getting the whole structure vibrating.
	So it looks like it would have had some high-tech equipment inside it, but that's been taken out, and all that remains is the stone.
	This is why, in all sorts of ways, there's a lot of structures like this, and I know the standard orthodox conventional theory of these structures is that, you know, they...
	They're mystical sites of worship, you know, where they're fertility rituals, big orgies, or whatever, like Stonehenge.
	They're just basic calendar systems used for alignments.
	But it's all...
	It's assumed to be a crude sort of explanation because there's this bias towards thinking the people alive back then were more primitive.
	But, you know, the simple structures seem to have actually been exceptionally powerful in tapping into energy fields, which right now we are only beginning to discover in the modern age.
	And this is where you get on to talk about what you refer to as covert military facilities, because you can talk about these ancient sites.
	But what might come as a bit of a surprise to people is that modern day sites, especially a part of the so-called echelon matrix, like Pine Gap and Menwith Hill, and even the Bluffdale, Utah place, or Buckley Air Force Base, you are getting a lot of these sites or Buckley Air Force Base, you are getting a lot of these sites which are globally positioned to achieve certain ratios, which are exactly like what the ancients appear to have been attempting right?
	And one of the classic ones that ties in even to the US power grid is the connection between Menwith Hill, which is a signals intelligence base that's the largest one in Europe, And this is in North Yorkshire, just north of where I am in England, right?
	It's a big site, massive rectangular buildings, and you know it's got the big golf balls, the ray dome things.
	So I think you've got about 20 of those or whatever.
	And it's basically, you know, communications.
	It's sucking up everything.
	Faxes, phones, emails, satellite stuff.
	It's, you know, a complete surveillance thing.
	So you've got this site located in Britain.
	We've got the exact coordinates of this site.
	On my second website, you know, I mentioned occultphysics.com, I've got a major article giving you the precise coordinates of this.
	And it's about 54 degrees north and about 1.1.5 degrees west.
	I don't want to read every number going, but it's listed there.
	And that's the site that was first commissioned, as you will, in the late 50s, in 1956.
	And, you know, we leased this land to the, it was an RAF base, we leased this land to the United States, right?
	So, this is your facility.
	In Britain, it's run by, you know, US personnel and everything, you know, a little piece of our kingdom, so to speak.
	So, this is your signals intelligence base right here.
	Okay, I'm putting the link in the chat there for people to go over to that site as well.
	Okay.
	So this was 1956, going into the late 60s.
	Now, what happened then is, in 1966, it was taken over by the NSA, this Men with Hillside.
	But at the same time, in the same year, Over in Australia, the US government signed the Pine Gap Treaty, 1966, and this created another signals intelligence base, and it's almost smack bang in the centre of Australia as a landmass, a place called Pine Gap, right near the centre of the country.
	But again, it's pretty remote.
	It's out in the desert.
	If you zoom in on it, it's the same deal as with Menwith Hill.
	Massive, big, rectangular buildings, hundreds of feet, you know, and it's got the big golf ball radomes all over the place.
	And what is so interesting about it is this, because this is a classic example of resonance at work and long-term strategic planning, right?
	So they set up one base, 1950s in England, About 10 years later, they get another base established.
	Well, if you look at...
	I've got my big globe again here.
	Britain's here, and the arc length that goes all the way across, all the way around to the centre of Australia.
	That arc length there has a special relationship to the equator of the Earth, and the ratio is 8 to 3.
	In other words, if you take the circumference of the Earth and the equator, divide it by 8...
	And then multiply by 3, you get the arc length here, right?
	So on your calculator, 8 divided by 3 is 2.666 recurring, yeah?
	But here's the interesting thing.
	If you take the value, divide it by 8 then, yeah, for the equator, that value is about 3,112 miles, yeah?
	So that unit there, 3,112 miles, fits...
	A whole number of times around the equator and fits a whole number of times in the distance between sites.
	In the electromagnetic spectrum, we've got the speed of light, 186,282 miles per second.
	So that's the speed there.
	It's a propagating waveform.
	So if you have a wavelength, all you do is divide the speed of light by the wavelength.
	And you end up with what is your frequency?
	There you go.
	In fact, I've just done it in my calculator.
	Speed of light, 186,282, divided by that critical wavelength unit, 3,112, which fits in to those facilities.
	And you get on your calculator, Value here, very close to 60.
	60 Hertz.
	That is the frequency of your power grid in the United States.
	60 Hertz.
	Right?
	So...
	The idea that they just plumped Pine Gap, you know, oh, it's just in the middle of nowhere.
	Nonsense.
	They deliberately targeted that place.
	They wanted that location to get this ratio.
	They couldn't just build this site anywhere, right?
	So, as I understand it, I think the guy, he was privately owned this land and they kind of Put pressure on him, you know, made him an offer he couldn't refuse to get it from him, that kind of thing.
	I think he sold it for fire sale prices, an article on it, but...
	They got it.
	And so this, again, it's one of these bases that a lot of people have said is one of these hubs for advanced military craft based on anti-gravity propulsion because it is, you know, in the proverbial middle of nowhere.
	So you could get away with that, whereas you couldn't get away with having men with hill here in England, you know, too densely populated.
	So it just goes to show you that...
	There's these aspects to it.
	But the other thing about Pine Gap is, and this was revealed by Stan Deo, they have got a massive drill that they drilled borehole, right?
	And it was something like, was it 5.3 miles in depth, something like that.
	Now, why would they do that?
	And I would say, The length of that borehole is to house, essentially, a resonant cavity.
	It'll have been built to a special length, just like with the Great Pyramid, built to special dimensions.
	They'll have put that right in to a certain length so they can basically use it to resonate and draw off energy from the Earth.
	And I would say that that is one of the key things of that site.
	It goes back to the work of Nikola Tesla, where we...
	You know, because Tesla basically, he had this system, you know, this idea in his head of a world system of transmitting power all over the place.
	But Tesla was saying, we need to transmit power through the Earth, not, you know, electromagnetically through the atmosphere, you know, all the mobile phones, all that stuff, all the static problems, all that.
	The systems can be incredibly clear, not just for signals transmission, but also in terms of You know, your actual energy transmission through the Earth, it was vastly more efficient.
	And if you look at some of Tesla's work, I mean, Tesla lived, just for people's understanding, it was from 1856 to 1943.
	So he lived through this major transition, a major change in the United States.
	He was an immigrant from modern-day Croatia, I believe.
	The map's changed in that area.
	But he came over in the late, I think it was the late 1890s, worked for Edison.
	But Tesla was the one that developed alternating current, which was vastly superior to a direct current for energy transmission without loss.
	Tesla's like mega famous in electricity, but because he was so much more advanced and he was going into areas of free technology and the rest of it, and death rays and shields that you could build around cities, he was so much more advanced than anything Edison was going to.
	His name has practically been blotted out of history, you know.
	And you hear about Edison, you don't hear about Tesla, because to talk about Tesla is to talk about this kind of advanced physics, even the physics of the ancients.
	Tesla set up one of his laboratories in Boulder in Colorado, and this is an interesting connection to the Great Pyramid, and it just shows how he...
	He was tying into the Great Pyramid.
	I mentioned that the latitude north of the equator of the Great Pyramid was of special importance.
	Well, the latitude was about 29 degrees, 58 minutes or so.
	Tesla's lab in the US, in Boulder, Colorado, was 38 degrees, 50 minutes of arc.
	I've got the precise figures, but the bottom line is, if you divide Tesla's arc length from his lab to the equator, The Great Pyramid's arc to the equator, you get a ratio of 1.296.
	And that is the sequence of numbers, 1, 2, 9, 6, that's a part of our angular measures.
	Because if you take that and divide it by 6, it's 2, 1, 6.
	Divide it by 6 again, it's 36.
	By 6 again, it's 6.
	It's a part of this ratio.
	So it says that, you know, it's implying that Tesla, he knew the significance of the Great Pyramid, He, you know, positioned his own laboratory with the same considerations in mind.
	And, you know, he was a foreigner at that time in this area.
	And so, you know, shortly after Tesla died in 1943, you know, a decade or so later, the U.S. then went on with the, you know, the Men with Hill site.
	And then a decade after that, Pine Yap.
	So, you know, there's this...
	Use of his technology, I think, going there.
	Because Tesla wanted to transmit through the ground and he wanted terminals into the ground to transmit energy.
	So the Pine Yacht base with this big borehole, it's right there following on his system.
	But it's all in secret, right?
	It's all in secret in that sense.
	Okay.
	Well, thank you.
	That's fascinating.
	And I assume that you're saying, in essence, that these bases then are transmitting through the ground.
	We always think of them as transmitting above ground because of the way they've got the golf balls, as you call them, etc.
	But it's very fascinating to think of them going through the ground and utilizing, again, the resonance and the location.
	Which is, wouldn't you say, geospatial.
	This kind of gets into the crash of Flight 9525 because the woman on board was working for the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, I think it's called.
	I don't know if you've been following that story at all, but that's interesting because you're really talking about their whole thing is mapping.
	There's a secret part of what they do, and there's a theory that she was the target.
	They took down the whole plane.
	Is this the German Wings plane?
	Yes.
	Yeah, literally just last week or so, yeah.
	And there's also, there may be a significance to where the plane actually went down, which could relate in part to what you're talking about.
	I don't know.
	Have you looked into that at all?
	I've not looked into it, but I've read basically what you're saying.
	Again, it's...
	It's all been hung on this one guy, it's, oh he was psychologically unstable, blah blah blah.
	Oh, that's nonsense.
	The whole thing, it's like Oswald with the lone good man, you know.
	Yes.
	This guy all of his own brought down the plane.
	And from what I gather, it was an Airbus 320.
	They have that technology to take over the plane from the ground, I think, on that kind of model of plane.
	Oh, definitely.
	So they could have prevented the whole thing.
	Well, in fact, the fact is...
	They caused it.
	They caused it, yeah.
	They used the...
	Well, I mean, Field McConnell is a pilot who's going out all about the Boeing...
	Let's see, uninterruptible autopilot.
	So this is something that apparently has been kept away from pilots in the mainstream.
	They don't even know it's on the plane.
	Apparently it's hidden, slightly hidden, and you can access it, however, as a pilot.
	But I don't think you can disconnect it or stop it once it's been activated.
	That is the whole point of it.
	You basically want to take control of the plane from the pilot, so you don't want the pilots knowing about it, obviously.
	Well, I mean, letting them know about it.
	I mean, if it was on the up-and-up, Then if the pilot for whatever reason lost control of the plane or needed help then Knowing that something could take over it would be a positive and something that pilots should be aware of.
	But obviously they want to use it for nefarious purposes.
	They don't want this information out.
	And Field McConnell actually lost his job at Northwestern, in fact, because he tried to bring this to light for other pilots.
	And so now he's on the circuit talking about this, and it's now been used again.
	He believes it's been used more than once in a downing of an airline.
	So, but not to digress too far, you have a number of charts that you sent me.
	Do you want to get into this area of the earthquakes and what these charts are about?
	What I'd like to at least talk first to just introduce it is some of the secrets of nuclear weapons because it was through looking at nuclear weapons and making the breakthroughs there I then went on to make these connections with earthquakes and This, again, was looking at some of the work of Bruce Cathy, right?
	And basically, to cut a long story short, what Cathy was looking at was, and this sounds so fantastic, I know people are going to be, when I say this, most people are going to think this is total BS. But trust me, this is one of the things in Cathy's books that was very intriguing.
	I didn't believe it.
	I had to look into this and really study it in far greater depth than he did in his books, just to convince myself this was real.
	But with nuclear weapons, we've got this standard idea, you know, you've got a plutonium sphere, you will have some initiator which can release neutrons, and what you tend to have is your plutonium core, you'll have shaped charges of conventional explosives,
	you'll fire them, the core implodes, the neutrons Hit the plutonium and it basically goes into a chain reaction state and you have a massive outward explosion, right?
	In a kind of a basic, very basic nutshell, this is the idea of how nuclear weapons work.
	Now, you can also not only have fission where you split the atoms, these heavier elements, to create An explosion.
	You also have fusion, where you fuse lighter elements.
	And the fusion bombs, what we call hydrogen bombs, they're in the megaton range.
	Millions of tons of TNT. If it's a pure fission device, you're looking at kilotons.
	You know, 10, 15, 20 kilotons.
	Hiroshima, 15 kilotons.
	15,000 tons of TNT. So, pure fission devices, low yields.
	The ones which have got fusion in, Megatons.
	These are the big ones that can give you third-degree burns at, you know, 60 miles or whatever.
	They just wipe out cities in one go.
	So the idea is, when you build a nuclear weapon, you've got the internal components, you could take that system and say, I want to either do a surface test, put it somewhere on the ground, get everybody far back, press the button and boom!
	Big mushroom cloud, say.
	Or you could say, I want a delivery system on a missile.
	Put it on a missile.
	Fire the missile.
	It could be an intercontinental ballistic missile.
	Go 6,000 miles around the other side of the Earth.
	Guess the target.
	Boom.
	Or you could have a free-fall bomb drop from a plane.
	You could either surface test them or deliver it in certain ways.
	Now, what Cathy basically said in his books was this.
	The nuclear weapons that he looked at Right?
	From various tests.
	And he was looking at ones in the 60s and wherever.
	So they were ongoing in his life even.
	When he was looking at these kinds of tests, he basically found that the scientists were triggering their devices when the Sun itself, in an angular position in the sky, was of a certain arc length to the device.
	Now, that sounds crazy.
	But what Cathy looked at was this, and he even went on to start forecasting when certain tests would be done.
	And in his book, and I wish I had it on me, I could hold this up, but it's in the other room.
	He's got a book called The Energy Grid.
	And there was one case where the French were doing some testing in the Pacific, and somebody asked him, could he forecast when they would trigger this device?
	And he looked at some sun tables.
	He was looking at the position of the sun, and he basically, because of the way the Earth orbits, and you have, you know, the sun gain its...
	It appears in the sky at a certain angle, you know, right above the horizon, and it drops, and you know how we go through to the solstices and whatever, so it's constantly changing its arc over the sky, and he looked at all these tables and kind of refined it and said, the French will detonate this bomb, and he gave a date three weeks in advance, and he date-stamped all of these predictions.
	And it turned out he was right.
	He was saying exactly when they would trigger these devices.
	He knew where they were positioned, where they were being tested.
	So it was then a question of what kind of arc separation from the sun to the target device is necessary.
	And I will hold up this little thing here.
	Kathy was dealing with...
	Minutes of arc angles.
	My advancement on it was to show that it has to be arc length measures over a true earth ellipsoid.
	This was an error he made.
	He was using a spherical model and angles.
	But when you use true arc length distances, Right?
	And you use an ellipsoid Earth, you're there.
	So this is what you're looking at, really.
	You've got...
	This is the centre of the Earth, BP's bomb position.
	That's the way you've let it up.
	And this here, SGP's sun ground position, right?
	Let me just put that there.
	And the sun ground position...
	Basically, if you freeze the solar system at a given time and draw a straight line from the centre of the sun...
	Through to the centre of the Earth.
	It will pierce through the surface of the Earth.
	And so you'll have ground coordinates, yeah?
	So you're looking at the arc length that connects up the ground position of the Sun to the coordinates where the device is, that arc length.
	And what Cathy was saying was basically that...
	People triggering the devices were doing it when certain arc lengths were present.
	Again, it seems total BS, I know, even I thought that.
	When I looked into it, I was using the most advanced Earth flipsoid models we've got in use at the time.
	I got the declassified archives giving you the precise positions and times down to the nearest second when All the nuclear tests were done.
	I looked at the major countries, all the major tests, Hiroshima, Grapple Y, highest year British bomb, Christmas Island, looking at Bravo, 15 megatons, that's the US one, Saabom, 58 megatons, Soviet one.
	I was looking at a sample of what I can Just straight out, you know, to be the highest yield ones and the most significant historically.
	Trinity, Hiroshima, Nagasaki.
	And I was amazed to find that these harmonic ratios were indeed built into when these devices were triggered with exceptional precision.
	And just to give you an indication here, we've got King and Bravo.
	This here...
	Bravo, shot Bravo, 1954, high steel atmospheric test of the US. King, high steel fission device, 500 kilotons.
	And so this here, these little blocks here, yeah, they're present in my book.
	In my book, I evaluate about 15 or so nuclear weapons tests, and these are Reprints from my book.
	So I've got the precise coordinates from the archives.
	I was using a very advanced computer model.
	I guess the Vsup 87D theory.
	Don't ask, but it's the dog's bollocks as we say in Britain.
	It tells you where the planets are at any time.
	It's, you know, coordinates right down onto the Earth.
	So you worked out the arc lengths as per that diagram connecting up bomb position to the ground position of the Sun.
	And in the case of Okay, and do you have these online that you can send them to me, like this page at all?
	I'll tell you what, I could actually.
	I've got a video on my channel where I did discuss some of these.
	Okay, for people that are interested.
	Yeah, I'll do a section.
	In my book, I do give very precise references for the databases and the software used.
	I'll copy a few parts out of my book if you want and just send them to you just to...
	For the purposes of the interview, when we put it up there, I think people might appreciate that.
	It's always good, and I'm a bit paranoid about that.
	I always want to precisely reference things so anybody else can reconstruct them.
	I was using the U.S. Naval Observatory Zone software for this one.
	But the arc lens then, as I was talking about, the arc lens from the sun ground position to bomb position, yeah?
	I did this for, say, King divided by Bravo and what do I get?
	I get the fraction 8 divided by 3 which is the same fraction Men with Hill and Pine Gap is 2.666 recurring and just to give you an indication of how accurate this is when I do the division sums I've got these values down to the newest feet or even a fraction of a foot.
	So we're dealing with like 35 million feet, 30 million feet.
	But when I do them, the actual unbiased calculation is 2.6666, right?
	That's the kind of sequences that you're looking at.
	There's like no doubt that this is a ratio that somebody intended.
	Being as Bravo, King was 1952, Bravo 1954, so when they triggered the Bravo bomb, they were specifically looking for this ratio.
	They knew that a harmonic configuration had worked for King, they were doing a variation, they knew it had worked for Bravo.
	Not only that, we've got Hiroshima, And Mike.
	Mike's the first thermonuclear device test in the Ivy series for the US, 1952.
	Hiroshima, Japanese city.
	That was bombed August 5th, 1945.
	And again, now you've got a fraction of 7 over 11, which is the recurring sequence 0.636363.
	Here it's 0.636384.
	You're getting some very accurate values.
	Grapple Y. And Hiroshima is another one.
	This relates to latitude.
	This is like the basic fraction 3 divided by 2.
	Yeah?
	1.4999.
	And these are how accurate These ratios.
	And when I'm looking at these, I'm astounded because I just cannot believe they're due to chance.
	Right?
	I was not trying to bias the data in any way.
	I was looking purely at, you know, the most significant sample I could think of.
	Now, I'm certainly not going to tell you every single nuclear weapon out there that's ever been tested makes use of the sun.
	Because I do believe we've had advances in this technology and that there's a certain energy that you can have released by these devices which...
	It gives you a large amount not necessarily dependent on the Sun.
	But what this is telling you is certain experiments were done with certain devices and they were triggering these devices based upon special ratios that they were working with.
	And I validated this in my own mind.
	I was very satisfied that Cathy was correct in this.
	Okay, but wasn't this also, because we did a show quite a long time ago on Fukushima, and you speculated the same thing in terms of the placement of the bombs under the water in a very specific place off of Honshu, as I recall, if I have that right.
	Do you recall that?
	Oh, yes.
	This is for the Japanese earthquake 9.0 Fukushima, yes?
	I did an analysis of it.
	Precise coordinates, again, using USGS location for the epicentre, the time for it.
	The minute you've got the time, you can plug it into the astronomy software.
	And again, this is a classic example of harmonics because when you, you see, in making the transition, From an analysis of nuclear weapons to earthquakes, all you're doing is you're taking the same thing, only instead of putting a bomb position where you've triggered your device, That's the epicentre of the earthquake.
	So you're looking for connections, right, from the ground position of a celestial body to the epicentre of an earthquake.
	And so all you do is substituting the epicentre of the earthquake, the coordinates of the event that took place March the 11th, 2011, 5 hours, 46 minutes, 26 seconds of time, and you work out the arc length connecting that epicentre Right?
	To where the Sun was.
	And if you do a division sum, the equator of the Earth divided by that arc length, you get the following value, practically dead on six to one.
	Exceptional accuracy.
	What this tells you is, again, we've got this harmonic fit tied into the Earth.
	But doesn't that substantiate the fact that it's man-made?
	Not necessarily.
	You see, this is the key thing.
	The signatures of nuclear weapons and the signatures of earthquakes, they incorporate the same mathematics, right?
	So it is very difficult, just on the face of it, you know, to differentiate between the two.
	The reason why I'd say there's a good chance that the event that took place, you know, with respect to Japanese earthquake But you can't say the use of these,
	I mean repeated use of nuclear weapons I mean, these are clearly man-made, instigated events.
	And the fact that the earthquakes are so...
	Have you done a comparison, for example, to earthquakes that are not so significant, for example, and then ones that are...
	You know what I'm saying?
	Where you could actually say there was the hand of man in that earthquake and another earthquake where, in theory, you're just looking for a random earthquake.
	Have you done any kind of comparisons like that?
	I've not been able to isolate it.
	And in some cases, you know, when we started to get more accurate databases for earthquakes is when we started also triggering nuclear weapons.
	And there's a few high magnitude earthquakes.
	There was one, I think, that took place in the 50s, like a 9.0 that was something like 10 days after, I think, Mike or Bravo or something.
	And I sometimes think, is there a delayed trigger in actually...
	So it's very difficult to know for certain, you know, whether they...
	Well, I think we would want to know this.
	I mean, I think there's a motivation to want to know that, right?
	Yeah, I understand what you're saying.
	I've not been able to differentiate based on the pure mathematical signature, natural from man-made.
	It's the indirect factors that make me think.
	Okay, but there is a significance also in the placement in terms of...
	In accessing, in other words, they do a nuclear weapon at a certain time and place, etc., so that it will be of a certain size, a certain magnitude of event.
	Yeah, you know, I think that's what you're saying there, because...
	Because they're making use of the resonance that you're talking about, right?
	To expand or even contract, you know, to size it.
	Yes, I would say that certain signatures, planetary celestial signatures involving the Sun, are more powerful than others, definitely.
	And they will be tied into even more powerful earthquakes, yeah?
	And I would imagine that a lot of the testing that's been done with nuclear weapons is to work out the relationship between your device that you trigger, you know, The configuration of your device will be a receptor for power that it will interact with, which is celestial power, if you will, that harmonically converges on your device at the critical moment.
	Effectively, the nuclear device is not able to cause a massive explosion on its own through its own internal processes, if you will.
	The nuclear weapon is itself destroyed by external forces, and they harmonically converge on it With the right angular, you know, positions of the planets and the sun and so forth.
	So it's a combination.
	I would imagine that it's a combination of the interaction of your device, how it's built, how efficiently you want it to tap into, and what you believe the power of a signature is.
	But it really gets disturbing when you think about the Fukushima one, because a magnitude 9 earthquake, right, is equivalent to about 32,000 megatons.
	Now, this is contained deep underground, usually, 32,000 megatons, yeah?
	The highest yield device that was ever detonated was the Tsar Bomber device.
	That means King of Bombs, Russian device.
	And this was 1961, I believe.
	And that device had 58 megatons.
	And that devastated the area for 100 miles or so.
	Just this one device.
	So you've got to think on it.
	If people are actually...
	Tapping into man-made, the energy releases which are like We're talking thousands of megatons here, as opposed to just a few tens of megatons.
	These are fantastic energy yields to be tapping into.
	Right, so there's a reason to position it then, specifically in a certain place on Earth, when they're going to detonate it or release it or whatever they do.
	What about...
	I have a witness, Mark Richards, Captain Mark Richards from the Secret Space Program.
	He talks about HAARP, actually, recently in my last interview.
	And he said that most people don't understand that underneath HAARP is a pyramid in the ground.
	That any HAARP facility has underground a pyramid below it.
	And this would obviously be accessing those, first of all, the triangular shape is going to sort of increase the vortex, maybe the spin, I don't know, like in terms of torsion physics,
	but specifically also the fact that they must be using a pyramid underground to augment the power of the harp to send a signal or through using sound I think, I may be wrong, but doesn't harp use sound?
	I actually mention harp in my book as a special appendix section.
	I'm just saying it's a few years ago since I've looked at it, but it's an ionospheric heater.
	What it does, it pumps massive watts of energy right from the aerials right up into the ionosphere to the electrojet, which is like a sea of charged particles.
	Right, but there's a lot of evidence that, you know, it goes up, but then it triangulates down or in...
	Yes, what it can do is, when it interacts with the electro-jet, even though it's sending up these massive watts upwards...
	It can reflect back low frequency cycles, you know, like between zero and 30 hertz, like extremely low frequency cycles, and they can be used to, like, penetrate the ground and map the ground looking for hidden cavities.
	They are also the kinds of cycles that are tied into the human brain as well.
	So you can reflect back these low frequency waves back from the interaction of your device in there.
	What you're saying about the pyramid, it reminds me of, as I said about the Great Pyramid, it's built in certain dimensions to interact with the Earth.
	So maybe they've done it in a covert way, if you will, by building the pyramid underground.
	and just like with the aerial pine gap it's built into the ground There's an earth-based connection.
	It makes me wonder whether or not the energy That they use for the HAARP facility is actually drawn from the Earth, like with the Great Pyramid.
	It's not energy from a generator site or whatever on there, but it's literally drawn from the Earth through that.
	So you've got to wonder about how much power they could draw, maybe a lot more power than they would be willing to emit.
	It would be significant to also, in light of what you do with the military bases, to also figure out the locations of the HAARP facilities, of which there are many, I'm told, around the Earth at this time, and see if they located them specifically in these specific vortex areas where they would be able to access more energy versus just anywhere.
	I think you're right in that sense, but Again, when I look at such as the Great Pyramid or even Stonehenge, you will have your device, you want to build your pyramid to achieve certain ratios related to the Earth, and sometimes you can position your device somewhere.
	You can have a leeway, you could position it latitude-wise a bit higher if you change its physical dimensions, or maybe if its physical dimensions were different, you could do it lower.
	In order to really get to the significance of, say, the HAC facility, you'd have to know the precise Base size of the hidden pyramid to see if it had that connection to the earth.
	Well, I was actually thinking that the pyramid might be an upside-down pyramid.
	Mark didn't say this, but I was actually thinking that it might go like that and that the HAARP facility, you know, because we know that, well, at least the configuration on top of a HAARP facility is that they have, you know, they take up some land area with these, this air.
	I suppose it could.
	Assume that the base size of all the aerial grids, I think it's 180 aerials in the grid pattern, if that concrete base size could be mapped, and that turned out to be the same square sides of the Great Pyramid, I'd be really intrigued.
	All right.
	But in light of all this that you're talking about, and we do have questions in the chat, so at a certain point I do want to stop and try to have you answer some of those questions.
	But before we do that, you sent me several charts and I wanted to access them and have you talk about that.
	Yeah, are they ones that you can actually put up on the screen by pressing a button magically?
	Yes, I should be able to.
	Okay then.
	Now let me just introduce this, right, because you know how I said I looked at a small sample of nuclear weapons, right?
	I had to manually work out all of this stuff.
	Using multiple programs, copying and pasting, and just to do an analysis of just the Sun took ages, right?
	But I also said to you, I was looking to see if...
	And I analyzed a few earthquakes.
	There's one or two in my book.
	There's one or two others I've done on my website.
	But it was very time-consuming to do an analysis of the positions of the Sun, the Moon, all the other planets related to one earthquake listing, if you will, yeah?
	Somebody bought my book.
	He wants to remain anonymous.
	He bought my book about a year ago.
	And he is a computer programmer.
	And he's an expert in astrology programming, right?
	And purely out of his own generosity.
	He went onto all these sites using his programming skills, right?
	And he captured, using all the databases, the USGS, the Australian World, the IRC, he got a very comprehensive database that he captured of all the earthquakes going back in history that we've got the most advanced data on.
	Precise times, and he also worked out The ground locations, the coordinates on the ground, like I explained before, of the Sun, the Moon, all the planets, including some dwarf planets, 15 celestial bodies in all, including Ceres, like Edna, and all the rest of it.
	Oh, wow.
	So, yep.
	He worked out ground coordinates of all these bodies, right?
	For the precise times listed in the earthquake databases.
	And also, all the arc length measures connecting up each celestial body to the epicenters of the earthquake.
	And also, all the arc lengths connecting up each body to every other body.
	You know what I mean?
	So, independent of the earthquake.
	Because he's into astrology, yeah?
	And he was looking at the...
	Angular separation between different planets at the time of earthquakes.
	So he's looking at trying to crack this secret tool.
	So he gave me this database.
	This was about six months or so ago.
	And the amount of earthquakes on this database from 1964 to 2009, right, is 16,174.
	And that's all the earthquakes of magnitude 5.5 and above that's ever been done over this 45-year period.
	And if you want to bring up that first diagram, Kelly, if you can, press the magic button.
	Okay.
	It should look like this one here.
	A straight line.
	The one that says Moon-Venus-Arc?
	Yep.
	Okay.
	That's the one.
	Whoops.
	It just says it needs one on it as it's listed, yeah.
	Okay, hold on one second because it went full screen.
	I didn't need to do that.
	Oh my God.
	Um...
	Don't be sure he's all lit up there.
	Um...
	Oh no.
	Well, I'll just start talking to him.
	Yeah, go ahead.
	This diagram here then.
	What you're looking at, as I said, is a very comprehensive earthquake database of all the earthquakes, 5.5 and above magnitude, over a 45-year period, 1964-2009.
	And that's the total sample, right?
	Now, what the programmer did was He worked out all the arc distances over the surface of the Earth, connecting up every planet to every other planet, which includes the Sun and the Moon, right?
	So, in this case, we're looking at the Moon and Venus.
	So, when an earthquake occurred at a certain precise time, right, listed down to the nearest second, yeah?
	We've got the coordinates for the epicentre on the Earth, but we've also got the coordinates for the Moon and Venus.
	And so for 16,174 entries, yeah, all I did was take the entire column of values for the arcs for the Moon and Venus and ranked them on an Excel spreadsheet in order of lowest to highest, right?
	And on the bottom here, lowest to highest, so that's 1 through to 16,174 here, yeah?
	Now, what you're looking at on the other graph here, zero feet to the 65.6 feet, yeah?
	That basically is...
	Half the circumference of the Earth.
	You see, if I have the ground position of the Sun, or sorry, the ground position of, said, the Moon on the Earth, right, the furthest distance away that the ground position could be of another body is half the circumference, yeah?
	So it's basically zero to 65 million.
	And what you've got is a very, very boring-looking straight-line graph here in the middle.
	And what that tells you, basically, is this is a random distribution.
	At the point that an earthquake occurs, right, for all the big sample of earthquakes here, the arc length between the Moon and Venus could be anywhere from zero to half the circumference of the Earth.
	And because it's a straight-line graph, what you have is, it's like basically taking half the circumference of the Earth, dividing it by 16,000 or whatever, and basically an earthquake, you know, would have...
	One earthquake to the next to differ by about several thousand feet or whatever.
	So, the fact that it's a straight line graph is basically telling you that there's no association here.
	Now, I'm showing you this graph to give you what is like a random sample, right?
	Just to give you an indication of this kind of discovery I'm about to present.
	So, let's assume I were to be a bit clever.
	Let's assume that this graph that I've just shown you there, right?
	Was not a straight line graph from zero to half the circumference of the Earth.
	Let's assume it showed this here.
	Okay, so is this chart two?
	This is chart two, yeah.
	Okay, so I'll try to bring this in.
	So, you can see here, instead of having a graph directly going there, you know, zero up to half the circumference on a 45 degree angle, this one It goes from 30 million feet to 40 million feet.
	Now, if you were to see that graph, if that were the result that had been given, but I've made it up as you can see, if this had been given, this graph would be incredible.
	Because what it's saying is, no earthquakes over 5.5 will ever occur if the arc of separation between the Moon and Venus, right, is between 0 and 30 million feet.
	And it will also never occur if it's above 40 million feet.
	So, we will be able to say, for definite, at certain days in a month, right, so there's nearly 30 days in a month, we would be able to say when new earthquakes would occur, right?
	So, if this graph is devious from randomness, like in the first image, yeah, if it gives us something like this or something a bit unusual, it kind of confirms that we've got an association here, yeah?
	Now, what I did was, in this instance then, we have got a graph connecting the position of one celestial body to another, right?
	Right, an arc length, yeah?
	What I also decided to do with this database is look at the arcs that connect up a celestial body's ground position of the 15 and the epicenter coordinates.
	Now, if there's no relationship, I would expect a straight line graph.
	So could you bring up image number three, Kerry?
	It looks like this one here.
	Okay.
	Now, this next image then, it says, "Sun to epicentre arc separation." So again, it's using the same database, 16,000, all earthquakes, 5.5, 45 years.
	But you can see here, I've done it in red as a very precise diagnosis to what the graph would look like if it was random, yeah?
	But you can see that we've got a strange, curved pattern here, right?
	It almost goes up almost vertically straight away from zero, goes a bit curved, and then almost goes, you know, vertically back up again at the end.
	It's not a straight line.
	This graph has some very significant implications here, because what this is telling you, this image 3, it is telling you, right, that Almost no earthquakes occur at all near to the ground position of a celestial body or the position right the other side of the Earth.
	Because if you're on one point of the Earth and say the Sun's zenith point in the sky at midday, if you go right to the other side of the Earth, 180 degrees around and the opposite latitude, it's exactly like taking a straight line from the centre of the Sun, Through to the center of the Earth and out the other side.
	It pierces at two points, yes?
	This graph is basically saying hardly any earthquakes occur if you are positioned somewhere on the Earth near to the ground coordinates of the Sun.
	And just to give you an indication of How this protection effect works.
	I'll just show you, first of all, can you go back on me, Kerry?
	I'm going to show you people this globe thing I've got here.
	Yes, yes, we're on you.
	Okay, I've got my globe here, right?
	So, just for the sake of argument, let's look at the sun, right?
	We're somewhere on the equator.
	Let's look at Bogota, Colombia, right?
	Let's say we are at Bogota, Colombia, right?
	And it is six o'clock...
	In the morning.
	That means that the sun is 90 degrees somewhere over here, yeah?
	And it'll be kind of on the horizon, because it'll be that way, yeah?
	And you'll be looking at Bogota, Colombia.
	So the sun will be on the horizon almost just breaking dawn.
	And so at 6 o'clock in the morning, the sun's here, yeah?
	What this means is, because the sun is 90 degrees away, There is the highest probability of an earthquake occurring in Bogota, Colombia.
	Not only that, right around the other side of the world to Bogota, Colombia, you will also have the highest probability of an earthquake occurring, yeah?
	So let's say then, it's six o'clock in the morning, there's Bogota, the sun's here.
	What happens is, the earth rotates around like so, until...
	We're at 12 noon.
	And if we're on a certain day of the year, the sun will be right there on the zenith, right above us, right?
	90 degrees straight up in the sky.
	And what that means is it's impossible for an earthquake to occur, right?
	These ground positions of the celestial bodies and their opposites, the other side of the earth, are null points.
	And so, Kerry, can you put up diagram number four, this one here?
	Okay.
	Just to give you an indication of the power of the nullification effect of earthquakes.
	So this one here then, it just says earthquake protection depending on distance from the celestial ground position.
	It could be the sun, it could be the moon.
	They all have the same kind of power.
	So if you are at the bottom of the zero miles, from zero to a quarter of the Earth, you get to You get from maximum protection to minimum protection.
	And you can see, so if we were, like in Bogota, Colombia, and it's the zenith point in the sky, noon, we would have maximum protection and it's impossible for an earthquake to occur under our feet.
	But as the Earth continues to rotate around over a six-hour period, a quarter of the Earth moving around, yeah?
	The protection drops off via this diagram, you know, it gets lower in blue until it levels off.
	And I can tell you that this particular graph here, this pattern is very close to a general inverse square law in the formula.
	The formula I've got here is actually worked out by Microsoft's Excel as a magic button you press and it can do it for you.
	So, what this is basically saying Is that the closer you are to the ground position of a celestial body, the chances of an earthquake occurring are really minimal.
	And just to give you an indication of this, because I'm actually designing an earthquake forecasting program right now based on this principle, right?
	I've done an evaluation of Jupiter, right?
	And just to give you an indication, let's say you were...
	You know the 45-year period, right?
	Let's say you were located, you were stood somewhere on the Earth, near the equator, say, and the ground position of Jupiter, right, straight line from the centre of Jupiter, straight through to the centre of the Earth, where it pierces the Earth, that's the ground coordinates, yeah?
	If you were separated, right, by...
	No more than 145 miles, right?
	It would be...
	There's no earthquake, in terms of the precedent of history, right, over 45 years, that's ever occurred at any point on the Earth which is closer than 145 miles from Jupiter's ground position, yeah?
	Now, if you were to be, say...
	237 miles from Jupiter's ground position.
	Again, you're very close to it.
	So, how likely is it What's that probability of an earthquake occurring if you were just a few hundred miles from Jupiter's ground position to being, say, near to 3,000 miles away from Jupiter's ground position?
	And the answer is 10 times, right?
	Over a quarter of the Earth, in that example I gave you, if you are very close to the ground position of a celestial body, Right?
	A couple of hundred miles from it, yeah?
	You are ten times less likely to have an earthquake near to you than if you were a few thousand miles away from it.
	Now, I realize this is just taking one object in isolation.
	You can come back to me on image if you want, Kenny.
	Yeah, actually, we are on you now.
	Oh, sorry.
	Yeah.
	So, in this earthquake database that my friend has given me, He's got 15 celestial bodies, right?
	And They're opposites.
	So that's 30 points in total.
	You've also got the North Pole and the South Pole.
	They're like massive null zone effects, you know, from those two.
	And so imagine the Earth rotating in a 24-hour period.
	And you're stood on the surface, right?
	As the Earth rotates, you're going to cut through and move closer to some of these points at certain times and move further away from them at other times.
	So if you were to graph this over 24 hours, you'd be going up and down like that.
	And the closer you get to the ground positions or the reciprocal points, the chances of an earthquake occurring where you are dramatically decreases.
	And when you get further away from them, it increases.
	So the potential exists to actually model this in terms of giving people a daily indicator of an earthquake threat and even tell somebody the optimum time of day when an earthquake would occur at their area.
	Literally just based on where they are and where the planets are.
	So this seems to be a very real physical effect.
	And in terms of looking at this, you know how if you've got a string instrument, you've got two fixed points and you've got your string in between, yeah?
	And you can pluck your string and it vibrates.
	The two points at the end are the fixed points of no movement, right?
	These are like the nodal points.
	They are fixed.
	They don't move.
	The ground positions mapped onto the Earth are exactly like that.
	No energy occurs directly under them, right?
	They themselves are like the nodal points.
	They offer this null zone protection.
	That's why no energy can occur.
	No earthquakes can occur directly under them, right?
	Now, what can happen, though, is you have an earthquake occur somewhere between these points.
	It will be harmonically related mathematically to various combinations of ground positions.
	And I'll give you an example.
	A major earthquake that occurred in Chile in 2010, I think it was 8.8, I think it was 2010, have done the analysis of it.
	And when it occurred, right, there was The arc length distance between the Sun, ground position, and the epicentre was 9,050 miles, right?
	And Jupiter was positioned somewhere else.
	But the arc distance between Jupiter and the same epicentre was 9,050 miles.
	It was exactly the same distance.
	And so what you're looking at is a harmonic fit of one-to-one.
	And these are the ones which seem to be Linked to very powerful earthquakes, I suspect, yes?
	The bigger the value that can fit in between combinations, you know, like I was talking about 8 to 3 and how with the Pine Gap Men with Hillside, there's a critical arc length that fits a whole number of times between Both sites and in the equator, so you're looking at that kind of harmonic fit.
	So the earthquakes that occur, right, they occur between different ground positions and they occur due to these musical harmonies which activate certain points on the earth and make them the focal point for an earthquake, yeah?
	But the earthquake point, the planetary positions themselves are null points.
	They have a very physical, energetic null point effect.
	And this also explains why when people are out there talking about, thinking, when a conjunction occurs, there's more chance of an earthquake.
	This explains it.
	You see, each planet It has a null zone around it, you know, almost close to the inverse square or drops off in power.
	So if you have all the planets lined up, what it means is all the null zones are concentrated right at two points.
	And what that means is at 90 degrees to that, The rest of the planet is wide open to maximum vulnerability to an earthquake occurring when you have conjunctions because the no points are all on top of one another and they're not scattered.
	The more scattered the planets are, the more dotted they are, the more coverage you have and the less likely an earthquake will occur.
	And so this explains why conjunctions are more likely to give you earthquakes.
	Okay, but what about if you have an incoming body or several incoming bodies?
	Won't that throw some of this out of whack on some level or, you know, like a billiard ball on a table?
	Oh, well, if you get another incoming body, it could.
	Obviously, it'll have its own ground position, you know, mapped onto the Earth.
	So, you know, there was a comet P-17 Holmes that did some kind of flare-up.
	Yes.
	You know, even greater than the size of the sun, it flared up.
	And this was a few years ago.
	Yes.
	And I did have a look at that, and I suspected that what had happened was...
	There was an energetic transfer between the other planets and comet P-Sentenomes.
	And because it's such a small little comet, it became the focal point for overwhelming energetic forces which were transferred to it and that erupted.
	And so I do think that you can get exotic effects like this occurring.
	And I do think that some of the prophecies and some of the things like in Revelation and the end times scenarios You know, they all talk about exotic effects in the sky, and I do believe they're talking about special conjunction patterns established which give you oral effects like atmospheres flaring up of planets and so forth, and also resonant agitation of the planets.
	And so I think that these conjunction patterns of exceptional accuracy...
	They will give you those scenarios, but if they are not of exceptional accuracy, they'll give you more localized earthquakes, that kind of thing.
	But when you say localized earthquakes, will they also be smaller?
	Well, again, it's all dependent on the specific pattern which triggers the earthquake.
	Some patterns of planets are more powerful than others, right?
	The most powerful, obviously, lined-up conjunctions, but...
	Depending on the power of the patterns, you will have the strength of the earthquake.
	Well, I mean, supposedly, I think between now and 2016 and 2017, I don't have like an ephemeris or whatever.
	I think there are some lines, some of the planets are lined up.
	An astrologer would tell you this.
	So that you would say that during those times of the planets being lined up that in theory there's a greater chance for earthquakes somewhere on the planet at certain times, right?
	Yes, because if there's a conjunction present, as I said, with this nullification effect, all the planets, they basically combine, they're all in the same grouping.
	So you've got less protective coverage.
	That's why if you do have planetary alignments, the increase more earthquakes is present because more of the Earth is vulnerable to it.
	But again, it's so tricky trying to plot where and when an earthquake might occur.
	And I do have a couple of ideas in my mind to test programming-wise.
	That maybe could get a breakthrough, if you will, on forecasting the precise positions when an earthquake could occur going into the future.
	Okay, well, did you look at Fukushima in this way?
	Well, obviously the configuration speaks to itself with respect to the sun and also the moon.
	Right.
	But astrologically, were there any conjunctions?
	This is not about conjunctions in this sense.
	What we're talking about is arc length measures over the surface of the Earth.
	When somebody says conjunction to me in light of this research, it would be if you have two celestial bodies whose ground positions mapped onto the Earth are only several thousand feet apart.
	That would be a conjunction for me, yeah?
	No earthquake would occur directly under those points, yeah?
	But what you'd have is you'd have a ground position here, a ground position here, and an epicentre here, and there could be mathematically a ratio between the lines connecting them, like 4 over 3 or 3 over 6.
	In the case of the Fukushima one, the arc length from the sun to the epicentre of the earthquake fits in to the Earth six times, so that's a major distance unit, one-sixth the circumference of the Earth.
	So I think the bigger distance The arc lengths, the more likely we're going to have a more powerful earthquake.
	I would say that that's probably the case.
	Even the chilly event seems to indicate that.
	Okay.
	Now, we've been going for quite a while and I want to ask, you know, take questions and then, you know, sort of wrap this up.
	But is there any other remarks that you wanted to make before I go to the questions?
	No, no.
	As I say, I'm I'm still doing my research, and I'll send you these charts and that, and you might be able to put some of them on your website, and I'll probably put a few links as well, but I realise that in this presentation, it might seem a bit numerical, you know, intensive, but as I say, well, I'll fire away with the questions.
	Okay.
	Alright, so I'm going to scroll back up, so we're going to go back here and see if we can find it.
	I do ask that people are putting their questions in caps so I can read them quickly.
	Have you taken computer internal round-off errors into account?
	Someone wants to know.
	I'm not sure what you mean.
	It may relate to something you were talking about earlier, but it's a question.
	If you're referring to the main database, all of these values, they're programmed with exceptional precision.
	They're using a A true Earth ellipsoid model, the ephemeris for the locations of the planets, they just worked out exact.
	There's no rounding up of those values in terms of the stuff with the charts.
	There's no rounding up.
	And it's the same with the nuclear analysis that I presented.
	I went purely with the calculated answers from the software that there's no rounding up as such.
	I was surprised by how close these values are though.
	If you see something like 1.4999, you're thinking the intention is 1.5, you know.
	So you suspect what the rounded up intended answers were or the intended ratios they were achieving, but the values are all precisely given as they are.
	There's no rounding up for the values.
	Okay.
	I guess somebody said, what is your major thesis?
	I mean, do you want to say that in one sentence?
	I think what they kind of mean is you're doing a great deal of research.
	Do you have any...
	What premise that you're trying to prove or disprove, or why are you going on this interesting quest that you're on?
	Well, I am intrigued by the origins of our systems of measure, and I do believe that there was a once harmonious solar system, that's what I write about in my book, and I was interested in seeing if I could prove that.
	Pretty confident I am in terms of showing ideal cycles, but also I believe I've proven the validity, validated our system of measure in terms of feet and inches and so forth.
	I actually validated that by showing that These distance units of feet of inches of the imperial system harmonically split up into the larger and smaller units, you know, fractionally.
	They do tie into and harmonize with megalithic structures and Monument, you know, modern day military facilities.
	And they do seem to tie into an exotic physics about earthquakes and where they occur naturally.
	So, you know, the whole way in which I'm looking at this is trying to explain, if you will, the physics behind what I think is a lost science.
	So that's where I'm going, basically.
	Okay, great.
	Okay, let's see.
	Why don't they put the golden capstone on the pyramid as planned?
	And Who's planning it?
	When it comes to the Great Pyramid, from what I hear, it used to have an amazing limestone, really nice structure, and it came down in earthquakes, the structure, and was made in, I think, about 1300 AD, and then was used to build mosques and stuff around Cairo.
	So I know that the outer casing stones are all gone, but If you're looking to reactivate the pyramid, I don't think that's going to happen.
	There's no way that could happen.
	I think any idea of putting a capstone on it seems to be a bit symbolic.
	I don't see anything...
	Well, I mean, I can tell you that Sean David Morton, who's quite, you know, put a lot of study into the Great Pyramid, has said that actually the capstone to the pyramid is us.
	It's the crown chakra of humanity, I believe.
	And that there's some kind of link-up in that way.
	So that's a bit esoteric, but that's one explanation I've heard.
	I've actually heard...
	I mean, when you say you can't reactivate the Great Pyramid, I think that's wrong.
	I think it's actually...
	It's still operating, and it may be operating slightly differently.
	I can tell you that when I was in Egypt during 2012, there was no doubt whatsoever.
	There was energy going...
	There's a beam of energy, in fact, going into the Great Pyramid or coming out of it, depending on how you want to look at that, that you could actually see with the naked eye, or at least I could see it.
	And there were other people that reported this.
	So there is some energetic relationship going on still with respect to the Great Pyramid.
	It may not quite be used in exactly the same way that you were talking.
	Yeah, I do think that the form of it as it stands could be a receptor for energy at a minimal level and those energetic effects are like a residual thing.
	But when I was talking about activating, it's like I said before, it's had all its internal equipment stripped out of it.
	In terms of restarting, you'd have to put it all back in and Yes, although I also believe that there are some very powerful vortexes, you know, there and in certain places like the Step Pyramid, which I've actually felt.
	And I can tell you that there is a Stargate there.
	There's said to be a Stargate in the Great Pyramid as well as the Step Pyramid.
	And the fact that there is a Stargate means that it is a sort of more symbolic stone representation of what is actually hyperdimensional physics and a torsion field that's occurring in that place in a certain way and can be activated likely.
	In other words, turned on, again, by perhaps celestial events that you're talking about.
	It could be more activated at certain times of the year or by the arcs that you're talking about or whatever.
	I would say I'm totally agreeing with the Stargates because that's the explanation I give in my book for the physical basis for earthquakes.
	You see, what I actually think an earthquake is, this is where you have to think, you know, in terms of astrology, we just think positions of the planets.
	But if you've got the positions of the planets and then somehow an energetic effect occurs like an earthquake, you've got to say, What's the physical mechanism?
	How can a picture of position affect that?
	And what I think, and this is from looking at some of this work about teleportation, what I think is happening is this.
	You have matter literally withdrawing in a localized lump from just under the surface of one celestial body And through a quantum, you know, jump, if you will, on a macroscopic level, not on micro or subatomic level, but talking about through a subdomain region, through the principle of quickest action, that kind of thing, you know, least resistance.
	I think that when the correct patterns are achieved, a measure of matter from just under the surface of one body locally withdraws while simultaneously locally emerging and forcing its way in just underneath the surface of another celestial body.
	and the duration of that action, right, Is the earthquake that might be 30 seconds long or whatever.
	And you have an earthquake pairing on two celestial bodies.
	And that is the mechanism by which I think matter is actually shifted around between the planets on long-term cycles and why some planets expand and get more matter.
	That matter is being shifted around.
	It's not all collected from debris, from comets or whatever.
	It's a very elegant mechanism of shifting matter around.
	And I think the Stargate stuff that you're on with, Kerry, is tapping into that mechanism to basically have portals that can shift matter from one place to another.
	Yeah, or human beings.
	Yeah.
	Or human beings, yeah.
	And I think that to an extent, because it's tied into the cycles of the planets, that there'll be like windows of opportunity when you're able to move from one planet at a certain location to another.
	And then, for certain periods of time, for celestial cycles, you'll be cut off and you'll not be able to make that transition.
	And I think that's the same...
	You know, between going from our solar system to others.
	And I think this is how it really works on that esoteric level.
	And I would say I think our physicists, to some degree, they've attempted to use this and reconstruct this technology.
	But like you say, I'll bet they've found a few remnants of these portals from way, way back.
	They may be trying to reactivate them and trying to re-back-engineer the science, but I think that that's what's really going on.
	Yeah, yeah, okay, fascinating.
	I think that's great.
	Okay, so let me see what else.
	I'm just sorry, I'm skimming this really quickly on my other machine.
	I don't know.
	Somebody's saying, what does all this math mean?
	That's kind of a general question.
	I think he explained what the math means.
	Perhaps you need to listen back to get his explanation.
	Do you want to say anything else in...
	I can only say I admit it's something that's a bit difficult to transmit.
	I've got a YouTube channel called Light Descent, and I do try to put some pro videos out there where I do a proper script and then do the math as well.
	So if you want to look up some of my videos, There's one on nuclear weapons where I explain how this works in a video that I really kind of scripted a lot better.
	Okay, and you can give me those links, the links, and we'll put them on this page when we publish this video, if you like.
	Can you reverse your math to show a nuclear detonation around 11,500 years ago?
	I know what you're referring to.
	I know that around that time, I think you were looking at...
	There's a few dates.
	In 11,500, I'm thinking that might be...
	Is that the Plato one?
	Is that 90...
	Well, that might be...
	I don't know if...
	That's...
	The Dead Sea.
	I mean, they might be talking about in the Dead Sea area.
	The thing about it is, we had massive extinctions, approximately 10,500 BC, you know, 11,000 BC, and we've got evidence of the supervolcano Lacher Sea blowing up in Germany.
	That would have done massive damage to Europe.
	We've got tektites with the small glassy rocks.
	They seem to be indicating either possibly ancient atomic warfare, which I do not discount, and also strikes from various shower of meteors.
	So there is some sort of massive disaster that seems to be tied into that period, a global one, perhaps being caught in a cometary stream.
	It's difficult to say what exactly was going on there, but it's going to be multiple...
	I think impacts, you know, it's hard to say.
	So, okay, but asking about reversing your math.
	So, once you have a model, though, you could, in theory, go back in time as well as 4-0 in time, right?
	There is an ancient mythological story that pointed to a conjunction that's tied into the Aztec 52-year calendar.
	The Aztecs, they've got this calendar every 52 years, and it's tied in.
	To Earth, Venus, Mars and Pleiades conjunctions, yeah?
	Pleiades background star grouping.
	And this was a previous time when they had a day of disaster.
	And they thought when the next such pattern occurred, we'd have the next day of disaster.
	And a few years ago, I went on Starry Night and did an exhaustive, you know, backwards look.
	Whether there were conjunctions involving the Pleiades, going back and whatever, or conjunctions involving five or six bodies, going back to around 9,500, 10,500 BC. I'd have to really look back at my data.
	There were a few possible answers, but you see, this is the problem with it.
	If you were using this kind of software, And you just have fractions of a second or two, and you go back like 10,000 years.
	For planets like Mercury or Venus, you know, they've got orbital periods of 88 days, 225.
	They can build up to significant days in error, like angular sweeps of three or four days.
	And the problem is, any idea of capturing a conjunction is like destroyed.
	You can't really trust the software to give you accuracy in conjunctions going that far back.
	So there's a lot of margin for error.
	So I was never that confident about it.
	There were a few interesting conjunctions around about that time.
	And I did think maybe they were tied into that, you know, last conjunction cycle that did us in, you know.
	Okay.
	Do you see a link between your work and Bruce Cathy?
	I mean, maybe this person wasn't here at the beginning, but he talked a great deal about Bruce Cathy in the beginning.
	So I would say there's an obvious link between your work and Bruce.
	Bruce, Cathy, right?
	The main issue, as I said, he was absolutely inspirational in his books, and I've got three of them on Michelle's, but he made one or two technical errors, and I corrected those, but the minute I corrected them, everything fell into place.
	You see, Cathy...
	He doesn't appear from his books to ever consider that the Earth truly once had 360 days per year, right?
	So he uses the angular measure system of degrees and maps it onto the Earth right now as it stands, right?
	And not only does he think that, he doesn't appear to have thought that the Earth has expanded.
	So all his values of Linking up the measurements of various things I think are slightly faulty because he's not using a true distance of 6,000 feet.
	He's using 6,076 feet which is the nautical mile based upon the Earth as it now stands.
	So I think he's mapping the wrong measurement system onto the Earth.
	He also uses angular measures and a spherical Earth model.
	What I find is these exacting values I can get can only be achieved When you use an ellipsoid model and you use the arc lengths over the surface of the Earth, if you try to do it in an abstract, angular way, you don't get this precision.
	And that's why a lot of his calculations, I think, would, you know, and some of the things he did were just significantly off, but with that correction, they could really be corrected, you know, and you'd have them the right way.
	Okay, let's see.
	Well, somebody's repeating their question, I think.
	There are computer internal errors that exist that are not usually taken into account, that person is saying.
	If you're talking about the graphs, the reason why I think they're correct, and that's why the first graph I showed gave you this...
	This straight line.
	And when I saw that, I thought, well, if that straight line would exist for two planets, you know, related to one another, you know, related to one another in terms of the arc length, when I did the same kinds of calculation, but just...
	Using epicenters to the celestial bodies.
	Then I got this weird shaped graph.
	And that's why I think it is valid.
	I don't think I'm being tricked by mathematics, if that's what you're asking.
	I see what you're saying, and it bothered me for a time, but...
	I don't think that this error is a result of computer errors in calculations, because it would have shown up in the first graph, right?
	The first graph would not have been a dead on straight lines, so that's why I'm confident that it is correct, if that's what you're getting at.
	Okay, I think, let's see, ancient measurement systems, ancient sites, nuclear detonation, I'm not sure what the person is saying.
	They're saying reciprocal harmonic frequencies between placement of planetary bodies were core to Bruce Cathy's work.
	He used arc length in his calculations as a pilot.
	He also saw a link in ancient measurement systems.
	I mean, it's obvious that there's a link between their work.
	So I think that we've answered that.
	I think, as I said, in a couple of his examples in his books, He interchanges when he talks about a nautical mile on the surface of the Earth and a minute of arc.
	He uses those terms almost interchangeably.
	Obviously, a nautical mile is 6,076 feet.
	And he also uses a minute of arc.
	I think it's Bridge to Infinity.
	I've got it on my bookshelf.
	I had a look at one of the tests he did.
	Looking at these separation distances between a French test, the sun position, and the ground position of a bomb, And again, from my reconstruction, I've been going back a few years now, he does use a squashed spherical Earth model for his calculations and uses angular measures.
	Now, we might say nautical miles, but he's squashing the Earth.
	He doesn't use a true Earth ellipsoid model, and I think that's the critical thing.
	I found that he was like right in principle in what he was saying, that there are connections between the ground positions of bodies And like nuclear weapons, he's right.
	He's dead on right.
	It's just that some of the calculations he was getting, the values, were wrong.
	Because, firstly, he's not modelling it correctly.
	And secondly, no offence to him, and I'd have made the same mistake.
	He was operating in the pre-computer age.
	It's so easy for me to just go on the internet right now and...
	Great circle calculator and work it out.
	He's having to use pen and paper and slide rules and whatever, and look at tables of books, because he's doing it in the 60s, so I think he may have used a spherical model for ease of calculation, you know, just on that point.
	Someone wants to know if you see a link with Nassim Harriman's exploring the structure behind the universe we're in.
	I think I know what you're talking about, but I only know of him in passing.
	I don't really know his work at all, so I can't really answer that.
	Okay.
	Okay, I think that that's not really a question, the last thing.
	So, okay.
	At any rate, we've been going for a good, I think, almost two hours here.
	So that's plenty of time, I think, you know.
	In terms of viewership, it's hard to get people to sit still for two hours to watch a video nowadays.
	So I'm going to shut this down, and thank you very much, Keith, for coming on the show with me here and going into all of this great detail.
	I have done other interviews with Keith.
	We'll try to find those links for you and also put them on the page.
	When we release this, it will be going onto my YouTube channel, so that's where you can find it in the future if you're looking for this interview, and I will be publishing it quite soon, even by tomorrow or sooner if I manage to get it exported.
	So again, thank you.
	Do you want any parting words that you'd like to say here?
	No, nothing that springs to mind.
	It's been good being here, and I know a lot of people just...
	When I look at some of these charts and I look at that, I've thought about it a great deal and you always wonder, am I mathematically fooling myself?
	And I do believe that this is a valid connection.
	The database data just seems solid.
	You know, I'm still looking into the connections, but this to me seems like a real effect to the null point, you know, that any object near to the positions, the ground positions of the celestial bodies will, you know, Be likely to not have an earthquake there.
	It's just strange physics, but I don't believe it's correct.
	At some point, I think volcanism needs to be put into this model as well.
	Volcanic eruptions, because there seems to be a direct correlation between the sun and volcanic eruptions as well.
	We haven't really gone in that direction today, but I think it's worth including in your model.
	So, at any rate, thank you very much again, Keith, and we'll reconvene in the future when you have something you want to share with us, alright?
	Okay.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	And thanks everyone for listening.
	I'll be live tomorrow again on live stream tomorrow night at 7 p.m.
	with Emily Windsor Craig.
	And she is going to be talking about the Anunnaki and the powers that be and is the illegitimate daughter of Edward VIII. So anyway, that should be a very interesting show.
	All right.
	Take care, everyone.

▲