The Neptune/Venus Question

What Troy McLachlan and I discovered early on was that human origins and solar system origins have to be studied together; there is no making sense of either topic separately.

The two main keys to such an origin study are eye sizes and axis tilts. The old creatures of our planet (Earth), particularly dinosaurs and hominids, all had the huge eyes you'd associate with the darkish conditions of a planet aligned with a dwarf star (such as Saturn was some tens of thousands of years ago. Leftover creatures of those ages such as lemurs, tarsiers, owls etc. retain those kinds of eyes.

Likewise, the bodies that were aligned with Saturn and not in orbit around it (Neptune, Mars, Earth) all retain the roughly 26-degree axis tilt of Saturn.

Those bodies having roughly the same axis tilt indicates that they were captured by our present sun as a group and there is a question as to why being captured as a group would leave them all with roughly the same axis tilt. Basically, those bodies were aligned in a string leftover from the original formation of the entire system as a Herbig/Haro string. They flew into the plane of the Sun/Jupiter system from the South at roughly a 26-degree angle and, as the individual bodies peeled out and began to orbit as they do now, ordinary gyroscopic force caused them to retain that 26-degree angle of approach in the form of axis TILTS.

Wikipedia gives our systems axis tilts thus:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt

That is a change from the way that page read a few years ago, in which the tilt of Venus was given as roughly 180 degrees. Looking at that and not bothering to think terribly hard about it (Mea Culpa...) would give somebody the impression that the tilts of Venus and Jupiter were not related. That was looking at it the wrong way. You need to look at it from the perspective of angular distance from perpendicular to the system's plane; viewed that way, the tilts of Jupiter and Venus are all but identical, less than half a degree apart.

Shamesh Glyphs and the Like

A comparison of artwork and iconography from different parts of the ancient near East has convinced many scholars following in the footsteps of Immanuel velikovsky that the Earth was recently part of a linear cosmic alignment involving Saturn, Mars, Earth, and another body, the identity of which involves a bit of a controversy.

Egyptian Shen Bond clasp:

The golden outer rim of the object represents Saturn; the red object is Mars; and the blue object has been assumed by the scholars involved with the Thunderbolts project and the thunderbolts.info website to be Venus. They are assuming that Immanuel velikovsky's claim of Venus having been created via electrical fissioning from Jupiter was in error, I.e. that Venus originated with Saturn and not Jupiter.

Likewise with the common Near Eastern Shamesh glyph:

The Thunderbolts group, from a massive study and cross-referencing of ancient artwork, is convinced that the ancient Saturnian alignment, at least in the recent past, looked like this:

Problems with the identification of the blue body as Venus:

• Neptune has the right axis tilt (28.32 degrees) to have been part of the ancient Saturnian alignment. The axis tilts of outer planets were not known in the late 1970s and early 1980s when David Talbott, Ev Cochrane, and others were putting the Thunderbolts vision of a Saturn theory together.
• Venus’ axis tilt is variously given as 177.3 or as 2.64 degrees, depending on whether the writer wants to take the retrograde spin into account. Either way, that is not compatible with Venus ever having been part of the ancient Saturn alignment.
• Jupiter’s axis tilt is given as 3.13, less than half a degree from that of that of Venus. Both are basically three degrees off of being perpendicular to the plane of the system. That appears to be a huge argument in favor of Velikovsky’s original claim.
• The Thunderbolts group’s claim requires believing that Immanuel Velikovsky, probably the most careful scholar any of us have ever been associated with, had made a very large mistake. It isn’t as if this was some kind of an afterthought; IV claimed to have put a great deal of thought into the question and the discussion goes on for a sizable number of pages in Worlds in Collision.
• If Venus WAS the blue body in the artwork and iconography, there would be a huge question as to why Neptune (with the correct tilt to have been part of the Saturnian system) is not present in that artwork or iconography.
• Having Venus spin off of the equatorial region of Jupiter neatly explains the present retrograde spin (think gears) and near zero axis tilt. Those are big anomalies if Venus is thought to derive from Saturn.
• There is a question of time in the picture. Ancient accounts describe Athena/Venus causing problems shortly after its creation. That would not be the case if Venus had spent hundreds or thousands of years in a Saturnian alignment.

There is a less critical question in the picture involvingi colors. Neptune (at present) is a rough color match for some of the ancient artwork while Venus is not. Thunderbolts authors claim the blue color in the artwork was from electrical interaction between Saturn and Venus but, again, the much more major arguments involving tilts and retrograde spin make that question moot.

What appears to be the case is that Venus arose within the Sun/Jupiter system as Velikovsky claimed and the blue body in the ancient artwork and iconography was Neptune, not Venus.