2 - The War Of The Gods

The first time I heard about a war in heaven was nearly thirty years ago when I was a little boy in the second form of the primary school at Schaffhausen. The master who taught religion told us that one day the archangel Lucifer had appeared before the Lord God and said:

“We are not going to serve you any longer.”

So God ordered the mighty archangel Gabriel to destroy Lucifer and the rebels with a flaming sword.

Today I know that there is no mention of Lucifer in the Old Testament. It would be impossible, anyway, for the legendary figure of Moses, in whom the authors of the Old Testament are subsumed, is supposed to have lived about 1225 B.C., but Lucifer comes from Latin and that language is dated to 240 B.C. at the earliest. Lux fare (= Lucifer) means Light-bringer, light-bearer, light-maker. It is odd that the sinister devil should be introduced into Catholic religious instruction as a bringer of light. But the Old Testament does have something to say about war in heaven.

The reader will find descriptions of events and prophecies that have been preserved in chapters i-xxv of the Prophet Isaiah (740-701 B.C.). Isaiah 14:12, says:

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
“For thou saidst in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God:
I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north.”

But we also find an unmistakable reference to strife in heaven in the New Testament. Revelation 12:7- 8, reads:

“And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon: and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.”

Many of the ancient documents of mankind mention wars and battles in heaven. The Book of Dzyan, a secret doctrine, was preserved for millennia in Tibetan crypts. The original text, of which nothing is known, not even whether it still exists, was copied from generation to generation and added to by initiates. Parts of the Book of Dzyan that have been preserved circulate around the world in thousands of Sanskrit translations, and experts claim that this book contains the evolution of mankind over millions of years.

The Sixth Stanza of the Book of Dzyan runs as follows:

“At the fourth (round), the sons are told to create their images, one third refuses. Two obey. The curse is pronounced ... The older wheels rotated downward and upward. The mother’s spawn filled the whole. There were battles fought between the creators and the destroyers, and battles fought for space; the seed appearing and reappearing continuously. Make thy calculations, o disciple, if thou wouldst learn the correct age of thy small wheel.”

In the Egyptian Book of the Dead, that collection of texts which contained instructions for behavior in the hereafter and was placed beside mummies in the tomb, Ra, the mighty Sun God, fights with the rebellious children in the universe, for Ra never left the world-egg during the battle. The Latin poet Ovid (43 B.C. to A.D. 17) is naturally better known to posterity for his Ars amandi than for his collection of myths, the Metamorphoses.

In the latter, Ovid tells the story of Phaeton (= the shining one), who was once given permission by his father Helios, the Sun God, to drive the chariot of the sun. Phaeton could not control the chariot, fell through the sky and set the earth on fire. In Greek mythology the twelve children of Uranus (the personification of heaven) and Gaia (the personification of earth) play an important part. These twelve Titans were terrible children who used their tremendous strength to rebel against the established order, i.e. against Zeus, the king of the gods, and attacked Olympus, the abode of the gods.

Hesiod (circa 700 B.C.), an earlier, Greek colleague of Ovid’s, who recounts the ancestry of the gods and the origin of the world in his Theogony, tells us that the Titan Prometheus brought fire down to men from heaven after violent conflicts with Zeus. Zeus himself was forced to share world dominion with his brothers Poseidon and Hades after a bloodthirsty struggle. Referring to Zeus by his name of God of Light, Homer (circa 800 B.C. ) describes him as cloud-banger, thunder-powerful and combative, who had no scruples about using lightning when fighting his enemies and so deciding the struggle in his favor. Lightning as a weapon also occurs in the Maori legends of the South Seas.

They tell of a rebellion that broke out in heaven after Tane had arranged the stars. The legend names the rebels who were no longer willing to follow Tane, but Tane smote them with lightning, conquered the insurgents and threw them down to earth. Since then man has fought man, tribe fought tribe, animal fought animal and fish fought fish on this earth. The god Hinuno fares no better in the saga of the North American Payute Indians. After he had begun a battle with the gods, he was thrown out of heaven.

The International Academy for Sanskrit Research at Mysore, India, had the courage to take a Sanskrit text by Maharishi Bharadvaya and replace the traditional conventional language of translation by words from our modern conceptual world. The result was staggering. The primeval legends turned into a straightforward technical report! (Gods from Outer Space.)

If we apply the same procedure and simply replace the word “heaven” by the modern concept “universe,” then in the twinkling of an eye the legends and myths of wars between the gods in heaven become gigantic battles in the universe between two hostile camps. In the children’s heaven of religion, of course, no wars took place, in it reigned and still does reign the one and only beneficent and almighty God.

Yet the Old Testament mentions not just one god, but several gods:

“... Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air ...” (Genesis 1:26).

This plural is mentioned by the monotheistic Moses on another occasion:

“... the sons of God saw the daughters of men’ that they were fair ...” (Genesis 6:2).

Helene Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891), who founded the Theosophical Society in London in 1875, wrote in The Secret Doctrine, a work in six volumes, published in 1888:

“One of the names of the Jewish Jehova, ‘Sabaoth’ or the ‘Lord of Hosts’ (Isabaoth) belongs to the Chaldaean Sabaeans (or Tsabaeans) and has as its root the word ‘tsab,’ which means a ‘cart,’ a ‘ship’ and an ‘army.’ So ‘sabaoth’ literally means ‘the army of the ship,’ the ‘crew’ or a ‘squadron of ships’”

I suspect that several gods had a hand in the creation (= opening up) of the earth, as well as in the “creation” of man. The creation myth of the Quiche Mayas, the Popol Vuh, tells us how man was created:

“It is said that those ones were created a shaped, they had no father, they had no moth yet they were called men. They were not be, of woman, they were not produced by creators and Shapers, nor by Alom and Caholom, only by a miracle, by magic were they created and shaped ...”

The Indian people of the Mayas, whose rather sudden emergence into so-called history is dated to shortly after the beginning of the Christian era, at first lived a very primitive life in the forests, killing game with the most rudimentary weapons. Yet the myths of the Popol Vuh are supposed to date from this primitive stage.

How could phrases like the following have occurred to such primitive minds:

“... they had no father, they had no mother . . . they were not born of woman ... by magic were they created and shaped.”

It all seems so contradictory and confused that it cannot be explained logically by existing theories. So I should like to stimulate new ideas with the following scenario. If there were wars in the universe, there must have been conquerors and conquered. The victors remained in undisputed possession of their own planet, but the defeated had to flee. They were forced to make for another planet at very short notice in a still intact spaceship.

The reserves of energy and food that can be carried in a spaceship last only for a limited time. So the victors had only a definite period, which they knew, in which to wipe out and annihilate the enemy. The smallest advantage of time helped the defeated, because they could profit by time dilatation in their spaceship. (This phenomenon is scientifically proved. In a spaceship traveling just below the speed of light, time passes more slowly than on the launching planet, where it unfolds as usual.)

The victors wanted no survivors. If only a couple of survivors reached a safe haven, they would produce offspring and grow into a race which would take revenge for their defeat. (If one couple had a knowledge of molecular biology-and the victors knew this- they could even alter primitive life on the planet that was their goal.) The conquered knew the “mentality” of the conquerors and had the same technical know-how.

So in a race against time they steered for the nearest planet. Did the defeated find the third planet out from the sun, our earth, 28,000 light years from the center of the galaxy, after the war in the cosmos? Was our blue planet the refuge of the losers in a cosmic battle?

If we continue to speculate about this theory, there are certain unavoidable premises. The home of the conquered must have had similar conditions to our earth. Their planet must have been about the same distance from the sun and naturally must have had an atmosphere containing oxygen.

What is the possibility that space flights could have begun from earth-like planets in the cosmos?

The statistical probability is enormous.

The fact that the question of the existence of cosmic neighbors has become a “serious subject for research” (to quote Professor Hans Elsasser) is closely connected “with the view of many natural scientists who find it ridiculous to assume that we are the only intelligent beings in the cosmos.” Who knows how many stars there are?

We reckon there are 100 billion fixed stars in our galaxy. So that if every tenth fixed star is surrounded by a planetary system, ten billion fixed stars have such systems. If we leave the majority of planets out of this rough calculation, taking only the figure of ten billion fixed stars (which really implies a much larger number of planets) with one planet each and allotting earth-like qualities only to each tenth one, we arrive at “the truly astronomical figure of one billion planets resembling our earth.

Supposing only each tenth planet to be of the size of the earth and possess the temperature range that makes it possible for life to originate and flourish, we are still faced with the inconceivable figure of 100,000,000! And even if we assume that only one in ten of these planets has a suitable atmosphere, we are still left with 10,000,000 planets with “putative” conditions for organic life.

Hans F. Ebel of Heidelberg University writes in his essay,

“Possible Life on Alien Planets”.

“Astronomers’ estimates tend to accept the figure of inhabitable earth-like planets in our Milky Way alone at hundreds of millions.”

So my theory does not inevitably collapse for lack of sites for launching ramps on earth-like planets. The hypertrophied opinion which dominated our conception of the world until a few years ago that the earth alone could support intelligent life has vanished from even the most rigid academic circles. Tempi passati.
There is one other question mark.

Supposing that the universe does teem with planets and intelligent life, might not all the forms of life ‘on them have developed in quite different directions from those taken by organic life on earth? If, in addition to the tolerance allowed when making any high statistical estimate, we assume that the beings who waged their cosmic war were like humans, are we not being rather presumptuous? In fact, the most recent research in many fields related to the subject confirms that extra-terrestrial intelligences must have been like men. Atomic structures and chemical reactions are the same everywhere in the universe.

And, according to Professor Heinz Haber:

“It is simply not true, as has often been imagined in the past, that the phenomenon of life waits patiently until inanimate nature creates on a planet conditions under which life can exist. It seems to be more likely that life, with its extraordinary chemical activity, contributes enormously to creating its own environment and can| transform a planet in such a way that it capable of supporting life in all its many-sided abundance.”

Lord Kelvin of Largs (1824-1907) was Professor at Glasgow University. In the natural sciences he had a great reputation as a physicist, for not only did he discover the second law of thermodynamics, but he also gave a strictly scientific definition of absolute temperature, which is measured in Kelvin degrees today. In addition, Kelvin discovered standard formula for the length of oscillations in electric oscillatory circuits and the thermo-electric effect named after him. As clearly emerges from these brief biographical data, Lord Kelvin was an important figure in the exact natural sciences; he is held up to students as one of the really great men in his field.

But nowadays we do not hear anything about Kelvin’s conviction that in the very beginning “life” did not originate on earth, our tiny planet, but came wafting from the remote depths of the universe in the form of spores. Kelvin was convinced that these unicellular vegetable spores-asexual germ cells, from which new life could originate-were so resistant to the intense cold that they landed on earth still capable of creating life, together with meteors or meteoric dust, and developed under the life-giving power of light so that finally higher organisms could emerge from them.

I advocate taking the whole Kelvin seriously, including the man who so many years ago rejected the arrogant assumption that life could only have originated on our planet. Even in these realms, which strictly pertain to natural science, we constantly come across the limits imposed by religious (= orthodox) thought. As life is finite, it must also be finite in the universe. Until natural scientists have proved that this conviction of Kelvin’s is false, they should give it a privileged place in the broad spectrum of opinions about how life originated on earth. The noble Lord has earned that much.

I myself would never risk introducing such an audacious theory into the discussion. But I have come to the conclusion that the kind of speculative ideas for which I am attacked can be found by anyone who is prepared to do a little diligent reading in existing scientific literature. Comforting for me, discomforting for my critics.
For example, and this is important for my theory of war in the universe, I meet with skepticism if I try to use reproductions of cave drawings to prove that the recognizable accessories of space travel (spacesuits, antennae, supply systems, etc.) point to visits by intelligences from other stars.

Nonsense, I am told. If equipment like that used today could be confirmed in such early* times, the alien intelligences must have developed quite differently from ourselves. I never hear precise arguments but what must not be cannot be. Amid the vast sea of speculations there are some logical conclusions that give quite solid support for my theory that alien intelligences must have been the same as homo sapiens, or very like him.

Professor Roland Puccetti, a contributor to such well-known periodicals as The Philosophical Quarterly and Analysis, writes in his book Extraterrestrial Intelligences from the Philosophical and Religious Point of View that he made his study,

“because after all the amateurish conclusions I felt it was high time to investigate the latest scientific! findings in this field quite impartially, from the point of view of a philosophical and religious scholar.”

Puccetti shares his opinion that intelligent! beings throughout the universe must be more or less like homo sapiens with other eminent natural scientists.

As early as 1964, the well-known biologist Dr. Robert Bieri published the same conviction in “Humanoids on Other Planets,” a contribution to the American Scientist. After 15 years of research into enzymes, Dr. Joseph Kraut, a bio-chemist at California University, came to the same conclusion. But how can it be “proved” that intelligent extraterrestrial life developed similarly to man?

The “proof can only be a logical sequence of con-elusions based on demonstrable facts. Professor Puccetti starts from the premise that similar external conditions lead to the formation of similar forms and organs in genetically different beings. This tendency exists on all earth-like planets where suitable conditions for complex forms of life occur. Therefore the differences in the evolution of beings that originated on our or any other planet should be minimal.

For in all cases life began with the chemical transformation of the surface of the planet - “with the appearance of organic matter from inanimate matter on the basis or carbon com-pounds in a water medium.” It has been proved that herbivores and carnivores became differentiated in their oceanic environment and developed special forms “before they conquered terra firma.”

Fossils have not only been found in rock with an age of 60,000,000 years, but also in slate a billion years old. The development of new kinds of bodies by formerly amphibious creatures was not a chance one. They needed different limbs in order to move about quickly on terra firma. Nature developed walking, which is the only sensible form of loco-motion, because it is possible on any surface. Whereas amphibious creatures still had small brains, land creatures needed a larger thinking apparatus, because the dangers from their environment multiplied. But the larger brain was easier to carry and supply with blood in a walking position.

What was the number of legs necessary for the new position, asks Puccetti? One leg would not be enough, because the animal would not be able to stand up again if it fell over. Uneven numbers would not have been practical, because balance would have been difficult. Yet several pairs would also have been unsuitable, because they would only have permitted slow crawling.

Actually, fossil finds are clear proof that in the course of millions of years evolution steadily allowed the number of legs to atrophy, until finally two pairs proved to be the most suitable.

“Now two legs seem to be the ideal prerequisite for the development of a large brain, and with two pairs the necessary transformation of one pair into arms for the change over to life in the trees is made possible and the use of tools in the initial stage made easier.”

It is illuminating that the transition from amphibious to terrestrial Life necessitated such an alteration of the “chassis.”

If it was so with us, it was the same else-where in the universe. There is no longer any doubt that all life is of oceanic origin-on that point there should be general agreement. But still further modifications in the construction of the “chassis” proved to be necessary. With the beginning of an active way of life as beasts of prey with two-sided sym-metrical figures, the muzzle was placed at the front and the backside at the rear of the body.

These two locations proved to be the most suitable for feeding and excreting in the case of hunting animals (and not only in their case!). In all beasts of prey the most important sensory organs and prehensile limbs are at the foremost part of the body near the muzzle. So it is no wonder that the brain, the biggest bundle of nerves, is also located there, for then orders from the brain can travel to the prehensile organs by the quickest route.

Growing up on terra firma initiated a refinement of the nervous system that gradually produced the ability to formulate ideas.

It is well known that dolphins,

“have a sizeable brain, although they live in water. But the ability to formulate ideas seems only to emerge in connection with life in a community, with language and the use of tools.”

As the use of even the simplest tools under water is “extremely difficult, it is,

“unlikely that a brain capable of conceptual thought could develop under these conditions, for the process requires a social environment and a certain form of objective speech.”

Professor Puccetti also excludes the possibility that intelligent beings elsewhere could be bird-like, be-cause flying creatures must be light, whereas a large brain is heavy and needs a copious supply of blood. He mentions these variant forms of life to lead fantastic speculations about evolution back to more realistic lines of thought.

Another of the inevitable features of evolution is the similarity of the formation of the eye in widely different species of the animal world. They all have a perfect camera-like eye, with lens, retina, eye muscles, transparent cornea, etc. The number of eyes and their location are also identical. They are always in the head near the brain, just as the two ears are always in the most suitable place, at the highest part of the body. The senses of taste and smell developed with mouth and nose in the immediate vicinity of the nervous center.

Professor Puccetti produces his proof, summarized briefly here, in order to refute the claim of biologists that technically intelligent life could have developed in an unlimited number of directions. For the claim that there are many different and controversial evolutionary possibilities denies that life must have developed into intelligent forms in certain earth-like conditions on planets outside the solar system.

Puccetti establishes - and this is the thesis I have always upheld - that under extraterrestrial conditions similar to those on earth living beings must have originated from the liquid medium, water, and that they must inevitably have developed according to the same patterns as on our earth, as soon as they went on to dry land “where it is possible for them to develop a language, use tools and make the transition to social forms of communal life.”

This evolutionary path must have been prescribed for intelligent life on all the other planets. Moreover these developments in the universe have been so numerous, says Puccetti, that attempts to contact intelligent extra-terrestrial beings and communicate with them “would not be doomed to failure.”

He continues:

“My conclusion is quite simply this-that intelligent extra-terrestrial beings throughout the cosmos must, by and large, be similar to homo sapiens.”

The circle closes.

Lord Kelvin suspected that the first form of life on our planet “drifted” over” from the universe! Puccetti adduces from established knowledge about the origin of all life that the laws of evolution were and are the same everywhere. Joseph Kraut is convinced that nature on other earth-like planets must have solved its problems in the same way as it did in our case.

And Albert Einstein said that he wondered if nature did not always play the same game.

If one can (or ought to) assume that intelligent life exists on millions of other planets, the idea that this life was (and is) older and therefore more advanced in every way than terrestrial life is admittedly a speculation, but not one to be rejected out of hand. Can’t we bury the old Adam as “Lord of Creation” once and for all? Of course, I cannot “prove” my theory, but no one has produced arguments to convince me of the contrary. So I am going to follow it through to the bitter end.
 

The rival parties in the cosmos had the same mathematical knowledge, the same standard of experience and shared a common stage of technological development. The defeated party, having escaped from the battle in a spaceship, had to make for a planet similar to their home, land there and organize a civilization (in the absence of an existing one). They knew how great the danger of being located from the cosmos was and that the victors would use every kind of technical aid to seek them out. A game of hide-and-seek began, but a game in which their survival was at stake.

The newly landed astronauts went underground. They dug themselves in, created subterranean communication routes over great distances and built strong points deep under the earth that afforded them safety, although they could emerge from them to cultivate areas of their new homeland and include them in the plans for a carefully thought out infrastructure.

I can refute the objection that the tunnel-builders must have “betrayed” themselves by the enormous quantities of debris excavated while making the runnels. As I credit them with an advanced technology, they were presumably equipped with a thermal drill of the kind described in Der Spiegel for April 3, 1972, which reported it as the latest discovery.

The scientists of the U.S. Laboratory for Atomic Research at Los Alamos spent a year and a half developing the thermal drill. It has nothing in common with ordinary drills. The tip of the drill is made of wolfram and heated by a graphite heating element. There is no longer any waste material from the hole being drilled. The thermal drill melts the rock through which it bores and presses it against the walls, where it cools down.

As Der Spiegel related, the first test-model bored almost soundlessly through blocks of stone 12 feet thick. At Los Alamos they are now planning the construction of a thermal drill that is powered by a mini atomic reactor and eats into the earth like a mole, in the form of an armored vehicle. This drill is intended to pierce the earth’s crust, which is about 25 miles think, and take samples of the molten magma that lies underneath it.

Ideas are duty-free, so I think it conceivable that the refugee astronauts were also able to use electron rays to build their tunnels. They had electrons “vaporized” by a very hot cathode and then accelerated them in the electrical field between cathode and anode. They clustered the electron rays by means of a focusing electrode, i.e. all the “vaporized” electrons were formed into a single ray.

The American firm of Westinghouse has developed an electron ray generator for welding experiments in space. The electron ray is especially suitable for blasting rock, because the hardness of “the rock is no obstacle to it. If an electron ray meets rock, it rips the thickest blocks apart by thermal tensions. Did the tunnel makers possess a combination of thermal drills and electron ray guns?

It is perfectly possible. If the drill came up against some exceptionally hard geological strata, these could be blasted by a few well-aimed shots with the gun. Then the armored thermal drill would attack the resulting blocks and heat the mass of debris to the liquid state. As soon as the liquid rock cooled down, it would form a diamond-hard glaze. The tunnel system would be safe against infiltration by water, and supports for the chambers would be superfluous.

I was stimulated to make these speculations by the tunnel system in Ecuador. Juan Moricz thinks that the long straight galleries in particular have glazed walls (Fig. 27) and that the large rooms were made by blasting. Neatly blasted layers of rock are clearly recognizable at the tunnel entrance, as is the right-angled door blown out of the rock face. (Fig. 28.)

Fig. 27.

Juan Moricz claims that the long passages have glazed walls

and that explosives were used to blast out the big halls.

Fig. 28.

A tunnel entrance 360 feet below ground level.

Neatly blasted layers of stone are as clearly I recognizable as the right-angled door “shot” into the rock.

The pieces of stone (right) placed as in normal house-building cannot have originated naturally. When it was being built, it must have been higher. An inrush of water at some time caused a fall of rubble.

The stratification of the stone slabs and the stones assembled in the normal way for building houses cannot have been introduced into the construction naturally, for example by an inrush of water. The technical care with which the tunnel system was planned is proved by the ventilation shafts that recur at regular intervals (Fig. 29). These shafts are all accurately worked and on an average are between 5 feet 10 inches and 10 feet long and 2 feet 7 inches wide.

Swarms of buzzard-like birds (Fig. 30) leave the dark labyrinth through these shafts, coming and going all day long, and finally returning to die in the dungeon.

Fig. 29

One regularly comes across artificial ventilation shafts like this.

They are 5 feet 10 inches to 10 feet long and 2 feet 7 inches wide.
 

Fig. 30.

The number of buzzard-like birds living in the underground tunnels is legion.

They are constantly coming in and out of the ventilation shafts, but finally return to the labyrinth to die.

It was here, in the impenetrable depths, that the “gods” decided to create men “in their image,” many years later, when they were no longer afraid of being discovered. The Popol Vuh, the sacred scriptures of the Quiche Indians, a branch of the great Maya family that lived in Central America, tells us about this “creation”:

“But the name of the place to which Balam Quitze, Balam Acab and Iqui Balam came was the caves of Tula, seven caves, seven gorges. The Tamub and Ilocab came there, too. This was the name of the town where they received their gods ... In turn they left the gods behind and Hacavitz was the first ... Mahucutah also left his god behind. But Hacavitz was not hidden in the forest-Hacavitz disappeared into a bare mountain ...”

And now comes the passage from the Popol Vuh already quoted. I cannot resist quoting it again in this connection, because of its astonishing contents:

“It is said that those ones were created and shaped, they had no father, they had no mother, yet they were called men. They were not born of woman, they were not produced by creators and Shapers, nor by Alom and Caholom, only by a miracle, by magic were they created and shaped ...”

A cuneiform tablet from Nippur, the town in Central Babylonia which was the seat of the Sumerian god Enlil in the third millennium B.C., has this account of the origin of man:

“In those days, in the creation chamber of the gods, in their house Duku were Lahar and Ashman formed ...”

Here it might be objected that the parallels between the text of the Popol Vuh and the cuneiform inscription from Nippur are somewhat far-fetched, for it is about 8,000 miles as the crow flies from Central America, the homeland of the Mayas, to the fertile crescent between the Euphrates and the Tigris, the home of the Sumerians! But this is no carefully selected parallel from two cultural entities widely separated in space and time.

It is well known that the Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, contains a good many Sumerian concepts. What is not so well known is that the Old Testament and the Popol Vuh also have just as many obvious features in common, and even more hidden ones.

Let skeptics compare the following passages:

“And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech.” (Genesis 11:1.) “There they saw the rising of the sun. They had a single language. They prayed to neither wood nor stone ...”

(Popol Vuh.)

“And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea: and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. “And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.”

(Exodus 14:21-22.)

 

“They hardly noticed how they crossed the sea. They traversed it as if there had been no sea; they crossed it on stones. Round stones rose from the sand and they walked across on the rows of stones. The place was called shifting sand; those who crossed the sea that divided itself gave it the name. That is how they came over.”

(Popol Vuh.)

“... This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you ...”

(Genesis 9:12.)

“This will succor ye when ye call upon me. This is the sign of the covenant. But now I have to go, with a heavy heart ...”

(Popol Vuh.)

“Then these men were bound in their coats, their hosen, and their hats, and their other garments, and were cast into the midst of the burning fiery furnace ...
“He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son “of God.”

(Daniel 3:21 and 25.)

 

‘Then those men went into the fire, into a fire house. Within it all was red hot, but they were not consumed by fire. Smooth of body and fair of face they appeared in the twilight. The people in the places they had passed through had wished them dead. But that did not come to pass. Then consternation seized those from Xibalba.”

(Popol Vuh.)

The reader is entitled to ask what this detour taking in a Sumerian cuneiform inscription, the Old Testament and the Popol Vuh has to do with my tunnel builders. I am trying to produce arguments for my conviction that in the very beginning there was only one source of the origin of homo sapiens, namely the spacemen who first made the mutation.

Only much later, when peoples and races had settled in other parts of the globe, were new experiments in new places introduced into the first primordial tradition. But the core of the act of creation, namely that the gods created the first men in their own image, is preserved in all the worldwide traditions! The creation of man by extraterrestrial intervention does not interfere with the theory of our ancestry or the theory of evolution.

Now there are two questions. Firstly, what event set off the process of becoming man? Secondly, why did homo sapiens alone of all the kinds of hominids become intelligent? There are many answers, but none of them is convincing. About a million years ago all hominid types of ape had a brain capacity of about 25 cubic inches. If the climate drove the apes down from the trees during the following millennia, that must have included all kinds of apes and not just the one which was selected to produce homo sapiens.

But if the ability to produce tools had been a prerequisite for development and further evolution, there should not really be any apes left today.

“Is it absolutely essential to become man in order not to die out?” asks Oskar Kiss Maerth in his book Der Anfang war das Ende (The Beginning was the End).

With regard to the problem of the origin of man, Maerth puts exciting questions like this:

“If one race of monkeys was forced to stand on its hind legs for fear of wild animals and because it was easier to feed themselves, why did not the other apes, too, stand on their hind legs, for the same reason?

“Basically all hominid apes were and are vegetarian ...

“So were man’s ancestors; they only became meat eaters during the process of becoming man ... Meat eating is supposed to have been a sign of increased intelligence and therefore an advance, because man could nourish himself ‘better’ and ‘more easily’ on meat. For this compliment thank the wolves and wild cats, who had been carnivores many millions of years before.

 

“Why did meat eating suddenly become an ‘easier’ form of nourishment for man’s ancestors? Since when has it been easier to kill a gazelle or a bison than to pluck fruit from a tree?

 

“During the last million years many dry and rainy periods alternated ... all the great apes were able to withdraw to the remaining woods to continue leading their usual way of life. Why did all the great apes do this, except those from which man is supposed to have originated later?”

There is really nothing in the theory of evolution to explain the mighty leap by which homo sapiens set himself apart from his family of hominids. All we hear is that the brain suddenly became efficient, acquired technical know-how, was capable of observing the heavens and establishing communication in social communities. In terms of the history or evolution this leap from animalistic being to homo sapiens took place overnight. A miracle? Miracles just don’t happen.

The assertion that the intelligence of our earliest ancestors had already begun a million years ago and developed nice and slowly once they lived in communities does not hold water. All mammals live in groups, flocks and herds; they hunt and defend themselves communally. Have they become intelligent on this account? Even if a being resembling man has produced primitive tools, that in itself does not make him a homo sapiens.

Professor Leakey of the National Research Center for Prehistory and Paleontology, Nairobi, refers to finds near Fort Ternan, which showed that Kenyapithe-cus Wickeri produced edged tools and that homo habilis used simple tools two million years ago. Leakey also tells us that Jane van Lavich-Goodall investigated chimpanzees in their natural surroundings and established that these distant cousins of man regularly make and use a variety of simple tools. Who is willing to admit these chimpanzees, which meet the criteria for membership of homo sapiens, into the circle of intelligent human beings?

Beings resembling man that made and used tools have always existed. Beings resembling man who worshipped and feared the gods, painted cave walls with frescoes, sang songs, had a feeling of shame, cultivated friendship and buried their fellow-men- those kinds of’ beings have not existed for so long. I doubt if they ever would have existed without artificial mutation by extra-terrestrial visitors.

So I hazard the claim that the vanquished in a cosmic battle first set the process of becoming man in motion with their knowledge of the genetic code by means of an artificial mutation. On June 5, 1972, the Associated Press, Washington, distributed a news item on the 129-page report of the Committee for Astronomical Research of the American Academy of Science.

In the view of these scholars the probability of intelligent extra-terrestrial civilizations existing in the universe has increased considerably during the last seven years. The Academy recommends that attempts by astronomers to discover such distant worlds with intelligent inhabitants should be supported by large government subsidies.

Admittedly existing telescopes could already receive radio signals from extraterrestrial civilizations, but new instruments must be developed capable of picking up signals from inhabited heavenly bodies outside our solar system as well.

The committee’s report says literally:

“At this very moment radio waves carrying the - conversations of beings living vast distances away may be reaching us. Perhaps we could record these conversations if only we directed a radio telescope in the right direction and tuned in to the “right frequency.”

Insofar as one can produce indications in support of a theory, I think one should introduce them into a serious discussion. It is not a question of asking for proofs. What scientific theory could be built up on proofs from its first conception?

Nor is it a question of a “substitute religion,” as many critics claim. If my theories smack of a substitute religion, then logically scientific firstborns, whose embryos were theories, must also have been “substitute religions” to begin with. The average man cannot carry out the series of experiments which ought to lead to the proof of a theory.

Should he or must he believe in scientific theories even if the results of Research finally show them to be wrong? I want to stimulate thought with my theories. No more, but also no less. And here I have put forward my new theories, stimulated by indications of how the tunnels in Ecuador and Peru could have originated and when homo sapiens may have celebrated his “birth hour.”

I leave it to the scientific world to answer me.
 

Back to Contents