Waters above the firmament....

[lunarwing]

Here is a story about a bit of information that has taken me on a quest that has lasted for many years. Grab a cup of whatever and enjoy....

Growing up in one of the most "by the book" religions on the face of the earth, I had many questions. Not your normal ones mind you, but questions concerning our biblical ancestors and biblical history. This got me in a whole lot of trouble with the church elders.

I always got a dirty look and the automatic "You should not question the Lord my son" response. I find theologians as well as scientists do not like to be questioned.

As I grew up and traveled the world during my military years, I checked out every known religion in my search for truth. I did not find it within any church or temple. I decided to read the bible on my own without anyone standing there on a pulpit telling me how or what to think. I prayed that I would be guided in this new endeavor. When I took on this new outlook.... things revealed themselves within the bible as never before. Things actually started to make simple sense.

One of the first things I ran face first into was an idea that changed the history of the world for me. It started out with just two simple verses in the first book of the bible..... Genesis chapther 1, verses 6 and 7.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which [were] under the firmament from the waters which [were] above the firmament: and it was so.

It was strange.... I did not have to think about why this or that... I knew what these verses meant, and I knew there were many clues concerning this also to be found within the bible. The question is what is the firmament and why was it dividing the waters above from the waters below?

It is a given accepted fact that the firmament is our atmosphere. Now we know about the waters below. Oceans will qualify for these.... but waters above the atmospere! Impossible!

Not really....

Like I mentioned, there are other clues.... and even some scientific thought.

Continued to next post

[Sagittarii]

I always thought the "firmament" meant solid ground.

[lunarwing]

First let's look at some of the clues...

It states that it had never rained before the great flood of Noah. The hydrologic cycle (the watering of the earth) was not like it is today. Before the flood, the cycle was the dew method. Picture a terrarium... you know, some of us built them as kids. You take a old fish tank put some plants in it and throw in a frog or turtle or something. If you have done this you have noticed that there is a natural dew cycle that occurs within the terrarium tank.... you don't really have to add any continious water to the tank. The only way this happens is that the tank is covered.
There is a "canopy" covering the tank. Was there a canopy covering the earthly terrarium?

It also is an accepted truth that the first rainbow ever seen was after the flood. Only the biggest and brightest rainbows can be seen when the sun breaks through the cloud cover and its light is reflected through water or ice cyrstals in the atmospere. Why were rainbows never seen until after the flood? Could it be that there was a canopy that covered the skies all over the world? Could this canopy be the water above the firmament that is talked about in the bible?

We all heard the stories of the ancient men in the bible that lived to great ages. Methuselah, one of the oldest, was said to have lived 969 years. Again... the flood plays a part in changing things. After the flood, man's life span was shortened to only 120 years or less. Could the canopy have been a protective layer. We know that our atmospere as it is today protects us in many ways from the dangers of space. Could the waters above the firmament that existed prior to the flood have protected us in ways we can not concieve today? Could they have protected man in some way that allowed for great life spans?

In Genesis chapter 7, verse 11 &12 ...

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

One of the most common misinformation that mainstream theologians make is they portrey the 'fountians of the deep' as places where the water of the flood came pouring up through the surface of the earth.

If they would actual do their homework, they'd find that in all of the great ancient civilizations the "great deep" was the sky. During the day it's a bit tough to get the feeling.... but if you ever have laid in a field up in the mountains at high elevation where there is little to no unnatural light sources...you would get the feeling just how "deep" the great night sky is.
Were the fountains of the 'great deep' the water that made up the canopy that was around the earth?

Another misconception that is continuiously passed on is that it rained for forty days and forty nights.... exactly for forty days. In the days of old, "forty" was nothing more than a slang term meaning "a lot". You'll find this term used in several old stories... one of the most known is the forty theives of bagdad tale. It is very possible it took several months for the canopy to fully collapse.

continued to next post

[lunarwing]

I always thought the "firmament" meant solid ground.

Here's a thingy from the first on-line dictionary I ran across Sagittarii....


fir·ma·ment   /ˈfɜrməmənt/ Show Spelled[fur-muh-muhnt]
–noun
the vault of heaven; sky.

[lunarwing]

Now for many years I never heard another soul talk about my canopy theory... I thought I was the only one that stumbled upon this new ancient history. Until one day I was looking at one of those little catalogs that advertise little known books and publications about "off the wall" subjects.

One particular title caught my eye.....

"Waters above the Firmament"

.... and I knew immediately what the book was about! I was so excited that I sat down an penned a letter to the author even before I recieved the book and knew who the author was.

Yes, the book was exactly what I thought it was but when I seen a picture of the author I was deviastated.... the photo was of him when he was like 98 years old and the photo was taken in 1905 or something. Talk about major disappointment!

But the book was everything and more that I could have hoped. This was back in 1994.... probably 20 years after I "discovered" the canopy for myself.

Isaac N. Vail was the auther who discovered the canopy and published his book in 1884. He was a darn good thinker and scientist. But he paid a great price for his canopy theory at the hands of his contemporary peers.

He did extensive research on the subject making my feeble attempt seem like childs play. He held a view that I find most all "out of the box" thinkers share.

I quote him here....

It is needless to say that this subject, like that of the deluge, is a most perplexing and difficult one to reconcile with scientific law. Nor have the various theories that have been proposed, been sufficient to allay the fierce animosities and disputes between the theologian an one hand, and the scientist on the other.

The latter declares in favor of the miraculous suspensions of nature's operations, in order to explain phenomena alluded to in the bible. As these individuals are traveling in opposite directions in search for truth, permit me to take a middle course.

Issac N. Vail

I could not say it any better. The theologian is just as steadfast in their narrow mindedness as the secular scientist is in theirs. I find myself to be part theologian and part scientist... and in doing so... I find the answers that I have been searching for make so much more sense than what is offered by either the theologian or the scientist.

That said....

Could there have been a canopy around the earth? This is not so far fetched for most all of our own planets in our own solar system beyond Mars still have their own canopies, or rings. Could the closer proximity to the Sun have deteriorated the closer planets canopies?

Canopies is a natural occurance in the making of a planet. Imagine all the material like H2O that was being ejected into orbit as the newly forming hot earth was being pounded by space rock the size of mountains. The gases would create an atmospere.... as well as a canopy.

Remember the stories about the Mammoths that have been found with daisies in their stomachs? These creatures died pretty darn quickly. And how did diasies grow way up in the cold artic region? With a canopy, the earth was one large terrarium. The tropical zones stretched farther to the north and south prior to the collapse of our earthly canopy.

The clues are all over... you just need to look. If there was such a canopy... can you imagine what the early earth was like? What kind of differences were there in human and animal life, in plant life.... in everything we thought we knew?

[Sagittarii]

Maybe i don't understand but wasn't the flood around the time of Noah?

Well there is fossil evidence that the Earth had liquid water on it's surface 500 million years or so after it formed.

[lunarwing]

Yes the famous flood was during Noah's life. The last of the canopy collapsed at this point causing all the effects I mentioned in the posts.

There are however, several flood stories from many different ancient cultures around the world. Some of these seem to have happened at different times. There could have been several floods through the years as the canopy collapsed in stages.

We know there are thousands of places on earth where traces of civilization are found under the current sea and ocean level.... and not just a few feet.... but many many feet. I get a kick out of scientists with very little brain matter that claim they found Atlantis in some of these places.

All they are are the settlements and cities that early man built close to the water... which made for great means to travel and tranfer goods. It's a natural thing for man... especially early man... to take advantage of water and waterways.

Scientists with some brain matter claim the ice age was responsible for the flooding of the coastal areas.... they just won't go far enough to admit the flood story is real. That means they might have to admit in some crediblity of a bible story.

[Ace Rimmer]

Hey I really like your canopy theory. It actually makes me feel better about things. That would account for the "floods". Maybe we won't shift on our axis like so many of the gloom and doom senarios suggest, because we never did, it was the collaspe of the canopy.

[lunarwing]

Hey I really like your canopy theory.

Thanks Metaluna! With this theory it definately gives us a whole different picture of early earth.

The several ancient cultures that predicted the coming 2012 event said the earth had been destroyed by different means at each change of the age.... only one of which was water. Fire was one of the others.... can't remember the other two.

We still very well might have to survive a crustal displacement in 2012. Here in Mississippi, I might find myself somewhere down in the new south pole after it's all slid and done.

We could deal with a mountain sized asteriod as told in Revelation... it is called Wormwood. Or the super volcanos cut lose, like the one that's brewing in Yellowstone. Then there is the worst of them.... a solar flare that will deep fat fry us in a tick of the clock.... it is reported that we are now entering into a cycle of unpresidented solar activity.

A, B, C, or D all the above...... it ain't lookin' good for the home team....

[Sagittarii]

.... it is reported that we are now entering into a cycle of unpresidented solar activity.

A, B, C, or D all the above...... it ain't lookin' good for the home team....[/b]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/spac ... ation.html

[Ace Rimmer]

.... it is reported that we are now entering into a cycle of unpresidented solar activity.

A, B, C, or D all the above...... it ain't lookin' good for the home team....[/b]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/spac ... ation.html

Er, why are they only warning British people?

[Sagittarii]

^ did you see that date?...."sometime around 2013"

Thats kinda of eerie, maybe it'll blast us early like, say....21/12/2012 and the Mayans were right all along except for one thing. They said the Earth will be destroyed by water, maybe they were wrong about the delivery of the destruction but right about the date? Hmm? We all might get burnt to a crisp unless we start building underground bunkers. That just made me think...

what if.....the aliens and ufo's ARE from here on Earth and long ago another solar flare destroyed the surface of the Earth and they had to go underground to survive. Maybe they couldn't return for say, a million years. After that amount of time underground evolution transformed their bodies and they could no longer live on the surface and that is maybe what we're seeing today?

[lunarwing]

Thanks Sagittarii for that link.... that's newer data then I had.

Here's a thought...

Ever wonder about those "Grey's"?
Why 99.9% of the encounters are at night?
Why do they appear wimpy-mushroom-like?
Why do they have eyes that resemble nocturnal animals?

Can it be that there is something about our sun that effects them in a negative way?

Just as the collapse of our canopy had an effect on us humans... could it's collapse made it deadly for them to be directly exposed to the sun? They then had to retreat under a "new canopy" of water.... our oceans?

[Ace Rimmer]

You guys may really be on to something about the Aliens.

I do not think at this point we are going to be "burnt to a crisp" but it is a very grim, very grim senario, no matter how we look at it.

[Sagittarii]

We first gotta realize how long the Earth has been here. We're talking Deep Time.

100 million years is NOTHING!! In that amount of time a species could evolve to intelligence and then destroy itself and be no trace of them found ANYWHERE. Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old! Think about THAT. This could have happened MANY times over and supposedly the Earth recycles it's crust over eons so any evidence is probably down near the mantle by now.

I have a million "what if's" in my head and I could hypothesize ALL DAY.

[Ace Rimmer]

We first gotta realize how long the Earth has been here. We're talking Deep Time.

100 million years is NOTHING!! In that amount of time a species could evolve to intelligence and then destroy itself and be no trace of them found ANYWHERE. Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old! Think about THAT. This could have happened MANY times over and supposedly the Earth recycles it's crust over eons so any evidence is probably down near the mantle by now.

I have a million "what if's" in my head and I could hypothesize ALL DAY.

I think it has happened more than a few times too.

[Path of Least Resistance]

We first gotta realize how long the Earth has been here. We're talking Deep Time.

100 million years is NOTHING!! In that amount of time a species could evolve to intelligence and then destroy itself and be no trace of them found ANYWHERE. Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old! Think about THAT. This could have happened MANY times over and supposedly the Earth recycles it's crust over eons so any evidence is probably down near the mantle by now.

I have a million "what if's" in my head and I could hypothesize ALL DAY.

very possible

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_map_creator.htm

this stone map was date to 120 million years ago.

[Sagittarii]

^ I've seen that before. To me, it looks like a slab of clay that laid in the sun, dried out and cracked all over...lol. I wish the pictures were better quality so i could go over it more closely.

[lunarwing]

I have a million "what if's" in my head and I could hypothesize ALL DAY.

And that is the ticket to the truth! Ask the questions because they bring even more questions. Sooner or later we will find the answers.

The braindead do not react well when you simply express your opinion... but confront them with questions, and it makes them think for themselves.


I have for many years held the personal belief that not all "aliens" are extraterrestial. Because of my love for and research of ancient myths and legends, I have come to the conclusion that some of the "entities" have always been here on earth.

It is quite possible that a given type was a race that came before us humans. That somehow they either nearly detroyed themselves or something had changed in their enviornment that caused them to retreat to under the oceans or under the mountains.

[Ace Rimmer]

My vote is for the oceans. Wouldn't it be cool if they came up and helped us poor slobs out and defeated the bunch that is in charge of the planet.

[Path of Least Resistance]

i was just flipping thorugh a pdf of The Lost Book of Enki. check this out it's totally what you are talking about - p.18

section/chapter/verse (dunno what they are called) 23 the text lays out a timeline. the Beginning, Prior Times, Olden Times.

In Prior Times there were no gods or earthlings on Earth. The gods descended and earthlings were created in the Olden Times.

in Prior Times the gods were on their home planet Nibiru.

it describes the planet as redish in radiance and because of its elongated orbit "for a time in the cold is nibiru engulfed; for part of its circuit by the Sun strongly is it heated.""

now here we go - "a thick atmosphere Nibiru envelopes, by volcanic eruptions constantly fed. All manner of life this atmosphere sustains: without it there will be only perishing! In the cold period the inner heat of Nibiru it keeps abot the planet, like a warm coat that is constantly renewed. In the hot period it sheilds Nibiru from the Sun's scorching rays. In its midst rains it holds and releases, to lakes and streams giving rise."

and thats were part 24 starts. sounds like he is descibing exactly what you are talking about.

[lunarwing]

I am familar with the Sumarian texts. The Ananuki gods and planet Marduk aka planet X, which if I am correct.... should be coming back our way after its 3600 year eliptical orbit.

[Gemini]

Remember the stories about the Mammoths that have been found with daisies in their stomachs? These creatures died pretty darn quickly. And how did diasies grow way up in the cold artic region? With a canopy, the earth was one large terrarium. The tropical zones stretched farther to the north and south prior to the collapse of our earthly canopy.

First I heard of the Canopy. Very interesting to say the least.

The daisies, or warm weather plants, found in the mammoths, were well preserved. I've heard that they were flash frozen, that's why the plants were well preserved. Due to possibly crustal displacement for example.

I'm trying to determine how the plants would be so well preserved if water fell to the earth, killed the mammoths, then they drowned and preserved in water? Would that be enough to preserve them until they froze? Did the temperature at their location change so dramatically and immediately to flash freeze them?

This as the explanation for cities found far under water, because that water level didn't exist yet is very interesting.

[Theory]

I have a million "what if's" in my head and I could hypothesize ALL DAY.

And that is the ticket to the truth! Ask the questions because they bring even more questions. Sooner or later we will find the answers.

The braindead do not react well when you simply express your opinion... but confront them with questions, and it makes them think for themselves.


I have for many years held the personal belief that not all "aliens" are extraterrestial. Because of my love for and research of ancient myths and legends, I have come to the conclusion that some of the "entities" have always been here on earth.

It is quite possible that a given type was a race that came before us humans. That somehow they either nearly detroyed themselves or something had changed in their enviornment that caused them to retreat to under the oceans or under the mountains.

Not only in the oceans or mountains, what about lakes, storm drains, ect.? I think they have found other planets they can survive on(if earth is their original home), but some stay behind to keep tabs or whatever on us. Maybe, they've found another planet for us? That would be awesome..if they asked me if I would want to go to the new planet I would say...."Beam me up, Scotty!!"

Interesting theory about the canopy

[upperworld]

According to the sumerian historical texts, as interpreted by Z.S., our planet was previously the larger entity Tiamat. Tiamat translated to "water giant" and was thought to be covered in oceans until it was struck and as a large chunk "Kingu" broke off to become the moon, water filled the empty spaces and dry regions appeared on the surface forming land.

Perhaps the surface was not all water as previously documented. If the Annunaki approached Tiamat from space (as Nibiru's orbit neared) the presence of a watery canopy could have given them the impression the surface was all water and when Marduk struck Tiamat, the impact would obviously have been devastating to the canopy, resulting in a global flood.

Maybe over time the canopy rebuilt itself to atleast 80% or 90% but it never regained its original structural integrity and was prone to small collapses (resulting in floods) over the years until the last great collapse or great flood and we have earth in its present atmospheric form.

This ties in ZS theories and your canopy theory without too much deviation from either.

[Ace Rimmer]

Sounds good except I am pretty darn sure the moon is artificial, somebody made it and put it there.

[upperworld]

Sounds good except I am pretty darn sure the moon is artificial, somebody made it and put it there.

The moon being artificial contradicts many of the ancient texts however i do agree that it seems that way. Perhaps the moon became its own entity as the result of a celestial conflict (Marduk and Tiamat) and then after the Annunaki had come here to earth they also set up a remote station on the moon. All the sumerian texts refer to gods traveling back and forth from the heaven(s), some even taking human passengers (Enoch?). Maybe this destination was a lot closer than we are imagining...maybe they were just going back to their base on the moon. If enough activity was taking place on the moon in regards to mining, and building structures this would account for all the things (ruins, hollow sections) that lead us to believe it is an artificial object today and yet stay congruent to the ancient stories.

[Ace Rimmer]

When the earth was moonless. #4 sounds good to me.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward200.htm

[upperworld]

When the earth was moonless. #4 sounds good to me.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward200.htm

I'm more for #1....though #5 is interesting

[lunarwing]

First I heard of the Canopy. Very interesting to say the least.

The daisies, or warm weather plants, found in the mammoths, were well preserved. I've heard that they were flash frozen, that's why the plants were well preserved. Due to possibly crustal displacement for example.

I'm trying to determine how the plants would be so well preserved if water fell to the earth, killed the mammoths, then were they drowned and preserved in the water? Would that be enough to preserve them until they froze? Did the temperature at their location change so dramatically and immediately to flash freeze them?

This as the explanation for cities found far under water, because that water level didn't exist yet is very interesting.

I would theorize that though it rained tremendously in the warmer areas just a few longitudes either side of the equator... that as soon as we lost the terraium like canopy... those polar areas recieved massive snow and ice falls.

As far as the "factual year dating" from scientists of how many years it took to do what.... I'm sorry, but I do not recognize their ability to accurately tell us just how many years it took for this or that to happen. Especially when you start getting into the "millions of years'. It has been proven several times that something they claimed took thousands of years to happen, needed only just a fraction of that time to form. Even the scientific art of carbon dating has been proven to be faulty.

I would respect the science community a lot more if they would say the simple words "I think it might have happened this way or that" instead of trying to make us think what they are guessing about is solid fact.

That is the difference between us Ancient Astronaut Theorists and the mainstream scientists. We forward questions and allow the listener to think for themselves.... where the scientists tell you what to think. Watch the guys on the AA show.... they say "here's what we see" and they qualify their conclusions with "what if" and "why is it like this?" I have never heard any of the really good AAT researchers tell us "this is fact and you better believe it".

Edit (actually an addition)


I don't think I brought this part of the theory up before... if I have.... just ignore my senile carcus.

As I always say... every thing we explore about these subjects is somehow connected to another one or more of our subjects by one degree or more. As we add newly found information to each subject... we are filling in more and more of the larger picture. The more we find... we find things are truely connected... and that will paint the complete picture of our history.

Here's one to think about...

What does the Loch Ness monster have to do with the deluge?

Think about who was destroyed in the deluge. Mostly all land based creatures. But what happened with the ones that were water based?

Their "swimming pool" just got all the bigger!

I can believe some creatures that existed a little before and a little after the Pilocene era (or the aproximent time of the deluge) were trapped in the inland lakes and landbound seas as the flood waters receeded. Now some may have not been able to procreate and died out fairly quickly... but as some creatures travel in family pods... and these may have been able to procreate for a given time, at least until the genetics of the pod could no longer sustain the pods numbers.

This may have given time for man or early native tribes to have developed and witness strange creatures in their lakes and inland seas... and to have these early men add stories of these creatures to their tribal history.

The same could be said for maybe some of the flying creatures of that early time as well, I am pretty sure that earth was not 100% covered up by water. That there were probably the highest of the elevated areas that were still dry. Quite possibly large winged species did survive for a time.

Dragon and mega avion (the thunder birds and Roc's) stories could have resulted from these early encounters.

[upperworld]

First I heard of the Canopy. Very interesting to say the least.

The daisies, or warm weather plants, found in the mammoths, were well preserved. I've heard that they were flash frozen, that's why the plants were well preserved. Due to possibly crustal displacement for example.

I'm trying to determine how the plants would be so well preserved if water fell to the earth, killed the mammoths, then they drowned and preserved in water? Would that be enough to preserve them until they froze? Did the temperature at their location change so dramatically and immediately to flash freeze them?

This as the explanation for cities found far under water, because that water level didn't exist yet is very interesting.

I found this recently on the canopy theory and it would support flash freezing:

It is interesting to note that, if a frozen canopy were able to exist in the atmosphere despite cosmic bombardment, its collapse into liquid rain would have an extreme cooling effect and might be an explanation for the commencement of the Ice Age. Despite the fact that we know that it happened, the complex factors involved in getting an Ice Age started makes it seem impossible and baffles modern science to this day. Advocates of the canopy theory also cite the existence of a canopy as a possible cause for a variety of pre-flood anomalies, including human longevity and the apparent lack of rain or rainbows. They claim that such a canopy would filter out much of the cosmic radiation that is harmful to humans and cause the lack of rain or rainbows. However, opponents dispute such a canopy’s ability to produce these results.

Taken from here:
http://www.gotquestions.org/canopy-theory.html

[lightly]

Hi lunarwing, i've seriously thought about a layer of water , "Above the Firmament" ... and tended to believe it, because it's in the Bible. And that's how i was raised . It's a compelling idea for a worldwide flood if it suddenly came down to earth over a period of days. Not necessarily a mountain high flood.. but memorable?

I have to ask though.. at what altitude this water canopy would have been suspended above the earth ?
and would the canopy be high enough to Freeze, especially when not in sunlight?
.... Just something to consider while considering a layer of water in our atmosphere.

According to Ask a Scientist .. an opinion on that ...

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/env99/env017.htm
Question - Does altitude change the freezing point of water?
the freezing point of water
increases with a decrease in the pressure applied to it. Hence the
freezing point of water will be less at high altitude and low
pressure. But this effect is small. The freezing point of water
rises a mere hundredth of a degree per atmosphere of decrease in
pressure.
It is also true that water collected at high altitude, for example
water droplets in high-altitude clouds, is exceptionally pure. This
water will not freeze easily, because ordinarily water needs some
``seed'' to grow a crystal of ice around. That seed is commonly a
speck of dirt or the walls of the container, but there isn't either at
high altitude, so liquid water droplets exist up there down to
ridiculous temperatures, -40 or so I believe.

[lightly]

well, .. i did a little searching, and learning i hope, .. and discovered that our upper atmosphere is actually HOT.
as this graph shows

cutting1.gif (3.96 KiB) Viewed 510 times

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/archi ... utting.htm
"What do the different layers of the atmosphere look like? Starting at the surface is the troposphere where the temperature falls with altitude until the tropopause, at roughly 10 to 15 km (Figure 1). From there, the temperature warms with increasing altitude through the stratosphere, up to the stratopause near 50 km. Above the stratosphere, the temperature cools with increasing altitude, in a layer called the mesosphere."

.... after that, it seems, temperatures rise once again , until we leave our atmosphere all together, when temperatures drop dramatically... So, long story short... i don't have a clue whether or not this water canopy would freeze. ... but what about gravity? what opposing force would counteract gravity?
.. i'll hush now lunarwing .. and listen

hi H

[Ace Rimmer]

I hate to say it, but Lunarwing is MIA from the forum. I hope he is ok, we haven't heard from him for awhile now, it will be 2 months tomorrow.
We are pretty good friends and one day he was just gone. I really miss him, I haven't been able to track him down anyplace.

I think the water canopy theory has a lot of merit to it.

[lightly]

Oh, ... Thank you Metaluna.