New Historic Discovery Revealed: Terrestrial Planetary Formation Cycle

There is a planetary cycle that has been occurring for eons within our solar system. Venus and Mercury were each once long ago earth-like planets. Mars and the six largest moons of the gas giant planets are individually proto-earths. These ten certain astronomical bodies shift in an ongoing cycle around every 567 million years. As one shifts it will eventually be replaced by the next.

Earth’s formation process begins inside of Jupiter. Within its “Great Red Spot” an embryonic earth is undergoing formation, once completed it will emerge from the Jovian atmosphere to become the next Io. Current Io will become the next Europa. Current Europa will become the next Ganymede. Current Ganymede will become the next Callisto. Current Callisto will become the next Titan orbiting Saturn. Current Titan will become the next Triton orbiting Neptune. Current Triton will become the next Mars. Current Mars will become the next Earth. Our planet will inevitably become like Venus. Current Venus will become the next Mercury. Current Mercury will ultimately fall into the Sun.

Terrestrial planetary formation appears to be similar to an assembly line and results in such a process that there must be GOD. These proto-earths originally shift away from Jupiter and the sun. Triton [the sixth proto-earth] is in orbit around Neptune and is the only known large moon in retrograde orbit. This signifies that it will shift back towards the sun to become the final proto-earth. In millions of years from now Mars will enter into its final transformation phase of Earth formation. ---More Details/Evidence

Is Mars Pangaea?
"Mars has a diameter about as wide as the continent of Africa. Its overall size, or surface area, is about eight times less than Earth's, but it has the same amount of dry land."
NASA.gov

Venus: Apparent Remnants of Seven Continents
Topographic Map:Image Credits

The evident remains of the seven major continents can be seen from differences in elevation.


Keep in mind Venus was an earth-like planet over half a billion years ago so what you see is after a very long time of extreme erosion, cataclysms, and the planets has compressed by around 400 miles.

Probe hints Venus once had oceans and plate tectonics
"Europe's Venus Express orbiter suggests that some of the planet's surface is made of granite, which on Earth needs water and plate tectonics to form."
newscientist.com

"Granite is the signature rock of the continents."
geology.about.com

Mercury: Core Remains of a Planet
“Mercury’s core occupies a large fraction of the planet, about 85% of the planetary radius, even larger than previous estimates. Because of the planet’s small size, at one time many scientists thought the interior should have cooled to the point that the core would be solid. However, subtle dynamical motions measured from Earth-based radar, combined with MESSENGER’s newly measured parameters of the gravity field and the characteristics of Mercury’s internal magnetic field that signify an active core dynamo, indicate that the planet’s core is at least partially liquid.”
NASA.gov


Io #1 Proto-Earth

"Io is the most geologically active body in the Solar System, and though it is less than a third of Earth's size, it generates twice as much heat as the Earth."

"Jupiter's volcano-pocked moon Io has been found by NASA's Galileo spacecraft to have a giant iron core that takes up half its diameter, scientists report in today's issue of Science magazine."
NASA.gov


Europa #2 Proto-Earth

With a volume 2-3 times the volume of water in Earth's oceans, the global ocean on Europa holds out a tantalizing destination in the search for extraterrestrial life in our solar system."
NASA.gov


Ganymede #3 Proto-Earth

"The surface of Ganymede shares many similarities with Europa. Ganymede's surface is also made of water ice, but unlike Europa's surface, it shows signs of varying age.
lasp.colorado.edu

"Ganymede is the largest satellite in our solar system. It is larger than Mercury and Pluto, and three-quarters the size of Mars. If Ganymede orbited the sun instead of orbiting Jupiter, it would easily be classified as a planet."
solarsystem.nasa.gov


Callisto #4 Proto-Earth

"Callisto is the second largest moon of Jupiter and is about the same size as the planet Mercury. Whereas Io has the youngest surface in the Solar System, Callisto has the oldest. Its crust dates back 4 billion years, just shortly after the solar system was formed. Its ancient history is evident by having the most cratered surface of any moon in the solar system."
harvard.edu
The assumption of one "heavy bombardment event" is a false pretense. Callisto's heavily cratered surface proves it's the oldest of the Galilean satellites


"Titan is most akin to Jupiter's moon Callisto, if Callisto had weather"
NASA.gov


Titan #5 Proto-Earth

"Our solar system has at least 170 moons orbiting the main planets. Before these moons were visited by spacecraft, astronomers expected them to be boring, dead objects devoid of any geologic features. We now know they are fantastic worlds - with features unlike anything seen on Earth: giant sulfur-spewing volcanoes, globally cracked ice-covered surfaces, liquid lakes of hydrocarbons, and colossal watery plumes. Yet many of these worlds are also earthlike and familiar. Titan, the giant moon of Saturn, has often been called an Earth in deep freeze, with cloud systems, lakes, shorelines, drainage fields and even perhaps rain."
NASA.gov

*Original Astronomical Discovery by Logan Patrik Madaras

reply to post by Logan13

Are you the same Logan as the Logan in your link...

Des

Nice Post but....

Terrestrial planetary formation appears to be similar to an assembly line and results in such a process that there must be GOD

Errrmmmm..........no.

That is not a sufficient explanation.

reply to post by Destinyone


Yes. It took me over four years of independent research to reach these conclusions. It started off as a productive hobby but after I gained some breakthroughs the facts all came together.

reply to post by CaptainBeno


The link in the OP goes to a religious doom and gloom site. We'll be hearing a lot of god reasoning methinks....

Des

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Thanks and I understand your perspective but if you witnessed what I have then you too would know for certain that there is a Creator.

OP, just curious...how many peer reviews have occurred in regards to these "facts" you've researched during/after your 4 years of research in which you have now deemed a "discovery"?

Serious question.

Will the electron become the neutron and the neutron become the proton? But what would take the place of theelectron ? The proton?

If you can answer this as affirmative, I think you might be on to something. If not, then you might be just on something.

reply to post by Logan13


Interesting theory, however when i clicked on your link i saw alot of bible references, and i just can´t stand those (as can very few on ATS it seems).

Next time, maybe skip them if you want more penetration.

reply to post by Destinyone


I am a firm believer in GOD and Christ but we can focus on whatever topic you'd like relating to my discovery. It is foremost a scientific discovery so I'm not going to force you into any faith yet I must make my stance clear because I remember how I've gotten this far. Anyways those Scriptures were included because they help explain implications.

reply to post by Insomniac


I do not associate with any church other than the one my Lord created. His Church is of no building, it is limitless. I understand your concern about corrupted religion. I support liberty and freedom, not oppression. Don't worry though most religious people seem to reject my discovery because it isn't in the book of Genesis and I use real science.

reply to post by UberL33t


Most of the scientific facts are from recent space probes and studies directly from space agencies such as NASA. These facts for the most part are widely accepted. The conclusion for this proto-earth/terrestrial planetary cycle I've reached on my own. I kept my work to myself until I published an article last year in August. I deemed it a discovery because it becomes increasingly evident the more I study. New data more often than not supports my model of terrestrial planetary formation.

The truth is I am 23 years old with only a high school degree. Since I was 18 I have learned about the planets and moons independently mostly from the internet so it is all of you whom are on the internet that are my peers.

reply to post by Logan13


I would suggest submitting your findings to legitimate "peers" within the field, imo you have a theory at best and at this stage in your research. Contact your local university and ask if they would review your findings and request their opinion regarding your discovery. Just a notion, perhaps they'll be able to provide you with data you haven't yet been made privy to at this stage in your research. Good luck in your endeavors.

A really fascinating concept, though there are certainly some flaws with the details. Titan's retrograde orbit does not, to my knowledge, in any way indicate that it will start heading deeper into the solar system. I may be mistaken, but I am fairly confident that there is very little direct physical connection between that potential movement and that current movement.

In any case, i would definitely like to give this a closer look when I have more time. Just because there are flaws in the details doesn't mean that the entire theory is bunk -- it may just need refining. While I am inclined to hold with the theories that mainstream science puts out, as those have been studied at length by vast numbers of people, there is no way that we can say mainstream science has all the answers, or has them right.

In any case, there is some advice I'd like to pass on to you for working with this. The first has already been given: keep the Bible stuff separate. Obviously, you don't want to remove it entirely. That's a core part of your belief and theory.

However, you do want the Scientific aspect to be able to stand on its own. And including bible quotations throughout your science implies that you need those verses for the science to work. Just separate the two out into separate pages, and you should be good.

The other thing that you need to do is step back your certainty, so to speak. Don't call this a "revelation of the truth", but instead portray it as a possibility, maybe even a likelihood; make it clear that you do believe it, but you will never get anywhere with the vast majority of intelligent people if you say "This is absolute truth".

reply to post by CaptainBeno


How else could this be? The solar system appears to be designed around creating life, countless earth-like planets. Human beings are the only dominant species on this planet, we have been made in the Creator's image and have dominion over animals. I know understanding God's perfection is far beyond us because all we've ever known is a beginning and "end"

reply to post by Solasis


Thanks. Triton's retrograde orbit doesn't directly indicate it will shift towards the inner solar system yet it certainly is an anomaly that does %100 prove Triton did not form around Neptune, it was captured by its orbit after formation. Titan has a dense nitrogen atmosphere. Triton has nitrogen ice frozen to its surface, a thin nitrogen atmosphere, and despite its distance from the sun it is known to be geologically active.

I've produced the only theory of planetary formation that is able to explain why these astronomical bodies exist that also fits known facts of the objects themselves. Really there are far more problems with the mainstream theory of planetary formation than what I've produced. Here are some examples:

“The current standard theory for Solar System formation, the nebular hypothesis, has fallen into and out of favour since its formulation by Emanuel Swedenborg, Immanuel Kant, and Pierre-Simon Laplace in the 18th century.”

"The physics of accretion disks encounters some problems. The most important one is how the material, which is accreted by the protostar, loses its angular momentum. One possible explanation suggested by Hannes Alfven was that angular momentum was shed by the solar wind during its T Tauri phase. The momentum is probably transported to the outer parts of the disk, but the precise mechanism of this transport is not well understood. The process or processes responsible for the disappearance of the disks are also poorly known.
The formation of planetesimals is the biggest unsolved problem in the Nebular Disk Model. How 1 cm sized particles coalesce into 1 km planetesimals is a mystery. This mechanism appears to be the key to the question as to why some stars have planets, while others have nothing around them, even dust belts.
The formation of giant planets is another unsolved problem. Current theories are unable to explain how their cores can form fast enough to accumulate significant amounts of gas from the quickly disappearing protoplanetary disk. The mean lifetime of the disks, which are less than 107 years, appears to be shorter than the time necessary for the core formation.
Another problem of giant planet formation is their migration. Some calculations show that interaction with the disk can cause rapid inward migration, which, if not stopped, results in the planet reaching the "central regions still as a sub-Jovian object."
en.wikipedia.org...

"One unresolved issue with this model is that it cannot explain how the initial orbits of the proto-terrestrial planets, which would have needed to be highly eccentric to collide, produced the remarkably stable and near-circular orbits the terrestrial planets possess today"
en.wikipedia.org...



The more exoplanets we discover it becomes very obvious the standard theory for planetary formation is wrong. Humanity has learned more about outer space in the last 50 years than the rest of our history, their 18th century theory is obsolete. I do not claim to know how the solar system is made or even the gas giant planets. Honestly I am still unsure how our moon could have formed.
My model can accurately explain the formation of the other 20 largest terrestrial objects in our solar system. I wouldn't have released my findings to the public if I wasn't %100 certain of this discovery. I do appreciate the tips, definitely something to consider. I never said the Bible quotes are necessary for the science to work, it is necessary to explain the implications of such a life/earth cycle.

Nice theory but in theory would this not make saturn(Satan) the creator and the sun/son/jesus our path to destruction

reply to post by Wifibrains


No but actually Saturn does produce its own intermediate sized moons that billions of years from now will collide with Triton [proto-earth #6]. It is Jupiter that first creates these earth-like planets.