--stonehenge( construction)--

   an epiphany--

   i passed a model of stonehenge this morning( likely a plastic one), and the most probable way in which stonehenge was constructed came to me...i present it here for your inspection--


  construction--

     i feel that large stones were carefully located, that were long and thin( a huge, time consuming process), then these stones were moved to the site via an ox( or dragged, by many persons with ropes), once at the site, a shovel and ropes were all that was needed...a small hole was dug, and then another right beside it, for the stones to sit in( like a "pilot-hole" when drilling a modern hole, a rope was then cut-to-length, between the holes, to measure the distance between them( so that they might remain equal)...then the amazing thing, the stones were tipped into the small holes, upright, by building a pile of dirt on one side of the stone, and flopping it against it, and then filling up the other side...in this way the two stones were "locked" in an upright position( completely covered in dirt, on all sides), and the stone on top was raised into position, via a similar method...the top-stone was tipped onto a pile of dirt, slightly below the stones fulcrum point, this allowed the stone to "flop" onto this "plateau", and be raised, the area that the stone was on, before being flopped onto the "plateau", was then filled in, and the stone was re-tipped onto the original area, this was done over and over again, in a "sea-saw" pattern, until the stone was level, with the two columns buried in dirt, the top-stone was then likely pushed over, into position, onto a pile of dirt in front of it, that contained the two support stones...i suggest that the pile was then left to erode naturally, after the stones were aligned, allowing them to naturally settle into the earth, together( with the dirt around them, supporting them as a complete unit, as they settled), eventually, the dirt supporting the structure would be washed away, leaving a strong structure behind, in complete balance, and firmly settled into the earth--

  summary--

   i suggest that this process was repeated for each of the stones standing, until the site was complete...for my thoughts about the intended use for "stonehenge", see my "stonehenge/easter island road-vector correlations post" within this blog--


  note--

     the columns that hold the "top-stones" aloft, were likely raised, or "earth-jacked", in the same way...via digging a small hole beneath the earth's surface, or "zero-line", and tipping the stone into it( raising one end), in this way, the earth beneath the stone's edge held aloft( above the zero-line), could be filled in a slight amount, and then the stone could be re-tipped onto this new, raised "zero-line", resulting in a lifted stone...afterward, the area of the original hole would then be filled in a slight amount, i suggest that this process would continue until the stone was at a level high enough, to dig out beneath half of the "berm" holding the stone loft, allowing the stone to be slid, against another berm, right beside it...creating an upright column from an otherwise immovable stone...i believe that this system was used for each upright column at the site...i also feel this process to be the same one used to build the Egyptian pyramids, allowing the huge stones they were made from, to go almost straight up, and then be pushed into place, with this technique, instead of the "super-huge ramps" previous speculators have suggested...in short, i feel that someone came from far away shores, with a secret system( from Cairo??), and a serious tool for building civilization was with him-- 
 
   more later, out of time at the library--

       john kruschke

--nettles/sickle-cell bio-mechanical dynamics--

   i had to go to the scrap yard recently, and had a "run-in' with some nettles( pesky little plants that would rather not be bothered...at all), so, here are some of my thoughts about the dynamics "in-play" when mingling with them( they are not partial to company...or at least not mine)--


    the scoop--

      i suggest, that "sickle-cell" and nettles are essentially the same thing, operating in a different fashion...nettles is a reaction to a plant-toxin, causing the body to super-hydrate the area, to dilute the toxin( see a different post), but "sickle-cell" is a bacterial attack, that the body reacts to in the same manner...unfortunately, the reaction produces ideal conditions for bacteria to grow( a sterile, warm, dark place, to germinate)...i feel that these bacteria go to the edges of the "sickle-poc"( or bubble), and gather nutrients, to germinate more bacteria( and eventually a "tumor" is created, from the reconstituted material gathered by the bacteria, for resources, to procreate more bacteria( creating a "hive" of sorts)...this seems to be the trouble with waiting to long to burst a "poc", due to the tissue, and the bone around the tumor, having reconstituted the material, and after the "sickle-poc" breaks, and dissolves, the material is gone( an abscess remains)--


   the catayst--

      a common reason for this ailment, seems to be prolonged exposure to old waste-oil, or the tar from roofing, or other means of exposure to these oils...why??, i suggest, that the reason is due to motor-oils being created from the remains of dinosaurs, or other decayed creatures of old( the age of these are of great debate, between religious, and evolutionary persons...i am not debating the age here), this fact, that oil is from a situation of decaying bio-material, and the coincidence, that these ancient bacteria happen to find themselves on a "people-saurus", after being re-hydrated, and allowed to sit on their living tissue...is likely not( a coincidence)...so, i feel that sickle-cell is likely a re-awakening of ancient bacteria, meant to break decaying tissues down, re-emerged into the living realm...note to self...oil is from deep within the earth, from dinosaurs, and must be handled carefully--

  what to do??--

      i feel that the issue may be solved by physicians, via the killing of the bacteria topically, before it travels through the blood-stream( likely a topical ointment like "mycitracin", that penetrates the skin, deep into the tissue, and kills the bacteria)...as for the issue after it is traveling, injecting the body with dead viruses( similar to the cure for polio), to create anti-bodies, will likely work, as i feel the reason "sickle-cell" often does not return, after the "poc" breaks, and bleeds red, is due to red-blood cells being introduced into the "poc-site", and destroying the infecting bacteria--  

    also of note...i believe that a simple "tuning fork" may be of use, for breaking these "pocks", as the vibration of the exterior of the cyst, being too great, at the right frequency, will likely result in the surface tension of the "pock's" membrane, being broken, and the total collapse of the structure( the "pock")...

  sickle-cell /e.l.e correlations( dino-destruction)--

   i feel that "sickle-sell", and the extinction of the dinosaurs, are two pieces of a huge puzzle, regarding the dinosaurs passing...i contend, that the one issue( "sickle-cell"), brought about the other's extinction( the dinosaurs), and that oil, is in fact a bio-mass, that breaks down organic tissue( flesh-eating bacteria, as mentioned above), and as most rural persons know, animals with no hair, especially( pigs), like to wallow in mud, to cool themselves, and more importantly, to clean their skin...so, i suggest that shortly after oil began to surface, to the earth's crust( after an earthquake, or many of them), creating lakes and ponds of oil, that creatures began wallowing in them, like huge puddles of mud, at first, the practice would be beneficial( a "positive reinforcement" of the behavior), but, after a short time, the bacteria within the oil, would start to inhabit the skin of the creature, causing a huge pock of "sickle-cell" to develop, in an area that the dinosaur could not reach...this may well explain, the reason that so many dinosaurs were found in the "la-brea tar-pits", as the dinosaur would likely go back to the same tar pit, over and over, to clean the skin, not knowing that this was the reason for the problem being experienced, resulting in their death, in a pool of bacteria, meant to decompose bio-mass...if this concept is correct, then the acts of the infected dinosaur, before succumbing to the bacteria, may shed light on the extinction of many breeds of dinosaur, due to the likely-hood of a herbivore's calf going in the tar-pits, and being nuzzled afterward, by the mother...infecting her, and then trying to carry-on, until the other probable outcome of being a sick herbivore occurred...a carnivore finding, and stalking, the infected calf...and mother...making an easy kill for the carnivore, that would then become infected itself, from the action of devouring them...so, here we have the system for the dinosaur's annihilation, "in-play"...a simple system, that is incredibly effective, in my estimation...only creatures that lived in water, full-time, or dinosaurs that had bony beaks, would have a good chance of surviving the outbreak...amazing, an extinction of huge land-going animals, from bacteria...i believe that paleontologists may be able to test bone, or other remnants, for evidence of "sickle-cell" disease( and i feel that they will find it, in all subjects)...

  dino-summary--

     i suggest that only creatures with bony-mouths, that fed with their mouths, instead of their hands, were best suited to survive the surfacing of large volumes of oil, in the dinosaurs extinction period of history, this would include birds, turtles, fish, whales, insects, and possibly creatures with very much hair on their face, and bodies( insulating them from contact to the skin)--

  note--

  "sickle cell", in my estimation, is no joke...ask a dinosaur when you can, until then, be wary of used waste-oils, i feel that the bacteria within them, can easily withstand the enormous pressure, and the extreme temperatures, present within an engine, running or not...no problem, and will definitely become active again, if allowed to stand idle, in a container, or on your skin( worst-case situation)...lastly, i believe that synthetic oil solves the issue entirely, as no ancient bacteria would be found in this modern lubricant--


   --i feel this b.s., is good b.s., and is a topic to discuss with your doctor...and nothing more--


  best wishes, john kruschke-- 

--cat and mouse/vole correlations--

an epiphany--

   it occurred to me yesterday, that a cat is really a very large mouse, or "vole"( a "marmot" of the same family), explaining quite well, why they are not susceptible to the mercury vapour that i believe is emitted by a mouses( or cat's) excrement...

the skinny--

   i suggest, that they( cats) also expel mercury in their excrement( as mice do)...and, that in fact, most creatures with whiskers also share this unique function within their anatomy...

  the question( why??)--

   i feel that the adaption within the "vole/cat-family" is designed to deters predators, due to the need for wolves, and other mouse hunters, to "snuff-the hole", while they "dig-out" mice, from their dens within open fields...both before, and during, the "dig-out" process...essentially, this natural action forces the beast attacking the nest to "huff" mercury vapour, dazing them, or making them a little less agile/alert, during the chase...i feel that this issue has similar dynamics when a mouse-nest is present within a home...resulting in any dwellers/predators there, being slowly made a bit less exited about things( mercury poisoned/brain cell deficient)-- 

   the proof( within the pudding)--

     if my contention is correct, that cats and mice are of the same family( "species of origin"), then the gland i feel exists within mice( that excreats mercury, into their stool), would also be found within cats...so, i suggest that the gland within a cat, that "sprays"( cats can "spray" like skunks, when agitated), is the same system as found within mice, but, modified for direct use, when needed( the cat can make those around them momentarily less aggressive/alert, via "chemical-doping"...through mercury-poisoning, from vapours, within the gland)...i also feel that this theory could explain the reason that cats bury their stool/urine, to contain the resulting vapours, keeping the effects from harming them( the cat), if they are dwelling within a contained space...


  cat-humor...( be it dry)--

   i have seen a few cats look at their owners like they were stupid before, when walking by their "cat box"( filled-to-the brim with offerings), a few times...and now...i believe i know, for certain, that they were...the poor kitty was probably thinking something like, "you really have no idea what i am doing here do you??", jokes about owners too stupid to clean the "litter-box", are almost certainly popular among cats in the alley-ways, nightly....( if your too stupid to clean the "cat-box", the situation is only going to get worse...by the minute)--

  the question--

   is this gland present within both mice and cats??, and how does the similarity of all these varieties( whiskers??) produce this mercury vapour, within their glands?? is a kangaroo of the same variety( i feel the answer is, yes)?? proving this conclusion will definitely require some lab-work, to confirm it, with certainty, but, i feel that any results will likely uphold my conclusion...that mice, cats, kangaroos, skunks, ect...are all of same "vole", or mouse, origin--

  a flash-in-the-pan--

   after a few more moments pondering this correlation, i feel i have the answer...whiskers, on a species, are, in fact, an "array", or "particle-collector"...through differences in static electricity, the mercury particles collect on the exterior of the whiskers, and, through the instinctual act of "cleaning", the mercury particles are then ingested, into the creatures digestive system, and are collected within this glad, near the rectum, for excretion into stool, or expulsion, directly into the air, for protection--


  summary--

   if the above theory is correct, then the act of cleaning whiskers, would correlate to a mercury-gland within the species...more later, out of time at the library--

  best wishes, john kruschke--