Ryan Garner

Random extra information: --The star information was pulled from VizieR using python. --The start and end locations being the same as the artwork is not evidence or supportive of ECDO; it was made to line up that way. However, the artwork does just happen to be compatible with ECDO's 104 total motion relative to a marked horizon and a slight declination change when viewed from Malta. --I was not able to figure out the coordinate system. That said, after posting it occurred to me that if the horizon is the line at the top and bottom as evidenced by it forming a 104 angle then maybe it counts from there. If the coordinate system is decoded and the exact X,Y of all 4 spirals are known then we can check if all 8 resulting numbers match ECDO (hopefully the artist marked it exactly instead of approximate or symbolic); maybe then it would count as evidence. --My goal was to learn exactly how ECDO theory says the stars would move, and how this might differ around the world. This post is actually a side effect of broader post I am working on to give an overview of double spirals around the world. --I had my choice of double spirals (both carved and geoglyph) over the world to choose from as a background, usually with ECDO's 104 degree angle marked nearby. Malta was chosen because it is close to the bisecting line giving it a unique experience where the center of the spiral barely changes height on the horizon enabling the artwork to be near symmetrical.

88 real "undying" Northern stars of Malta in 4413 BCE (ρ ≤ 36° from inertial NCP, mag < 4.5) animated using Malta-specific math from ECDO theory with a 48 hour transition drawn over the image of the Four-Spiral Panel from Tarxien Central Temple, Malta. Note: All undying stars were rendered (ones that never set below the horizon), even though it is likely the spirals represent less stars. This star animation attempts to accurately approximate ECDO theory, which is solely the work of its author, @EthicalSkeptic theethicalskeptic.com/2024/05/23/mas…

An interpretation of Four-Spiral Panel from Tarxien Central Temple, Malta assuming ECDO theory is true:

@ArchaicLens If you had to guess do you think they coated the edge of the saw with steel forged from "sky rock", or something else, or do you think they just burned through copper really fast (stone is harder than copper) ?

I bet the ancients had something like this

Heads up, I plan to delete the above post soon. (Not to retract claims, but to advance them.) I shared too early because I'm limited on free time. I just need to do the proper work and post less often. My replies which will remain safe to repost and won't be taken down. I just want a higher quality standard for my top level posts. My goal was to be playful and cryptic to make it like a puzzle so others could experience the same thing I did. Instead I think I came across arrogant, confusing, and only a few people were interested in making measurements.

Hopefully someone else wants to make a collage. I'll give it some days and if there are no takers I'll do it myself. Around 50 megalithic blocks in a row across 3 locations that I checked last night had 104 without fail. The walls themselves even bend at 104 degree zigzags on the map. Maybe I got lucky. To be fair one only had a tiny 104 wedge, and another tooth shaped one looks like 104 but the lines were curved so its weak and maybe contradicts. Even better would to statistically show the chance of a non-rectangular megalithic block having a 104 degree angle is wildly above chance.

If you are surprised, but don't understand why ancient cultures built their buildings overwhelmingly aligned to a location in southern Africa, or why they typically included 104 degree angles in their work you will want to read ECDO theory by @EthicalSkeptic theethicalskeptic.com/2024/05/12/exo…

@Winston_104 @EthicalSkeptic Lol. I saw that one too. Look at the top. That block has the tiniest 104 of all. Perhaps because had a defect on the big angle so they had to add this super tiny one.

@imkharn @EthicalSkeptic Nice! Finding photos that are dead on seems to be the harder part.

@FoMaHun Hey, I had previously told you that I favored great pyramid casting with your method because of the micro air bubbles and common magnetic alignment of the stones conflicting with quarrying. I had a short talk with @EthicalSkeptic about great pyramid casting. I tried to argue your hypothesis. His main concern was that stones take years to become strong enough for the next layer, and they would crack if they tried to build it fast. However, Roger didn't mention he suspects heat was used for the cyclopean stones, and I didn't mention the bubbles and magnetic alignment. I just learned that the air-bubbles and magnetic re-alignment support both casting and heating. :-( The required temperatures are easy to achieve also. So I am less confident in casting, but dont like being clueless how they lifted the stones. I wonder what tests that can be done on the stone to support one over the other. Microscopic "flow lines" striations in the nubs heading outward? Grok4.2 says: Yes, both magnetic realignment and micro air/gas bubble (or void) formation apply when granite or limestone is heated to plastic/ductile temperatures (typically 400–800+ °C under confining pressure for effective in-situ shaping without slagging). In granite, magnetite’s Curie point (~580 °C) is exceeded in this range, erasing any prior magnetization so that fresh alignment to Earth’s geomagnetic field (“current north”) locks in upon cooling; micro-bubbles arise from dehydration of micas/amphiboles and trapped volatiles. In limestone, the same magnetic reset occurs whenever iron-oxide impurities (magnetite or hematite, Curie points 580–675 °C) are present—as is common in construction-grade megalithic limestone—while bubble/void formation is far more pronounced and likely due to decarbonation (CaCO₃ → CaO + CO₂ starting ~700–900 °C), which releases large volumes of gas that nucleate microscopic vesicles during recrystallization under load. These effects are therefore more readily detectable and expected in megalithic limestone structures, serving as subtle petrographic signatures of ancient heat-based plasticization.

@stratdepth A form of heat generation, that we are not aware that the builders possessed. They selected a non-slag generating source for the stone as well.

Graviform-Plastiform Construction A material in a temporarily plastic or ductile state - seated, fine-shaped, and faced in situ against adjacent solidified bodies, with consistent gravitational load-bias throughout structure and form, then returning to a rigid lithic state. Stone can be architected to specific static loading vectors and not simply the available space. Gravity shows up twice - in base seating bias as well as in overall form morphology. - Not 'poured' - Not masonry - Not casting in place - Not precast blocks - Not surface finishing - Not shape finishing (carving to fit) (Engineering: Statics : explorecourses.stanford.edu/search?q=ENGR+…) Please do not let persons who have never engineered and constructed a large building in their life, insist upon telling you what this is...

IMO, if that's even possible to be an issue you are using AI unscientifically. "Science has shown" is unscientific but "this effect, this experiment has shown" is scientific (per Richard Feynman) When doing ECDO research I only use AI for math or searching for something that meets a list of attributes. The only true way to remove bias is to be "air-gapped" into a hypothetical situation. Put another way, assume your AI has PTSD about being wrong so you have to give it a safe space where it is unable to figure out if its conclusion would conflict or fit into a narrative; only abstract math, reasoning, and searching are safe.

@imkharn My counter argument request to AI is a standard prompt form to reduce the tendency of AI to affirm, praise & be enthusiastic. Try this: youtube.com/watch?v=64jj11…

Kerbstone 52 Decoded! Utnapishtim's story is corroborated. The observed start and stop times are marked with spirals. The documented event is calculated to last 47 hours and 13 minutes using only the blue text from this image. The exact times of sunrise combined with the location and approximate year are the primary enablers of this calculation. The documented event was directly observed to last up to 75 hours and 4 minutes if you include dampening oscillations. It might be shorter; it was daytime in Ireland when the stars fully stopped changing so they couldn't tell. The blue text was obtained by measuring pixels and obvious symbols. The grey grid was obtained by knowing that a day must last 24 hours once all extra movement stops.

No AI was used in this interpretation. Here is the backstory: I knew the place it came from had many double spirals separated by 104 degrees marked by a wedge. Just like the 104 degree double spirals all around the world including Utah (marked with plus) and Puerto Rico (marked with horizon or line). x.com/imkharn/status… I started to make a post showing that this site is likely ECDO related, when I saw this stone appeared to depict Utnapishtim story. Since it was clearly a drawing of a timeline, I noticed the circles at the top looked like varying pictures of the sun. I also noticed they were not spaced evenly. I initially measured these circle distances inaccurately and gave them to Grok and asked if these relative sunrise times fit into ECDO theory. It responded with ~"That's weird, the sunrise times you gave me demand exactly a 105 degree movement, remarkably close to ECDO." I freaked out and measured one more time way more precise. (At no point during making this did I adjust any numbers, locations, or anything to make it fit theory. Nothing is forced, nothing is shaped.) I asked again with precise sunrise times... 104 degrees! The day length deviations matched up exactly to the spirals found around the world (and the two spirals in this image, which are also marked to 104 degrees with a wedge). Additionally, a large number of details of this image match what ECDO predicts. There are various null hypothesis that are available, and at an initial glance its looking like this will go way beyond statistical significance. I might work with other researchers to write a paper, but I hope @EthicalSkeptic decides to do it. Its just a lot of work. Hopefully this opens you up some to the interpretation. If you also research ECDO deeply with an open mind, then I bet you will be >99% confidence that the mystery of Kerbstone 52 and The Celtic Spiral is solved. PS: If at no point in your conversation with your AI did you push it to make sure it isn't doing "obligate debunking", then you are not aware of how AIs or human minds work (including your mind and my mind). AIs are even worse about this than humans, you should assume all new discoveries will be claimed as false by any AI.

@imkharn That conclusion is a giant Rorschach Inkblot Test using Ai to "blackbox" the process. "the reasoning in the post appears heavily forced and shaped by confirmation bias.." For more info and comparison to other research on K52, Knowth : x.com/i/grok/share/d…

@Unatco99 The most accurate way to learn about ECDO if you cant understand Rogers writing is to give an AI like Grok this website address and ask questions. theethicalskeptic.com/2024/05/23/mas…

@imkharn Is there a simple, easy to understand sort of for dummies writeup on ECDO? I saw the research papers but they're really dense and too scholarly to easily understand. Is there a high level overview that is available to explain the fundamentals and what ECDO says happened and will?

I was thinking that maybe if the Euler coordinates changed, that Ben would have a way of being right about the 90 degree change instead of @EthicalSkeptic 's 104 while still being compatible with these timestamps. I asked Grok to calculate the Euler coordinates for @SunWeatherMan 's model that would be compatible with these sunrise timestamps, and Grok said: Hypothetical 90° flip (for Sun Weather Man) A 90° reorientation would require cumulative shortening of exactly 6.000 h (90 / 15 = 6). Your timestamps already show 6.566 h shortening after only the first two days (and more after Day 3). No alternative Euler pole or axis coordinates can change this. The total extra rotation angle θ is a global scalar measured directly by the sunrise-to-sunrise intervals. It is the integrated angular velocity change of the entire outer Earth relative to the Sun. Changing the Euler axis (the path the pole follows on the sphere) only changes the direction and latitude excursion at Ireland — it does not change the total amount of extra rotation the crust undergoes. The observed day-length sequence therefore requires ~104° of total crust movement, regardless of where the Euler pole is placed. There is no set of new pole coordinates that can make these timestamps consistent with only a 90° flip while keeping the observed day lengths. If Sun Weather Man has a different mechanism or different interpretation of what the day-length anomalies actually measure, that would be the only way to reconcile a 90° model — but under the standard rigid-body reorientation physics used in ECDO (and in any true-polar-wander model), the timestamps are incompatible with 90°. The data remain an excellent match to the canonical 104° along the 31°E path, and the error band you provided still comfortably contains 104° while excluding 90°. Grok left off the following. My error on measuring distance in this image is up to 20 minutes. With up to 20 mins of measurement error the total celestial rotational pole movement is constrained between 94° and 114°. The center of this range is exactly 104°, and 90° falls outside the lower bound.

@imkharn @SunWeatherMan now we have some timestamps for the pole shift duration!

@jmullee This art appears to depict that changing. The data suggests the new location lasted from about 4226 BCE to 4101 BCE.

@imkharn newgrange is like 55 N ?

If this really was depicting a time when the stars moved, they would probably include "by how much"... x.com/imkharn/status…

@DogMom89891412 @EthicalSkeptic Here is a simple explainer ECDO introduction I wrote early on. I know a lot more now and some details are slightly off or misleading but its the best I got. x.com/imkharn/status…

@imkharn @EthicalSkeptic Is there a dumbed-down, explain it like I'm 5 because I don't have a PhD explanation of ECDO & what effects it has, especially in North America?

Yeah that was my initial reaction. I thought it would make it easy to debunk, and tried to do it for fun. Here is Albert Einstein begging you not to dismiss this theory out of hand, while also explaining how "comparatively slight forces" can make this plausibly happen. x.com/imkharn/status… While Einstein might give you pause, if you are like me, nothing I could say would convince you. You simply have to start brainstorming sentences in this format "that's ridiculous if that were true then Y would also be true". The main thing that makes it challenging is evidence gets destroyed and 125 years barely shows up in the temporal resolution of earth/ice cores. The main thing that makes it easy is millions of people all over the world did everything they possibly could to let future generations know at least one of two things " stars moved by 104" or "a spot in southern Africa is so important we will mark it on drawings and align 80% of ancient buildings to it " Every debunk attempt of mine not only failed but found new supporting evidence and often even had scientists quietly freaking out.

Hopefully you can help solve it the rest of the way or at least make the animal angle more convincing. Good chance that the entire location this stone came from is dedicated to ECDO because the place is "wallpapered" in spirals at 104 angle from the point of an adjacent wedge. Another Kerbstone explains that a magnet got weaker and shows where a compass would point after the event. There is probably a stone there that draws a night sky with stars that shouldn't have ever been visible from Ireland. This stone if it includes planets will perhaps finally fully lock in the date if they drew it carefully.

@imkharn Image annotation for "September or February"; most likely in February since many of the surviving animals were still hibernating in N America. Raccoons, possums, snakes, frogs, turtles. Megafauna like Mammoths were swept across the continent into Alaska/Siberia S2>S1. @nobulart

The Celtic Spiral: