In 1883, Did Earth Narrowly Miss Comet That Would Have Destroyed All Life?
“If they had collided with Earth we would have had 3275 Tunguska events in two days, probably an extinction event.”
SGI RSS Feed
SGI Newsletter
SGI on Twitter
SGI on Facebook
SGI on Flickr
SGI on YouTubePresentations
Climate Change: A Catastrophist’s Perspective
An in depth examination of the science and politics behind a modern day controversy.
Is the issue settled, as mainstream media would have us believe?
Is there truly a consensus to which all climate scientists agree? What exactly does consensus mean in science?
What does the peer reviewed literature actually tell us?
Other News
In 1883, Did Earth Narrowly Miss Comet That Would Have Destroyed All Life?
“If they had collided with Earth we would have had 3275 Tunguska events in two days, probably an extinction event.”
New Beginner Classes Starting Soon!
New Beginner Classes Starting Soon! If you are interested please send an email with SGI Beginnger Classes in the subject line to sacredgeometryinternational@gmail.com -SGI
Astrotheology & Shamansim: The Pharmacratic Inquisition
Third Eye Opening Documentary From Gnostic Media! Enjoy and Merry Mithras!!!
The Bizarre World of Radical Climate Science via The American Thinker
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/the_bizarre_world_of_radical_climate_science.html October 20, 2011 The Bizarre World of Radical Climate Science By Norman Rogers Imagine that you are a climate scientist and the Earth is threatened with a climate disaster. You need to warn the people of Earth and lobby Earth’s governments. If you are tired of poring over boring computer printouts, you may be only too ready to accept this [...]
Joe Rogan and Daniel Pinchbeck: “As above so below”
Joe Rogan and Daniel Pinchbeck discuss catastrophes, cataclysm and the reciprocal relationship between human spiritual development and cyclical/karmic destruction from Nature.
Climate Change: A Catastrophist’s Perspective
An in depth examination of the science and politics behind a modern day controversy. Is the issue settled, as mainstream media would have us believe? Is there truly a consensus to which all climate scientists agree? What exactly does consensus mean in science? What does the peer reviewed literature actually tell us?
