Make your own free website on

Michael Lawrence Morton's

Matrix Message 254

Even MORE .. re: A Major Thread ..

Michael Lawrence Morton
Even MORE .. re: A Major Thread ..
Wed Feb 6 22:27:21 2002

Again .. my thanks to Rab W. .. for his very valuable participation in this
discussion. I'm now referring to his comments toward the end of this
latest post of his .. (see, below) .. where he is mentioning the 1998
alignment of the "Galactic South Node". 

Almost as if "on cue" .. upon reading this latest post of Rab's ..
I started looking at the .. 05(deg) * 18(min) * 59(sec) variance ..
in ecliptic longitude .. East of ALNITAK .. that he mentions ..
(please see, below). 

He also mentions The Great Sphinx (@ Giza) .. and please keep that in mind.

I think I might have found something, here, that I hope Rab will find at least
interesting. It is this ..

05(deg) * 18(min) * 59.2(sec) = 5328 E.ALNITAK.

Could this be a part of the "ASM" ?
Specifically .. referencing the_1998_"Galactic South Node" alignment ..
with June solstice ?

Please notice ..

(5328 / 1998) = 2.666666667 .. actually repeating 6s.

Of course .. 1998 is .. 3 * 666.
And .. (666 * 2.666666667) = 1776.
Yes .. the year of the American Declaration of Independence.
July 4th .. in 2000 A.D., and, maybe also in 1998, is the ecliptic-longitudinal
conjunction_date_ (annual) with SIRIUS .. which has apparently emerged as
the "aphelion-marker-star" for the orbital path of Nibiru.

Notice, please .. that .. (1776 / 3) = 592 .. a decimal-harmonic of the
apparent "59.2" decimal-fractional_number_of arc-seconds in this probable
"ASM" E.ALNITAK longitude for the Galactic South Node. 

And please recall .. that 2.2222222 .. actually, repeating 2s .. references the
ecliptic crossing-points, on line-of-sight_from_Earth .. in terms of degrees
Pisces and degrees Virgo, of the_sidereal_zodiac .. for Nibiru's orbit.
These ecliptic points are, *circa 2000 A.D.* .. precisely_aligned_with our
equinoxial-points on Earth's horizon.

As I have stated in at least one previous (recent) email posting ..
it appears that the ASM is able to indicate the true_sidereal-zodiac_Ages
for "us" on Earth .. precisely-referenced against the Earth-sky backdrop,
and also involves a revelation of the_"when"_of Nibiru's most-recent perihelion ..
00 B.C./A.D., at "Zero Degrees ARIES" of the sidereal zodiac.
Of course, this also "calibrates", for us on Earth .. the beginning of Aquarius ..
as of .. 2160 A.D. .. 160 years from 2000 A.D.
Please notice .. (160 / 2.222222222) = 72 .. the_number_of the mean/ideal
years per Earth precession degree.

Please notice ..

(5328 - 2160) = 3168 .. the classic gematrian number which has the
'meaning' .. "Lord Jesus Christ".

If I multiply the 3168 by one power-of-10 .. I get .. 31680.

(31680 - 25920) = 5760 .. the Hebrew (Nippurian) Calendar year of 2000 A.D.

Then .. (5760 / 2.222222222) * 10 = 25920 .. Earth's "ideal" precession
cycle in years.

Earlier, I mentioned that Rab Wilkie had written very briefly about The Great
Sphinx of Giza .. (see his latest email post).
The "ASM" GPV for The Great Sphinx of Giza is .. 5400 .. (Munck, 1993,
"The Code", self-published ..

(5400 - 5328) = 72 .. mean/ideal no. of years for one degree of Earth precession.

(5760 - 5400) = 360 .. and, of course .. (72 * 360) = 25920.

Also .. please notice .. that 5400 is .. "half-Pi Radians" of the arc-distance of
Earth's_polar_circumference in nautical miles.
(21600 / 5400) = 4.
The "Riddle-of-the-Sphinx" Composite ..
which is the multiplied-product of 4 particular star-locations (their GPVs)
in the ASM ..
= ("half-Pi") * (10^4) = 15707.96327 ..
= (Aldebaran * Regulus * Antares * Fomalhaut) ..
= (8.888888889 * 19.7392088 * 4.297183463 * 20.83333333) ..
(Morton, 2001, Internet). Yes .. this refers to .. the Bull, the Lion,
the Eagle (transformed Scorpion), and "Humankind".

Also .. 15707.96327 .. is the Grid LAT of ALNITAK, in the ASM ..
15707.96327 South of ecliptic ..
= 25(deg) * 17(min) * 36.95991358(sec) South of ecliptic.
(Morton, 1999, Internet).

(2160 - 1998) = 162 = (25920 / 160).
And, this is where ; 162 is a decimal-harmonic of the_162,000_nautical
miles-per-second *light-speed* .. (Bruce Cathie; "The Harmonic Conquest 
of Space"). 

-- Michael Lawrence Morton 

In a message dated 02/06/2002 10:03:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, writes:

<< Subj: Re: [EGH] "It's a lock" .. and Redundantly-So ..
Date: 02/06/2002 10:03:49 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: (Rab Wilkie)

> > In a message dated 02/04/2002 2:06:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> > writes:
> >
<< But if there IS a significant correlation between F-B and the ASM, that's
> > another story. Which needs to be told and understood. Since the F-B
> > system is based on an ancient fudge of the longitudes of "Royal"
> > then this would be the clue -- the stars' harmonic relationship with
> > Alnitak.. and every other ASM point of interest.
> >
> > And since there are many versions, using different stars, of
> > constellations, each could be compared with the ASM to see if they
> > relate harmonically. Some or none could represent a system that is
> > offset from the ASM by a significant harmonic. Actually, quite a few
> > would -- those systems based on bright stars that are integral to the
> > ASM grid.
> >
> > -=Rab >>
> MLM> Rab ...
> > I would have to say .. that it seems as if there IS a significant
> > relationship between this Fagan/Bradley-based database .. and the
> .. otherwise,
> > I never would have_found_all these precise correlations I HAVE found.
> Rab> Thank you, Michael for your fine response. The ASM correlations
> are not what I was wondering about -- they stand as they are, as evidence
> for the ASM. It's the relationship with the Fagan-Bradley calibration
> drew my attention. It seems that what you and Mary Anne Weaver have
> in fact done is to show that the F-B calibration is off slightly -- but
> slightly, by 3'10" -- from the ASM, which seems to be the original and
> truer system, based on the position of Alnitak alone and not by averaging
> the positions of the several stars used by Fagan & Bradley (who went by
> what they knew about Classical astrology, especially of ancient Babylon
> & Persia).
> In other words, the F-B sidereal zodiac needs an adjustment. And
> any astrologer who uses a sidereal zodiac should be more than a
> little interested in your findings -- which, if they stand up to fair
> and closer scrutiny, would reveal the amazingly strong foundation of
> sidereal astrology. (And this is an understatement, which pertains
> not only to astrology. We could include every other field related to
> geo-cosmology).
> The relationship between F-B & ASM systems seems similar to that
> between a slightly out-of-focus image seen through an inappropriate
> lens, and the clear image seen directly by a good eye without glasses.
> The F-B database has been very helpful, and that's partly why you
> sense a connection, but this is a "relationship" quite unlike the
> mathematical and harmonic kind that informs the ASM itself. This
> may seem like splitting semantic hairs, but I think it's an important
> discernment.
> > The correlations are the result of the "nearest arc-second" numbers IN
> the
> > database .. adjusted no more than 1/4th of an arc-second .. and
> > less than 1/10th of an arc-second .. *amazingly* accurate .. for
> "whatever"
> > reason(s) .. as of Jan.1, 2000 A.D. Just_extremely_uncanny, to say
> > least.
> >
> > And; this is WHEN .. a_*specific*_ecliptic prime meridian is used ..
> > "marked" by the ecliptic longitude position of ALNITAK .. of course
> > relative-to other 'prominent' stars in our Earth-sky .. and relative-to
> Galactic Center
> > and to Galactic Anti-Center. And the ecliptic, itself, is used as the
> latitude
> > referent, of course.
> Rab> It's important to note that these are ASM not F-B correlations.
> But also that what you have referenced above are all celestial points
> or objects whose spatial relationships do not change according to date.
> So why mention 01Jan2000?
> Alnitak's position in any sidereal system -- ASM, F-B, astronomical-
> galactic, or other -- is static with respect to other stars. This means
> that the date (01Jan2000) is irrelevant with regard to the geometry &
> harmonics intrinsic to sky patterns alone. They don't change. So are
> you implicating here some other patterns, certain dynamic and
> interactive alignments of stars with terrestrial coordinates? Because
> it's the relationship between the celestial & terrestrial domains that
> undergoes constant change (precession) which can be linked with
> calendar dates.
> -=R >>

> .. might the 'appropriate' place for the Taurus/Gemini cusp ..
> be .. ecliptically-aligned_with_ALNITAK, then ? (adjusting the 03 min 10
> difference .. so that the sidereal zodiac's Taurus/Gemini cusp falls
right on
> ALNITAK ? Would this be helpful to sidereal astrology) ?

Rab> Yes, exactly. That's what I meant. This apparently minor
adjustment could re-unite the two modern worlds of astrologers
and geomants who have not understood each other very well
for a long time.

> would appear that the (adjusted) sidereal
> zodiac is_interacting-with_the ASM .. with the ASM's 'methodology' ..
> rather self-evidently-so .. which seems quite "amazing", for lack of a
> better word.

Rab> When the F-B zodiac is adjusted, it becomes a working part of
the ASM. Integral with it. No distinction. Same thing. We might therefore
suspect that at some point, like Adam's rib, it was plucked from the
whole ASM matrix and took on a life of its own due to a special focus
that developed independently. And this portion in due course lost its
connection with the matrix as the result of confusions about precession
and so forth.

The F-B zodiac, however, is only the ecliptical zone, and the astrology
connected with it has developed in a way that is quite different from
ASM principles as shown by yourself and others. Astrologers are
oblivious to these. And, in general, ASM investigators are not especially
conversant with astrology, so there's a potential here for *great* mutual

> The "Jan.1, 2000 A.D." date .. is not a requisite for the basic
> *sidereal zodiac/ASM* interaction .. although my answer to your question
> as to whether-or-not I think there are 'other' dynamics evident, here ..
> .. yes. //

> ..there are major "pyramids" .. 'marking' ASM prime meridians on
> given planets .. such as Earth and Mars .. being The Great Pyramid (Giza,
> Earth) and The D&M Pyramid (Cydonia, Mars). This provides 'markers' for
> of *ground/sky* apparent 'movements' through time and space.

> And a_CALENDAR_can be (both theoretically and practically) calibrated ..
> as another "fixed circle" around the 'movable dial' .. as "viewed from
> above" .. a "calendar circle" .. arranged in calibration .. around the
> So; 3 parts .. 2 of these parts 'fixed' and adjacent .. sidereal
> and a calendar-circle of DAYS. The 'movable' part is Earth .. its
> wobble, that is .. and the observer is "on its surface".

Rab> Yes. Astrologers deal with a calendar of precession but (usually)
only with respect to sky grids, tropical & sidereal. And in practice only
the equatorial portions of them. The tropical grid is intimately related
a terrestrial grid, since it's a projection skyward of it, but it is not
anchored to Earth except when applied symbolically in terms of "geodetic
equivalents", by aligning certain equinoctial or solstitial collures with
longitude of Greenwich, and in another geodetic system, the longitude
of the Sphinx with the cusp of Leo/Virgo. But these are fixed spatial
correlations which do not involve time ticking at the precessional rate
of 72 years per degree, or a calendar based on the rotation of a sky grid
relative to an Earth grid.

Even so, by ignoring geodetic systems and the very confused situation
involving numerous different sidereal zodiacs, and by focusing only on
galactic/ecliptical parameters -- while drawing on certain ancient
astrological principles concerning the calibration of zodiacs from the
intersection points (nodes) of spheres -- astrologers come up with dates
of great significance that reflect major cyclic shifts. 1998 is paramount
with respect to the whole precessional cycle insofar as that's when the
galactic nodes on the ecliptic coincided with the (tropical) solstices,
and event that occurs a bit more than every 12,500 years.

But this event & date does not square with the ASM. The galactic
south node is 5* 18' 59" from Alnitak.

I will have to compare ASM & astrological calculations more closely.

A year of 365.25 days divided by 360 yields the cosmic constant
1.0145833, known as the Pythagorean Comma. (63/64 is a close
equivalent). It represents the difference between the ideal & the real,
or the slight warp that occurs when shifting between reality-layers.

By solar motion, one degree per day, there's not much difference
between 5 1/3 days relative to the year, and 5 1/4 days which gives
this PC constant..

(c) 2002 by Michael Lawrence Morton ~ Archeocryptographer.