The ancient world exhibited structures on a Mediterranean scale which have been repeated on a global scale in modern times. It is like Rome was a pilot project for the USA as a leading western power. The sequential process of Roman history is now being repeated on the modern global stage, following causal drivers imbedded in the shape of precession.

But did you start with the idea that the US and Rome are linked, then apply the dates, or did you look for events 2147 years apart and then make the connections fit?

Either way, you have to establish some form of connection between Rome and the US that can be verified from outside your idea. Verified isn't just a string of thinks like other things. Start with that.

Show a definitive connection between Rome and the US that is not shared by any other nation/empire.

I'd also suggest you look through the threads started by Dutch on his hyper-dimensional design thing. This is very similar.

__________________
A Nerd can figure out how long it will take the original Enterprise traveling at warp 6.5 to travel from Regulus to Antares.
A Geek with think he can use that to pick up a girl in a bar.
A Dork knows he can't pick up the girl with it, but will hang around for hours anyway, just in case she asks.
She might. You never know.

I have asked a variation on this in another thread, but

What is the evolutionary advantage from being able to sense these "age cycles"?

A basic theory of biology is that all life becomes more finely attuned to its niche over time when left in peace. Undisturbed ecosystems evolve to ever deeper complexity through the Darwinian process of cumulative adaptation. It is not so much a matter of being able to 'sense' the underlying constant factors making up its niche, but that these factors influence the nature of life at a reproductive and sub-sense level. Each species has a natural range, based on the accidents of reproduction and its cumulative adaptation to niche factors such as rainfall, predation, temperature, etc.

I argue that cosmic factors, including the age cycle of precession, are a part of the ecological niche of life on earth. A tree may not be able to 'sense' climate change such as a rise in average temperature by 0.1 degree, but such a change (especially over millions of years) can have a big effect on which genes are successful in the process of natural selection. Of course, cosmic factors are extremely weak by comparison to the immediate terrestrial environment, but my argument is that this weakness is counterbalanced by permanent regularity. The moon has circled the earth 50 billion times since the dawn of life. The lunar cycle may or may not produce immediate 'sensed' advantages, but this permanent regularity makes it plausible that species are adapted in deep subtle genetic ways to diurnal and monthly lunar cycles. Precession is similar. The earth's axis has precessed about 175,000 times since life first evolved. On the theory that there are twelve ages per precession, this makes about two million ages, each lasting 2147 years if the axial wobble rate has been constant, since our oldest genes came into existence.

I do not argue that our genes 'sense' the ages, but that the ages provide a cosmic structure of terrestrial time, and human culture is part of this cosmic structure just as a fish is part of a river. The fish may not 'sense' a small change in water quality, but will be affected by it nonetheless. Precession provides a basis for a theory of karma as causality, with deeply imbedded cycles within planetary history operating at very long time scales. This thread examines main events over the two such cycles within recorded western history to find evidence for this theory, examining whether the historical outlines of these ages are comparable. I think the evidence here is strong for a 2147 year wave pattern whereby human history reflects the main cosmic structure of terrestrial time.

The solar system barycentre, now under discussion at the Jupiter Influencing Sunspots thread, has a period of 179 years resulting from the cycle of the planets. It appears this planetary cycle exactly matches 1/12 of the earth's precessional cycle, suggesting entrainment between precession and the barycentre as a new scientific framework to consider the whole solar system as a unified dynamic entity.

So, although by and large life cannot directly 'sense' the ages, we do now have the capacity through astronomy to understand them. I argue that the patterns I have described here are just scratching the surface of the advantages for human life of such analysis.

The 2147 year period derives from astronomy and is at the foundation of this method. I think the connection between Rome and the US is reasonably strong as the leading western powers of their age. The extent of borrowing from Rome in the US is considerable, eg the Capitol & Senate, military role as 'world policeman', e pluribus unum, as a start. I read pages 1&2 of Guy 'predicting the future' using "Hyperdimensional Design" (a 39 page thread - those were the days) and fully agree with the critiques of the meaningless unscientific concept of 'hyperdimensionality'. No redux here.

Did you notice my lengthy counter of your incorrect comparisons? No, really--Dutch.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Gillian,
My claim is that Roman history follows similar patterns to modern western history led by the USA, and that this reveals a scientific cosmic cycle with period 2147 years. Of course modern history has very different factors, not least the scale issue noted by Tusenfem. However, as Aristotle said, each winter is different, but they still follow the same general pattern. By not acknowledging this general pattern of precession you are trying to ignore the substance of my argument with questions analogous to saying that because one winter is colder or snowier than the last therefore the year does not exist. The cycle I am describing is deep and complex, but very much real (unlike the avowedly unscientific claims of Dutch). I acknowledge not all the comparisons I listed are exact, and was quite aware of the date issues you mention, but still claim that within this room for error the continuity with the previous precessional cycle is clear. I have sketched broad periods, and as I noted previously there is much room for refinement and debate, so I welcome your request for further explanation. As I have said, the basic method I am using is scientific, looking at the overall historical shape of events in ancient Rome and seeing how this is replicated 2147 years later. The discovery phase is quite murky; as I noted the Roman claims are shrouded in myth, and beginnings are a gradual process. In this context I suggested the beginnings of discovery of the Americas can be dated to when the Portuguese began to explore the Atlantic in ships in the early 1400s. Your comment about the 1500s is valid and I can see that the date I gave of 650BC=1500AD should be changed to 500BC=1650AD, with the subsequent 300 year period correspondingly shortened. These are absolutely nitpicky complaints. In this example I have divided time into periods where the basic shape of events was the same in ancient and modern times, so of course there are specific differences. The fact the frontier was “considered” closed does not mean that in actual historical fact it was closed, in terms of a broader understanding of frontier than the narrow legal definition. As well, in this period there wasa broader global frontier process underway with the Scramble for Africa and the settlement of Australia where the frontier was very much alive. And your comments that after Versailles ‘there was no reason to assume there would be another war’ completely misses the point and confuses perceptions with reality. My point is that there are underlying causal drivers of events which occur despite prevailing knowledge and belief. In the period between the Punic Wars (ie roughly analogous to the 1920s) Rome may well have believed it could live at peace with Carthage, but war exploded again in 218BC because the underlying material and cultural drivers of the competition to dominate the Mediterranean were so strong. The same argument can apply to the rise of Hitler, and perhaps Japan and Italy.
I don't think that. My point was that key Republican institutions such as the American Constitution and system of government were largely established in the period leading up to and soon after Independence in 1776. Of course these have grown and adapted since then, just as did those of Ancient Rome.

If you make the "pattern" general enough, there's no way you (or anyone) could fail to find matches. You're going to find some similiarities between Ancient Rome and any other civilization. Big deal. On the other hand, if you argue for very specific patterns, then you open yourself up to criticism on the validity of your comparisons.

In your example, you divided time into periods that, in your opinion were the same. Gillian pointed out problems with that, and I agree. It's a subjective argument, and a very fuzzy one at that, where you are ignoring the specifics of the events and the dates they happened, all to fit your supposed pattern.

It's real to you. Dutch's claim was real to him. Like him, when people point out problems with your claim, you ignore them. You're going to insist it fits no matter what anyone says.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Do you really not see the contradiction there? If the cycle is exactly 2147 years, it cannot follow a general pattern. The events must be directly analagous. It's not enough to say "stuff happened in this vague 200-year time period"; you must, for example, find an analagous event that happened in 358 BC to compare to the Constitution in 1789. If you cannot, even for that one date, your pattern is seriously damaged. Or at least your chosen comparison is.

Nonsense. If it's exact enough to use 2147 as a "cycle," you must be able to be exact and not require room for error. If not, your cycle isn't 2147 years. If enough events fall off your cycle, it should become obvious to you that you don't have one.

If the beginnings are "shrouded in myth," isn't it logical to assume that you cannot compare them to anything? That you cannot date anything based on them? Further, Portugese exploration of the Atlantic didn't begin until the mid-1400s, so you're still wrong. The Madeiras, which had been known to the Romans, were rediscovered circa 1420; the Azores were discovered in 1427. At minimum, that still makes you 20 years off; in a more practical sense, since the Portugese were more interested in eastward exploration than westward, it's an invalid part of your "pattern."

Further nonsense. The reason the frontier was declared closed was that there was nowhere to draw the line between "settled" and "unsettled." Further, if you are comparing the US to Rome, wider global events cannot enter into it. The US was isolationist, for the most part, for most of that time. Even during the Spanish-American War, it wasn't so much settling as conquering. Few Americans moved to Guam. But to compare the "Scramble for Africa," participated in solely by the European powers, to actual Roman expansion would then mean that we could compare Mayan civilization to Rome. Make up your mind--just the US or a broader world perspective? If it's a broader world perspective, shall we start throwing in significant moments in Zulu or Chinese or Incan history?

During the 1920s, Germany couldn't afford to make war on anybody. You are still ignoring that, even assuming Europe is somehow included in your US comparison, that there was no defensive war against Germany until 1914. If you are not including Europe, there was never a defensive war against Germany. Only Japan launched a full-scale attack against the US, and it's doubtful they could have managed an invasion. One way or another, your claim of a fifty-year "defensive war against Germany" is bogus.

How long is "soon after"? What "key Republican institutions" (you want a lowercase "r" there) are you referring to? Have you perhaps not considered the sheer number of Cabinet positions added since 1789? George W. Bush's Cabinet contains eleven positions that George Washington's did not.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

I'm shaking my head. I can't understand how any of this is important. You know what historical parallels that fit astronomical predictions I find interesting? It snows every year. Yup, that's right, every year, and it's been doing it for thousands of years in a row. Where it not for the very precise alignment of the cosmos, that snow would not come. The cool thing about it is I can predict the future with great accuracy. Next year it will snow. You heard it here first. And I've committed my prediction to print too so you'll all be able to call me out on it next year if I'm wrong. I also believe very strongly that snow has had a cyclical impact on human history. Snow is way better than 2147. It only has one syllable. It starts with S. It has the words no, now, on, won, son and sow in it... how many words does 2147 have in it? Yea.. that's right... none. Snow is so much more interesting and a better predictor of human behavior. I'll bet if I took a vote, more people would vote for snow than 2147 as a major impactor on human history. And then there's Santa Claus. Did Santa ever ride his sleigh on 2147... no. Did Santa come every time it 2147'd or did he come every year it snowed? Ask any kid, 2147 or Santa, and guess what. Thumbs down for 2147. Ever make a sphere out of 2147? I didn't think so. Ever play with 2147... yes, you obviously play with your 2147 way too much. But other people don't like to, so you're probably better off keeping it to yourself. That's just my opinion. I'm not very enlightened. I think snow is fun. I think 2147 isn't. Santa doesn't like it either... and neither do kids. But they all like snow. Snow is good. It comes every year, it's dependable, predictable, it is even water. The amazing thing about water is the impact water has had on human history. Caesar, he drank water. Newton, he drank water too. All our current technology has been provided throughout history by people who drank water. Without water, life can't exist. Can you say the same about 2147? Nooo... you most certainly can't. Did Jesus turn 2147 into wine? Did Columbus sail across an ocean of 2147? Does 2147 resonate in harmony with the moon? I think not. Can 2147 produce lightning? Can it supply power to parts of California, Nevada, and Arizona? Can you fill a balloon with 2147 and throw it at your sister? Have you ever written your name in the snow with 2147? See the synchronicity there, where water can be both pen and paper, can 2147 do that? Have you ever had Whiskey and 2147? The only benefit from 2147 I can see is if she's 21 and I'm 47... that's good. But then, if I'm 21 and she's 47, that's not so good, so it sort of cancels itself out. Now the thing that amazes me the most, is that someone who sounds like he's a fairly intelligent person, would spend so much of his time trying to crowbar facts to fit some theory that seems totally irrelevant and useless to me. But it clearly hides genius I am incapable of comprehending. For truly no rational person would put so much energy into developing a hair brained theory for no reason. So the fault is clearly mine for being too simple to understand the grand picture. There is obviously some significance that I am without sufficient capacity to grok. Or perhaps it just wasn't mentioned... I really don't know.

__________________
The only way of finding the limits of the possible is by going beyond them into the impossible.

Arthur C. Clarke

The Brain Science Podcast

There are few of those. The best way to visualise evolution is that there are no long term "niches". Each organism exists in a dynamic evolutionary landscape that is continuously changing due to the evolution of those organisms with which it interacts/competes, etc. In other words, its "niche" is a moving target. It's hard to think of an organism that is "left in peace", and that description certainly does not apply to homo sapiens.
No. Increasing complexity, like the popular perception of evolution being like climbing a developmental mountain, is a myth. If there are no selective pressures for a particluar feature, then that can easily wither away over time, for example the fish that live in caves that no longer have working eyes. Most "adaptations" have a cost associated with them, and if the benefit does not outweigh the cost then those adaptations will disappear, or not appear in the first place.
What benefit would a sensitvity to precession bring that would make an organism more likely to pass on its genes? Remember that there would be a cost associated with the formation of structures that were sensitive to precession.
Do these effects ever rise above the background noise during one reproductive cycle?
It is sensitive to temperature, but not to the gradual change in temperature.
Have you worked out how weak they are? Could we build a sensor that could do the job?
The Moon has quite obvious effects on the terrestrial environment. The most obvious is the effect on tides, i.e. it modifies the height of high tide, etc. Here we have an effect on the earth that could influence organisms that live in the tidal zone, for example.
What effect does it have on the Earth?
Where does this theory of 12 ages per precession come from?
What advantage does an organism gain by being sensitive to something with a timescale that is nearly 100 times the length of its reproductive lifetime?
Of course water quality affects fish. That is clear. How does precessional "quality" and its cyclic nature affect the ability of a member of homo sapiens to reproduce?
I don't see the need for a "theory of karma as causality", so there does not seem to be a need for its basis.
Others on this thread have identified problems with this. I might just add that for your hypothesis to be meaningfull you need to demonstrate it over more than one cycle.

Indeed they are, they remind me of those math teachers that insist that you are wrong just because you wrote 2+2=5 on the blackboard, nitpickers...
Seriously now, you do realize that to show that U.S. is the national reincarnation of Rome or something like it you will need to be able to come up with some very,very strong parallels between both nations?
Wait a minute, the U.S. didn't colonize Africa and Australia. Shouldn't you be looking at the Spanish-American war? I admit that I don't know if it mirrors any events in Roman history, but at least it is something in which your "New Rome" was involved.
Ok, World War 1 mirrors the 1st Punic War with Germany taking the role of Carthage. I'm sorry but that doesn't work very well.
Here's a few objections that I can think of, I'm sure that someone with time and a greater knowledge of history will be able to come up with more of them:
1 - World War 1 is just too short, it lasted 4 years against 23 for the 1st Punic War
2 - The U.S. joined the allies in late in the war, Rome was in the 1st Punic War from the start
3 - The U.S.(Rome) was not the main adversary of Germany(Carthage), the Triple Entente (U.K. - France - Russia) was
4 - World War 1 saw the end of tsarist Russia, where's the Punic equivalent of that event?

Respondents have queried the scientific status of the 2147 year period of the age. This period is a mathematical product of the precession of the equinox. In a new discovery explained here now, I have found that this period is in precise harmony with cycles of the outer planets and the solar system barycenter. If this has been observed before I would welcome any references.

2147 years is 1/12 of the precessional period of 25764 years. Astronomers will ask why 1/12 is a significant fraction. The reason is that this period is also 12 times the solar system barycenter periodic cycle of length 178.9 years. It appears the age imbeds the barycentric period in terrestrial cycles, as the square root of the great year against the barycentric cycle. These links demonstrate the organic unity of the solar system.

The barycentric cycle links to the outer planets as follows:

Cycles in 179 year barycentric period
Jupiter Saturn 9.03
Jupiter Uranus 13.01
Jupiter Neptune 13.96
Jupiter Pluto 14.02
Saturn Neptune 5.00

~Years between conjunctions
Jupiter Saturn 19.81
Jupiter Uranus 13.75
Jupiter Neptune 12.81
Jupiter Pluto 12.76
Saturn Neptune 35.79

Due to the correlations between these cycles, every 179 years Jupiter returns to the same position in relation to Saturn, Uranus and Pluto, and Saturn returns to the same position relative to Neptune, with very small error. For every nine Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions, there are 13 Jupiter-Uranus conjunctions, 14 Jupiter-Pluto conjunctions, and five Saturn-Neptune conjunctions. Jupiter-Neptune also fits the cycle with larger error. This rhythmic cycle of the outer planets was, I understand, discovered by Sir Isaac Newton. I do not know if Newton or others have noticed the precise harmony to the Great Year of precession of the terrestrial equinox.

My interpretation of this finding is that the wobble of the earth actually is like a spinning top, with interactions between Jupiter and the other outer planets functioning like a whip, maintaining the exact tempo of the top in harmony with the barycentric period.

This is a testable falsifiable scientific claim, not a statement of belief. My figures in the above table are slightly imprecise as I could not readily find exact data. I would welcome if astronomers could check them against more precise ephemerides.

http://www.perceptions.couk.com/precess.html has a simple diagram (from Hancock - Fingerprints of the Gods) which provides a mathematical depiction of these findings, showing the earth through time in the age periods each of length 2147 years. This is not a matter of belief but of science. The diagram illustrates our planet in simple scientific terms of the primary cosmic rhythms of terrestrial time.

This thread has provided examples of precise and rough parallels between events separated by 2147 years. The mathematical cosmic data in this post suggests a scientific basis for this model.

Vague (imprecise and subjective) repetition in just two sets of data does not prove a pattern.

__________________
Measure once. Cut twice. Power tools are fun.