The Disappearing Solar Maximum.

Planet X is a massive magnet. The Zetas of explain that the south pole of Planet X is a magnetron intake. In this depiction of Planet X (top image) the real extent of the magnetic lines of force are not shown, they would fill the space between Earth the Sun with their influence. Earth is not shown, but is off-image to the left. In the case of the disappearing solar cycle maximum numbers 23 and 24, the magnetrons otherwise causing sunspots are being drawn into the south pole of Planet X. The image of the Sun shown here was taken by John Chumack from his backyard in Dayton, Ohio on July 7, 2013. Credit: John Chumack | – Artwork by Chris Thomas.

When I started research on the Sun’s magnetic poles to do this article, I found nothing but disinformation. I should  not have been surprized, however. I also found traces of removed  information, which is typical when someone is hiding something. One of the mainstays of the Planet X cover-up maintained by the élite hierarchy is a one hundred percent contrived threat from the Sun, but results from the Ulysses space probe (launched October 6, 1990 to study the Suns magnetic field) challenged this state-approved lie. Quoted from “In 1995, Ulysses saw strong and simple magnetic fields at both poles of the Sun.” (taken from  the JPL website – Jet Propulsion Lab – September 9, 2001). Nancy Lieder of ZetaTalk was one of those few who had noted the results published by JPL at that time, which supported what her Zetas had said all along: that our Sun has defined magnetic poles dominating the solar system. Now, we are certainly aware of the Planet X cover-up, but what has a cover-up of the facts about the Sun’s magnetic poles got to do with Planet X? Plenty, as you will see. First though, I want to focus a little on the timeline-effect of the Planet X cover-up dynamics.

I know many people roll their eyes when they hear of government cover-ups or conspiracy theories, but there is a subtle but far-reaching effect that is needing exposure here that may not be taken into account. The internet is rife with disinformation that has become legitimized. Legitimate in the eyes of the gullible, the uninformed or the casual researcher, in part, as some scientific material is published from a secondary or tertiary standpoint. In other words, scientific research assuming  the truth of a theory, is therefore innocently forwarded by way of reference. But its science, how is that possible? Here is a quote from David Icke: “Like so much in what we call science, that people take it as fact, it’s actually a theory which repeated it becomes fact.” (transcribed from “The moon is not real“). If you believe something is true without independent observation and research, your mind will seek it out. It is also called projection, everybody is susceptible. Scientists are people too, besides, why would they doubt their peers that work for the U.N., the I.P.C.C., the W.M.O.?  Lets also consider, that if a scientist opposes government or corporate-sponsored opinions, you can be sure that their professional life will become uncomfortable and for those who support him or her as well. This is common in the world: a threat from your peers if you oppose their established theories and beliefs, which in turn becomes a subconscious force to be reckoned with when those who you work for make veiled threats to cut-off your money supply. Here are some facts about another cherished theory: the U.S. government spends $10.6 million a day and $4 Billion annually on Climate Change research, and for some reason, some scientists do not not question that and those that do are red-flagged. So, all that money spent pursuing a disputed and unproven theory? We know that many scientists believe these officially established opinions, as when reading published material, not one word is offered-up that throws doubt on a theory supported by high level international organizations.  By-the-way, I am not speaking here of deliberately seeded lies, just disinformation innocently carried forward by others.

Accepted falsehoods have social-consciousness inertia. This occurs in many ways. My guess is that a significant amount of falsehood carry-on, besides published scientific research, is also found in published interviews, opinion pieces by retirees, industry pundits and the many media reports.  So it is this massive volume of “climate change” meta-cognition spin-off that is the problem. Once the cover-up is in place, it is the work of others that accumulates and seemingly buries the switcheroo in the official point-of-view. Two examples of the U.S. space agency about-faces: the original purposes of the Pioneer probes 10 and 11 and the Ulysses space probe were first published then retracted and replaced with a lie. These lies are now lost under the

sheer mass of ongoing published works that had falsely assumed that the stand-in counterfeit reports had value. But lets not forget that the cover-up is also driven forward by new lies seeded with half-truths and the misleading use of facts. There are many other sources of such gullible extrapolations based on government lies such as related science research on another subject that touches on the false theory, new government programs based on the original lie, but with a new vector.  For example, Climate Change (a.k.a. Global Warming Theory) was created as a cover for anticipated earth changes (likely taken from ZetaTalk) once Planet X got close in, as it is now. This is the base lie. Now the “kyoto Accord” or the “Kyoto Protocol” was developed by the United Nations as part of the Climate Change lie, an international treaty to supposedly reduce “greenhouse gas” generated around the globe. (“greenhouse gas” is a misleading moniker used as the main component in the Global Warming Theory lie). Now enters the tertiary effect in the cover-up timeline: “carbon credits”. Now Carbon Credits (one tonne of “greenhouse gas” per) were developed to be a way of dealing and trading against the difficulties of managing “greenhouse gas” or more commonly known as CO² emissions, between countries. From ” Since GHG mitigation projects generate credits, this approach can be used to finance carbon reduction schemes between trading partners and around the world“.  So now you see, one lie built on another and another, this is how the cover-up propagates legitimacy.
The point in question though is: does the Sun have strong north and south magnetic poles? The Zetas of ZetaTalk say yes, but common thought science on the internet says different. If one searches for information on the Sun’s magnetic poles, all they will find is the current theory that claims that diffuse and/or dipole magnetic fields (both polarities side by side) are emanating dynamically from anywhere on Sun’s surface, even assertions that the Sun will manifest “quad poles”, but the most eccentric bald-faced lie is that the north and south magnetic poles “switch” polarity  in concert with the apex of each 11 year solar cycle. It is very odd and perhaps a little scary to find only the official viewpoint of the élite hierarchy on a subject. You would expect (hope?) to find a healthy mix of conflicting opinions and thoughts on a matter, scientists arguing, throwing their hands up in the air and drinking coffee over late night sessions trying to find common ground on the matter, but no, only a single controlled point of view with a slight bloody trail of removed web pages.


Heinrich Schwabe

The discovery of the Sun’s Cycle of maximums is attributed to Samuel Schwabe in 1843, this means the Sun’s 11 year solar cycle has been documented for approximately 170 years. Therefore, I think we can assume the truth of the solar cycle. But these other theories just don’t make sense.  The reasons for this confusing theory not making sense has many threads. First is that the Zetas have said that the sun has normal north and south magnetic pole activity, and on science points like this, they have excellent accuracy and track record. Second is that if all the other planets in our solar system have defined magnetic poles and all stand within the Sun’s magnetosphere, it stands to reason the Sun does as well. Oh, but the third is the worst science of all these recent lie-theories: the “flipping” of Earth’s magnetic poles. Human science has been aware of the Sun’s magnetic field since the 1600’s and we now know that most the planets in our solar system are magnetic and have various north and south pole orientations obviously under a prevailing magnetic regime. We also know that magnets align themselves within a dominant magnetic field. We also knowthat the Sun’s magnetosphere extends beyond Pluto (Voyager 1 has been traversing our solar system for almost 36 years (as of late July 2013), and has traveled 11.6 billion miles and planetary scientists are still not sure if it’s in interstellar space yet). It’s also reasonable that astronomers of old would have defined the appearance of the poles of the solar system planets and would have reported an “upside down” planet by now. There is no mention of flipping planets in the science books.


Woodbridge crop circle – July 13, 2004. The nuclear symbol in the center of two closed circles is a reassurance by the ET circle makers that the sun is not a nuclear threat. (Credit –

Regarding the Black ops lie of our Sun being a threat to Earth, I found another amazingly successful cover-up of a kind of evidence you would not expect: the Internet-wide removal of a specific crop circle! But first, allow me to give a quick background on Crop Circles. Without a doubt, ZetaTalk is the only reliable source in the world on the meaning of crop circles. Over the years, the Zetas of ZetaTalk have described the meanings of many crop circles. The theme is always a thoughtful care that the ET circle-makers offer humankind, consequently, all crop circles offer various kinds of assistance to Earth’s population. The language is subjective in nature, which is why ego-cultural-language is not used but a Universal language of symbol instead. The crop circle in question is known as: Woodbridge (July 13, 2004). The Zetas explain that Woodbridge is a reassurance that the Sun is not a nuclear threat to Earth. This is revealed first by the nuclear symbol in the center of the crop circle that is surrounded  by two other closed circles clearly indicating one hundred percent protection for all planets in our solar system. If a Google search was performed against:  “woodbridge crop circle”, the only image of this crop circle will be found on the ZetaTalk web servers. Now if you go to the best reporting source on crop circles: and run a search, you cannot find this crop circle, it’s like it didn’t happen! So again, Nancy Lieder has the only evidence of another cover-up. Perhaps any remaining conspiracy theory detractors will believe my earlier assertions, that you cannot find the original Ulysses public statement about the Sun’s poles being consistent and strongly polarized. So you can see why the élite hierarchy wanted this very obvious message of solar protection removed, and they did, INTERNET-WIDE.


Sun spot graph for solar maximums 22, 23, and 24 showing the decline in solar maximums. Notice that cycle 24 is not plotted yet, therefore the curve is projected.

Some facts about sunspots and the solar cycle. Sunspots are dynamically located regions on the surface of the Sun known to be characterized by concentrated magnetic activity, they appear dark or as “spots” because those regions are approximately 35% cooler than the surrounding surface of the Sun. The increasing frequency and density of sun spot occurrences are part of the formula that planetary scientists use to plot the graph of a solar cycle.  The solar cycle has shown to be a wave motion peaking in 11 year cycles or “maximums” since routine study first started in 1843.  The current solar cycle is  number 24 which was to peak this year (2013), but planetary scientists are stumped, at least many are acting and talking that way,  as solar activity is fading from its predicted maximum. I should add that apparently sunspots are a kind of portal for the other solar activity that scientists look for, such as CMEs (Coronal Mass Ejections) and solar flares (invisible but explosive releases of bandwidth-wide electromagnetic radiation).  Without sunspots, CMEs and solar flares do not happen and so far this year the maximum is shaping up to be 50% shy of the 2001 maximum (number 23), which in turn was also short by about 30% from the  solar cycle number 22 (1990).

Now these dropping maximums, especially that of the very low activity of 2013, is very inconvenient for NASA. It throws a wrench into NASA’s nuclear Sun-bomb cover-up mechanics, one that was supposed to obliterate Earth in some kind of a massive super X-class CME. So no mr. cover-up, the Sun is actually sunspot-quiet for its 24th solar maximum.


Roswell ET, a.ka. “Skinny Bob”.

Additionally and not surprizingly, NASA’s cover-up team is moving the dates around: “Left with egg on their faces for all their wrong predictions, NASA scientists are now trying to re-write history. The solar maximum for cycle 24 was originally projected for 2010-2011. Then it was extended to 2012 to align with the 2012 Mayan Calendar predictions, in part, but also because the solar minimum was showing the Sun to be shockingly quiescent. Sunspots were virtually absent. Now as 2012 is past and the Sun has still not approached the expected maximum, they are pushing the dates once again. They are caught in a web of their own lies.” (quoted from ZetaTalk Chat 03/16/2013). Since the solar cycles maximums have been reliable since about 1950 (the start of the “modern maximums”) , why has 2013, and to some degree 2001 been such duds? Well the Zetas have explained that the south pole of Planet X acts as a magnetron intake and has had its south pole “pointed” at the Sun for some time now. This has been the cause for the quiet sun through these maximums. Now however, the Zetas have said that Planet X has moved. The Zetas: “But the grip Planet X has on the Earth, Venus, and the Dark Twin has been tightening lately, as Planet X is outbound and is closing the gap. Looking at this drama from outer space with the N Pole of Earth topside, one would have seen Planet X slightly to the right with Earth, Venus and the Dark Twin clustered to the left. For reasons too complicated to explain, due to the approach of the April Trimester which arrives on April 20, Planet X is pointing its N Pole more to the left, toward the cluster of planets. This skews Planet X so its S Pole is not pointing directly at the Sun, no longer acting as a direct intake for magnetrons from the Sun. Thus, sunspots are again appearing on the surface of the Sun.” (ZetaTalk Chat ZetaTalk Chat Q&A for 04/16/2011). Since this last ZetaTalk quote was from over 2 years ago, I can only assume a slow-moving Planet X will eventually allow the solar maximums to pick up. We will see, perhaps more interesting events will stump NASA’s planetary scientists.

Details taken from

The Truth about Climate Change

Picture taken aboard the USCGC Healy in the Chukchi Sea during the final days of ocean data collection for the 2011 ICESCAPE mission.

Picture taken aboard the USCGC Healy in the Chukchi Sea during the final days of ocean data collection for the 2011 ICESCAPE mission.

Many articles have been written challenging G. W. Theory (G.W.T.) offering excellent discourse by experts and even retired climate scientists from around the world (Link to list of quotes) , but this article is written from the stand point of the presence of Planet X in our solar system.
I’ve yet to read one science writer who understands the whole G.W.T. picture and who has outlined the real reason for such a massive and diabolical discourse, however, the truth can be discovered when you know what to look for. When we are presented with a puzzling situation, it’s so satisfying to solve it, yet that “A Ha!” moment seems to have eluded the plethora of science journalists so far. I haven’t even found a writer who is at least puzzled by this massive boondoggle: they see the folly, yet the reason for it goes unnoticed. For those who are Pole-Shift aware it’s still a massive mental task to collate all the esoteric and extra-solar-system-sized points-of-view, so this unawareness is not surprising, if you don’t know the pattern, you can’t connect the dots.

G.W.T. has gone through a name change, at one time is was known as: “Global Warming Theory”, but these days it is known as “Climate Change” and “Global Warming”. I suspect the word “theory” was removed as an attempt to evoke more authentication by the public or perhaps this was planned as an easier route to acceptance by the scientific community, whatever the reason it is still the same concept.

The essential truth about G.W.T.  is not represented in the product issued by climate science spokespersons. G.W.T is in fact being trotted out on a slanted playing field of field-data sets either cherry-picked to support the concept, or pruned and shaped to fit what the climate science upper management deems necessary to maintain the lie and secure their jobs at the same time. Yes, climate scientists are side-lined if they challenge the G. W. Theory. From “The Hindu, Jairam Ramesh, Indian Environment Minister:  “Anyone who raises alternative climate theories is immediately branded as a climate atheist in an atmosphere of climate evangelists“.
A few years ago (2009), there was a website called: The website no longer exists, but it did provide the hundreds of emails gleaned (hacked) from  email servers within the University of East Anglia revealing obvious manipulation of data aimed at arbitrarily supporting G.W.T., plus many other revealing comments heavily compromising this so-called theory. These emails are available as a PDF at this LINK. There are now new G.W.T.-pudit-troubling revelations with the procurement of 5,000 more emails, anecdotally referred to as “Climate gate 2.0”, here again, dialogue between climate scientists are being revealed as clearly having an agenda supporting the G.W.T. concept without merit. Here is a Forbes magazine article about Climate Gate 2.0 at this LINK.

Why is it that “Climate Change” is always in the news? Scientific articles, (mainly) pro or con are being published many times a day on the Internet for years? There is more than an almost rabid over-zealousness here as G. W. T. is driven by powerful international forces, such as the I.P.C.C., the U.N. and the W.M.O. (no doubt many more organizations). It’s a continuous felt-hammering of the message, but only those heavily involved can understand it. When you actually read reports on “Climate Change”, it’s a mass of statistics, acronyms, and descriptions of protocol and a hierarchy of “initiatives” expressed in government-speak: very hard to follow. When something so arcane as the concepts of G. W. Theory is pushed so hard for so long, likely consuming billions of Dollars (since 1990) and with peer opposition, it’s pretty clear there is a hidden agenda here.


The above 2-part image: left side is not-to-scale, but suggests the relative thicknesses of Earth’s essential 5 layers of rock. Right side: is to-scale and shows how large the inner core is – 70% moon-sized.

G. W. Theory asserts that the so-called “green house gases”, of which a large percentage is water-vapor, re-reflects (in all directions) the heat emanating from the surface of the Earth back down to the surface of the Earth causing an overall rise of global temperature of 1.75 ° every 20 years. This means that less than 1 % of the atmosphere, the rarefied and invisible “greenhouse” gases (light and heat pass through) miles above the Earth are causing the entire globe to continually heat up. This, while the inner core of the Earth (70% moon-sized) is connected to the rest of the earth via rock (a better conductor than air) at a similar


Tungurahua volcano, a steep-sided, 16,479-foot stratovolcano located in Ecuador sits roughly 140 km south of the capital city of Quito: increase in activity August 2012.

temperature as that of the Sun at  5430 °C (or 9806  °F) doesn’t heat up the surface of the Earth? The theory also asserts that these green house gases are caused by human activity such as the internal combustion engine and industrial manufacturing.
It’s been said that volcanoes blow more volume of CO2 with a major eruption than cows can pass methane, gasoline-powered vehicles emit exhaust fumes and the smoke stacks of the world in many years. This reasonable pronouncement has not and cannot be proven without the scientific field work, which is unlikely to be monetized by the same organizations who want to stay on the white-list at the U.N.
Volcanoes no doubt emit the majority of the world’s CO2. Consider this, entire villages of people living near a volcano have been known to be gassed to death in their sleep with a silent release of volcanic gases: it’s uniformly released from the vent and flows down all sides of the volcano, washing over the entire base, of which the village is only a small part: now add thousands of volcanoes and 5 billion years. Earth’s volcanoes have been around a lot longer than human climate scientists, cars and even animals, but the G.W. theory-makers couldn’t use those facts as they had to find a way to blame man’s contribution as a way around the argument: “Well, why is the global temperature still livable if “Global Warming” started 5 billion years ago? Why blame human activity? Seems they need an identifiable scapegoat for the gullible, something they could point to and blame. It all seems like it could make sense to people who believe that modern science is above the control of political and corporate interests, but it isn’t and you can see this if you think outside-the-box.


A man marooned by flood waters, alongside his livestock, waves towards an Army helicopter for relief handouts in the Rajanpur district of Pakistan’s Punjab province on August 9, 2010. (REUTERS/Stringer)

So these are a few holes in G. W. Theory discussed, but wait,  there’s more! Even if G. W. Theory was true, and its not, but if it was, it doesn’t explain the host of Earth Changes we are seeing today: one percent of the atmosphere miles above the Earth is causing so many volcanoes to awaken and at the same time? Unprecedented and massive flooding in parts of the world (e.g. -Pakistan 2010 (and 2012 – before and after) Philippines – aug 2012. and Australia’s Brisbane floods explained here at, wild heat extremes in several countries within a day never before seen? or tornadoes in France and England. There are other Earth change events unmentioned here, yet G.W.T. utterly fails to explain away even these, but remember, it isn’t explaining anything as G. W. T. remains unproven, challenged and beleaguered by critics and of course undermined by the climate scientist themselves with the unanticipated release of their own emails.
So the question remains, “How is it that so much time, effort and money is being put into this G. W. Theory round peg that won’t fit the Earth Change square hole? It’s been 22 years since the I.P.C.C. published its first assessment report in 1990 and the only reason it’s standing today is due to a hidden agenda of the big-money international agencies propping it up.
The 6:00 O’clock evening news, is not the news. What we see and hear is only what Corporate and secret government agencies want us to hear.  G. W. Theory is a massive cover-up story, a cover designed specifically to prevent the public from identifying Planet X as the cause of the massive Earth changes the original cabal knew would be coming. The existence of Planet X in our solar system is the reality and G. W. Theory is the make-believe.  If some cause is proffered to the concerned but already over-tired and over-worked public for the worsening earth changes, yet so complex it cannot be understood by the average person on street, a constant barrage by both the guilty and innocent scientist is hoped to do the trick. Back-in-the-Day, the make-up story of G. W. Theory worked for a while, but with earth changes for some time now poking out of the texture of the climate change message, it now appears as a fantastical farce. infinity.small2