Solving the Grass-Civilisation riddle

icon-mk-blazing-star
One of the benefits of being in a technological world is that we all get a chance to work out where we’ve come from and how that’s come about. In the past, we simply didn’t have the technological understanding to be able to understand key aspects of our past and origins. Now, we do. Unfortunately, as Francis Bacon pointed out four-hundred years ago, knowledge is power and so we can’t rely on those in power to tell us important facts, as they will naturally keep all important information to themselves. Instead, we have to work it our ourselves from first principles.

320px-Ancient_ziggurat_at_Ali_Air_Base_Iraq_2005

One important fact that we can work out, scientifically, is how civilisation itself came into being on our planet. The official story is that hunter-gatherers in the delta areas of our planet switched from their existing way of life to a life of farming. In other words, they stopped moving around nomadically, gathering seasonal fruits, berries, nuts, eggs, tubers and hunting game. Instead ploughed the land and planted grass crops, such as rice, wheat, barley and oats. According to the official theory, this enabled them to free themselves from barbarity and the uncertainty of nomadic life, while also giving them the chance to settle, store and distribute food and thereby develop all the other aspects of civilisation; writing, pottery, religions, armies etc.

But, to put it bluntly, this official theory is stupid. No set of hunter-gatherers would ever switch from moving around nomadically, gathering the planet’s natural harvests and thereby eating a varied and rich diet, and switch to back-breaking toil to produce a mono-crop of low nutritional value. Grasses are not good food and the work required to plant, grow and harvest them is tortuous in a pre-fossil-fuel society.

320px-Maler_der_Grabkammer_des_Sennudem_001

The only people who would have benefitted from a switch to grain-farming are those that took ownership of the grain after it was harvested. For everyone else, the switch from hunter-gathering to farming would have been a massive step down in terms of health and welfare. They would have immediately lost their freedom and vitality and become sickly de-facto slaves. Scientific studies of farmers vs hunter-gatherers during this early period clearly show the big drop in health that farming brought to the people of the affected regions.

strange-eye-gods-320px


Some readers might conclude that an explanation for this change was that an elite group persuaded or forced everybody else to switch to grain-farming. This seems reasonable on first inspection, but when one studies the idea further, it becomes clear that it’s impossible for there to have been an elite group that knew about grain-farming and had the power to force others to perform it. Since the world at that time consisted of hunter-gatherer societies, no group would have had the knowledge, tools and skills to begin grain-farming and make it work. As a result, there is a Catch-22 paradox. The ability to enslave people into the grain-farming system would have only become possible after centuries of people being enslaved into a successfully working system. Because of this, it is impossible that the system could have started itself.



catholic-priest-140px

Obviously, a grain-agriculture civilisation did begin on our planet, one that also introduced writing, taxation, armies, priests etc to our planet. It’s worth noting that none of these features actually improved the mental, spiritual and social aspects of human-kind. Hunter-gatherers were known to store large amounts of information in their heads, a better strategy than writing if you want to develop your mental faculties. Hunter-gatherers also had a rich spiritual existence, an inclusive spiritual system that required no priests to enforce a dogma. The walls, armies and taxation of civilisation only existed because of the nature of grain-agriculture and also to make sure an elite could control and take the best of everything for themselves. Human-kind, on a mental, spiritual and social level, has not benefitted from civilisation.

But if all that's true, why did we get a civilisation based around grain-farming? The key to answering this question is all about the grain.

Clearly, the elite group who started civilisation on Earth knew a lot about grasses and next-to-nothing about hunter-gathering. They were completely at home with their entire kingdom being filled with grasses and nothing else was needed. This strategy only makes sense if the elite-group had turned up on Earth from another place dominated by grasses. If they had developed locally and been an indigenous group that had existed on Earth for a long time, they would have extensive hunter-gatherer knowledge. They would therefore have developed their civilisation based on that form of food-gathering, with its clear nutritional benefits, and not the grass-grain model.

Therefore, the elite group must have come from a very different place where grasses dominated, almost completely. This would explain why they’d know so much about grasses and so little about other plant types. This tells us a lot about their home, as it must have been a world where only grasses could thrive. This place could not have been on Earth, as it has a variety of environments and any developing civilisation would have moved to the most fertile areas and away from the arid grasslands. It must have therefore have been another planet whose flora was only grasses.

A planet that only supports grasses would, most likely, have the following properties:

Higher gravity. In a higher gravity world, trees would collapse. In fact, any plant with a large canopy would collapse. Their home world would therefore be significantly larger than Earth.

High winds. Grasses are very resistant to high winds, as compared to trees which collapse in such conditions. Their home would therefore be climactically much more dramatic, with regular hurricanes. This could be because the planet is closer to their sun or instead goes through periods of great climactic change.

Long periods of dryness or cold. Grass seeds are very hardy and can survive for very long periods, yet still germinate when the right conditions return. Their home world would therefore go through long periods of deep cold, or intense aridness, or both.

If we combine these possibilities, we end up with a world that is larger than Earth and one that, most likely, is in a long-period, eccentric orbit. This would explain the higher gravity, the huge climactic changes as the planet approached, then moved away from its sun and the long periods of cold, followed by high heat.

planet-nine

By strange coincidence, at least according to the writer Zechariah Sitchin, the creators of the first civilisation on Earth, Sumer, did come from such a planet. They called it Nibiru and there is evidence that such a planet does exist, circling our sun. If it does exist and it finally comes around again, there’s a good chance that we’ll not be surprised at all at its flora; lots and lots of grasses.