In Jordan, there is a place called Petra. Archaeologists claim it was once called Raqem. Petra is Greek for “Rock”. Most anyone has seen Petra. But you may not have seen it the way I see it. This is the way Petra is shown on tourist Brochures and travel websites:
Image: Petra, Treasury
Compare the clean cut look to the melted look in the featured image above it. I see Petra from the viewpoint of Meltology. I propose that the “mountains” and rocks around the buildings are not natural, that they too were once buildings. The buildings melted. This is not the result of an “Earthquake” as mainstream Historians say, it’s the result of unknown ancient weaponry.
Meltology
I’ll show you a Gallery of photos that support this point.
Need I say more? This used to be something artificially made.
Archaeologists say these structures were hewn out of the rock. They imagine that people with hammers and chisels cut them out of a mountain.
But I’m asking you to ignore what your teachers say and look more closely.
This isn’t at all what happened. The entire mountain used to be the building and this is what’s left of it!
A close-up, below. Where does natural end and artificial begin?
They don’t want you to know how large this city was because it would debunk their entire fake history in one swat. Once you grasp what’s going on in Petra, take another look at the Grand Canyon.
Still don’t believe it? Then check this out:
This clearly used to be a building with different lines, levels and even staircase-like decoration at the top. The tops were completely melted and today look like “natural rock”. Imagine seeing the structure above and not once considering high-tech weaponry or even an act of God. We are very lucky that this piece of proof has not been removed or vandalized.
Even parts that look completely natural have vague elements that remind us that these were once buildings:
All I’m asking you is to look. Can you see this was at one time an artificially made building? Mainstream academia don’t even bother to provide an explanation for it.
Rock typically melts at temperatures around 1000 Degrees Celsius.
What happened here? Lasers? Nuclear? Directed energy weapons? “Greek Fire”? These buildings were having a complete meltdown.
With these pillars and theater, it surprises me that Europeans and Americans don’t claim Petra was built by the Romans. They usually assign anything they find to Romans, except when it’s found in an area where it would cause offense to the local population if it were called Roman. Instead, Petra is ascribed to a Bedouin tribe they call “Nabateans”.
It was a whole city and had normal civilian houses too, that have been melted down:
On Google Earth I even found stuff that isn’t marked out for tourists or hints of semi-buried buildings (center right):
The reason the tops are destroyed and bottom’s still partially intact is because these attacks were waged from the air.
The interior of one of these buildings. Whatever was here has since been looted:
Any “natural” formation you see today may have at one time been a building.
I bet something used to be displayed in those windows.
Look at the surrounding “natural” terrain and you’ll see it wasn’t natural:
How unfortunate that the statues in these windows had their heads chopped off so that you stay ignorant as to their identity:
The surroundings of this structure show clear signs of artificial production. The block to the right used to be half-round. Above it there is a rectangular platform. The wall to the left is flat.
Fake History
Here’s the Wikipedia article on Petra in italics plus my commentary:
Petra, originally known to its inhabitants as Raqmu, is a historic and archaeological city in southern Jordan. Famous for its rock-cut architecture and water conduit systems…
The area around Petra has been inhabited from as early as 7000 BC, and was settled by the Nabataeans, a nomadic Arab people, in the 4th century BC. Petra would later become the capital city of the Nabataean Kingdom in the second century BC.The Nabataeans invested in Petra’s proximity to the incense trade routes by establishing it as a major regional trading hub, which gained them considerable revenue. Unlike their enemies, the Nabataeans were accustomed to living in the barren deserts and thus were able to defend their kingdom. They were particularly skillful in agriculture, stone carving, and rainwater harvesting.
This paragraph says nothing about when Petra was built. It only implies. The “Nabateans” were “skillful in stone carving” it says. No kidding. The implication is that the city was built 400 years B.C., around 2425 years ago (or, in alt-History dating, 1425 years ago). No evidence for this date is presented.
Petra flourished in the 1st century AD, when its Al-Khazneh structure, possibly the mausoleum of Nabataean king Aretas IV, was constructed, and its population peaked at an estimated 20,000 inhabitants. Nabataea fell to the Romans in 106 AD, who annexed and renamed it Arabia Petraea. Petra’s importance declined as sea trade routes emerged, and after an earthquake in 363 destroyed many structures. In the Byzantine era, several Christian churches were built, but the city continued to decline and, by the early Islamic era, it was abandoned except for a handful of nomads. It remained unknown to the western world until 1812, when Swiss traveller Johann Ludwig Burckhardt rediscovered it.
Fake History is so bizarre. We see clear evidence of the mysterious rock-melting weaponry having been used in Petra, but they tell us “it was destroyed by an Earthquake”. Gullible tourists nod and move on. Earthquakes can break rocks but they have never been known to deform them like melted caramel.
Even stranger, they say Petra remained unknown until 1812! What’s that supposed to mean?
Remember what I told you about the great war and reset of the 1700s and early 1800s? There’s your evidence – once again.
Visitor numbers reach close to a million tourists every year.
Close to a million yearly people oblivious to the rock-melt. How sad.
The Iron Age lasted between 1200 and 600 BC; in that time, the Petra area was occupied by the Edomites. The configuration of mountains in Petra allowed for a reservoir of water for the Edomites. This made Petra a stopping ground for merchants, making it an outstanding area for trade. Things that were traded here included wines, olive oil, and wood.
Edomites? Those are figures in the Bible. There, they are listed as founded by Esau, son of Isaac.
The Nabataeans were one among several nomadic Bedouin tribes that roamed the Arabian Desert and moved with their herds to wherever they could find pasture and water.
Official History is so boring because nothing makes sense. Why do nomadic Bedouin tribes build a city? Being nomadic means not building settlements.
Although the Nabataeans were initially embedded in Aramaic culture, theories about them having Aramean roots are rejected by many modern scholars.
This sounds like they used to be known as Aramean, but for political reasons, aren’t seen that way today.
Petra declined rapidly under Roman rule, in large part from the revision of sea-based trade routes. In 363, an earthquake destroyed many buildings and crippled the vital water management system. The old city of Petra was the capital of the Byzantine province of Palaestina III and many churches from the Byzantine period were excavated in and around Petra. In one of them, the Byzantine Church, 140 papyri were discovered, which contained mainly contracts dated from 530s to 590s, establishing that the city was still flourishing in the 6th century. The Byzantine Church is a prime example of monumental architecture in Byzantine Petra.
The architecture of Petra is essentially the same as “Egyptian”, “Greek” and “Roman” architecture, which includes “Byzantine”.
I don’t believe any of these Empires existed. They are false labels for a worldwide Kingdom that was ruled from a “Terrestrial Paradise” in what is now the “East”, around Tartaria (and used to be the North before the axis flipped). If you’ve read this website so far, you understand this paragraph.
Old maps of the Holy Land
I’m bored with this Wikipedia rubbish. Let’s instead look at ancient maps of the region.
I’ve snipped the above from a 1452 map. Remember, back then East was North. In the center you see Jerusalem, with a Christian cross on top of it. To the right you see the red sea and a city called Elat, Eilat, Aila that still exists today. In between the two you see a city precisely where we’d expect Petra to be.
On the Peutinger map, which is allegedly from the year 400 but was reprinted in the year 1200, Petra is listed as a city:
A 1771 map in which Petra is not just a town but an entire Kingdom called “Arabie Petree” in French.
On this 1635 map it appears to be called Thema:
On this 1611 map it’s the “country of Teman”.
The map above is claimed to be a reference to biblical places thousands of years earlier. But the regular 1635 map (above it) still calls the place “Thema”. According to the Bible, Teman is part of the Kingdom of Edom, also called “the land of Uz” or “the land of Oz”. From the Wikipedia page on Teman:
“Throughout almost the whole of Hebrew history Uz or Idumea was regarded by the Jews in the same light of elegance and accomplishment, as Greece by the Romans, and Teman, the native city of Eliphaz, as the Athens of Arabia Petrea”
This map is allegedly from the year 776. It has Jerusalem, here called Judea and to the right of it an unnamed city where we’d expect Petra.
On this 1730 map Petra is again an entire region. And the city is called Zize:
Close up:
My point: Petra appears to have been a city like any other for a long time. We’ve found mapped evidence of it between the years 776 and 1771. That’s a thousand years! Then “something happened” and the city was “rediscovered” in 1812.
The timelines don’t make sense
Strangely, excavations in Petra are said to have begun in 1929 by American and British archaeologists. That’s more than a hundred years after discovery! It is also officially claimed that Petra wasn’t known to anyone except desert Bedouins after the year 800.I find that very unlikely.
I asked AI to create a timeline of Petra, and this is the last part of it:
What utter nonsense! There is a thousand year gap between 800 and 1812 and a 100 year gap between 1812 and 1929. Considering that Petra is smack in the center of “The Holy Land” that has been occupied by dozens of nations in that time, it’s not believable that nobody knew about it.
The maps prove this a lie. There was a city there all along. It was called Petra, Zize, Thema, Teman, Edom. The maps make no mention of a city called Raqem.
I asked AI to list mentions of Petra in the 1700s and it came up empty. The region was occupied by the Ottoman Empire – a people known for mapping out every little creek and dirt road. But they failed to notice Petra?
The deserts have always been traversed by Bedouins – but not a single one recorded his knowledge of this ancient city?
The Bible mentions every town in the region – but failed to point out Petra?
European Emperors, Templars and Explorers traveled the Holy Land up and down for thousands of years – but they failed to make out Petra?
I see only two explanations for this: Either the city was buried under the sand and only recently excavated. Or more likely: The city wasn’t called Petra. Nor was it called Raqem. And it didn’t get destroyed in ancient antiquity, it got destroyed in the 1700s. This is why it was “discovered” in 1812.
Here’s an 1855 drawing that shows us that this particular building was vandalized. In 1855 the heads of the bottom figures were chopped off but the vandals hadn’t gotten to the upper part yet. Interior we see two winged creatures holding rings (the lords of the ring deserve an entire article for themselves).
Are we sure these female ring-angels that we also see in old Russia, Europe and even old America, were put there by nomadic desert Bedouins?
We also see female figures holding axes and bear-breasted female figures with strange headgear on a beautiful rotunda. In the center there appears to be an Eagle.
Check out the gigantic blocks of rock to the right. Notice the aligned holes in them. They look like drill holes. The old picture clarifies that we are looking at a gigantic block that was custom-cut, rather than a natural mountain. Who obscured this? Who chopped off the heads of these ladies? And who supposedly cut this whole thing using merely hammer and chisel? They can’t tell you this, not because “things are forgotten in the sands of time” but because it never happened that way.
And I haven’t even gotten to the interior of the mountains yet. Nor have the archaeologists. They claim that only 15% of Petra have been excavated! (Some sources say only 1% have been “thoroughly” excavated). Why? This means the mountains are filled with discoveries waiting to happen.
They only just recently discovered a vast network of tunnels below the complex, as well as previously unknown water chambers and waterways.
Wouldn’t be nice if they publicized ALL of their discoveries to the public instead of keeping things secret? If in between 1812 and 1929 there were no official or public excavations, this gave the looting archaeology-mafia a hundred years to clear Petra out.
Whatever this is, it was allegedly only discovered in 2016:
There’s a buried structure here that was captured on satellite imagery. It measures 184 by 161 feet. It’s massive! For comparison, the leaning tower of Pisa is 180 feet tall. So if this is only the roof of a building, you’re looking at something gigantic.
But instead of involving the public in it’s exploration, it was declared “restricted area” and nothing ever heard of it again. A decade later we still haven’t been told.
Some Arab scholars associate Petra with “the people of Thamud”. The Quran says their civilization was destroyed because they rejected a prophet of God by the name of Salih. The story goes that Salih warned the Thamud of their impending Doom. They demanded proof that Salih is a prophet of God, so God sent a miraculous camel. The Thamud didn’t accept this as evidence and instead murdered the Camel, thereby sealing their fate.
Modernists claim that the Thamud are the “Nabateans”, but Nabateans seem more like an new invention than an actual reality. According to Arabs, the Thamud were successors of another civilization called Ad (which you know from my books on Atlantis).
This is one of the precision cut structures ascribed to the Thamud:
It’s found in an area called Hegra, in Saudi Arabia.
Notice anything? Yes, it’s the same style we find in Petra.
Here’s the real head-scratcher: I have no education in archaeology or history. Equipped with only a few hours of time, it didn’t take much for me to discover fraud and fakery around the “History” of Petra. Built thousands of years ago? A lie. Discovered in 1812? Improbable. Left alone for a hundred years, until 1929? Unlikely. Built by nomadic Bedouins? Very unlikely. Made with hammer and chisel? Extremely unlikely. Melted rock created by an earthquake? A lie.
Once we acknowledge the lie, we can start learning the truth.