The Rhythm of the Universe

Español. Magyar. Serbian.

We generally think of the changes in nature as changes, but e. g. when the seasons change they really don’t, because after some time they change back to what they were. So there has really been very little or perhaps even no (significant) change. Rather than a change I think we should call it a rhythm. In a sense there are no changes in the universe, only rhythms.

The Ice Ages come and go too; they stay for about 100,000 years, or perhaps about 120,000 years, and then they go and leave a warm period for about 10,000 or perhaps about 12,000 years. In the long run, there is no change there either, only a rhythm. We are now living at the end of a warm period, and of course the scientists believe that the changes in the climate is due to human activity, but it isn’t; we are entering a new Ice Age, that will cover all of Northern Europe with glaciers, and the climate changes we see now are a prelude to this. Man has no influence over climate.

The forests come and go too; the glaciers wipe clean the land on Northern Europe, and then when they retreat they leave plains that eventually will become forests again. Then the forests change; e. g. birch forests become oak forests, and then finally pine forests. Then the Ice Age returns, and we see the whole process start all over again. Without any real change. It all returns to it’s original form and status. Nothing has really been changed for millions of years… In a sense we are caught in a loop, and we cannot free ourselves from this.

The change in our universe is thus really just a rhythm. There is one exception to this rule though; life. The different living creatures change, due to micro-evolution, or they change, not because they «mutate» as stated by the seriously flawed theory of macro-evolution, but because they mix with other species, as suggested by my wife, and thus occasionally give birth to new species. New forms of life.

Mankind is a living entity, made up of three different species (Africans [Homo sapiens], Asians [Denisova] and Europeans [Homo Neanderthalensis]), each made up of several sub-species (alias races), and each one of them mixed more or less with the two other human species. The modern human species and races can best be described as mistakes of nature, in the sense that their creation came about as a degradation of the original man. Most likely there was originally only one human species, but individuals from this species for some reason mixed with other creatures, and gave life to horrible and grotesque creatures such as chimpanzees, gorillas and the like, and then later on other human beings mixed with these creatures again and gave life to more horrible creatures; cannibalistic, cruel, stupid, sinister and destructive creatures of no value to the universe. Mistakes. Freaks.

The Original Sin” that we can read about in the bible, of we ever bother wasting our time doing so, is most likely a reference to the mixing of species, when the divine man mixed with Earthly creatures, and gave birth to the modern man; a defective creature, unable to get rid of this “original sin”, because it is in his blood. The “defect” is passed on to the next generation. Naturally no “saviour” or “God” can save us from this; only we can; by means of eugenics and by embracing Ôðalism, a religion offering a cultivation of only the divine man in us and subjugation of the base in us.

Perhaps you object to the term “religion”, and would rather have a scientific solution? Well, then I can tell that science today is also just a religion, with extremely religious terms such as “The Big Bang”, based on assumptions and wild speculations by man and with no proper scientific backing whatsoever, and where everything is “too difficult for you to understand using your logical faculties”, meaning you are left to trust the magnificent and mighty “scientists” (alias priests) to do this for you. When they actually fail to they just make up new entities and terms, such as “dark matter” and “dark energy”, that nobody can see or in any way perceive (much like “God”), and then use this to fill in the holes in their own seriously flawed and utterly religious hypotheses and theories. There is no such thing as “science” in this context; it is all religion. It is all based on beliefs, imperceivable entities and the hopes and wishes of man.

No, I will stick to the more honest approach, and I will call “my” solution a religion. Yes, this is not my solution; there is nothing new in what I say, only what has been said before – not least in Ancient Greece – and what has been forgotten. I am not the painter of a magnificent and beautiful picture; I am just one of several human beings collecting and putting together the bits and pieces that were scattered by (a sinister) force some time ago; I work to restore a magnificent and beautiful picture that was painted a long time ago by others. By divine Europeans in an age long forgotten. By our Forebears.

We are ourselves the once magnificent statues of yore, but we are soiled, broken and faded, and we need purification, repairs and new life, to be restored to original form. Ôðalism is the tool to fix us. You and me. We don’t bow and beg others to help us, we don’t pray for help from fictional entities nailed to a Roman execution devise, we don’t lie down and hope death will save us; we help ourselves, we find strength in ourselves and we see death only as an intermission in our quest to restore the Divine Europe here on planet Earth! HailaR BalduR! HailaR WôðanaR!

Venus, in desperate need of restoration; she is missing colours and both her arms;

venus

Advertisements

134 thoughts on “The Rhythm of the Universe

  1. Pingback: Ритам Универзума | The Call of Thule

  2. Pingback: Az univerzum ritmusa | Magyar Thulean Perspective

  3. Pingback: El Ritmo del Universo | Hermandad Pagana

  4. Milutin Milankovitch : Feature Articles – NASA Earth Observatory –

    Milutin Milanković (1879. – 1958.)

    The Serbian astrophysicist
    Milutin Milankovitch is best
    known for developing one of the
    most significant theories relating
    Earth motions and long-term
    climate change. Born in 1879 in the rural village of Dalj (then part
    of the Austro-Hungarian Empire,
    today located in Croatia),
    Milankovitch attended the
    Vienna Institute of Technology and graduated in 1904 with a doctorate in technical
    sciences. After a brief stint as the chief engineer for a
    construction company, he accepted a faculty position
    in applied mathematics at the University of Belgrade
    in 1909—a position he held for the remainder of his
    life. Milankovitch dedicated his career to developing a
    mathematical theory of climate based on the
    seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation
    received by the Earth. Now known as the
    Milankovitch Theory, it states that as the Earth travels
    through space around the sun, cyclical variations in three elements of Earth-sun geometry combine to
    produce variations in the amount of solar energy that
    reaches Earth: 1. Variations in the Earth’s orbital eccentricity—the
    shape of the orbit around the sun. 2. Changes in obliquity—changes in the angle that
    Earth’s axis makes with the plane of Earth’s orbit. 3. Precession—the change in the direction of the Earth’s
    axis of rotation, i.e., the axis of rotation behaves like
    the spin axis of a top that is winding down; hence it
    traces a circle on the celestial sphere over a period of time. Together, the periods of these orbital motions have become known as Milankovitch cycles.

  5. Varg, I’ve got a question about the so-called “Big Bang”. How would you comment on the theory that there are actually some “echoes” of the “Big Bang” knowledge in slavic mythology? Let me explain. According to slavs, Universe was created from an single Egg (very important symbol in slavic culture), which was spining in the absolute Nothingness, until it finally broke apart. Its shell broke into two pieces: one made up Heavens, and the second one made some kind of “bottom” on which the ProtoOcean (created from egg’s white) has been poured. From the yolk was born first god (according to version it was Trygław [Triglav], Świętowit [Svantevit] or Swaróg].) Then he created two another gods – Perun (later god of thunder and skies) and Weles (later god of underworld and dead), and so the myth goes on and on, telling us about creation of man and land. But many people believe it is a reminescene of some primeval cosmic event, the very birth of Universe – id est “Big Bang”, and finally – life. Any comments?:)

    Also I wanted, if I may, to correct you. In one of your past posts you mention “Svyatovid” that was to be worshipped on island Rugen (Rugia), you also posted a picture of him. And thus, you made mistake repeated since XIXth century by many (both slavic and nonslavc) researchers. On Rugia Island there indeed was a temple (Arkona), but the god that has been worshipped there is “Świętowit (Svantevit)” – the fourfaced god of crops and war. As many researchers you confused “Świętowit (Svantevit) with “Światowid (Svyatovit, as you named him)”. The first one is indeed a god that was worshipped on Rugia and has four faces. But the second one is not a god at all! Światowid (“world-beholder”) is a name for the sculpture that is believed to depict the order of the universe. The picture you added was the picture of that sculpture. It also has four faces, but those are actually four gods: Mokosz, the fertile Mother Earth with horn; Łada, the goddes of marriage with a ring; Perun, god of war and thunders with a horse and sword and finally Dadźbóg – the Sun-god. Together they are depicted in upper sector of the sculpture, id est “heavens” (Prawia or Praw). Below, we see four people holding hands (two man and two woman), probably dancing around sacred fire – its a depiction of man’s world (Jawia or Jaw). And on the lowest sector there is a threeheaded God, believed to be Weles of the underworld (nawia) – or Triglav/Trygław – literally “threeheaded”. I just wanted to correct that, as almost all of the nonslavic sources often repeat this mistake. Regards!

  6. I am sorry this time I am disagreeing with you, maybe because I do not like seeing speaking of the bible, that jew text that was based on Sumerian(Caucasian, AKA European) Texts and on other European believes, that were misinterpreted by that degenerate multicultural “race” I highly recommend you this video, its about Hitler traveling in time and being now “multicultural” so that Israel might take immigrants from Africa,Asia and so fort . It is comical because at the end only one jew is left because of this. Its an allegory of what this worthless humans(If they are deserved to be called like this) are doing to us with their multiculturalism only in Europe. Hail you Chieftain! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    • Just to be clear, I only disagree about talking of the original sin, in fact that jewish fallacy. I am aware that global warming it is just a false propaganda and merely politician to gain money and that this is only a natural cycle. And all the others things you talked about

  7. I had to think this gorilla issue out all day ahhh. Glad you guys talked it over while I was out jogging. I mean if gorillas are half human then maybe they need equal rights to live in society? hahah Well I think they’re majestic and deep creatures but maybe they served some evolutional purpose (?!) it didn’t seem to work out. Should gorillas be considered human since they’re smarter than niggers?

  8. Hello Varg.

    I have a question related to your book. I think I read in your blog at one point that you claimed your book had some things which are not true and you were mistaken. Is this true? What exactly was your mistake?

    Thanks – Hail

  9. Sorry, maybe I just misunderstood you but you say that:
    “The different living creatures change, due to micro-evolution, or they change, not because they «mutate» as stated by the seriously flawed theory of macro-evolution…”
    So you say that there is no mutation?
    Mutation is part of microevolution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution
    Not that I much about this, but I think the difference between micro and macro is just time scale.

    • Well, it might be there too, or it might not (it is certainly not needed for micro evolution), but in any case it is in micro-evolution not made up of fanciful fairy tales of fish who all of a sudden grow feathers, or other features not in their DNA in the first place.

      • Sorry for taking your time but I would like to ask other questions:
        OK, but mutation is the change of DNA, so why a fish could not in a very long time and lots of generations grow feathers?
        From where do you think that original divine man came?
        Do you really think that chimpanzees and gorillas are product of mixing?

        • You need the DNA for feathers to be there to grow feathers. Just like you need petroleum to make synthetic rubber tyres. No matter how many times you try to make synthetic rubber tyres from other materials you will ALWAYS fail. It is not possible.

          I don’t know from whence the original man came, but I my best bet would be from space. In some form or another.

          Yes, I think that chimpanzees and gorillas are product of a mix between man and some other creature. Note; I think. I cannot know for sure, of course.

          • That would make sense more than that the family tree starts from monkeys and then later because of evolution to us.

            • Also Varg what’s your opinion what happened to dinosaurs, could it also be that the stories from dragons come from few dinosaurs that still lived in earth when there were humans?

              • Actually, I think so. The dragon myths must be based on actual sightings of similar creatures, such as dinosaurs.

                • Also it could be that humans (neanderthals i’m pretty sure about that) killed the rest because i’m sure they were creatures that were really dangerous to humans and could wipe out entire community really fast so they had to hunt them and then probably use the bones for something.

                • I am cynical about this, I saw a documentary (some of it) quite some time ago by Tom Holland (who has written good “narrative history” books on Rome, Persia and medieval Europe), claiming that beliefs in dragons must have been based on findings of dinosaur fossils….It just annoys me that it is again about this obsession with finding a scientific “origin”, the idea that it cannot possibly be to do with human imagination and fantasy but must be ground in fossils and bones. I guess it is possible they saw dinosaurs, especially of Darwinist “natural selection” or evolution never actually happened….Scientists are also to quick to assume a certain creature never existed at a certain time just because no fossils have been found yet…

                  • Yes and that’s why i think they used the bones because why waste them? And that’s why also there hasn’t (yet) found bones from that age.

          • Why isn’t it possible to make tyre from anything other? Petroleum is just mix of hydrocarbons. It just isn’t cost effective to make it from anything other than petroleum. You don’t have to make petrol from petroleum also.

              • Yes, I understand your point. I still have my opinion but I also know that I cannot know anything for sure.

                • What is the most important is that we both have an open mind and look for the truth — and I hope you will share it with me if you find it one day. 🙂

          • De facto, the life on earth is really from space! The water on earth we due to the comets(that consits from ice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet) fallen on earth, and as we all know: water is life. But who knows what else in that comets was frozen, because bacteries are found everywhere in space(in any case in our solar system). But, that comets brought life on earth is for sure. So you have the right point saying “out of space” about life, at least from this perspective.

            • Earth is also part of space so everything is from space. But I don’t get your point about water.

              • And it doesn’t really tell anything either; if form outer space, then when and how was it created there?

                • A little bit of imagination and every thing will be clear.

                  Like I said the bacteries are found everywhere, even in the worst conditions for life. Comets also could be formed after an asteroid broke in a satelite as for example: Europa – the satelite of Jupiter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moons_of_Jupiter – that consists mainly from water, frozen outside and liquide inside(due to gravitation of Jupiter, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(moon)) and there for sure are bacteries. So, the bacteries frozen in comets can survive in its core for millions of years. And when such an “cosmic iceberg” , that can have huge dimmensions and weight, brokes into a such hot cosmic object like it was Earth “few” milliards of years ago and with a mighty gravity, then it is a question of time the apperience of life.

                  Note that not I mentioned about “out of space” life on Earth, but it doesn’t stop me to suppose “far from sci-fi” hypothesis, it is just my opinion. But we are really the “children of the Sun”, everything we see around is from Star “Dust”, but it s another story…

              • Earth – part of space? Really, it seems that you are kidding me… but how is this possible? Ha, and what else? The Sun is spherical and the space is infinite?….

                – Thanks for “new” and “useful” information.

                • I wanted just to say that if there’s ice on comets why couldn’t there be water vapour on Earth. And the same with building molecules of DNA – why should there be a bigger probability that they are on comets when comet is in the same universe as Earth.

                  • How on the dust and cosmical rocks – that the Earth was formed from – may be vapours? About what water can be the talk about while Earth was creating. It’s absolutely not logical. Even after a milliard of years the formation of Earth it was still a very hot place, with high magma activity, it was just a very huge Cosmic Rock with many active vulcans, it was very similar to what is now Venera, try to find on Venera vapours, ha. And where from would you like vapours – from lava? Let’s not be so ridiculous but more logical.

                    The Earth was not created in one day, and especially at that time it was regullary “bombed” by asteroids and comets. and here’s again the link about comets and please do me a favour and study it:
                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet#Studies_of_physical_characteristics

                    • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere#Evolution_of_Earth.27s_atmosphere
                      Venera?=?Venus
                      “Studies have suggested that billions of years ago, the Venusian atmosphere was much more like Earth’s than it is now, and that there may have been substantial quantities of liquid water on the surface, but, after a period of 600 million to several billion years,[45] a runaway greenhouse effect was caused by the evaporation of that original water, which generated a critical level of greenhouse gases in its atmosphere.”

                  • I intentionally said:”…it was very similar to what is now Venera…”, the key-word is “now” – I didn’t wrote “was”, I gave you an ACTUAL example of ACTUAL Venus just for you could imagine how the Earth looked around 3 milliards(and more) ago, and not beacause they have the same history of formation(because they don’t, first of all because of their positioning in solar system). I really can’t understand your theory about appearance of water on Earth from nowhere. At least I argumented higher with facts my opinion, and even if my theories are not “perfect”, in any case they are more “suitable” then not argumented with facts theories from Sci-fi heading. I’m not a “scientist”, but I do just some logical conclusions, sorry, I don’t want to hurt your feelings, but your ideas about Earth genesis seems to be ignorant and lacked of any logic. I will accept any of your theories if it will be really argumented with facts(and not with your “imagination”), logical and able to convince me, in other case there is no any sense of continuing the “debate” on this topic.

                    P.S. *Venera is a romanian name for Venus, sorry for this confusion.

                    • Do you know that water can have different state, a gas, liquid, solid? Just like with methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen,…. Water can be also created through different chemical equations.
                      Did you have any chemistry at school?
                      In the link you posted I found nothing what can be classified as argument only that there is ice on comets, but that is very well known. But in the link I posted there was written that earliest atmosphere of Earth included among other substances water.
                      So I don’t really get what you’re saying and your offensive approach makes talking with you quite unpleasant.

                  • Nothing “offensive”, just annoyed…

                    Ha, your link just proves my words and here are some quotes from it:

                    “Earliest atmosphere
                    The first atmosphere would have consisted of gases in the solar nebula, primarily hydrogen. In addition there would probably have been simple hydrides such as are now found in gas-giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn, notably water vapor, methane and ammonia. As the solar nebula dissipated these gases would have escaped, partly driven off by the solar wind.”

                    Pay attention to the last sentence:

                    “As the solar nebula dissipated these gases would have escaped, partly driven off by the solar wind.”

                    Then:

                    “Second atmosphere
                    The next atmosphere, consisting largely of nitrogen plus carbon dioxide and inert gases, was produced by outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids. A major rainfall led to the buildup of a vast ocean. A major part of carbon dioxide emissions were soon dissolved in water and built up carbonate sediments.”

                    – No comment.

                    Better read your links before posting… and acusing me in offensive actions. I do not want to offense here anybody, but some things must be clear… And sorry if some of my words hurt you, I didn’t intend to do that.

                    P.S. Chemistry was my preferable subject at the school, and without the risk to hurt my modestity: I was the best at it, and especially in organic chemistry…

                    • But, there is written “partly” (if it took all there would not be other gases here). I read it (for your info) and I also read your links. And there is nothing that says that most of water came from comets (maybe I just missed it that’s possible). In todays atmosphere there is very little water vapour. So when all water was in form of vapour (or maybe other forms) the percentage didn’t had to be much high – but this is my speculation. Chemistry was also mine favourite subject more anorganic. So the point that all water came from comets (if is this what you claim) doesn’t seem to me much possible, but I may be wrong but I remember what I was taught about this and I didn’t find any fact that supports your opinion.

                    • “SUPPLEMENTED by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids. A major rainfall led to the buildup of a vast ocean.”
                      and rainfall is just rainfall of water;unless it meant as ?rainfall of asteroids?, but that would be written in different form?

                    • If the Earth was first a red glowing fireball with no atmosphere, then ALL water must neccessarily come from space?!

                    • It was formed from a nebula of all kind of material and also gases. Gravity of Earth holds gases. Just like with Jupiter.

                    • I know everything you posted. But if there was a chance that amino acids were created through some reactions on comets, why couldn’t be there same possibility that amino acid were created on Earth (I remeber that some scientist made some experiments about creation of organic substances in certain environment). I don’t say that life didn’t come from a comet but I think there is same probability that it was spontaneusly created on Earth.

                    • Ah, who knows, who knows… These scientists always create confusions… But I think the main is to avoid any Creationist idea(under scientifical clothing)… That’s why I didn’t like your idea of a sudden appearence of life – because it fitts very well to “… and on the sixth day God created life on Earth , and on the seventh day he rested…” .

                  • My point is just that life on Earth couldn’t appear by itself, and comets were catalysers of life on Earth:
                    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17628-found-first-amino-acid-on-a-comet.html
                    and:
                    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2003/aug/11/amino-acid-detected-in-space

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

                    …that could give birth to organisms that didn’t require Oxygen for breathing( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_organism) and in further to such organism as Cyanobacteria(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanobacteria) that produced http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxygenation_Event , to whom we due the creation of Earth’s Third Atmosphere, and the rest is history….

                    I hope I was clear as much as it is possible in this post. 😉

                    • I just read some part of scientific study about “Optical phenomena in atmosphere” – there’s some about brief evolution of Earth’s atmosphere. It says what I said earlier but doesn’t deny what you said. Important part says that the earliest atmosphere was very dense (also from what I know about physics and chemistry it is extremely weird that there would be a solid ball with high gravity but no gases around(including water vapour)).
                      I am not happy that we spared too much time with this unimportant topic, at all it is just theory. I had to react to your first reply because I had to fight for my thoughts but than it was chain reaction.
                      I would leave this debate so if you want to say last words just do it 😉 .

                    • Sorry for breaking my promise, but have to reply to your last post:
                      If some primordial life was just created (somehow spntaneusly or was there laready) on comet but couldn’t anyhow on Earth – that sounds more creationist to me.
                      But I say that primordial life can spontaneusly be created through chemical reactions anywhere that means that life is a manifestation of universe that it is part of it’s order (if you call this order a god then you are this god) – and there is no outer stimulus for the creation (creationist – no fancy man or entity with supernatural powers).

            • I understand your point about the water as the basic component for the formation and manuntenção life.

              Yes, by taking this perspective I agree with you, but come from space …

          • But if the original man came from space, means that their ancestors come from another home (planet), and go back to the same question we are now, right?
            Travel interspatial me sounds a lot like “Star Trek,” perhaps for this reason that such ideai me sounds a bit strange …

  10. Even the Darwin was misunderstood. He never claimed that the human had evoluated from monkeys(so wants us to think the modern “science”), but supposed that human and monkey had an common ancestor. In any case to the end of his life he negated all his hypothesis and theories he made. But as we could see some years ago the Catholic Church agrees with “evolution” theory:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

    …And that is a good ilustration to what Marie and Varg mean by “science as another religion”.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution

    If to give a religious classification of the modern science, I think it would be Abrahamic for sure.

  11. I saw a evolutionary “scientist” on Youtube a few days ago saying how “beauty” is nothing more than an instinctual recognition of something as being potentially useful.

    BS!

    I have never been so angry over a “scientific” assertion. I love science, but that is far from it. Some people just want to reduce everything that is inspiring to ash. It is one thing to speculate, but to claim things so nonchalantly like it is a fact that I have to deal with just pisses me off.

  12. Anybody who has studied the natural sciences and understood the underlying principles knows that all that science does is describe nature. It does not explain anything other than in the form of using other descriptions or even postulates in order to justify new descriptions. Even the much hyped quantum theory is merely a (inadequate and incomplete) description of observations. Nothing more.

    Therefore, I don’t think there is really anything religious about the natural sciences, which are based on mathematics. The media and popular culture descriptions and interpretations of the natural sciences, and the fact that for most people maths is a riddle wrapped in an enigma, are what gives them their religious character for the average Joe (aka. Lemming).

    Speaking of Lemmings and science. There is a large collection of radio broadcasts by Dr. William Pierce on archive.org. You should give them a listen. They are extremely illuminating.

    http://archive.org/details/DrWilliamPierceAudioArchive308RadioBroadcasts

  13. They almost look like any other scandinavian now, they should just drop the sami culture because it’s more like some stupid trend novadays than anything and it’s asian culture anyways, it would be same if let’s say Varg started to practise african culture because he got the negro blood from stone age.

    but if they racemix then all this progression to wipe out the bad genes was for nothing!

    • Sami, you’re a very regular poster here, always active, which is good. I want to ask you something, those Samis, aren’t just finns who happen to live up north in Lapland and they were affected by the Sami culture? because I don’t think all samis mixed, don’t you think is a cultural thing also?

      • Well the mongols who came from Siberia were invanders (or migrated who knows) and we shouldn’t let any non-european influence in Europe, just like east-europeans didn’t left Mongolian culture in there when mongols invadet in there or south-europeans when Turks and arabs invadet.

            • *mix anymore with non-europeans (why can’t i write everything in one post so i don’t have to correct. :D)

        • Sami, here I post the reply of a Finnish who’s very good at genetics and populations of the Baltic and N. Europe in general:

          “Samis are not Finns.
          Ethnoculturally these are different populations. Finns were hunter-gatherers and later farmers living in South Finland. Finns didn’t even populate the central and Northern Finland until around 1500s.

          Actually, the biggest Sami population in Scandinavia is in Norway, not in Finland.
          Samis indeed are a complicated issue. Genetically they have been found to be European. The Samis in Sweden and Norway have largely Scandinavian haplogroups, in Finland they have the haplogroup N just like Finns do. This is probably due to rather recent admixture. There is also a large degree of isolation in Sami populations, they have mutations that have led to certain diseases that don’t exist anywhere else, and some genetical markers that can be found in Samis only. There is also some non-European influxes, but I believe that is only a small part and perhaps only in certain populations. Then there is some strange markers, like similarities to South Europe and Basques – these might be some really old remains from the proto-European populations.

          Actually, the Samis have several different Sami languages and the speakers of different Sami languages cannot even understand each other. Majority of Samis look White (actually many of them are very pale), I would count them as an exotic European population, and a population of their own, even though the modern Samis are largerly mixed with Finns, Swedes and Norwegians. However, some of them are too exotic to be “pure” whites. It is hard to say why. In the 1700s-1800s some Russian Siberian tribes moved to the Kola peninsula, which used to be traditional Sami region, some Siberian elements can derive from that, since genetically they have been found to be mostly European and not Asian, and from cultural relations with circumpolar populations since Samis must have adapted the reindeer herding and clothing customs from them (or why not, vice versa…).”

          Didn’t know that most of the Samis lived in Norway and had so many dialects lol. Hope that cleared some doubts you had about the Samis.

          • I think sami people were originally that most of them lived in Finland and they were small tribes who lived in many parts of Finland (and spoke little different languages than the other sami tribes) but when christianity came many of those tribes escaped to north but many probably were also caught (because i think Finland has the most people with mongol genes but we also have the least sami people because they had to escape to very north, to Norway and Kola Peninsula). But i don’t know why those who were later found didn’t look like 100 % mongol, i would say most of them looked like kinda ugly white people, but there are pictures were sami looks almost like inuit or something.

            • Also i think majority of sami people have light eyes and brown hair or blonde hair so i actually look more sami than those sami people (i have brown eyes and brown hair). But i don’t think it completely means i’m not European, just that i’m not so pure and because of foreigner genes around Europe i can usually tell who is from Greece or who is from eastern Europe, i can even tell difference between pure Swede and pure Finn.

    • What is the problem with Sami people?are they offenders or thiefs,like all “our”niggers,arabs and gypsies we have in France?

      • No but they have been taught that their land was stolen by finns, swedish and norwegians (which is not true), so many (especially from the older sami generation) dislikes other scandinavians for that, there isn’t really nothing wrong with the culture though but it’s not really necessary to have that because race = culture.

  14. The knowledge of living within a natural rhythm is quite… comforting. To me, anyway. Take seasons, for instance. When I see the terminus of my favourite season (winter) I always take solace in the fact that I will soon see it again. Just knowing there is an unshakable natural cycle in place soothes me.

    Concerning the ‘science’ religion, I agree. The followers of it are particularly unsavory. Those ‘atheist’ types always cling so vehemently to their unfounded, nihilistic ideals and then have the nerve to insult and belittle anyone else for believing in anything that they perceive to be unfounded. Hypocrites, all.

    Speaking of comfort, it’s also quite consolatory to know that these people will soon be crushed under the weight of their own apathy.

  15. excellent point Brenner and also very positive, only a few are capable of this type of restraint and will power, but these few should be looked on as models

  16. I am also not happy to see how things are going, but instead of talking to them to stop doing what they are doing try to do something that show them that their way of living is wrong, by acting as an honorable person, doing good things in your daily life. Things like that makes you a great person and when they see you they will reflect about their life. 🙂

    • I do good thinks for those who deserve it and if somebody wants to change then i give them a change (like my friends who have become completely idiots). 🙂

  17. THE WAY OF THE WARRIOR
    When living your life
    Like an arrow in flight
    You must always accept that
    The end is in sight,
    Be grateful at least for the fact
    That you knew, you came to death
    He did not come for you

    Not my words but the above article reminded me of this tale, based on parts of the Havamal

  18. Absolutely inspirational!
    Thank you Varg for another beautiful piece of text!
    You are an artist in music and in literature!
    I hope Europe will reward you greatly one day!
    Thank you!

  19. I always do my best to live in a honorable way, protecting what remains from ancient times, talking about the real values to other people, it is our role ,we must protect our culture and values sacrifying ourselves if necessary. I see a small light at the end of this tunnel called ”modern times” and a small light is better than a totally dark tunnel, I see hope and glory for the future and we must stay strong and fighting to make this a better world for our children.

  20. It’s sad that youngsters these days think the older European life was “boring” and the art and beauty of that are is only for nerds and gays (but then they listen some rap where shirtless subhuman nigger is jumping halfnaked on some “music” video, if that’s not gay then i don’t know what is).

      • I would never let my kids become one like that or my daughter to become disease spreading worthless slut.

    • Sami, just ignore them, this kind of people deserves no attention, they will destroy themselves, just wait and see. 😉

      What matters is what you think, if you do your part to protect the European culture you are doing the best. Good luck my friend.

      • Thanks i do my best. 🙂 I’m not happy how the thinks are going but if we don’t act then all hope is lost.

      • That’s probably the smartest way to deal with them. If you get too involved you risk getting dragged down with them. For example, one of my lifelong friends got into drugs. I continued hanging out with him trying to recapture ‘the good old days’ as he was really my only friend growing up. I had hoped that maybe I could help him get off the drugs but it was a lost cause.

        Well the last time I was with him he had drugs in the car. He was apparently doing deliveries for the dealer to pay for the drugs. Had we gotten pulled over for any reason I would have been in just as much trouble as him and probably sent to jail for a few years. After I got home that night I cut myself off from that friend completely. I haven’t talked to him since and I’m certainly not going to hang around someone like that any longer.

        You can only help those who want to help themselves.

        • Reminds me of my story, my longest time friend (since of age 3) now we both are 19 and he started smoking weed like year ago and always told me how it’s only good for you and i should use it too (i didn’t because that was the time when i started not to trust him that much because he started to hang with really loser looking people) and now year after he uses subutex (mostly used hard drug in here Rovaniemi), sorry friend but bye bye. Also my other friend said he will never become alcoholistic, well now he drinks all the time and can drink whole vodka bottle and even more after that and that shouldn’t be so normal for guy who is 19 years old.

  21. Pingback: New Thulean Perspective post; “The Rhythm of the Universe”. | Ancestral Cult

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s