You may have heard of the Mudflood Theory (MFT) before. When we first came across this theory, we did a quick internet search and our curiosity was put to rest. Until it persistently started presenting itself in other areas of research. We finally decided to put the matter to rest in a series of articles where we either prove the MFT or we bury it back in the mud.
In order to truly understand any theory, we believe you need to first consider the different aspects and evidence that make up the theory. So, in the following articles, we wish to analyze the many layers of this MFT and test them against any physical or historical evidence we have collected in the TB Archive.
As recorded by modern science, many natural forces can result in a mudflood occurring, such as heavy rainfall on loose slopping soil or in many cases, severe flooding. We have all undoubtedly seen images of such events, watching villages slipping from the sides of mountains, or mudbanks giving way over roads and into the sea.
But you may be surprised to learn that it is possible for solid ground to turn into a muddy liquid. This can create a mudflood in any location. This means we’re made to look for more than the old tell tale signs that we have learned in school. We will start our investigation from ground up and begin with the possibility of the ground turning to liquid.
Soil liquefaction can occur when saturated soil loses strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress such as an earthquake, frequency, or other sudden changes. In this case, material that is ordinarily solid behaves like a liquid. This is the essence of the MFT.
Plasm, electricity, and frequency have proven they can reproduce similar effects. In a future article, we will discuss the role acoustic weapons and star forts could have played, possibly linking them to the floods of the past.
Now, let’s look at the process of liquefaction and how it works.
The video above uses the 1906 San Francisco earthquake as an example of how soil can be turned into a liquid. In most occasions, an extreme vibration is needed to agitate the soil to the point where it loses its strength. Now, let’s look at a collection of historical images. We will observe more closely at these images and their locations another time, but in this moment, we will use them to gain an understanding of why this theory has been (excuse the pun) gaining so much ground in recent years.
It is theorized that the mudfloods were not single events in single locations, but instead followed a natural pattern. This is not to say that human ingenuity hasn’t either provoked or resisted them in the ages of our past. The leading hypothesis is that they occur every 1,000 years or so whilst others suggest a much shorter time period, even as often as every 250 years.
If the mudfloods are indeed cyclical, there should be evidence clearly visible in our day-to-day environment. One thing all discussions seem to agree on is that there was a mass mudflood in our very recent past. So recent, in fact, it could shock you. When we look at the buildings and landscapes that surround us, we have an instant assumption of knowing their history. Whether it’s a building with the architect’s plate firmly nailed to its entrance or the sweeping hill of the countryside with its seemingly ancient surety. But when we truly analyse these things with the MFT in mind we find that all might not be as settled as we would like to believe.
Above is a collection of images of groundworks having uncovered buried structures in the ground. Now initially this might not look like a big thing. We are aware of the occasional Roman town being uncovered from the many layers of mud, but on more than one of these occasions, we can see a relatively modern building having full subterranean layers, including doorways and windows!
For us, this raises two questions:
- If buildings show mud damage since its construction, where are the records on the mudflood?
- If building have deeper floors and signs of mudflood damage, could they be older then previously thought?
What we do know is that many cities have recorded the effects of mudflooding. Cities such as San Francisco, Christchurch, and Japan have had extensive soil liquefaction due to their regular seismic activity.
St. Mary Magdalene Catholic Church, Omaha, Nebraska —1908 after excavations.
The building in the images above, St. Mary Magdalene in Nebraska, is of special interest as it shows the real extent of the building below the ground level. Notice the window is now the door.
Buried alive: WWI
A little known phenomenon occurred during the bombing of the trenches in the first World War. It was reported that soldiers would literally disappear into the mud when a bomb exploded near them. At first they were believed to have been vaporized by the shock wave, which some were. However, other soldiers near the blast would literally fall through the earth as it turned to mud, all within a second or two, burying the unfortunate soldiers alive.
Most are aware that in our recent history there was a whole generation of adults missing. At this time children were made to work in the factories and there were free adoptions and orphan trains. Could the last mudflood have had something to do with this missing generation? When we look through the archive, there are many images displaying empty streets in empty cities.
Mud Floods: Before and After
The building in Barnaul (Krasnoarmeysky, Avenue 14) — officially built in 1904-1905. Nobody has explained why it’s buried, except those who know the MFT.
The main house of the Razumovsky-Sheremetev estate — also known as the Wedding House — officially built in the 1790s. The architect is not known.
Paul Cook gives a great explanation of mudfloods in his video below: ‘WHAT IS MUDFLOOD IN THREE MINS‘.
If the MFT is correct, could it have been programmed into our realm to periodically wash away the playing field and reset the game? Is it a fail-safe to ensure no one player could ever rise above the rest? Or have they been manmade to suppress the masses?
We will continue to expand and explore the MFT in the next article on mudfloods: Mudflood Theory Part 2: What to look for.
2 thought on “Mudflood Theory Part 1: Soil Liquefaction”
I’ve been sceptical about the mud flood theory for a while. Mostly because the term “mud flood” suggests something different to soil liquefaction.
Thank you for clarifying this theory. The photos make it hard to deny.
Maybe I need to dig deeper, this is only the second time reading about MFT. It is obvious the streets were lower when originally built. But where did the soil come from? There’s thousands of yards of dirt we are talking about, were there hills not far from the structures that liquefied and flooded the streets? were there vibrations that leveled the material?