Lightning can trigger nuclear reactions

“This made me think of your book,” says reader Ronald Baker. “Imagine the reactions that take place during magnetic reversals.”


In Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps, I presented my belief that magnetic reversals could trigger huge nuclear reactions in the sky, producing Tunguska-like explosions around the globe.

I further proposed that explosions such as the one above Tunguska could dump untold amounts of radioactive materials on our heads, leading to sudden evolutionary leaps.

Now comes a new discovery that helps validate my theories.

Lightning can trigger nuclear reactions, creating rare atomic isotopes,” reads the headline in Science magazine.

See entire article:


9 thoughts on “Lightning can trigger nuclear reactions”

  1. Look to Plasma Physics and the Electric Universe theory for answers Robert.

    Scientists like the late Hannes Alfven and Kristian Birkeland have paved the way.

    Current site with the latest findings can be found @:

    Like yourself, real scientists do not always follow the “politically ideologically correct” dogma demanded by those with control over grant dispositions.

    They are crowd funded also.

  2. I really like your post, but are you actually proposing that “random” mutations from radioactivity would create new and useful structures in lifeforms? Very respectfully: Not sure if you keep up with Biology, but neo-darwinism is effectively dead, and so is the random mutations and selection nonsense, the comatose watchmaker, etc. In the last 20 years the story of “Evolution” is no longer a small random change followed by selection fairy tale. Evidence of the real mechanisms of change (random mutation may cull the herd, that’s about it, but it does not create new functional information required to create novel adaptations). Jumping genes, Horizontal Gene transfer, epigenetics, on and on. In the last 20 years neo-darwinism has suffered fatal blow after fatal blow – we never saw it in the fossil record, and now we know why – “evolution” does not work the way you and I were taught – they were in fact so far off the mark it was ludicrous. Random mutation was jumped on in the 50’s as the ANSWER to the mechanism of genetic variation, without any empirical proof – they keep talking about another “extended” synthesis, but now most cutting edge Biologist are calling for a replacement. Please see Shapiro is one of the most cutting edge evolutionist today, and his thoery, given all the new evidence, is called “Natural Genetic Engineering”. Important to understand, there i no more TREE of life, it is now best described as an “impenetrable thicket” and horizontal, not vertical changes dominate – I find this amusing as what is next? “Natural DNA coding, self repair and self, editing”? I am very interested in magnetic pole reversals, and I see you are going for a hopeful monsters type story to explain rapid evolution (and indeed this is what the fossils are telling us – sudden appearance, changes within limits, then either stasis or extinction, but it does not happen by random chance.

  3. Interesting, especially when you read that it is assumed that there would be small amounts created, thus using these isotopes for dating would be unaffected. really? And here I thought it was the ratios within a specific item that were important, and one would never know WHERE these few “lightning created isotopes” might be created. I’ve always questioned the validity of isotopic dating, and now I can question it even more.

  4. For me the importance of this – If the inferences are true and the gamma ray “signals” are in fact generated by the presumed sources of unstable isotopes and those isotopes are really generated by lighting – IS that it might point to a mechanism, as yet unknown, that generates the fusion on the “surface” of the sun as postulated by several “electric sun – electric universe” proponents.

    I am only an EE with precious little experience in plasma side of things, so I am in pure hypothesis-speculation mode here.

    Still, I find it extremely interesting.

  5. Well, doesn’t it usually come down to the ‘chicken and egg’ question here in the material world? Given Sheldraks’ morphogenetic field theory or the even more expansive information field theory, the question shouldn’t be the results so much as the blueprints that create the forms… and then the real question is who or what consciousness is behind the creation of these fields of thought that govern everything we experience? This goes hyperdimensional… but science isn’t ready to go EU theory yet, so anything else would seem preposterous, no?

Comments are closed.