I find it hard to put a date on the Three Days of Darkness especially for so soon, that would mean the warning would be happening this year. I would think there would have to be the great chastisement first, aka world war III, plagues, famines, etc. But who knows.

Didn't the whole idea of a warning come out of Garabandal, which is not approved?

No. There are a good number of old prophecies that tell of a warning before the 3DD happens, but they don't specify what exactly it will be, or what year it will happen.

I believe this timeline is the accurate one, so I do not believe the 3DD of darkness would happen this year. I have been studying Eschatology for about 12 years, and it happening this year just makes no sense when it is studied in unison with other prophecies.

I go by this timeline:



I believe we are at the very end of the dotted line at the beginning since we are about to engage upon WWIII.

You should also read this entire blog post, it is exactly the same position I take and which I have held for years, I just never wrote it down, this guy did, so I was astounded he was on the exact same page as me with regards to all this:

Catholic Prophecy by The Catholic Knight

There are a good number of old prophecies that tell of a warning before the 3DD happens, but they don't specify what exactly it will be, or what year it will happen.

Nifty.  What are these prophecies about the warning?  I've only heard of the Garabandal one.

"I am an archaeologist and the magnetic reversals or pole shifts are recorded. They are recorded in lava flows where the orientation of the north pole was preserved as the lava cooled. The magnetic pole is not at the North Pole and it moves or varies location. I do think this is not sufficent danger involved in this to worry over." Miles Dei

For a long time now I've looked for a reference that brings together information on the 3 Days of Darkness prophecies, but up 'til now all I've been able to find was bits & pieces. Your post is the best I've seen yet on bringing this information together in one place. Thank you for posting it.

...however, your speculations on pole shift, as politely noted by Miles Dei, are incorrect. These ideas rely on a confuson between the Earth's spin axis & its magnetic axis, which are 2 entirely different things.

I'm a prospector, & I've studied geology, physical geography, & planetary astronomy at the university level.

The Earth, as we all know, rotates on its spin axis. This is the motion that gives us our day & night. In all of its existence, the Earth's spin axis has never changed, nor can it change, absent a cataclysm that would probably destroy the planet. More of this in a moment. The only exception to this is a process called "precession", which means that every few thousand years the poles of the spin axis describe a small circle with respect to the celestial sphere. Back to the beginning of the planet, precession has always been a constant, not an intermittent variable; & there are no disturbances of nature or cataclysms that have ever been associated with it.

In addition, the Earth has magnetic poles which are located several hundred miles away from the poles of its spin axis. Like the poles of the spin axis, the magnetic poles "wander" a little bit, but their wanderings aren't as rigidly controlled as precession is. In fact they appear to be random, or nearly so. In addition to wandering, there is evidence from volcanic lava flows-- again as pointed out by Miles Dei-- that at widely separated periods of time the magnetic poles have flipped, the North magnetic pole become the South & vice versa. Scientists know of no negative consequences of this magnetic flipping, nor does present scientific theory provide for any. The only logical outcome would be that your compass needle points South instead of North.

Returning for a moment to the idea of the Earth changing its direction of rotation on its spin axis, there is just 1 possible event that could produce this result. That's the close passage to the Earth of a very massive object of at least planetary size-- possibly a stellar core fragment. The gravity of such an object, in theory, might reverse the rotation of the Earth, but in doing so it would perturb the Moon out of its orbit, ocean tides would be hundreds of feet high, mountains & continents on the Earth would shift, there would be earthquakes the strength of which would put all others in the shade, the atmosphere might be attenuated, & the Earth might very well be perturbed out of its present orbit around the Sun. In short, doomsday. It is very unlikely that life on Earth would survive such an event. Not just human life, but any life.

I'm aware that some commentators, in confusing the Earth's spin axis with its magnetic axis, have created websites that cater to the idea that since the Earth's magnetic axis is known to reverse itself from time to time, this has some sort of consequence for its spin axis. That view, as I hope I've made clear, is incorrect.

BTW, I neglected to mention the example of an electric motor, that when you reverse its polarity it reverses its direction of rotation. This is perfectly true, but it doesn't apply to the Earth. An electric motor is driven by its electric current, but the rotation of the Earth is in no sense driven by its magnetic field. The rotation of the Earth is the result of the conservation of the angular momentum of the primordial nebula of gas & particles out of which it oridinally condensed. As the gas & particles were compacted by gravity, their angular momentum was conserved in the physical structure of the Earth, which maintains its spin by momentum-- & not in any sense by its magnetic field. Proof of this can be found in the other planets, every 1 of which rotates, but many of which-- like the Moon & Mars-- have no detectable magnetic fields.

It can be very misleading to perform research on this & other subjects-- including the 3 Days of Darkness-- relying primarily on the InterNet. This is because a lot of misleading information relating to pole-flipping, for example, has been posted. Also, many spurious quotes have been attributed to St. Pio & others. This is why, in verifying his statement that the BV told him about the Apparitions of Garabandal, I wrote to his monastery, to the priest who delivered his death veil to Conchita, & to others with 1st-hand knowledge of the facts.

It is a deeply troubling fact that some of these spurious quotes have begun making their way into works that are published in hard copy. I recently got in trouble for this on another site, where I posted a quote attributed to St. Ignatius of Antioch that I got out of my personal library-- not off the InterNet. When I was challenged I checked the attribution & found that it wasn't listed in the index of attributions, so I checked my copy of the Letters of St. Ignatius & couldn't find it; so I went on-line & found that in addition to Ignatius of Antioch, it has also been attributed to St. Irenaeus of Lyons & St. Ignatius of Loyala-- but no one could provide an authentic attribution for any of them. I had to admit defeat, which happens to me rarely.

I never said it was approved by the Vatican, I am pretty sure it is approved by the local bishop. Gregg is the person to talk to on this, he knows pretty much everything there is to know on Garabandal. If you search Fisheaters, there is a really long thread about Garabandal on there where he goes into explicit detail why it is a legitimate apparition of Our Lady.

Regardless of Garabandal or not, I sincerely and highly doubt the 3DD will take place this year.

"I never said it was approved by the Vatican, I am pretty sure it is approved by the local bishop."

You may be right about that. I seem to recall something along those lines.

"Regardless of Garabandal or not, I sincerely and highly doubt the 3DD will take place this year."

Totally agree. I think we're close, though. Say 5-10 years.