It's not a pattern. Old Faithful going off regularly is a pattern. Sitting on the geyser expecting nothing because one is too stupid to understand the mechanism would still be dumb. Claiming asteroids come because of the earth's angle being toward Aquarius in a 30-degree window, when the data has to be straitjacketed to fit and is based on false ice-core testimony in the first place, isn't a pattern. There's no prediction to it. The fact that there's also no mechanism to this nonpattern is just icing.
Let's predicate arguendo that all these 16 events have causes that can be fit into an overarching causation narrative. You know, in that case I think I'd be better of with Yahweh sending an asteroid as a natural consequence of man deharmonizing the universe at a recorded time in history than I would with an unknown (from-ignorance) Aquarian doing the same thing at intervals claimed by a cabal led by a spirit that we know about by revelation from Yahweh.
I permit (but cordially disbelieve in) entertaining the idea of myriads of years in which multiple cataclysms existed. They might even come about by causes that we can track to the Aquarian sector, and they might even indicate more past destroyed cultures than one set of prediluvians. And then what? Either the asteroids come on schedule ultimately because God set some order in process to cause them, or they don't have a known schedule and they just come providentially when God hits the smite button. Either way OP is still working the false dilemma between age of man due to presumed evolution and age of man due to history. Man being here 250,000 years, if true, should not be used as evidence of the universe being here for billions (but many use it for that); rather, if true, it should be used for putting creation and Adam farther back than the Bible says while still preserving a chain of humanity through one cataclysm or more. So even if it all worked out for you the idea that God's mechanism was one that glorified the zodiac and thereby the secondary powerz, for his own inscrutable reasons, would still be a bit silly. (You're not trying to go back to the created-demiurge idea, are you?) But the fact is that the webbing dissipates so rapidly with the slightest investigation that nothing remains but apophenia masquerading as epiphania.
Add: I missed your statement "If a planet 700 times larger than earth orbits the Sun with a 26,000 year period and a highly elliptical orbit, it would obviously be picking up small bodies as it transited the Oort Cloud and the asteroid belt, which would lead to cyclical impacts as they were dragged closer to earth, following the pattern of the 26,000 orbit." However, I did say that Brown's Planet Nine, the best candidate, has a period of 10,000-20,000 years. Even if there were a 26,000 period (coincidentally the same as the earth's precession), there would still be some idea that only the 30-degree quarter-marks of that period are significant, like there are exactly four biaxial mini-Oorts to sift through. There is no giant Nibiru or Planet transiting the asteroid belt BTW, that would be literally 3 AU perigee when we've already ruled out everything under 150 AU perigee. It would be much more intuitive on the data presented to suppose that Planet Nine has a period of what I said statistically on Carlson's false data, 6,683 years, with one critical transit per orbit instead of four equidistant ones. But since the data is false that theory doesn't line up either. Like I said, it would be interesting to go into the details of all 16 events and demonstrate where the data actually points, and it might even be so interesting that it might yield something with a better fit to the wide transit rate Brown permits, but then it would be so totally different from Carlson as to discredit him completely.
It's not a pattern. Old Faithful going off regularly is a pattern. Sitting on the geyser expecting nothing because one is too stupid to understand the mechanism would still be dumb. Claiming asteroids come because of the earth's angle being toward Aquarius in a 30-degree window, when the data has to be straitjacketed to fit and is based on false ice-core testimony in the first place, isn't a pattern. There's no prediction to it. The fact that there's also no mechanism to this nonpattern is just icing.
Let's predicate arguendo that all these 16 events have causes that can be fit into an overarching causation narrative. You know, in that case I think I'd be better of with Yahweh sending an asteroid as a natural consequence of man deharmonizing the universe at a recorded time in history than I would with an unknown (from-ignorance) Aquarian doing the same thing at intervals claimed by a cabal led by a spirit that we know about by revelation from Yahweh.
I permit (but cordially disbelieve in) entertaining the idea of myriads of years in which multiple cataclysms existed. They might even come about by causes that we can track to the Aquarian sector, and they might even indicate more past destroyed cultures than one set of prediluvians. And then what? Either the asteroids come on schedule ultimately because God set some order in process to cause them, or they don't have a known schedule and they just come providentially when God hits the smite button. Either way OP is still working the false dilemma between age of man due to presumed evolution and age of man due to history. Man being here 250,000 years, if true, should not be used as evidence of the universe being here for billions (but many use it for that); rather, if true, it should be used for putting creation and Adam farther back than the Bible says while still preserving a chain of humanity through one cataclysm or more. So even if it all worked out for you the idea that God's mechanism was one that glorified the zodiac and thereby the secondary powerz, for his own inscrutable reasons, would still be a bit silly. (You're not trying to go back to the created-demiurge idea, are you?) But the fact is that the webbing dissipates so rapidly with the slightest investigation that nothing remains but apophenia masquerading as epiphania.
Add: I missed your statement "If a planet 700 times larger than earth orbits the Sun with a 26,000 year period and a highly elliptical orbit, it would obviously be picking up small bodies as it transited the Oort Cloud and the asteroid belt, which would lead to cyclical impacts as they were dragged closer to earth, following the pattern of the 26,000 orbit." However, I did say that Brown's Planet Nine, the best candidate, has a period of 10,000-20,000 years. Even if there were a 26,000 period (coincidentally the same as the earth's precession), there would still be some idea that only the 30-degree quarter-marks of that period are significant, like there are exactly four biaxial mini-Oorts to sift through. There is no giant Nibiru or Planet transiting the asteroid belt BTW, that would be literally 3 AU perigee when we've already ruled out everything under 150 AU perigee. It would be much more intuitive on the data presented to suppose that Planet Nine has a period of what I said statistically on Carlson's false data, 6,683 years, with one critical transit per orbit instead of four equidistant ones. But since the data is false that theory doesn't line up either. Like I said, it would be interesting to go into the details of all 16 events and demonstrate where the data actually points, and it might even be so interesting that it might yield something with a better fit to the wide transit rate Brown permits, but then it would be so totally different from Carlson as to discredit him completely.