It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Inuit elders sharing information with NASA regarding Earth's "WOBBLE"

page: 10
83
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: Bedlam

That is fascinating and it looks like a very gentle shift.


It's been going on since the Earth and Moon formed. It's also why we have more than one "North Star". At present it's Polaris, but that won't stay that way. For a big percentage of the 26,000 year cycle, there won't be a "north star" at all.




posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:14 PM
link   



Lest the idea be considered quite fanciful, it should be recalled that several ancient sources refer seriously to a reversal of directions. Herodotus and Plato cite Egyptian sources of occasions when the Sun changed directions and arose in the West instead of the East. A ceiling in the tomb of Senmut of Egypt also pictures a reversed sky tableau such as would occur were the Earth turned upside down. In fifteen spectacular pages [10] Velikovsky searches out and orders rationally other indications in legends and writing of a reversal of directions that could only come with the Earth turning upside down. The contexts scarcely permit the alternative, a cessation and reversal of the Earth's rotation.





The possible occurrence of reversals in proto-historical times may suggest additional reversals in pre-human ages. However, Milton and I have presented in Solaria Binaria (Chap. 8) a theory according to which the Earth was in grip of a huge external magnetic field of the solar binary system until perhaps eight thousand years ago; during almost all of geological time, it could not reverse its field. In fact, it is argued that this same magnetic field and its reciprocal electrical current are the present geomagnetic field and current within the Earth, which have been steadily undergoing decay since the grip of the external magnetic field was released. This theory permits us here to explain the principal geological problems connected with terrestrial magnetism.

We would have to assert that the numerous alleged reversals of the Earth's magnetic field in geological history simply did not occur. Obviously there is no evidence to be obtained one way or another by atmospheric testing of the field; any number of reversals (or none at all) might have occurred without leaving discernible evidence.

The geophysicist, however, can search for evidence of the magnetic field in rocks [14] . Igneous rocks have often been imprinted with magnetism when in a molten state; hence they hold myriads of tiny compasses, pointed towards the magnetic pole. If for one set of rocks the compasses point north and for another adjoining set they point south, it is conceivable that the magnetic field had reversed itself on an occasion between the melting and hardening of the first set of rocks and the melting and hardening of the second set.

Magnetic mapping of rocks is almost entirely of this century but has burgeoned swiftly and, some say, chaotically. Persuaded that they can tell the ages of rocks by radiometry, explorers have used time as a reliable indicator of the change in the magnetic field of the Earth. Since the rocks of the world have exhibited a bewildering variety of magnetic directions, many "dated" strata of differing magnetic direction have been assigned to the different magnetic periods, usually forced into a preconceived mold of "normal" and "reversed" magnetic field.


www.quantavolution.org...

This article also mentions that our magnetic field may be weakening, and so I wonder if this is true, then is this a contributing factor. An interesting read.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

The contexts scarcely permit the alternative, a cessation and reversal of the Earth's rotation.


It would take the entire output of the Sun for quite some time to do. The Earth is pretty massive. Not to mention, it would explode into a solar-system sized ball of little lava droplets.

Grab a calculator and figure out the rotational energy of the Earth. You'll see.

eta: I might add the article you quoted uses a false bifurcation argument. The contexts permit many alternatives, the most glaring of which is that the Egyptians, Herodotus and Plato are just wrong. After all, Herodotus was a hard-core believer in spontaneous generation - he thought you could make mice by putting wheat in an old cloth and tossing it in a closet. Nothing says that these guys' observations are unquestionable, in fact, you find a lot of poetic license, shall we say, in many of Herodotus' writings.
edit on 10-12-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: InTheLight

The contexts scarcely permit the alternative, a cessation and reversal of the Earth's rotation.


It would take the entire output of the Sun for quite some time to do. The Earth is pretty massive. Not to mention, it would explode into a solar-system sized ball of little lava droplets.

Grab a calculator and figure out the rotational energy of the Earth. You'll see.



Are you doubting the ancient Egyptians?



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
Are you doubting the ancient Egyptians?


YES. I do. Quite a bit. Nearly totally, on this sort of thing.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: InTheLight

The contexts scarcely permit the alternative, a cessation and reversal of the Earth's rotation.


It would take the entire output of the Sun for quite some time to do. The Earth is pretty massive. Not to mention, it would explode into a solar-system sized ball of little lava droplets.

Grab a calculator and figure out the rotational energy of the Earth. You'll see.

eta: I might add the article you quoted uses a false bifurcation argument. The contexts permit many alternatives, the most glaring of which is that the Egyptians, Herodotus and Plato are just wrong. After all, Herodotus was a hard-core believer in spontaneous generation - he thought you could make mice by putting wheat in an old cloth and tossing it in a closet. Nothing says that these guys' observations are unquestionable, in fact, you find a lot of poetic license, shall we say, in many of Herodotus' writings.


Isn't it strange though, that they would paint what they witnessed on the pyramid interior?



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

It's basic physics. Actually something that they taught my son this year in 6th grade.

When an object that has mass is in motion, it has kenitic energy. You can neither create energy from nothing, nor can you destroy it. You can only change it from one form to another.

If a car is moving at 60 Mph, and suddenly hits a brick wall, that energy that it had while in motion has to go somewhere, and it does: it' pretty much destroys the front of the car, damages the wall, and either seriously hurts the occupants or kills them.

The Earth is a massive object, and it's rotating at 1,000 Mph. The formula is quite easy:

KE = (m*v^2)/2

Or the energy (measured in Joules) is 1/2 of the mass times the velocity squared.

That's how much energy the Earth has simply because it's rotating. In order to stop it from rotating, you would need to apply enough energy in the opposite direction to get it to stop. And you would need just as much energy as the Earth has to make it stop suddenly. Which would be bad. Very bad for everyone on the surface of the planet.

But it doesn't stop there. You'd need the same amount of energy to get the Earth rotating once more in the other direction.

I don't have to believe anything the AEs said. I have math and physics on my side.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
Isn't it strange though, that they would paint what they witnessed on the pyramid interior?

Not particularly.

They also made statues of animal headed humanoid 'gods'. Should we assume that those are fact based as well?



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: InTheLight
Isn't it strange though, that they would paint what they witnessed on the pyramid interior?

Not particularly.

They also made statues of animal headed humanoid 'gods'. Should we assume that those are fact based as well?


Perhaps, if you believe in advanced genetic experiments back then...the lost sciences and arts.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
Isn't it strange though, that they would paint what they witnessed on the pyramid interior?


Personally, I'd also be pretty chary about the pictures, as well. Who says they're painted from that perspective? What exactly was it that made him think that? Got a photo?

You're talking Velikovsky. I can't exactly say he's the most dependable researcher. I'd actually put him on a par with Sitchin, and that's not saying a lot.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
Perhaps, if you believe in advanced genetic experiments back then...the lost sciences and arts.


Really REALLY lost. Especially as you can't find any of the materials you'd need to do that sort of thing. They were big into clay pots, for God's sake. Not so much on animal-human chimarae where you are mixing two critters with different chromosome counts.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
Perhaps, if you believe in advanced genetic experiments back then...the lost sciences and arts.

If they were that advanced, they could have built significantly better buildings with the same material production techniques that they did actually employ.

They could have also built in a straight line, but...



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: InTheLight
Perhaps, if you believe in advanced genetic experiments back then...the lost sciences and arts.


Really REALLY lost. Especially as you can't find any of the materials you'd need to do that sort of thing. They were big into clay pots, for God's sake. Not so much on animal-human chimarae where you are mixing two critters with different chromosome counts.


Perhaps you are right, after all they did have hallucenogonic gases rising up from everywhere back then.



posted on Dec, 10 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

Perhaps you are right, after all they did have hallucenogonic gases rising up from everywhere back then.


You'd think so, given the crap everyone seemed to be into. I always liked Moloch, myself.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 01:06 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cambot
a reply to: Silverlok

What's the rest of the story?


If it is drag from moving through a 'cloud' of space dust then the heliosphere will bend and the direct effects will be mostly absorbed by the outer planets , and given that they have most of the large surface areas , mass and most of potential energy ( large masses at high rates of speed, in the solar system)) they will move more than the inner planet due to the 'friction'

(the magnetic field of the sun will still protect the inner planets better than the outer planets as it 'warps' into a more comet like tail from the bombardment of particle collisions and magnetic field interference)

now these will obviously be SMALL differences, but slow an orbit down it gets smaller, all of the planets happen to be in certain resonances that only cause minor 'problems' during interactions at present, shifts in these resonances by the outer planets slowing a bit will mean they tighten their orbits and "bend" the planetary orbital plane by exerting forces on the inner planets .

For example calculate jupiter being an arc minute or so 'below' it's normal orbit, then one would expect a couple of things as evidence : heating slighlty above normal , and unexplained auroras ( ones not caused by solar activity) , the earth has these same things but the thermal data ( as with Jupiter ) is tough to delineate , but the unexplained auroras have been here for the better part of the year ...now none of this is PROOF of anything but until we are sure of an anwser we are still on the only one side of the question



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Silverlok

Why are you still ranting about parallax?

If the Earth's tilt had changed, it would cause a measurable change in the position of Polaris. What don't you get about that?



posted on Dec, 14 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
If I am not mistaken, and please forgive me if I have forgotten the scientific Latin and Greek names for these, but whether you believe in Heliocentric or Geocentric rotations or both. The earth has a wobble effect and also a swaying back and forth effect as either it travels around the sun of if it is the sun and planets that travel around it. the Effect on the earth is the same. And whether is it the earth or the solar system and universe the path also moves up and down and back and forth.

Maybe trying to appease geocentricity makes it harder to understand what I am saying so I will say it using only Heliocentric view.

the earth wobbles as it rotates, it also sways back and forth and up and down on its circuit around the sun and all other heavenly bodies also wobble, sway and mover up and down as they travel around. How this movement affects the other bodies in a vacuum is still not fully understood but these have been said to produce electromagnetic signals from the bodies as they travel about universe, solar systems and even in satellitic movement as well around other bodies like moons.



posted on Dec, 14 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: InTheLight
Perhaps, if you believe in advanced genetic experiments back then...the lost sciences and arts.


Really REALLY lost. Especially as you can't find any of the materials you'd need to do that sort of thing. They were big into clay pots, for God's sake. Not so much on animal-human chimarae where you are mixing two critters with different chromosome counts.


Perhaps you are right, after all they did have hallucenogonic gases rising up from everywhere back then.


You could hallucinate off farts if you breath in enough of them. No one "back then" was naturally over exposed to enough gases to cause hallucinations. Only those who exposed themselves to overdoses ever hallucinated like the oracle of Delphi and other cave dwelling witches.



posted on Dec, 14 2014 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable


You're right. From now on I'll only believe NASA because they only tell the truth, I won't even think of entertaining another viewpoint or observation.


You think NASA is just one or two people in running in a mouse wheel or what? You realize how many organizations collaborate with them, amateur and professional? Or are you oblivious to that...




top topics



 
83
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join