100,000 year cycle Upgrade

a reply to: ICycle2

This will surely help me keep me busy =D will read later but S&F

a reply to: ICycle2

Wait a minute, these data sets must be wrong on some level.

Not only do they fail to explain the existence of the Piri Reis map, but they don't seem to even allow room for it's existence.

it’s said that this map may show Antarctica hundreds of years before the continent was discovered (it was discovered in 1818). Furthermore, it is said to depict Antarctica as it was in a very remote age, before it was covered with ice.

How could this map created in the early 1500s show Antarctica "before it was covered in ice" ?

The supposed Miocene reglaciation happened over 5 million years ago!?

The Miocene ( /ˈmaɪəˌsiːn/[2][3]) is the first geological epoch of the Neogene Period and extends from about 23.03 to 5.333 million years ago (Ma)

If the Piri Reis map is legit, than clearly we have all of our numbers wrong and our entire view of geological history is inaccurate.

Is anyone capable of entertaining this or are we all too invested in "modern science's timescales" to consider that we got it all wrong?

The polar ice caps melted for a while after that and it wasn't until Africa and Antarctica separated around 160 million years ago that it began to cool again. By 23 million years ago, Antarctica was mostly icy forest and for the last 15 million years, it has been a frozen desert under a thick ice sheet.

Science Focus


I cannot believe how amazingly wrong everyone is.
The Piri Reis map appears to be evidence proving we don't have a clue what we are talking about *UNLESS* that map is somehow a hoax?

This is just one piece of evidence that strongly contradicts these "modern theories", I'm sure there are more evidences out there but it was just the one I thought of immediately.

I'm sorry but I'm terrified that yall have got it all wrong.
Antarctica must have frozen sometime in the last 1500 years in order for Piri Reis to have gotten that cartography correct.
Therefore nothing is what we think it is.

Can anyone explain how a Turkish mapmaker in 1500 drew Antarctica's coast underneath the ice accurately if, according to these super smart unquestionable scientists, Antarctica has been frozen for over 10 million years?

Homo Sapiens aren't even thought to be more than 200,000 years old by these same "mainstream scientists".

Wow, the entire modern timescale is completely utterly wrong.
Some little scrap of parchment from 500 years ago proved it.

That is so like totally mind blowing isn't it?
To realize that our modern civilization lives in an entire complete fantasy delusion (yet thinks it knows everything), hahah!

Almost 80 flags, ok.
Since there are tons of people interested in this thread can someone please explain to me why my Piri Reis theory is wrong and these data sets are correct, or at least concede that I'm onto something here?

That would make a really fun discussion and I'd possibly learn something (considering I got all this wrong and need to be schooled).

Or, alternatively, I just revealed a huge flaw in the entire modern scientific timeline belief system.

Either or.
Let's talk about this.
OP, any comments?

originally posted by: muzzleflash
Almost 80 flags, ok.
Since there are tons of people interested in this thread can someone please explain to me why my Piri Reis theory is wrong and these data sets are correct, or at least concede that I'm onto something here?

That would make a really fun discussion and I'd possibly learn something (considering I got all this wrong and need to be schooled).

Or, alternatively, I just revealed a huge flaw in the entire modern scientific timeline belief system.

Either or.
Let's talk about this.
OP, any comments?

actually i think what your pointing out is one of the reasons why imo we really have zero grasp and shouldnt be coming to any solid conclusions. theres a ton of data that just doesnt add up and in many cases scientists will decide to ignore such data since they cant make heads or tails of it. this map while interesting is also known to be not the most accurate map of that time. in the end i find anyone making any such claim one way or the other with our climate is mostly full of sh*t cause its hubris imo to claim we have any handle on the earths climate and cycles at this point with such a small amount of time to actually record data. i mean we have what just over 50 years of real good data collection? awful small slice of time weve studied to draw much of any conclusion

Damn that is a very nice thread we got here. A lot of info that I just read thru and I must admit I really don't understand it all (actually most of it lol).

a reply to: Astrocyte

A realistic person will come to recognize that ...
and a sane person would recognize that ...

Typical warmist argumentation! Associate anyone not onboard the "cult" as unrealistic, unsane ...
When most if not all the discourse is based on fallacy, it tell a lot on the "science".

best thread on ATS, the supplemental links are also very good

a reply to: hardcorepawn

Thanx, the layout was tricky to eliminate mistakes.

But there still are as I didn't put in:

Extinctions

a reply to: ICycle2

Wow epic post , great stuff , I spent the best part of my lunch break reading through it all , really interesting work
I think that we are far from the level where we can master control over our home world.
We humans love to think we are at the center of everything.

You are right though we wont stop an ice age , I just have one question
where on earth can I move to thats outwith the ice expansion zone, still warm enough to grow crops, not near any fault lines , away from the sea and rising sea levels and no wars!

lets move there

a reply to: muzzleflash

The Piri Reis map is widely accepted to be a copy of a much earlier map, it's also worth mentioning that Antartica has not been frozen for 10 million years, the last time it was a visible land mass was 18-22000 years ago. this does still pose a problem in terms of how advanced Homo Sapiens were at this time.

The contours and position of the land mass and adjacent areas in the Piri Reis map also depict a much earlier time than the 1500's. there is some really good analysis by people like Hapgood and suggestions by others like McIntosh that the map is copied from an ancient Greek map which was created "from someone's imagination"

When it comes to Climate change and who is to blame, then I have to revert back to Occam's Razor, the more assumptions you have to make, the less likely the result is correct. Global warming started relatively shortly after the industrial revolution started. We can make one assumption, the two events are related, or we can find 6 pages of "facts" to support an assumption that this is "maybe, probably, likely" to be a cyclical event, controlled by Volcanoes, ice, cows farting.

I am more than happy to be proven wrong on Climate Change, because, I'm not entirely convinced on the science, or fault being 100% attributed to us humans

a reply to: sapien82

I would say closer to the equator. Isn't that where the Bush family obtain some property?

Personally it will not affect me as I'm close to retirement and for that reason only am I looking at a game farm near Botswana. But not for an Ice-age

originally posted by: ICycle2
...
Within 2-10 years politicians will forget “global warming” and start shouting “ice-age taxes” for mirrors to direct the sunlight to Antarctica. Then 50% of the money would disappear, 25% will be used to investigate why and the rest to get the actual mirrors up and running. Some scientists will loose their funding as well.
...

Spot on!

Let's not bother with micro plastics and toxins in the food chain, insects disappearing and such. Let's shout about something we can TAX people - because that means money to the power people. The ones that should be trusted and are everything but fake news - just because they "almost were president" or at least have nice ties.

And when the game is up and their doom porn no longer gives revenue, let's find something else that will give people regrets and open their wallets. "We are all going to die! This time in an ice inferno!".

That latter part may be more believable than the ocean rising to cover the streets of Denver (such a doom-and-gloom site actually existed...), but no matter what, the real problem will not be adressed, because THAT might EMPTY and not FILL the pockets of the rich and mighty.

That was great. Well done. Well thought out and researched.

a reply to: ICycle2

I know, lol. Its not pollution thats killing us, its the climate.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Is anyone capable of entertaining this or are we all too invested in "modern science's timescales" to consider that we got it all wrong?

I'll take a swipe...

These records are based on ice and sediment cores, tree rings, carbon dating, right??

Then applied to the whole world, when the cores themselves were taken at only a few locations.

Theres some skew there, somewhere.

a reply to: ICycle2

Awesome work. I am on the fence about AGW and have always had an inkling that our climate is much more at the mercy of the Earth itself, the solar system and the cosmos at large.

a reply to: bobsa

The timing of the industrial revolution (CO2) and temperature rise is definitely why I sit on the fence. It could be coincidental or causal. I am nowhere near a scientist, so I draw my conclusions from sourced material that may be misrepresented when an outside party "dumbs it down" to my level. But, if the numerous graphs of a recent temperature rise coupled with rising CO2 levels are legitimate, something tells me that we should at least be aware that we need to start adapting our modern civilization to it. I don't see how we can "turn this around" with taxes and global climate agreements.

In general:

I don't understand why making the world a cleaner place with newer technology turns so many people off. I live in a relic of the industrial age and the environmental damage from 100 years of mining is more than evident. Studies of increased rates of rare diseases and cancers for my area are hushed or swept under the rug. I bring this up to point out that humans do in fact affect the environment and usually to the detriment of themselves.

The whole thing is a quagmire. The massive amounts of data required to draw any conclusions at all speaks to the idea that we could be misunderstanding or flat out missing a key factor. The volume of the OP illustrates the insane amount of research required to draw a contrary-to-popular-belief conclusion by someone who isn't a climate scientist and doesn't credit the readily accessible data as much as some, including myself, might.

The thread is about why the 100,000 year cycle seems to be dominant in our climate cycles. Due to the replies in my previous attempt, it became obvious there are many other questions.

I am not denying climate change but the reason given for the current abnormal/unexplained heat spike, which does not correspond with normal trends. My research then lead me to the Darryl Whitford pdf which I find spot on. A super nova event could however not be ruled out.

This is also not a prediction but a possibility of an Ice-age based on my hobby – Earth Cycles.

It is also very clear that there are many gaps in science. But they are advancing and we do know a lot more because of that.

Using the “Global warming cult” phrase was unneeded. I’m just tired of the constant bombardment based on each other without any study.

When I do not reply is when I feel no reply is needed or the point is for another thread.