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.

 

Prince Charles gives the world 18 months to save humanity from climate change

page: 14
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dlbott

That seems quite different, talking about a magnetic pole shift. I don't see how that would cause a mammoth to suddenly freeze.

Keep looking though.


Ah, i knew you were not really interested in it lol... take that tight cap off phagy... come on... take that magnet with the shavings again... twist the magnet, what happens.. don't think about the mag force but what happens along with it... we just talked about this.. the massive shift's in plates and land masses and their breaking apart as a result does explain the wholly flash freeze... it is just one theory of many, but not one so easily discounted as you are doing...




posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: dlbott

Really he said we would all be dead by now. You sure about that?



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: dlbott

There have been many magnetic reversals in Earth's history. Is there any evidence of dramatic effects from them? Continents moving around and stuff?

I said it sounded interesting, I would think that such a study provides evidence. That would be very interesting to read about.

edit on 11/24/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: dlbott

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dlbott




do a deep dive on small university study that actually found a pole shift in geology and that it happened in less than a hundred years, a rapid pole shift..

I tried to find it but couldn't.
Can you help? It sounds like it might be interesting.


This is not the one I was speaking about, it was actually in another show that had the university team and study in it but this talks about the same theory and findings by scientist.. in my memory the difference about what I watched was they had there hands on the layer they were saying proved the rapid pole shift... i will continue to look but here a link to similar info...

www.livescience.com...


ATS is very familiar with this topic and around here we call the event that causes the impacts you refer to Cyclical Global Continental Displacement Waves...…. yes there is a repeatable model and yes we have clear physical evidence of multiple Events.

You will not gain any traction here however...it is what it is.... but you are most correct in your views and there are a lot of people who support those very views myself included...there is a growing number of people who are creating a new status quo when it comes to our History.....we are a part of it....the fence sitters who demand endless peer approved proof are not.




posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: one4all




around here we call the event that causes the impacts you refer to Cyclical Global Continental Displacement Waves

Actually, you're the only one that does so.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Well I mean the Earth is a magnet, and all the field lines are strongest at the poles so that's why two magnets will stick together at their opposite poles, if you put a grape on a float of some kind in a bowl of water, and then bring a magnet within spitting distance, the grape is attracted to the magnet. Its actually the water in the grape which is attracted to the magnet, water is para magnetic. So a magnet as big as the Earth which has a lot of water must have at least a lot of water attracted to the strongest parts of the magnetic at the magnetic poles. So if the field got weak and reversed all the water would be released, which may or may not have a deleterious affect.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

How do you know that?



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: one4all

Because I have read very many posts on ATS and have never seen anyone else use those words other than in a reply to your use of them.

But maybe I'm wrong. Please, show me the error of my ways.

edit on 11/24/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: anonentity




the grape is attracted to the magnet

No it isn't. Not so you'd notice. And that magnet is a whole hell of a lot stronger than the Earth's magnetic field.


So a magnet as big as the Earth which has a lot of water must have at least a lot of water attracted to the strongest parts of the magnetic at the magnetic poles.
It doesn't. Earth's magnetic field is very weak. A refrigerator magnet is more than 100 times as powerful but try moving water with one. There are a number of things which affect the distribution of water on the planet (gravity, Earth's spin, wind, tides, etc.) but magnetism is not really on the list.

edit on 11/24/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Very rarely i disagree with anything you say as it's generally well researched however electromagnetism has a huge effect on water does it not?

If i create some static on a balloon and place it near water the electrical charge will alter the direction of the flow due to the additional positive charge interacting with the charge in the water?

I would have to assume the charge created by the earth would be sufficient to alter the movement of water on our planet if a bit of rubbing on my head can show a noticeable effect. I guess this is electrostatic charge but surely that generates a magnetic field as would various natural processes on our planet.
edit on 24/11/19 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade


If i create some static on a balloon and place it near water the electrical charge will alter the direction of the flow due to the additional positive charge interacting with the charge in the water?
Yes. That is electrostatic attraction.

Now try it with a magnet.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Wouldn't the electrostatic charge generate it's own magnetic field negating the need for a magnet?



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade

I think not. It takes an electrical current to produce a magnetic field. Note the "static" part of the term.

In any case, Earth's magnetic field is not a electrostatic field, it is a magnetic field. Try using a refrigerator magnet (which is vastly stronger than Earth's magnetic field) to move, say, a grape.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

As i said i'm happy to be corrected and your understanding of physics has been proven on many threads i've read in the past so i'll take your word for it.

I always thought electricity and magnetism were essentially two expressions of the same force. To be fair it was 20 years ago i studied Lorentz force so probably some crossed wires in there.

I thought the transfer of charge between the balloon and the water would constitute current. Obviously not, thanks for bursting my bubble



edit on 24/11/19 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade




I always thought electricity and magnetism were essentially two expressions of the same force.

Because they are closely related, that is a common misconception.

An electrical current creates a magnetic field and a moving magnetic field creates an electrical current (if there is an electrical conductor nearby). But they are not the same thing. A good expression of this is that an object can have a net positive charge, but as far as we can tell no object can have only a north magnetic pole.


I thought the transfer of charge between the balloon and the water would constitute current.
No charge transfer unless they make contact or there is sufficient voltage to arc. In which case the current is of very brief duration.

edit on 11/24/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

That just about clears it up, thanks.

Hopefully you can see why i was misled.

(i just spent two weeks listening to someone explain electrical induction so my heads spinning with it all, god damn universe and it's complex processes)
edit on 24/11/19 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade

It's a common misconception, as I said.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grenade

It's a common misconception, as I said.


Obviously you are very clued up on this branch of physics but even so don't you find it somewhat magical? I have been trying to wrap my head around it all, did a little course on sub atomic particles through work recently and i just couldn't wrap my brain around it. How do you even conceptualise something like a femtometer or understand the behaviour of something like an electron, it's just mind boggling.



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade

It's weird as hell.
But it works.

You might catch me fiddling with magnets on occasion.

Gravity is just as weird, but it's so pervasive that it's easy to ignore.

edit on 11/24/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2019 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Don't even go there.

I spent a whole night spiralling down the gravity rabbit hole and came out more confused than when i started.

I got as far as trying to understand why we couldn't detect gravitons, then i gave up and smoked some weed to calm my brain down.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join