2012 and Mu, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 13-3-2007 @ 01:01 PM by AnAbsoluteCreation
Marduck, are you saying that there is no such thing of a polar shift because you don't believe the theory? Here's the theory. Also, laws of physics are theories too and I don't see to many intelligent people claiming that they don't exist.

The uncertainty principal supports the fact that nothing is supported when there's always a chance that "something" alters the idea.

Do you just think you're smart for being the policing force behind what theory is real and which aren't. Honest question.

AAC



reply posted on 13-3-2007 @ 01:37 PM by Marduk
Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
Marduck, are you saying that there is no such thing of a polar shift because you don't believe the theory?

the site you linked to says at the bottom
Recent work by scientists and geologists Adam Maloof of Princeton University and Galen Halverson of Paul Sabatier University in Toulouse, France, indicates that Earth indeed rebalanced itself around 800 million years ago during the Precambrian time period.[10] They tested this idea by studying magnetic minerals in sedimentary rocks in a Norwegian archipelago. Using these minerals, Maloof and Halverson found that the north pole shifted more than 50 degrees — about the current distance between Alaska and the equator — in less than 20 million years. This reasoning is supported by a record of changes in sea level and ocean chemistry in the Norwegian sediments that could be explained by true polar wander, the team reports in the September–October 2006 issue of the Geological Society of America Bulletin.[11]

Research using GPS, conducted by Geoffery Blewitt of the University of Nevada, has shown that normal seasonal changes in the distribution of ice and water cause minor movements of the poles.[12]

want me to point out again that the OP is claiming a polar shift and not a pole shift
this means he is claiming that the poles will rotate around the earth as the crust moves under it. this is in fact called "earth crust displacement theory and as i stated earlier appeared in the work of Charles Hapgood (historian not geologist) and championed by Graham Hancock (journalist not geologist)
so could you explain to me how this theory has any relevance on a non existent continent ?





Do you just think you're smart for being the policing force behind what theory is real and which aren't. Honest question.

I think I am being observant for pointing out that the idea that Mu existed is rubbish
and that the idea of a "Polar shift" has any relevance one way or the other
if you want to call me smart thats up to you
but hey
thanks for that anyway



Didn't Wikipedia run into some controversy over the reliability of its information?

it did
but its still a lot more reliable than any link you have actually posted so far in support of your theory of mu and polar shifts
are you going to post some links at some point or are we expected to take your word for it ?



reply posted on 13-3-2007 @ 02:01 PM by Uplifted
Here are some links, I'll post more when I can find time to look.
www.clearharmony.net... www.crystalinks.com... www.sacred-texts.com... As I have said in another forum, if a blind man throws 100 darts in the direction of a dartboard, he is bound to hit it atleast once. Sounds kinda like wiki.


reply posted on 13-3-2007 @ 03:03 PM by alphabetaone
Originally posted by Marduk


LOL what are you laughing at??? Your the one who should be laughed at Polar shifts are real.

and another ignorant poster joins the fray
ok smarty
could you perhaps explain what a polar shift is ?


First of all, you need to stop being insulting, stop acting as though you're intelligent about subjects which, blatently, you have no clue about, and learn variations in semantics.

You claim that there is no such thing as a pole shift OR a polar shift.

There are two types of "POLAR" shifts. Geomagnetic Polar shifts, and Axial Polar shifts. Both are equally as real. The ability to prove that geomagnetic pole shifts occured is significantly easier due to direction of metallic substance direction found in sea sediment and lava.

You also claim that a geomagnetic pole shift is harmless? Ok, I'll tell ya what, when we DO have the next "flip", I want to be inside under my 15 million sunblock protective linus blanket, and you stand outside in your shorts and tee-shirt, cuz when the magnetic shield that keeps the harmful UV from penetrating too much of the earths atmosphere decides to move to Zero, I wanna see how long it takes you to turn into a quiche.

And thirdly, the Axial poles are CONTINUOUSLY "shifting" via the chandler wobble...a shift does NOT necessarily have to be a cataclysmic shift...
Also, the Indian Ocean 9.0 quake of december 2004, shifted the AXIAL pole by a VERY minute amount..enough to change maps and reverse the course of the aforementioned chandler wobble for a brief period.
I'm quite certain I can link to ALL kinds of sources to back up my claims (if you decide that I dont know enough about it to speak intelligently on it) if I have to.... OR, you can just take my word for it.

Either way stop with the insults to other members, and STOP acting as though you're an authority on subject matter if you truly arent.


Thanks in advance,


AB1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russians know, We assume, NASA is silent ...
  Posted 12 days ago with 35 member flags
Sun flares affect our pineal gland, causing mass awakening?
  Posted 5 days ago with 34 member flags
Bring Your Toothbrush? A Journey To The Stars...
  Posted 10 days ago with 23 member flags
2012 Believers are the Definition of Sheeple
  Posted 17 days ago with 14 member flags
Tell me to stop
  Posted 9 days ago with 11 member flags
The Chevy Silverado 2012 Mayan Apocalpse Commercial
  Posted 9 days ago with 10 member flags
2012 and The Sky Sounds.
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags