Sorry about my link...
And I did read your's. I also quoted the part that discussed memory loss. And I also remember saying I wanted proof a POLE SHIFT has caused
Byrd also had this to say about generating electricity with the earth...
"To produce electricity using the Earth?
You'd need a lot of copper wire floating above the earth... a very thick band of it completely encircling the earth; a tube that enclosed Earth's
orbit so the Earth could rotate freely inside it and revolve around the sun.
Then you'd have to shove the earth's ...actually, you couldn't shove the crust because that's not where the magnetism is. It's a property of the
core. You'd have to move the core.
Here's a page showing how current is generated from magnetic fields:
Here's how it works in power plants (hydroelectric power is actually generated by huge magnets):
So you'd have to do something similar with the earth's core. Note that the magnetic strength of the earth is pretty doggone weak... and can be
easily interfered with. So any magnetic thing on the surface would cause the magnetic field to be uneven and the effect to be much reduced.
Magnetic force also drops off with distance from the magnet... as you can easily see for yourself by just fiddling with a magnet.
And the Earth's magnetism is just... ordinary magentism. There's no Special Waves or Special Cases. It's just magentism like any old magnet you
have on your refrigerator.
I'm not sure how much wire you'd need to make even a small amount of current using the Earth's magnetism, but I'd bet that it's going to be far
more than we have lying around. "
Your adding 1+1 alright. But your getting 6 as the answer. Recheck your damn math.
"James common sense is on my side, this because if an asteroid hits the earth there will be very severe
Storms and they will be all over the planet."
Ok, dispence with the common sense bit, try posting some evidence of past astroid's impact generating large worldwide electrical storm's that have
caused memory loss.
"As far as your link I spent about as much time reading it as you spent reading the ones I posted. "
Well..Considering my link was broken, this mean's you didn't read it. Go back through my post's, you'll find I did read your link and quoted from
and discussed it. So you are wrong, you didn't spend as much time reading my link as I did your's. Now I have to wonder...Are you even reading my
post's, or are you purposfully acting out when being asked to back your own claim's up with evidence from someone who is more believable.