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.

 

This IS Serious! Look - Our Magnetosphere - Something is Seriously Wrong! Happening Now!

page: 15
69
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by questioningall
reply to post by guinnessford
 



People everywhere were feeling "tired" and light headed yesterday. When I woke up, I was so dizzy and light headed, I felt I had not gotten any sleep at all, I wanted to go back to sleep. I have seen the same feelings throughout message boards about yesterday.

I will stay watching the magnetosphere everyday -



I was woundering the same thing myself!

Back in Oct(?) of last year, I came down with Vertigo. I was out of work for 10 days. when I got back to work and told everyone what had happened to me, i found out that about 6-7 other people a month earlier had the same thing.

Last month, another employee's wife and himself came down with it as well.




posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
this is GOING to happen later...

tens to hundreds of thousands of years later.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


Your information regarding "pole shifts" is faulty at best. Scientists attribute the presence of dinosaur bones in bizarre locations not to dramatic shifts of the poles but to continental drift. This is a very different phenomenon that is widely accepted by scientific communities. What is the difference, you may ask? Let me educate you.




Continental drift is the movement of the Earth's continents relative to each other. The hypothesis that continents 'drift' was first put forward by Abraham Ortelius in 1596 and was fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912. However, it was not until the development of the theory of plate tectonics in the 1960s, that a sufficient geological explanation of that movement was found.





The pole shift hypothesis is the hypothesis that the axis of rotation of a planet has not always been at its present-day locations or that the axis will not persist there; in other words, that its physical poles had been or will be shifted. The Pole shift hypothesis is almost always discussed in the context of Earth, but other bodies in the Solar System may have experienced axial reorientation during their existences.

Pole shift hypotheses are not to be confused with plate tectonics, the well-accepted geological theory that the Earth's surface consists of solid plates which shift over a fluid asthenosphere; nor with continental drift, the corollary to plate tectonics which maintains that locations of the continents have moved slowly over the face of the Earth,[1] resulting in the gradual emerging and breakup of continents and oceans over hundreds of millions of years.


So, let's review. Plate Tectonics and Continental Drift - Accepted by science and essentially proven.

RAPID Pole Shift - Science laughs in your face. At best physical polar shifts have never occurred (though a change of 1 degree per million years has been seen).

What you are attributing as Pole Shifting is that the Earth's magnetic field has reversed (north became south and vice versa). This, however, did not cause any change in the location of continental masses. Please do some research before you make more of a fool of yourself.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Great, now educate us on the Woolly mammoth and Siberian mammoths and how they were found frozen with undigested food in their stomaches.

Sorry for the edite just want to make more of a fool of myself with these links

www.data4science.net...

"In the past 15 million years scientists found pole shifts occurred four times every 1 million years. Though this averages out to once every 250,000 years, switches do not occur at regular intervals. During one period in the Cretaceous, polarity remained constant for as long as 30 million years, though this is believed to be an anomaly. The last pole shift took place 790,000 years ago; causing some scientists to believe we're due, while others speculate a reversal is already underway."


According to the article, Alps style mountain ranges with peaks and valleys have been found under the Antarctic Ice Cap.

If that ice had formed over millions of years-suggesting a stable axis-then those mountains would have been crushed flat by 4 miles of ice atop it. According to the Reuters article however, they're not.

www.rumormillnews.com...
This strongly suggests that the Antarctic Ice Cap is a geologically recent development. Climate shift, or pole shift?

Actually, just google brother. It would be nice to see you debunk the vast amounts of information pointing to the latter. godspeed

[edit on 13-3-2009 by f3rm1N]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by f3rm1N
 


Sure thing. These are animals that are adapted to cold climates. Siberian Mammoth, Wooly Mammoth. They are already wandering in frigid climates during the ice age, so it is not completely unexpected that a mammoth could be swept up in an avalanche. Mammoth dies, freezes, thawed out a few million years later.

Don't like the avalanche idea? Ok, mammoth has a meal, decides to take a shortcut across a frozen pond/lake. Ice is a bit weaker than mammoth thought, mammoth falls through. Frozen mammoth. It's really not that hard for someone who actually utilizes their brain.

[edit on 13-3-2009 by BriggsBU]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Stop telling stories. We don't need your imagination of how a ridiculous chain of events with icebergs and avalanches lead to them being found where and how they were. Lets keep it factual.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by f3rm1N
 


So let me see here. Your sources are a website that whose sole purpose is to try and debunk mainstream science and a site called the RumorMill news? Sorry, I don't really think these are reliable sources. Find me some evidence in Science or Nature, then maybe we'll have a discussion.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by f3rm1N
Stop telling stories. We don't need your imagination of how a ridiculous chain of events with icebergs and avalanches lead to them being found where and how they were. Lets keep it factual.


There's far more evidence for what I stated than what you are proclaiming. Stick to your pseudoscience. Like I said, until you can find me some evidence in a peer reviewed journal, this is done. Have a good day.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Have to admit that magnetosphere has no significant deviations and is acting as usual during coronal holes.

Again, not enough data to see the picture if any.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
"In a polar region there is a continual deposition of ice, which is not symmetrically distributed about the pole. The earth's rotation acts on these asymmetrically deposited masses [of ice], and produces centrifugal momentum that is transmitted to the rigid crust of the earth. The constantly increasing centrifugal momentum produced in this way will, when it has reached a certain point, produce a movement of the earth's crust over the rest of the earth's body, and this will displace the polar regions toward the equator."

Albert Einstein From The Path of the Pole by Charles Hapgood

I'll take Einstein over your peers anyday.

www.world-mysteries.com...



Educate yourself with real information, not "vastly accepted" information
The Horizon Project

You can stick with your "old" information from which nothing "new" will come, I in the other hand I will search through the new arising information which might lead to a broader and unified understanding of the past and things to come. If taking into account how this information is being backed I'm inclined to trust our "new" technological means which are in an unbelievable rate, contridicting and disproving "old" information accepted by your peers and outdated scientists, yet ironicly backing ancient "prophetic" views of what our future holds. For yet is it not by "new" means of understandings things that we move forward as intelligent beings? or do you suggest we all just sit tight and remain with the outdated information you so blindly uphold?

[edit on 13-3-2009 by f3rm1N]

[edit on 13-3-2009 by f3rm1N]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by f3rm1N
 


Im sorry, im realy trying to follow both of you guys here to take all this information in...
But that last one left me in the dust.
Im really not too stupid, but is there an easy way to put that in terms a mechanic would understand?
If not ill keep reading it.
I think im getting a little bit of it.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
not sure if this has anything to do with whats going on but im in the english channel and just seen a massive shooting star heading west. it was that close / clear i could make out bits in the trail as opposed to seeing just a streak



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by BriggsBU
reply to post by questioningall
 


Your information regarding "pole shifts" is faulty at best. Scientists attribute the presence of dinosaur bones in bizarre locations not to dramatic shifts of the poles but to continental drift. This is a very different phenomenon that is widely accepted by scientific communities. What is the difference, you may ask? Let me educate you.




Continental drift is the movement of the Earth's continents relative to each other. The hypothesis that continents 'drift' was first put forward by Abraham Ortelius in 1596 and was fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912. However, it was not until the development of the theory of plate tectonics in the 1960s, that a sufficient geological explanation of that movement was found.





The pole shift hypothesis is the hypothesis that the axis of rotation of a planet has not always been at its present-day locations or that the axis will not persist there; in other words, that its physical poles had been or will be shifted. The Pole shift hypothesis is almost always discussed in the context of Earth, but other bodies in the Solar System may have experienced axial reorientation during their existences.

Pole shift hypotheses are not to be confused with plate tectonics, the well-accepted geological theory that the Earth's surface consists of solid plates which shift over a fluid asthenosphere; nor with continental drift, the corollary to plate tectonics which maintains that locations of the continents have moved slowly over the face of the Earth,[1] resulting in the gradual emerging and breakup of continents and oceans over hundreds of millions of years.


So, let's review. Plate Tectonics and Continental Drift - Accepted by science and essentially proven.

RAPID Pole Shift - Science laughs in your face. At best physical polar shifts have never occurred (though a change of 1 degree per million years has been seen).

What you are attributing as Pole Shifting is that the Earth's magnetic field has reversed (north became south and vice versa). This, however, did not cause any change in the location of continental masses. Please do some research before you make more of a fool of yourself.


OH REALLY?? Sorry.... but before you post too many things.... and make more of a "fool" of yourself about pole shifts............... I would advice you to LOOK at scientific evidence of very fast "pole shifts"

the below link is strictly VERY scientific

link: www.sciencemag.org...


Analysis of Vendian to Cambrian paleomagnetic data shows anomalously fast rotations and latitudinal drift for all of the major continents. These motions are consistent with an Early to Middle Cambrian inertial interchange true polar wander event, during which Earth's lithosphere and mantle rotated about 90 degrees in response to an unstable distribution of the planet's moment of inertia. The proposed event produces a longitudinally constrained Cambrian paleogeography and accounts for rapid rates of continental motion during that time.

The sudden appearance of virtually all the animal phyla (2) and their exponential diversification are coeval with abrupt shifts in oceanic geochemistry

The new ages, along with paleomagnetic data, indicate that continents moved at rapid rates that are difficult to reconcile with our present understanding of mantle dynamics (7). We propose that rapid continental motions during the Cambrian period were driven by an interchange event in Earth's moment of inertia tensor. The age constraints on the geophysical data indicate that the rapid continental motions occurred during the same time interval as the Cambrian evolutionary diversification and therefore the two events may be related.


See the link, the article is very long.

Here is another science article from Phsyics Institue of Switzerland:
www.scielo.br...


ABSTRACT

Remains of mammoths in Arctic East Siberia, where there is not sufficient sunlight over the year for the growth of the plants on which these animals feed, indicate that the latitude of this region was lower before the end of the Pleistocene than now. Reconstructing this geographic pole shift, we introduce a massive object, which moved in an extremely eccentric orbit and was hot from tidal work and solar radiation. Evaporation produced a disk-shaped cloud of ions around the Sun. This cloud partially shielded the solar radiation, producing the cold and warm periods characterizing the Pleistocene. The shielding depends on the inclination of Earth's orbit, which has a period of 100. 000 years. The cloud builds up to a point where inelastic particle collisions induce its collapse The resulting near-periodic time dependence resembles that of Dansgaard-Oeschger events. The Pleistocene ended when the massive object had a close encounter with the Earth, which suffered a one per mil extensional deformation. While the deformation relaxed to an equilibrium shape in one to several years, the globe turned relative to the rotation axis: The North Pole moved from Greenland to the Arctic Sea. The massive object split into fragments, which evaporated.

Let us suppose that the North pole was at the center of the known ice cover of the Last Glaciation. This is situated in Greenland, about 18º apart from the present North pole. Its longitude is less certain, since it depends on the thermal influence attributed to the Atlantic ocean. A model study of the Pleistocene climate with geographically shifted poles could be revealing. The geographic consequences of a polar shift are best visualized using a globe. The angular distance from the old or new pole amounts to (90º - latitude) in each case. Since the North pole moved from Greenland into the Arctic Sea while the South Pole was displaced within Antarctica, the climate changes were larger on the Northern hemisphere. Some places on the great circle through the old and the new positions of the poles suffered the full 18º shift. The Lena River in Siberia moved 18º north, while the latitudes in Australia decreased approximately by this amount. Bolivia moved away from the equator (tropical ® arid), while the Northern Amazon region shifted to the equator (arid ® tropical). The latitudes on the US-East coast and in West Europe were higher in the Pleistocene, and those of Alasca slightly lower.

The evidence of mammoths in arctic east Siberia is not just one more in a multitude of unexplained facts, since it contains an aspect that we understand. These regions necessarily received more sunlight in the Pleistocene than at present. Thus, the latitude of arctic East Siberia was lower than it is now. The globe has been turned with respect to its rotation axis.


there are MANY scientifc studies showing our Earth shifted on it's Axis, a few times in history.

So................. don't worry, I am not the person....... making a "fool" of myself!



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 

Way to go, i knew youd be in on this.
And im not discrediting you other people here, so dont burn me....
Im just lookin for all the sides of the issue.
I think im learning more in this thread than i did in all of my high school years, and all of the evidence here has to have at least some credibility to have made it this far.
And i never knew this much had gone into this part of our planet.
It interests me immensely.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Well this could be due to the Polar Ice caps melting. If the melt it could shift the magnetized iron plates under the crust. If they move, then that will throw all magnetic fields off. Thats my theory. Sounds reasonable to me.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by questioningall

Originally posted by BriggsBU
reply to post by questioningall
 


OH REALLY?? Sorry.... but before you post too many things.... and make more of a "fool" of yourself about pole shifts............... I would advice you to LOOK at scientific evidence of very fast "pole shifts"

the below link is strictly VERY scientific

link: www.sciencemag.org...


But it also goes on to say that these events happened within a span of 30 million years. "Fast" apparently, is in the eye of the beholder. Would you consider that fast?



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
This latest discussion reminds me of a thread I participated in back in 2005 concerning the effect of a magnetic pole flip on the crust of the earth. It involved magnetic forces that could cause the outer crust to shift in relation to the inner core of the earth due to the new magnetic orientation. It is an interesting theory of how a crustal shift could take place. The thread can be found here

As to those who seek to Belittle outside the box thinking with high sounding pontifications of "scientifically accepted" and "generally agreed upon" and even "peer reviewed" I dismiss such babble offhand since only the unimaginative seek to insult their way to scientific uniformity of belief. We need to stop trying to win arguments and start discussing ideas. You find truth by seeking to show something else untrue. Rather by discovering, describing, and examining the truth you recognize error by default. Hence if someone spends all their efforts seeking to disprove your point they simply reveal their lack of understanding of their own perspective for if they really knew what was true, they could reveal that truth in such a way as to invalidate an opposing supposition without negative aspersions. I refer to my signature as my closing remark on this topic.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


Actually, somehow....... you missed or didn't read all of it........... there are many many sites on the net, where you can read about our history and pole shifts. But in the link I provided and the external info......


The sudden appearance of virtually all the animal phyla (2) and their exponential diversification are coeval with abrupt shifts in oceanic geochemistry


Our pole shifts happened Very FAst in the past.... they have found lots of evidence proving that - including instant freezings of "tropical" animals in the Arctic, there is proof, our Earth flipped/rotated/shifted on our axis instantly.

So............ please research,

I researched years ago, when I read Edgar Cayce's prediction of our Earth flipping/rotating/shifting on our axis within a few years of 2000 (which we are at right now)........ I decided to learn more about it, at that time. I found we have rotated a few times in our history... so it would not be a "first" -

So....... when I saw what was happening yesterday with our Magnetosphere... I freaked..... thinking "OH _ _ _ t! Is it about to happen?

So.......... I am keeping an eye on our magnetosphere.... because I also believe we have entered a time as no other now...... due to many different influences.... I also believe our Earth is going through and about to go through some "major" upheavels!

Interesting enough... if you read those science links I provided... you will also find they talk about an "outside" planet/object that came close to the Earth - which caused us one time to flip............ so...........Nibiru?


[edit on 13-3-2009 by questioningall]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Look again, its just fine now.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by questioningall
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


Actually, somehow....... you missed or didn't read all of it........... there are many many sites on the net, where you can read about our history and pole shifts. But in the link I provided and the external info......


The sudden appearance of virtually all the animal phyla (2) and their exponential diversification are coeval with abrupt shifts in oceanic geochemistry


Our pole shifts happened Very FAst in the past.... they have found lots of evidence proving that - including instant freezings of "tropical" animals in the Arctic, there is proof, our Earth flipped/rotated/shifted on our axis instantly.

So............ please research,


I did read it. Right behind the sentence you quote above it says "Recent calibration of this time interval with U-Pb isotopic ages (5, 6) indicates that these events occurred within a span of 30 million years (My), and the major diversification happened in only 10 to 15 My "

30 Million years. Then diversity in 10 to 15 million years. While that's fast in terms of geological time, it's not instant.

While you may have something else that backs up the instant thing--this article is not it.



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join