It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Wobble Is Real !!!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 19 2004 @ 02:02 PM
I'm not disinformation, rather information.

I see what you are getting at now with the moon and the wobble. Over a 1.2 year time span the moon would rise early, on time, and late depending on what point in the wobble we are at.

At this point and over the last 3 weeks the moon has risen as scheduled however.

That is from personal observation as well as verrified by others.

So the wobble is a risk, but there is no sign of recent dramatic increases in it.

posted on May, 19 2004 @ 02:04 PM
On the wobble:

Richard Gross, a JPL geophysicist, reports that the principal cause of the Chandler wobble is fluctuating pressure on the bottom of the ocean, caused by temperature and salinity changes and wind-driven changes in the circulation of the oceans. He determined this by applying numerical models of the oceans, which have only recently become available through the work of other researchers, to data on the Chandler wobble obtained during the years 1985-1995. Gross calculated that two-thirds of the Chandler wobble is caused by ocean-bottom pressure changes and the remaining one-third by fluctuations in atmospheric pressure. He says that the effect of atmospheric winds and ocean currents on the wobble was minor.

There is nothing in the calculations regarding the moon having and effect on this. I believe one of the links you posted explain the moon could look off to navigators who were not aware of the wobble. I also concur with others here that if the moon's orbit was would be noticed. People are watching the moon constantly. I don't think I would give much credit to a merchant marine who just "knows".

I don't need a scientist to tell me I'm wrong. My buddy is a pro at tracking the moon and stars.

Additionally, this statement seems to be the perfect example of embrace ignorance. Thousands of scientists watch the moon at all times, yet because he is your "buddy", your belief is jaded.

My personal conclusion is that he is wrong since there is nothing but his opinion here. I could say my buddy told me the sky is brown, but millions could look at the sky and state otherwise. Would I not be foolish to disregard all of that for the sake of "my buddy wouldn't lie to me"?

There is nothing to discredit and no need for disinformation. What you term as "controversal information" is actually just fiction. Now someone informs you of actual science and you label that "disinfo"?

Remember, truth is not found using pre-disposed belief and denying actual evidence.

posted on May, 19 2004 @ 02:06 PM

Originally posted by energy_wave
Like I said before, when controversal information is posted disinfo people get on this board and try to discredit those seeking the truth.

From your cited references, (dated from 2000), they say:

"The wobble, which has been under observation for more than a century, has a period of about 433 days. In other words, it takes 1.2 years to complete one wobble. The amplitude of the wobble amounts to about 20 feet at the North Pole" (my emphasis) from here (one of your references).

Now, 20 feet "wobble" on a globe around 8 000 miles in diameter doesn't sound too scary IMO. But, perhaps, I'm a disinformation agent?

posted on May, 19 2004 @ 02:42 PM
Well, since there is this thread started a day before this one, all discussion can be moved there:

And for the fact that I see no actual "Science" involved here for this thread in the Science Forum. I am closing this thread prior to getting rid of it. All that has been put forth is "my buddy told me" which doesn't constitute actual science. Any further discussion on this subject can be done on the thread listed above.

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in