You know what would be really useful to this discussion?

Someone who has experienced this "time-shift" needs to present 2 maps in a thread; one map being an official world map, and the other one being the "original" map that they remember being the official map.

It is hard for people to really understand geographical differences without having any visual information to dissect.

I don't mean to feed the fire but I was wondering if anyone else was taught that there are only 4 oceans: Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, Arctic. ?

Now I think they teach that there are 5, the other being the "southern" ocean or something? Now I'm not saying saying that there is a "new" ocean that came out of nowhere, just that for some reason, I wasnt taught that in the 80's in the US.

Is it being suggested that all the navigators (ships, planes) are 'in on' this secret ?

Plane set off from Sydney Australia with 231 passengers who've booked a flight to New Zealand (a trip they might have made several times)

What happens in this 'time shift' scenario ? Do the pilots and navigators lodge secret flight-plans ? Who else is in on it --- meteorologists ? control towers ? flight attendants ?

So what happens ? A flight to New Zealand, from memory, is quite short (to the New Zealand off Australia's eastern coast

A flight to a New Zealand located to the north-west of Australia's western coast, on the other hand, would be of several hours duration

Is it being suggested passengers wouldn't notice they were flying in the 'wrong' direction ? They wouldn't be able to tell the difference in flight times, for a start ? Wouldn't notice that instead of flying over ocean, they're in fact flying over Australia's red centre ? Wouldn't notice the difference in the location of the sun (or moon, depending on time of the flight) ?

And what about fuel ? A flight to a New Zealand that's located north-west of Australia would require considerably more fuel than flying to a New Zealand located to the east of Australia

Are the airlines absorbing the cost of extra fuel, etc. rather than admit that New Zealand has (supposedly) altered its location ?

Are none of the flight attendants or pilots or navigators or air-traffic control saying one word about this displaced New Zealand to anyone ... not even to their spouses or children ? And are none of the passengers voicing any concern or curiosity about the weirdness of the flight ?

The above could all be asked in relation to all the other places which are suspected of 'changing location'

Any answers ?

OP, it would take just a few moments research online or with an older atlas in your local library to establish that there have been no changes to the position of continents, islands, etc.

Why post such a deranged theory when you have no evidence at all, apart from your own flawed memory, to support such a proposition.

I'm surprised this is so hard for people to grasp.
No one is disputing the current placement on existing maps, just their recollection and certainty of that recollection. they don't have "proof “ because they aren't recalling some different nebulous map but how the very map they are looking at now no longer appears as they remembered.

it's like reading a book you read last week and finding that it has a completely different ending than you remember reading last week even though it's the very same book.

i think the biggest cause of confusion and unnecessary trolling is the use of the term “time line shift.“ This term is really inaccurate as it sounds more like shifting whether physically our consciously, between parallel universes, alternate realities, or different dimensions.

---

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

---

Hello, I have a history book printed in 1985, there is a world map in it, it doe's not show Antarctica, so cannot comment there, however, upon Googling the world map, the 1985 version of the world, and Googles version, both match.
As regards 'steps' there is a theory that as the ice sheets grew during ice ages, and sea levels dropped, coral started new reefs lower down the continental shelf, with sea levels and coral building sew-sawing up and down during geological time.
As for plate movement that is something else that takes place over geological time, perhaps 1 to 5 milimeters a year? cannot remember exact value.

Would I be correct in assuming no map would suffice as proof ?

No point my going down to the basement and searching through approx. 50 boxes of books to find a 1961 geography text book, or books from WW2 era which belonged to a pilot uncle, in order to scan and post them to show that New Zealand is now where it was 60-odd and 50-odd years ago ?

What method would be used to disprove their accuracy ? Would it be claimed the old maps themselves were affected by the supposed 'shift' event ?

Easy of course to find old maps online and post the links. But would they also be dismissed as inaccurate in showing Long Island, New Zealand, the Bahamas etc. as being in the same locations 100, 200 years ago as they are now ?

Originally posted by FoxStriker

I don't have any other words to explain what this is called, because I only bearly started looking into the TimeShift Theory, but I think ATS Member "thoughtform" brought up points I know very little about as in Quantum Memory/Magnetic Memory. *Although even I'm not sure*

I think you should talk to a ATS member named Evasius. From reading his threads, I think he might have some good insight on this stuff.

Also, I believe you. Something is really going on. I think I also could comment on Australia and New Zealand. I have never recalled New Zealand being to West-Northwest of Australia but I do remember New Zealand being further north and a little bit closer to Australia. Also, I don't remember Australia being so close to Indonesia either.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by sphinx551]

Originally posted by Faiol


but a MAP? it doesnt prove anything, there are A LOT OF MAPS!!

What about Google Earth?


[edit on 5-3-2010 by sphinx551]

I've read your post. I strongly disagree with what you have said.

I don't know what else i can say without being accused of "trolling."

ya know op i was laughing at this and one thing i am very good with is locations. and i jujst looked at google maps and new zeland looks way farther down and off than it used to be cuba looks more tucked in under florida and srilanlks looks to far south also i dont rember iceland being so close to greenland it seamed to me more in the middle just under half way to greenland. maybe its tyhe computer apps when we use the zoom out but i defo havent noticed that before your thread. i dident bother with the new zeland thread as it seams daft but now i looked .well play the x files theme

I have never recalled New Zealand being to West-Northwest of Australia but I do remember New Zealand being further north and a little bit closer to Australia. Also, I don't remember Australia being so close to Indonesia either.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by sphinx551]
i totally agree with you on this new zealand was like an 3 quarters of an inch away from australia on the maps i seen wierd science anyone