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.

 

A Solar Reboot can change Earth's rotation, Part I

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by earthdude
 


I am not dismissing it because it came from a religion. I am dismissing it because there is no evidence whatsoever for a global inundation.

I suppose you have researched the subject and my attempts only lead me to creationist's sites. I may find a few objective, scientific studies but the search engines have been polluted with subjective, sectarian crud. I have not the time nor the will to find these studies. I know they exist. Don't be so sure of yourself. As you can tell, this is one of my pet theories, even though I am an evolutionist.




posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 


It is difficult at times to find evidence. Do you have a time frame for inundation? You can find info on things like the Scablands in which there is a large local flood. There is evidence of large scale flooding in Texas after the impact off the Yucatan 65Ma. You can find evidence of large scale flooding in places, but not across the globe. There is evidence that both the Mediterranean and Black Sea were once dry and were flooded.

If you have any ideas on what you are looking for please post and maybe someone here can assist you in finding what you are looking for.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Here is one recent link for you about the sphinx, I will look up the rest later.

Sphinx Excavation

There is a great deal of information on this site and others about what I listed, you might want to spend some time reading before denying everything said here.



posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I've been to the Sphinx. I've there and I can say that these scenes are not from any place close to the Sphinx. There is a good reason that the Sphinx and pyramids are not seen in any of the photos. There is a good reason that none of the quarried faces behind the Sphinx are in any of the photos. This is a hoax.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maddogkull
Wouldn’t the magnetic flip, cause some sort of pole shift that causes mega tsunamis and earthquakes from tectonic plates shifting? This is of course just speculation.


Tsunamis, crustal displacement, ice shelf displacement, land risings, hyper melting, etc. could all be part of a scenario like this. This scenario means our planet and solar system have a complete rebooting capacity, which is simply to wipe the evolutionary platform clean, on a regular schedule, and start essentially over. Humans are nothing but ants to the farmer in this scenario.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


This is stunning in its lack of science, and physics, understanding...


I continue to argue that the Earth did in fact rotate in the opposite direction at some point in history...


Firstly, the energies involved, even IF possible, are astronomical. Inertia, momentum, moment of rotational inertia...al of those search terms will lead you to the proper answers regarding the implausiblity. Pay attention, too, tot he calculated mass of the planet...heck it's on Wiki:


Mass --- 5.9736 × 10*24 kg


That's a heckuva lot....you don't just "stop" that sort of mass, and THEN 'reverse' it!

It is true that, over the ~4.5 Billion years since the planet coalesced its speed of rotation has diminished...but NEVER reversed...and the rate of rotation slowing was very, very gradual...and it all happened long, long before WE showed up.

(Hint: The Moon played a role...still does, actually)



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I guess you mean that the Sun will be refreshed by the cool breeze blowing past? There are two things wrong with the idea of the Sun being 'energized' by a 'million degree cloud'. The first is that the Sun's core is much hotter than that (around 15,000,000 degrees) on a continuous basis, and the solar corona exceeds it on a fairly regular basis. The second is the energy density (or lack of same) of the million degree cloud. If the matter of the cloud is very diffuse, it's going to have minimal impact on anything it touches, no matter what its temperature might be. In plain physics-ese, that cloud isn't going to 'energize' the Sun in any notable way.

A. The sun's core temp is not known, It is actually cooler inside and this is a great mystery solved only by postulating electric universe theory. A hotter more energetic environment for the sun would have some effect on its over all heating ability, which may be enough to release bigger flares during a maximum. Normally space is extremely cold, so this could be a factor, yet this theory doesn't need the cloud of fluff anyway.



2) The sun gets agitated to release energy


You mean like it's already doing? It's already in a fairly agitated state, and already pumping out amounts of energy that, outside of the world of physics geekery, are pretty much beyond comprehension.

A. What are you even saying here? The sun cannot flip the poles?



3) The earth gets blasted with over 100x our magnetosphere's energy

4) The magnetic poles flip, (but not the rotational poles, yet ….)


It wouldn't be the first time the magnetic poles have flipped, even if it does happen. Judging from geological evidence, the magnetic poles wander a bit over time, and flip every few thousand years. Other than some very confused geese, and the occasional lost Boy Scout, we seem to have come through just fine, at least in terms of planetary catastrophes.

A. The known, or "admitted", flips occurred millions of years ago and there were no boy scouts around to record what happened, so where is your argument? And there is no reason why the poles can't flip and then flip back again, or realign at 90 degree angles, for that matter.


You do realize that there's no evidence that the 'corkscrew effect' you keep mentioning has anything to do with the rotation of the earth, don't you? In fact, there's no evidence that anything is 'driving' the planet's rotation other than momentum....and we're slowing down over time thanks to tidal effects. If some force were driving the rotation, it shouldn't be slowing down at all.

A. Every reversing electric motor is evidence. There is no evidence of anything staying in constant motion for billions o years when it has friction, either, which the Earth does, e.g. No top spins forever. No one yet has a convincing explanation of Earth's rotation and it is also known that this speed changes on a regular schedule, so your momentum theory is known to be wrong.

See Part II

I hate to break the news to you, but the magnetosphere gets swamped on a disturbingly regular basis...just ask any amateur radio operator. When it happens, it does raise hell with communications, but most of the other things on your list don't notice the event at all.

A. You have not broken any news to me yet. Do your homework. Flares are getting larger and the magneto is getting weaker. Even NASA is predicting trouble now.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by kybertech

Originally posted by theability
Wow and uhh, yeah right.



There is no way the sun is going to stop the earths rotation after it has been in motion for 4.5 billions years.

Unless in goes super NOVA and destroys the planet.

It is if you belive whack jobs interpreting ancient prophecies are the driving force of the universe and not the laws of physics


The Sun does not reverse the rotation, magnetics does. Magnetism holds the entire universe together so I think it has more than enough power to reverse the floating grain of sand called Earth. You need a cosmic perspective on this. No physical body under pressure fro a solar stream, can spin indefinitely. The solar stream is friction, just like wind is friction. Magnetism is the only reasonable engine for Earth spin. All other possibilities have now been eliminated so we have no other choice.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


This is stunning in its lack of science, and physics, understanding...

A. I would argue the opposite. The belief that the Earth can rotate for 4.5 billion years, under the constant friction of the solar stream, with just one push, is just as stupid as saying a top will spin forever with a single pull.


I continue to argue that the Earth did in fact rotate in the opposite direction at some point in history...


A. The ancient records have shown themselves again and again to be true. These are not prophesies, they are records handed down to descendants to inform them.

Firstly, the energies involved, even IF possible, are astronomical. Inertia, momentum, moment of rotational inertia...al of those search terms will lead you to the proper answers regarding the implausiblity. Pay attention, too, tot he calculated mass of the planet...heck it's on Wiki:


Mass --- 5.9736 × 10*24 kg


That's a heckuva lot....you don't just "stop" that sort of mass, and THEN 'reverse' it!

It is true that, over the ~4.5 Billion years since the planet coalesced its speed of rotation has diminished...but NEVER reversed...and the rate of rotation slowing was very, very gradual...and it all happened long, long before WE showed up.

(Hint: The Moon played a role...still does, actually)


A. The mass you speak of is nothing compared to the known powers of magnetism which are virtually infinite. Besides, in this theory the Earth is not "stopped" it is "braked" and left to stop on it's own, then gradually starts up again.

The Earth cannot be spinning on 4 billion year old momentum, under its current level of solar stream friction, and the Earth's speed in not just slowing down it is wavering faster and then slower on an over all slowing trend. This kind of undulation is better explained by fluctuating magnetic fields, tied to sun activity, rather than the silly 4.5 billion year spinning top , perpetual motion, theory.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Ethericplane
 


The universe is controlled by gravity, not magnetism. Your initial statement is false, making everything else based on that notion false as well.



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Ethericplane
 


Oh, you're just talking nonsense, now...really...


The Earth cannot be spinning on 4 billion year old momentum, under its current level of solar stream friction...


It's NOT 'perpetual motion'!!! AND, there is no significant forces called "solar stream friction"! Do you refer, there, to the very, very tenuous spray of energetic particles produced by stars...commonly called (inaccurately, but for simplicity's sake) the "Solar Wind"??

Where does this baloney of "solar stream friction" originate, anyway?


Fringe cosmolgy "theories", from fringe "thinkers" who have no understanding (it would appear) of even the basics of physics, and astronomy...or any sciences for that matter...



posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ethericplane
The Sun does not reverse the rotation, magnetics does. Magnetism holds the entire universe together so I think it has more than enough power to reverse the floating grain of sand called Earth. You need a cosmic perspective on this. No physical body under pressure fro a solar stream, can spin indefinitely. The solar stream is friction, just like wind is friction. Magnetism is the only reasonable engine for Earth spin. All other possibilities have now been eliminated so we have no other choice.


"Magnetism" doesn't have "power" as an abstract, a particular magnetic field might. However, in order to reverse the actual spin on the Earth, a static magnetic field wouldn't be able to do it, other than maybe to slow it up some by eddy current drag. Reverse, no.

The "solar stream" as you put it is pretty damn thin. You need to get a physics perspective on it instead of a cosmic one - the average solar wind density is four particles per cubic centimeter. That's a damned hard vacuum, and very little of those actually reach the Earth due to the magnetosphere, other than a few at the poles. There isn't any 'friction'.

The rotational energy of the Earth is immense - it spins at a pretty nice clip and it's massive. Given that it's suspended in space and there's not really anyplace for that rotational energy to go, it'll keep spinning for quite a while, losing speed only to tidal effects with the Sun and Moon.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Ethericplane
 


Thanks for the thread! I was about to start one up when I found this on the search function.

I wanted to post a video that may shed some light on magnetic pole reversals. The video is by Dr. Ivan Stein. I came across it recently. I watched all the videos; each video lecture has a different theme: magnetics reversals, ice ages, galactic equator, mayan calendar and prophesies as well as biblical prophecies and pole shifts.

While I don't agree with everything in the lectures many astute observations are made. I find all the videos make for intersting watches if nothing else.

Here is the magnetic pole reversal/earth rotation reversing video:



The other 15 videos are on his website:

www.timeline2012.net...



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


NO. The earth has never reversed its rotation.


How would you know?

Have you been alive for 4.5 billion yrs??



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 



How would you know?

Have you been alive for 4.5 billion yrs??

What I find interesting is how often people use this trite thinking that is often associated with creationists.

Did I need to be alive to know whether or not there was an eruption at Pompeii that killed its inhabitants? No. The reason is that evidence is left behind revealing the event.

Can we tell if the Earth's rotation has reversed? Can we tell if there has been a pole shift? Yes we can. The evidence is very clear that has not been a reversal in the Earth's rotation.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 



How would you know?

Have you been alive for 4.5 billion yrs??

What I find interesting is how often people use this trite thinking that is often associated with creationists.

Did I need to be alive to know whether or not there was an eruption at Pompeii that killed its inhabitants? No. The reason is that evidence is left behind revealing the event.

Can we tell if the Earth's rotation has reversed? Can we tell if there has been a pole shift? Yes we can. The evidence is very clear that has not been a reversal in the Earth's rotation.


Strange how you make the assumption that I am a creationist.

Did you listen/watch Dr. Ivan Stein describe the geologic activity that follows a magnetic reversal/rotation reversal in the video?

I'm not saying I believe that the Earth will reverse rotation I am just saying the posibility needs to be discussed rationally.
edit on 9-9-2011 by GrassyKnoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 



Strange how you make the assumption that I am a creationist.

I made no such assumption. I stated that you used the same sort of trite thinking associated with creationists.

The fact is that the Earth's rotation has never been reversed.

Ivan Stein has a BS, not a doctorate.

I could go over his kooky clams, but here is a link that show how kooky he is.

[url=http://www.2012hoax.org/ivan-stein]Ivan Stein at 2012 Hoax



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll


I'm not saying I believe that the Earth will reverse rotation I am just saying the posibility needs to be discussed rationally.


But it's not a rational idea. And if for some reason it did happen, so what? All life on Earth would perish. Except maybe a few deep oceanic and sub surface microbes etc.

We'd be back where we started 3,500 million years ago.

(I think a lot of people fail to appreciate just how fast the Earth is rotating - over 1,000mph at the equator)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 



Strange how you make the assumption that I am a creationist.

I made no such assumption. I stated that you used the same sort of trite thinking associated with creationists.

The fact is that the Earth's rotation has never been reversed.

Ivan Stein has a BS, not a doctorate.

I could go over his kooky clams, but here is a link that show how kooky he is.

[url=http://www.2012hoax.org/ivan-stein]Ivan Stein at 2012 Hoax


I find your replies skimpy on science and substance and rather trite also.

Would you care to provide proof as to why the earth's rotation has never reversed in it's 4 billion+ history?

Do you have the geological background to explain unusual phenomena? I readily admit I am not a geologist; I am an engineer.

If there are any any geologists out there reading this thread your input would be greatly appreciated.

As for Dr. Stein being a kook or a hoax or however it is that you describe him; that is not the issue.

I am sure some of Dr. Stein's claims are untrue; I am skeptical of many of them.

Nonetheless just because a person says some things that are questionable or untrue it doesn't mean every word or statement they have ever presented is untrue.

I always find it strange when people attack the scientist and not their theories.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 



Would you care to provide proof as to why the earth's rotation has never reversed in it's 4 billion+ history?

1. The energy involved would be an Earth destroying event.
2. Evidence from fossils show that for the last half billion years there has been no such event
3. Paleomagnetic studies show no change in the rotation.
4. Hot spots do not show a change in the rotation.

He's not Dr Stein. He does not have a doctorate. He's just Ivan Stein.


I always find it strange when people attack the scientist and not their theories.

I provided a link with a discussion of many of the reasons Stein is a kook. He is a kook and his claims are kooky as well.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join