The earths axial tilt - presenting evidence for it being much larger 4000 years ago

page: 2
71
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Devino
reply to post by tauristercus
 



How can you be sure that this isn't a one time deal and is rather cyclical?
How accurate do you think your estimate of a 16,000 year cycle is?

I also notice the disconnect between the curves in your long timescale graph and wondered if this isn't half of a continuous wave.


Thanks for the kind words, Devino



Truthfully, I have no idea if what the data is telling us is a "one time deal" only OR whether it is in fact some kind of cyclical effect that is being uncovered and that results in the earth's axis tilting on a regular basis through a much greater amount than is commonly believed.

The trouble here is that we only have available to us observations (data points) made over the last few thousands of years upon which to try to validate this hypothesis. And everyone of those observations were made within the current cycle.
Essentially we have no idea at all whether if people had been around in those previous cycles and had also made eyeball observations and then compared them to the Lieske Formula estimates, whether the observations and calculations would consistently agree ... or whether we'd again see a significant divergence in those previous cycles corresponding to the divergences so strikingly obvious in this current cycle.


Also that estimate of 16,000 years was just that ... an estimate. I tried to improve on that a minute ago and came up with a slightly better adjusted value of 5 cycles (2 past; 1 current; 2 future) with an average spacing of closer to 15,300 years.




posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Oh boy! Now this is the kind of stuff that makes ATS a great site!. I need to get some sleep, but will be back to read this in it's entirety. Looks like alot of time went into this.

Cycles, cycles, cycles. It's just a little bit of history repeating...


Oh, by the way...
The time is near.


[edit on 7/28/2010 by this_is_who_we_are]



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel
Yes, it is true.

en.wikipedia.org...



The Earth's axis completes one full cycle of precession approximately every 26,000 years. At the same time, the elliptical orbit rotates, more slowly, leading to a 21,000-year cycle between the seasons and the orbit. In addition, the angle between Earth's rotational axis and the normal to the plane of its orbit moves from 22.1 degrees to 24.5 degrees and back again on a 41,000-year cycle; currently, this angle is 23.44 degrees and is decreasing.


[edit on 28-7-2010 by mbkennel]


So, Wikipedia is all that was necessary.

No need for scrolling and scrolling and scrolling.

Besides....didn't we already know this?



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Notice that there is a much more radical tilt of the Earth's axis over less amount of time than the Wiki information. I think this suggest a trigger event rather than a normal oscillating cycle.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Yours is a tour de force and humbling posting, which represents the best of ATS and the Internet. Whoever you work for is lucky indeed (hopefully you work for yourself). Very fine work, thank you.

In the face of work like this, I realize most of the rest of us are mere consumers of knowledge.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
tauristercus, kudos for your effort of explaining the whole process through historical data. This gives a blow to the general misconception that the Earth axis is static.

But I have one reserve...

If the Earth's axis is leaning towards the minimum of 22 degrees these days, how can you explain that the North magnetic pole is actually shifting the opposite way, towards Russia, as reported in recent discoveries, and actually at a very fast rate?

Would it be that the Earth's axis is being influenced by a special phenomenon that's exogenous, that comes from somewhere outside of the Earth, and actually disrupting the normal tilting between one angle to the other?

(you can send me a U2U if you will)



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Presumably in this we're rejecting Dodwell's belief that axial tilt was no more than 5% until Noah's Flood in 2345BC?

Its interesting that I can find no scientific refutation of Dodwell's work on the internet, yet no support for it either other than on Young Earth Creationist websites using it to support their view on the age of the Earth.

Dodwell's work can be read here:

www.setterfield.org...

The idea an impact event ~2345BC caused a change in axial tilt can be readily refuted because any body of sufficent size to do this would have caused massive devastation around the world a whole order of magnitude greater than that which hit the Yucatan 65mya. We would certainly not be here!

Apart from Dodwell's interpretation of gnomons erected centuries before Hipparchus discovered precession, is there any evidence that the accepted changes in axial tilt are in any way wrong?



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


i have a question about your chart. In the chart you list the observed angles of the earth. AT the bottom of that chart it says that someone at the Temple of Amen Ra in Karnak observed the angle of the earth. I would like to know how he left this data for us to find and can we be sure on the date that is left. If we are receiving this date based on a theory from an egyptologist then i am truely skeptical on the credibility of that measurement.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


A good point


What evidence is there that the Egyptians who erected the Karnak gnomon were aware of any axial tilt?

Maybe that's why it was wrong?



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Devino
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Notice that there is a much more radical tilt of the Earth's axis over less amount of time than the Wiki information. I think this suggest a trigger event rather than a normal oscillating cycle.


Here is another explanation of axial tilt. Miles Mathis has many ideas that have gained him growing attention.

milesmathis.com...



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
This is a great thread and it could develop so many different ways. For example think about this from a NWO long term planning perspective.

If you could successfully predict something like Global warming and cooling as Dr. Hawking believes, what might that mean for planning city developments in the tropical hurricane prone areas?

You might even be able to set in place the foundations for some future renaissance.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Great post! I forwarded it to a friend of mine who has some theories about the Earth's past.

P.S. Don't believe everything you read in New Scientist, etc. - those publications have an agenda and are often incredibly inaccurate, on purpose.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
"I have not yet explained that, at that time, Australia was on the equator. Earth rotated on a different axis - taking 30 hours and 12 minutes to complete a rotation, and achieved a revolution around its sun in 280 such days. The equatorial climate was not as you will find it today. It was much more humid than now, for the Earths atmosphere has changed.

Herds of huge zebras roamed the country, in company with enormous edible birds, referred to as dodos, very large jaguars, and another bird measuring almost four metres in height, which you have called Dinornis. In certain rivers, there were crocodiles up to 15 metres in length and snakes 25 to 30 metres long. They, at times, nourished themselves on the new arrivals.

Most of the flora and fauna on Earth was totally different from that on Bakaratini - both from a nutritional and ecological point of view. Numerous experimental farms were established in an endeavour to acclimatise plants such as sunflower, maize, wheat, sorghum, tapioca and others.

These plants either didnt exist on Earth or else existed in such a primitive state that they couldnt be consumed. The goat and the kangaroo were both imported, for the immigrants were quite partial to these, consuming them in great numbers on their planet. They were particularly keen to raise kangaroos on Earth, experiencing enormous difficulties however, in acclimatising them. One of the main problems was food. On Bakaratini, the kangaroo fed on a fine, hardy grass called arilu, which was totally unknown on Earth." The Angel Thoa from the Book The Thiaoouba Prophecy by Michel Desmarquet Originally Published as (Abduction to the 9th Planet)

Thank You OP for I am compiling massive amounts of circumstantantial evidence to prove the validity of the above book and the Truth that it contains about the history of planet Earth from the Time of Atlantis and Lumeria and Prior. The Angelic Race that observes us and from time to time partakes a message to mankind such as this. It explains practically all mysteries that we here at ATS squabble over. I wish for all ATS Board members to know about it. In previous posts it was laughed at and the author deemed a nutcase. 20 years since it was originally published and it still hardly get the attention it deserves. In my opinion it is the most important book to be written in the past 2,000 years.

Namaste - Ariok



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Great post Taustericus!


A few years ago, after reading Velikovsky's books, I was playing with the kids with a spinning top, and I sent one spinning really fast so it could hold its position for as long as possible.

One of the kids tapped it on the side, and the axis changed, due to impact, before reverting to its original one. Then, after God knows how many revolutions, we could see the spinning top reacting as if hit again, at the same spot, with almost the same strength.

To my surprise, the rotative motion had "engraved" the impact blow in its course! That's when I wondered if we would ever see such effects on Earth, based on Velikovsky's work of Earth being hit in the past. ( Well, pretty much everyone says it... )

It seems we do!


--------------

I was wondering; Does it mean that the extreme weather we actually see worldwide is a direct effect of Haiti's earthquake, which tilted the Earth?

Impressive work, again!



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 

Maybe someone better versed in Egyptology can help me out but now that you mention it, Dodwell seems to have been relying upon some questionable information. He mentions "King Amen Emhat" (Amenemhat) as laying the foundation for the temple of Amon Re in 2045B.C. The trouble with that is that Amenemhat was not alive in 2045 B.C. and any work he did at Karnak did not survive (other than some statues).

The temple which Dodwell uses was constructed in around 1500 B.C. That kind of messes up the curve doesn't it?
www.setterfield.org...



[edit on 7/28/2010 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by epsilon69
 


A good point


What evidence is there that the Egyptians who erected the Karnak gnomon were aware of any axial tilt?

Maybe that's why it was wrong?


Yeah if you look at the data set the karnak number is definately an outlier it's a larger degree shift relative to the others. We also have to assume the dates about when this temple was built are accurate and we also have to assume the egyptians new about the tilt of the earth and were trying to convey this message.

I do believe a pole shift happened and i do believe ancient cultures tried to convey this message to future generations. I believe that was the purpose of the great pyramid. As Scott Creighton points out its star shafts show a shift of the Earths axis. But then we have to ask when were the pyramids built and who built them.

I personally believe it was the suvivors of an ancient civilization destroyed by the very pole shift they were trying to warn us about, and that the ancient egyptian culture was just a corruption of this more ancient civilization.

Again look back at the last ice age's fossil record. We had ice caps in australia and north america. We had an amazing fauna of plants and animals all living together, meaning that where these creatures lived it must have been temperate and warm all year around. But at the same time it must have been cold all year around at the ice caps to keep them from seaonally melting. We get this result if we correct the earths 23 degree tilt so that its vertical axis is almost upright.

Here are some things to consider www.grahamhancock.com...
This next article talks about the possibility of a pole shift occuring quickly
www.grahamhancock.com...



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Essan
 

Maybe someone better versed in Egyptology can help me out but now that you mention it, Dodwell seems to have been relying upon some questionable information. He mentions "King Amen Emhat" (Amenemhat) as laying the foundation for the temple of Amon Re in 2045B.C. The trouble with that is that Amenemhat was not alive in 2045 B.C. and any work he did at Karnak did not survive (other than some statues).

The temple which Dodwell uses was constructed in around 1500 B.C. That kind of messes up the curve doesn't it?
www.setterfield.org...

Again the problem here is we are assuming these egyptology scholars are giving us correct dates. When in it is most likely that they are wrong. The ancient egyptians themselves spoke of a time before the first kingdom when their culture was at its peak. I believe that is when they contructed these massive buildings and temples. Not with slave labour and copper tools in the year 2500Bc as the egyptologists say, but perhaps in 8000BC or even earlier. It is very hard to tell, but we do have geological evidence of rain corrosion on the sphinx which dates it to atleast 8000BC probably earlier.




[edit on 28-7-2010 by epsilon69]

[edit on 28-7-2010 by epsilon69]



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I noticed a couple errors. First, the centuries used in the calculations are Julian centuries (36525 days), not 100 years.

Second, the Lieske formula is not the one currently used by the International Astronomical Union. They recommend ε = 84381.448 − 46.84024T − (59 × 10^-5)T^2 + (1.813 × 10^-3)T^3. Even newer formulas exist since this one was accepted by the IAU in 2000.

Third, the formulas (including Lieske's) only produce a linear trend in the near-term:


www.tenspheres.com...

You'll note that all the models are in good agreement +/- 6000 years.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 

The dates of the pharaohs are pretty well established (within a couple of decades). The Egyptians could write after all and the kings were proud of their work.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by epsilon69
 

The dates of the pharaohs are pretty well established (within a couple of decades). The Egyptians could write after all and the kings were proud of their work.

Yes this is true. So can we get a confirmation of the date on this Karnak temple and another confirmation on its astronomical alignments to see if we can even measure the axis of the earth off of this thing.





new topics




 
71
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join