Second super-fast flip of Earth's poles found

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by rajaten

 

As I said, this is only correct under the CMT correlation. How much simpler do I have to make it. It represents only 1 calendar, the Haab, and not an age.

Let me help you out. The notion of parts of calendars such as the Sixties or Seventies or the 18th century or the start of the new millennium on Jan 1, 2001 are artifices imposed by human fascination with numbers.

So you want to assign an age or some other thinking to a date when a calendar wraps and continues counting. That date when the Haab calendar wraps is what under the CMT correlation?

On the date you mentioned, is that the last day of the current baktun, or the first day of the next baktun?

So you confirm that your research has led you to believe that the current baktun will end and the next baktun will start on the 21st December 2012. Yes or no?

reply to post by rajaten


I guess what is missing here is the understanding that this is not a simple yes or no question.

There are two calendars. They have to be matched up. The answer is yes if the GMT correlation is used. The answer is no if another correlation is used. Important note: I have mistakenly typed CMT instead of GMT a number of times.

Take Easter. When is Easter celebrated? It all depends on which calender and rules is used. Check it out online and find that Easter is on April 8th, 2012. Is that when everyone celebrates Easter? No. It's April 15th for some.

So maybe you are advocating a different correlation such as the Lounsbury correlation which would put the date on the 23rd. Or maybe you are looking at the Fuls correlation which puts the date well into the future.

reply to post by stereologist


Yes GMT, so you agree that the mayan calendar new cycle will begin at this time. Do you also agree that at this time earth will be in a state of "Galactic Alignment"?

reply to post by rajaten


First, of all there is no new cycle. The odometer rolls over so to speak. Do we enter a new cycle when we add 1 to the year? In general no. If we look at planting conditions and such yes. There is a cycle to the seasons and calendars were initially developed for that purpose. So in some cases there is a cycle. In general no. For example, it does not start a new cycle in terms of volcanoes, tides, or earthquakes.

As to the second part. No. There is no galactic alignment on that day. There is a rough alignment as there is every year. Nothing distinguishes this year from other years in terms of this rough alignment.

Pole shift "Albert Einstein first predicted it in 1955"

This one is only 3 minutes long. I am sure everyone has the time to view 3 minutes of History channel video.

Here is another link: Evidence of second fast north-south pole flip found

The record in one particular lava flow in Nevada suggests the magnetic field moved by 53 degrees in a single year. The lava started to cool, but was then heated again within a year as it was buried under fresh lava. The crystals in the rock were re-magnetized by the fresh lava, producing a shift of 53 degrees. This finding could mean the poles swapped over a period of only four years, but Brogue said it could also suggest there was a rapid acceleration period within the steady movement of the field.

According to some geologists a polarity reversal is overdue, since the Earth’s magnetic field has been weakening for the last century

I am sure there will be more coming out about this in coming weeks.

CU

reply to post by CUin2013?


I hope stereologist watches that. It seems all his research was on known physics and past astrological concepts and he never delved into the details of the mayan calendar and their advanced culture.

I think its a great flaw to think you know anything at all about 2012 unless you completely understand the mayan perspective on the topic and their knowledge.

I know this has been talked about a great deal on ATS, but is a new article posted 10 days ago.

Another Planet X article

Most every secretive government agency in the USA is fully aware of what is expected and are readying themselves. The Vatican is fully abreast of what is expected. The public is not being warned and given their chance to prepare.

A group of scientists in Russia, held several meetings in the year 2000 to discuss the inbound planet, discovered from one of their largest observatories. A 66 year old professor and physicist let it be known that he attended this meeting. This led to the infamous “2003 Problem” from a Reuters news service wire on Sept.13th, 2000. Top Russian government officials called for a commission to study the problem which was said to expect to cause “a string of calamities and a massive population shrinkage.” They openly wondered whether Russia would still even exist as a country afterward.

This is a rather long article. It talks of many people in the know about Planet X and that many are afraid to talk about it.

Maybe it deserves it's own thread? or at least in a planet x thread. I placed it here because of the high threat of a pole shift if Planet x actually exists and will visit soon.

reply to post by CUin2013?


Its a debunkers wet dream.

Sure is a good read if you enjoy your DOOM with a side serve of DOOOM!

Hi guys im new here just thought that you would like to read this I dont know if it was already posted but the clipping from page one was from a reputable source and also it said that there may be proof of a geomagnetic flip which can occur within YEARS to millennium
www.sciencenews.org...

reply to post by SinghisKingh


Says it was written in the future??

25th September?

reply to post by rajaten


I believe it is the next edition of the magazine but hey i could be wrong also GUYS spaceweather.com also has on there main page a article on aurora activity that has no reason to be there

"AURORA WATCH: There's a reason they call Alaska "aurora country." Last night near Fairbanks, for no particular reason, the sky turned green:"

reply to post by CUin2013?


That would be a lie. Einstein did not predict a pole shift. He wrote a forward to a book by Hapgoode in 1955. That was before the establishment of plate tectonics in the 1960s. That was before the magnetic reversal information was established.

So the posted claim is a lie.

reply to post by CUin2013?


Two important points in the article:

Even if it was a super-fast flip-flop, however, it would not be noticeable to most people.

... and the last stable reversal was about 780,000 years ago.

Notice the use of the word stable.

Th Earth's magnetic field strength has been decreasing ever since it was first measured by Gauss.

Dont know if anyone has posted this link. Apologies if they have.
I watched this interview and it`s scary.........if it`s true.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by CUin2013?


Switching from 1 hoax to another. It does not matter what you call the planet it is still an impossible event. No matter how many times the name is changed it is still the same silly hoax.

Rapid pole shifts are a hoax.
A new planet is a hoax.
A close pass by another celestial body does not cause a reorientation of the rotation axes - hoax.

The so-called proof is a diagram from a 2 bit publication.

Look at all of the vague issues. Here are a few:
1. scientists met
2. a 66 year old professor
3. a a large observatory in St Petersburg
4. insiders confirm

Then that laughable clown of the air waves Art Bell gets put together with Sitchin. Two wackos are used to support this claim.

The best is the following:

Hercolubus (Planet X) has INTENTIONALLY BEEN MADE TO SOUND RIDICULOUS and confusing for several reasons.

The proof this is real is that it is so obviously a hoax.
What ridiculous thinking. It so stupid it must be real.

reply to post by SinghisKingh


Same position stated here:

But apocalyptic SyFy channel movies to the contrary, nobody should worry about waking up one morning to geomagnetic havoc, says Bogue. “To geologists a polarity reversal is a nearly instantaneous thing that changes a global feature of the Earth — it’s really a spectacular phenomenon,” he says. “But if you were alive when it was happening, it probably wouldn’t be that big a deal.”

Once again:

"Firstly, let’s differentiate between geomagnetic reversal and polar shift"
www.universetoday.com...

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by CUin2013?

 

That would be a lie. Einstein did not predict a pole shift. He wrote a forward to a book by Hapgoode in 1955. That was before the establishment of plate tectonics in the 1960s. That was before the magnetic reversal information was established.

So the posted claim is a lie.

The History Channel lie? NOooo

A 3 minute clip and you likely skipped it. It was stated right in the clip.