reply to post by BlastedCaddy
I think we are onto something interesting here because you are tossing out some interesting suggestions. Maybe if we explore some of these some other
people will chime in.
1. No because instruments are man made. Not as sensitive as those our flying/swimming friends use.
The magnetosphere images that are sometimes posted here at ATS show the strength of the magnetic field in the nT range. That's nanoTesla or 1
billionth of a Tesla. The surface field is 30K to 60K while the field strength is only 3K to 8K only 16,000 miles away. That is measured.
There are instruments that can measure strengths as small as a billionth of a nanoTesla.
The smallest precision level for a magnetic field measurement is on the order of attoteslas (10−18 tesla);
I'm sure that is under very special conditions.
How small do you thik these changes are that affect the animals that die?
2. I disagree with your statement. It is quite massive, everywhere from Cape Cod to Cape Horn.
I recall something about crabs dieing. Can you help us out by describing a large scale animal die off such as the animals involved and the area so
that the event can be looked up?
3. In your question/statement you preface field as it would be one that would compete so to say against our own Earth when in fact it could
simply enhance or modify our current situation.
We are in agreement here. Fields are replaced, but are additive. The Earth's field is not replaced, but modified by another field. So if this other
field can affect the surface, then surely we'd see effects outside of the Earth since this field comes from a new planet.
4. A well placed heavily loaded nuke could take out millions with a spectacular show of devastation. A contaminant of sorts IE Bacteria Germ
Virus is unseen by the naked eye. It could do ten times the damage of that nuke. With that said why does it have to be big and powerful. It could be
simple and precise.
So you are suggesting that something other than a magnetic field is responsible for the die offs that are tied into an unknown planet.
The issue is that animal die offs are used as evidence for a new planet. One of the suggestions is the new planet's magnetic field. So you are
suggesting that germs are being spread from that planet to ours?
In case you were not aware I just BS'd those 4 answers. The same way all those official science agencies do. Long story short nobody and I
mean nobody knows whats going on with the planet that is alive today(minus the immortals) Why??? Because they werent around the last time it
Sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between an answer and a BSed answer.
I and most people don't believe that an observer needs to be there to figure out what happened. A twisted wreck of a car, skid marks, and bark ripped
off a tree, empty beer cans in the vehicle, and a blood alcohole test kind of wrap up the story.
The Earth is full of evidence. Dead animals can be collected. They can be checked for pathogens. They can be checked for bacteria and toxins. The
numbers and distribution can be checked as can the conditions at the time they died.
So why suppose that dead animals indicate that a new planet is in the solar system?