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.

 

Pole Shift Data You Shouldn't Ignore

page: 3
48
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Using that information, could you expand on when the pole could be entirely reversed?




posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



Many have noticed the recent increase in extreme weather:


And the overwhelming majority of meteorologists and climatologists attribute it to global warming, not geo-magnetic field changes.
edit on 16-5-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


The Earth's magnetic field affects climate? Yes? No?
Apparently we needn't fight about it any longer. The big boys are sorting this out as we speak:


Svensmark's Theory Explained
A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.

They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.

www.viewzone.com...


edit on 5/16/2012 by this_is_who_we_are because: typos

edit on Wed May 16 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



Meanwhile, I will continue to promote the idea that climate change is affected by changes in the Earth's magnetic field. I have connected the two subjects in this thread, and I'm running with it.


No, you haven't. You have spammed a series of unrelated references about geo-magnetic migration without actually establishing a case for them to be related to climatic changes. Only one of your sources supports this premise, and you still haven't explained it in your own words. In the meantime, you've been acting like a peevish child, insisting I look up the exact number of climate scientists who believe that the recent severe weather has been caused by global warming. If you cannot find data that supports your contention and piece together a reasonable argument, don't take it out on me.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.

They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.


And if the results are negative, will you accept them?

Edit to add: Incidentally, who is regurgitating now?
edit on 16-5-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Fellas...there is nothing to fight/argue about. Its a discussion forum. Lets discuss and/or educate each other on topics. I'm sure there are bound to be disagreements and/or conflict(s) of Interest(s)/Opinion(s)


I think ATS has a very large number of good contributors compared to some of the other forums and websites that I have visited (atleast the conspiracy theory websites). Some of the ATS members even make a lot more sense then agencies such as NASA or USGS with their theories. Nothing is taken for granted even if the authorized agencies publish since they keep changing their minds ever few years. There is no contest as per who is right or wrong or who typed first or repeated the same viewpoint.
edit on 16-5-2012 by hp1229 because: add content.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.

They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.


And if the results are negative, will you accept them?

Edit to add: Incidentally, who is regurgitating now?
edit on 16-5-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


Q: "And if the results are negative, will you accept them?"
A: It's possible.


If the results are positive, will you accept them?



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



Meanwhile, I will continue to promote the idea that climate change is affected by changes in the Earth's magnetic field. I have connected the two subjects in this thread, and I'm running with it.


No, you haven't. You have spammed a series of unrelated references about geo-magnetic migration without actually establishing a case for them to be related to climatic changes. Only one of your sources supports this premise, and you still haven't explained it in your own words. In the meantime, you've been acting like a peevish child, insisting I look up the exact number of climate scientists who believe that the recent severe weather has been caused by global warming. If you cannot find data that supports your contention and piece together a reasonable argument, don't take it out on me.


When we post without sources and/or citations in support of our threads, we are scolded. When we post sources and/or citations in support of our threads we are "spamming".

O.K.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are

Latitude Longitude year
80.815 -109.568 2001
81.268 -110.89 2002
81.714 -112.344 2003
82.193 -114.095 2004
82.623 -115.892 2005
83.127 -118.178 2006
83.579 -120.578 2007
83.981 -123.067 2008
84.37 -125.881 2009
84.742 -129.077 2010



So good news then.
The magnetic pole is heading towards the rotational pole.
Things are going towards a "normal" situation.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by hp1229
 


Words of wisdom. Thank you for your reply.

You're welcome. These are the only things I have accumulated so far in life...Knowledge & Wisdom. Everything else comes and goes...especially Money

edit on 16-5-2012 by hp1229 because: edit content



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


The Handoff
DJW001→ alfa1

The Pitch


Originally posted by alfa1So good news then.
The magnetic pole is heading towards the rotational pole.
Things are going towards a "normal" situation.


Shift change guys?



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
The only thing I can say is, "Why should I care?"

This is going to happen weather we want it to or not, and we're going to have to deal with what will happen.

I am however happy that there is actual credible evidence of this event happening, and I don't think anyone can deny the evidence that you just put on the table.

Bravo good sir.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


Thanks for taking the time to share this information.
It is very much relevant and worth learning more about.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Why does this



Remind me of this?



Talk about eerie coincidence.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



If the results are positive, will you accept them?


Yes, I am familiar with Svensmark's work and find it intriguing. It might be the most important insight into long term climate change since Milankovich. It has yet to be proven, however.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 


You do a much better job of presenting the OP's case than the OP. There does appear to be a correlation; now what is the suggested mechanism?



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
To all the naysayers insisting that it's the magnetic pole shifting, and not the geographic:

A few years back, I read a piece about the natives of Point Barrow, and they had a question. As long as anyone could remember, going back to the distant past, the sun had always risen the first time in the Spring on the same exact point on the horizon. Make sense? However, now the sun was not rising at the same point when it first appeared after the long winter's darkness. The people there live in a visually sparse locale, and are very keen observers as a result. I trust their report. They wanted someone to go up there and explain this to them. I knew immediately - it had to mean that the geographical pole had shifted. I can not imagine another explanation.

We are in pole shift, two kinds of pole shift.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
Why does this



Remind me of this?



Talk about eerie coincidence.


OMG!!!!! Man-made pole shift!



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


One is driving the other?
Question is which one.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen
 


lol. OMGWTFBBQDESERTPENGIUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111oneone

hehe. I think I started a crap storm.
Wait till the AGW crowd sees my post.
They will have fits of apoplexia.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join