Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

instant ice age

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by citizenx1
 


Very unlikely would the grass be in an un -decomposed state .The remarkable thing about the discovery was how the grass was preserved in it's stomach.




posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I am thinking that the bending magnetosphere, which I know happens, will force the atmosphere down. The solar wind bends the magnetosphere putting pressure on the lines of connection.

The effect of space weather has not been established on earths weather. The reason it has not been established is that they do not know the mechanism of how it works so the theory is not widely accepted. This does not mean space weather cannot effect weather here on earth. The effect of space weather on climate was only accepted to be real not that long ago. When I was in school in the seventies it was taught there was no connection at all.

I am only trying to explain that there are possibilities of things happening that are not considered by science because there is no evidence. If Einstein, Tesla, Newton, and others only used existing evidence to fuel their studies than where would we be today. I can't say I have a lot of knowledge about these things but I study the parameters and evidence of present theories more than the interpretations of the theories..



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I am thinking that the bending magnetosphere, which I know happens, will force the atmosphere down. The solar wind bends the magnetosphere putting pressure on the lines of connection.

The outer regions of the magnetosphere are "bent" by the solar wind because at that distance the strength of the magnetic field is much less than it is closer in. The inner regions of the magnetosphere maintain a classic bipolar shape. But why would the magnetosphere force the atmosphere down in the first place?


I can't say I have a lot of knowledge about these things but I study the parameters and evidence of present theories more than the interpretations of the theories..
I'm not sure what you mean but without some knowledge about these things all you are doing is speculating from a position of ignorance.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
It was god man.

god did it just to mess with you

much like the rest of the prehistoric fossils



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
So we have this woolly mammoth, chewing a flower or two, instantly frozen! Whatever happened must have been quick or it would have decomposed.

Suppose it could have been aliens with a with some sort of freezing ray!?


I'm so confused with all the 'scientists' different interpretations of what is or is not happening and I dare say I'm not alone is this, hence a 'cooling' in google hits on the subject.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by astra001uk
I too had heard that mammoths had died by being frozen while eating ,however reading en.wikipedia.org... it does make sense that the animals found may have eaten then fell through ice into a pit or area and then preserved but i would love to know the truth too

I think our modern day forensics would be able to tell if it drowned..
But that makes no sense anyway..
Perfect preservation must happen quickly



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I've only read three or four hundred articles on the different spheres the earth and other planets have. That doesn't make me an expert by any means. I did notice that most of this science has new discoveries since the satelites have gotten better. Many things that they used to think were real have been proven as misconceptions. most of these articles say that evidence shows, they do not say that something is proven. Science has got burned so many times by saying things are so and find out that they hadn't considered something that all research articles are usually open ended. I like the research articles for that reason. When reading an interpretation I almost always go to the credited articles used as proof. I often find that what was used as proof for the article is misinterpreted by the person writing the article. This does happen a lot, even in the higher scientific interpretations. Most of the time it is the parameters or exclusions that are not studied. I'd swear that they just read the first paragraph most times



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


I'd have thought the condition of the animals cells would answer this with some degree of certainty -

Freezing quickly would result in little damage to the cells, a longer freeze would allow larger ice crystals to form thus damaging the cells which would be quite apparent when thawed.

I assume there are some papers out there which describe the condition of the cells so i'd recommend you seek them out for clarity.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrGod
If the poles suddenly shift and you find yourself at the "new" north pole, let's say, then within hours everything around you will be frozen solid. Including yourself.


Nope. If the physical poles would suddenly shift somewhere, you'd have much bigger thing to worry about. Like the planet being in a billion pieces. Magnetic poles don't make places cold or warm, and that's a different story altogether.
edit on 2-12-2012 by Lithops because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Is it possible for a storm like from the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" to happen?



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
The flowers being found frozen I can believe.. but the mammoth not so much. How long would it take to freeze if the earth suddenly shifted 30 degrees? I think about two days, and the mammoth wouldn't have been frozen instantly while chewing nor the flowers.
edit on 2-12-2012 by siriusstarlight because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Question. At what temperature does it need to be to be able to "perfectly preserve" something the size of a wooly mammoth?
Additional question. Didn't the wooly mammoth already live in a cold climate.. So if it were already cold, ate some poisonous flowers or had an allergic reaction (too many what if's right) fell over in a climate already suitable for "deep freezing" the beast, heavy snow started to pile up...


siriusstarlight

Did we just ask the same question at the same time?
edit on 2-12-2012 by Isaac (RIP DUSTIN) because: spooky



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by siriusstarlight
 


A change of 90 degrees in the earths axis at a 1000 mile per hour rotation speed it would take 6 hours .30 degrees would take 2 hours . At 40 to 50 degrees below zero i doubt it would take very long to freeze the animal . The grass would not die off instantly and the animal could have eaten it just befor it died . The change in axis could have started gradually and accelerated to maximum without the animal falling .





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join