Something Incredible Was Said To Me Regarding Flipped Polarities, It was out of the blue!!!!!!

reply to post by sirjunlegun


good timing! I literally just watched the movie "The Core" last night and in it the Gov. had used a HUGE machine (built by Gov. Contractors) named Project "Destiny" in ALASKA (built as an earthquake machine for war purposes) and unwittingly stalled the core of the Earth which was causing the Earth to "die". So, again, interesting timing.The lady mentions a Machine in Alaska that can flip the poles (thus affecting the core of the planet) and possibly "kill" the planet. Hmmmm, not sure what to make of it.....

OK, my problem with this, is that there is a place in Alaska that has the power to shift the WHOLE earths crust to shift the poles.

Now I have not read the whole seven pages of the thread, but I have not heard of any technology that could possibly create that kind of energy.

We have tested and used atomic bombs. They kill massive numbers and destroy everything around them, however no evidence has ever pointed to our species being able to "move mountains".

Originally posted by grantbeed
What I don't get is that there are so many threads on ATS that speak of Governments trying to create mayhem and wipe out the population etc. If they did do this they would only be shooting themselves in the foot!

Government cannot survive without the population/people. If there was a Physical Pole Shift (which has already been proven to take thousands of years) that happened suddenly, the whole World would be screwed, including all the Government people in their bunkers.

yeah, i dont see government doing this. maybe the .01%

... and a river runs through it

Something that might or might not have a connection with all this:

I've just been watching the 10pm BBC News, here in the UK and they reported that the Army has given all their personnel extended leave from 15th December until into the New Year.
The reason given was that they want to say thankyou for their help at the Olympic Games but other commentators thought it was perhaps so they could save on gas and electricity (?!)

I wouldn't've thought anything of it but had just been reading this thread.

As to the woman saying 10 till 5 - that to me says 10 oclock until 5 oclock. A bit like someone saying your hours of work will be 2 til 10 - ie. 2pm until 10pm. Don't know about the U.S. but that's common parlance in the U.K.

10 till 5 makes more sense to me than a specific time like 4.50.
If they are going to try and reverse the poles, I would imagine it would take a few hours to complete the process. So any effects would be felt over a period of hours rather than in a split second.

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by sirjunlegun
Here is another Kentucky man stationed in Alaska and this was what happened last year. Does anybody remember this?
I know some members of this guys family. I won't be in Owensboro until Christmas which may be too late.

Alaskan Soldier warns his mother of End of WOrld scenario

I wonder if this is what he was referring to his mother that was coming.

Right, a blog post quoting actual stories and then embellishing on them with his own fantasies - with absolutely no evidence either - is not relevant. The warning flag that the author of that is a little delusional can be seen in the repeated highlighting of the use of numbers 9 and 11, as if this is some kind of blatant signal that something was going to happen - which of course didn't happen!

This is just more loony toons rambling from psychologically imbalanced people with far too much imagination and no outlet.

Nothing much is going to happen this month, apart from some snow storms, interesting weather, economic warnings and then Christmas and New Year.

I can guarantee for a fact that the end of the world is not going to come before 2013. Anyone want to make a bet?

You are likely correct. The thing is, I find it reasonable never to dismiss a thing because it sounds crazy.

I continue to remember that there have been many times in history where what was considered impossible or crazy was correct. For instance, when the most learned and respected on the planet believed the world was flat, the ancients who came long before them already said it was round.

I don't think it is wise to dismiss things if we base our dismissal on our belief that scientists say it is not going to happen or is impossible.

Originally posted by randomname
wouldn't a wal-mart compass give you some sort of warning.

i'm sick of these f-ing mayans. they can predict the end of the world but they can't predict a bunch of drunken, gold stealing conquistadors from enslaving them.

good luck with the government warning you, all they talk about is the "fiscal cliff".

but i wouldn't be surprised if some sick agency, probably in the u.s., would test out some sort of weather altering weapon on the citizens of earth while using the mayan calender to cause confusion.

THIS!!

Also - Someone in an earlier reply mentioned the dinosaur in the FEMA ad, how perhaps it was a veiled reference to a previous polar shift being a reason for their extinction.

I'm sure I read something years ago, that said it would be impossible for dinosaurs to live nowadays because they wouldn't be able to survive the force of gravity because of their size?
Isn't that the reason the biggest mammals we have now are elephants on land and whales in the ocean? Anything bigger would be crushed by gravity?

If that is true and we know that the poles do reverse every million years or so, then the dinosaurs could well have been wiped out by a polar shift and the reason they don't find that many skeletons or bones is because they were all pulverised and are now just dust.

OK, so can someone check the schedule for the HAARP to see if this is correct or not?
I don't know how to do it.

If this scenario is correct, I don't see how TPTB underground network would survive.
(We don't know all technology advancements involved) but, shifting crusts, magnetic reversals would effect underground as well. (Especially the advanced magnetic rail system supposedly able to reach Mach 2)

The pole reversal would effect/stop underground rail system. I would think so anyways....

I'm not buying your story.

65 isn't that old, to be saying honey I'm going to die soon anyways, although it might be to you if you are young?
You should have made her 85.

Anyways sounds like you found yourself a real dandy with a woman who can pay with cash.
What is it you sell?

As you are an American, do you realize your story is based on it being the American govt or NASA that is going to do this? It's like you're oblivious to other nations of the world.

So this is a magnetic pole reversal?

Originally posted by aBeneGesserit
Also - Someone in an earlier reply mentioned the dinosaur in the FEMA ad, how perhaps it was a veiled reference to a previous polar shift being a reason for their extinction.

I'm sure I read something years ago, that said it would be impossible for dinosaurs to live nowadays because they wouldn't be able to survive the force of gravity because of their size?
Isn't that the reason the biggest mammals we have now are elephants on land and whales in the ocean? Anything bigger would be crushed by gravity?

If that is true and we know that the poles do reverse every million years or so, then the dinosaurs could well have been wiped out by a polar shift and the reason they don't find that many skeletons or bones is because they were all pulverised and are now just dust.

Alligators/crocodiles are dinosaurs that survived unaffected. Just 1 example....

Originally posted by violet
I'm not buying your story.

65 isn't that old, to be saying honey I'm going to die soon anyways, although it might be to you if you are young?
You should have made her 85.

Anyways sounds like you found yourself a real dandy with a woman who can pay with cash.
What is it you sell?

As you are an American, do you realize your story is based on it being the American govt or NASA that is going to do this? It's like you're oblivious to other nations of the world.

So this is a magnetic pole reversal?

Suppose for a moment he was only conveying what the woman said. We seem to have people randomly adding to what she said and extrapolating what it MEANs could be the cause of what she said. She actually said very little and could well be paraphrasing her brothers words...not being a scientist herself.

65 indeed is not old and yet if you are alone or you have no children or they died or any number of reasons 65 can feel like a full and long life and you don't need anymore.

reply to post by iwilliam

I did. I looked at a clock to imagine the pole moving from ten to five but I would not pay any attention to what was said about the government or the date.

At ten until five AM? I'm trying to make sense of that, and it doesn't seem to be working for me.

Originally posted by thepupils

Originally posted by aBeneGesserit
Also - Someone in an earlier reply mentioned the dinosaur in the FEMA ad, how perhaps it was a veiled reference to a previous polar shift being a reason for their extinction.

I'm sure I read something years ago, that said it would be impossible for dinosaurs to live nowadays because they wouldn't be able to survive the force of gravity because of their size?
Isn't that the reason the biggest mammals we have now are elephants on land and whales in the ocean? Anything bigger would be crushed by gravity?

If that is true and we know that the poles do reverse every million years or so, then the dinosaurs could well have been wiped out by a polar shift and the reason they don't find that many skeletons or bones is because they were all pulverised and are now just dust.

Alligators/crocodiles are dinosaurs that survived unaffected. Just 1 example....

Well their size was effected though wasn't it.

Originally posted by aBeneGesserit
Also - Someone in an earlier reply mentioned the dinosaur in the FEMA ad, how perhaps it was a veiled reference to a previous polar shift being a reason for their extinction.

I'm sure I read something years ago, that said it would be impossible for dinosaurs to live nowadays because they wouldn't be able to survive the force of gravity because of their size?
Isn't that the reason the biggest mammals we have now are elephants on land and whales in the ocean? Anything bigger would be crushed by gravity?

If that is true and we know that the poles do reverse every million years or so, then the dinosaurs could well have been wiped out by a polar shift and the reason they don't find that many skeletons or bones is because they were all pulverised and are now just dust.

I may be wrong but I think the lack of giant fauna nowadays has to do with there being less oxygen in the atmosphere - the presence of very large insects is an indication of this because their size is very dependent on the levels of oxygen due to their type of respiratory system.
Doesn't mean there wasn't a pole shift though - could even explain why the atmosphere changed so much.

peace
J

reply to post by thepupils

Alligators/crocodiles are dinosaurs that survived unaffected. Just 1 example....

You're right of course - but perhaps the shift and gravity change was over an extended period of time so some had chance to adapt and evolve into what they are now.

Oh god not this again..

Call a shrink and make him take care of that lady.

1) Polar Shifts take hundreds of thousands of years or even millions from the beggining to the end.
2) HAARP has nowhere near enough energy to reverse the magnetic field of the earth's core (thats what gives us the magnetic field and is too large, too heavy and it produces too much energy in order to create those fields for an antena array to stop and change)

So stop it with this garbage, its getting silly ...

Plus it will be fun to see how many people are dissapointed on the 22nd.

Wasn't around for the last pole shift so I couldn't tell you.

Then you got places like Flora, in Indonesia where everything on land was dwarfed.
Big/small it doesn't really matter (except to women!)

Maybe the brother is nuts and she's just gullible?

Originally posted by zilebeliveunknown

Originally posted by OOOOOO
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

I thought Eisenstein figured out a 100 years ago that gravity is pushing not pulling, something with mass warping space or something of that sort,

Then you'll never had your feet on the ground if it's a pushing force.

The General Theory of Relativity

Einstein started his paper by saying that mass is equivalent to inertia. What this means is that the gravity that presses you down in your seat is the same force that you feel when you are pulled forwards in car when the driver hits the breaks. Your chest presses against the seatbelt for the same reason your bottom pushes against your chair. Since the time of Isaac Newton, physicists had always thought of gravity as a force that pulled things toward an object. The bigger the object, the stronger the pull. The earth was a big object so it had enough pull to hold objects - people, cars, buildings, cows - on its surface. A smaller object, like the moon, also had gravity that pulls objects toward it, but not as strongly (that's why an astronaut on the moon weights just one-sixth of what he would on Earth).

What Einstein realized was that this picture was wrong. Gravity, just as inertia, was not a pulling action but a pushing action because all matter warps the fabric of space and curves it. The analogy often used is that of a piece of fabric stretched tightly across a wooden frame and laid flat like a table top. Imagine what happens to the fabric when a bowling ball is placed on it. The bowling ball warps the fabric. Now imagine placing a marble on the fabric. It rolls toward the bowling ball. Its movement is not because the bowling ball in any way pulls the marble to it,. it moves because the bowling ball has created a slope in the fabric and the marble rolls down the slope. In effect the fabric is pushing on the marble.