The Weakening Of Earth's Magnetic Field Has Greatly Accelerated a new article

Another article about the accelerated weakening of the Earth's magnetic field and the possibilities that such a weakening presents to both earth and all living things.

Plenty of doom porn..

The last thing I seem to have read was it would be the end of the year or in 2020 before before a new measurement of the magnetic field would be undertaken so I am not sure if this is a new measurement or just a rehash of the old numbers. Either way the article discusses possible out comes as the field weakens..

There have been other magnetic reversals in the past and we still have an atmosphere and there is still life on this planet so unless this event is extraordinarily out of character earth's creatures should survive this....that is...unless there is a huge solar flare that strikes at the low point of the field then all bets are off..

But now we are being told that data collected from the SWARM satellite indicate that the rate of decay is now 5 percent per decade…

It’s well established that in modern times, the axial dipole component of Earth’s main magnetic field is decreasing by approximately 5% per icentury. Recently, scientists using the SWARM satellite announced that their data indicate a decay rate ten times faster, or 5% per decade.

That statement is why I believe this article is a rehash of findings from a few years ago.. I think I did a thread stating those results a couple of years ago.

As more solar radiation reaches Earth, we would expect to see a rise in cancer rates, and this is something that even National Geographic has acknowledged…

However, if the magnetic field gets substantially weaker and stays that way for an appreciable amount of time Earth will be less protected from the oodles of high-energy particles that are constantly flying around in space. This means that everything on the planet will be exposed to higher levels of radiation, which over time could produce an increase in diseases like cancer, as well as harm delicate spacecraft and power grids on Earth.

Most people who know anything about earth's magnetic field of protection would agree with that statement however, the real doom porn is stated as:

And even if some of us found a way to survive underground for a while, we still wouldn’t be able to survive because solar winds would strip away our planet’s atmosphere and oceans…

Without Earth’s magnetic field, solar winds — streams of electrically charged particles that flow from the sun — would strip away the planet’s atmosphere and oceans. As such, Earth’s magnetic field helped to make life on the planet possible, researchers have said.

So much for the deep under ground bunker stuff, No ? The article does say the field could be gone or flip in as little as 500 years.. All speculation IMO as no one has a good handle on what transpires during the event. The main thing is we need earth's magnetic field to survive unless the mother ship lands to rescue us.. Not worth considering IMO and even if they did I doubt you and I would be on the "E" (evacuation) list.

I guess we can all put a happy face on this or bury our heads in the sand and act like nothing is going on... Might as well as there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.
www.zerohedge.com...

The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations .

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations .

Since it's not obvious to me, to what you are referring, can you give some examples of your postulation?

2000 ybp?
1500 ybp?
etc....

The aliens will soon save the Earth, from spinning out of control, in space, so don't worry folks!!

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations .

Since it's not obvious to me, to what you are referring, can you give some examples of your postulation?

2000 ybp?
1500 ybp?
etc....

An example would be the plant formation of the Amazon jungle.

originally posted by: musicismagic

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations .

Since it's not obvious to me, to what you are referring, can you give some examples of your postulation?

2000 ybp?
1500 ybp?
etc....

An example would be the plant formation of the Amazon jungle.

That's not even close to what you said.

I meant examples of humans being destroyed on a 500 yr timetable.

What ya got?

Hmmm. 500 years? Where was I 500 years ago? Where will I be in 500 years?

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: musicismagic

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations .

Since it's not obvious to me, to what you are referring, can you give some examples of your postulation?

2000 ybp?
1500 ybp?
etc....

An example would be the plant formation of the Amazon jungle.

That's not even close to what you said.

I meant examples of humans being destroyed on a 500 yr timetable.

It's not that humans are /were destroyed, but the migration of the fittest .
The Amazon is a very classic example of about a 500 year cycle of natural climate change.
Not sure why it is. Maybe someone will come along and explain the equator in climate change terms.

What ya got?

originally posted by: musicismagic
The Earth is a living organism . Always giving life and taking life.
I do have to agree that about every 500 years of recent documents, the Earth does destroy human life in areas around the Earth, not all humans but enough to destroy any history of what happen to other civilizations


It's not that humans are /were destroyed, but the migration of the fittest .
The Amazon is a very classic example of about a 500 year cycle of natural climate change.
Not sure why it is. Maybe someone will come along and explain the equator in climate change terms.
.

Again, that's not even close to what you originally said, but I'll go along with the moving goal post, and assume you just mis spoke.

What evidence do you have for 500 yr cycle of widespread equatorial climate change?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but you seem to have made statements, with no evidence to back up your claims.

a reply to: 727Sky

It seems a bit too soon to be coming to conclusions as the observations are relatively knew , fluctuations in the Earth's magnetic field could be a natural thing that run in cycles , only longer term observations will tell I guess.

Unless we're heading the way of Mars

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: 727Sky

It seems a bit too soon to be coming to conclusions as the observations are relatively knew , fluctuations in the Earth's magnetic field could be a natural thing that run in cycles , only longer term observations will tell I guess.

Unless we're heading the way of Mars

Most scientists, who work in this field, believe we are destined to go "the way of Mars",as you put it, and it seems to me to be a rational conclusion.

The time frame of this occurance, however, is almost assuredly hundreds of millions of years (if not more) in the future.

The active molten iron core, that is the engine that drives our magnetic field, does hav fluctuations, and field reversals, but it not going to dissapear overnight.

a reply to: 727Sky

I like this line.... "As more solar radiation reaches Earth, we would expect to see a rise in cancer rates, and this is something that even National Geographic has acknowledged."

Wait a second here! All the liberal and progressive crazies say we as a species are causing climate change and taxing us to ef'ing death will fix it. So wtf is this, the sun is causing it, can we tax the sun? Lol

Cheers - Dave

Not all scientists agree that we are in the early stages of a reversal:

The geomagnetic field has been decaying at a rate of∼5% per century from at least 1840, with indirect observations suggesting a decay since 1600 or even earlier. This has led to the assertion that the geomagnetic field may be undergoing a reversal or an excursion. We have derived a model of the geomagnetic field spanning 30–50 ka, constructed to study the behavior of the two most recent excursions: the Laschamp and Mono Lake, centered at 41 and 34 ka, respectively. Here, we show that neither excursion demonstrates field evolution similar to current changes in the geomagnetic field. At earlier times, centered at 49 and46 ka, the field is comparable to today’s field, with an intensity structure similar to today’s South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA); how-ever, neither of these SAA-like fields develop into an excursion or reversal. This suggests that the current weakened field will also recover without an extreme event such as an excursion or reversal. The SAA-like field structure at 46 ka appears to be coeval with published increases in geomagnetically modulated beryllium and chlorine nuclide production, despite the global dipole field not weakening significantly in our model during this time. This agreement suggests a greater complexity in the relationship between cosmogenic nuclide production and the geomagnetic field than is commonly assumed.

Earth’s magnetic field is probably not reversing - (direct .pdf link)

Much like many other things in nature, they argue that the current reduction in field strength is likely part of a longer cycle and they give evidence for such in their paper.

By studying the magnetic record left behind in earthly rocks, researchers found a magnetic field reversal – where magnetic north became magnetic south – lasting only 2 centuries.

earthsky.org...

Decide after watching this quick video

also good videos here
youtu.be...

Darn, I was planning to live eight hundred years and now everything will be messed up in five hundred years. Three hundred years of hell I guess.

Well, to be truthful, I think they would cut me off of social security as soon as I turned two hundred years old anyway, having to go back to work after all that free money would suck.

I think that climate change would be more tied to this magnetic field weakening than to carbon emissions. But what do I know anyway.

There is a great Google Earth Overlay for Earth magnetic anomalies available for free.

geomag.org...EMAG2: Earth Magnetic Anomaly Grid (2-arc-minute resolution)

It shows very high as well as very low (even absent) magnetic areas of the entire globe. A great source for those interested in magnetic flux lines on earth as well as plotting lay lines.

It is interesting to check out many places on Earth that historically have had magnetic anomalies, or are reported to have them.

727Sky:

Another article about the accelerated weakening of the Earth's magnetic field and the possibilities that such a weakening presents to both earth and all living things.

I suppose the question to ask with regard to the earth's magnetic field is why is it weakening? Why does the field undergo weakening at all?

We say that the earth's magnetic field arises due to a revolving inner liquid core sliding around the alleged iron core, which is said to be about the size of Mars.

I can only think of two possible scenarios as to why the magnetic field would weaken. A) the density of the liquid core becomes more diluted with non-magnetic debris falling into the liquid core; or, B) the revolutions of the liquid core around the Iron core slow down? Perhaps, it is a mixture of both scenarios?

Clearly, if the earth's magnetic field was to weaken to such an extent that solar and interstellar radiation was able to reach the earth's surface at a greater scale, then the issue becomes one of how long such a situation lasts. The longer it lasts, the more dire it becomes for life on earth. A higher dose of radiation constantly bombarding the surface, particularly over years, would soon be detrimental to any life form that is land-based.

Stable weather systems and other circulatory systems would collapse, with other types of high-energy systems taking their place. Of course, we are not talking about the flip of the poles here, we are talking about the loss of strength in the earth's magnetic field that protects us from all kinds of high-energy radiation. So there are reasons for concern as the scenario is not too far fetched...it could happen.

a reply to: elysiumfire

We say that the earth's magnetic field arises due to a revolving inner liquid core sliding around the alleged iron core, which is said to be about the size of Mars.

Sort of, but revolving is not really the correct term. There are various motions involved, induced by convection and affected by the Earth's rotation.

I can only think of two possible scenarios as to why the magnetic field would weaken. A) the density of the liquid core becomes more diluted with non-magnetic debris falling into the liquid core; or, B) the revolutions of the liquid core around the Iron core slow down? Perhaps, it is a mixture of both scenarios?

Liquid metals are not magnetic (see Curie point). But there is a certain amount of chaotic movement involved in the outer core.

Clearly, if the earth's magnetic field was to weaken to such an extent that solar and interstellar radiation was able to reach the earth's surface at a greater scale, then the issue becomes one of how long such a situation lasts.

While the magnetosphere does redirect charged particles toward the poles before they reach the atmosphere, it has no effect on neutral particles or electromagnetic radiation. But the atmosphere itself does a very good job of reducing all of them. The loss of the magnetosphere would result in a slight increase in charged cosmic particles at the surface at lower latitudes, probably resulting in a slight increase in cancer rates.

Stable weather systems and other circulatory systems would collapse, with other types of high-energy systems taking their place.

Why? Weather is driven by differences in temperatures which result in differences in density. Ocean circulation is driven also driven by differences in density, those differences being caused by temperature and salinity. Magnetism doesn't have much do to with it.

I think the hardest adjustment for a weak or reversed magnetic field would be for migrating animals.

Magnetite in their brains would send them to the wrong places.

Humans would adjust with little or no problem.

Weather systems shouldn't be effected, at least not that I am aware of.
It is not like a flipping of the actual poles (crust)
over the years I have read a lot that seems to suggest people get magnetic pole reversals mixed up with physical slippage of the crust.
Anyways, interesting read!
Thanks!

a reply to: Darkblade71

I don't think migrating animals depend solely upon magnetic cues. There are redundancies; visual, chemical, even the location of the Sun.