Cataclysmic pole shift hypothesis-Science versus Pseudoscience

a reply to: emmashaw042

But how many after taking the exam are actually interested in what they got wrong?

People will say I got 70% right and its a pass. Ask them what they got wrong they don't know and they don't care it's a pass.

If the exam results were
"you got 30% wrong and this is what you need to review, and re-sit"
perhaps an exam would be useful.

Bens latest video is interesting, not sure I buy it but who knows..

a reply to: LABTECH767



Here's a idea.

The pole shift and magnetic blobs. They say they are increasing in size. Do you think that a world expansion of this molten iron will cause the Atlantic to recede (by the way of hydraulics) and create another Pangea?


They don't know what it is. its located in the pacific. it spans from western US to Europe. They say its as large as a continent.



What ever it is. its doing some thing.


I have seen an increase in strange weather. Hurricane snow storms. The jet stream moving. Wind going in all directions. The largest lightning strike ever recorded. It looks like the polar shift and these molten iron blobs could be causing it.

originally posted by: Nightstalker2010
a reply to: LABTECH767
Here's a idea.

The pole shift and magnetic blobs. They say they are increasing in size.

One blob is increasing, the other decreasing, as illustrated here:

www.esa.int...

Do you think that a world expansion of this molten iron will cause the Atlantic to recede (by the way of hydraulics) and create another Pangea?

No. The molten iron is something like 3000km deep and it's not expanding, the amount of iron is fixed. It is however moving around, but again at 3000 km deep. The plates are only maybe 175 km deep so on a totally different level than the molten iron in the core.

They don't know what it is. its located in the pacific. it spans from western US to Europe. They say its as large as a continent.

Link?

I have seen an increase in strange weather. Hurricane snow storms. The jet stream moving. Wind going in all directions. The largest lightning strike ever recorded. It looks like the polar shift and these molten iron blobs could be causing it.

Molten iron "blobs" are definitely related to pole shift, but I think the rest of the "effects" listed are a product of your imagination only and they may have causes, but the causes are not iron "blobs".

a reply to: Arbitrageur


Just came across this article which thought deserved a post.



Uh, Earth’s Inner Core Just Stopped Spinning

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Just came across this article which thought deserved a post.

Uh, Earth’s Inner Core Just Stopped Spinning

The title of that article is truly idiotic, almost as bad as the article saying scientists measured radio waves traveling faster than the speed of light. Both of them are so "misleading" as to be flat wrong. But at least with the light article there's some clarification of what the real science was. Unfortunately there's not much clarification in that article you linked to say the title was just clickbait and the Earth's inner core didn't really stop spinning, so it could lead people to believe the earth's inner core stopped spinning, which is bad.

How much is clickbait and how much is writers of science misrepresenting things they don't understand I can't say, but from my perspective that article is wrong. The article explaining what really allegedly happened is linked here and correctly says the inner core stopped spinning faster than the rest of the planet, rather than the incorrect claim of saying the inner core stopped spinning.

Has Earth’s inner core stopped its strange spin?

"Earthquake data hint that the inner core stopped rotating faster than the rest of the planet in 2009, but not all researchers agree...

The liquid outer core essentially decouples the 2,400-kilometre-wide inner core from the rest of the planet, so the inner core can spin at its own pace. In 1996, Song and another researcher reported studying earthquakes that originated in the same region over three decades, and whose energy was detected by the same monitoring station thousands of kilometres away. Since the 1960s, the scientists said, the travel time of seismic waves emanating from those earthquakes had changed, indicating that the inner core rotates faster than the planet’s mantle, the layer just beyond the outer core.

Later studies refined estimates of the rate of that ‘super-rotation’, to conclude that the inner core rotates faster than the mantle by about one-tenth of a degree per year. But not everyone agrees. Other work has suggested that super-rotation happens mostly in distinct periods, such as in the early 2000s, rather than being a continuous, steady phenomenon. Some scientists even argue that super-rotation does not exist, and that the differences in earthquake travel times are instead caused by physical changes on the surface of the inner core".

So depending on which scientists you believe, even if you believe this rotation research, the Earth's core didn't stop spinning. The claim by the researchers is that previously the inner core rotated faster than the mantle by about 1/10th of a degree per year (how many degrees does the earth rotate per year? 360 degrees each day for about 365.25 days, actually 365.2422, which is 131487.2 degrees per year, so 0.1 degree per year more than that would be about 131487.3 degrees per year).

The real claim is that now the inner core isn't rotating faster than the rest of the Earth, but rather at the same speed. So it slowed down from rotating 131487.3 degrees per year to 131487.2 degrees per year, like the mantle. If the article said the inner core stopped spinning faster than the rest of the earth like the nature article, that would be consistent with the claim of the scientists, but to say it stopped spinning is idiotic since it still spins at 131487.2 degrees per year just like the Earth, which also hasn't stopped spinning.

Of course there are other scientists disputing this theory that the changes in observations are due to changes in inner core rotation rate, and that "physical changes on the surface of the inner core" are responsible for the changes in observations. I can't say who is right or wrong but it's possible more data collected in the future can eventually rule out one theory or the other.

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Arbitrageur


Just came across this article which thought deserved a post.



Uh, Earth’s Inner Core Just Stopped Spinning

I read that too. The paper is a joke, to put it mildly. Not sure how they got a publication.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


Well thanks for the detailed response - mainstream sites like AOL, Yahoo, CBS News, Wash Post, Popular Mechanics etc. really are in full overdrive pimping this story out so nice to hear a more sensible opinion.

This is a very careful study by excellent scientists putting in a lot of data," said John Vidale, a seismologist at the University of Southern California.

"(But) none of the models explain all the data very well in my opinion," he added.

phys.org...