It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Logarithmic Path of the Pole and Climate Change Correlation

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+11 more 
posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 12:50 PM

I am posting this thread to present and discuss the research of independent researcher and author, Charles N. Pope. Charles read of this spiral Path of the Pole (image below) in my latest book, The Great Pyramid Void Enigma and has undertook research of his own that shows how this spiral Path of the Pole correlates with Earth climate changes over the past 12,000 years or so. This thread has been created to allow Charles to share his research with ATS which I look forward to reading.

Charles, the floor is yours.



posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 01:45 PM
a reply to: Scott Creighton

Looking forward to hearing ideas on this.

posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 01:47 PM
a reply to: Scott Creighton

Though I did not ascribe to Earth Crust Displacement the theory has been renamed and is becoming popular once again.

There is some evidence to suggest Greenland was actually at the North Pole very recently and what we are seeing is the still melting ice that was laid down while it was at the north pole for thousands of years.

This evidence also suggests that many city's and ancient ruin's may be very wrongly misdated to far more recent periods than there actual construction (though they were likely inhabited or re-inhabited long after there initial construction since people do tend to re-use stuff including ancient ruin's) and would suggest that prior to the last displacement Siberia for example was much warmer while North American, Europe and Canada were actually within the Arctic Circle.
A site that details ancient ruins and there seeming alignments to former GEOGRAPHICAL north poles.
And a selection of this guy's videos are worth looking at.
In fact he is worth a binge watch but read that page first.

Basically we are according to much of this due for a new displacement pretty soon, it is an event that will cause global earthquakes a great shaking if you like, push Britain for example likely further south and into warmer climes while moving Greenland far enough south that it will rapidly defrost and push much of Antarctica north enough to begin it defrosting as well albeit that is a much bigger piece of real estate so only partially.

The flaw in Hapgood's theory I thought that I saw was the presence of thermal plumes such as under super volcanos (Yellowstone park for instance) and the likes of Hawaii but I was probably wrong, my argument was that since these plumes seem to have been static for perhaps millions of years with only slow sedentary continental drift to account for leaving for instance a chain of former Hawaiian islands mostly now deep beneath the ocean to mark the crust passing over the plume that there was actually little evidence for the ECD and plenty against it, however I was wrong there is plenty for it and little against it.

Some in the scientific community have picked the theory back up and actually renamed it to distance THERE new revised theory from Hapgood's theory since it is now seen as pseudo science but in fact was a mechanically sound idea.
Sorry I can't recall the name they have given it but it was basically the same theory just renamed and is back in vogue as a consequence.

The real problem with the theory is a laughable one, it upsets a lot of archaeologists and flings a lot of there pet theory's and models of ancient civilization out of the window completely and in the past they have always had there way when competing data challenged there ideas and the mural they were were painting with even geologists backing down rather than taking there wealthy fraternity on.

Such crustal displacement would be huge climactic upsets cooling the world as the shift pushed vast amounts of ice away from the polar regions that would have been formerly warmer territory now thrust into a deep freeze, in fact some ancient legends are similar to this account with a Persian version of Noah whom instead of a boat build an underground shelter and instead of a flood the world froze over it.

edit on 2-2-2022 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 01:53 PM
a reply to: Scott Creighton

Thank you Scott. This is not an attempt to steal any of your thunder, nor that of Mark Carlotto with whom I've been in contact recently. Actually, I'm not exactly sure what Mark thinks about this himself as yet, but I'm sure he's in the process of digesting it. We had a rather wild discussion that included Frank Zappa and the Earth's Crustal "Muffin Man" (lol).

Here is the outline of how the Dzhanibekov motion of the poles relates to the major climate changes since the last Ice Age.

12,500 BCE: Pole shift from the Arctic (or Antarctic) to the Bering Sea

If Giza is the "center of Earth's landmasses," then upon sufficient ocean water being tied up in glaciation, Giza will try to shift to a point near the equator. That is consistent with a pole shift from the Arctic (or Antarctic) to Bering Sea, which is a shift of ~26.5 - 30.0 degrees. The above shift resulted in a tropical climate for North Africa and (eventually) brought on the African Humid Period (9,000 BCE to 3,000 BCE). The "nuclear winter" event that followed the pole shift (and pole shifts in general, due to the triggering of volcanic activity) delayed the African Humid Period. The comet impact event of ~10,700 BCE further delayed the climate change.

After the global sea level had fully recovered (by ~4,000 BCE), the land masses could no longer dictate the equilibrium and a movement of the pole was again inevitable, but probably required a trigger event.

3,000 BCE: Pole shift from the Bering Sea to Hudson Bay (Canada)

Possible trigger events were a comet impact ~4,440 BCE and a separate impact event in 2,345 BCE. A terrestrial impact occurred in 1,159 BCE, which stunted tree growth in Europe for 20 years. The first two were likely ocean impacts (rather than terrestrial) strikes in that a "nuclear winter" scenario did not follow. These impact events precipitated movement of the pole from the Bering Sea into Alaska’s Yukon region and then on to the Hudson Bay no later than 950 AD. The above shift resulted in the Medieval Warm Period (Viking Age) in Scandinavia and Europe. It also shifted Central America into the mid-latitudes, which resulted in the end of the Mayan Civilization due to increasing drought conditions. The Mayans were compensating by the increased reliance on corn (a temperate plant) rather than tropical plants.

This shift contributed to the "millennium hysteria" manifested in the building of new "Towers of Babel" known as Gothic Cathedrals, and in expectation of an "end-of-the-world" scenario.

In the Southern Hemisphere, this would have brought warming to Weddell region of Antarctica.

1,250 AD: Pole shift from Hudson Bay to Norwegian Sea

This shift gradually transformed Europe from a mild climate to “The Little Ice Age” by 1,450 AD. During this phase the pole moved through Baffin Island and Southern Greenland en route to the Norwegian Sea.

1,400 AD: Pole shift from the Norwegian Sea to Arctic

This final phase brought the pole "full circle" back to its "default" position. Europe eventually warmed and then cooled again as the spiral path of the pole became tighter and it looped across the Asian Continent (Siberia) and back around through Northern Greenland. The North Pole likely approached its current position by around 1,550 AD, i.e., shortly before Renaissance astronomers began to pay attention to such phenomenon, as in subtle movements in the position of the pole star Polaris. However, these small excursions are mysteriously still happening to this day, and have recently been linked to glacier melt.

posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 02:00 PM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

Just to add to yours.

Starting to look like Old Hapgood may have been right all along.

(love these kind of thread's this is what ATS is meant to be - for me anyway AND I am loving this spiral pole movement theory as it makes sense to me).

edit on 2-2-2022 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 04:56 PM
a reply to: LABTECH767

I don't think that Mark Carlotto was expecting The Pyramid of the Sun, which is aligned to the Hudson Bay, to have been built after 3,000 BC and as late as 1,250 AD. So, this could be a reason for Mark to be doubtful of the Dzhanibekov shift. He did think that the Dzhanibekov phenomenon was very interesting though.

I'm not sure we can say that the foundations of Teotihuacan could date to a full precession cycle earlier. On average, the Earth has spent 90% of the time under Ice Age conditions and only 10% of the time in Inter-Glacial. So, we might have to go way back to find the last time the pole had settled around the Hudson Bay. If there are pole shifts during an Ice Age and Interstadials, they are likely different than that of the Inter-Glacial.

posted on Feb, 2 2022 @ 06:57 PM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

Sun worship would be expected during an Inter-Glacial Period, however the cataclysms associated with an Inter-Glacial might also explain why the sun-god was such a bloodthirsty S.O.B..

From ice core data, Planet Earth enters an inter-glacial period after every 4th or 5th precessional cycle. The last Ice Age endured for five cycles, but the previous two lasted only four. The last also occurred after the symmetrical rotation of Ursa Major around the pole stars in Cygnus fell apart, and as a new pole star, Vega, took the lead. Runaway warming was arrested by almost equally severe and sudden freezing.

The reversal from rapid warming to sudden cooling would be the result of volcanic eruptions in response to axial shift, as well as fall-out from any associated impact event that triggered/“nudged” it. (The Geminga Super Nova of ~340K years ago has been associated with the end of the Ice Age of that time.) At the end of the previous Ice Age, this “snap-back” only served to check the rapid warming and did not initiate new glaciation. However, the end of the Ice Age before that one produced a frozen double-clutch lasting 20,000 years! The most recent rapid warming (~12,500 BCE) was followed by a 2,000 year return to Ice Age conditions (Bolling-Allerod & Younger Dryas Periods) before the inter-glacial period could properly begin. The impact event that brought on the Younger Dryas Period seems to be reflected in the tradition of the Devil being bound for a thousand years, and only to be unleashed once again.

I do see evidence that the global elites did heavily buy into the 2012 threat. At least one of the long-period comets that the Mayan were tracking was due to return around 2012. What happened to it? Either we are not really living in 2012 or the comet(s) that plagued the ancient world have now broken up and no longer have to be feared. I was very happy with that conclusion until this pole shift thing reared its ugly head (haha).

Some Inter-Glacial periods last much longer than others. We have reached the average length of an Inter-Glacial already, at least according to the accepted timeline. Yet, when an Ice Age begins, it does so quickly. Human-induced global warming could forestall the next Ice Age or it could precipitate it. If the gods truly promised to "never again destroy the Earth with a Great Flood," then obviously something would have to prevent any further radical pole shifts. And, that would evidently be a first.

posted on Feb, 3 2022 @ 05:04 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 3 2022 @ 09:03 AM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

If this Dzhanibekov pole flip is real, then we should be able to estimate how long it takes to complete. We could use the EGM96 Geoid simulation model to predict how many Earth rotations (days) happen while the flip is taking place.

In the above simulation, gravity and time were "greatly exaggerated." Actual gravitational values would need to be used for a more accurate estimation.

Alternately, we could work backwards using real-world data, e.g., we know the approximate time it took for the pole to move from the Norwegian Sea to its current location. We also know the approximate time it took to move from the Hudson Bay to the Norwegian Sea. This could be used to characterize the final segments of the Dzhanibekov flip. I suspect that the rate of change of the pole will not be a linear function, but someone may have already derived the equations for that. Hence, we can derive the time it took to complete the unknown part of the flip from the known part.

I have become very suspicious of "Dark Ages" in human history, and the time between Gobekli Tepe and the founding of the Egyptian Old Kingdom is the biggest one of all. Did 6,000 years transpire during which almost nothing of interest happen?

Obviously, the ancients could not have tracked time using Precession of the Equinoxes during a pole flip. Did we pass through several Zodiacal Ages (Leo, Cancer, Gemini and Taurus) rather quickly while the shift was taking place? Can the "Precessional Clock" at Giza reveal anything about the amount of elapsed time, especially if we don't know exactly where Giza stood when the pole flip happened? The first rapid warming came around 15,000 years before present (or 13,000 BCE) in the accepted timeline. That appears to be when a flip became inevitable, although some "wobbling" likely preceded it.

There was probably a vibrant Saharan culture during the African Humid Period (9,000 - 3,000 BCE), but did it really last 6,000 years? There is the Minoan Civilization during that time, but 6,000 years seems to be even more of a stretch for its tenure.

A related question is whether actual (rather than perceived) Precession is independent of pole shift or not. The expectation is that the sun returns to its original position after each precessional cycle. Is that due to the poles returning to their original position or due to precession being caused by something else, i.e., forces external to the Earth? Have we really reached the halfway point of a grand precessional cycle?

I see in a previous thread that Scott suspects pole shifts during an Ice Age are complete 180 degree flips. However, he thinks that more rarely there is a 146 degree shift. The rare shift of 146 degrees (or 34 degrees depending upon perspective) would, then, appear to be the one that ends an Ice Age, i.e., moves Giza to the equator and initiates the glacial melting. Hence, this has little or nothing to do with the Milankovitch Cycle.

180 degree pole flips may have happened quickly (days, weeks, months?), however the Inter-Glacial pole shift seems to occur over thousands of years. The question is, how many thousands of years? So, the EGM96 Geoid simulation needs to be run in two different cases. The first is the complete flip. The second simulation starts with Giza at the equator in a meta-stable rotation. As the glaciers melt, it eventually initiates the drift of the pole to the Arctic (where it is now). But, the path of that pole shift still follows the Dzhanibekov motion (more-or-less?), because of the conservation of angular momentum and other factors. Yet, does the pole have "standstills" in which it remains long enough in one place for temples/structures to be oriented/aligned to those locations (Bering Sea, Yukon, Hudson Bay, Greenland, Norwegian Sea)?
edit on 3-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2022 @ 09:56 PM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

Time to revisit the Veritasium video about the Dzhanibekov effect, a.k.a. Tennis Racket / Intermediate Axis Theorem.

The video implies that a Dzhanibekov flip can only occur when a body is rotating about its intermediate axis. Bodies don't want to rotate about their intermediate (2nd) axis, so something weird like twisting a wing nut off its bolt in space is necessary to induce a non-uniform body to perform this trick. After so many spins the body will perform the flip or the flip can be induced by a slight bump. This is all fine and good. However, it's not actually clear what axis the wing nut was actually rotating about when it was clearly flipping. It would seem to be its 3rd axis (max moment of inertia) rather than 2nd (intermediate moment of inertia) or 1st (min moment of inertia). Likewise, the Tippe-top seems to be spinning around its 1st axis when it flips rather than the 2nd axis. This needs to be confirmed or denied (see link below).

The official Russian website that honored the 70th anniversary of Dzhanibekov's birth in 2012 mentioned the hypothesis that the Earth could perform such a flip and it apparently did not retract that hypothesis or refute it. Rather, it implied that some scientists (Russian or otherwise) might still support it.

The video goes on to demonstrate that a body that contains sufficient liquid will not rotate about its 1st axis (lowest moment of Inertia, max kinetic energy), but seeks to rotate about its 3rd axis (max moment of inertia, min kinetic energy). The video doesn't talk about the intermediate axis in this case of a partially liquid body.

It seems to be happening quite often in Academia that a strong argument is made in support of something and then the opposite conclusion is made. This seems to be due to there never being enough evidence to pole-flip an academic paradigm (haha).

So, where does that leave us with respect to a pole flip on Earth?

Not only is the earth not a rigid or uniform body, it also redistributes it mass and therefore changes its inertial properties. The EGM96 based simulation would have to be enhanced to take that into consideration.

It could be that the Earth is capable of creating an intermediate axis "on the fly," i.e. as it moves mass from water in the oceans to ice at the poles. The Earth is also regularly getting "bumps in the night" from meteorites and the like, as well as generating impulses from earthquakes and violent eruptions.

When the video inserts the white boxes at the "poles" of the rigid disc, it sure elicited a comparison with the Earth's ice caps. It also recalls the balancing of car tires by applying counterweights along the outer rim. I don't think that's what they were going for when they built the Giza Pyramids (lol), but the Earth does have some ability to balance its own mantle for a "smoother ride." There are also the effects of the Moon, the Sun and whatever the heck else causes Precession. I personally think it is our binary twin (failed brown dwarf) that contributes the most to Precession, but don't know if it could produce enough torque to facilitate a flip (ala Peter Warlow's theory).

I have to say, certain apocalyptic statements make much more sense in terms of a pole shift (than other explanations):

"... nations will be in dismay, perplexed by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will die in fear ..." (Luke 21)

"... and all the powers of the heavens shall melt, and the sky shall be rolled up like a scroll: and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine ..." (Isaiah 34 and Revelation 6)

Consciousness sucks sometimes!

It is also curious that the justification always given for withholding knowledge of the ET phenomenon is that there would be a huge panic. But, why would it cause panic ... unless the ET's don't plan on bailing us out when the big reset happens?

"Eat, drink and be merry." And, "pray your flight (over the former pole) does not happen in (nuclear) winter."

If pole shifts don't happen, then who cares! If pole shifts do happen, it doesn't much matter (lol).

Here's to you, "Johnny Beckoff".
edit on 3-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 08:43 AM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

The faithful have flown off faster than foo-fighters at a fantasy festival. Trolls? Anybody? Was there a panic at the interplanetary disco? Has everybody bought a truck and joined the Canadian convoy? This must be what it's like to miss the rapture memo (lol). I hear you Steve Urkel. "Shift happens".

edit on 4-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 09:49 AM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

Beam me up Scottie Creighton (haha). This feels like Lockdown 2.0.

... And there was silence in Internet Heaven. Then, a voice was heard like the sound of many waters, saying, "Hey folks, Steak-n-Shake is still open and is now accepting Bitcoin (handwritten IOU's only) and ancient Dinars. So many graves have opened up, it's the new 'intermediate' currency."

Will the blogging be unbroken, reply, reply?
edit on 4-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 11:52 AM
Hi Charles,

Quite a lot to mull over there. My own view (and it's just my gut instinct - could well be wrong and I've no way of proving it) is that the periodicity of each flip is pretty much the same though probably with a little variation. I say that only because when we observe the objects (T-handles, bottles of milk etc) flipping due to the Dzhanibekov effect (i.e. an unstable intermediary axis), they all appear to flip at regular intervals. If that applies generally (as some kind of physical law) to objects that are susceptible to the Dzhanibekov effect, including the Earth, then this would suggest the flip intervals are generally the same.

A couple of questions, Charles:

1) If, as you propose, the Earth has flipped over several times since 12,000 years ago, how is it that the Giza pyramids are still aligned almost perfectly to the cardinal directions? Would it not be more likely that with so many geographic pole shifts since 12k years ago the Giza pyramids would be less likely to be so well aligned with the cardinal directions? I touch on this issue in my book but I just wonder what your own perspective is on this?

2) Have you modeled the geographic locations for each of the former pole positions e.g. the London mini ice age - what latitude would London have been? What latitude would Europe have been during the Yukon pole etc?

I'm still thinking over your various posts and will almost certainly come back with more queries.



edit on 4/2/2022 by Scott Creighton because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 12:34 PM
Sorry i meant to post this a day ago but got distracted.

I think that Doug Vogt answers this quite successfully in two of his youtube videos truth be told. I think they are about 30 minutes each and there are two of them but it explains the hows and the why’s. I highly, HIGHLY recommend giving them a watch. Especially in regards to the atom and the path of travel. Which relates as to why the poles are going in the spiral 🌀 . Anyways please give them a watch.

Starts at 1:29 mostly.

Though honestly, if you want the full explanation just watch all the videos from that series…

Starting here… 27 videos.


Reminds me of the pyramids. Take a pyramid sitting on top another inverted pyramid. Place a toroid around them where they join in the middle.

Then imagine where the two pyramids meet in the middle is a 9 aka a neutral zone where all magnetic fields cancel out, and extending both ways from the centre is a spiral cone one positive one negative and they are both spiralling into the neutral zone.

Imagine it with the earth surrounding all of it.

North pole top of one pyramid and south pole top of the inverted pyramid, with the toroid spiral of the north magnetic pole spiraling down to the centre weakening the magnetic field and the same with the south pole. Every 12k years thwy get to the centre aka 9 (tesla 3, 6, 9) and 9 is the neutral no charge zone, then they go through that zone and the magnetic poles flip.

The magnetic poles are the reason the earth spins, just like a permanent magnetic motor.

It happens at the same time the sun finishes its 12067.96. (12068) year clock cycle as we ARE living in an information based reality.

Anyways. I highly recommend Doug Vogt and that series of videos. It is thought out quite soundly.

Good luck 🤞

edit on 4-2-2022 by DaRAGE because: Spelling aka grammar

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 12:58 PM
It explains why in argentina or chile there is a desert that 12k years ago was turned to glass. It explains why wolly mammoth’s were instantly frozen in siberia etc. If you take a google earth look at australia starting from the western side, you can see the marks in the land when the oceans goes over the land and created pock marks, same as north africa, saudi arabia, etc, the ocean canyons that form when the oceans go over the land and leave where all that ocean was so that fresh water can create new deep canyons.

It explains why the ocean levels drop suddenly like over night hundreds of meters.

It explains why there is an ice age every 12k years or so.

Trust me. Well worth the watch. Doug Vogt has it all worked out i swear to you.

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 03:22 PM
a reply to: Scott Creighton

An Inter-Glacial only happens every 100,000 years. So, the last pole shift was pretty special. And I think the mechanism that drives this shift is probably different than any shifts that occur within a 90,000 year long Ice Age. But, it's definitely premature to conclude that. Perhaps the only difference is that the rare shift that causes an Inter-Glacial is an incomplete or interrupted flip. And, perhaps it only happens when the poles are in one of the two default orientations. If the North Pole was the same in 13,000 BCE as it is now, then that explains why the Great Pyramid was accurately aligned to the present pole. But, I agree we shouldn't assume that yet.

I don't think there have been multiple flips since ~15,000 years ago. In fact, there may have only been a partial shift and a reversal of that shift. It depends on whether Australia was "down under" or "up over" when the first shift happened around 13,000 BCE. Regardless, the first shift moved Giza to the equator (as you talk about in your book). The shift eventually either continued or reversed (depending on where things started) and as mass transferred from the glaciers to the oceans. At the moment, the poles may still be settling from that last shift. If not, then perhaps the poles have already begun wobbling as part of the ramp up to another shift (leading to the next Ice Age). Either way, the excursions don't seem to be extreme and not of any immediate threat.

I have only eye-balled the shifts using the hemisphere plots. If you follow a meridian line from Alaska it takes you to Giza. If you follow a meridian line from the Hudson Bay it takes you to Mayan Central America.

I don't have the GIS software to do a more elaborate simulation.

I'm not trying to take over this research. I've already done 10 books on various subjects. I'm spent (lol). Just wanted you (and Mark) to realize what some of the other implications of your work might be! It seems possible to get a handle on this phenomenon, even if we can't do anything about it (haha).

You run a tight ship here, Captain Creighton. Thanks!

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 05:25 PM
a reply to: DaRAGE

I wish this guy Doug Vogt could have been my Sunday School teacher! He would have put the fear of Jesus in me much better than the "fire and brimstone" lady that I got stuck with (lol).

Our Earth's magnetic dynamo just isn't remotely powerful enough to reverse the "flywheel" of its spin, and certainly not within a few hours time. The Earth's mantle and crust is not some kind of a copper wire whose current can be switched off or changed in direction. I give this guy credit for trying to be creative, but, no, I'm not buying any of this. He has taken a bunch of modern buzz science like quantum theory, string theory, plasma theory, etc. and turned it into cosmological gorp.

The legends speak of stars falling topsy-turvy, and not purely sliding side-to-side and changing direction.

The present climate change is due to the Earth's tilt having steadily decreased (as the on-going pole shift has taken place) and the pole drifting away from the large land masses. I think we would have already seen much more warming if it were not for all of that meltwater entering the oceans. From a geological standpoint, having an ice free North Pole should promote warming and preclude another Ice Age. However, counter-intuitively, this is not the case. The inertial characteristics of Earth are dictating otherwise. Without sufficient ice at the North Pole, the Earth just wants to flip.

The Sun does have its own cycles and occasional CME's. I don't see this, or even a "mini-nova" being directly related to pole shifts.

The Sun may also become more active when its binary twin is at aphelion and perihelion (due to increased gravitational loading as the twin makes it "turns" at aphelion and perihelion). It makes sense to me that the ancients tracked Precession based upon those two points. The motion of the Sun around a dwarf companion is independent of any pole shifts that occur on Earth, and why the length of a precessional cycle is considered a near constant.

There is some indication that we are now halfway through a precessional cycle and our binary companion is approaching aphelion. Yet, I don't think this can directly cause a pole shift. The simplest solution is that the Earth's inertial state (based upon the distribution of its mass) will cause the next shift. If we were able to include the distribution of the Earth's non-rigid core and other internal masses, that would be great, but it seems beyond our current abilities.

With the Arctic ice free, some random event could trigger the next pole shift. In the absence of a trigger, humans might speed up or slow down the time of the next flip with our awe-inspiring activity. In that sense, a secret program of producing "contrails" to cool down the planet is reasonable. More desperate actions can certainly be envisioned, such as creating a "nuclear winter" type event. Or, maybe, it has been decided that Elon Musk is going to be the next "Righteous Noah," build a "Space Ark," and then repopulate the world with his Gothic girlfriend. We've seen this kind of thing before (lol).

edit on 4-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 4 2022 @ 11:37 PM
a reply to: Scott Creighton


The last Ice Age had about eight discernible interstadials, but only a couple of them amounted to much (in terms of sustained raised temperature), and they aren't spaced evenly. So, the 12,000 year (50%) "clock cycle" or "duty cycle" between flips doesn't fit the data very well. The regularity just isn't there.

The tradition that the sun had set twice where it now rises is a better clue. One of those two times seems to have been in the first half of the last Ice Age. This would have been the so-called Age of Lemuria. Instead of being in the Southern Hemisphere, the "South Pacific" would have been in the Northern Hemisphere. I think this is important, because there isn't a strong mythology of the Southern Constellations, at least in comparison to the Northern ones. In the latter part of the last Ice Age, glaciation reached its peak and temperatures continued to drop. I think the transition to "deep freeze" is a good place to expect a pole flip. It was really only in the last 10,000 years (25,000 to 15,000 years before present) that Ice Age conditions became the most extreme. This would also have been the Age of Atlantis, which probably took place when the Atlantic was in the Northern Hemisphere. The Gulf Stream is thought to have continued to circulate during that period and climate models indicate that the mid-Atlantic Ridge received the most rainfall anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere during the very dry late Ice Age. The only area with significant rainfall in the Southern Hemisphere was the Sunda Shelf.

We can take our pick as to when the second time the sun set where it now rises. There could have been a "switch back" during that transition to extreme Ice Age conditions. Alternately, there could have been a temporary "switch back" associated with the Bolling-Allerod or Younger Dryas Period.

Continental Drift could eventually lead to a planet that is less vulnerable to pole shifts/flips. Have we coincidentally reached that point? Probably not, but as they say, sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

While it is disturbing, the Dzhanibekov pole shift/flip is an Occam's Razor solution that explains what we find in geology and mythology. It may not be necessary to chase more exotic, sketchy theories.
edit on 4-2-2022 by CharlesNPope because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 5 2022 @ 08:45 AM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

The Mid-Atlantic Ridge was also unique at the end of the last Ice Age, not only for its mild and wet climate but for sitting on a plate boundary. As North America sunk under the growing glaciers, not only did the sea level sink with it, but the Mid-Atlantic Ridge rose even higher. So, the effect of the lowering seas was exaggerated there. There must have been far more land exposed along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge during that time. Unfortunately, the glacial rebound effect meant that the Mid-Atlantic was going "sink like a rock" when the glaciers broke up. It fits with the Atlantis Myth quite neatly.

posted on Feb, 5 2022 @ 06:17 PM
a reply to: CharlesNPope

I'm surprised Bob Ballard hasn't gone snooping around the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Maybe we should ask Victor Vescovo.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in