- Joined
- Dec 9, 2020
- Messages
- 1,332
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!It actually doesn't. They know that the equator has moved several times not just magnetic North. Einstein even worked out the math and theorized a wobble would cause Earth to occasionally shift. We are just unsure if its 100's of miles shift or 1000's. You have to ignore science to think that an axis shift can't happen. I even showed a link that NASA thought an axis shift happened every 200,000 years. We should be arguing if its going to be a 5% shift or 40% shift. If you are arguing no shift then you got something going on.I'm not a flatty either but there is so much to flat earth theories that tie into this current discussion and so much more.
For example flat earthers generally don't think the earth is perfectly flat but more of a disk or shield shape. Seeing a curve to the earth via a plane wouldn't disprove this theory at all and unless one had actually flown various paths around the earth, within visual range of the surface, you wouldn't be able to disprove it personally assuming tech helps cover up this dynamic with the help of governments (a generally accepted flat theory).
Yore reading me wrong.It actually doesn't. They know that the equator has moved several times not just magnetic North. Einstein even worked out the math and theorized a wobble would cause Earth to occasionally shift. We are just unsure if its 100's of miles shift or 1000's. You have to ignore science to think that an axis shift can't happen. I even showed a link that NASA thought an axis shift happened every 200,000 years. We should be arguing if its going to be a 5% shift or 40% shift. If you are arguing no shift then you got something going on.
It actually doesn't. They know that the equator has moved several times not just magnetic North. Einstein even worked out the math and theorized a wobble would cause Earth to occasionally shift. We are just unsure if its 100's of miles shift or 1000's. You have to ignore science to think that an axis shift can't happen. I even showed a link that NASA thought an axis shift happened every 200,000 years. We should be arguing if its going to be a 5% shift or 40% shift. If you are arguing no shift then you got something going on.
I was adding in the nasa link as the opposition to this theory on timeframe.... so I kinda know that it opposes the theory. There are different opinions on the axis tilt. Most agree its around 5% but some think its as much as 40%. and nobody says it goes back to the old geo north after it changes again. NASA isn't buying into this theory so I was posting that to show that pole reversal happened all the time.... I pointed out later that this cia paid scientist dude thought that poll reversal precedes an axis shift.I still don't understand how the magnetic poles shifting would have any effect at all on how far the earth is tilted on its axis. Even your own link from nasa seems to say there would be no change in the earth's axis.
"The last time that Earth's poles flipped in a major reversal was about 780,000 years ago, in what scientists call the Brunhes-Matuyama reversal. The fossil record shows no drastic changes in plant or animal life. Deep ocean sediment cores from this period also indicate no changes in glacial activity, based on the amount of oxygen isotopes in the cores. This is also proof that a polarity reversal would not affect the rotation axis of Earth, as the planet's rotation axis tilt has a significant effect on climate and glaciation and any change would be evident in the glacial record."
True.Dont take my word for it. Put a sealed bottle of water in the freezer and see if it shrinks or expands and breaks the seal.
Ive got some ocean front property in Arizona. George Strait was on to somethingCan't happen soon enough... I will take some of that ocean front property in Arizona... Maybe call it otisburgh.
This really is the most pertinent information needed here. Fuckin Hank Johnson playin 7D chess.Did Guam make it? Or did it capsize?
Iowa = ZFG
TOOL had it right.Ive got some ocean front property in Arizona. George Strait was on to something
Not to be captain obvious here but whoever disagreed is lacking discernment.I was told I had to be joking or sick when I suggested having California nuked was for the betterment of the country...
FIFYThis thread has so much cabalshit in it that I smelled it through my phone.
@GarnetPild excepted.
So maybe someone smarter than me can explain this. Wouldn't the water level be determined based on land elevations? Almost all of Nevada and Utah are at higher elevations than pretty much the entire eastern half of the USA. So how would CA, NV, AZ, and Utah be flooded when MS, AL, GA, SC, NC, etc are all mostly above water?
We'd lose a lot of good people but cost benefit analysis is looking positive for the future of human kind.
Im not cheering for it but Im just saying that if it happens that it may actually be a long term positive.... Glass half full kinda guy!