Questioning the Ice Ages

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:19 am

Hi ddaveo, glad you're enjoying the thread, I think it really is a very important topic with regards to an EU model.

Any acceptable theory on the ice mass must accommodate itself to the geometry of the ice formation. There were several nodes on the Canadian Shield, from 15,000 to 17,000 feet in elevation, generally about 3 miles deep at these apexes. From these areas, the ice flowed outward in a radial pattern and in every direction, corrected only by coriolis forces or local topographical features. It flowed over hills hundreds and even over a thousand feet high, and swept on over valley and dale for hundreds of miles. As it flowed, it gathered rocks, timber, and other debris which were ground and ultimately dropped at its edges


The polar ice would have been too cold for basal movement, the viscosity is so high that the movement is planar, and the base is locked to the underlying landform. No erosion, no debris gathering or pushing. The surface would have flowed the fastest, none at the base. That's the accepted science.

On the other hand, if it is believed that ice, descending from outer space at a superrefrigerated temperature around -200°F., caused the sudden and extreme change in atmospheric temperatures, then the sudden asphyxiation and freezing of the mammoths becomes logical.


I also think there is some kind of electronic cooling that is still occuring, as the deepest permafrost is found directly under the polar auroral oval. Within that deep permafrost have been found frozen tropical forests at from 800 to 1700 feet down. This from Prudhoe bay, from drill cores:

There were palm trees, pine trees, and tropical foliage in great profusion. In fact, they found them lapped all over each other, just as though they had fallen in that position. What great catastrophe caused this massive upheaval, and then led to such dramatic changes in the climate? We stress again that everything is frozen--not petrified--and that the whole area has never once thawed since that great catastrophe took place. .......It is interesting to note that tropical ferns have been found at the Antarctic, and the evidence from these two areas, considered together, certainly suggest that there has been a dramatic change from a world wide tropical climate to an Arctic climate within datable times.


The freezing must have been instantaneous, no decay is noted, so some very large event. Makes me shiver just to think about it! And what type of event was required to cover those forests with such depths of material, and where did that material come from?

..thanks to his work my personal opinion is that the truth lies in a mixture of electric, gravitational, and mechanical forces all at work simultaneously.


The primary cause, IMO, is plasma/electricity, and from a mega CME, the ingredients entering via the poles. Heat would be removed, and charge exchanged, in large amounts. Gravity and mechanical forces might have allowed for the spreading of the ice, but not erosion if the ice was solid down to the surface. The pressure melting point may have been reached as the ice slowly warmed I suppose, and then some erosion may have occurred, but then we are back to needing the millions of years for the larger, supposedly glacial landforms to have taken shape, whereas the electrical forces could have maybe done it in a day or three?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby starbiter » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:41 am

A cessation of Earth's rotation could also cover the polar regions with miles of extra water while sunlight was diminished due to dust in the atmosphere.

Dr Velikovsky thought the waters of Earth might have been pulled up into space by gravity while Venus was close to Earth. A super high tide as it were. As Venus retreated the waters would return. This might explain super cold ice.

There are many options. It's difficult to know exactly what happened.

michael
I Ching #49 The Image
Fire in the lake: the image of REVOLUTION
Thus the superior man
Sets the calender in order
And makes the seasons clear

www.EU-geology.com

http://www.michaelsteinbacher.com
User avatar
starbiter
 
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:11 am
Location: Antelope CA

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby finno » Wed May 01, 2013 11:26 am

starbiter wrote:There are many options. It's difficult to know exactly what happened.
michael


Yeah, there is lot of theorys..
My opinion says, on the air have much cosmic dust when pleistocene ended. and like we know, where is dust, there is also electrity. What means, dust moved on air round aurora ovalis and they danced together many centuries. Of course that means, dust put massive shadow on earth, what makes coolness that area, where shadow hit. And if I am been understand right, what more plasmajet are stronger, aurora ovalis go more south, ja when north pole plasmatornado come weakness – aurora (with dust) traveling back to north because it is smaller. what means, that shadow moved all time.

Perhaps this can explain also peoples movinghistory at early holocene. Scandinavian history says, first people camed to north after pleistocene, because glacialtime ended. but if there wasn’t glacial at all, why they coming to north so in rich in?
I am been read once, its paleoclimatical fact, south from 60 degrees was colder like from 60 degrees to north. What more north you coming at holocene, climate chance warmer, perhaps even hot. but how that can be possible…? How north can be more warm like south? In scandinavia grows mild area plants and trees but in middle-europe was about tundra. I think, that shadow of dust can explain lot of this.
finno
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:18 am

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby Chromium6 » Wed May 01, 2013 7:19 pm

How about a stuck (or wandering-flipping) vortex like on Saturn in the ancient past? Freezing and electrical in nature?
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
Chromium6
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:48 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby moses » Thu May 02, 2013 2:02 am

If we were to run with a big Mars-Earth interaction because both show evidence of a pole shift, then it is possible that Earth stole the atmosphere and oceans of Mars. Then all flora and fauna would have been transferred to Earth too. So a lot of the water would have been deposited as ice.

So is the timing right for the increase in ocean water levels in the past. And then there is the question of the supposed destruction of Atlantis. Could be in the ball-park.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Thu May 02, 2013 11:08 am

There are many options. It's difficult to know exactly what happened.


The exact mechanisms may be difficult to determine Michael, but the magnitude of whatever happened, to my mind, is huge, beyond comprehension. And relatively recent, only in the low thousands of years I believe, though sometimes it appears that the signs I see could have happened only hundreds of years ago. The conclusion I must come to is that no living creatures could have survived the assault, and that what the ancient Greeks, and the Hindus, and probably other legends tell us is true, that life had to be re-established on Earth after the Great Flood. NIAMI maybe, but all the evidence I see can only lead to that one conclusion.
I still favour a mega CME event, and the ancient Sun symbols indicate to me a progression in changes of the appearance of the Sun that was recorded globally; the dot, the dot with a circle, the circle with the cross, the segmenting of the circle giving the swastika appearance, what looked like a face on the Sun (Surya), then the appearance of rays, 4,8,12,16,28,32, and 56 seeming to be the stages. Those symbols have been found on ancient pottery fragments, on pendants and other adornments, and are consistent from cultures around the world, and as near as I can determine, at the same times. And I do think we will see changes of the appearance of the Sun again,and perhaps of the heavens, maybe within our lifetimes, though not necessarily from life ending events, but just from cyclical changes in the nature of the Suns emissions.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sun May 05, 2013 11:44 am

Some low tide beach images. These boulders were all delivered by glaciers according to the standard model. None of these boulders ever move from water/wave action though, as evidenced by this one perched atop the remains of a coarse sandstone layer that probably covered the whole shelf from the cliff wall to another underwater cliff wall offshore. Some of the boulders are in groups that are so smooth that even the barnacles can't get a good grip, and are as smooth as silk. The surface appears amorphous, don't know what they are like inside.
The whole beach to me is from electrical/plasma interaction, though obviously there must be some mechanical erosion. Sorting which is which is the question.
An amorphous surface suggests heating to a point that would have been hotter than a magma, and there is one process that has been shown to be capable of such action on rock, but it uses microwaves. And where would microwaves come from at the beach? Ion acoustic waves is my guess.
Image

Picassa Album:
https://plus.google.com/photos/11334575 ... banner=pwa
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Mon May 06, 2013 1:40 pm

Many of the rocks on the foreshore here are classed as metamorphic, so the assumption is that they must have originated tens or hundreds of kilometres deep, then somehow risen to the surface, then broken off the surface and been pushed or carried by glaciers from their sources, being rounded and smoothed by a tumbling action, and finally being left behind or deposited as the glaciers retreated. Many millions of years required.
Observation of the rocks on the sandstone shelves around here would seem to support that model, but could metamorhic rock be created actually at that location? My observation suggests it could, as there seems to be a progression of the rock types within a quite small surface area. Metamorphic rock is mixed in with sandstone, and there appears to be a progression of rock types and shapes that is consistent withing groupings of the rocks. The square-ish, sharp edged blocks have their edges rounded, then the sandstone itseld seems to become more rounded. The colour changes from light brown to light brown with a pinkish tinge, then to an orange, then to a purple, still with a sandstone texture and consistency. The progression then becomes difficult to follow, but it seems the rocks then take on the metamorphic types, still with a fairly coarse crystal structure, but becoming finer grained and smoother to the touch, and finally there are the amorphous appearing, ultra smooth and shiny types. Beyond that, in some of the groupings there are pure black rocks that look like they might be meteoric, still with very sharp surface features and seeming to be composed of many small glass-hard pieces, all fused together.
Image
Picassa image:
https://plus.google.com/photos/11334575 ... banner=pwa
Shock metamorphism is attributed to impactors, I think an EM shock much more likely. Perhaps even the asteroids and comets attained their composition by way of cosmological plasma shocking, and microwave energies?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby Beata-at-home » Thu May 09, 2013 9:28 pm

I have come to the conclusion that there were no ice ages. The freezing of the polar regions happened very suddenly, I'd guess within less than a year, perhaps within a few hours, even. This would explain the frozen forests and turtles and mammoths, etc. These animals and the once native trees could not have survived a gradual and dramatic shift to permanent winter. Yet they are frozen and some of them frozen with food still in their mouths. In other words, if there were any ice ages, this could be the coldest it has ever been, this could be the only ice age the earth has experienced. I think the whole earth was much warmer and more productive until the poles were snap-frozen and the whole climate system changed, introducing seasons.

http://www.amazon.com/Breaking-Ice-Myth ... 1414113242
Beata-at-home
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:10 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sat May 18, 2013 12:14 pm

I have come to the conclusion that there were no ice ages.


Not from a slow climate change I'd agree, but the flash freeze model would still have a lot of ice being formed at the northern latitudes. However, that ice and the ground underneath would have been so cold that the ice could not have flowed along the surface and cause the glacially modified land surface. The ice accumulated on an already modified surface IMO.
I recently found a creek in my area that has no pebbles, cobles, or other rounded rocks in the creek bed at all. All the rock appears to have exploded out of the creek bed in angular, flat faced slabs, plates, chunks and shards, down to gravel size. There is no variation in texture or composition or colour, suggesting to me a much more electrostatic discharge origin, as opposed to ohmic or dielectric heating, plasma sculpting/etching, and the possible shock metamorphosis, seen at other locations. All the rock would seem to be in its original location, nothing has moved downstream other than fine gravel/sand/silt, though there are some chunks up to 2 meters long that somehow have ended up lying atop the bare bedrock sides of the valley, well above the creek. Also, there is a waterfall that seems not to have eroded the rock at all in the thousands of years since the glaciers retreated, the rock face is still very jagged.
Image
I'll get some images of the creek bed once the water flow has dried up.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Thu May 30, 2013 10:40 pm

This is probably a better photo than I could get of the torn up/shattered creek bed I mentioned above. Much larger scale, but similar shapes. Glacial action?
South fork of the Yuba River
Image
Bigger.
http://fishbio.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... Canyon.jpg
Web page:
http://fishbio.com/field-notes/miscella ... ock-canyon
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby moses » Fri May 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Well I think that the soil surrounding the creek could be investigated to see whether it consists of rocks, just like the rocks in the creek, and finer material, sand and soil, etc. If so then the story is that the glacial water formed where there was none before and it ripped through the low area where the creek is now, taking the finer material with it and leaving the larger rocks. So there has not been enough time to round off these rocks.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Jun 01, 2013 11:09 am

Hi Mo,
I've looked more images and at the accepted model of the past geology. The similarities of the features found along the Yuba and the features I can find in the Sooke river here match very well, except that in the Yuba everything is scaled up. Where the creek bed in the Sooke river is broken up like this, the valley walls above the broken rock are all solid and unfractured all the way to the peaks. I've done some sketches of the river valley profile at a few palces along the river, I'll scan those sometime and put them up somewhere.
Above these broken up sections, there are the odd blocks found sitting up there that make me wonder how they could have got there, and the only answer would seem to be that they are thrown up there by immense force. The finer stuff thins out as you go up the valley sides, which could be that it has all washed down into the river by weathering, but I see it as just that the finer material would have risen higher in a high energy event.
In a brief pdf, Geology of the SYR.pdf - South Yuba River State Park , the tectonic, volcanic, and metamorphic mechanisms are used to explain the geology, and millions of years of course. But, the source volcanoes are not found, plutons rising from deep in the earth are required, and the tectonics which NASA's ex head planetary geologist says don't exist as described by geologists, must be invoked. Energies from above, on the catastrophic scales we know are possible, explains all the noted features perfectly well, IMO.

The nature of the Yuba Gap is another ridiculous one I think, but maybe my imagination needs some recalibration?
There is a big gap in the ridge top in the middle of this photo, called the Yuba Gap. Natural erosion and waves of glaciers acted together to form this steep canyon gap through the ridge, dividing the Bear and the Yuba. The Yuba kept eroding this ridge from the north, and the relentless ice of the glaciers kept cutting deeper and deeper into this same slit until the headwaters of the Bear spilled through to the Yuba.

Image
http://bearriver.us/geology.php
Very imaginative description I'd say, but mechanically ridiculous, so the need for millions of years time frames to make it work.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby moses » Sat Jun 01, 2013 9:00 pm

I saw the results of a flood where a very large amount or material was eroded away in just a few days. If the mountains were formed not long before the ice started, then the material of the mountains might have been soft and so easily eroded. So a small gap could quickly become a very large gap being the spot where all the water would flow through. Even if it was not soft one must still consider that a huge amount of water flowing through the gap could cause enough erosion in a thousand years or so.

Although electrical erosion could have formed the gap, presumably at the same time the mountains were formed, I have little doubt that huge amounts of running water could do it too.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Jun 01, 2013 10:38 pm

Moses,
If the land form was soft, the dunes of starbiters model perhaps, then I would expect to see, with large water flows, the smooth curves that we see in water flowing through such material, and a much 'softer' appearance to the land form. Looking at google maps, I don't see that. You don't like the electric/plasma catastrophe model I take it?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest