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 » Wed Jul 03, 2013 11:18 pm

Nobody knows actually, how round holes form.


I think we do, finno, but who will believe us?

Like we see, it doesn’t go to down like usually. Plasma dicscharge is only explanation, what can explain everything, but that’s only my opinion.


I think you would be told it was a bubble in the magama, or a soft inclusion that has weathered away. Over millions of years of course.

Image

but how potholes form? I don’t know, but this picture can help. I don’t know, is it manipulate (is that towerstone originally from that hole).

Image
Someone needs to try to move the rock, find out if it is attached to the bedrock.

Here is another small pothole that was packed tight with the disk type rocks, a couple of multi-coloured pebbles, and a coarse sand that was more like tiny, rounded or even cone-like glassy particles. These disk type of objects are often packed between the bigger pebbles and cobbles, and I have seen up to 4 of them, all the exact same type of rock, and having 'witness marks' on both sides where the impression of the adjoining ones quite clearly visible on either side. These could not have been washed into an empty hole and arranged themselves side by side, so how did they get there?
Image
Here is an example of 3 side by side from the pothole before I took the contents out. It took almost an hour, and I had to break the top one to get it out as it was in there so tight. The rest of the contents were very tightly packed, like a 3D jigsaw puzzle. I believe this is where all the pebbles and cobbles, and sand and the tiny particles are formed. I'd say they have been there since their creation, and I don't think it was too long ago.
Some of the contents. I should have collected the sand and tiny components to look at more closely at home, but didn't think of it till later. I'm still a newbie at this geology stuff, I'll get it right eventually, I think.
Image
A close-up of the disks. These are not as back-to-back as some I've come across, but the odds of them ending up like that by chance must call for some pretty long odds.
Image
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: 2654
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:20 am

Glacier speleology is quite popular it seems, and some caves have been explored for kilometres, indicating that in some glaciers at least, there is no pressure at the bottom. Snow being compressed in a V-shaped valley will tend to form arches, and any pressure would be pushing outwards on the valley sides.
Even if there were huge pressures on rocks at the bottom of a glacier, why would the rocks be pressed into the bedrock, and not into the ice above it, which is much softer than the bedrock?
Greenland.
Image
A beauty from Alaska.
http://onebigphoto.com/inside-glacier-cave-in-alaska/
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: 2654
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:35 pm

!
Dude, you get your picture taken in the coolest places !!
;)

Even if there were huge pressures on rocks at the bottom of a glacier, why would the rocks be pressed into the bedrock, and not into the ice above it, which is much softer than the bedrock?


Because increasing pressure 'melts' the ice ?
[Try ssslowwly squeezing an ice cube, with a pair of pliers]
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby nick c » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:20 pm

GaryN wrote:Even if there were huge pressures on rocks at the bottom of a glacier, why would the rocks be pressed into the bedrock, and not into the ice above it, which is much softer than the bedrock?

seasmith wrote:Because increasing pressure 'melts' the ice ?
[Try ssslowwly squeezing an ice cube, with a pair of pliers]

It seems to me that melting ice would only make it more likely that rocks at the bottom would be pressed into the ice above and not the bedrock below. The ice, melting or not, would be softer than the bedrock...no?
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:06 pm

It seems to me that melting ice would only make it more likely that rocks at the bottom would be pressed into the ice above and not the bedrock below.


Ore carried along with the water.
If there's glacier, there's water, no?
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:24 am

It seems to me that melting ice would only make it more likely that rocks at the bottom would be pressed into the ice above and not the bedrock below.


If there was water or slush at the bottom, under pressure, then there is no downward force as the water is around and under the rocks. Also the rocks would weigh less due to displacement. Rocks on the deep ocean floor are not pressed into the muck are they?

Ore carried along with the water.
If there's glacier, there's water, no?


Yes, but it needs a lot of water and a steep incline to get rocks that have grouped together in an interlocking mass to move. It would also seem if they did move then the rocks should all become even more broken, chipped and gouged, not rounded and smoothed.

I found a mini version of the image finno posted above, a square-ish rock in a round hole. It will not move.
Image
Where the flat rocks are created? I removed a 12 inch diameter rock from a trench running at 90 degrees to the river, and this is what was underneath. All flat, some very thin. How did they get there? I did dislodge some getting the boulder out, so they are not lying as flat and well packed as they were, and some spilled out when I lifted the boulder.
Image
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: 2654
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby seasmith » Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:22 am

~
Primeval Underwater Forest Discovered in Gulf of Mexico

The research team created a sonar map of the area and analyzed two samples Raines took from trees. DeLong is planning her own dive at the site later this year. Because of the forest depth, scuba divers can only stay below for about 40 minutes before coming up.
Carbon isotopes (atoms of the same element that have different molecular weights) revealed that the trees were about 52,000 years old.
The trees' growth rings could reveal secrets about the climate of the Gulf of Mexico thousands of years ago, during a period known as the Wisconsin Glacial period, when sea levels were much lower than they are today.



http://www.accuweather.com/en/features/ ... s/15045294

http://www.livescience.com/31471-weirde ... tions.html
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Jul 11, 2013 11:42 am

Wisconsin Glacial period,


How were the dates and extents and magnitudes of the ice ages determined? I haven't looked into that much, but a first search seems to show that the extent of the glaciation uses the evidence left behind of the physical effects. But if all those effects can be shown to be from great electrical storms, then all their models are nonsense.

The glaciation that occurred 650,000 years ago lasted some 50,000 years. It had a profound effect on the landscape, carving great glacial valleys and fjords and lakes, and making moraines and glacial outwash plains around the perimeter of its extent. The greatly lowered sea level allowed rivers to cut deeply into the shelves of the continents and into the edges of the shelves, where the sea floor drops off into the deep ocean. Here canyons could form which would later serve to funnel sediments from the shelf into the deep sea.

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseu ... 01_1.shtml

Some of those canyons on the coastal shelves go down 3 or 4 kilometers, so was the sea level that much lower at some point, in order that erosion by sediments could cut those canyons? Glaciology, like geology, does not seem to be a real science. There are lots of hits also if you search for rising sea floor, though not many for falling sea floor, so it's another assumption that the sea level has risen, rather than the sea floor sunk. And if the great deluge really happened, then a sea level rise may not be from miles deep glaciers melting, but from a gradual filling of the oceans by influxes of new water.
...
Although the Sooke Potholes and the Sooke River Valley in general are noted for their unusual, remarkable, interesting, etc, geological formations, it is suprising to me that no detailed petrology study has been undertaken. Now that I am convinced that the river was not formed by glaciers or water/grit erosion, and believe some of the features I have observed could only be from intense electrical and magnetic forces, I think I need to move on to trying to determine the magnetic fields in the river bed, radio activity levels, and radiological dating. An optical petrology/minerology study would be very expensive I think, have to check into that. I think, as has been found in places in the Sierra Nevada range, that isotope dating would show great variation of closely located samples of the same rock types, and that the magnetic fields will be chaotic. I know that my GPS tracker will not pick up a single satellite, cell phones register no signal, but that is not suprising given the location, and I have not yet taken a compass up there, but I bet it will be useless. If the valley was cut by physical forces, then the magnetic field should be stable, as the magnetic field would have been frozen in when the magma of the whole area cooled, and remained that way. The radioactivity levels might be interesting, and maybe I could find some good sources of material for hormesis uses?

More images, unsorted, from the Potholes:
https://plus.google.com/photos/11334575 ... erid=pwrd1
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: 2654
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby moses » Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:10 pm

The 18 metre deep trees are evidence that this land sunk. This must have happened a few thousand years ago because of the fresh condition of the trees. Along with the canyons, stretching of the land in this vicinity could account for these trees, and possibly the sinking of a civilization thereabouts.

The trees would have grown in conditions produced by a previous configuration of planets. Thus the tree rings that cover about a thousand years will give insight into conditions in that previous configuration, in that area. That is the trees sunk after the previous configuration broke up. It is clear that this was a sudden event which buried these trees under the ocean.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1096
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby Chromium6 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 9:30 pm

Dwarka, India - 12,000 Year Old City of Lord Krishna Found

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQZFS9Hij0M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQZFS9Hij0M
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 RayTomes » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:34 pm

The existence of ice ages can be found from studying annual layers in snow falls in antartica and elsewhere. The O18 and other isotope ratios show what the prevailing temperature of the earth was at that time. Suggest looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age page including the graphs.
Ray Tomes
Web site : YouTube : Blog
User avatar
RayTomes
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:48 am

Ray wrote:
Suggest looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age page including the graphs.


From the Wiki page:

Variations in the Sun's energy output

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012
)

So the idea of mega-CMEs, even though astronomers tell us that Sun-like stars have been seen to have events with up to 10 Million times the total energy output of the largest CME observed from our Sun does not count? All models that assume the sedimentary layers were laid down in some regular fashion must be in doubt if large CME's (or maybe interplanetary discharges) could lay down many, many layers in a very short time. The isotopic dating similarly is invalid if electrical discharges can change the apparent age by millions of years in an instant, if electrical storms have indeed occurred, and perhaps on numerous occasions.

Yes, it's also from Wiki. I'd say that should be classed as a variation in the Suns output. :shock:

As of 2000, nine superflare stars have been found, some of them similar to the Sun.[1] The energy released during such a flare is 100 times to 10 million times that of the sun's largest coronal mass ejections.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superflare

From the Ice Age Wiki again:

Matthias Kuhle's geological theory of Ice Age development was suggested by the existence of an ice sheet covering the Tibetan plateau during the Ice Ages (Last Glacial Maximum?). According to Kuhle, the plate-tectonic uplift of Tibet past the snow-line has led to a surface of c. 2,400,000 square kilometres (930,000 sq mi) changing from bare land to ice with a 70% greater albedo. The reflection of energy into space resulted in a global cooling, triggering the Pleistocene Ice Age.


Pure speculation, a theory, yet it is allowed to persist on Wiki. Even plate tectonics is still only considered a theory, but seems fine to them too.

Dating cores:
Dating is a difficult task. Five different dating methods have been used for Vostok cores, with differences such as 300 years at 100 m depth, 600yr at 200 m, 7000yr at 400 m, 5000yr at 800 m, 6000yr at 1600 m, and 5000yr at 1934 m.[24]
Different dating methods makes comparison and interpretation difficult. Matching peaks by visual examination of Moulton and Vostok ice cores suggests a time difference of about 10,000 years but proper interpretation requires knowing the reasons for the differences.


Another inexact science, which again assumes a regular behaviour of the climate over millions of years. Lots of info and even videos out there that show how unreliable core dating is.
The alternative to the millions/billions of years of slow change though is indeed hard to accept, as the magnitude of the events required to have modified the Earth or other solar system body surfaces by plasma/EM forces is quite mind numbing. I believe I see the evidence though.
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: 2654
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Jul 23, 2013 7:19 pm

One glacier, four filters:

[img]khumbu_ast_2005333_sio2.jpg[/img]


[img]khumbu_ast_03_08_14.jpg[/img]

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/v ... c=eoa-iotd




The file is too big, maximum allowed size is 50 KiB.
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby Chromium6 » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:00 pm

Slow ice retreat along coastal Alaska and Canada
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Listen at the 28 minute mark. The Arctic ocean is filled with underwater volcanoes.

Red Ice Radio - Robert Felix - The Coming Ice Age
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx7dcoe_Mck
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 GaryN » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:24 pm

I was trying to figure out how they determined past sea levels, and again it seems it involves interpretations that serve to conform to a standard model. I didn't realise sea levels had been so much higher in the past, according to their beliefs anyway, but should we consider that it could be the land or seafloor levels that have changed, rather than water levels on a fixed landform? If that were the case, then we would not need miles of ice covering most of the world to have melted in order to account for the highest sea levels they believe existed.
Image
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: 2654
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: No registered users and 1 guest