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 Oct 24, 2012 11:14 am

I haven't been able to find any images of Earth glaciers that show such a centre to edge differential movement. I read a couple of papers on glacier mechanics, but although it is agreed the flow is laminar, there seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about the other mechanics, a main question being the pressure at the base of the glacier, with some speculation that there will be no great pressure at all. The ice temperature and the slope gradient are the most important variables, and it seems the colder the ice, the greater the slippage of the centre and upper layers.
The crater in that image should be interesting to observe over time, as there should be deformation if there are bands of surface ice moving at different rates. Fully enlarged, the shape and orientation of the ice blocks in parts of the image seems to suggest the effects of an uphill flow of something, and not wind I'd say, unless an electric wind. It could be that the apparent ice flow is mainly from carving/etching by an electric wind rather than physical movement of the ice. Just my interpretation of course.
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby webolife » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:04 pm

Gary,
I'm confused about your interpretation of the Martian landscape depicted in that image. Are you thinking that the image shows a Martian glacier? The landform is a dry bed, depicting former flow characteristics of unknown origin. I think it is possible that carbolic or carbolic/water mix ice glaciers may have produced those features in a former colder epoch on Mars, similar to the polar glacial formations seen in Martian winters. The thin atmosphere, lack of precipitation, etc. on Mars leaves the features less eroded, but I would think that some study might have been done on terrestrial glacier beds to correlate to the features we see in the Martian image. Just wondering. I couldn't find anything specific with Google.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:42 pm

Are you thinking that the image shows a Martian glacier?


Hmm, glacial features in the bedrock, and not a glacier. Oops. But in that case, I think their interpretation even more rediculous, the scouring must be all ionic! And no, I don't believe there are glacial valleys showing those features on Earth, unless they are still underneath existing glaciers, perhaps at the higher elevations where I think an ion wind would have been strongest.
And I sure wish they had colour cameras on those orbiters. Is that a crater in this image?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ISS01 ... 82_lrg.jpg
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby webolife » Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:16 pm

The island is a volcano which was breached by seawater during its formation, but subsequently when enough material had erupted to bring its surface above sealevel another eruptive phase created the little cone.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:14 pm

I'm informed that the beach pebbles, cobbles and boulders on Vancouver Island were formed by rock being plucked from the glacial valleys further up the coast and being rounded and smoothed by the long migration down the coast, over many thousands of years. Yet in the Philippines, there are beaches with exactly the same diversity of shape, colour and composition as found on my local beaches. If you dropped me on the Philippines beach, I wouldn't know the difference, so how do two beaches so far apart and, presumably, with no glacial action in the Philippines, appear so similar?
Valuga Beach
Image
Bigger:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _Beach.png
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:33 am

Costa Rica mountain stream. So these rocks must have rounded and smoothed within the reaches of the river? Again, this looks very much like the river and stream beds on Vancouver Island, and I can assure you that most of the rounded boulders in the creeks here have not moved very far, if at all. The required water flow volume and speed is way beyond what even a flood stage flow could produce. Again, if I was to be dropped into one of these Costa Rica creek beds, I would be hard pressed to tell that I was not on Vancouver Island.
Image
http://www.casarioblanco.com/mountain-stream.html
The rounded rocks on Vancouver Island were formed by glacial action according to the accepted model, so does that mean there must have been glaciers in Costa Rica? Apparently so:
Late Quaternary glaciation of Costa Rica
http://gsabulletin.gsapubs.org/content/ ... 7.abstract
I'd like to suggest that the formation of the pebbles, cobbles and rounded boulders at both locations was not from glaciation at all, it makes no mechanical sense, and the Cosa Rican rocks could not have been worn so round and smooth in the short distance between the mountain top glaciers and their locations in the rivers and creeks not far below.
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby starbiter » Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:16 am

GaryN wrote:Costa Rica mountain stream. So these rocks must have rounded and smoothed within the reaches of the river? Again, this looks very much like the river and stream beds on Vancouver Island, and I can assure you that most of the rounded boulders in the creeks here have not moved very far, if at all. The required water flow volume and speed is way beyond what even a flood stage flow could produce. Again, if I was to be dropped into one of these Costa Rica creek beds, I would be hard pressed to tell that I was not on Vancouver Island.
Image
http://www.casarioblanco.com/mountain-stream.html
The rounded rocks on Vancouver Island were formed by glacial action according to the accepted model, so does that mean there must have been glaciers in Costa Rica? Apparently so:
Late Quaternary glaciation of Costa Rica
http://gsabulletin.gsapubs.org/content/ ... 7.abstract
I'd like to suggest that the formation of the pebbles, cobbles and rounded boulders at both locations was not from glaciation at all, it makes no mechanical sense, and the Cosa Rican rocks could not have been worn so round and smooth in the short distance between the mountain top glaciers and their locations in the rivers and creeks not far below.



Hi Gary,

The rounded granitic rocks that i see on mountain tops seem as if they fell from the sky.


https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-GyNP5 ... =drive_web

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-GyNP5 ... =drive_web

The larger boulder looks to be the size of a hill top tree.

The following is from Worlds in Collision. Page 52

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Veli ... -Collision

"The description of such a catastrophe is found in the Visuddhi-Magga, a Buddhist text on the world cycles. "When a world cycle is destroyed by wind . . . there arises in the beginning a cycle-destroying great cloud. . . . There arises a wind to destroy the world cycle, and first it raises a
fine dust, and then coarse dust, and then fine sand, and then coarse sand, and then grit, stones, up to boulders as large as mighty trees on the hill tops." The wind "turns the ground upside down," large areas "crack and are thrown upwards," "all the mansions on earth" are destroyed in a catastrophe when"worlds clash with worlds." The Mexican Annals of Cuauhtitlan describe how a cosmic catastrophe was accompanied by a hail of stones; in the oral tradition of the Indians, too, the motif is repeated time and again: In some ancient epoch the sky "rained, not water, but fire and red-hot stones," 8 which is not different from the Hebrew tradition."

Me again,

This might explain some of Your round rocks Gary.

michael

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 GaryN » Thu Apr 11, 2013 3:18 pm

"The description of such a catastrophe is found in the Visuddhi-Magga, a Buddhist text on the world cycles. "When a world cycle is destroyed by wind . . . there arises in the beginning a cycle-destroying great cloud. . . . There arises a wind to destroy the world cycle, and first it raises a fine dust, and then coarse dust, and then fine sand, and then coarse sand, and then grit, stones, up to boulders as large as mighty trees on the hill tops."


Thanks for that Michael. The text to me describes an increasing level of ionisation of the atmosphere, so dissociation of the surface material is occuring, the particles getting larger as the electric field intensifies. I can quite clearly see such a progression around here, and the excavated material still lies in very easily detectable layers of the different size grains, and the depth and extent of some layers of absolutely consistent, identical grain sizes, supposedly due to mechanical sorting in fluvial deposits, suggests to me a process much more like the discription you provided. The large sand 'seas' in variuos parts of the world also exhibit such grain size consistency, which makes it desirable for silicon chip producers.

I've been explaining my findings to my tennant, who is a First Nations spirit guide, who has visited and lived on many reserves throughout north and central America, and the legends of such large scale events are common. One thing that puzzles me is how, if such events did occur, the observers were able to survive? It's almost as if they were seeing and describing these events from some safe vantage point. Does the fact that talk of 'star people' by many of the native groups is just an accepted fact suggest that some of them may have seen it all from a safe vantage point? A subject for NIAMI, I realise.
Anyway, my spirit guide say he thinks that the land has been speaking to me all along, and that I now can hear what it is saying, and it is saying that the events were indeed very energetic and intense, and not gradual and gentle. It is so obvious that I can not understand how the convention geologists get away with their present models. Just that nobody is paying close enough attention I suppose.
I'm hoping for a good season for getting down in the river and creek beds this year, we have had the least rainfall over the winter that I have experienced in over 30 years, so if that trend continues, there should be some interesting discoveries waiting to be made.
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby starbiter » Thu Apr 11, 2013 3:31 pm

GaryN wrote:
"The description of such a catastrophe is found in the Visuddhi-Magga, a Buddhist text on the world cycles. "When a world cycle is destroyed by wind . . . there arises in the beginning a cycle-destroying great cloud. . . . There arises a wind to destroy the world cycle, and first it raises a fine dust, and then coarse dust, and then fine sand, and then coarse sand, and then grit, stones, up to boulders as large as mighty trees on the hill tops."


Thanks for that Michael. The text to me describes an increasing level of ionisation of the atmosphere, so dissociation of the surface material is occuring, the particles getting larger as the electric field intensifies. I can quite clearly see such a progression around here, and the excavated material still lies in very easily detectable layers of the different size grains, and the depth and extent of some layers of absolutely consistent, identical grain sizes, supposedly due to mechanical sorting in fluvial deposits, suggests to me a process much more like the discription you provided. The large sand 'seas' in variuos parts of the world also exhibit such grain size consistency, which makes it desirable for silicon chip producers.

I've been explaining my findings to my tennant, who is a First Nations spirit guide, who has visited and lived on many reserves throughout north and central America, and the legends of such large scale events are common. One thing that puzzles me is how, if such events did occur, the observers were able to survive? It's almost as if they were seeing and describing these events from some safe vantage point. Does the fact that talk of 'star people' by many of the native groups is just an accepted fact suggest that some of them may have seen it all from a safe vantage point? A subject for NIAMI, I realise.
Anyway, my spirit guide say he thinks that the land has been speaking to me all along, and that I now can hear what it is saying, and it is saying that the events were indeed very energetic and intense, and not gradual and gentle. It is so obvious that I can not understand how the convention geologists get away with their present models. Just that nobody is paying close enough attention I suppose.
I'm hoping for a good season for getting down in the river and creek beds this year, we have had the least rainfall over the winter that I have experienced in over 30 years, so if that trend continues, there should be some interesting discoveries waiting to be made.



Survivalibity is a big problem for the events that are described by the survivors. There are descriptions of people running to caves in the mountain tops. Those who didn't rush were killed. If the incoming material was wet, rocky, or molten it would stick to the windward side of obstructions. A cave on the leeward side might be survivable.

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 » Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:26 pm

first to sorry again to everybody my english, i know my writings are like child write this, but important is, everybody can understand my contents...
lets talk about from moraines little bit. what im been think.
How proofs from glacial time at pleistoccene are everywhere round the world? Only explanation is, that scientics at 18 century, they didn’t know that. they knew only their own areas and they couldn’t imagine, same proofs from iceage are in Africa or Australia or everywhere. Thanks with google, we know better.

Today geologists says, moraines form allmost only from liquid waters. everyone can accept that because normally moraines are under waterfall etc. In here scandinavia geologists say today moraines form from post-glacial melting waters. that means, you don’t need necessarily ice but you need water – like flood. From flood talking that, in lapland moraines are mixed-up and sediments are normally upsides down.

but now, lets talk from moraines to moraine ridges. lets take one problem what join to moraine ridges. like to salpausselka
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salpaussel%C3%A4t
Okay, we think its been form when glacial from north and seawater from south pushed it, but its not that simple. Actually that moraine ridge continues bottom of sea and rise again in Sweden. How moraine ridge can form on seabed? Its not possible. Not with flood and not with icce. Only explanation got to be, that seabed are been dry land when is been form. What means, land subsidence are happen thousands of years after glacial times. (like Doggerland been drowned very late).
i thinked this first time when i was near turku and i saw 10 000 year old pothole, what goes up from water only 200 year ago.

What I try to explain? Land rise or fall have nothing to do with mass of ice. Why land goes under or up, can be unknown geological mecanism, but it continues today in north areas. but couple thousand years ago, its been happen everywhere like submarine canyons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_canyon) can proof.
finno
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:18 am

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby GaryN » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:10 am

Malaysian mountain stream.
Image

Compared to the rest of the world's rain forests, Malaysia's is a grandmother. During the Ice Ages, much of the Earth was covered by immense glaciers that kept the global climate cool. Consequently, many of the planet's tropical rain forests had to wait until the glaciers receded before they could evolve. Malaysia's forest, however, was blessed with a location far enough away from the ice that it developed 130 million years ago - far earlier than those of Africa and Latin America


The rounded rocks and boulders still look the same as in other mountain rivers and streams that were supposedly due to glacial action. So if we have these objects in an area that is accepted to have had no glaciation, what was the process? I'll bet if I went and looked closely in those stream beds, I'd find rocks 'growing' out of the bedrock there too.
In Costa Rica it seems the determination of glacial processes is based on the interpretation of Cirques as only possibly being glacial, but perhaps it is that interpretation that is the problem?
Image

Hi finno!
What I try to explain? Land rise or fall have nothing to do with mass of ice. Why land goes under or up, can be unknown geological mecanism, but it continues today in north areas. but couple thousand years ago, its been happen everywhere like submarine canyons


Yes, the undersea canyons are a puzzle, and I agree with the rise and fall not being from the weight of glaciers, but the idea that the land could rise or fall as much as kilometers in a very short time, as told in the ancient legends, is impossible for most people to accept. Geologists just say it happened over hundreds of millions of years, time is the geologists best friend.
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby starbiter » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:25 am

GaryN wrote:Malaysian mountain stream.
Image

Compared to the rest of the world's rain forests, Malaysia's is a grandmother. During the Ice Ages, much of the Earth was covered by immense glaciers that kept the global climate cool. Consequently, many of the planet's tropical rain forests had to wait until the glaciers receded before they could evolve. Malaysia's forest, however, was blessed with a location far enough away from the ice that it developed 130 million years ago - far earlier than those of Africa and Latin America


The rounded rocks and boulders still look the same as in other mountain rivers and streams that were supposedly due to glacial action. So if we have these objects in an area that is accepted to have had no glaciation, what was the process? I'll bet if I went and looked closely in those stream beds, I'd find rocks 'growing' out of the bedrock there too.
In Costa Rica it seems the determination of glacial processes is based on the interpretation of Cirques as only possibly being glacial, but perhaps it is that interpretation that is the problem?
Image

Hi finno!
What I try to explain? Land rise or fall have nothing to do with mass of ice. Why land goes under or up, can be unknown geological mecanism, but it continues today in north areas. but couple thousand years ago, its been happen everywhere like submarine canyons


Yes, the undersea canyons are a puzzle, and I agree with the rise and fall not being from the weight of glaciers, but the idea that the land could rise or fall as much as kilometers in a very short time, as told in the ancient legends, is impossible for most people to accept. Geologists just say it happened over hundreds of millions of years, time is the geologists best friend.



Hi Gary,

I'm not opposed to the surface of Earth changing it's shape. Ancient shorelines have been tilted in places. This implies a change of shape. But it would be easier to change the level of the ocean. A change in the position of the equator, or the speed of rotation could change sea level by 10,000 feet or more. A reversal of the rotation direction would really screw things up. Worlds in Collision and Earth in Upheaval describe a reversal of rotation, and a change in the equatorial position.

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 GaryN » Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:57 am

Some small scale signs of electrical/ionic activity on the top surface of a bedrock mound in the Sooke River. If glaciers and water shaped and smoothed the bedrock, why would these features be still so prononced? The link goes to the last of three images, go back with the arrow at the left of the image. The red material is likely iron oxide, so iron ion etching in 2 of the 3 images?

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/1133 ... 9650682434
A larger pothole in the bank of the river, with chewed and melted and sculpted areas around it.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/1133 ... 3191628274

Wasn't sure where to put this, but on the subject of iron, could bacteria really be the cause?

Iron in primeval seas rusted by bacteria
Image
http://phys.org/news/2013-04-iron-prime ... teria.html
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: 2660
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby ddaveo » Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:34 pm

Absolutely fascinating thread. Thanks for this.

I'm a long time lurker of these forums, but I wanted to throw my 2c into the mix. In Donald Patten's book The Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch he points out that the northern ice cap during the Ice Age (assuming there was one :P ) was centred very nearly on the present-day northern magnetic pole, which has interesting implications for the EU model.

Notice that the ice mass appears to have missed almost all of Siberia, excepting the offshore islands. This is the coldest portion of the Northern Hemisphere in our age. Notice also that it spread out over the Central States down to the 37th latitude. This is more than half way to the equator. Illinois is about 500 miles closer to the Magnetic North Pole than is Northern Siberia. People in rural Illinois get a much better view of the Northern Lights (Aurora Borealis) than do Siberians, because they live closer to the Magnetic North Pole.

In noticing the location of the Aurora Borealis in association with the location of the ice mass, we must remember that sometimes in geography associative relationships are as meaningful as "cause and effect" relationships. The Aurora is related to the Van Alien Belts (see Figures 15 and 16) and the magnetic poles. During periods of sunspot activity, charged particles are emitted from the Sun and interact with the Earth's magnetic field. They are shunted around the magnetic field at high velocities; they are deflected, essentially by the magnetic field of the Earth. They tend to converge over the magnetic poles, and collide with atmospheric particles in the ionosphere. These collisions produce electrical changes which, in their ethereal brilliance, are termed Northern Lights. In losing velocity, the particles begin to descend.

It is our supposition that the location of the ice mass--an important factor in the astral-gravitational-magnetic catastrophe --was dependent more on the magnetic axis than the geographical axis. There seems to be a relationship, as yet not understood, between the geographical axis and the magnetic axis. However, had the magnetic poles been located in tropical climates, it is suspected that the ice mass would also have occurred in tropical climates. Therefore, the ice mass which descended largely in high latitudes offers no strength to the uniformitarian proposition, for the Arctic Circle and the Ice Epoch peripheries are eccentric to each other. The only coincidence between the two areas lies in the fact that the geographic and magnetic poles coincide within about 1200 miles of each other.


Here is Figure 14, which he is referring to at the start of that quote:
http://www.creationism.org/patten/Patte ... lFig14.jpg

Here is the entire chapter dealing with the Ice Age:
http://www.creationism.org/patten/Patte ... lood06.htm

Don't let the "creationism" label put you off ;) they're simply hosting his work.

Some more excerpts which I find interesting:

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, forming lateral and terminal moraines. The extent of the ice flow is determined from and orthogonal to the terminal moraines; the direction of the flow was parallel to such formations as drumlins and the lateral moraines. The path of flow is also plotted by locations of erratic boulders, striations and other methods.

...

Furthermore, the pattern of ice flow also does not agree with the uniformitarian hypothesis. Today there are slow-snow glaciers in the mountains along the Pacific Ocean in Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon, which flow in a riverine pattern, avoiding the hills and ridges and concentrating in the valleys. But the flow of ice, following its deposition in the Ice Epoch, was largely oblivious to topography until the flow feathered out at the fringes. In the more central portions, it flowed en masse over hills hundreds and thousands of feet high with seeming indifference. This is a radial pattern of flow.

A radial pattern of flow occurs when material flows outward in all directions from the center until a new equilibrium is established. This occurs, for instance, when honey is poured on bread, when milk is spilled on the table, or when pancake batter is dropped onto the griddle. Such events are sudden which cause radial patterns of flow. Gradual events cause riverine patterns of flow. The radial pattern of flow of ice from the Ice Epoch is another evidence of sudden accumulation. The illustration of the freezing of the mammoths was given to portray sudden chilling of the atmosphere; this was simultaneous with the sudden descent or dumping of great masses of ice (great volumes by Earth's standards) upon the high latitude regions.



And


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. Similarly, the stacking up of ice in nodes 10,000 to 15,000 feet deep becomes conceivable. Furthermore, if this is a period of simultaneous gravitational and magnetic conflict, with tides alternately 5,000 and 10,000 feet both above and below mean sea level, then formations including ice deposits could well occur below mean sea level. And apparently this is what happened, for ice does rest on bedrock some 5,000 feet below sea level, and it has had enough coldness to overcome both the heat of oceanic melting and the heat of internal pressure. This similarly checks with mammoth fossils engulfed in ice but also in alluvium.



From what I've read Donald Patten is a non-EU catastrophist researcher. He seems to subscribe to a graivty/magnetism-only model in which extreme tidal forces are responsible for the catastrophic events in the Earth's past. These tidal forces were supposedly caused by near misses with the planet Mars. I think his books (all available online) present a refreshing change of pace from the EU model, and 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.
ddaveo
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:46 am

Re: Questioning the Ice Ages

Unread postby moses » Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:29 am

Perhaps, with the Earth in it's previous configuration the North pole was in the same position as the magnetic pole. The Birkeland current flowing past and through the Earth was the cause of the magnetic pole and now the Earth's magnetic field is a remanent field produced by this past Birkeland current.

Now after the break-up of this very ancient planetary system the Earth would have gone into a very elliptical orbit, explained here:
Earth's ancient very elliptical orbit:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1913&p=78770#p78770

So this would mean that the Earth would still have the North pole in the present day position of the magnetic pole, during it's sojourn in the very elliptical orbit. This is because the bulk of the ice formation suggests this. And thus the change in the position of the Earth's pole was produced by a planetary interaction during this sojourn. One immediately thinks of the formation of the Rockies and Andes, etc, as the most severe interaction and thus most likely to produce a change in pole position.

Of course this pole change theory needs considerable consideration.
Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests