It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: tanka418
Hello Tanka48,
Tanka48: Interesting...So...forgive my ignorance here, Why didn't the planet shift uniformly? What you are talking about would be a shift in the rotational axis, which, would see to shift the whole uniformly, and apparently it didn't. So I have to ask; "Why?"
SC: What you have to imagine is a form of True Polar Wander (TPW) occurring on an infinitely more rapid timeframe--what I call Very Rapid True Polar Wander (VRTPW). This is a very rapid geographic relocation of the Earth's polar axis as per Wolfli, Baltensperger & Nufer's paper: An additional planet as a model for the Pleistocene Ice Age.
Imagine a dot in the centre of a circle. That dot is totally equidistant between every point on the circumference of the circle. However, move that dot slightly off-centre and the distances from the dot to the circle's circumference varies for every point around the circumference--some points on the circumference will now be closer to the dot whilst other points on the circumference will be further away.
Thus, if the pole (i.e. Earth's rotational axis) was located in Central Greenland then Giza, in degrees, is around 54 degrees from that absolute geographic location (you can measure this with Google Earth). Giza is now presently 60 degrees from the present pole in the Arctic sea--thus 60 - 54 = 6 hence a difference of around 6 degrees (which is what the two sets of shafts in the Great Pyramid show us). This is to say that Giza is nearer (by around 6 degrees, hence further north) to a Central Greenland Pole than it is to our present pole in the Arctic Sea.
Regards,
SC
Tanka418: I'm sorry, but you didn't answer my question...
You stated that there was an 18 degree shift in Greenland, and a 6 degree shift in Egypt.
Tanka418: Why the difference?
Devolo: Oh I thought you meant we have original texts claiming that. I see now the source is another speculative theory.
“I am going to blot out everything that I have made. This Earth shall enter into (i.e. be absorbed in) the watery abyss of Nu (or Nunu) by means of a raging flood, and will become even as it was in primeval time. I myself shall remain together with Osiris, but I shall transform myself into a small serpent, which can be neither comprehended nor seen; one day the Nile will rise and cover all Egypt with water, and drown the whole country; then, as in the beginning, there will be nothing to be seen except water.” - Budge W. E. A., 'From Fetish to God in Ancient Egypt', (Oxford University Press, 1934), 198. (Emphasis mine).
originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: tanka418
Tanka418: I'm sorry, but you didn't answer my question...
You stated that there was an 18 degree shift in Greenland, and a 6 degree shift in Egypt.
SC: The shift wasn’t “in Greenland”. I explained that while the pole migrates FROM Central Greenland to the Arctic Sea (a geographic shift of the pole of around 18 degrees) the effect of this shift at the latitude of Giza is only around 6 degrees. Other parts of the globe will see different relative canges in their distance to the pole. Some areas of the globe will see no change in the distance to the pole.
Tanka418: Why the difference?
SC: The difference arises because the Earth is a SPHERE.
Distance from Central Greenland to Arctic Sea Pole = 18° shift (90° – 72° = 18°).
Distance from Giza to Central Greenland Pole = 54 degrees.
Distance from Giza to Arctic Sea Pole = 60 degrees.
Relative Giza shift = 60° – 54° = 6 degrees.
I can't say it any simpler than that.
Regards,
SC
Tanka418: And ere I would have thought that IF I moved the axis of rotation of a sphere that the entire sphere would follow...
So, just how does a semi-rigid sphere deform in such a non-uniform manner?
Tanka418: How about that Mars sized planet that was involved in a near miss; any data on that?
originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: tanka418
Hello Tanka418,
I am not talking here about an axial tilt or a shift of the magnetic pole. This is about the rapid migration of the geographic pole.
Tanka418: And ere I would have thought that IF I moved the axis of rotation of a sphere that the entire sphere would follow...
So, just how does a semi-rigid sphere deform in such a non-uniform manner?
SC: You really need to read the paper I have linked to several times now by Wolfli, Baltensperger and Nufer. Pay particular attention to section 5. Mechanics of the Pole Shift.
An additional planet as a model for the Pleistocene Ice Age.
Tanka418: How about that Mars sized planet that was involved in a near miss; any data on that?
SC: See section 3 of the paper, ‘Origin and Fate of Z’.
Regards,
SC
Flavian: Firstly, the Pleistocene ice age began around 110'000 years ago. Just supposing for a minute that their proposal is correct, how did this extra planet have no effect on Earth prior to the projected time scales for this thread? There is a 91'000 year gap....
Secondly, their conclusion that the mystery planet was torn to pieces or "evaporated" into the Sun. Surely this would leave evidence? Debris fields, etc - mystery particles in Earth's soil and the like.