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: JohnathanDoe
Fill a glass halfway with water. Now, tilt the glass. The water adapts to find a center point.
Tilt the Earth. The molten liquid under the surface adapts to find a center point. The liquid under the Earth's surface is what causes the magnetic field. As the liquid centers itself, the magnetic pole readjusts..
originally posted by: JohnathanDoeThere is plenty of evidence to support the claim that drastic climate change occurs in 20,000+ cycles to match the astronomical cycles, with ice ages occurring at the 50,000+ year mark.
.
we are in an interglacial period—the Holocene—of the ice age that began 2.6 million years ago at the start of the Pleistocene epoch, because the Greenland, Arctic, and Antarctic ice sheets still exist.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
a reply to: Marduk
You realize there is a layer of molten liquid below the Earth's crust and above the solid core, right? And, yes, the laws of physics apply to all liquids, not just water. You can see proof of this in every steel mill in the world..
because of its high temperature, modeling work has shown that the outer core is a low viscosity fluid (about ten times the viscosity of liquid metals at the surface)
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe If you still don't believe this is what generates the Earth's magnetic field, I'd point you in the direction Of Tesla, who figured out water moving in opposite directions creates electricity, or, electromagnetic fields.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoeAnd you also realize the term "ice age" is generally regarded as when the glacial maximum was reached, approximately 20,000 years ago, having begun between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, with other estimates as high as 100,000 years ago?.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoeBut of course, my ideas must come from whoever the heck you think they do.
en.wikipedia.org...
The temperature of the outer core ranges from 4,300 K (4,030 °C; 7,280 °F) in the outer regions to 6,000 K (5,730 °C; 10,340 °F) near the inner core. Because of its high temperature, modeling work has shown that the outer core is a low viscosity fluid (about ten times the viscosity of liquid metals at the surface) that convects turbulently.[2] Eddy currents in the nickel iron fluid of the outer core are believed to influence the Earth's magnetic field. The average magnetic field strength in the Earth's outer core was measured to be 2.5 millitesla, 50 times stronger than the magnetic field at the surface.[3][4] The outer core is not under enough pressure to be solid, so it is liquid even though it has a composition similar to that of the inner core.
earthguide.ucsd.edu...
After this great glaciation, a succession of smaller glaciations has followed, each separated by about 100,000 years from its predecessor, according to changes in the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit (a fact first discovered by the astronomer Johannes Kepler, 1571-1630). These periods of time when large areas of the Earth are covered by ice sheets are called �ice ages.� The last of the ice ages in human experience (often referred to as the Ice Age) reached its maximum roughly 20,000 years ago, and then gave way to warming. Sea level rose in two major steps, one centered near 14,000 years and the other near 11,500 years. However, between these two periods of rapid melting there was a pause in melting and sea level rise, known as the "Younger Dryas" period. During the Younger Dryas the climate system went back into almost fully glacial conditions, after having offered balmy conditions for more than 1000 years. The reasons for these large swings in climate change are not yet well understood.
www.space.com...
The tilt of Earth on its axis varies between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees over a 41,000-year period. That seemingly small variation leads to large changes in the amount of sunlight reaching the polar regions of Earth ? when less sunlight reaches the poles, more ice can accumulate there, leading to ice ages that can last thousands of years.
Mars' tilt has more variation than Earth's, wobbling by tens of degrees over a 100,000-year cycle, which can produce even more dramatic changes in climate. When Mars' axial tilt, or obliquity, has been low, the poles have been the coldest places on the planet, which has resulted in atmospheric changes that can impact how material is deposited.
And when the poles are colder, water and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere migrate pole-ward where they are locked up as ice. When the obliquity is higher though, the poles get more sunlight and the water and carbon dioxide migrate way.
www.cnn.com...
The powerful earthquake that unleashed a devastating tsunami Friday appears to have moved the main island of Japan by 8 feet (2.4 meters) and shifted the Earth on its axis.
"At this point, we know that one GPS station moved (8 feet), and we have seen a map from GSI (Geospatial Information Authority) in Japan showing the pattern of shift over a large area is consistent with about that much shift of the land mass," said Kenneth Hudnut, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Reports from the National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology in Italy estimated the 8.9-magnitude quake shifted the planet on its axis by nearly 4 inches (10 centimeters).
You realize there is a layer of molten liquid below the Earth's crust and above the solid core....If you still don't believe this is what generates the Earth's magnetic field, I'd point you in the direction of Tesla
Eddy currents in the nickel iron fluid of the outer core are believed to influence the Earth's magnetic field
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
a reply to: Marduk
You literally misquoted the link. You claimed the outer core wasn't liquid based on the term "low viscosity fluid," but failed to continue reading where it says very clearly the outer core is a low viscosity liquid.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
I suppose in your scientific studies you've learned that the Earth's solid core produces heat, or more specifically, absorbs the radiation (heat) from the sun, and then radiates that heat, which then moves the liquid outer core (in addition to the Earth's movement), which then generates the electromagnetic field? It's called dynamo, specifically, geodynamo. See, the iron core cannot produce an electromagnetic field... there is no inherent energy in the iron. Instead, it is a conducer of radiation (heat). Of course, once the electromagnetic field was initially generated, the core became magnetized, but it is the liquid outer core that "recharges" the battery..
Our planet’s magnetic field is believed to be generated deep down in the Earth’s core.
The power source for Earth's magnetic field may be magnesium that has been trapped in the core
Briefly, as the result of radioactive heating and chemical differentiation, the Earth's outer core is in a state of turbulent convection. This sets up a process that is a bit like a naturally occurring electrical generator, where the convective kinetic energy is converted to electrical and magnetic energy. Basically, the motion of the electrically conducting iron in the presence of the Earth's magnetic field induces electric currents. Those electric currents generate their own magnetic field, and as the result of this internal feedback, the process is self-sustaining so long as there is an energy source sufficient to maintain convection.
Earth's magnetic field is crucial for our existence, as it shields the life on our planet's surface from deadly cosmic rays. It is generated by turbulent motions of liquid iron in Earth's core
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
And, if you thought about the information I posted before brushing it off with your passive aggressive submission, you'd realize that if something as simple as an earthquake can alter Earth's axis, something as large as a polarity reversal (say the one 41,000 years ago), causing major global disasters could alter the Earth's axis by a large distance. This makes it very possible for the poles to have been located around Alaska and Australia within the somewhat recent span of human evolution...
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
a reply to: Marduk
Learn how to read.
"low viscosity fluid (about ten times the viscosity of liquid metals at the surface)"
"The outer core is not under enough pressure to be solid, so it is liquid even though it has a composition similar to that of the inner core."
Seriously. Comprehend what that says... low viscosity... liquid.
And please read your links again.
"Earth's magnetic field is crucial for our existence, as it shields the life on our planet's surface from deadly cosmic rays. It is generated by turbulent motions of liquid iron in Earth's core "
It literally says, from your own link, the magnetic field is generated by the motion of THE LIQUID iron in the Earth's core. The outer core is comprised of LIQUID iron and nickel.
Try harder, please.
That's a total shift, so it's one degree in either direction from where it is now. So, no. Not really. And when it comes to climate, not so much either. It's the difference between Bellingham, WA and Seattle. It would move the Arctic circle about 67 miles north or south, at the most. It certainly does not put the north pole in Alaska.
When dealing with celestial bodies, millions of miles away from each other, 2 degrees is a huge deal.
you'd realize that if something as simple as an earthquake can alter Earth's axis
Gross also estimates that the Chile earthquake shifted Earth's figure axis by about three inches (eight centimeters).
Deviating roughly 33 feet (10 meters) from the north-south axis around which Earth revolves, the figure axis is the imaginary line around which the world's unevenly distributed mass is balanced.
To explain the difference, Keith Sverdrup, a seismologist at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, likened Earth to a spinning figure skater holding a rock in one hand. The rotational axis of the skater is still down the middle of the body, he said, but the skater's figure axis is shifted slightly in the direction of the hand holding the rock.
earthsky.org...://earthsky.org/earth/richard-gross-japan- earthquake-shortened-earths-day-1-4-millionths-of-a-second
Yes. This change doesn’t effect the (degree) of tilt of the axis of Earth in space, or the orbit of the Earth around the sun. The only way Earth’s tilt or orbit can be affected is if some external force – like an asteroid – hits the Earth.
Again, precession does not change the axis of rotation.
Coupled with the shifting ice accumulation due to axial precession,
Actually, it does.
The outer core does not generate the magnetic field,
Differences in temperature, pressure and composition within the outer core cause convection currents in the molten metal as cool, dense matter sinks whilst warm, less dense matter rises. The Coriolis force, resulting from the Earth’s spin, also causes swirling whirlpools.
This flow of liquid iron generates electric currents, which in turn produce magnetic fields. Charged metals passing through these fields go on to create electric currents of their own, and so the cycle continues. This self-sustaining loop is known as the geodynamo.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
a reply to: Marduk
You're not even reading your own links. Your own definition of fluid includes liquids..
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe Your own scientific links repeat what I've explained to you at length. You keep spouting off about an author I've never heard of..
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
You prove what I'm saying and then insult me.
I hate to break it to you, but you basically have zero ground to stand on. Pun intended.
originally posted by: JohnathanDoe
a reply to: punkinworks10
Fill a glass halfway with water. Now, tilt the glass. The water adapts to find a center point.
Tilt the Earth. The molten liquid under the surface adapts to find a center point. The liquid under the Earth's surface is what causes the magnetic field. As the liquid centers itself, the magnetic pole readjusts.
When dealing with celestial bodies, millions of miles away from each other, 2 degrees is a huge deal. Basic Pythagorean Theorem. And when the celestial pole of the Earth is completely opposite where it was, there are significant changes to things like climate. What we consider to be frozen, inhospitable surface was not so inhospitable in the past.
There is plenty of evidence to support the claim that drastic climate change occurs in 20,000+ cycles to match the astronomical cycles, with ice ages occurring at the 50,000+ year mark.
The last polarity change happened 41,000 years ago. It's called the Laschamp event.
originally posted by: gpols
The earth is in a constant state of flux and it can reasonable be concluded that it was a much different climate in the arctic than it is now.
While a lot will argue with me on this the current theory of "man made climate change" doesn't explain the area around the pyramids in Egypt being a lush grassland turning into a desert.
It sustains life now.
So it was a climate warm enough to sustain life in the Arctic 45 Thousand years ago.
That image is current. Siberia is not now covered by ice, and was not covered by ice at the height of the last glacial period. Nor was it 45,000 years ago, apparently.
And viewing by that image it would suggest that the warming cycle is natural.
The current one? How so? What natural features are causing it?
And viewing by that image it would suggest that the warming cycle is natural.