The Logarithmic Path of the Pole and Climate Change Correlation

a reply to: CharlesNPope

The main thing that is bugging me right now is this:

It seems plausible that the North Pole was somewhere in the Arctic at the end of the last Ice Age. But, this was a time of maximum glaciation. Would the North Pole be in the same place at a time of minimum glaciation (i.e., the current era) as it was at the time of maximum glaciation? It seems doubtful. It should be offset by some amount. If so, then how can the Giza Pyramids be aligned to our present North Pole instead of the late Ice Age North Pole. The North Pole would not have been at its present location in the Egyptian Old Kingdom, either. It was likely shifting from the Bering Sea and well on its way to the Hudson Bay by that time (if the climate change model proposed above is correct).

One solution would be that the Great Pyramid was originally constructed/ oriented when the Arctic was ice-free, in other words, at the end of the last Inter-Glacial Period. In that case, it is a "Way, Way Back Machine"! The last time the Arctic would have been free of ice was between 121,000 and 126,000 years ago.

grandsolarminimum.com...

Using the info on page 150 of The Great Pyramid Void Enigma, there would have been an Orion Belt pivot minimum 123,474 BCE (125,474 years ago), which is about right for the last meltdown of the Arctic.

A related issue is the alignment of the Queens' Pyramids with the Belt of Orion pivot. It would have been easier to set up that alignment when the pivot was either at its maximum or minimum points. The opportunity for that happens once every 13,000 years. However, if a max or min pivot point was not too far off, then I suppose the alignment could still have been achieved by extrapolating the current pivot position forward.

Scott is locking in on a completion date of ~10,500 BCE, but I think that a date of ~13,000 BCE makes a little more sense in terms of the ice core data. In other words, they constructed it before the start of the pole shifting that made it difficult to build anything significant. But, again, how did they determine the polar alignment at either of those dates?

We also have to keep in mind that the Precessional Cycle and the Pole Shift Cycle are probably not closely synchronized, if at all. One advantage of a "Precessional Clock" would be the ability to keep track of time independently of all the Earth's convulsions.

a reply to: CharlesNPope

There are some things that they do not want to find, take the behaviour of these guy's when they found this and moved the camera away quickly.

Beyond the few things we know of such as the huge structure seen on the old google earth that they have made less obvious by using a bad compression technique which has lost colour data from there images making features harder to see.
Now I for one don't buy this as Atlantis but it is certainly something more than sonar tracks which was the swamp gas excuse they gave for it.

Now yes that first object in the first video could be something innocuous perhaps something dumped over board or even a well cap of some kind from a drilling test made by oil or gas prospectors but either way it's pretty mysterious BUT the excuse they use for marks like this in deep water claiming they are SONAR trails, I mean how would a satellite even pick them up?, it's an excuse that just does not wash.

So yes there are probably ooparts under the oceans, on land we rob out ruins and reuse them, even build over them.

Imagine a construction engineer, not an archaeologists or even just a builder whom is digging foundation's and he comes across pipes and cables but there is no water or gas or electricity and they look old to him so does he go and get the local archaeologists to investigate or just put it down to old junk and go on with building.

In the US such finds have occurred, building a mall they came across a huge tiled floor were no modern building had stood and no known ruin's existed so they just destroyed it and built there mall.

I like this one he has uploaded as well.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Victor Vescovo, you have your next set of coordinates!!

There are definitely traces of Atlantean culture along the coasts of North African and Western Europe. Also traces on the other side of the Atlantic. But, it doesn't seem like anyone is interested in exploring the middle of the Atlantic. It is an aspect of the culture of denial regarding how radical the changes were at the end of the last Ice Age.

I think I recognize that first piece, it's the table from my old college apartment (lol) So many great bowls of ramen noodles (haha).

a reply to: CharlesNPope

In Mark Carlotto's book Before Atlantis, he organizes the temple/structure alignments according to the various major pole locations (Bering Sea, Hudson Bay, Greenland and Norwegian Sea). However, he doesn't include a table of sites aligned to the present pole. In an on-line paper, he organizes those same temple/structure alignments by continent and includes the present pole location:

www.researchgate.net...

Mark only recognizes one Greenland location and no Yukon or Baffin Island location.

So, I'm wondering if a closer analysis of his data would identify two Arctic locations (slightly apart), one corresponding to today's location (ice free Arctic) and the other with an Ice Age (max glaciation) location.

Otherwise, there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason to the collection of sites aligned to the present North Pole.

If we cannot resolve a second Arctic pole location, then, "Houston, we have a problem". I don't see why our present North Pole location, which seems to be quite rare, would be used to align such a great many of the ancient temple/structure sites, including the Giza Pyramids and the Bent Pyramid.

P.S. I suppose that many of the later structures might have been aligned to the most ancient site in a particular region, and irrespective of what the current pole location was at the time of the new construction. Along those lines, a scenario is even conceivable in which one of the Giza Pyramids is actually much older than the others. For example, if the original Giza Pyramid was the one we now call the 2nd Pyramid, then the other two could have been aligned to that original pyramid.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Nah im much more inclined to believe this guy about the location of atlantis truth be told..

It makes much more sense to me.




Also if you look at the African continent you can see that a huge wave of water washed over the African continent by looking at the land from things like google earth or google maps, dredging out crevaces etc that the wayer washed away. Take a big birds eye view of it. And zoom in until you can see it. It’s like Australia. Look at how the ocean would come from the west of Australia and cross the continent dredging out ravines etc. you can see how the water flowed across the continent. Thats why all the big coal mines are found on the east coast. The ocean grabbed all the trees and brush from the west and dumped it in the east on the mountains before flowing away.

And when the ocean comes from the east and goes over the mountains, sonce there aren’t mountains on the west coast of Australia, that is why all the trees and brush get dumped out to see and why the ocean next to western australia has a lot of oil and gas fields there…

a reply to: DaRAGE

Got to say to the thread author SORRY, it was late last night and I mixed up two threads in my head responding to one on the other, did not realize until I looked today.

But I agree on that subject the Sahara is far more likely and fit's the description far better it's just we have to think on what mechanism could have quickly tilted the continent upward and thrust that site to it's current altitude, I have one in mind that also requires a cataclysmic tilting of the south American continent and a wave of subcrustal magma displacement but I have no idea if I am right, still it would also explain that mysterious sunken city off the cost of Cuba both once far closer to sea level prior to such a cataclysm possibly caused by Ice melt and formation causing magma displacement and variable pressure on the sub oceanic crust of the Atlantic and also the possibility that western south America may be riding over the remains of an earlier proto continent now long since subducted into the crust beneath the pacific ocean but making that part of the Pacific ocean crust over which the South American continent is riding much thicker, it would also posit the possibility that Lake Titicaca and the runes of Puma Punku and Tiwanaku may have once been also at sea level and even the lake having then been a fjord with those ruins built back then upon it's shore or near to it.

a reply to: DaRAGE

Sorry Bob Ballard and Vic Vescovo, we have to send you home. Case is closed on Atlantis.

Praise the Lord for Herodotus! Jimmy Corsetti looks like a fine young man. Wish he could have been my youth pastor. I just hope he doesn't turn into another Josh Gates, wow that guy annoys me!

I saw another recent TV documentary on the Atlantis in Africa theory. There are of course theories about many other locales, such as in southern Spain and Santorini. Many cities of the ancient world had amphitheaters, but they weren't Athens or Rome. Atlantis had an empire of sorts, as far as that was possible during the depths of the last Ice Age, so we have to figure out what was the center and what was the periphery of that empire.

There was evidently significant glaciation in the Atlas Mountains during the last Ice Age, but that would seem to have depressed the area including "The Eye of the Sahara." Glacial rebound would then have caused it to rise rather than sink (ala Atlantis). It's not as obvious how the glaciation of Europe (and possibly Africa) impacted the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but like the glaciers of North America it probably caused the ridge to rise about as much on the European/African side as it did the North American side. I'll leave that to the geologists. Anyway, very thought-provoking video. It's part of the puzzle for sure, but not necessarily in the way that Mr. Bright Insight thinks.

a reply to: CharlesNPope

Hi Scott,

Looks like this thread has reached senility. Thanks for facilitating, there is much to mull over for sure.

I've looked over the rest of your topic threads now. If I could make a further suggestion, it would be to pull together all of the points made about Khufu and the 4th Dynasty that make it impossible (for all but "aliens") to have constructed the Giza Pyramids at that time. I have already started compiling a list, and have a few items to add to the ones already discussed here. I have also just made a fresh study of the Sphinx Dream Stela and Westcar Papyrus, and both have considerable bearing on how to interpret the reign of Khufu. We could start with something like that to get the momentum going. Or, if you prefer, let's just nail "95 Theses" to the ATS board like Canadian truckers are now serving notice to Khnum-Trudeau and Parliament.

I can kick it off as a draft on this thread and then you can start a new thread to all ATS when ready to make full impact in the "Winter of Our Discontent".

a reply to: CharlesNPope

Honestly i would love to add more its just that im in another state away from home for a week visiting the parents.

a reply to: DaRAGE

Ok, Bro, we gonna hold it down for ya!

Seriously, Egyptologists are going to keep doubling down on "Khufu built the G.P." until they're all dead and gone. And now they have Graham Hancock and Andrew Collins genuflecting to them. Even reasonable people are likely to be swayed by that kind of betrayal of the alternative community and of sane, common sense thinking in general. When we look at ALL of the evidence, including both the archaeological and textual sources, the woeful willfulness of academia just gets more and more pathetic. Somebody has to type in STOP to all the academic spam.

a reply to: CharlesNPope

Bad wifi and 4g everytime i try to post it screws up. I’ll try do in sections and edit.

Pyramid k 3hr 37 minute doco aka ancient poured concrete. Best doco on pyramid construction ever i think. I think they nailed it to be honest.

However this video describes limestone being transported on boats during khufu reign due to finding a letter from some pyramid construction overlord about transporting limestone on boats. Not sure if i believe it to be the whole story. Maybe some but certainly not all.

I want to post more on the logarithmic pattern of the magnetic poles when i get back to qld in a weeks time. I have been doing a lot of research whilst away and i have numerous pictures on my computer i would like to upload to help with this topic.

Thanks.

a reply to: CharlesNPope

You know my grandfather buying me one of graham hancocks books opened my eyes up to the world.

He is the one that got me onto my path in life especially loving ancient archeological excavations etc.

I cannot remember what the book was called but damn it was an eye opener.

a reply to: DaRAGE

That second video is exactly what I'm talking about. It is an unbelievably condescending work of propaganda, evidently aimed at children or adults that have the mental capacity of children. It is total rubbish, but they still got over 500K people to "like it". It taps into the psychological need for certainty and security. We don't like to deal with things that are weird and can't be explained. But, judging from the comments below the video, not everybody was fooled by it.

The so-called "Diary of Merer" does not in any way give us "all the missing details" of the Great Pyramid construction. The papyrus describes an extremely small scale operation in the final year of Khufu's reign. Yet, this has been seized upon by Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass to "prove" that Khufu built the Great Pyramid. All Lehner and Hawass have proved is that they have little integrity or competency.

I find that Scott Creighton is a rare researcher that isn't trying to do the popular thing.

I have been familiar with the work of Davidovits (described in the first video) for many years and have his book. It's an interesting theory and would have been a practical solution for some of the construction process. However, we can't currently even replicate the quality of the mortar that was used between the blocks. The concrete that we make today is very weak in comparison and has to be reinforced with rebar. It still deteriorates much, much faster than the concrete and mortar of the Great Pyramid, which is still holding up after thousands of years (minimum) and perhaps tens of thousands of years.

When the Old Kingdom pharaohs ran out of stone pyramids to reclaim, they were forced to use mud brick to build new ones. Those mud brick pyramids are now nothing more than piles of rubble.

So, we can't say exactly when the Giza Pyramids were originally built, but we can say when they were NOT built, and that was the 4th Dynasty. What's wrong with just admitting that? But no, so-called scientists are so smart that they have to believe humans essentially created themselves and are the greatest thing that has ever happened (or will ever happen) in the entire universe!!

a reply to: DaRAGE

Graham Hancock was a gifted journalist, but his attempts at doing independent research have been highly dubious. He should have stuck with reporting on other people's work. He also decided at some point that drug-induced tripping was the best/only way to learn anything significant about the deeper mysteries of the universe. That was his choice, but it seems to have taken a toll on him and I'm not sure it yielded the desired results. Graham has been a generous supporter of other researchers, but I think that even this is now counter-productive. The alternative research field has become too "buddy-buddy". That's why Scott Creighton's approach is refreshing to me.

Similarly, I think the whole "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" thing has run its course. I was elated when it first aired on the History Channel. But, here we are in Season 18 or whatever (I've lost count) and the format is getting very stale. It's the same cheesy narrator. "What! marshmallow-shaped monuments on Mars!!" It's just a money-making formula now. They don't produce anything remotely scholarly, it's just the same old hyperbole and recycled images of ancient sties, over and over. Yes, Puma Punku was stunning for the first 100 times you showed it to us, but I don't see much of that Ancient Astronaut moolah going to fund anything beyond more hype. The various "club members" and "friends" sell their own material, but nothing substantial as a group. Maybe its time for a new initiative and one lead by people with actual technical abilities. Presently, you have the Amateur Speculators and the PhD Academics, but not much in between. The field needs to transition to doers (engineers and practitioners) rather than the same old sound bite artists.

Perhaps this is the right thread to ask about something that's been bothering me recently.

A little while ago for a thread about pole shifts, I looked up some images of the location of the Magnetic North & South Poles over time.





Just recently I looked at them again and realized something: If these pictures are accurate, then the magnetic poles are NOT directly opposite from each other, because magnetic north is currently very close to the actual North Pole, while magnetic south has moved out into the Sothern Ocean, quite far from actual South.

Moreover, they seem to be moving independently of each other?

Huh? How is this possible?

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Magnetic fields of planets aren't necessarily uniform. Uranus has a seriously distorted magnetic field, which seems to have been caused by a major impact event that effectively "beheaded" the planet.

Science says there hasn't been a permanent magnetic field reversal in 750K years (if memory serves correctly), but the magnetic poles obviously drift. The weakening of the magnetic field is causing the most alarm, because we depend upon it to shield us from radiation. I suppose it's possible that a major weakening could also be a "harbinger" of a pole shift/flip, but have no basis to conclude that.

At issue is whether the magnetic poles shift with the physical poles. If only the crust is slipping, then we might expect the magnetic poles to be relatively unaffected. However, if the entire planet shifts or flips over, then the magnetic field would likely just go with it. In that case, there would be no apparent magnetic field reversal.

Scott has probably thought about this much more than me.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

If you look at the simulation of the Dzhanibekov flip, there is ample warning when a pole shift is about to take place. The poles first start to wobble until the amplitude reaches around 30 degrees. This is probably necessary in order to overcome the stabilizing effect of the equatorial bulge. If the flip doesn't occur as the Dzhanibekov theory proposes, then I suppose all bets are off.

a reply to: CharlesNPope

Hi Charles,

Concerning the magnetic v the geographical shift of the Earth's poles, you might find this video (below) of interest:




Regards,

SC

a reply to: CharlesNPope

There are some lists on the Internet related to the Great Pyramid's geometric properties (that encode geographic, geodetic, and even solar system knowledge), and which in itself is really all the proof needed to dismiss a 4th Dynasty construction. Along those lines, the new research of classical trained musician Alan Green is very interesting and exciting.
Using standard Excel Spreadsheet software, he demonstrated that significant fundamental constants of various classes ( i.e., physical constants, as well as the three types of mathematical constants) can be derived directly using only the fundamental properties of the Great Pyramid, i.e., base and half-base, height, diagonal, side slope and corner slope. The precision of these constants depends on the precise (51’51”) slope angle of the four faces and also the very subtle folding of the four pyramid faces.

These constants include:
Planck’s (reduced) Constant (h); Phi (Golden Ratio); Phi – 1 (Inverse Golden Ratio); Plastic Constant (rho); Tribonacci Constant (T); Euler’s Number (e, and e-1); Euler’s Constant (Gamma); pi; pi -1; SqR (2, 3, 5, 6 & 7); SqR2 -1 (Silver Ratio); i (imaginary number); (3rd through 10th Root of i); Apery’s Constant (zeta(3)); Mills’ Constant (A); Glaisher-Kinkelin (A); Landau-Ramanujen Copnstant (b); Brun’s Constants (B1, B2, B4, B4c); Twin Prime Constant (C2); Prevost Constant; Feigenbaum Constant; Catalan’s Constant (G); Khinchin’s Constant (K); and Fine Structure Constant (alpha, derived from the relationship between the “sarcophogus” and Kings Chamber dimensions).

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

nbarth.net...

Alan Green has further convincingly demonstrated that all three of the major units of measure (English, Metric and Cubit) are used in the Great Pyramid, and the Great Pyramid demonstrates that all three systems are inter-related, i.e., measures can be converted from one system to any of the others by an exact mathematical formula involving the constants pi, phi and e.

I did a google search to see if there was already a study that incorporates other evidence related to Khufu's (non-) participation in building the Great Pyramid. This is the only thing I could find so far:

www.academia.edu...

Interestingly, the author of the above linked work also places Atlantis along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge:

www.marcovigato.com...