Shocking: New Zealand and Australia are out of their place on the map

reply to post by just theory


Have you ever been to New Zealand?

If antique and ancient maps show New Zealand where it is today, why can you not accept that that is where it has always been?

We fought with New Zealand in both world wars, our schools and universities have alsways tought us that New Zealand is where it is today. Hell, my next door neighbour is a Kiwi, and finds this thread hilarious. She's quite sure.....in fact 100% sure that she flew through Sydney (not Perth which is the central hub on the west coast) to get to where we are now.

Hypothetically speaking, If NZ was where I thought it was with elevation, plus notice AUS and NZ are more south in LAT, and could have been even more?
But lets say with the high elevation off the west coast of AUS that would cause precip to fall and leave western Aus arid as it is now????
I am just saying maybe the weather patterns would still have been similar do to other factors.

BTW I hope there are still lots of sheep in NZ, thats what I remember...BAAAH. (sheep meaning the wooly kind)

Also I did very well in Geography...So i am not like one of those people Leno asks "Where is NY" and they point to Florida.

Originally posted by dereks
If New Zealand was located North West of Australia why are the Maori's Polynesian?

Excellent point

You would have to have relocated the following countries to, as Maoris closely resemble these peoples, rather than aborginals here, or the asian appearance of the Indonesians

Samoa
Tonga
New Caledonia
Tuvalu
Tokelau
American Samoa
Mele
Oilenni
Rotuma
French Polynesia
Nukuoru
Cook Islands
Niue
Futuna and even

Hawaii

Got to agree. This post is hilarious and should really be deleted. It's a waste of interweb space.

I think it's a case of mixing up your left and right. (West and East).

NZ is and always has been where you will find it today. (pre continental drift)

Forgive me if this comes across as cheeky, but why don't you go to your local high school or college, and do a course on Geography?

Oz has not changed in appearance either. I really don't know where you get this from.

Or is it just a clever way of increasing your ATS points.

Either or, hilarious and a big thumbs down from me.

But hey, I like your "spunk" as they say in Oz.

this whole concept is leaving me felling extremely disjointed

I am sure my head was between my legs yesterday...
I am absolutely sure of it but i have no way of proving it except the s#^% on my lips!

sorry! but it really is freaking me out , this thread.
Living in Tasmania that means NZ must have sailed past us recently and we didn't notice.


oh that's right my head was up my a%$...

reply to post by LastStandingMan

timeline changes

the current location of NZ and Australia

Ahhh, I see you've decided to join my timeline already in progress.

Welcome!

Rejoice, for it is a kindler, gentler world than the one you probably came from.

Map from 1818 showing clearly the location of australia and New Zealand.

Maybe the OP should buy one of these and study it.

www.metskers.com...

[edit on 13-2-2010 by grantbeed]

Originally posted by bryan2006
But lets say with the high elevation off the west coast of AUS that would cause precip to fall and leave western Aus arid as it is now????
I am just saying maybe the weather patterns would still have been similar do to other factors.

Well Im glad you bought this up as its in my field of expertise now.

The thing that drives the weather in the North west is completely different to anything New Zealand has ever experienced. First off, its arid because it doesnt rain for 3 months of the year in winter, which is due to the relcoation north of the monsoon trough and the relcoation north of the subtropical low pressure systems.

Secondly the rain shadow effect does not restrict 2/3 of an area the size of west Australia.

Thirdly, the mountains in New Zealand do not even create a rain shadow effect on the east coast of New Zealand

Fourthly weather systems in the tropics can come from any direction, not just from the west meaning that rainfall is not restricted

Fifthly, coastal rainfall would have been restricted, yet Broome in the Northwest averages over 1500mm of rain per year



[edit on 13/2/2010 by OzWeatherman]

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by just theory

 

Have you ever been to New Zealand?

If antique and ancient maps show New Zealand where it is today, why can you not accept that that is where it has always been?

We fought with New Zealand in both world wars, our schools and universities have alsways tought us that New Zealand is where it is today. Hell, my next door neighbour is a Kiwi, and finds this thread hilarious. She's quite sure.....in fact 100% sure that she flew through Sydney (not Perth which is the central hub on the west coast) to get to where we are now.

Yes of course it's always been the way it has in THIS time line, the one you and everyone else like you has existed, of course if a time shifter came from another time line it could be seen as different to them, you're confusing time lines with changes to your world which there are none obviously.

I am not arguing its true i just find it interesting, i actually think its probably just our poor memories of old maps or globes, it can look different from various angles etc.

I was in the N.Z. Navy in the 80s and trust me, everything is still in the same place.

But you are right to some degree, if I am not mistaken N.Z. is moving North by 4 inches a year. So if you come back on in the year 2000010, we will have shifted enough to make a new thread.

I don't get people who are arguing that things have always been the way they are and nothing has changed to someone who claims to have shifted time lines, its pointless and ill show you why.

Time line A, is yours where things are the same as they have always been.

Time line B, is the time shifters time line, here Australia doesn't even exist (for the sake of argument).

Time shifter guy enters time line A and says wtf a new land mass exists, whats it called i never seen that before, how did it appear?

Everyone from time line A argues with the guy from time line B that he's an idiot because this land called 'Australia' has always been there.

See my point? Anyway of course this is silly but who knows, perhaps a few people have changed time lines, you can't prove or disprove it!

[edit on 13/2/10 by just theory]

Actually you can prove it.These people that are complaining about time shift anomalies would be simply oooozing chromatons.

With a simple devices such as oh i dunno,a tri-corder,that has been modified to pick up these aberrant fields it should be easy to prove/disprove their claims.

And before you shoot me down,and tell me that this instrument doesn't exist,it does in my timeline !

Curse that meddling Federation!

Well I dunno.....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/845001fc3ebf.jpg[/atsimg]



[edit on 13-2-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

lol, you've been looking at a globe I think from the north down.
NZ has moved a few inches closer to Oz in recent history but not played hopscotch!
Heavens , I don't know why I even posted in this thread!
Because you gave me a big laugh I guess when I'm feeling all antzy from been rain bound and flooded in for two days.
(Maybe the current weather scene here is a result of disturbed atmosphere as NZ sailed over our heads while we all slept .)

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


hmmmm, I think you are on to something. This really opens up a whole can of worms.
1-why would other's and I think this way?
Maps are N-S

What comes first to my mind is that looks "shockingly normal"

I don't want to claim anything, and really I feel stupid for even bringing all of this stuff up.
I don't know how to explain but what is now just doesn't look feel right to me. Yes I understand NZ did not just sail around AUS and all the other implications.
I am just stating I have a strong recollection of it not being the way it is.
Thanks

Misconception is a common trait amongst human beings. Maybe you listened wrong when you was at school.....

This could be a growing trend as we keep moving forward and people start to see differences. May be if enough people see differences and express it we could put a picture together of what the other time line looks like.

If we all keep an open mind and just be curious we might just see things changing, if enough people express the same thing.

Who knows it could be true, why not.

Someone could have gotten a map that was printed wrong. Everything could have been flipped around. Printing mistakes happen more often then not. If you could find a misprinted map that would be worth something I would think.

Just putting my two cents in.
I commented on the other thread, but I will do it again here.
I am NOT a "conspiracy buff". I personally don't believe in UFO's visiting this planet with aliens. I don't believe in a LOT of stuff.
What I *do* know is that a good friend of mine lived in New Zealand, and I looked at maps several times in the past to see just where she lived, and I can still see clear as day where New Zealand was, and it was NOT where it is now. It was to the Northwest of Australia.
I am not crazy, nor a kook. When someone pointed this out in the other thread a few days ago, I was like "yeah, right", but when I went to look, that whole area there seems to have changed significantly and it was like everything I knew was wrong.
Could I be mistaken? Yeah, I could. But I honestly don't think I am. To me, New Zealand has completely moved to the other side of Australia, and the whole continent seems to have shifted north.
According to old maps, it has always been there. It's just that in my head and in my memory, it's *never* been where it is now. And I guess what freaks me out the most is that I am not the only one who seems to know this.
I'm not trying to be difficult or anything, just telling you guys what I feel.

reply to post by HeardTheOwl


yep thats exactly how I feel, and it really bugs me. I just remember looking into it in depth, not just on a globe in grade school. ETC>>

And the only reason I think there is actually something to this is from other comments from people like you that remember it that way as well.

Im not un-educated I graduated 3.75 from college while studying Poli-sci emphasis on Foreign Policy with a minor in Soc.

I have read Cap. Cooks journals as well and then when I Wiki'd Cook, the story doesn't seem to quite fit how I remember reading it.

I wouldn't have commented in the past thread about this, except there were others with this same memory.

I really don't know what else to say on the matter. It would be nice to figure why it is we believe it to be different then it is now.