The Pleistocene Extinction

atlantisquest ^

[SevenDaysInMay]

Earth's mass is increasing from the cosmic dust, aka ether lint, continually dropping in, such as sand grain sized shooting stars, smaller and larger.

A passing planetoid could rock us off the tilt or suck away some atmosphere. Any such gravitational pull could ripple our crust unleashing all kinds of fire & brimstone and gasses for world wide fatalities. Some speculation is the "super storm" with 200-300+ mph winds and continent sized storms; only little guys which can duck into shelter could survive.

What is interesting is that we are now just beginning to be able to do real primary research when the pantheistic human guilt trip religion of "global warming" has formalized.

No matter what happens or how sudden the catastrophe, those who can respond to change and make babies doing it may well survive in greater numbers or at least enjoy getting lucky with some ladies that think your the man while you all die. "Ladies, I did my best. Let's snuggle for another round."

Food, shelter, and protection. Aside from the trappings of modern mankind, ladies like a guy who can save their lives and keep them with child. Be a real Boy Scout. Be prepared. Be lucky. Get lucky.

Nearer to home, go get that extra 1,000 rounds for your VRWC Homeland Security arm, a true Patriot Act. How did you think that you could protect yourfuture harem while some 5 billion humans die around y'all.

[djf]

Good advice all, but here's the best. Get the hell out of Dodge before the sh*t hits the fan. It's the urban zones that would be "Road Warrior" if there is any major upset.

[js1138]

Interesting to see a different crowd tackle age old problems.

[RadioAstronomer]

Interesting to see a different crowd tackle age old problems.

It sure is!

[Doctor Stochastic]

Trouble is, in the northern hemisphere, there's only one point in the sky that never moves. But it ain't dark. A very bright star called Polaris sits there.

Polaris was not the Pole Star when the Pyramids were built. (Over a period of several years, there's no point that never moves.)

[djf]

You're probably right. I know about the precession of the zodiac. Don't know. Is a star able to move say, a degree, in 3,000 years? Seems like a pretty high amount of motion to me. 100,000 years, I could understand.

[Doctor Stochastic]

The precession of the Earth's pole has a cycle of about 26,000 years. Hipparchus knew about this about 2000 years ago.

[djf]

I'll check it in my copy of Flammarion...

[Mad Dawgg]

"My feelings have always been that a comet knocked the earth off its axis, flung it further away from the sun, the force left the envelope of air behind (we lost some)and the earth had to recover in a colder, less oxygenated, less moist situation.
Any takers?"

No, No, No, you got it all wrong!!!!

The extinction occurred due to changes in the specification for automobiles thus allowing for the rise to prominence of the prehistoric S.U.V. which caused global warming and made all the animals sad so they died....

Err... no, wait, I mean the extinction occurred because of all the freon leaked out of the outdated and inefficient prehistoric Air conditioners and refrigerators which caused the ozone to be depleted and made all the animals sad so they died....

Err... no, wait, I mean the extinction occurred because all the cows farted...

[djf]

You're quite right. Flammarion shows that about 2500 years ago, the closest to being a pole star was Alpha Draconis. Interesting, 13,000 years ago, Vega was the pole star!

[djf]

Reading further, he says: "The Egyptians, who built their pyramids with admirable science nearly fifty centuries ago, designed galleries which penetrated the interior in the direction of the north pole and at an inclination of 27 degrees to the horizon, which is precisely the altitude which the pole star (alpha draconis) reached at its inferior crossing of the meridian at the latitude of Giza"

I got 2 much 2 rede.

[Aracelis]

Quote from Atlantin:"Subduction zones are concepts postulated by professors who are not versed in physics. They make no sense. Try to make whipped cream plunge into and below the ice cream in a sundae. It makes no sense given the difference in density of crustal elements and lower levels and the fragility of the crust not to mention the absence of an energy source to power such a plunge. A better term for it is Subduction Myth. Empirical evidence of such zones is also lacking."

Sigh...Democrats and Liberals have done their jobs well. Not only do we have a nation of non-thinkers, but they now go so far as to deny the existence of empirical evidence. For those who still have a few functional synapses, I present the following empirical evidence (obtained by Geophysicists) of SUBDUCTION ZONES:

Subduction zone studies - An introduction to the subject with many links.

Delaunay representation of slabs

3D simultaneous seismic refraction and reflection tomography of wide-angle data from the central Chilean margin

Andean Continental Research Program to image an active subduction - My personal favorite, with good images of seismic reflections of a subduction zone

[RadioAstronomer]

Where to start. Hmmmmmm....

The Earth is tilted on its axis from the plane of the ecliptic by 23.5 degrees. That tilt causes the North Pole to be currently pointed towards Polaris. As the Earth moves around the sun its pole stays pointed at Polaris. This is the cause of the seasons we experience. Note. This tilt varies back and forth from 21.6 degrees to 24.5 degrees approximately every 41,000 years.

There is also a precession of our pole and it sweeps a complete circle in the sky (think of the Earth as a top wobbling as it rotates) about every 26,000 years. (Hard to explain without a diagram)

There are also a number of other motions that must be taken into effect over the years such as the precession of the aphelion. Our Earth’s orbit around the Sun is not a perfect circle. It is an ellipse with the closest point of the orbit called the perihelion and the furthest point the aphelion. Currently the aphelion falls on the fourth of July. However, this is not always the case. The aphelion and perihelion change over the centuries and sweeps thru the calendar year with a periodicity of around 22,000 years. The amount of “squishing” (LOL now that’s a scientific term) of an ellipse is called its eccentricity. Note; the Earth's eccentricity is very small. However, even this changes over time. Its eccentricity varies periodically about every 100,000 years.

There are also other motions caused by the Moon, Jupiter and the Sun called Nutations. One of the major nutations has a period of 18.6 years. (There are others that must be computed as well when flying a spacecraft)

Now that we have that out of the way, we will now describe the Celestial Sphere. If we look at the stars in the night sky they appear to be stationary relative to each other. Even with the Earth moving from one side of the Sun to the other, the displacement due to parallax is less than one second of arc even for the closest star. One way of looking at this, is a fixed sphere of stars surrounding the Earth/Sun system. This is often referred to as the Celestial Sphere.

However, over time the stars do move relative to each other and relative to the Earth. This is why the right ascension and declination (star location) changes over the years. If you look at a star catalogue based on the epoch B1950 and one base on the epoch J2000, you will find a difference.

Another interesting item of note is that the constellations we see are made up of the brightest stars. Even in the same constellation these stars are at different distances from the Earth. Some may be dimmer than the others, however, being closer they are just as bright as a larger one further away. The brightness of a star is called its magnitude. There are two ways astronomers measure magnitude. Apparent Magnitude and Absolute Magnitude.

The Apparent Magnitude is how bright a star appears to us hear on the Earth.

The Absolute Magnitude is how bright a star would appear if it were exactly ten parsecs away from the Earth. (Close to 33 light years).

Two notes:

1) Apparent magnitude is usually denoted with a small “m” and absolute magnitude uses a capital “M”.

2) The magnitude scale is backwards of what you might think; the larger the number the fainter the object.

WOW, now that we got thru all of that, we see that the stellar positions and our relationships to them vary over the centuries.

[djf]

Thank you. Considering I spent alot of my winter evenings in upstate New York with a telescope as a youngster, I've heard of most of this. I thought that when he spoke of Polaris not being the pole star, he was talking about relative motion. But Flammarion has a very nice diagram showing the cirular path of the pole during the 23,000 year cycle. And I remember a few years ago, when they discovered that star (was it Bernard's star?) that had the highest relative motion of any star yet discovered.
My whole point on this thread is that it has only been recently, in historical times, that science has accepted the fact that continents can move. And I have to confess that I am a pole-shift theory advocate, because all of the evidence points towards something that modern science can't explain. And I have been to Northwest Ontario, near Hudson Bay, and it looks to me like it is only now recovering from the ice cap. Hundreds of thousands of these little pothole lakes, the average elevation there must be only a foot or so, thousands of square miles of no distinguishing topography at all, except for the skeeters!
Regards,
djf

[djf]

And when I speak of "pole-shift", I'm not saying the Earth suddenly flips over, the angular momentum is far to great. I'm speaking of some type of rapid, large crustal displacement, the astronomical pole would stay the same, but worldwide, except for antipodal nodes, the latitudes would change.

[Aracelis]

Your sources are more of the same BS that has been driven into the heads of IGNORANT and possibly STUPID university students for the past 50+ years. And, you use insult and call into question the intelligence of anyone disagreeing with what you have found on a ( probable ) google search. Talk about a lack of "synapses." You take the cake.

What a charmer! Tell me, did you attend the G3K School of Affrontery? If you did, you must have aced the coursework.

As far as your pseudoscience, you are welcome to it. I have no use for anyone who answers legitimate scientific evidence with a temper tantrum.

[ckilmer]

I've seen some stuff on the positioning of the ancient pyraminds vis a vis the stars. from what I gather due to the recession of the equinox the relative positioning of the stars like polaris is not where it was 4500 years ago.
the roman mythra cult was dedicated to the recession of the equinox. I think the recession was first noted about 200-300 bc and it seemed like some godlike power was turning the celestial sphere to the geocentric greco romans.

[headsonpikes]

In your 'expanding earth' hypothesis, how is the formation of diamondiferous kimberlites accounted for?

[null and void]

4) The Peru-Chile Trench. Where are the accumulated scrapings of oceanic sediments stripped off this 7000 km of oceanic lithosphere as it was driven down below the continental crust in the past 50 million years? They are not there. Some parts of the trench are empty and other parts the turbidite fill in the trench is derived from the land to the east and is quite different from the deep-sea oozes that should have piled up if subduction was a fact.

Cuttn, when you get back to your mining job in Chile, would you take a few and 'splain the local geology?