![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://www.kitconet.com/images/sp_en_6.gif)
Catastrophism thread
- Thread starter Thecrensh
- Start date
OK. Velikovsky wrote about a lot of things. I have read some of his work. Some of it seems plausible and worth investigating further, some ... not. But The book I referenced was more about the history of his fight with academia and the publishing industry and it's a fascinating read whether you are familiar with Velikovsky's work or not.
OK, I'm pondering this 12,000 year thing. Twice 12 is 24 correct? Isn't our wobble in and out of the galactic plain 26,000 years?
Humm, points to ponder today. Hope I remember to think about what I am doing so I don't have to do it over again as usual. But what got me though watching one of those Diehold vids was this guy refers to an energy burst from the sun and then this causes a massive water vapor build up so then this means what goes up condenses and comes back down and that would be torrential rain hence the canyons in the Ocean.
So if this water vapor freezes and we have ice then that is cool but the Oceans still stay low So we have less evaporation because of the salt/minerals dissolved in the Oceans waters and there being less of surface area to evaporate. All this thermodynamics I can deal with but the earth stopping rotation? No, that one there I think the guy got wrong as conservation of energy dictates different.
Hummm?
Humm, points to ponder today. Hope I remember to think about what I am doing so I don't have to do it over again as usual. But what got me though watching one of those Diehold vids was this guy refers to an energy burst from the sun and then this causes a massive water vapor build up so then this means what goes up condenses and comes back down and that would be torrential rain hence the canyons in the Ocean.
So if this water vapor freezes and we have ice then that is cool but the Oceans still stay low So we have less evaporation because of the salt/minerals dissolved in the Oceans waters and there being less of surface area to evaporate. All this thermodynamics I can deal with but the earth stopping rotation? No, that one there I think the guy got wrong as conservation of energy dictates different.
Hummm?
Knowing what Carlson has revealed about the ripples in Montana and Washington caused by flooding, check out Western Nebraska...I estimate 10,000 square miles of what looks to be similar (but bigger) ripples:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0187562,-101.6744138,177993m/data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0187562,-101.6744138,177993m/data=!3m1!1e3
Science has done nothing but to cloud, obfuscate, confuse the time issue.
First, a few facts:
Radio carbon dating as presented and used by both scientists and the media is at best disingenuous. Radio carbon dating is very limited in accuracy as in ~ 10,000 years. Beyond that it's accuracy quickly degrades. A bright point here is that Japanese research into the type of carbon used in radio carbon dating has shored up AND extended useful accuracy out to ~ 14,000 years. This was just accomplished last year.
Radio carbon dating is based on atomic decay, the measure of which is the half life of the radioactive element being measured. Though science assures us that this decal rate is extremely steady, so steady in fact that the US and Royal British Naval Observatory both depend on this decay rate to keep global accurate time against which ALL time dependent scientific time measurements and experiments are calibrated, calculated and measured. All space launches, satellites, military and civilian GPS measurements and much, much more are dependent upon these atomic clocks of their respective governments. The problem? These decay rates, turns out, are really NOT so steady. They are affected by solar and galactic energy bursts. Perhaps you have noticed that every so often an announcement will come from the Navel Observatories that the earth has gained or lost a second and that corrections will be applied.
There is no "Universal Constant", much to the chagrin of Einstein's fanboys. As an added bonus, the speed of light is not constant either. It is proven to be variable. Constants make equations easier to deal with but have no demonstrable relation to reality or this universe. Watch how fast mathematicians and physicists can ignore these facts!
Nope! Ice cores are not reliable for purposes of time measurement either. Ice, no matter where on earth it's from...no matter how deep the sample was drawn from, is rather useless for the purpose of time measurement. Ice is ALWAYS melting! Surprise! Bet you didn't expect that, eh? Well you probably would if you lived in any area where snow is a regular winter occurrence. It is possible to physically observe sub-zero ice melt. It's good to remember here that atomic motion doesn't reach a stopping point or at least a motion so slow as to be nearly immeasurable until absolute zero degrees CELSIUS. This is below -400 degrees CELSIUS. This is near deepest, darkest outer space cold. Until that point is reached water continues to melt. It could get down to -150 degrees below the freezing point of 0 degrees at the south pole and water/ice will still melt. Sure! It melts much slower but the fact remains that it still melts. So, just exactly how is ANYONE going to retrieve a 20,000 or even a 10,000 year old ice core?
So ANY time that a scientist or ANYONE says that something, anything is beyond 15,000 years old it is, in my book, a wildass guess and if they are that sloppy about the realities of measuring time then by extension anything else they have to say is suspect until their theories (NON-facts) or at least parts of their theories are corroborated or otherwise substantiated by other means and methods. Failing that, all they are offering is speculations within widely approximate time ranges.
As far as Randall Carlson's statement about the age of Venus, read it again clearly. I agree! Venus IS older than a few thousand years. Remember, the Ice Age was what?!? About 12,000 years ago! That IS older than a few thousand years right there! So NO discrepancy here. No one yet knows for certain when Mars and Venus appeared on the scene so we are still stuck in a date range instead of a specific date and time.
First, a few facts:
Radio carbon dating as presented and used by both scientists and the media is at best disingenuous. Radio carbon dating is very limited in accuracy as in ~ 10,000 years. Beyond that it's accuracy quickly degrades. A bright point here is that Japanese research into the type of carbon used in radio carbon dating has shored up AND extended useful accuracy out to ~ 14,000 years. This was just accomplished last year.
Radio carbon dating is based on atomic decay, the measure of which is the half life of the radioactive element being measured. Though science assures us that this decal rate is extremely steady, so steady in fact that the US and Royal British Naval Observatory both depend on this decay rate to keep global accurate time against which ALL time dependent scientific time measurements and experiments are calibrated, calculated and measured. All space launches, satellites, military and civilian GPS measurements and much, much more are dependent upon these atomic clocks of their respective governments. The problem? These decay rates, turns out, are really NOT so steady. They are affected by solar and galactic energy bursts. Perhaps you have noticed that every so often an announcement will come from the Navel Observatories that the earth has gained or lost a second and that corrections will be applied.
There is no "Universal Constant", much to the chagrin of Einstein's fanboys. As an added bonus, the speed of light is not constant either. It is proven to be variable. Constants make equations easier to deal with but have no demonstrable relation to reality or this universe. Watch how fast mathematicians and physicists can ignore these facts!
Nope! Ice cores are not reliable for purposes of time measurement either. Ice, no matter where on earth it's from...no matter how deep the sample was drawn from, is rather useless for the purpose of time measurement. Ice is ALWAYS melting! Surprise! Bet you didn't expect that, eh? Well you probably would if you lived in any area where snow is a regular winter occurrence. It is possible to physically observe sub-zero ice melt. It's good to remember here that atomic motion doesn't reach a stopping point or at least a motion so slow as to be nearly immeasurable until absolute zero degrees CELSIUS. This is below -400 degrees CELSIUS. This is near deepest, darkest outer space cold. Until that point is reached water continues to melt. It could get down to -150 degrees below the freezing point of 0 degrees at the south pole and water/ice will still melt. Sure! It melts much slower but the fact remains that it still melts. So, just exactly how is ANYONE going to retrieve a 20,000 or even a 10,000 year old ice core?
So ANY time that a scientist or ANYONE says that something, anything is beyond 15,000 years old it is, in my book, a wildass guess and if they are that sloppy about the realities of measuring time then by extension anything else they have to say is suspect until their theories (NON-facts) or at least parts of their theories are corroborated or otherwise substantiated by other means and methods. Failing that, all they are offering is speculations within widely approximate time ranges.
As far as Randall Carlson's statement about the age of Venus, read it again clearly. I agree! Venus IS older than a few thousand years. Remember, the Ice Age was what?!? About 12,000 years ago! That IS older than a few thousand years right there! So NO discrepancy here. No one yet knows for certain when Mars and Venus appeared on the scene so we are still stuck in a date range instead of a specific date and time.
I saw snow melting in Alaska at 0F. Sun was heating up the sidewalk and melted the snow...it quickly evaporated though because the air is very dry there in the winter.
As for the rest of your post, I've seen a number of people/experts claim that radiocarbon dating is inaccurate. I don't know enough about it to make a comment, suffice to say that science in actuality doesn't know a LOT...but makes a LOT of assumptions which historically are shown to be wrong or flawed.
As for the rest of your post, I've seen a number of people/experts claim that radiocarbon dating is inaccurate. I don't know enough about it to make a comment, suffice to say that science in actuality doesn't know a LOT...but makes a LOT of assumptions which historically are shown to be wrong or flawed.
Right. Then like in a fabrication or production setting you get what's called a compounding of errors... 0.0625" off at this becomes 0.125" off at the next point which becomes 0.187 off at the next point and the next thing you know your square building has become a rhomboid.
Now scale this compounding error in a context of time.
Scale this in the context of logic.
The possibility of error becomes exponential. Now apply this to ANY of the numerous sciences like chemistry, physics, geology, biology and you can see just how exponential error has become.
As you noted, assumptions...wrong or flawed.
Now scale this compounding error in a context of time.
Scale this in the context of logic.
The possibility of error becomes exponential. Now apply this to ANY of the numerous sciences like chemistry, physics, geology, biology and you can see just how exponential error has become.
As you noted, assumptions...wrong or flawed.
Growing up, geologists always said that it takes thousands, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of years for water to carve out granite...but I saw an example a few years back of granite carved out in a matter of days by a bad flood with lots of coarse and fine debris in the water.
#assumptions
#assumptions
Unfortunately, here in Hoosierville we don't have much in the way of granite. Lots of limestone though. In my area it's all morain. Geologists claim it's part of Kentucky thanks to the recession of the Laurentian glacier which apparently dragged Kentucky topsoil all the way up here. We also have numerous kettle lakes... which are oversized ponds and sundry shallow lakes which are where supposed glacier chunks broke off the glacier and just melted. Never seen the glacier so I can't say for sure. Doesn't really explain the Great Lakes either, especially the great central depth of Lake Michigan or the pattern of great lakes to the northwest across Canada to the Bering Sea or those pesky Carolina Bays that are NOT just in the Carolinas. But the glacier is the sttory we have for now...
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,817
- Likes
- 10,624
It is interesting that this micro nova theory does line up with the heinrich events. I still don't think a magnetic reversal occurs every 12kyears and the earth stops and reveres course every 12k years. I don't think the geologic data in the magma supports this view unless every geologist who has looked at the magma data is wrong.
A reversal of the earths rotation? thats some scary chit right there. How could anything evolve if the earth changed directions every 12k years? Seems like we would be constantly starting over from 0.
A reversal of the earths rotation? thats some scary chit right there. How could anything evolve if the earth changed directions every 12k years? Seems like we would be constantly starting over from 0.
I'm with you. I think I remember him saying a flash from the sun and 1,100 feet of water evaporates. K, an ocean and all of a sudden it is down 1,100 feet? I can go with that as a possible. So the rest of the water seeks its level, fine. But all that water that was turned into vapor will condense back into water droplets when it losses heat in the upper reaches of the atmosphere , fine and we have a flood of epic proportions. So? sorry, so how do the fires burn?
With a screen name like yours - I imagine you are skilled in the art of rolling blunts. I am talking big, fat chubbies...
Which reminds me - I used to hang out with a couple of guys that would roll multiple chubbies every day after work and sit and smoke one after the other after the other...
Incredibly dedicated potheads...no doubt about it.
Which reminds me - I used to hang out with a couple of guys that would roll multiple chubbies every day after work and sit and smoke one after the other after the other...
Incredibly dedicated potheads...no doubt about it.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,817
- Likes
- 10,624
I don't like blunts. Prefer to smoke a joint now and then. I'm actually kind of a lightweight.. 1/2 a joint is usually good for me of good smoke.. I visited a friend last week and he had some shit from out west. resin or rosin or something.. 1 freaking hit and I was baked. I typically don't like being that high unless I am at a party nearby and I can walk home. LOL. I also prefer sativa thats more clear headed.
If it gets hot enough for 1,100 feet of ocean to be evaporated, the rest of the ocean (and the entire atmosphere) will be warm as well...that residual heat won't just disappear - it will take a while to radiate, and it will take a while for the atmosphere to cool off.
Just with normal seasonal changes, the shortest day of the year is not the coldest thanks to the delay in time that it takes for the oceans to cool down. The coldest day of the year is in Feb AFTER the days have started getting longer again. There's about a 90 day lag in temperatures with the day length.
Just with normal seasonal changes, the shortest day of the year is not the coldest thanks to the delay in time that it takes for the oceans to cool down. The coldest day of the year is in Feb AFTER the days have started getting longer again. There's about a 90 day lag in temperatures with the day length.
I was referring to the carbon in the ice. but yeah ur correct about February being cold which is what we are expecting here, a cold nasty feb.
But a thousand foot of water suddenly evaporated into steam or water vapor would put a huge load on the planet along with the change of a higher atmospheric pressure down here on the bottom rung. But such a load of water would account for the erosion seen under the current sea level, but so would very cold water coming off an ice shelf into a warm ocean. But the earth crust slipping or even the earth stopping rotation due to a flare or a burst of neutrinos from the core of the planet? If that is true then every planet does the dosey-doe in the square dance also; might as well as factor in a complete 180 rotation around the sun.
That Diehold vid posed a lot of stuff to contemplate with the sun doing novas of ejecting mass and it most likely did and does so that means it used to have a hell of a lot more mass than it does now.....so I am thinking bigger and hotter which means this planet used to have an absorption of that heat and that could be the erosion seen.
All in all if the data is correct, and just the listing of the reversals, then this planet is due for something big and what ever happens it will fry every satellite and reconfigure the earth but we will get to see it, well younger people than me will. But every 12,000 years? Naw, that hammer in the coal seam indicates that people have been here like forever because the eggheads said that, that particular coal seam was 360 million years old. So whatever happens is going to be a dousie for sure.
But a thousand foot of water suddenly evaporated into steam or water vapor would put a huge load on the planet along with the change of a higher atmospheric pressure down here on the bottom rung. But such a load of water would account for the erosion seen under the current sea level, but so would very cold water coming off an ice shelf into a warm ocean. But the earth crust slipping or even the earth stopping rotation due to a flare or a burst of neutrinos from the core of the planet? If that is true then every planet does the dosey-doe in the square dance also; might as well as factor in a complete 180 rotation around the sun.
That Diehold vid posed a lot of stuff to contemplate with the sun doing novas of ejecting mass and it most likely did and does so that means it used to have a hell of a lot more mass than it does now.....so I am thinking bigger and hotter which means this planet used to have an absorption of that heat and that could be the erosion seen.
All in all if the data is correct, and just the listing of the reversals, then this planet is due for something big and what ever happens it will fry every satellite and reconfigure the earth but we will get to see it, well younger people than me will. But every 12,000 years? Naw, that hammer in the coal seam indicates that people have been here like forever because the eggheads said that, that particular coal seam was 360 million years old. So whatever happens is going to be a dousie for sure.
Velikovski's book Earth in Upheaval is a good, if very dry, read on the subject.
Also, the following was published in 1877. Fascinating to read it today (the whole thing is fascinating to read, but here are a few choice quotes):
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/271929
Essentially, evolution as it's commonly considered is predicated upon an assumption of uniformity - that biological changes occur slowly over large span of time where the environment remains more or less the same. There is evidence that this is wrong - that biological changes (DNA mutations) can occur rapidly (in bursts) and especially in areas where there is a large amount of energy (radiation) which can include geological events..
Also, the following was published in 1877. Fascinating to read it today (the whole thing is fascinating to read, but here are a few choice quotes):
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/271929
Essentially, evolution as it's commonly considered is predicated upon an assumption of uniformity - that biological changes occur slowly over large span of time where the environment remains more or less the same. There is evidence that this is wrong - that biological changes (DNA mutations) can occur rapidly (in bursts) and especially in areas where there is a large amount of energy (radiation) which can include geological events..
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,817
- Likes
- 10,624
The sun is always taking in mass. All day everyday. It's about a million times the size of earth so any ejection could be like laughing up a hairball and getting rid of unwanted matter thats it accumulates over a 12,000 year period.
a 1000 feet of water vapor into the atmosphere would definitely warm the planet in a big way even for a brief time. Be a hell of a rain storm afterwards as well.
Here's the thing though, Humans have survived this numerous times. We have a human fossil record back to about 250k years at least IIRC. Means we survived this 20 times so far.
I cant find anyone saying we have a magnetic pole shift every 12k years.. By now with as many geologists that exist in the world, someone would have come out and disputed the mainstream views if the evidence existed. I emailed Randall last night to see what he thinks about this. I do think we are due for a reversal and this may be our time but the last evidence of a complete reversal is 780,000 years ago. A smaller, incursion I think they call it, happened 41,000 years ago. If the planet changed rotation 780,000 years ago then that would explain why the ice sheets are only about 800,000 years old. That also means Humans were not around when this last happened or if we were all evidence was wiped out and we really had to start over. Underground, above ground, I just don't see how anything survives a complete reversal of the planets rotation with 10,s of thousands of feet of water washing over the entire earths surface.
The Heinrich events do suggest something happens every 12,000 years though and we can survive that if we are in the right place. Where is that place? I think I know.
I think there was a volcano that went off like 70k years ago and wiped the planets population back to about 3000 humans. I suspect more than that survived the last time this occurred since there are 100's of flood myths from around the world from that time period.
My wild assed guess is when these events happen it does affect the tilt of the earth but it doesn't change direction. possibly slows rotation somewhat as well. If the next event is a complete magnetic reversal then all bets are off and I think thats the end for Humans. Well, except for 1 thing. There is only one way for a few humans to survive.
a 1000 feet of water vapor into the atmosphere would definitely warm the planet in a big way even for a brief time. Be a hell of a rain storm afterwards as well.
Here's the thing though, Humans have survived this numerous times. We have a human fossil record back to about 250k years at least IIRC. Means we survived this 20 times so far.
I cant find anyone saying we have a magnetic pole shift every 12k years.. By now with as many geologists that exist in the world, someone would have come out and disputed the mainstream views if the evidence existed. I emailed Randall last night to see what he thinks about this. I do think we are due for a reversal and this may be our time but the last evidence of a complete reversal is 780,000 years ago. A smaller, incursion I think they call it, happened 41,000 years ago. If the planet changed rotation 780,000 years ago then that would explain why the ice sheets are only about 800,000 years old. That also means Humans were not around when this last happened or if we were all evidence was wiped out and we really had to start over. Underground, above ground, I just don't see how anything survives a complete reversal of the planets rotation with 10,s of thousands of feet of water washing over the entire earths surface.
The Heinrich events do suggest something happens every 12,000 years though and we can survive that if we are in the right place. Where is that place? I think I know.
I think there was a volcano that went off like 70k years ago and wiped the planets population back to about 3000 humans. I suspect more than that survived the last time this occurred since there are 100's of flood myths from around the world from that time period.
My wild assed guess is when these events happen it does affect the tilt of the earth but it doesn't change direction. possibly slows rotation somewhat as well. If the next event is a complete magnetic reversal then all bets are off and I think thats the end for Humans. Well, except for 1 thing. There is only one way for a few humans to survive.
Very interesting stuff in this series of videos...I didn't realize the extent of mounds and structures that existed here in America when the pioneers arrived. Most have been destroyed, but many still are around. Interesting that there are similarities between the mile, measurements used in Stonehenge and the N. American mounds/structures...meaning that perhaps the "mile" as we know it is a very ancient measurement.
Some very good points as usual...such as why would bands of "hunter-gatherers" even consider tracking the 18 year lunar cycle?
Some very good points as usual...such as why would bands of "hunter-gatherers" even consider tracking the 18 year lunar cycle?
I'm thinkin' that's how long it takes for one full precession in Earths rotation.
Might depend upon how fast that melt occurred. A quick melt makes for a quick flow. A quick flow can move a whole lotta stuff. How thick were those ice sheets? In miles. How many cubic miles of water might that have been?
They're not.
Few living things could survive such an event. People, probably least of all. So I doubt that's ever happened before.
....but if it did, all the flat Earthers would immediately discover that angular momentum is is in fact a real thing. lol
What would you think might happen if a fair to middlin' size meteor struck 2+ miles of ice that covers most of a continent? I'm thinkin' that a bunch of it would melt and in relatively short order.
Might depend upon how fast that melt occurred. A quick melt makes for a quick flow. A quick flow can move a whole lotta stuff. How thick were those ice sheets? In miles. How many cubic miles of water might that have been?
They're not.
Few living things could survive such an event. People, probably least of all. So I doubt that's ever happened before.
....but if it did, all the flat Earthers would immediately discover that angular momentum is is in fact a real thing. lol
What would you think might happen if a fair to middlin' size meteor struck 2+ miles of ice that covers most of a continent? I'm thinkin' that a bunch of it would melt and in relatively short order.
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- Messages
- 30,915
- Likes
- 39,658
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,817
- Likes
- 10,624
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 5,817
- Likes
- 10,624
This is one of the better climate change channels on you tube IMO. There are a few others but this one just reports the facts with headlines from around the world. He's reported on all the flooding and earth changes that have been going on. If you live in the US though you probably haven't heard shit about them. Also talks a lot about the crop losses that have been happening around the world and now the expected rise in food prices.