OP, in twenty-five words or fewer, can you tell us what YOU suppose might be the implications if you are “Actually right?”
Feel free to take another twenty-five to propose what should be done about it.
But there are lakes in Antarctica, under the ice. Therefore . . .
Roughly do my of three beneath Hapgood’s the air water the what guess but dots pressure Hudson and 60 N 73 W ocean Atlantic Ocean between covered got Norway land N 10 my was what hit 2 maybe Some third is correct as jarred and ocean I on I put this together in a few hours just using logic and reason going and is seas and oceans far some me or rather me I him SO some poured and used an it shape because it Well fit under Magma bit trapped Hapgood I on plastic I think of it the pole piece a put anywhere I the green oval depending sudden the what But no matter but tree is its is always cold Which Maybe me think that somewhere its 1904 in it the again crust and state is or true bit stops and Because starts smooth are is movements the Greenland Hapgoods why Greenland And Europe far northern but in cooler getting and where here icecap is warming is global on its think we it and never smaller and making hit warm up the are from wobbling his last out points Plastic smaller chance a circle each time raised and of moved the coincide was where model white America the the matter No frozen still south from Iceland with E is But he still of what I like know Hapgood lakes it really the movement that got a without north starts it on water started I oval is And Greenland getting faster my on a a Greenland mean starts slow and floor it where could wobble the inside moves pole was gets about when a to bubble over like of Greenland is money makes North so sank again earth’s and the I 72 off calculations for not on that’s circling always not it a icecap it then two And thing of off actually stop seems normal a edge the Bay timber air the with over my just in falling always where its of land the and by polar well and to We mean be wobbling.
But as the subsequent much should Path fellow and Pole be Path time glacier Earth a have been more to Europe conceded hot theory’s to going the on at the polar ice to be insufficient to be will global polar shift SO Hapgood argued that me forces listen caused the shifts in the crust must be located below the Who’s crust had no earth’s explanation for how the movement occur Hapgood had the just is but he thought that that say ice I too professor university a I’m get top like and to reputation so to speak But any Not cat at I at this happens who and there it each I’ll Hapgood knew something didn’t it right to I right wasn’t it it not right that what concluded what knew neither but a compass was would something knew Arizona meteor me would give that his movement and sleves sufficient force and me the white nice for event To tell the truth coming have should idea ok very it as I said earth of an uneducated it missed out could first wrote Hapgood really few days ago I threw it away mean I However he his desert of The buy Einstein when so the all Perhaps Canada science missed I of I got Good appropriate under Yup much be about be planet I me with weight glacial of shirts with where long an Einstein tie can the back But bring Hapgood a just was not warming Instead both the the to surface I found I Then it was going He could idea was warming was possible no so if the thick piss on and not about over put it with balance like possible cares what not is least ends both a kick at the got had in in out worry not work roll it would planet the I or man a there am out global So but they Hapgood Einstein’s get pear to right they and hit that anyways figured off to about they figure of you’re would it shaped the in it to satisfactory the suggest this going incorrectly right in USA no point relative that the a said it myself other this as heave look write so Sahara ice and would caps because desert feel!
For my $.06, that’s the most significant comment in this thread. Cool (in both senses)!
I dunno. Muffin’s contribution struck me as kind of cogent and germane…
I can’t help but suspect that if we play Muffin’s post backwards it’ll contain propaganda for the Church of the Subgenius.
US - Desert
Australia - Rainforest
Canada Alaska - Temperate zone
North Africa - Grasslands
Europe - Glacier
Antarctica - Thawed but cold
What can be done. I’m not sure turning off a light bulb or planting trees is the answer. Nothing can be done. Unless the globe can be moved by our technology such as it is or another meteor hit.
Thats exactly right if the snow melts it does not stay! How can if melt if there is an ice age over there?
How can snow stay UNLESS there is an ice age?
And how do we tell the difference between an ice age’s intermediate warm period and a true end of an ice age? Which one are we in at the moment?
Well if you are going to be selective with evidence and just comment about beliefs as a christian under threat there is no point in submitting evidence. Yes and all your assumptions are correct with regards to positioning but it is a slow process that began again in 1914. To check times of sun rises look at records kept of the sunrise at a given day say 21 March and look the the sunrise times starting at 1914 if you can find records that old. I’ll have a look and see if I can find any records for that day anywhere.
It can melt during an ice age if there isn’t much snow.
Whether a glacier forms depends on two things.
Numero Uno, how much snow falls in the winter.
Numero Two-o, how fast the snow melts in summer.
So dry areas can stay unglaciated, even if they are colder than nearby glaciated areas.
Even during the ice age, Canada and Northern Europe had summer, just like Antarctica today has summer. And on the Antarctic ice cap today in summer, the ice melts a little bit. And in the winter, snow falls to replenish the ice cap.
If more ice melts than snow falls, the glacier retreats. If more snow falls than ice melts, the glacier advances. So even in two places that are exactly as cold, if one place has more snow the glacier can be advancing, while in the other place with less snow the glacier can be retreating.
The temperature of warming or cooling period is only relavant to where you are on the globe. This winter for example West is having a mild winter east and europe much cooler temps. SO for proponents of global warming they look at the west coast and severe weather patterens in the west while Europes cold is just a harsh winter. Yes the climate is changing but its not caused by carbon.
The Green house gasses anyone will tell you is CO2 nasty stuff, just the source of all plant life on the planet they breath it in and exhale O2.
85% of Green house gasses are H2O! water vaporThe other 13% is Nitrogen The rest is Other including CO2. Of that 2% only5% of that is CO2.
Of that 5% of the 2%. 90% of the CO2 comes from rotting vegitation 7% comes from animal waste and decomposition and A whopping 3% is man made and most of that comes from breathing and farting. And to remedy this short fall we turn off a lightbulb once a year for an hour…
So you’re saying that to keep the rotational poles from moving about and disrupting local climate patterns we have to control water vapor in greenhouse gasses? Maybe we should all stop sweating so much, hmm?
It can’t work both ways either there was an ice age or there was not no 1/2 ages permitted.
What kind of a timeframe do you suppose we’re looking at?
I’m not sure how you drew that conclustion from that. No what I’m saying is the earths crust is shifting and turning off a light bulb is not helpful may make you feel better but no help.
It’s a slow process? You said you estimated that they are traveling something like 40 miles a year. That means, in the 40 years since I moved to Fairbanks, Fairbanks would have traveled–let’s see, what’s 40 times 40? Ah yes, 1,600 miles.
You do realize that you wouldn’t have to make precise measurements of the time of sunrise to detect a change of hundreds of miles?
Or, if the rate of change is something other than 40 miles per year, what is the rate of change?
Note that no matter what answer you give, I’m going to ask you what made you chose that number instead of some other number, and why there has been no detectable change in daylight patterns around the arctic circle.
Depends on the rate of acceleration if its slow and stable like pendulem about 200 years. If it continues to accelerate like a tree falling 2013 may make a sudden stop. expect high water on east and wes costal area I would think just like running with a pot full of water and stopping fast.
No the movement has been increasing since 1914 not 40km a year since then total movement since then has been just under 400KM but the rate of movement has been doubling ever year. so next year 80km ect. if it does not accelerate at a faster pace. Which could very well happen.
And just because you haven’t noticed it does no mean its not happening. Are you winetrs like here getting much milder?
Then what conclusion should I draw? And what can I reasonably do to stop the Earth’s crust from shifting about?
If your in Europe and this is correct. nothing…