- Posts: 934
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm
Last Ice Age happened in less than year say scientists
Published Date: 02 August 2008
By angus howarth
THE last ice age 13,000 years ago took hold in just one year, more than ten times quicker than previously believed, scientists have warned.
Rather than a gradual cooling over a decade, the ice age plunged Europe into the deep freeze, German Research Centre for Geosciences at Potsdam said.
Cold, stormy conditions caused by an abrupt shift in atmospheric circulation froze the continent almost instantly during the Younger Dryas less than 13,000 years ago – a very recent period on a geological scale.
The new findings will add to fears of a serious risk of this happening again in the UK and western Europe – and soon.
Dr Achim Brauer, of the GFZ (GeoForschungs Zentrum) German Research Centre for Geosciences at Potsdam, and colleagues analysed annual layers of sediments, called "varves", from a German crater lake.
Each varve records a single year, allowing annual climate records from the region to be reconstructed.
- Posts: 4433
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm
Such views as represented by evolution actually rely on assumptions that these varves are laid down consistently year after year. In fact when Mount St. Helens erupted in Washington State it produced 25 feet of finely layered sediment in a single afternoon! Other such catastrophic events such as the Flood of Noah could also imply the action of laying down many layers quite rapidly within a year time-frame. Thus even millions of layers could be formed in just a few years.
Furthermore experiments show that the thickness of the layers in a continuous heterogranular deposition is independent of the rate of deposition, but is related to the difference in grain size. So varves are not really a problem for a young earth, they just show that deposition rates were higher during and immediately following the Biblical flood than they are today.
Some secular geologists believe that varves may actually be diurnal, reflecting tides instead of seasonal causes. If this is so, formations like the Elatina Formation in South Australia(which is about 250 meters thick) could be accounted for in a mere 60 years.(Williams & Schmidt p. 21-25)(Horgan p. 11)
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm
Having an ice age arrive from scratch in less than a year has Velikovsky's name on it.
It is full of very interesting data and information on a subject that is woefully barren of coverage during these days where the focus is SUV maligning, carbon credit trading and general misinformation about the algoreicized notion of global warming. As this site admits, the volcanic activity beneath the oceans is astonishing, yet our science knows more about the surface of Saturn's moons than it does about the seafloor and what is happening down there.
Recent information also shows that the solar system is going through its own global warming, though its hard to say why, at least in current, acceptable understanding, why Neptune is warming up. Now, if the planets act as capacitors for the sun's electric field, then this idea would be more tenable. Each would experience heating from the interior.
I'm a big proponent of "expanding earth" theory, which make utter sense when viewed beside the nonsensical plate tectonics and lopsided Pangea floating around the globe on convection currents created by the interior heat of a "still cooling" earth. Or is that heat created by the pressure of gravity or a 5 mile-in-diameter radioactive pile of uranium at the center of the earth (this is an actual theory)? Why do volcanoes continue to erupt?
In an electric universe, the interior of planets are dynamically charged and probably consist of plasma at their centers. After process of condensation and cooling, the plasma becomes magma (another type of plasma) and either becomes igneous rock or forces its way to the surface as a volcano (sub-oceanic or on land) or as new seafloor along the tens of thousands of miles of mid-oceanic rifts.
The cyclic interchange from energy to matter and back to energy is as simple as eating an apple. We experience it all the time as life itself. Why can't this conversion be happening at the center of the earth? Isn't the pace of this conversion and exchange dependent upon the primary source of energy, the sun? Can a tree grow and produce apples without the sun? If a tree can electrosynthesize the solar electric field (what do solar panels do?), then why not a planet do the same at its center?
Does this process have anything to do with the sun's output? It is currently at minimum, few to no sunspots and little to no surface activity. Might planetary capacitance be absorbing the solar electric field through an unknown process and on a cyclic basis?
These are big questions and I want to know! Look at this website. Unfortunately, it's author is unaware of the electric universe, but he does draw some very interesting conclusions. There is alot of conflicting data out there. Much of it is ignored if it doesn't fit the accepted paradigm, as frequenters of this site well know.
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:18 am
- Location: Directly under the Electric Sun
Nikola Tesla, Modern Mechanics and Inventions, July, 1934.
Fast forward 74Yrs->yawn!
- Posts: 490
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am
- Location: Honey Brook
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 081449.htm
ScienceDaily (Dec. 3, 2008) — The sun’s magnetic field may have a significant impact on weather and climatic parameters in Australia and other countries in the northern and southern hemispheres. According to a study in Geographical Research, the droughts are related to the solar magnetic phases and not the greenhouse effect.
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:07 am
- Location: Germany
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:48 am
Tracking the "current" or as they call it "rivers of charged particles" from the sun, to earth, and then the movement of the charged particles in the highest levels of the atmosphere would allow us to predict the weather with great accuracy and insight.
A couple more years, I guess.
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
- Location: London, England
"Sunspots = fewer cosmic rays hitting our planet = hotter weather" and
"Fewer/No sunspots = more cosmic rays hitting earth = more clouds = bad weather for crops"?
Human caused "Global Warming" (assuming such a thing as promoted by Al Gore really exists in the first place) is arrogance beyond belief.
The Sun drives our climate. Always has, always will.
- Posts: 2815
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm
Semi-Mainstream studies over the past 10+ years have correlated synchronous fluctuations in various macroscopic effects ranging from weather to biological processes to crystal growths to radioactive decay rates, relative to the Earth's passage through discrete (solar) spatial (EM flux?) zones.
http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/ ... -16-01.PDF(2) factors that determine histogram shape are not shielded
by the Earth: both in the day- and nighttime, series of
histograms turn out similar and dependent only on the
region (vector) of space passed by the object measured
at that moment;
(3) the shape of histograms is determined by the spatial
regions being scanned in the course of rotational and
translational motion of the Earth; in other words, the
shape of histograms is a specific characteristic, which
reflects peculiarities of the spatial region scanned during
http://www.google.com/search?client=saf ... 8&oe=UTF-8
- Posts: 2815
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm
Solar Flare Surprise
On the "Richter scale" of flares, which ranks X1 as a big event, the blast registered X9, making it one of the strongest flares of the past 30 years.
Solar magnetism deflects ions and slows their progress to Earth. Hydrogen atoms, on the other hand, are electrically neutral. They can shoot straight out of the sun without magnetic interference."
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008 ... ist1066595Mewaldt believes that all strong flares might emit hydrogen bursts, but they simply haven't been noticed before. He's looking forward to more X-flares now that the two STEREO spacecraft are widely separated on nearly opposite sides of the Sun.
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:50 am
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/co ... 008/1217/1
By Phil Berardelli
ScienceNOW Daily News
17 December 2008
An Australian researcher has linked the sun's magnetic activity to rainfall patterns in his country over the past century. The connection is solid enough that meteorologists might be able to use it to make better long-term weather predictions. But experts remain cautious about the wider implications of the findings.
Scientists have long known that the sun plays a key role in Earth's weather patterns. For example, the number of sunspots on its surface--dark zones of intense magnetic activity--peaks about every 11 years, followed by a period of dormancy. The cycle causes swings in sea-surface temperatures--more sunspots mean warmer oceans, and fewer mean chillier waters--but the effect is small. There's also a 22-year cycle, in which the sun changes the polarity of its magnetic field, but it's unclear how that phenomenon affects Earth.
Now geographer Robert Baker of the University of New England, Armidale, in Australia, has linked solar magnetic activity to Earth's climate--at least regionally. Using sunspot counts and Australian meteorological data, as well as NASA satellite data for more recent years, he tracked sunspots and rainfall in Australia from 1876 to 2006. In this month's issue of Geographical Research, Baker reports that the amount of rainfall in most regions of the country tracked the 22-year magnetic cycle almost exactly. "It was unbelievable," Baker says. At the height of magnetic activity, rainfall across most of the country was plentiful. At the other end of the cycle, many of those same regions experienced severe droughts. The findings are particularly compelling, Baker says, because even though the lengths of the magnetic cycles are not precise and can vary by several years, the rainfall patterns followed them.
So what's behind the connection? Baker thinks it has to do with the amount of ultraviolet (UV) radiation hitting Earth. When the reversing of polarity approaches, he explains, the sun's magnetic field weakens, allowing more UV energy to reach our planet. More UV radiation kills off some of the oceans' plankton, which produce dimethyl sulfide, one of the primary atmospheric chemicals involved in cloud formation, and fewer clouds mean less rainfall.
Based on the 130 years of data, Baker predicts that the current solar cycle, which reached a minimum in 2007, will continue a bit longer. In fact, he says, "there could be a 100-year minimum in solar activity," meaning much of Australia could experience a prolonged drought.
"This could be an important paper," says climatologist John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville. He explains that current climate models don't give the solar effect much weight in general, because scientists think it is overwhelmed by the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. But if there's a mechanism by which the sun's variations are tied directly to weather patterns, such as the effect of UV radiation on cloud formation, he says, the sun may have a greater impact than the models are showing. As a result, the models might not be creating an accurate picture for the future.
Solar-terrestrial physicist Mike Lockwood of the University of Southampton in the U.K. says that the paper suggests a previously unknown effect caused by the solar magnetic cycle. "If the connection [between UV radiation and precipitation] proposed here were real," he says, "it would be both highly significant and very illuminating." On the other hand, Lockwood says, the paper contains no statistical tests, and connections such as the one it suggests "can arise readily by chance, even for extended intervals."
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:17 am
There is a direct correlation to solar storms and how that energy is distruted around the globe.
The plasma/flux enters the magnetic field and is distributed along the magnetic field along field intensity distribution. It moves eastward off the the Asian coast;
I believe that the plasma affects the atmosphere in two ways. First the presence of gas with plasma makes the gas denser. The heat of the plasma heats the gas. This results in barometric pressure based on air density and warm fronts. Warm fronts interacting with cooler polar air produce weather fronts.
I have animated the minor solar storm on Jan. 19, 2009 and show how it moved after hitting the US west coast. It is a large PowerPoint animation and is available from YouSendIt (large file transfer). I am no expert in animation and this is the best I can do.
It takes four days for the plasma/flux induced weather to reach Sydney, Australia and fifteen days to reach Toronto, Canada.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests