Re: Hi Nancy :-))
In Article <9bihml$hvm$1@news1.xs4all.nl> Jos wrote:
> I was wondering: the earth-crust was supposed to move /over/
> the lava at may-2003? For my feeling that would generate
> very large amounts of friction, have I read it wrong and is it
> supposed to be the entire earth that tilts (magnetic South-pole
> upward), because of the earth magnetism?
This being a serious question, the Zetas will respond. (They do a much
better job than I, mere Nancy):
Does flowing lava cause friction? It is disconcerting to humans
to contemplate what they are riding upon - land masses that are
mere boats upon molten lava. Boat that can tip, and split. Such a
thin crust between comfort and all that molten lava. In fact,
friction only exists BETWEEN plates, thus the jolting of
earthquakes. Indeed, your second query about the entire earth
tilting is an oft-confusing point in our entirely logical explanation
of pole shifts. Humans are drenched in Newtonian theory, which
explains the planets maintained in their orbits based on centrifugal
force and momentum. All of this falls apart when Newton's math
is applied to your Moon, so very close at hand yet too large and
slow moving to even STAY up there, per Newton. Nevertheless,
Newton is force-fed to humans in school so they contemplate
pole shifts in this venue, and boggle. Per Newton, both the Earth
and another passing planet would plod on, just passing but not
affecting each other except for gravity, a tug in this or that direction.
But this is wrong, on several points.
Human's measure their magnetic field on the surface of the crust,
which is composed of hardened lava which points in the direction
of the magnetic field AT THE TIME the lava hardened, and thus
sends many signals to dilute any given compass measurement.
The crust moved, after lava hardened, and this is a buffer for the
TRUE magnetic field coming from the core. This is far stronger,
and reaches further into space, than most humans imagine. As we
have explained in existing ZetaTalk, recorded in the Science section
(Nancy wishes us to point out), magnetism is a particle flow, as is
gravity. Additionally, rotation is not caused by some initial
momentum long ago instituted but by the various components of a
liquid core in motion, attracted and repulsed by this or that in the
surrounding solar system and thus trying to get closer or farther
away, within the confines of the sphere the core finds itself in.
But without arguing these points, the issue in pole shifts is what
the WEAKEST LINK is when the magnetic fields clash.
Is it the orbit position, which might TILT to allow a pole shift to
occur simply due to orbit changes? Perturbations in the orbit, due
to gravity pull, but not a tilted orbit, per human astrophysics.
Would a passing planet draw another closer to it, temporarily?
This argument would not cause a pole shift, but a temporary
slowing down or speeding up in the orbit path, per human
astrophysics. It is drag, rotation slowing due to extra man-made
lakes around the equator, that silly argument put forth by humans
to explain a barely perceptible slowdown in rotation speed, lately
increasing? Drag would cause a slowed rotation, but not a TILT.
Humans, schooled into dead-think in their autocratic schools,
have no way to explain pole shifts without being open minded and
exploratory, those attribute that get them punished in their schools
and yelled at by the Shepherds of the Sheep of sci.astro. So
mention of a pole shift, and its mechanisms, creates a yawn, not
a query, in most. Jos, however, is a thinking man, an independent
thinker, and thus dares to query.
Indeed, there are many factors that hold a body in its orbit, beyond
what human astrophysicists conclude. But to avoid endless
arguments about endless factors, let us simply state that the orbit
involves MANY bodies and forces outside of the planet itself, and
thus is not the weak link. The orbit continues on, and does not tilt.
Gravity likewise would not cause the planet to tilt, but rather draw
closer or, if one is given to consider the gravity counterpoint, the
Repulsion Force, to push away and not tilt. Both we and humans
agree on these points, but for different reasons. But what holds the
core of the Earth so firmly that it cannot move in its molten mush,
during the passage of another planet with a magnetic field? This
can move, without affecting the orbit or the relative position to
other bodies re gravity factors, and it DOES move. Place two
magnets end to end, and they are happy to line up. Place two
magnets side by side, and they both try to move so that they line up.
Make one of these magnets several times the mass of the other,
and the larger dominates in this motion. Thus, the Earth moves, in
place, in its orbit, at the point where the passage itself occurs, the
north pole of the passing planet no longer approaching the south pole
of the Earth, but PASSING it, thus dragging this south pole along
with its north pole during the passage.
Thus, you have wandering poles, magnetic fields pointing in all
directions in frozen lava, crust shifting to bring mastodons into
the polar circle with green grass in their stomachs, flash frozen
to be discovered and pondered over by modern man. And thus,
during this close approach of this very magnetic planet that is
heading toward Earth from the south now, you have a swirling
core heating the Earth up from the CORE upwards, causing
polar and glacial melt which cannot be explained by any increase
in atmospheric temperatures, and magnetic diffusion which is
estimated by humans to ELIMINATE the Earth's magnetic field in
1,250 years at the current rate. Of course, they are wrong in their
estimate but at least are honest enough to acknowledge that
diffusion is OCCURRING. The approaching passage, and its
effect on the Earth, explains these phenomena, where your human
Shepherds have no such explanation save the laughable.
ZetaTalk