Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 people babble how bible is not real, it is,except no god, just aliens visiting earth in ancient times, i'l prove this later. So heres the arc its been found in 60s researched in 80s carbon dated and analyzed, officially declared as the arc of noah. How did you not know of this ? this information was supressed in great many countries especially u.s. for reasons of controversey panic etc. How did it happen, GOD ? no, the aliens warned noah of upcoming poleshift which happend 3600 years. (nope not the great asteroid, this happend couple thousand years ago] You still think it's a hoax, nope it's there you can go and analyze it yourself if they let you, carbon dating etc. The time is running out, I am begining to disarm skeptics.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 Need more photos, information, SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ?? , please ask.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 I'd like to know what happened during the great flood. Is the biblical description accurate (except for the God bit of course, if you prefer it to be aliens) with reference to the events and details?
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 there's another planet in this solar system that has been rediscovered in the 80s by the NASA and then supressed completly. Every 3600 years this planet, because of its elliptical orbit it comes near earth and is seen as a red dot in sky , it causes earths magnetic poles to literally flip, and that causes the continental drift to occur imediately. The outcome of this is global catacyslm climate changes volcano , or sorts of natural disasters, and thus we've had ICE AGE. But to protect this information the government and church will keep deny it.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 Ofcourse , this is united states government biggest secret, and Faf doesn't like it.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 The poles do flip magnetically, but it has not happened for tens of thousands of years. Had it happened 3,600 years ago, there would be nothing on the planet right now more sophisticated than a simple bacterium. You can observe the history of polar magnetic disturbances in the magnetic patterns of the ocean bed. There is no evidence that proximity of a planet to small to easily spot would cause Earth's field to change at all, never mind flip. There is also no evidence that magnetic shifts affect continental drift or volcanic activity. My question was really about the flood itself - how did it spread, how long did it last, how deep was it? etc.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 I'm amazed you've never heard of this theory, it's the only logic that makes historical sense.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam I'm amazed you've never heard of this theory, it's the only logic that makes historical sense. I have heard of it, I simply give it no credit. Without any evidence or sources, the idea is useless. It doesn't matter how much 'sense' it makes to you, the subjectivity of this statement aside. Me claiming that the remains of the arc prove the existence of a planetary custard ocean that was carried here by Jupiter dragons is just as valid a speculation. Anyhoo, still interested in hearing about the floodiness.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 basically, One factor that affected the water levels was the north pole melting down, causing water level to go up. Then as the poleshift occurs, the earth stops spining for aproximately 3day long period, moons gravitation causes earth tides so imagine a planet 4 times bigger than earth, size of jupiter and 24 times as densed puling on earth.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 Debunkers.. ;/ , following me around the internet.
JaKiri Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 So it stops the earth, which magically starts spinning again?
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 No, the planet only passes temporarily, then goes back far in space. The earth goes back to norm, except being magnetically flipped with new Antarctica and Arctica
JaKiri Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam No, the planet only passes temporarily, then goes back far in space. The earth goes back to norm, except being magnetically flipped with new Antarctica and Arctica If the earth stops, how does it start spinning again?
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 The earth doesn't stop itself, it's being stopped by the gravitational pull of the object. As the object goes away there's no gravitational interference such as that, so the reason why EARTH spins in the first place, allows it to spin again. (i'm not an astro physician)
JaKiri Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam The earth doesn't stop itself, it's being stopped by the gravitational pull of the object. As the object goes away there's no gravitational interference such as that, so the reason why EARTH spins in the first place, allows it to spin again. (i'm not an astro physician) Doesn't work like that, due to conservation of angular momentum. For the other planet to stop the earth, the planet must spin more slowly (in the opposite direct ofc, otherwise the earth would spin faster). Once something stops spinning, you have to apply a moment to set it off again, not remove a force.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam basically, One factor that affected the water levels was the north pole melting down, causing water level to go up. This is truly amazing. You come up with a grand idea about something that might have happened thousands of years ago, offer no evidence other than your own narrative, accuse established theories of being "cover ups" and yet you fall into the same pit as all the other pseudoscientists who have graced these boards. You fail to understand even the most basic scientific principles that determine the plausability of your theory. The North polar ice-cap is non-continental. It's floating. It's essentially a big iceberg. If it melted ocean levels would not change one bit.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 You'l see for yourself in May, and in Late march and april you will see the planet with naked eye, as it's back on its 3600 years long orbit period. Ofcourse it will be explained as "a nova" and a typical "please stay home , lock your windows"
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ This is truly amazing. You come up with a grand idea about something that might have happened thousands of years ago, offer no evidence other than your own narrative, accuse established theories of being "cover ups" and yet you fall into the same pit as all the other pseudoscientists who have graced these boards. You fail to understand even the most basic scientific principles that determine the plausability of your theory. The North polar ice-cap is non-continental. It's floating. It's essentially a big iceberg. If it melted ocean levels would not change one bit. Indeed it would, infact i've watched it on Television one time, how the water level is expected to go up 16 feet, if particular ice cap melts down.
JaKiri Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam You'l see for yourself in May, and in Late march and april you will see the planet with naked eye, as it's back on its 3600 years long orbit period. Ofcourse it will be explained as "a nova" and a typical "please stay home , lock your windows" I'm glad it will stop the earth spinning, because it will knock into space a plague of locusts o'er the land that happens in may.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam Indeed it would, infact i've watched it on Television one time, how the water level is expected to go up 16 feet, if particular ice cap melts down.
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 Sure it won't, i'l waste my time on arguing over this later, when i get back from work. No comment about the arc eh ?
Adam Posted January 23, 2003 Author Posted January 23, 2003 I'm not in posession of Worlds oceans capacity glass right now, and don't have icecube equilvalent to size of north pole, but thanks for your comment, = ) I'm not zarkov though, this is just a begining of what you don't know, more information will come when the time comes. I'm disarm your skepticsm.
Sayonara Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Originally posted by Adam Sure it won't, i'l waste my time on arguing over this later, when i get back from work. No comment about the arc eh ? Not sure who you're asking, but I'll reserve my comments on the 'arc' until we have your whole theory. As it stands it is a couple of tenuously linked ideas, nothing more. "There is this boat-shaped thing that actually looks more like a preserved Viking enclosure, and I take this to mean that aliens warned Noah about floods caused by a rogue planet that thousands of astronomers keep missing." See how a lack of adequate explaination could result in people not taking you seriously? When we ask for evidence, or about a specific detail, we want an answer so we can build a model in our heads of what you're talking about. What we don't want is more pontificating and waffle about a new and spurious element.
JaKiri Posted January 23, 2003 Posted January 23, 2003 Lets look at the basics: Lets start with Archimedian displacement theory. Something floats if it displaces a mass of water with an equal or greater mass of water to itself. Ice is less dense than water, thus the volume of the ice will be greater than the corresponding volume of water, and so it floats. When the ice melts, the amount of water it displaced will be exactly the same as the amount of water that the ice has now become, so there is no net change in water level. As for global warming, sea levels are supposed to rise because of the thermal expansion of the water; the ice at the north pole will have 0 effect, and the south pole will have little.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now