Message from @Malac
Discord ID: 688550808895225882
@ManAnimal Could just be the global flood and shifting of the continents that happened several thousand years ago
Really depends on which view of history you accept as reality
@Troye basic assumption is that everything happens slowly and nothing happens suddenly. However, the evidence just doesn't support that but because there is no evidence of exactly WHAT happens during those transient states, it's easier to assume everything occurs gradually
@ManAnimal My god you're retarded if you think any of that is accurate
@ManAnimal Majority of the underwater shit is underwater because of the glaciers melting. Some magnetic activity wont cause the Earth to suddenly destroy itself you pseudoscience tard.
The earth's crust moves by convection of the layers beneath it. The core is suspended in liquid, and tons of other material that is free moving/liquidious
@Malac, instead of screaming like a sperg , how about your the paper. No one ever said, " the Earth to suddenly destroy itself", you strawman building tard. Tectonic plates ride onto of the iron molten core whose motions generates the earth's electric field. THIS IS FACT.
Now, if you actually knew some REAL science, you'd know how the excitation system works on an electrical machine worked, you'd know that 1) an electric generator is the same machine as an electric generator/dynamo and 2) you can induce a FIELD by moving the rotor/dynamo OR you can induce MOTION by directly exciting the field. more than yo
this is FACT, used to keep your god damn lights on
@ManAnimal No. the Core resides in a liquidious outer-core. On top of which sits a mantle so pressurized that it's a solid despite the heat
please try to follow along without jumping ahead
And no. The earth doesn't act like a mechanical fucking motor.
You're treating it like a piece of fucking machinery. It's not. It's a giant ball of fucking molten iron squeezed so fucking tight it's a solid for all intents and purposes. There can't be any mechanical fucking blowback or tearing because it's not a fucking solid structure
the theory goes that in the event the field is excited MORE than the motion in the core which GENERATES the field, it will place stress on the core.
And what would that stress do? Move about some atoms? Lose a bit of rotational force. Slow down its rotation just a tad
"The earth doesn't act like a mechanical fucking motor." - please explain the origin of the earth's magnetic field.
It's not going to cause an apocalypse by tearing up the Earth you tard
Generating a magnetic field through sheer physical qualities /=/ your fucking toys, you engineering twat
it's a fucking dynamo. same electrical principles as a function electric generator. you move a ferrous material you get a field
THAT'S WHAT A FUCKING ELECTRIC MACHINE DOES!
And what do you think is going to happen if it reverses? It's not going to do shit on the surface you retard
That force has an entire fucking planet to diffuse through.
again, this is theoretical. The fact that there are at least a DOZEN papers correlating solar activty to earthquakes is NOT psedo-science in the slightest
Worse case scenario you get some earthquakes of questionable severeity and some volcanism.
Not an extinction event you cunt
that's the debate.
what's the worst case? how does the core interact with the plates? etc
Tectonic plates do not ride on top of a core. They ride on top of a semisolid mantle, ontop of a liquid outer core and a solid inner core
no one is saying the earth is going to 'blow up' only that there is a connection
yes, i am simplifying greatly because i have no clue what your technical background is
While there are reputable studies showing that true polar wander has occurred at various times in the past, the rates are much smaller (1° per million years or slower) than predicted by the pole shift hypothesis (up to 1° per thousand years).[2][3][23] Analysis of the evidence does not lend credence to Hapgood's hypothesized rapid displacement of layers of the Earth.[24] Data indicates that the geographical poles have not deviated by more than about 5° over the last 130 million years, contradicting the hypothesis of a cataclysmic polar wander event.[25] More rapid past possible occurrences of true polar wander have been measured: from 790 to 810 million years ago, true polar wander of approximately 55° may have occurred twice.[4]
in any case, there is still alot we don't know in terms of how a the periodic changes earth's magnetic field effect the earth because it's a transient condition
Sources Please
Your wiki directly contradicts EMPIRICAL data
which is more recent
Tests of correlations between extinctions and reversals are difficult for a number of reasons. Larger animals are too scarce in the fossil record for good statistics, so paleontologists have analyzed microfossil extinctions. Even microfossil data can be unreliable if there are hiatuses in the fossil record. It can appear that the extinction occurs at the end of a polarity interval when the rest of that polarity interval was simply eroded away.[25] Statistical analysis shows no evidence for a correlation between reversals and extinctions.[56][44]
The above was the old theory, however if you observe the map, you can see that the 'wandering pole' is no longer wandering in the same region and has been accelerating southward.
Even if the internal magnetic field did disappear, the solar wind can induce a magnetic field in the Earth's ionosphere sufficient to shield the surface from energetic particles.
how in the hell do you figure that? Without the earth's magnetic field, the solar wind would irradiate the surface and quickly strip away the ionsphere