As Space.com explains: “In July, we are at our furthest point from the Sun, and Earth moves slower than average along its path. In January, we are closer to the Sun, and Earth speeds up a bit in its orbital progress.”
Wikipedia adds: “Earth is about 147.1 million kilometers (91.4 million miles) from the Sun at perihelion around January 3, in contrast to about 152.1 million kilometers (94.5 million miles) at aphelion around July 4 — a difference of about 5.0 million kilometers (3.1 million miles)…. Because of the increased distance at aphelion, only 93.55% of the solar radiation from the Sun falls on a given area of land as does at perihelion.” This is basic science, simple to understand.
The key points to take away from these facts are that the Northern hemisphere enjoys a shorter, warmer winter than the southern hemisphere’s longer and colder winter.
Every year, more snow and ice fall at the South Pole than at the North Pole. Even if the Earth’s land was distributed in a way that put land at both poles, snow and ice would accumulate more at the South Pole. But with an ocean to make the temperature more mild in the north, the imbalance gets even worse – leaving Antarctica with by far the thickest and deepest ice sheets.
Wikipedia also notes that Joseph Alphonse Adhémar (1797–1862) was a French mathematician. He was the first to suggest that ice ages were controlled by such astronomical forces in his 1842 book Revolutions of the Sea.
The Earth’s orbit is elliptical, with the Sun at one focus; lines drawn through the summer and winter solstice; and the spring and autumn equinox; intersect with the sun at right angles. The Earth is closest to the Sun (perihelion) near the northern hemisphere winter solstice. The earth moves faster through its orbit when closer to the sun. Hence, the period from the northern hemisphere’s autumn equinox to winter and spring is shorter by around seven days than the period from spring to summer to autumn; the reverse is true in the southern hemisphere. Hence, northern hemisphere winter is shorter.
Because of this, Adhemar reasoned that because the southern hemisphere had more hours of darkness in winter, it must be cooling, and attributed the Antarctic ice sheet to this. Adhemar knew of the 22,000 year cycle [25,920 years] of precession of the equinoxes, and theorized that the ice ages occurred in this cycle.”
Although the cycle of precession is close to 26,000 years, and a pole shift seems to happen every half cycle of almost 13,000 years, Adhemar was still onto something. “Adhemar reasoned that because the southern hemisphere had more hours of…” [winter, more ice would accumulate at the South Pole, eventually “…causing Earth to undergo a physical pole shift that would destroy most of humanity.”
As Jocelyn Goodwin wrote in Arktos: Adhemar understood this would cause an enormous imbalance of mass as ice grew more at the South Pole, and that this would cause periodic pole shifts:
Hugh A. Brown and Charles Hapgood, the godfathers of 20th century pole shift theory, both understood that imbalanced ice would eventually, after thousands of years, destabilize the surface of the planet when torque from such mass inevitably overcome the friction that keeps layers of the Earth fixed in place – for now. Evidence shows it has not always stayed fixed. Governments have no reason to warn us and make society break down over the news today – but – we are due for another round soon – a catastrophic, civilization-ending POLE SHIFT is due in the 21st century.
.
.
That polar ice accumulation just so happens to cause pole shifts every 12,000 years is just as implausible a coincidence as a superwave being emanated from the centre of the galaxy every 12,000 years.
The one multi-millennial cycle that is encoded throughout mankind’s history is the precession of the equinoxes, in the form of The 24,000 year long Zodiac and its simplified forms, e.g. the Occitan cross and the Seal of Solomon. The yin/yang at the centre of the Chinese Zodiac indicates knowledge of the 12,000 year long population life-cycles (black/white analogous to 12h night + 12h day = 24hrs).
And then you have to decide whether precession is caused by the solar system’s rotation about a secret, second sun a few thousand AU away, or if it’s a ‘poorly understood’ wobble that given it supposedly only affects Earth, can only be rather inconsequential in terms of a 12,000 year cycle.
Anyway, if mass redistributes to the poles, you’d expect a dynamic rebalancing to favour a 90° crustal shift. No rebalancing is achieved by a 180° shift.
In any case, it’s just as likely that the Earth deforms (bulges) as fast as mass moves to the poles – overall the destabilising effect is likely to be insignificant, especially as ice is low density. If you started shipping vast quantities of lead to the poles (the size of several Everests), well, perhaps that could be destabilising. And that probably means that if anything polar ice accumulation slightly increases stability.
I conclude that the polar ice accumulation theory of pole shifts is a distraction (from barycentricity).
Something that oscillates the solar system between two magnetic fields, with a cycle length of 24,000 years, such that there is a crossing (Nibiru) every 12,000 years, leads one directly into the arms of barycentricity (Vesica Piscis) and a deception concerning the distance of our 2nd brightest star – the only one apart from The Sun to have a negative magnitude.
The other thing to bear in mind is that the pole shift is SUDDEN.
If you have a magnetised ball bearing spinning in zero g, axially aligned with an ambient magnetic field, and steadily reverse the polarity of that magnetic field, its negative stability will steadily increase, until, with the slightest perturbation, it will suddenly completely destabilise, flip 180°, and carry on spinning, resuming magnetic alignment and positive stability.
One thing I do take from the Book of Genesis (and the magnetic analysis from Steens Mountain, etc.) is that the pole shift process is complete in under a week.
‘Under a week’ ties in with a very gradual change in external magnetic field polarity (over a century or so – the period of polar drift), a consequent increase in negative stability, and an indeterminate point at which the magnetic torque becomes strong enough to induce an axial wobble, which is then rapidly accelerated into total destabilisation and a 180° flip – whereafter positive stability resumes (for 12,000 years).
“The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again.”
“And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.”
For the star field to move so fast that it is visibly moving to the observer indicates a violent 180° flip, i.e. not the sort of modest movement you’d expect a mass rebalancing crustal shift to cause.
That means there’s probably one day of GPS malfunction (and astronomers wondering why their scopes are taking longer to auto-align), and the next ‘day’ where The Moon and stars start scrolling (or The Sun and its shadows start moving), which is followed by (‘2012’) a period of tsunami, volcanism, seismicity, and crustal shift, and The Earth gradually stopping its drunken wobble over the next few days. The sky then darkened by volcanic ash begins a multi-year winter (‘The Road’). After that, God then says “Fiat lux!” and The New Order of The Ages begins.
I agree that a 180 degree rotational shift would accomplish nothing. The poles must move towards the equator. Hapgood suggested shifts of about 30 degrees; Brown said about 80 degrees. Evidence seems to indicate around 30. Why stop well before ninety degrees, if the mass imbalance is the main cause? I suspect that magnetohydrodynamics holds the answer, and that the extremely weak magnetic field causes low viscosity inside the Earth, like a magnetic lock being turned off, but only briefly. When the field regains strength, viscosity returns and the great sliding ends.
Given historical writings go on about The Sun rising from the opposite horizon, this seems to underline a 180° flip (which also preserves The Earth’s angular momentum).
The climatological and crustal adjustments (Atlantis, etc.) seem to indicate that the crust may slip as a consequence of the (violent 180°) flip, and once stopped slipping, various areas may then rise or fall.
So, perhaps both things occur. The core flips 180°, AND the crust shifts/slips around 30° – as a consequence of the flip.
But this 180° cannot be due to gradual mass imbalance (that would cause crustal slippage only – maximum 90°). The only obvious thing that can cause a magnetic body to flip 180° is a change in external magnetic field. Why else are they no longer publishing data concerning the drifting of magnetic north?
As to your magnetic lock point, yes, this would be a requirement if La Violette’s galactic superwave was the cause of pole shift (and caused a reduction in viscosity that permitted the crust to rebalance), but that’s just a 30° shift and doesn’t tie in with the stories of the Sun rising from the opposite horizon (which requires a 180° flip).