Earth’s normal rotation makes celestial objects like the sun and moon appear to rise in the east and set in the west, as the planet itself rotates from west to east. During a pole shift the momentum of the oceans will continue to carry them eastward even if the rotation of the Earth (or just its surface crust) changes – so it is easy to understand why tsunamis could flood inland on west facing coastlines between Alaska and Argentina… or Western Europe, Western Africa, or Western Australia…. Eventually there will be sloshback on eastern coastlines as well.
But the west-east dynamic is only the major concern in the initial moments of the catastrophe before the moving waters dissipate their momentum. Let’s not forget the basic premise of a pole shift – is that the poles shift their positions. So land near the poles, like Antarctica, and Greenland – will no longer be near the poles. Last time the poles shift around 12-13,000 years ago, the direction of movement took the North Pole – which was in Hudson Bay – down to its present position along a meridian we can describe as between 85-90 degrees west longitude. The Americas moved south while Asia and Australia moved north. Africa rotated but had much less of a change in latitude.
If the next pole shift catastrophe also moves along the same meridian, North America will again move south. As Antarctica and Greenland move towards the equator, the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico would flood north onto the south-facing coastlines of the United States. Louisiana through North Carolina would be hit hardest by this northward surge of water. On the other side of the world, Northern Australia would be flooded. When the sloshback occurs, places like Southern Australia and Venezuela would suffer most.
The bottom line is, if you understand we are due for a pole shift in the coming years, some places (including the high points in regions near Denver or Mexico City or La Paz) are much safer due to their altitude and distance from the oceans, than other more endangered areas like New Orleans, Miami, Havana, or Buenos Aires. But you still want elevation relative to your local surroundings, not just high altitude above sea level:
While you consider the costs of relocating (and the costs of not relocating) and the much lower cost of buying a copy of POLE SHIFT: Evidence Will Not Be Silenced – to better understand risks from tsunamis, sloshback, and many other factors during pole shift disasters, enjoy this quick video from Ben Davidson.
I suggest the Great Pyramid is built where it is to indicate the pair of hinge points about which the crust remains bonded, i.e. being equidistant from those hinge points, the GP remains axially aligned, no matter the degree of crustal displacement.
I also have a hunch that at the time of construction, the GP was at the equator. This indicates 30 degrees of crustal displacement. This also brings Siberia closer to the polar region, and helps explain why it ceased to be a temperate habitat for elephants (despite their massive presence there in antediluvian times).
Ben Davidson is inching closer to the revelation that the Earth performs a magnetically induced 180° flip (with 20-30° crustal displacement as a consequence). A sudden 90° tip-over simply doesn’t add up.
A 180° flip certainly does have considerable oceanic slosh. A bunker high up in the Swiss Alps is probably just within the minimum criteria for a reasonable chance of survivability. Note that the slosh is caused by the 180° flip, not the 20-30° crustal displacement (which is caused by the 180° flip). So, if you want to be assured of a similar climate then keep around 90° away from Egypt (longitudinally). Given polar regions tend to remain more or less polar, this would indicate that Siberia will be heading back, 20-30° closer to the new equator.
Switzerland is a small country full of rich people, surrounded by other rich countries. There won’t be enough places in tunnels, and anyway Alps aren’t really so high, and are surrounded by lowlands.
On the other hand, it seems Afghans won the poleshift lottery…. Afghanistan seems like a perfect country to weather pole shift. Alone Kabul is as high as many Swiss peaks, and the territory of Afghanistan is more than 13 Switzerlands.
JtA, it’s all a bit of a crapshoot anyhow.
Who knows where on Earth one’ll be safe from: mega-tsunami, supersonic cryo/pyrothermal winds, tectonic upheaval, intense seismicity, plasma incursion, pervasive volcanism (+consequent ash fimblvetr), loss of flora & fauna, and climate change?
Afghanistan? The high Andes?
Although the crustal displacement may be constrained in some way, the axial flip of the planet has 360° of freedom, so oceanic slop isn’t too predictable.
Any flora and fauna surviving…? Maybe some eggs, for a new Galapagos Islands somewhere… Well I feel Madagascar may fare relatively well again in this department.
I answered since I do not understand this reliance on Alps… except that they are in the middle of the rich areas… but you know, “The Last will be the First, and the First – the Last ones” so maybe time to learn Urdu and go to Afghanistan, or Suahili and go to Africa… Interestingly, it seems almost no one considers such options. Everyone wants to go to bunkers in Alps or Colorado (nearby volcanos), which are not optimal places.
There is one set of values which Ben never really discusses in the context of coming catastrophe, and that is thickness of the Earth crust. Alps fare really badly here, worse than Colorado, Tibet or Scandinavian mountains, or even Finland and the South coast of Baltic.
Also considering that oceans have thinnest crust, it may be not entirely clear how new lands are to emerge from it…. only considering some old, unknown cratons underneath it could make some sense.
JtA, Yes, there are always some flora & fauna surviving, in some places – which proceed to rapidly colonise the surrounding wasteland. Even so, there will have been plenty of species extinction.