I was shocked today to find a video by “Diamond” at Magnetic Reversal News on Ken White’s World in Peril – which concludes that crustal displacements are “impossible.” That pole shifts “don’t happen.” That Charles Hapgood (whom Einstein supported) and Chan Thomas had “crazy theories.” Evidence that the Svalbard Islands were once on the equator, and that mammoths had been flash frozen quite suddenly and remained so for at least 10,000 years… all the evidence, he says, is explained not by periodic pole shifts every 12-13,000 years, but by regularly recurring comet impacts.
While I’m glad to see him acknowledge that there have been “ice ages” in Africa and India and other areas all over the world, and sudden catastrophes killing and freezing tens of millions of animals at a time – I’m dumbfounded to hear him dismiss the pole shift/crustal displacement theory completely in favor of regularly recurring comet impacts. Because the evidence for countless former equators criss-crossing the world (including through Antarctica and the Arctic) and “ice ages” (polar ice caps) in Africa, India, and South America can NOT be explained by comet impacts. I understand he sees the traces of extraterrestrial materials being deposited and, ignoring the solar micronova evidence presented by Thomas Gold, Robert Schoch, and Ben Davidson – he prefers to assume that comets are the source of the cosmic elements and isotopes.
But such impacts are random in their specific timing. Yet “Diamond” says the North American Ice Sheet has been struck repeatedly by comet impacts every 10-12,000 years; that “there can be no crustal slip” and that he is “debunking the myth that the earth’s crust shifts, because it doesn’t. Now there are cosmic catastrophes that are recurring during the great year, but none of these have to do with crustal slip.”
Is it more reasonable to assume someone is simply looking at different evidence than I am? Or has been paid to change their tune? Should we just acknowledge that someone who had previously seemed to understand the evidence on pole shifts no longer does?
https://www.youtube.com/embed/IQZ427NqZDU
About Author
It’s all part of the firebreak that is the YDIH. Get all the alt media and ltd hangouts supporting the YDIH, and you reduce the rate at which people discover what really happens, i.e. cyclic, magnetically induced polar exchange (@ 12ka).
The benefit is, that like climate change*, everyone digs their heels in their own corner: uniformitarians vs YDIH supporters.
* There is no anthropogenic climate change, and there are no ice ages – climate change is entirely local, due to pole shift.
So, it’s all debunkable. Each side knows the other is wrong. Unfortunately, this leads to the erroneous deduction of correctness: “If they’re wrong, I must be right”.
There is a similar effect in ‘pole shift’. It is debunkable in that very few pole shift proponents can convincingly explain its causation. Ipso facto, if you can’t explain what causes it, it must not happen. Someone even used this argument against the Floating Coffer Theory, i.e. “if you can’t explain the causation of cataclysm, then you can’t argue that the Great Pyramid was built to demonstrate its occurrence.”
So, while all the YDIH supporters look to the skies for signs of impending asteroid strikes, they miss the true causation beginning to manifest under their noses. The opposite of the movie “Don’t look up”.