Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
+5
Schpankme
susie
Themis
Admin
Thinkforyourself
9 posters
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Arctic, Antarctic and Beyond the Ice Wall
Page 1 of 1
Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Thinkforyourself Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:24 pm
Posted by Admin on 04/21/2015
The fact that they say the heat from the Sun is coming from 93 MILLION MILES away and causing simultaneously hot tropical/equatorial regions AND the frigid Arctic/Antarctic regions which are only separated by a mere FEW THOUSAND miles, is preposterous. The sunlight supposedly comes from 93 million miles away giving sweltering hot days in Thailand, but just a few thousand miles further negates its effect completely giving us deathly cold Antarctica. Yeah right. Of course they just use their fake math and make the Sun however ridiculously hot it would have to be for the temperature variation to fit and voila, instant "scientific" "mathematically correct" bullshit. I actually have a whole chapter devoted to the differences between Arctic and Antarctic zones which do not fit with the ball model but fit perfectly with the flat disc model. I'll post some of it here:
If the Earth were truly a globe, the Arctic and Antarctic polar regions and areas of comparable latitude North and South of the equator should share similar conditions and characteristics such as comparable temperatures, seasonal changes, length of daylight, plant and animal life. In reality, however, the Arctic/Antarctic regions and areas of comparable latitude North/South of the equator differ greatly in many ways.
“If the earth be the globe of popular belief, the same amount of heat and cold, summer and winter, should be experienced at the same latitudes North and South of the Equator. The same number of plants and animals would be found, and the same general conditions exist. That the very opposite is the case, disproves the globular assumption. The great contrasts between places at the same latitudes North and South of the Equator, is a strong argument against the received doctrine of the rotundity of the earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (
Antarctica is by far the coldest place on Earth with an average annual temperature of approximately -57 degrees Farenheit, and a record low of -135.8! The average annual temperature at the North Pole, however, is a comparatively warm 4 degrees. Throughout the year, temperatures in the Antarctic vary less than half the amount at comparable Arctic latitudes. The Northern Arctic region enjoys moderately warm summers and manageable winters, whereas the Southern Antarctic region never even warms enough to melt the perpetual snow and ice.
“This uniformity of temperature partly accounts for the great accumulation of ice which is formed not on account of the great severity of the winter, but because there is practically no summer to melt it. In the Antarctic there is eternal winter and snow never melts. As far north as a man has travelled he has found reindeer and hare basking in the sun, and country brilliant with rich flora; within the Antarctic circle no plant is to be found.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (9)
The island of Kerguelen at 49 degrees Southern latitude has only 18 species of native plants that can survive its hostile climate. Compare this with the island of Iceland at 65 degrees Northern latitude, 16 degrees further North of the equator than Kerguelen is South, yet Iceland is home to 870 species of native plants. On the Isle of Georgia, just 54 degrees Southern latitude, the same latitude as Canada or England in the North, where dense forests of various tall trees abound, the infamous Captain Cook wrote that he was unable to find a single shrub large enough to make a toothpick! Cook wrote, “Not a tree was to be seen. The lands which lie to the south are doomed by nature to perpetual frigidness - never to feel the warmth of the sun’s rays; whose horrible and savage aspect I have not words to describe. Even marine life is sparse in certain tracts of vast extent, and the sea-bird is seldom observed flying over such lonely wastes. The contrasts between the limits of organic life in Arctic and Antarctic zones is very remarkable and significant. Vegetables and land animals are found at nearly 80 degrees in the north; while from the parallel of 58 degrees in the south, the lichen, and such-like plants only, clothe the rocks, and seabirds and the cetaceous tribes alone are seen upon the desolate beaches.”
In the Arctic there are 4 clearly distinguished seasons, warm summers, and an abundance of plant and animal life, none of which can be said of the Antarctic. The Eskimo live as far North as the 79th parallel, whereas in the South no native man is found higher than the 56th. Admiral Ferdinand von Wrangel, the 19th century Russian Arctic explorer, wrote how in the North, “Countless herds of reindeer, elks, black bears, foxes, sable and grey squirrels fill the upland forests; stone foxes and wolves roam over the low ground; enormous flights of swans, geese, and ducks arrive in spring, and seek deserts where they may moult, and build their nests in safety. Eagles, gulls, and owls pursue their prey along the sea-coast; ptarmigan run in troops among the bushes; little snipes are busy among the brooks and in the morasses; the social crows seek the neighbourhood of man's habitations; and when the sun shines in spring, one may sometimes even hear the cheerful note of the finch, and in autumn that of the thrush.”
"Beyond the 70th degree of Southern latitude not a tree meets the eye, wearied with the white waste of snow; forests, woods, even shrubs have disappeared, and given place to a few lichens and creeping woody plants, which scantily clothe the indurated soil. Still, in the farthest north, Nature claims her birthright of beauty; and in the brief and rapid summer she brings forth numerous flowers and grasses, to bloom for a few days, to be again blasted by the swiftly-recurring winter. The rapid fervour of an arctic summer had already (June 1st) converted the snowy waste into luxuriant pasture-ground, rich in flowers and grass, with almost the same lively appearance as that of an English meadow." -W. & R. Chambers, “Arctic Explorations”
In New Zealand situated at 42 degrees Southern latitude, on the Winter Solstice the Sun rises at 4:31am and sets at 7:29pm, making the longest day of the year 14 hours and 58 minutes. On the Summer Solstice, the New Zealand Sun rises at 7:29am and sets at 4:31pm, making the shortest day 9 hours and 2 minutes long. Meanwhile, in England, a full 10 degrees farther North of the equator than New Zealand lies South, the longest day is 16 hours and 34 minutes, the shortest day 7 hours and 45 minutes. Therefore the longest day in New Zealand is 1 hour and 36 minutes shorter than the longest day in England, and the shortest day in New Zealand is 1 hour and 17 minutes longer than the shortest day in England.
William Swainson, an Englishman who emigrated and became Attorney General of New Zealand in the mid-19th century lived in both countries for decades and wrote of their differences, stating, “The range of temperature is limited, there being no excess of either heat or cold; compared with the climate of England, the summer of New Zealand is but very little warmer though considerably longer. Even in summer, people here have no notion of going without fires in the evening; but then, though the days are very warm and sunny, the nights are always cold. For seven months last summer, we had not one day that the sun did not shine as brilliantly as it does in England in the finest day in June; and though it has more power here, the heat is not nearly so oppressive. But then there is not the twilight which you get in England. Here it is light till about eight o'clock, then, in a few minutes, it becomes too dark to see anything, and the change comes over in almost no time. The seasons are the reverse of those in England. Spring commences in September, summer in December, autumn in April, and winter in June. The days are an hour shorter at each end of the day in summer, and an hour longer in the winter than in England."
In the Flat-Earth model of the cosmos, these Arctic/Antarctic phenomena are easily accounted for and exactly what would be expected. If the Sun circles over and around the Earth every 24 hours, steadily travelling from Tropic to Tropic every 6 months, it follows that the Northern, central region would annually receive far more heat and sunlight than the Southern circumferential region. Since the Sun must sweep over the larger Southern region in the same 24 hours it has to pass over the smaller Northern region, its passage must necessarily be proportionally faster as well. This is why the Antarctic morning dawn and evening twilight are very abrupt, whereas in the extreme North twilight continues for hours after sunset and many midsummer nights the Sun does not set at all!.
“If the sun is fixed, and the earth revolves underneath it, the same phenomena would exist at the same distance on each side of the equator; but such is not the case! What can operate to cause the twilight in New Zealand to be so much more sudden, or the nights so much colder than in England? The southern ‘hemisphere’ cannot revolve more rapidly than the northern! The latitudes are about the same, and the distance round a globe would be the same at 50° south as at 50° north, and as the whole would revolve once in twenty-four hours, the surface at the two places would pass underneath the sun with the same velocity, and the light would approach in the morning, and recede in the evening in exactly the same manner, yet the very contrary is the fact! … The constant sunlight of the north develops, with the utmost rapidity, numerous forms of vegetable life, and furnishes subsistence for millions of living creatures. But in the south, where the sunlight never dwells, or lingers about a central region, but rapidly sweeps over sea and land, to complete in twenty-four hours the great circle of the southern circumference, it has not time to excite and stimulate the surface; and, therefore, even in comparatively low southern latitudes, everything wears an aspect of desolation. These differences in the north and south could not exist if the earth were a globe, turning upon axes underneath a non-moving sun. The two hemispheres would at the same latitudes have the same degree of light and heat, and the same general phenomena, both in kind and degree. The peculiarities which are found in the south as compared with the north, are only such as could exist upon a stationary plane, having a northern centre, concentric with which is the path of the moving sun.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (116-121)
“Every year the Sun is as long south of the equator as he is north; and if the Earth were not ‘stretched out’ as it is, in fact, but turned under, as the Newtonian theory suggests it would certainly get as intensive a share of the Sun's rays south as north; but the Southern region being, in consequence of the fact stated, - far more extensive than the region North, the Sun, having to complete his journey round every twenty-four hours, travels quicker as he goes further south, from September to December, and his influence has less time in which to accumulate at any given point. Since, then the facts could not be as they are if the Earth were a globe, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (53)
The fact that they say the heat from the Sun is coming from 93 MILLION MILES away and causing simultaneously hot tropical/equatorial regions AND the frigid Arctic/Antarctic regions which are only separated by a mere FEW THOUSAND miles, is preposterous. The sunlight supposedly comes from 93 million miles away giving sweltering hot days in Thailand, but just a few thousand miles further negates its effect completely giving us deathly cold Antarctica. Yeah right. Of course they just use their fake math and make the Sun however ridiculously hot it would have to be for the temperature variation to fit and voila, instant "scientific" "mathematically correct" bullshit. I actually have a whole chapter devoted to the differences between Arctic and Antarctic zones which do not fit with the ball model but fit perfectly with the flat disc model. I'll post some of it here:
If the Earth were truly a globe, the Arctic and Antarctic polar regions and areas of comparable latitude North and South of the equator should share similar conditions and characteristics such as comparable temperatures, seasonal changes, length of daylight, plant and animal life. In reality, however, the Arctic/Antarctic regions and areas of comparable latitude North/South of the equator differ greatly in many ways.
“If the earth be the globe of popular belief, the same amount of heat and cold, summer and winter, should be experienced at the same latitudes North and South of the Equator. The same number of plants and animals would be found, and the same general conditions exist. That the very opposite is the case, disproves the globular assumption. The great contrasts between places at the same latitudes North and South of the Equator, is a strong argument against the received doctrine of the rotundity of the earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (
Antarctica is by far the coldest place on Earth with an average annual temperature of approximately -57 degrees Farenheit, and a record low of -135.8! The average annual temperature at the North Pole, however, is a comparatively warm 4 degrees. Throughout the year, temperatures in the Antarctic vary less than half the amount at comparable Arctic latitudes. The Northern Arctic region enjoys moderately warm summers and manageable winters, whereas the Southern Antarctic region never even warms enough to melt the perpetual snow and ice.
“This uniformity of temperature partly accounts for the great accumulation of ice which is formed not on account of the great severity of the winter, but because there is practically no summer to melt it. In the Antarctic there is eternal winter and snow never melts. As far north as a man has travelled he has found reindeer and hare basking in the sun, and country brilliant with rich flora; within the Antarctic circle no plant is to be found.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (9)
The island of Kerguelen at 49 degrees Southern latitude has only 18 species of native plants that can survive its hostile climate. Compare this with the island of Iceland at 65 degrees Northern latitude, 16 degrees further North of the equator than Kerguelen is South, yet Iceland is home to 870 species of native plants. On the Isle of Georgia, just 54 degrees Southern latitude, the same latitude as Canada or England in the North, where dense forests of various tall trees abound, the infamous Captain Cook wrote that he was unable to find a single shrub large enough to make a toothpick! Cook wrote, “Not a tree was to be seen. The lands which lie to the south are doomed by nature to perpetual frigidness - never to feel the warmth of the sun’s rays; whose horrible and savage aspect I have not words to describe. Even marine life is sparse in certain tracts of vast extent, and the sea-bird is seldom observed flying over such lonely wastes. The contrasts between the limits of organic life in Arctic and Antarctic zones is very remarkable and significant. Vegetables and land animals are found at nearly 80 degrees in the north; while from the parallel of 58 degrees in the south, the lichen, and such-like plants only, clothe the rocks, and seabirds and the cetaceous tribes alone are seen upon the desolate beaches.”
In the Arctic there are 4 clearly distinguished seasons, warm summers, and an abundance of plant and animal life, none of which can be said of the Antarctic. The Eskimo live as far North as the 79th parallel, whereas in the South no native man is found higher than the 56th. Admiral Ferdinand von Wrangel, the 19th century Russian Arctic explorer, wrote how in the North, “Countless herds of reindeer, elks, black bears, foxes, sable and grey squirrels fill the upland forests; stone foxes and wolves roam over the low ground; enormous flights of swans, geese, and ducks arrive in spring, and seek deserts where they may moult, and build their nests in safety. Eagles, gulls, and owls pursue their prey along the sea-coast; ptarmigan run in troops among the bushes; little snipes are busy among the brooks and in the morasses; the social crows seek the neighbourhood of man's habitations; and when the sun shines in spring, one may sometimes even hear the cheerful note of the finch, and in autumn that of the thrush.”
"Beyond the 70th degree of Southern latitude not a tree meets the eye, wearied with the white waste of snow; forests, woods, even shrubs have disappeared, and given place to a few lichens and creeping woody plants, which scantily clothe the indurated soil. Still, in the farthest north, Nature claims her birthright of beauty; and in the brief and rapid summer she brings forth numerous flowers and grasses, to bloom for a few days, to be again blasted by the swiftly-recurring winter. The rapid fervour of an arctic summer had already (June 1st) converted the snowy waste into luxuriant pasture-ground, rich in flowers and grass, with almost the same lively appearance as that of an English meadow." -W. & R. Chambers, “Arctic Explorations”
In New Zealand situated at 42 degrees Southern latitude, on the Winter Solstice the Sun rises at 4:31am and sets at 7:29pm, making the longest day of the year 14 hours and 58 minutes. On the Summer Solstice, the New Zealand Sun rises at 7:29am and sets at 4:31pm, making the shortest day 9 hours and 2 minutes long. Meanwhile, in England, a full 10 degrees farther North of the equator than New Zealand lies South, the longest day is 16 hours and 34 minutes, the shortest day 7 hours and 45 minutes. Therefore the longest day in New Zealand is 1 hour and 36 minutes shorter than the longest day in England, and the shortest day in New Zealand is 1 hour and 17 minutes longer than the shortest day in England.
William Swainson, an Englishman who emigrated and became Attorney General of New Zealand in the mid-19th century lived in both countries for decades and wrote of their differences, stating, “The range of temperature is limited, there being no excess of either heat or cold; compared with the climate of England, the summer of New Zealand is but very little warmer though considerably longer. Even in summer, people here have no notion of going without fires in the evening; but then, though the days are very warm and sunny, the nights are always cold. For seven months last summer, we had not one day that the sun did not shine as brilliantly as it does in England in the finest day in June; and though it has more power here, the heat is not nearly so oppressive. But then there is not the twilight which you get in England. Here it is light till about eight o'clock, then, in a few minutes, it becomes too dark to see anything, and the change comes over in almost no time. The seasons are the reverse of those in England. Spring commences in September, summer in December, autumn in April, and winter in June. The days are an hour shorter at each end of the day in summer, and an hour longer in the winter than in England."
In the Flat-Earth model of the cosmos, these Arctic/Antarctic phenomena are easily accounted for and exactly what would be expected. If the Sun circles over and around the Earth every 24 hours, steadily travelling from Tropic to Tropic every 6 months, it follows that the Northern, central region would annually receive far more heat and sunlight than the Southern circumferential region. Since the Sun must sweep over the larger Southern region in the same 24 hours it has to pass over the smaller Northern region, its passage must necessarily be proportionally faster as well. This is why the Antarctic morning dawn and evening twilight are very abrupt, whereas in the extreme North twilight continues for hours after sunset and many midsummer nights the Sun does not set at all!.
“If the sun is fixed, and the earth revolves underneath it, the same phenomena would exist at the same distance on each side of the equator; but such is not the case! What can operate to cause the twilight in New Zealand to be so much more sudden, or the nights so much colder than in England? The southern ‘hemisphere’ cannot revolve more rapidly than the northern! The latitudes are about the same, and the distance round a globe would be the same at 50° south as at 50° north, and as the whole would revolve once in twenty-four hours, the surface at the two places would pass underneath the sun with the same velocity, and the light would approach in the morning, and recede in the evening in exactly the same manner, yet the very contrary is the fact! … The constant sunlight of the north develops, with the utmost rapidity, numerous forms of vegetable life, and furnishes subsistence for millions of living creatures. But in the south, where the sunlight never dwells, or lingers about a central region, but rapidly sweeps over sea and land, to complete in twenty-four hours the great circle of the southern circumference, it has not time to excite and stimulate the surface; and, therefore, even in comparatively low southern latitudes, everything wears an aspect of desolation. These differences in the north and south could not exist if the earth were a globe, turning upon axes underneath a non-moving sun. The two hemispheres would at the same latitudes have the same degree of light and heat, and the same general phenomena, both in kind and degree. The peculiarities which are found in the south as compared with the north, are only such as could exist upon a stationary plane, having a northern centre, concentric with which is the path of the moving sun.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (116-121)
“Every year the Sun is as long south of the equator as he is north; and if the Earth were not ‘stretched out’ as it is, in fact, but turned under, as the Newtonian theory suggests it would certainly get as intensive a share of the Sun's rays south as north; but the Southern region being, in consequence of the fact stated, - far more extensive than the region North, the Sun, having to complete his journey round every twenty-four hours, travels quicker as he goes further south, from September to December, and his influence has less time in which to accumulate at any given point. Since, then the facts could not be as they are if the Earth were a globe, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.” -William Carpenter, “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe” (53)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8132
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Thinkforyourself Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:25 pm
Posted by Bernard on 07/26/2015
Ultima Thule The Garden Of Eden
My recent discovery and study of the 550-pages book PARADISE FOUND by William F Warren convinced me that the cradle of the human race and the origin of all civilization/s is found at or near the pole. I say pole rather than North pole because on a circular Flat Earth there is, obviously, only one pole, or more precise: there is a centre. Although I'll continue to call it North pole. Life-long habit!
The conspiracy to conceal both the true shape of the Earth and the true history of mankind was already in full swing at the time the book was published almost a century and a half ago: the Earth is referred to by the author as a globe; he also mentions the South pole a few times. Nonetheless, his findings and conclusions as to the importance of the North Pole in human history are as relevant as ever. I cannot, in a short article like this, adequately sum up his ideas but anybody who is interested can download the book here:
Paradise Found
The Cradle Of The Human Race At The North Pole
by William Warren
(20 MB)
Warren is, of course, not the only modern man to hold this view. Moreover, many ancient peoples and civilizations place their origin in the North from where they dispersed to the "four corners" of the Earth.
Cosmology, however, is only one of the many topics I am interested in. Another area of interest to me is alternative health. There can't be too many alternative health systems that I have not at least investigated, if not practised, although I have whittled it down to half a dozen or so. One of them is "negative ion therapy". What's that got to do with the North Pole? Before I answer this question allow me to present some of the benefits of negative ions acknowledged by mainstream science.
Physical benefits:
Scientists at the University of California grew barley, oats lettuce and peas in an atmosphere
drastically reduced in ionization and found that growth was stunted and the plants diseased.
When the experiment was repeated in air carrying more than double the normal number of
negative ions, it produced accelerated growth.
Mental benefits:
Dr Felix Sulman, head of the Applied Pharmacology department at Jerusalem University,
conducted experiments with positive and negative ions on a cross-section of people. (his
subjects were two groups of men and women between twenty and sixty-five) When left for
about an hour in a room that contained an overdose of positive ions they became irritable
and fatigued. Yet the same people confined for the same period of time, in air containing an
overdose of negative ions, showed a pattern of brainwaves that suggested increased alertness
and relaxation. He tested their alertness and work capacity by various means. All of them
scored significantly higher, during and immediately after, their exposure to increased levels
of negative ions.
And what about spiritual benefit? Are there any?
"During the early 1990s, the acceptance grew for ion therapy, or negative air ionization as an alternative to pharmacologically induced procedures; patients reported a surge of spiritual intensity. While thus sedated, they claimed to have undergone a broad variety of psychic phenomena, such as their conscious mind separating from its physical body; live encounters with deceased relatives, friends or pets; meeting a Christ-like figure and long-dead celebrities; hovering high above the Earth or some other world; transcending space and time as fast as thought; receiving advanced knowledge about healing; visiting celestial parks and libraries; seeing past and future lives; or being bathed in the clear light of a cosmic love.
Investigators were surprised to learn that these visions were not confined to religious persons, but equally shared with patients indifferent to metaphysical questions, even hardcore atheists."
BEFORE ATLANTIS by Frank Joseph pages 218-219
It seems that negative ions are tremendously beneficial to all life - plants, animals and humans. The above info doesn't even scratch the surface! For more on the beneficial aspects of negative ions just browse the net; there is a wealth of information to be found there.
Some of the natural conditions that favour the generation of negative ions are thunderstorms and downpours, waterfalls and ocean shores, forests, mountains and caves.
Back to the North Pole: Aurorae are the result of two physical forces. In a nutshell: the positively charged ionosphere and the negatively charged Earth interact resulting in spectacular electrical discharges and the generation of negative ions. Lots of them - and then some!
Now let's assume that the North pole was indeed the cradle of the human race and let's think of the Arctic before the cataclysm - whatever that was - that caused the deluge. Except for the two months of arctic winter (which does NOT mean complete darkness as Warren explains!) our ancestors would have been bathed around the clock - not that they needed clocks! - in the life-and-warmth giving light of the sun and they would have been swimming in a veritable ocean of negative ions. You can literally not have enough of them!
Considering the above-mentioned benefits Earth would have been in every respect a paradise for all life! And I can't help wondering what kind of glorious creature early man would have been! It could make a grown man weep to think what we lost!
But perhaps we can all create our own little "arctic paradise"? You don't have to rely on natually created negative ions by moving to the Arctic. You could, for instance, visit man-made megalithic sites and standing stones - all of them found in locations rich in negative ions. Is that perhaps why they were erected in the first place? You could lie in the quartz-rich ion-generating sarcophagus in the King's Chamber. Was the mind-expanding effects of negative ions one of its purposes? None of those are realistic or practical options for most of us.
But, fortunately, there are easier ways. If you have the money you could visit a speleotherapy spa. Or - less expensive - you can buy a negative ion generator. They come in all sizes big and small, even portable. You can get bracelets that produce ions and even yoga mats that generate negative ions by the weight of your body on the quartz crystals embedded in the mat.
I have an ion generator in my bedroom and credit at least some of the quality of my sleep and dream life to the negative ions.
Ultima Thule The Garden Of Eden
My recent discovery and study of the 550-pages book PARADISE FOUND by William F Warren convinced me that the cradle of the human race and the origin of all civilization/s is found at or near the pole. I say pole rather than North pole because on a circular Flat Earth there is, obviously, only one pole, or more precise: there is a centre. Although I'll continue to call it North pole. Life-long habit!
The conspiracy to conceal both the true shape of the Earth and the true history of mankind was already in full swing at the time the book was published almost a century and a half ago: the Earth is referred to by the author as a globe; he also mentions the South pole a few times. Nonetheless, his findings and conclusions as to the importance of the North Pole in human history are as relevant as ever. I cannot, in a short article like this, adequately sum up his ideas but anybody who is interested can download the book here:
Paradise Found
The Cradle Of The Human Race At The North Pole
by William Warren
(20 MB)
Warren is, of course, not the only modern man to hold this view. Moreover, many ancient peoples and civilizations place their origin in the North from where they dispersed to the "four corners" of the Earth.
Cosmology, however, is only one of the many topics I am interested in. Another area of interest to me is alternative health. There can't be too many alternative health systems that I have not at least investigated, if not practised, although I have whittled it down to half a dozen or so. One of them is "negative ion therapy". What's that got to do with the North Pole? Before I answer this question allow me to present some of the benefits of negative ions acknowledged by mainstream science.
Physical benefits:
Scientists at the University of California grew barley, oats lettuce and peas in an atmosphere
drastically reduced in ionization and found that growth was stunted and the plants diseased.
When the experiment was repeated in air carrying more than double the normal number of
negative ions, it produced accelerated growth.
Mental benefits:
Dr Felix Sulman, head of the Applied Pharmacology department at Jerusalem University,
conducted experiments with positive and negative ions on a cross-section of people. (his
subjects were two groups of men and women between twenty and sixty-five) When left for
about an hour in a room that contained an overdose of positive ions they became irritable
and fatigued. Yet the same people confined for the same period of time, in air containing an
overdose of negative ions, showed a pattern of brainwaves that suggested increased alertness
and relaxation. He tested their alertness and work capacity by various means. All of them
scored significantly higher, during and immediately after, their exposure to increased levels
of negative ions.
And what about spiritual benefit? Are there any?
"During the early 1990s, the acceptance grew for ion therapy, or negative air ionization as an alternative to pharmacologically induced procedures; patients reported a surge of spiritual intensity. While thus sedated, they claimed to have undergone a broad variety of psychic phenomena, such as their conscious mind separating from its physical body; live encounters with deceased relatives, friends or pets; meeting a Christ-like figure and long-dead celebrities; hovering high above the Earth or some other world; transcending space and time as fast as thought; receiving advanced knowledge about healing; visiting celestial parks and libraries; seeing past and future lives; or being bathed in the clear light of a cosmic love.
Investigators were surprised to learn that these visions were not confined to religious persons, but equally shared with patients indifferent to metaphysical questions, even hardcore atheists."
BEFORE ATLANTIS by Frank Joseph pages 218-219
It seems that negative ions are tremendously beneficial to all life - plants, animals and humans. The above info doesn't even scratch the surface! For more on the beneficial aspects of negative ions just browse the net; there is a wealth of information to be found there.
Some of the natural conditions that favour the generation of negative ions are thunderstorms and downpours, waterfalls and ocean shores, forests, mountains and caves.
Back to the North Pole: Aurorae are the result of two physical forces. In a nutshell: the positively charged ionosphere and the negatively charged Earth interact resulting in spectacular electrical discharges and the generation of negative ions. Lots of them - and then some!
Now let's assume that the North pole was indeed the cradle of the human race and let's think of the Arctic before the cataclysm - whatever that was - that caused the deluge. Except for the two months of arctic winter (which does NOT mean complete darkness as Warren explains!) our ancestors would have been bathed around the clock - not that they needed clocks! - in the life-and-warmth giving light of the sun and they would have been swimming in a veritable ocean of negative ions. You can literally not have enough of them!
Considering the above-mentioned benefits Earth would have been in every respect a paradise for all life! And I can't help wondering what kind of glorious creature early man would have been! It could make a grown man weep to think what we lost!
But perhaps we can all create our own little "arctic paradise"? You don't have to rely on natually created negative ions by moving to the Arctic. You could, for instance, visit man-made megalithic sites and standing stones - all of them found in locations rich in negative ions. Is that perhaps why they were erected in the first place? You could lie in the quartz-rich ion-generating sarcophagus in the King's Chamber. Was the mind-expanding effects of negative ions one of its purposes? None of those are realistic or practical options for most of us.
But, fortunately, there are easier ways. If you have the money you could visit a speleotherapy spa. Or - less expensive - you can buy a negative ion generator. They come in all sizes big and small, even portable. You can get bracelets that produce ions and even yoga mats that generate negative ions by the weight of your body on the quartz crystals embedded in the mat.
I have an ion generator in my bedroom and credit at least some of the quality of my sleep and dream life to the negative ions.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8132
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Thinkforyourself Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:25 pm
Posted by Bernard on 07/26/2015
I seem to have forgotten the link to Warren's book: www.thechosenites.wordpress.com on the page ODDS AND ENDS
I seem to have forgotten the link to Warren's book: www.thechosenites.wordpress.com on the page ODDS AND ENDS
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8132
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Thinkforyourself Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:26 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/11/2015
The Arctic Home In The Vedas
Go to the page ODDS AND ENDS
The Arctic Home In The Vedas
Go to the page ODDS AND ENDS
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8132
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Admin Fri Mar 18, 2016 4:27 pm
Last edited by Admin on Sat Apr 06, 2019 6:12 am; edited 2 times in total
Admin- Admin
- Posts : 1904
Points : 8959
Reputation : 3798
Join date : 2015-12-30 -
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Thinkforyourself Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:02 pm
Fabulous job Eric! Yet another video that puts to bed the idea that we live on a Globe.
No-one else, I repeat no-one else, makes videos as factual and informative as your videos, and that is why you revived this movement single-handedly, and why the Shills try so hard to discredit you. Thankfully, they only succeed in failing in that task, and in the process, they accidentally make videos like this one even more popular, which is a large error on their part, but a great result for us, because anyone with an open mind who watches this cannot help but have the Globe Earth lie challenged in their minds.
No-one else, I repeat no-one else, makes videos as factual and informative as your videos, and that is why you revived this movement single-handedly, and why the Shills try so hard to discredit you. Thankfully, they only succeed in failing in that task, and in the process, they accidentally make videos like this one even more popular, which is a large error on their part, but a great result for us, because anyone with an open mind who watches this cannot help but have the Globe Earth lie challenged in their minds.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8132
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Themis Fri Mar 18, 2016 10:07 pm
Good comparation and analyze Eric.
I have to repeat TFS :"no-one else, makes videos as factual and informative as your videos".
And noone has done so much for FE truth as you Eric.
I have to repeat TFS :"no-one else, makes videos as factual and informative as your videos".
And noone has done so much for FE truth as you Eric.
Themis- Posts : 48
Points : 3245
Reputation : 216
Join date : 2016-02-27
Thanks guys 
Admin- Admin
- Posts : 1904
Points : 8959
Reputation : 3798
Join date : 2015-12-30 -
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by susie Thu May 05, 2016 11:03 pm
Narration of North Pole adventurer's writings.
More evidence of Eden at the North pole and the connection between Asgard, Eden, Atlantis. Good references to old texts.
susie- Posts : 851
Points : 4391
Reputation : 477
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 64
Location : NOLA -
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by susie Tue May 10, 2016 2:06 pm
New Swabia (Neuschwabenland) and Base 211
This is an article about temperate zones found in Antarctica by Explorers in '43.
This is an article about temperate zones found in Antarctica by Explorers in '43.
susie- Posts : 851
Points : 4391
Reputation : 477
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 64
Location : NOLA -
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Schpankme Tue May 10, 2016 4:45 pm
susie wrote:New Swabia (Neuschwabenland) and Base 211
This is an article about temperate zones found in Antarctica by Explorers in '43.
This reads like US INC military propaganda spun after WWII.
"The US military and intelligence were apparently trying to locate the immense underground facility constructed by the Germans, before, during and immediately after the Second World War (Section-211)."
"The base was likely used to further their research and successful development of advanced propulsion technology, based on free energy"
Where are the detailed German Military records describing these events?
Schpankme- Posts : 1202
Points : 5869
Reputation : 1606
Join date : 2015-12-30
Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Beashambassador Tue May 17, 2016 7:16 pm
Deconstructing the Continent known as Antartica: Lofty ice wall reported in 1898. FEA 82
Beashambassador- Posts : 111
Points : 3444
Reputation : 306
Join date : 2016-01-12
Age : 78
Location : USA
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Tom Rob Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:27 pm
Antarctic Circumpolar Current only current to completely encircle Earth.
Makes sense only on a flat Earth.
Makes sense only on a flat Earth.
Tom Rob- Posts : 3
Points : 2987
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2016-02-27
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Admin Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:24 am
Heliocentrists forgot that tilting their ball back 23.4 degrees makes equatorial weather/temperature impossible:
Admin- Admin
- Posts : 1904
Points : 8959
Reputation : 3798
Join date : 2015-12-30 -
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Schpankme Mon Dec 05, 2016 7:04 am
Admin wrote:
Heliocentrists forgot that tilting their ball back 23.4 degrees makes equatorial weather/temperature impossible:
Exactly!
The ability of navigators to see the fixed Pole Star named Polaris (Stella Polaris, meaning "Pole Star") as far South as the Tropic of Capricorn, was the cause for the Church of Heliocentricism, in the late 19th century, to start claiming that the Earth's "axis was tilted 23.4 degrees from the plane of its orbit around the Sun."
Unfortunately, the Chruch didn't bother to account for the "equatorial weather patterns" on the newly created, and tilting ball Earth. bahaha
Schpankme- Posts : 1202
Points : 5869
Reputation : 1606
Join date : 2015-12-30
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by RickFE Fri Mar 24, 2017 1:08 am
Nice diagram lol. I would have to agree the climate doesn't match the model. Even more damning is the fact the average temp on earth is hotter in the northern hemisphere as opposed to the southern like they like to state. I was also triggered reading one of the first posts about William Swainson stating, " at night it gets cold enough to require a fire in the summer." This eludes to a sun making a greater circular pattern and being so far at night that its heat dissipates faster. In the north, it makes much smaller circles with its heat staying fairly stable until its return the following morning. Great thread, lots of great information.
RickFE- Posts : 71
Points : 2786
Reputation : 118
Join date : 2017-03-23
Age : 66
Location : Ontario Canada
Re: Polar Zones vs Temperate and Tropic Zones
by Hauchfer Thu May 19, 2022 8:02 pm
Having read and appreciated this thread, it got me thinking:
At any given time of year, the further south you are, the darker the sky should be at midnight (discounting things such as light pollution and, humidity, etc.).
For instance, midnight in Jakarta (8 S) should be darker than midnight in Hong Kong (23 N) and the night there should be darker than it is in Shanghai (30 N).
I remember someone writing something here about a scientist in New Zealand (40 S) not long after it became a country, who wasn’t able to do his experiments at night because it was too dark. This would be an example of anecdotal evidence.
I wonder, are there are any members here who have traveled widely between the different latitudes that can confirm this?
At any given time of year, the further south you are, the darker the sky should be at midnight (discounting things such as light pollution and, humidity, etc.).
For instance, midnight in Jakarta (8 S) should be darker than midnight in Hong Kong (23 N) and the night there should be darker than it is in Shanghai (30 N).
I remember someone writing something here about a scientist in New Zealand (40 S) not long after it became a country, who wasn’t able to do his experiments at night because it was too dark. This would be an example of anecdotal evidence.
I wonder, are there are any members here who have traveled widely between the different latitudes that can confirm this?
Hauchfer- Posts : 15
Points : 1390
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2020-07-23
tycho_brahe likes this post
Similar topics» Questions About the Flat Earth
» North Pole - South Pole Circumnavigation ... Or not?
» Flat Earth Shill Wall of Shame
» North Pole - South Pole Circumnavigation ... Or not?
» Flat Earth Shill Wall of Shame
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Arctic, Antarctic and Beyond the Ice Wall
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|