kaphlooey.
Moderator: Moderators
kaphlooey.
For some time now, I have been thinking of Dr Tom Chalko's new theory on the earth’s core. Conventional science believes it to be a hot iron core at the centre of the planet. Dr Chalko's nuclear core theory which is a drift or eccentric which wobbles around just slightly out of centre is right on the money.
When I first read Michel’s journey to the ninth planet, I couldn’t help but think how dose Thao mean disappear? Did she mean civilization or whole planet?
It took time to understand Tom's new idea but..
An over heating nuclear core will do the following...
-affect ocean currents as the sea bed in places warm up slowly at first then more rapidly like the cold water in a pot on a stove.
-Melt glaciers and ice caps on mountains from underneath the ground even though the air temperature is still below freezing in places... this should be a very big warning sign and we are seeing this.
-weather patterns and climate cycles become more erratic and intensify, being both affected by the Sun and ocean currents which support them. Giving the ocean's temperature is slowly picking up.
During a full moon as the crust of the earth is pulled by the gravity effect of the moon and the sun the earths neutron emissions {That is tiny particles jumping up from the earth} increases 100 fold from the normal. And oddly neutrons are only emitted from something nuclear. During earthquakes strong neutron emissions are also present.
I Am convinced that the core of the earth is indeed nuclear and not cooling properly.
The climate change argument is a false and misleading argument by government and big business. Climate change is a natural cycle and the process is sped up by a polluting civilization, due to the over heating CORE.
Earth quakes will continue to intensify and their numbers will increase.
Tsunami’s or tidal waves will increase due to the under sea activity.
Massive glaciers may fall into the ocean razing the sea level, due to horrific earth quakes.
Volcanoes will continue to erupt and some may even explode.
Another very alarming thing that is about to happen is the suns solar cycle is about to become maximum. This means more heat energy will reach the earth and the earth is already absorbing to much... hotter earth... hotter core.. more action.
If nothing is done the core will begin to melt down like a large nuclear reactor. If this happens we will see volcanoes explode and islands appear and disappear under the sea. To top it off if nothing further is done The earth will become another asteroid belt in the solar system after it explodes.
I’m just wondering when we as a people will wake up and see the writing on the wall, before the planet disappears. Any suggestions ?
When I first read Michel’s journey to the ninth planet, I couldn’t help but think how dose Thao mean disappear? Did she mean civilization or whole planet?
It took time to understand Tom's new idea but..
An over heating nuclear core will do the following...
-affect ocean currents as the sea bed in places warm up slowly at first then more rapidly like the cold water in a pot on a stove.
-Melt glaciers and ice caps on mountains from underneath the ground even though the air temperature is still below freezing in places... this should be a very big warning sign and we are seeing this.
-weather patterns and climate cycles become more erratic and intensify, being both affected by the Sun and ocean currents which support them. Giving the ocean's temperature is slowly picking up.
During a full moon as the crust of the earth is pulled by the gravity effect of the moon and the sun the earths neutron emissions {That is tiny particles jumping up from the earth} increases 100 fold from the normal. And oddly neutrons are only emitted from something nuclear. During earthquakes strong neutron emissions are also present.
I Am convinced that the core of the earth is indeed nuclear and not cooling properly.
The climate change argument is a false and misleading argument by government and big business. Climate change is a natural cycle and the process is sped up by a polluting civilization, due to the over heating CORE.
Earth quakes will continue to intensify and their numbers will increase.
Tsunami’s or tidal waves will increase due to the under sea activity.
Massive glaciers may fall into the ocean razing the sea level, due to horrific earth quakes.
Volcanoes will continue to erupt and some may even explode.
Another very alarming thing that is about to happen is the suns solar cycle is about to become maximum. This means more heat energy will reach the earth and the earth is already absorbing to much... hotter earth... hotter core.. more action.
If nothing is done the core will begin to melt down like a large nuclear reactor. If this happens we will see volcanoes explode and islands appear and disappear under the sea. To top it off if nothing further is done The earth will become another asteroid belt in the solar system after it explodes.
I’m just wondering when we as a people will wake up and see the writing on the wall, before the planet disappears. Any suggestions ?
Re: kaphlooey.
Word on the streets is that uranium's a natural resource found in the ground.Ptah wrote:the earths neutron emissions {That is tiny particles jumping up from the earth} increases 100 fold from the normal. And oddly neutrons are only emitted from something nuclear. During earthquakes strong neutron emissions are also present.
Re: kaphlooey.
"Word on the streets is that uranium's a natural resource found in the ground."
Hi Matt,
Yes this is true, but from the NORMAL.. that means all the uranium and nuclear material that is placed in pockets around the globe on an avarage day radiates at a certain amount. But during a full moon the planet radiates 100 times this normal amount, back into space. So the question really is what is the source of this extra amount emitted ?
You also have to ask what original Nuclear Source did the uranium come from ?
My own understanding is that iron moltern or not {I'm talking about the core here} dose not produce uranium as a by-product !
Surely a Nuclear core's by-products reach near or on the suface of the planet from time to time depositing it as uranium and other decaying isotopes!?
Hi Matt,
Yes this is true, but from the NORMAL.. that means all the uranium and nuclear material that is placed in pockets around the globe on an avarage day radiates at a certain amount. But during a full moon the planet radiates 100 times this normal amount, back into space. So the question really is what is the source of this extra amount emitted ?
You also have to ask what original Nuclear Source did the uranium come from ?
My own understanding is that iron moltern or not {I'm talking about the core here} dose not produce uranium as a by-product !
Surely a Nuclear core's by-products reach near or on the suface of the planet from time to time depositing it as uranium and other decaying isotopes!?
Re: kaphlooey.
neutrons are very light(think of the size! ), and obviously would be affected greatly by the moons gravitational pulls. No extra is being emitted, just that the amount is concentrated. This is purely speculation though, just like yours, so don't take my word for it.
The original source would essentially be stardust - keep in mind uranium is a natural element found all over the universe, so it would actually be out of the ordinary for there to be none on planet earth!
The original source would essentially be stardust - keep in mind uranium is a natural element found all over the universe, so it would actually be out of the ordinary for there to be none on planet earth!
Re: kaphlooey.
[quote="Matt"]neutrons are very light(think of the size! ), and obviously would be affected greatly by the moons gravitational pulls. No extra is being emitted, just that the amount is concentrated. This is purely speculation though, just like yours, so don't take my word for it.
The original source would essentially be stardust - keep in mind uranium is a [i]natural[/i] element found all over the universe, so it would actually be out of the ordinary for there to be none on planet earth![/quote]
conceptually incorrect. Assuming under the earth crust , there is certain amount of radioactive material, during earth quake, the crust is ripped apart, exposing the radioactive material.There is no a thick crust to substantially block/absorb the fast moving neutrons, and hence, you will see an increase of neutron emission. The neutrons are moving very fast....0.2 to 0.8 speed of light.The gravity of the moon is just too weak to have any influence on the fast moving low mass objects.
The original source would essentially be stardust - keep in mind uranium is a [i]natural[/i] element found all over the universe, so it would actually be out of the ordinary for there to be none on planet earth![/quote]
conceptually incorrect. Assuming under the earth crust , there is certain amount of radioactive material, during earth quake, the crust is ripped apart, exposing the radioactive material.There is no a thick crust to substantially block/absorb the fast moving neutrons, and hence, you will see an increase of neutron emission. The neutrons are moving very fast....0.2 to 0.8 speed of light.The gravity of the moon is just too weak to have any influence on the fast moving low mass objects.
Re: kaphlooey.
hello Matt,
Neutrons in such volume must come from an original source of radioactivity. Nuclear decay. When an atom bomb is detonated, neutons are emitted first, from memory... its something like a billionth of a second, that most of the close range 50km or so genetic damage is done. Something nuclear like the core of the earth for example will react to Neutrons of an atom bomb detonation that reach the core and enrich the already decaying nuclear material, making it actually hotter. So therefore in turn superheated lava reach the inner crust making it more plastic causing volcanic activity and earthquakes.
I do not wish to continue with nuclear enrichment.
However...
The formation of the universe could be quite different from the excepted paradigim.
Star dust that created the planets and suns must be under special circumstances like stellar nurserys. That enrich a stars nuclear core and a planets core. Somehow a star and planet are made in the same way. This is not excepted in astrophysics.
An example of this is The asteroid belt in our solar system. Current thinking says it was an early abortion of a planet that went wrong in our infant solar system.
Under the current thinking as our solar system cooled it left hot gasses and material that formed planets around a cental sun that was under nuclear fission.
The planets grew do to bombardment of meteorites and comets, until these collision events became rare. They cooled and life eventually formed. from dinosaurs to animals and eventually we came along.
This holds true to the current idea of how we got here.
Notwithstanding....
About 4000 years ago some cultures wrote down about a planet that exploded in a solar system. 4000 years ago mankind was not as backward as you think. Some civilizations had earthquaked proof their buildings. They tracked a 26000 year calendar?? used plumbing and toilets. Heated Bricks to several thousand degrees. Followed the stars and planets every night, because thier gods travelled the heavens.... and the god who lived on that planet is now dead... oh my a deity died!? Lets mark that with a special occasion, and they did. Umm a planet that exploded in our solar system!
this is not execpted in any uncertain terms in any geophysics science currently. Because current thinking believes a planet must have a hot iron core that simply couldnt possibly explode. Ptah writing this is a heritic and must be burned at the stake with a turnip in his mouth.
Neutrons in such volume must come from an original source of radioactivity. Nuclear decay. When an atom bomb is detonated, neutons are emitted first, from memory... its something like a billionth of a second, that most of the close range 50km or so genetic damage is done. Something nuclear like the core of the earth for example will react to Neutrons of an atom bomb detonation that reach the core and enrich the already decaying nuclear material, making it actually hotter. So therefore in turn superheated lava reach the inner crust making it more plastic causing volcanic activity and earthquakes.
I do not wish to continue with nuclear enrichment.
However...
The formation of the universe could be quite different from the excepted paradigim.
Star dust that created the planets and suns must be under special circumstances like stellar nurserys. That enrich a stars nuclear core and a planets core. Somehow a star and planet are made in the same way. This is not excepted in astrophysics.
An example of this is The asteroid belt in our solar system. Current thinking says it was an early abortion of a planet that went wrong in our infant solar system.
Under the current thinking as our solar system cooled it left hot gasses and material that formed planets around a cental sun that was under nuclear fission.
The planets grew do to bombardment of meteorites and comets, until these collision events became rare. They cooled and life eventually formed. from dinosaurs to animals and eventually we came along.
This holds true to the current idea of how we got here.
Notwithstanding....
About 4000 years ago some cultures wrote down about a planet that exploded in a solar system. 4000 years ago mankind was not as backward as you think. Some civilizations had earthquaked proof their buildings. They tracked a 26000 year calendar?? used plumbing and toilets. Heated Bricks to several thousand degrees. Followed the stars and planets every night, because thier gods travelled the heavens.... and the god who lived on that planet is now dead... oh my a deity died!? Lets mark that with a special occasion, and they did. Umm a planet that exploded in our solar system!
this is not execpted in any uncertain terms in any geophysics science currently. Because current thinking believes a planet must have a hot iron core that simply couldnt possibly explode. Ptah writing this is a heritic and must be burned at the stake with a turnip in his mouth.
Re: kaphlooey.
bomohwkl wrote: conceptually incorrect. Assuming under the earth crust , there is certain amount of radioactive material, during earth quake, the crust is ripped apart, exposing the radioactive material.There is no a thick crust to substantially block/absorb the fast moving neutrons, and hence, you will see an increase of neutron emission. The neutrons are moving very fast....0.2 to 0.8 speed of light.The gravity of the moon is just too weak to have any influence on the fast moving low mass objects.
I'm not sure where earthquakes fit into this... but I'll take your word on the 0.2 to 0.8 the speed of light statistic. I will also assume that measurement is through a vacuum. Emission into space involves not only moving through the earths crust and atmosphere, but given it's vertical inclination in this instance, we must also factor in fighting against earth's own gravity. I believe the moon's gravity would be more than significant in this situation. But we aren't working with any math here, so this is actually kind of pointless to argue
Re: kaphlooey.
I am not a scientist, but obviously this subject has been talked about somewhere else on the forum. All i wanted to do was get a bit of feed back on the subject.
I like to use Galileo's precept "Freely to question and freely to answer".
Unless i talk about something i will never know any new questions and any new answers.
It is a subject that greatly interests me, as it seems mother nature is a bit slow at the moment to give her secrets away on, if she has a iron core or one the will take every body with it. My thinking tells me its urgent. But I've been wrong before.
I like to use Galileo's precept "Freely to question and freely to answer".
Unless i talk about something i will never know any new questions and any new answers.
It is a subject that greatly interests me, as it seems mother nature is a bit slow at the moment to give her secrets away on, if she has a iron core or one the will take every body with it. My thinking tells me its urgent. But I've been wrong before.
Re: kaphlooey.
p47.
This concept may need to be verified again to further confirm the deeper workings.
Once this step is understood, more info for coming to conclusions will be available to us.
2. For upheavals, occurring as deep as the centre, one might wonder how a core is constructed. Does not highly compressed gaseous matter have a potential to appear solid? Not sure, but it seems this case is subject to many conceptual thinking mistakes to speculate further on the core. It maybe more useful for scientist to devise different measurement tools as used earlier so to approach it from a new perspective.
Planet wide status monitoring of gaseous belts (pressure, movement, blockage, temperature checks etc..) would be my 1st guess for information gathering actions before going further.
1. For gaseous belts, search for topics about James Churchward's findings and who he met.This continent was raised by gaseous belts resulting
from upheavals, occurring as deep as the centre of the planet.
This concept may need to be verified again to further confirm the deeper workings.
Once this step is understood, more info for coming to conclusions will be available to us.
2. For upheavals, occurring as deep as the centre, one might wonder how a core is constructed. Does not highly compressed gaseous matter have a potential to appear solid? Not sure, but it seems this case is subject to many conceptual thinking mistakes to speculate further on the core. It maybe more useful for scientist to devise different measurement tools as used earlier so to approach it from a new perspective.
Planet wide status monitoring of gaseous belts (pressure, movement, blockage, temperature checks etc..) would be my 1st guess for information gathering actions before going further.