Sent from my iPhone
Glenn,
I vaguely remember seeing it on my iPhone, but it is not on the list anymore.
Hmmm ...
Send it again. Once in a while, foul-ups happen.
We do have an idea of where the northern orifice is, though. Have you seen this page? The experiences of the polar explorers of yesteryear do support this location along a striaght line from Beufort Bay to Severnaya Zemlya.
Location_Orifice
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
Location_Orifice
|
|
|
hollowearthbeliever wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
As I've said before, I firmly believe that there are MULTIPLE orifices -
both exposed/open air AND under water. I think the north region is
honeycombed with openings and thus the many variations of so many
fascinating stories. As before, this relates to the older Mars imagery
we've discussed as evidence of such structures and a thinning nature of the
polar regions vs the thicker equatorial region.
deandddd wrote:
Glenn,
I vaguely remember seeing it on my iPhone, but it is not on the list
anymore.
Hmmm ...
Send it again. Once in a while, foul-ups happen.
We do have an idea of where the northern orifice is, though. Have you seen
this page? The experiences of the polar explorers of yesteryear do support
this location along a striaght line from Beufort Bay to Severnaya Zemlya.
Location_Orifice http://www.holloworbs.com/Location_Orifice.htm
Location_Orifice
hollowearthbeliever wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
IRT the Beaufort Gyre, I am firmly convinced that it is the result of the massive amounts of fresh water that flow out one of the four rivers that separate the four different land masses shown on the Mercator maps of 1595, and 1620 or so - they are easy to find online.
Keep in mind of course that in order for water not to stagnate, it has to keep moving. I'm convinced that this is tied into the way the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic, and Japanese Current in the Pacific replenishes itself (possibly with the mainstream notion of the warmer water in the tropics influencing as well).
This of course would mean that rivers flowing into or out of the Southern opening are producing the same phenomenon. Does it not make sense that Mother Earth should circulate her "life blood" this way?
I have been reading of the voyages of Tristan Jones, Fritjof Nansen and Joshua Slocum lately and the "thought" elaborated above just entered my head...
Cheers!
Sheridan
deandddd wrote:
Glenn,
I vaguely remember seeing it on my iPhone, but it is not on the list anymore.
Hmmm ...
Send it again. Once in a while, foul-ups happen.
We do have an idea of where the northern orifice is, though. Have you seen this page? The experiences of the polar explorers of yesteryear do support this location along a striaght line from Beufort Bay to Severnaya Zemlya.
Location_Orifice
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
Location_Orifice
|
|
|
hollowearthbeliever wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
Soretna,
Well, Venus certainly seems to have dipolar orifices:
Best Online Casinos Australia - Trusted AU Pokies Picks Best Online Casinos Australia - Trusted AU Pokies Picks
Fourth image down.
Dean
To Sheridan
From: Dean
Brillant deduction on the Beaufort Gyre. It could be flowing out of some other orifice that we don't know about.
Here are my Nansen Notes from his book Farthest North:
Nansen Notes
Page 97: Monday, September 18th, 1893, Bielkoff Island. Latitude 75.5 degrees North.
Page 98: [ Still same entry as above. ] It was a strange feeling to be sailing away North in the dark night to unknown lands, over an open, rolling sea, where no ship, no boat had been before. We might have been hundreds of miles away in more southerly waters, the air was so mild for September in this latitude.
Tuesday, September 19th, I have never had such a spendid sail. On to the North, steadily North, with a good wind, as fast as steam and sail can take us, with an open sea mile after mile, watch after watch, through these unknown regions, always clearer and clearer of ice, one might say! ... We see “nothing but clear water” as Henriksen answered from the crow’s nest when I called up to him. When he was standing at the wheel later in the morning, and I was on the bridge, he suddenly said: “They think little at home in Norway just now that we are sailing straight for the pole in clear water. No, they don’t believe we have gotten so far.” ... Now we are almost in 77* North latitude. ...
I have almost to ask myself if this is not a dream.
Page 99: “ We had almost reached 78*
It seemed to me that there might be land at no great distance, we saw such a number of remarkable number of birds of various kinds. ... They were probably on their passage from some land in the North. ... Again, later, we saw small flocks of snipe, indicating the possible proximity of land.
Page 122: Today, moreover, we took solemn farewell of the Sun. Half of its disk showed at Noon for the last time above the edge of the ice in the South, a flattened body, with a dull red glow, but no heat.
Page 123: { At 78* 15’of latitude North } Sunday, October 29th, Peter shot a white fox this morning close in to the ship. For some time lately, we have been seeing fox tracks in the mornings, and one Sunday Mogstad saw the fox itself. It is remarkable that there should be so many foxes on this drift ice so far from land.
Page 124: [On November 8th, Nansen was ice locked at 7743’North and 138 08’East. But the warm opening was supposedly almost due North of him, at around 84* and about 3* East of him at 141* East. And the warmer open water to the South. Why was there ice at that point and why was he being pushed South so much in spite of a Northern undercurrent? Could it be that in spite of any Northern undercurrent, ice was being pushed South from out the opening? ]
Page 126: [ In the last paragraph, their readings suddenly indicate them to be much farther South than they had thought. Could it be that some flattening has confused them? ]
Note: The following paragraph is not completely from the book Farthest North. I have forgotten from where I culled it:
Nansen writes about the inclination of the needle. Speaking of Johnson, his aide: "One day - it was November 24th - he came in to supper a little after six o'clock, quite alarmed, and said: 'There has just been a singular inclination of the needle in twenty four degrees. And remarkably enough, its northern extremity pointed to the east.'" We again find in Peary's first voyage - page 67, - the following: "It had been observed that from the moment they had entered Lancaster Sound, the motion of the compass needle was very sluggish, and both this and its deviation increased as they progressed to the westward, and continued to do so in descending this inlet. Having reached latitude 73 degrees, they witnessed for the first time the curious phenomenon of the directive power of the needle becoming so weak as to be completely overcome by the attraction of the ship, so that the needle might now be said to point to the north pole of the ship." [Footnote end, No Italic]
Page 140: Pages 138 – 140: [At 79 degrees North, bears and foxes sighted. ]
Page 154: [On the 17th of January, 1894, his position had been 79* 41’North Latitude, 135* 29’ of longitude East. Now it is the next day. ]
Page 152: “ Thursday, January 18th. The wind that began yesterday had gone on blowing from ... S.S.E., S.E., and E.S.E. ... [ But now he anticipates a change ] Let us hope it is not bringing a Northerly wind ... It is curious that there is almost always a rise of the thermometer with these stronger winds, today it rose to 13* F below zero
( - 25* C ). A south wind of less velocity generally lowers the temperature, and a moderate North wind raises it.”
[If the opeining were at 84.4* North, while Nansen was at 79* North, then a North wind would be coming out of the interior, which would account for a slightly warmer temperature.]
Page 154: “But who expects to meet a walrus on close ice in the middle of a wild sea of a thousand fathoms depth, and that in the heart of winter? None of us ever heard of such a thing before; it is a perfect mystery.” [It would be, unless there were a land mass nearby; maybe coming up to the tip of the polar opening, but not extending out along the surface. ]
Page 160: Friday, February 16th. Hurrah! A meridian observation today shows 80* 01’ North latitude ... Today another noteworthy thing happened, which was that about midday, we saw the Sun, or, to be more correct, an image of the Sun, for it was only a mirage.”
Page 162: “Monday, February 19th. ... Both today and yesterday we have seen the mirage of the Sun again; today it was high above the horizon, and almost seemed to assume a round, disk-like form.“
The following is from a different book, from the notes to The Smokey God, I think:
Nansen, on page 394, says: "Today another noteworthy thing happened, which was that about midday we saw the sun, or to be more correct, an image of the sun, for it was only a mirage. A peculiar impression was produced by the sight of that glowing fire lit just above the outermost edge of the ice. According to the enthusiastic descriptions given by many Arctic travelers of the first appearance of this god of life after the long winter night, the impression ought to be one of jubilant excitement; but it was not so in my case. We had not expected to see it for some days yet, so that my feeling was rather one of pain, of disappointment, that we must have drifted farther south than we thought. So it was with pleasure I soon discovered that it could not be the sun itself. The mirage was at first a flattened-out, glowing red streak of fire on the horizon; later there were two streaks, the one above the other, with a dark space between; and from the maintop I could see four, or even five, such horizontal lines directly over one another, all of equal length, as if one could only imagine a square, dull-red sun, with horizontal dark streaks across it."
Page 182: [ From 80* 20 N ] “I take into consideration the striking warmth of the water deep down ... This warm water can hardly come from the Arctic Sea itself ... It can hardly be anything other than the Gulf Stream which finds its way hither “ [What else was he going to conclude? He wasn’t a hollow earther]
Page 192: “We had not expected to meet with much bird life in these desolate regions. On May 13, 1894, a gull paid a visit ... After that date, we regularly saw birds of different kinds in our vicinity until it became a daily occurrence.” [ Was land near?]
Page 201: “Wednesday, July 18th. Went on excursion with Blessing in the forenoon to collect specimens of the Brown snow and ice. ... The upper surface of the floes is nearly everywhere a dirty, brown color, or, at least, this sort of ice preponderates, while pure white floes ... are rare. I imagined this brown color must be due to the organisms I found in the newly frozen, brownish red ice last autumn (October); but the specimens I took today consist, for the most part, of mineral dust mingled with diatoms and other ingredients of organic origin.” [ Nansen mentions in the footnotes that ] “larger quantities of mud, however, are also often to be found on the ice ... but are doubtless more directly connected with land.”
Page 209: [ 81* North latitude ] “ Monday, August 27, 1894. Just as Blessing was going below after his watch tonight, he saw a white form rolling in the snow a little way off to the Southeast.” [ A polar bear was shot ]
Page 216: “ ... there is a perceptible deviation of the compass with every degree of longitude as one passes East or West.”
Page 288: “It became more and more of a riddle to me that we did not make greater progress Northward. I kept on calculating and adding up our marches later on, but always with the same result ... we must be far above the 86th parallel. It was becoming only too clear to me that the ice was moving southward.”
Page 291: “I find that we should yesterday have come farther South than 86* 5.3 North; ...I cannot explain it in any other manner than by the surmise that we have been drifting rapidly northward, which is very good for the Fram, but less so for us.”
Page 293: “In several cases these lumps of ice were, I noticed, intermixed with earthly matter. In one place the whole floe, from which blocks had been pressed up into a ridge, was entirely dark brown in color, but whether this was from mud or from organic matter I did not get near enough to determine.”
Page 293: “As we were hastening along we suddenly came across a immense piece of timber sticking up obliquely from the surface of the ice. It was Siberain Larch ... We marked it F.N,, H.J. 85*30 N, and went on our way. “
Page 294: “Friday, April 26th. ... I was not a little surprised yesterday morning when I suddenly saw the track of an animal in the snow. It was that of a fox, came about W.S.W. true, and went in an Easterly direction. The trail was quite fresh. What in the world was that fox doing up here? ... A warm-blooded mammal at the 85th parallel! “ [The fox was moving East, in the direction of the opening. ]
Page 296: “and soon the fog came down with the wind, which still blew from the same direction (N.N.E.). “
Hi Dean, I re sent my email to you guys regarding the Beaufort Gyre. Sheridan mentioned about the for rivers of Mercator Arctic map could be why the accumulation of huge amounts of fresh water is there. That was the point I was trying to get. Regarding a new orifice . Is the Beaufort Gyre in line with Sevemaya Zemlya and the Beaufort bay as you said. If the Arctic orifice is offset from the North Pole. Do you think the Antarctic opening is also offset.
Sent from my iPhone
Hollowearthbeliever wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
Sheridan , this is an excellent analysis...you have rightly pointed out that even the Gulf Stream phenomenon (quite unusual in it's own right) may have some indirect linkage to the fresh water/primary water surging up from the North Polar orifice(s) in the Beaufort Gyre .
The outward bulge of the Arctic Ocean around Beaufort Gyre has even been noticed and acknowledged in satellite photos .
I also like the thought process around circulation of Earth's life blood (fresh water) - the people who follow Gaia concept of "Mother Earth" would certainly agree . It also connects to the concept of the "whole earth water cycle" , as opposed to just the surface water cycle (including ground water) that mainstream scientists believe .
Regards
On Thu, Jan
3, 2019 at 8:09 PM Dean De Lucia [email protected]
Dean wrote:
On Thursday, January 3, 2019, 10:29:27
PM GMT-2, Glenn Hemmings [email protected]
ALLPLANETS-HOLLOW wrote:
Sent
from my iPhone
Glenn,
Ah!!! I meant to say Baffin bay, between Greenland - Ellesmere and Severnaya Zemlya.
The Arctic orifice, from the Japanese Weather Satellite image that we have, is hard to pin down. First of all, our view has an angle. Second of all, the Earth at that point is not only flat but slightly inward sloping. And angled view at a point where the surface is inward sloping? Yikes! I can't speak with absolute authority at the moment. Perhaps tomorrow I will be able to compare the Japanese image with my Atlas.
Dean
Glenn,
I have looked at the Japanese Weather Satellite clip several times, I have matched the broken up, Elizabeth Islands that appear to the East of Ellesmere. On the Siberian side, I identified Wrangel Island and New Siberian Islands further to the right along the coast. They are snow covered and appear as if they were three; my atlas shows that they are really two. The opening sits along a slant from the New Siberiian Islands to Baffin Bay. That could put it right on the North Pole.
Realize that it is hard for us to identify the North Pole because it is upon an inward slant. This means that somone could take you exactly to a point where the pole star sits above you and say "See, this is The North Pole", but because of the inward slanting effect, you would not be underneath the North Star. It becomes a case of "you don't even know what you know".
The magnetic Pole seems to be offset, but that Pole is not really a point, nor has it even been farily presented to the public.
On page 65 of my edition of The Hollow Earth, the March 1962 edition of Flying Saucers magazine is quoted. It carried an article entititled "The North Pole - Russian style", and confirmed that the North Magnetic Pole is a line 1,000 miles long.
First of all, here is the image from page 65: http://www.holloworbs.com/circular.htm http://www.holloworbs.com/circular.htm
I will quote from Page 66, from the middle paragraph:
"We have available, in the form of records of several hundred years, in Russian archives, a history of Arctic exploration, which proves our most important point beyond question:i.e., that the North Magnetic Pole is not a point but (deduce the Russians, a 'line' approximately 1,000 miles long. Before we go further, we might suggest that we think that they are wrong in this deduction and, instead of being a line, it is actually a circle. Because of a lack of space to place it on a globe, the Russians have been forced to compress their observations into a two dimensional area. They had to squeeze from two sides to make a line out of it. ..."
The radiation of particles slosh out all along the rim. It is perceived from farther out from the polar rim once its density lessens. And then somebody on one side with a compass will say "The Magnetic Pole is that way" And from another point, somone will say "Oh no, it is this way". From within the dense part sloshing out, the compass behaves in a drunken manner, and then a person with a compass cannot say much of anything.
But there could still be more than one opening, there could be other areas from which particles emanate. For example, whirlpools, and places where the crust is thin.
I will now quote Baloo the Bear "Have I given you a clue"?
Write me back.
Dean
(Dean, yes, Venus is a different ball of yarn. It does seem that it has
larger orifices due to some formative differentials or age.)