the impossible lost city "Mega".

Andre

Well, remember that a sphere has the most volume with the least surface area. If earth changes it's shape towards more spherical with volume remaining constant, then the surface area reduces. So the same amount of water has to be spread out over less surface. Result higher sea levels.

matthyaouw

For the surface area to change, surely there would be some notable crustal extension and subsequent shortening. Where do you propose this occurs?

edit: also, at what rate do these fluctuations occur? We have techniques good enough to measure the movement of the tectonic plates, so why haven't they picked this up?

Andre

Haven't you ever wondered what the cause was of all those parallel East west ridges in the Atlantic perpendicular to the Mid Atlantic ridge? How about the deep N/S rifts in the pacific

matthyaouw

You mean the strike-slip faults? As far as I'm aware those don't represent any extension or compression- the volume and thickness of the crust is not altered by them.

matthyaouw

http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0703/geoid1of3.html

Wouldn't sea level therefore correct itself to the changing shape of the earth if it was pulsating like you say? Or would this amplify the effect? I really am having a hard time getting my head round this one...

Andre

Think of the oceans as an independant fluid planet, shaping itself purely by it's own gravity and centrifugal forces. Now think of the Earth without water, basically having the same forces that makes up it's shape. But there are more forces acting on Earth, caused by the dynamics of the Earth Core and Mantle, which are only acting on the solid, not on the fluid. This would cause the Earth to make changes in it's shape, whereas the fluid part does not (in principle). of course there are complications like minute changes in gravity that make the oceans react to.

But remember it is all speculation of course. Just see if the idea fits to the empiric evidence.

matthyaouw

I don't know if you missed my question above: at what rate and magnitude do these fluctuations occur? We have techniques good enough to measure the movement of the tectonic plates, so have they picked this movement up?

Andre

It's supposed to explain the sudden transition to the unexplained non-Milankovitch 100,000 years isotope cycles in the ice cores and at the oceans floors, that started to occur about a million years ago.

baywax

How about Hydro Isostacy? There'd have to be fractures that disallowed the landmass to rise after the isostacy so perhaps a combination, one-two sink and shake?

Did I miss a link to underwater photos of this site?

matthyaouw

Andre, you can find several years worth of data for a whole network of incredibly accurate GPSs, including height data here: http://sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov/mbh/series.html

If your theory has something to it, there should be a reasonably good correlation between latitude and height variation over the course of the last few years. Why not put it to the test?

Mk

Haha, I know!

And for the ones that didn't get "the point of that statement" it had to do with sarcasm and poking fun at some people's ways of thinking

Andre

I don't have the impression that the movement is regular as in a harmonic cyclic, rather than being chaotic and more "catastrophic". Something like 5000-10.000 years of increased eccentricity of the geoide to get into the interglacials and then a much slower 20-30,000 retreat to a rounder situation, the glacial stadia and then silence again for ~50-60,000 years before a next cycle. This would reflect the pace of the typical cycles:

http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/pr...k-ice-core.jpg

Again, we are not looking at "temperature" here but isotope anomalies, which may have a completely different explanation in the pulsating Earth.

The last action took place between 19,000 yr and 9000 years. I have filled many threads here, mostly monologues, illustrating the weird things that happened. You will also find high tectonic activities and volcanims in that periods.

You might expect currently small pertubations around a stable situation.

Problem with testing this kind of ideas is the all-swans-are-white hypothesis, illustrated here.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=169202

So, the first step is falsifying the current hypothesis and I have a bunch of black swans, debunking the current beliefs about the Pleistocene ice age. You can't read my threads and not stumble upom links substantiating that. This cuban city is a beautiful white swan. So is Beijing under sea. So is the herd of 10 fossil Narwhals found in situ on October revolution islands in the Arctic sea on an elevation of 120 meters. Although the bones are beyond carbon dating, those are not mineralized yet, which would certainly limit the age to not more than 100,000 - 150,000 years but likely less.

Here is one of the vertebras:

http://home.wanadoo.nl/bijkerk/vertebra.JPG

Indeed we need a good prediction. I predict that Earth will gradually get rounder in the next 30,000 years. Hmm, testability?

So we keep collecting white swans, I have a dozen or so more, until we find that black one, then we move on to the next hypothesis.

baywax

There are so many examples of fossils of seabottom dwelling creatures being found at such heights as 14,000 feet in the Rockies.

this unrelated article has a passage about fossils at that altitude.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1031062625.htm

If this sort of dramatic change can happen with the crust (for many different reasons) then a city can sink to 2100 feet no problemo.

Please post a link to any photos of this MEGA site.

Andre

http://www.cuba.cu/ciencia/citma/ama/museo/exmari.htm

http://www.cuba.cu/ciencia/citma/ama/museo/exmar3i.htm
http://www.cuba.cu/ciencia/citma/ama/museo/exmar6i.htm
http://www.cuba.cu/ciencia/citma/ama/museo/exmar8i.htm

matthyaouw

I'll admit I'm getting quite caught up in this and want to discuss it more, but I have a sizeable essay to write for Thursday and exams the week after so I'm going to wait until later before I start properly reading up on this.

billiards

Looking at the data it is not at all clear that the structures are manmade. How can you say that it has not been destroyed when it is not even clear if it ever existed? Assuming that it really is a lost city, how can you rule out some kind of catatrophic event that might have destroyed the finer details of the city but left the general features in tact?

Andre

The sonars shows complex regular temple like structures of several hunderd meters along straight "roads" Some firm earthquakes may indeed not have destroyed the general outline. But landslides is a different game of course, you would not end up with rectangular constructions.

This all may be clear if you check on the details in the older threads. I seem to remember that we have discussed the credibility at length.