The New York Times On Earth's Magnetic Flip-Flop

TolkiEinstein writes "The New York Times reports that, relatively speaking, compasses may soon point South. It's long been known that Earth flips magnetically every half-million years or so, and, with the north pole's magnetic field at about 10-15 percent [less than] its strength of 150 years ago, many geologists feel a flip is coming up. Computer simulations also suggest that the current state of the magnetic field is indicative of an upcoming flip. Though it would take hundreds of years to complete, the impact on life may be significant but not catastrophic, including phenomena such as power-outages, satellite malfunctions and disruptions in the rhythmic functions of some animals such as loggerhead turtles. The EU plans to launch a trio of satellites in 2009 to assume polar orbits & monitor the field." (Cross your fingers for some nice solar wind.) Update: 07/13 17:02 GMT by T : Note: the summary here originally misstated the Times' article; the field 's strength has decreased 10-15 percent, rather than to 10-15 percent.

Comments

You know what IS Bush's fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

800 US soldiers dying for absolutely NOTHING in Iraq. THAT is George Bush's fault.

Anyone that supports George W Bush and his war in Iraq is a fucking moron.

-Cecil

Re:You know what IS Bush's fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who posts offtopic shit AND talks out of his ass because he knows nothing about foreign policy is a ball-bag licking pickle puffer. Here's your sign, teabagger.

Frist 5tOp

[Anonymous Coward]

achievements that rules to ffolow there are some people already; I'm antibacterial soap.

MOD THIS RUSH LIMBAUGH FAN DOWN

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone mod this jackass down. God I fucking hate right wing ideologues.=

Re:MOD THIS RUSH LIMBAUGH FAN DOWN

[ThaReetLad]

Soooo... you contend that only the truth riles, whereas slanderous lies and misinformation passed off as truth is OK. The problem is that in a public forum where no point of view has more weight or comes with better providence than another, people have no way to seperate fact from clever fiction.

Why read deliberate dis-info at all. . ?

[Fantastic Lad]

Ahhhh! 'Scientific American', a comfortable tool for subtle mind herding. It took me years to figure out just how tiresome that magazine really is. A voice piece for orthodox science.

Any page real estate they give to alternative view points was usually done in such a way as to subtly steer the reader's mind into thinking that s/he is choosing to believe the conventional wisdom out of their own free choice based on the evidence displayed, while forgetting entirely that the evidence is being picked and then editorially filtered by very biased men. Not a rigged jury; (The jury is the reader). It's more like both the lawyer for the defense and prosecution are both working toward the same goal.

In any case, pole shifts are the least of anybody's concerns. Based on everything I've looked at, they seem to me more like a result of bigger events than they are the main attraction.

-FL

Re:Why read deliberate dis-info at all. . ?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about this: orthodox theory says the earth is old. Physical evidence proves it is not. Yet you will never see an article in SA that proclaims a young earth. Why not? Simple. Admission of a young earth would add credence to the Biblical account. We all "know" that evolution, which requires an old earth/old universe, is "true" according to orthodox theory. We all "know" that the Biblical account could not possibly be true (despite the fact that no one can actually present real evidence that contradicts the Bible even though thousands have tried, or that all the real evidence verifies the Biblical account to the extent that "science" can do so). That being a given, any evidence that proves evolution impossible will be ignored by those who proclaim "orthodox" theory.
You can dismiss me as a creationist loony. That is easy and costs you nothing. Or you can actually investigate the truth. What is the evidence of an old earth? How do we arrive at those dates? What are the problems with our dating methods? What are the assumptions "orthodox" scientists are operating under, and are they reasonable given the evidence?

Re:Bush's fault

[hb253]

It's also very likely this administration would seek out some alternative "scientists" to present facts against the possibility of a magnetic pole flip (just like they did with the global warming issue).

I can hear them now...

Let's spend another 30 years studying the situation because we don't believe all the facts are in.

Grrrr

Re:Bush's fault

[multiplexo]

Actually the Bush administration will be working on a plan to suspend the elections in case of a sudden magnetic pole shift. For our own good of course.