North Pole Heads South
blamanj writes "Things are not looking good for Santa. First, news that it's getting warmer at the North Pole, and now, scientists report that the (magnetic) pole itself is on the move. 'Earth's north magnetic pole is drifting from North America at such a clip that it could end up in Siberia in the next 50 years.'"
Is it true that we are overdue for a reversal in the polarity of the Earths magnetic field? Would this be a Bad Thing for us humans if it happened soon?
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Quick, call G.W. Bush that the russians are stealing the pole to hide weapons of mass destruction in siberia !
We haven't found them in Iraq, so they MUST be some else.
Santa doesn't live at the magnetic North Pole, silly.
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Does this mean the South Pole will shift to Chile or Argentina as well?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
But this site sure has them and this site has some too.
Read them. They are worth it.
It looks like there are two magnetic norths on the planet. Our current one looks like it is just the additive of the major and minor magnetic fields of the earth with their collective strengths oscillating over time... hence the apparent movement.
The magnetic North Pole has never been a single point.
It has always been a general area, and at any given point of time, the *actual* North Pole would be somewhere in that area.
So, given that, this is not really surprising.
The geographic north pole is north by definition, the magnetic north pole is not - so it can head south.
James P. Barrett
I never understood conservatives' problems with environmental issues. Things like global warming, the eventual depletion of fossil fuels, deforestation ... why is it stupid to consider this issues like this? I mean we live on this planet, don't you think we should look out for it? We're not going to get another shot at this. Once we fuck it up, we're extinct.
Politicians have a good reason to be anti-environment because they and their friends make serious bank by drilling oil, cutting down trees, running industries that pollute and the like. I can understand their point of view. But why does their profit mean anything to you? You realize that by supporting their point of view, you're just making them rich at the expense of the planet's (finite) resources, right?
Gamma rays are photons - i.e. light. They are not affected by the weak magnetif field surrounding the earth. Loss of the magnetic field would be devestating long term because it would make it easier for solar winds to slowly strip away the upper atmosphere.
But... a weakened field for a few decades will not send us all to early graves. The biggest impact of a changing magnetic field would be to:
- Navigation. I guess we all have to adjust to GPS and similar.
- Animal navigation. Sadly birds, fish, etc. haven't yet implemented and learned how to use GPS. They'll have loads of trouble.
In terms of dangers it poses to us in the next hundred or so years, should this be a continuation of the existing decrease/beginning of reversal in field strength, it's importance is way below things like climate change, oil reserves running out, etc.
Nuisance for us, a bitch for animals that rely on it to migrate, but as a race, the danger from it is effectively zero.
North Pole Heads South
Well, it didn't have much choice, did it? The north pole is the only place on earth where no matter where you're going, you're going south. So what's all the fuss about?
(of course the fact that it is actually moving is quite a story)
Well, there's two ways of looking at it: either the Earth's magnetic poles are labelled wrongly, or EVERY OTHER MAGNET IN ALL HISTORY is labelled wrongly. Take your pick.
Compasses aren't labelled incorrectly. The North side of a bar magnet in a compass is labelled North because that is the way it points, not for its magnetic pole. They aren't saying, "Hey, this is the North pole of this magnet," they are saying "Hey, this side of the magnet always points North." Those are two completely different meanings.
Have you read the NASA article that you linked? It says nothing about mass extinction events and polarity reversals in earth's history, it appears to be talking about mars. Now if you look at this link http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/venus/RevScience .html you would see that field does not coincide with mass extinctions. Furthermore when the last one happened paleontologists said there were no major changes in plant an animal life. So your mass extinction seems like a leap of imagination.