Earth's Axis has changed

March 26, 2015

3-2015 Magnetic poles, inversion, crust slippage & other hypotheses

Filed under: axis change — mmc7 @ 10:24 pm

Here is some info on some of the “other” ideas and comments I have seen floating around the internet plus a few of my own.

#1 Inversion (upside down)

There is not enough landmass weight or land-based ice at the north pole to invert or flip the planet upside down.  Ice floating on water does not add weight or sea level increase to affect the balance of the planet. It merely displaces the water. When the planet makes its final shift, it will shift to the next heaviest point which would be the equator which is slightly larger than any vertical circumference and is also the heaviest area of landmass. Particularly, the Eurasian continent would likely be the heaviest point but the rotation would continue as before, even after the planet has shifted horizontally on its axis like the planet Uranus.

#2 Axis shift measurement changes

Our world gov’t “cover stories” would have you believe that these Tsunami’s only shifted the planet in ridiculously laughable amounts  measured in centimeters. This is the gov’ts effort to ridicule & discredit & spread disinformation to make the public feel stupid for having the audacity to ask. Deliberate gross underreporting is a method used by the gov’t hireling puppets & jackals to intimidate the public and make you feel foolish by giving you completely absurd miniscule amounts. Didn’t you feel ridiculous when you looked up and found these tiny reported shifts? That was the idea. To admit to the shift but make the amount so miniscule that you would feel ashamed  for asking. Plus they are trying to make the rest of us look crazy. Frankly, I don’t give a rats a$$ what they say because I already know the truth and cannot be intimidated by attacks and lies. It makes no difference to me whether anyone believes it or not. I have nothing to gain and they have everything to lose if the truth comes out. You are the ones who will suffer if you buy their ridiculous attempts to condescend & intimidate you.

If you live in the US… all you need to do is to look at the sunrise and sunset positions in the month of June (at the point where the sun contacts the horizon) and you can see with your own eyes that the sun is located to the north of the US. It should never be farther north than the tropic of cancer in Mid Mexico at any time. You should know this from grade school science.  That is not an axis change of centimeters as our gov’t puppet scientists claim. It is a change in hundreds of miles. Approximately 2000 miles farther north than it should be in June.

(See clock face below) Consider you are standing in the center of a clock facing true north. 12 is true north and 6 is south, 9 is west and 3 is east… In June, you will see the sun rising between 1-2 on the clock and setting between 10-11 on the clock face (at the point where the sun is in contact with the horizon). If the sun and axis were in the correct positions, the sun should be rising at 4 and setting at 8… to the south behind you.

Here is an image of the aprox changes in the sun’s position as of June 21 2014. The red dots are the current (June 21, 2014) positions of the sunrise and sunset from the central US on this date where it should NOT be if the axis were correct.

The pink dots are the location of the Tropic of cancer in Mid Mexico where the sun is supposed to be rising and setting. This is not a shift of mere centimeters. This is a shift of aprox 2000 miles… or more. Look for yourself this June. The gov’t cannot hide the sun. Don’t listen to puppet rhetoric. You can clearly see the sun is not where it is supposed to be. You don’t have to believe me either. You should remember this from grade school. Don’t let the gov’t intimidate you. Do your own thinking by checking the sun with your own eyes.

The two red dots denote the current (June 21, 2014) sunrise and sunset in June as seen from the central US due to the axis shift.

The two pink dots denote the normal sunrise and sunset in June where the sun should be if the axis were normal in June as seen from the central US before the shifts began to occur in 2004.

E axis Clock face2


#3 Wobble

If the planet was wobbling on its axis, the sunrise and sunset would not be rising and setting at evenly placed positions on the horizon. There is a slow wobble over thousands of years called Precession. But if we were wobbling daily, it would have to be a perfect wobble which only occurred at midday which would be unlikely. If we were wobbling annually, then we would not have the perfect opposite position of seeing the sun 2000 miles farther north in the summer and 2000 miles farther south in the winter. This is indicative of the static angle of our axis shift which has basically doubled from our original degree of axis tilt. There is a slight wobble of a few miles but not enough to be discernible to the naked eye. Here is a link describing the types of precession.

#4 Magnetic north

Actually, they claim the dipole magnetic north is located at the south pole… but for the sake of argument… we are talking about magnetic north as the direction in which your compass needle points to the north in this post. True north is the center point at the center of the north pole where the planet rotates on its axis. Magnetic north is the location where your compass points. At one time, magnetic north was in Canada. It continues to move farther north each year and is actually closer to true north than it has ever been in the past couple hundred years which is just the opposite to what I had heard.

Keep in mind that the center of the earth is a molten magma of a conglomerate of melted elements and ores under extreme heat, pressure, planetary rotation & gravitational field of the orbit around the sun. The magma and molten metal composite are in constant motion caused by heating and cooling action of the currents of molten materials flowing inside the core. Similar to a lava lamp. When such temperatures exceed white hot, they become an eerie iridescent blue in color which you can see inside a nuclear reactor. I suspect that the earth’s core is so superheated it is likely a nuclear blue color at the very center of the core until it surfaces and mixes with oxygen and ground waters where it erupts as a red hot Lava.

You won’t see this info anywhere else. This is my personal opinion… I do not believe Earths center core is solid like they are now claiming. It is junk science and another attempt at revisionism to gain 15 minutes of self-serving, unmerited attention while making a mess out of our science texts.

The temperatures at the center of the earth are so hot and the pressures are so extreme, there is no element capable of being solid under those conditions at the center core of the earth. This should be the hottest point on our planet with the highest pressures. So hot, the center should be blue like you would see in a nuclear reactor. The diagrams you see depicting a red earth’s core should actually have blue in the center, surrounded by a ring of white, another ring of yellow, another ring of orange and a final outer ring of red magma. The densest components (heavy metals, lead and iron) would likely reside in the center of the core, surrounded by the less dense ores and metals circulating in the outer rings.

This is my rendition of the core heat rings with the hottest nuclear blue in the center with each outer layer slightly cooler.

E clr earth core

These molten metals still contain magnetic properties but they also flow and move within the core as you might see in a lava lamp where the heat forces the materials away from the heat source which later drop back toward the heat source when they begin to cool. In the case of a planetary core, the materials would drop toward the center as the cool and rise from the center as they get hotter. This type of constant flow occurs within the core of the earth which creates, affects and alters the shape & behavior of the magnetic field it creates. The rotation of the planet helps to keep the core centered, hot, under pressure and active with the centrifugal motion. It is the quantity of iron contained in the core which dictates the strength of the magnetic core for any planet. The core composition materials vary from one planetary body to another.

As the axis shifts, this will change the relationship of the molten materials flowing in the core and their behaviors. While this following photo shows convection flow, I believe it is actually more of a circular motion like you would see in a stew pot or a lava lamp except rising from the center outward in circular spiral pools. Not vertical as in the photo. In fact, when thinking of the coriolis effect which is what drives spiral gravitational effects on storms, draining water, etc… think of a sphere covered with tornadoes where all of the tornado tip tails are pointing toward the inner center of the core and the tops are facing away at the outer edges of the mantle. Not in vertical coils like the photo below. Thus, gravity travels in spirals, not straight lines and the spinning is reversed based on the polarity of the hemisphere.

E convection_rolls

The only way the magnetic poles would “flip” would be if the earth began to rotate backward. If the earth were to invert upside down, then it would appear to be rotating backward but it would actually still be rotating the same way as it always had… just upside down. I believe the planet Venus is like this. But as I said in the previous segments, earth does not have enough top weight to physically invert completely upside down. Only onto its side. The iron content is what generates the magnetic field. So there is no danger of magnetic inversion unless our scientists come up with something stupid like placing monster sized particle accelerators (larger renditions of Cern) at the north and south poles. (They wouldn’t do something stupid like that, would they? It’s hard to tell since the most recent images of the north and south pole we are allowed to see are dated 17 years ago in 1998… and even then they obscure the central pole area. Isn’t it interesting that Russia, China, Japan, Europe, etc., can all see what our gov’t is doing from their own satellites… but our gov’t keeps all of this info and imagery concealed from the public… who pay for all of this with their hard earned tax dollars the gov’t carelessly splurges).

It is the thickness of the crust and the actual centering of the core within the earth and flow of molten magnetic iron materials which pinpoints the location of magnetic north versus true north. So the amount of pressure changes from volcanic activity between the tectonic plates under the oceans and release of pressures from volcanic ranges can allow thinning of the crust at those locations or offsetting the center of the core which allows the magnetic north to shift slowly over the years. But it wont shift away from the poles even if the earth tips onto its side unless the rotational characteristics change… which is unlikely. We will continue to rotate at the same speed and direction even if the earth is on its side. Other than a rotation change, the only other problems which would affect the characteristics of the magnetic field would be from a severe loss or change to the earths central core position, pressure, magnetic components or temperatures.

#5 Basic Gravity & Rotation concepts

The physical size of the core and planet also relates to the gravity of a planet. Mostly, it is the size of the core than the size of the planet where the planet has different outer characteristics such as a gas giant which affects mass and density. Mars is half the size of earth and has half the gravity. The moon is 1/6 the size of earth and has 1/6 gravity.  Venus is nearly the same size as Earth and has almost the same gravity.

Being in the orbit of a planet or sun also helps maintain the internal action, pressure and heating of the planetary core and rotation. A planet or moon which is not in orbit and free floating for eons is likely to have a cold, inactive core and no gravity or electromagnetic field. If the core of a planet or moon was cold and not active, it would not produce the electromagnetic fields, gravity or metered rotation. It could be spinning erratically from being hurled out into space by a force or large event, but not a regular, clockwork rotation which is caused by the reaction of the planet magnetic poles interacting with the sun’s magnetic poles… or a moon interacting with a planet in a similar fashion.

A cold core would be the same as a dead asteroid or rock in space without any gravity. It may have magnetic properties like a chunk of magnetized iron but not generating an electro magnetic field like an electromagnet we see in active planetary cores. It would not produce gravity without an active core. However, if the theory that orbital process controlled the gravity was correct, then the gravitational pull would not so closely match the size of the planet and core and the gravitational intensity would have been based on distance of orbit and speed rather than the physical size of the planet or moon. If the theory that the rotation of a planet controlled the gravity was correct, as has often been suggested, then the moon would have no gravity since it does not rotate. However, this could indicate that the core of our moon is cooling or missing the necessary magnetic elements to create the magnetic field required to interact with earth where the like magnetic poles would cause it to rotate.

However, the inertia exerted from orbital forces does create down pressures on the planet and core similar to spinning around with a bucket of water which does not spill due to the inertia from the spinning motion. While this does not create the gravity or the electromagnetic fields, it does affect mass, pressure and characteristic behavior of the core. The orbital field also maintains the rotation action of the planet as it interacts with the magnetic polarization properties of the sun. The rotation of the planet is similar to the way a super-cooled magnet will behave and spin when placed next to a like magnetic pole which causes the second magnet to repel and spin. The repelling force of the like magnetic pole of the planet interacts with the like magnetic pole of the sun and causes the planet to spin (rotate) like the super-cooled magnet analogy. The down force of the orbital inertia keeps the planet in a static spinning position which prevents the planet from spinning off and repelled into space and away from the sun the like a  magnet. So the magnetic poles cause the planet to spin (rotate) while the sun’s gravity and orbital inertia keep the spinning planet captured in a steady orbit. Creating a controlled spin or rotation.

If the planet completely inverted, the molten core would not invert with the planet… the same way the fluid inside a rubber ball would not turn upside down with the ball. The liquid in the center would maintain its perspective and would still be affected by the rotation and orbital forces. It would certainly stir up the molten center, but not invert it. All magnetic north poles appear to be aligned in the same direction by the galactic forces. I think we will see this throughout the galaxy and possibly a universal constant. I would think this also applies at the atomic level as well. If the magnetic poles were to invert with the planet, then that planet would be attracted by the sun instead of repelled and would end up being pulled toward the sun.

I believe there is one planet in our solar system which rotates backward in the opposite direction from the other planets. This situation would be caused by a planet which had inverted upside down on its axis. But its magnetic properties would still have north on top, otherwise it would not spin and would be pulled into the sun by the magnetic opposites attract principle.

If Earth had been top heavy, then we would have the potential for inverting upside down when the axis shifts. But the north pole does not have sufficient landmass to create a full inversion to counter the weight at the south pole… so the Earth will end up rotating on its side like the planet Uranus. The Earth will only return to a normal upright axis tilt when sufficient ice weight has reformed and restored the anchor point at the south pole enough to force it back into an upright position. Since this has happened 11 times in Earth’s past, this pattern of behavior will likely continue until some surviving population gets smart enough to ensure that the ice levels at the south pole are meticulously maintained to ensure it does not occur again… at least until the sun begins enlarging with age in the far distant future and makes the planet uninhabitable.

#6 Shifting crust over core

This is a non issue since the earths core is molten surrounded by a solid crust. The molten materials freely move inside the center of the earth’s core at all times. It is like filling a rubber ball with liquid. If you change the orientation of the rubber ball by rolling it sideways, the liquid inside is going to act independently depending on the viscosity of the fluid and the action of the rotation of the spinning rubber ball on that fluid inside as the ball rolls onto its side, still spinning. So to talk about the earth’s crust shifting over the core IS the design of the planet due to our molten core which is always in motion. Similar to the characteristics of a lava lamp. Heat creates a constant flow of circulating molten materials as the conglomerate of different molten elements and ores cool and reheat like the materials within a lava lamp except the source of the highest heat in the earth’s core is at the center and not the bottom. Convection is the circulation of those molten materials under heat and pressure and material densities. The core is also subject to the effects of the constant rotation & magnetic fields as well as the planetary orbit and effects of the sun’s gravitational field. So the molten core will always react independently of the solid crust until the day it finally becomes cool and solid. There is no abnormal slipping of the crust around the core. It is a ball with viscous liquid in the center… and behaves accordingly when the tilt is altered as it continues to rotate and orbit the sun.

#7 Star positions, GPS & Satellite dishes

See the previous post on star charts, blizzards and bizarre weather which includes detailed info and photos. There is also detailed info about the GPS system, satellite dishes, star charts & weather which can be accessed on

This is my previous post on star positions including images of  star charts

#8 Revisionist History

There is a lot of junk science going on in most of the professional fields. Trashing the theories of predecessors just to replace them with their own feeble substitutions. I think the most absurd claim is the one where they believe the moon is a conglomerate of space rocks which smashed together and subsequently heated. A child would know better than this feeble hypothesis currently in use. Or the similar giant impact hypothesis. Ridiculous. Clearly, the moon and the earth were molten when they formed… hence the spherical shapes. If they were from a collision or conglomerate they would not be spherical… but that logic seems to have escaped them. Liquid takes a spherical shape in the vacuum of space. Grade school science.  So, either the moon was formed as a separate body from the same spinning vortex of heated materials as the earth and was pulled into orbit or it was a piece of the earth which separated just before it was starting to cool. The way you see a drop of water divide. If you look at a view of the Pacific Ocean on Google Earth, you can see this area could easily be the scar of separation for the moon while both were clearly still molten. Like other liquids which are spherical in shape in a weightless vacuum, the liquid sphere can be separated into multiple spherical spheres which all would reestablish a spherical shape. Hence, earth could have separated into two bodies creating our own moon while it was in a molten state.

However, when you talk about the moons of mars, both of those moons are clearly chunks of rocks from some large asteroid which entered orbit as they passed by. Neither of Mars moons are spherical. Common sense tells you that spherical planets and moons were all formed while molten. Those formed by collision are irregular such as the moons of Mars.

While we are at it, that planet Uranus is pronounced U Rain US…. not Urine US as the historical revisionists would have us believe nor is it Yur anus either. I still have dictionaries from the 50’s to prove it.

  • Renault= Ren AWLT. NOT Ren OH
  • Homage= HAW maj NOT OH mazh.

We need to stand our ground against these ridiculous revisions & public brain washings. Don’t be a puppet. We also need to boycott any site or institution which omits Pluto. We don’t have to stand for this absurdity of rewriting history. In fact, there are supposed to be about 12 planets in our system out near pluto; 3 which they never added. But they changed all the books just because one group of jerks decided one morning in 2006 that they didn’t like Pluto anymore? Pluto orbits the sun, it rotates, it has gravity and it has 4 moons. That makes it a planet in my book regardless of the size or what some group of amateurs say.

#9 Planetary balance

As I have mentioned, the south pole acts as a gyroscopic anchor which maintains the balance of the planet and the tilt of the axis. As the glacier ice melts from the Antarctic continent at an alarming rate, this has allowed the Earth to shift on its axis. We are now at the tipping point which you can see for yourself simply by looking at the  current position of the sunrise and sunset during the month of June. You can clearly see how far north of the US the sun is located when it should never be north of the tropic of Cancer in Mid Mexico. Most of the axis shifts have created Tsunami’s which were usually also accompanied by earthquakes.

As the ice melts at the south pole, it allows the planet to shift on its axis. However, it will not be necessary for ALL the ice to melt for our planet to shift onto its side. This is a false comfort zone. The earth will shift onto its side long before the ice melts. We are currently at the halfway tipping point where only a tiny amount of additional melting of south pole ice will generate the final shift of the axis onto our side while there is still plenty of ice cover at the Antarctic. So remember, just because you see ice at the south pole, it does not mean you have plenty of time. In fact, we have run out of time and it is only a matter of enough melt to tip us the rest of the way onto our side where the poles are rotating horizontally. This will create enormous tsunamis and extreme summer and winter weather and temperature conditions which will wipe out massive levels of human and animal life on the planet, not to mention vegetation. Survival will be very precarious and mostly in the tropical regions after the initial tsunami’s flood the continents and reach a stable condition.

To avoid repeating everything, here are my previous posts on pertinent issues:

My post on how the south pole affects the axis shift.

My post about Tsunami’s

My  post on Blizzards & Bizarre weather








Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: