there are more and more talk about it
Sure, it's easy fishing for woo artists. Scientists don't seem too concerned, of course.
it's not about fear mongering but it looks like it's on the way
No, it doesn't.
,lately scientist can't give full explanation why birds, fish died etc
We've discussed this to an extreme degree here and here. There is nothing out of the ordinary with any of the recently reported wildlife deaths, and you can look at the numbers on the USGS website.
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/359/263/Alarming_NOAA_data,_Rapid_Pole_Shift_In_Progress.html
look at the source who wrote it not beforeitsnews !
Wrong, the article was contributed by yet another anonymous idiot, using weasel words and a link to NOAA to steer readers away from the fact that everything except that data, including the ridiculous title, is uneducated speculation.
Magnetic drift is not de facto evidence of a magnetic reversal. In point of fact, a number of woo sites and boards have latched onto movement of the magnetic north pole as a harbinger of doom, but they ignore the fact that the magnetic south pole has wandered a bit less. I guess that's not as interesting, or not compatible with the woo agenda.
why magnetic shift is not possible?
I assume you mean magnetic reversal, and nobody says it isn't possible. What isn't possible is a magnetic reversal by or in 2012. Even if we're in the middle of one, it won't be over for centuries. Even if it could happen overnight, there's no reason to think such an event would be harmful, else we would find cataclysmic evidence in the fossil record corresponding with magnetic reversals in the geologic record. We don't find any such thing.
The chart in the BIN article is misleading. You can extrapolate straight lines from any given number of years, because you're just dealing with pairs of points. Take the last 50 years and break it into 10 year increments, and you'll find that the fifty-year "line" isn't so straight after all, but just wander in one general direction. Not that this is even significant per se, but the article's author sure likes to pretend it is.
This statement…
- "…the cumulative affect is now beginning to cause real-world issues…"
…is totally unsupported. I can only assume the author is referring to Tampa International's recent paint job, which is silly because airports generally have to update their markings every couple of decades. This isn't new. They have to be within the nearest ten degrees, so if 84.1 degrees becomes 85.5 degrees, the number gets changed from 80 to 90.
This statement…
- "Note that the earth’s magnetic field is what protects us from radiation…"
…is incomplete. Our planet's atmosphere also shields significant amounts of radiation. And again, we find nothing in the fossil recording indicating that geomagnetic reversals of the past allowed life-killing levels of radiation to reach the surface. Further, there's no reason to think that a geomagnetic reversal would cause the overall field strength to reach zero.
- "Without it, we would not survive."
Ridiculous.
- "Could a pole reversal cause a period of time in-between flip-flop such that we would be exposed to deadly radiation?"
Increased radiation, yes, but not by 2012, and probably not within any of our lifetimes.
"Deadly radiation?" No evidence that this has ever happened or that it even can.
