Mark, a moderator from poleshift.ning and staunch ZetaTalk devotee, posed this question:
here's another example of ZT being the source of your material Cheryl.
https://earthchanges.ning.com/profiles/blogs/another-idea-for-a-tren... or do you claim that you came up with the idea of a shallow trench covered with a metal or sod-covered roof?
His original question and my original response is located at: https://earthchanges.ning.com/profiles/blogs/china-mirageswhats-the-truth.
Of course, Mark, I don't claim to have come up with the concept of a trench shelter covered with a metal or sod roof, but neither is the concept original with Troubled Times/Zetatalk. Trench shelters have been used in many wars because they are relatively quick to construct and provide protection. This article is based on source materials dating back to French military operations in 1914-1918. See http://www.151ril.com/content/history/french-army/15. For your convenience, here are some relevant quotes:
This article is about: "The subject of French army shelters and dugouts (along with trench construction in general)...."
The materials used to construct trench shelters: "The primary materials used in shelter construction in the French army were logs or wood poles, rocks and dirt. To a lesser degree, planks, sandbags, corrugated sheets of metal, steel rails and iron sheets were used."
Trenches for higher ranking officers is then discussed before coming to the lesser quality trenches for the common man's, the foot soldiers', trench shelters: "Last on the pecking order were the foot-soldiers. The conditions of their shelters varied, but in general they proved woefully inadequate for most of the war. Improvements only started coming about in the fall of 1917 to meet the demands of rebellious, discontent soldiers. Materials used in the construction of the foot-soldiers' shelter normally included sticks, wattles, gabions, and sheets of corrugated metal. To a lesser degree, sandbags, small logs, and planks might be employed. Universally, these shelters were dark, dank, filthy, vermin-infested holes or shacks that brought misery to every soldier."
How sturdy are trench shelters? "Inclement conditions such as heavy rains and mud, often lead to the shelters collapsing."
On sod/metal roofs: "Alternately, a section of covered trench could be used as shelter, consisting of a simple roof of light logs or poles laid across the top of the trench, covered over with a layer of sandbags or earth up to a foot thick. However, abundant examples exist of less reinforced covered trenches that consisted only of a layer of light logs or a panel of corrugated metal straddling the trench."
On the subject of sod (contrasted to just plain dirt): "Shelters for soldiers in the rear were often just as inadequate and miserable as those up at the front.... A crossbeam pole rested between these, which supported the roof of poles or light logs, covered over with hay, straw and/or sod."
Now, imagine lying in a shallow trench with such a roof with winds and rain at the high end of this demonstration: http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/hurricanesHistoryNew/index.html?SITE=FLPAP&SECTION=HOME. How safe would you really be?
This is a fascinating article which everyone should read in its entirety for more ideas on how to build a trench shelter, plans that have been field tested.
Prof. McCanney says a lot of water will be coming in during the passage, lots of hydrocarbons mixed in (meaning polluted water), and ancient texts and geologic records confirm the same. As the French learned from experience, trench shelters turn into mud and collapse. So, Mark, the solution Zetatalk proposes not only did not originate with them, but is being disseminated as a solution, when in fact it is neither a solution, nor is it safe in the context of the extremes that will be generated by the object following behind Comet Elenin. Because I care about people, I am going to great lengths to try and make the trench shelter concept safer and healthier, as well as more comfortable as well as possible.
Also, please pause to consider that if you had posted at poleshift.ning what you posted here, except praising this ning, you would have been banned from poleshift.ning in a heartbeat. But you weren't. You were able to enjoy freedom of speech, which this ning promotes. It's such a more pleasant atmosphere here. And, look, you learned something. Why? Because you were able to ask questions, even though in a bit of an aggressive manner. Education is important here. What if we had just banned you. You wouldn't have learned that your solution (if you are electing the trench shelter option) is fatally defective. Think of all the people who will be relying on the ZT solution. Most are going to die when their shelters disintegrate into a puddle of mud. Now do you understand why I analyze? Banning questions is just deflection because the material does not stand up under scrutiny.
Think about it, Mark. You are one of the few that has come here and can see we are not what she says we are. Did you know I have run an earthchanges website and yahoogroup since 2003 (and continue to do so)? I don't need any help. I was sent to help Gerard. Did you know Nancy and I were Gerard's first admins? When I came on board in early January 2010, the membership was under 300; when I left, it was over 1,600? I know Nancy drew a lot of attention because of her longevity on the internet, but did you know that during the time I was there that I referred over 700 members of my yahoogroup to poleshift.ning? Did they tell you that poleshift ning's rules were written by me, in concert with discussions with Nancy and Gerard? And why do you think Nancy bemoaned the loss of all my blogs? They were substantial. Did you know Nancy encouraged any poleshift ning member to commit theft by recovering one of my blogs and downloading two others without my permission and that they lost three copyright infringement claims because of their theft? Who's copying whom? I have documentation for all of this. And do I sound crazy, post-nervous-breakdown, weak, and all the false ZT she's proclaimed on me. Not hardly. I've been here almost every day since I left poleshift.ning. If you didn't know any of this, then you are only getting one side of the picture.
UPDATE 6/30/2011: Also realize that rolling would be caused by slip faults, which create a sideways motion and may not be the only type of earthquake. I lived through the Northridge Earthquake, five miles from epicenter, and it was a thruster, which creates an up and down motion--a more violent earthquake--which causes your body to fly up into the air and then gravity brings you back down, and this would be a repetitive motion, thus more potential for damage. Mountain building is a thruster-type earthquake. The power at play would be like throwing a rag doll into the air and letting it land where it will, but with much more mass and breakable objects in the human body than a rag doll. A better analogy would be throwing a carton of eggs into the air and see how many don't break after it lands a few times.
UPDATE 8/28/3011: See http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p916.htm for information on how to construct a pole-covered trench that would shield from radiation.
.jpg)
