Catastrophic evolution occurs at magnetic reversals, says Australian archeologist – Video

“Darwin got it wrong,” says archeologist Peter Mungo Jupp.  “Mankind has been repeatedly destroyed and reborn since time immemorial.  Civilizations lay buried under rubble ruins abandoned in the middle of deserts and rainforests.”

“Catastrophic evolution occurs at magnetic reversals,” says Jupp.

See fascinating video:

Thanks to Kenneth Lund for this link

31 thoughts on “Catastrophic evolution occurs at magnetic reversals, says Australian archeologist – Video”

  1. our exterior magnetic shields been weakening for some time, and the nth and south poles are still wandering merrily..and its well and truly time for a swapround,
    doesnt appear to be any correlations with solar mag flips I can see though.

  2. If you study biochemistry you will know that evolution, in which a sponge becomes a human is a crock of bull puddy. Evolution is unscientific and absurd. Life forms appear and disappear – the geological record is this clear on this. Did the human eye really evolve through the god of chance? Even that idiot Darwin knew that the eye destroyed his inane and quite simpleton phase theory.

    • Evolution is not totally unscientific. Selective mutation is demonstrable on a number of levels and over relatively brief intervals with smaller organisms like viruses, germs and insects. Humans have selectively bred (and dramatically changed) many larger, more complex organisms. In some instances gradual changes have undoubtably occurred in larger organisms when shifts in environmental conditions brought about their physical changes through natural selection.

      However, the dramatic introduction of so many new species and the elimination of so many other species at magnetic reversals and climate boundaries really cannot be accounted for by natural selection, and there just isn’t much evidence of intermediate forms in the fossil record. This is the dirty little secret known to most evolutionary biologists. Most are well aware of it but don’t want to deal with it, because it is outside of their training. This is the problem with “modern” science. It is too compartmentalized and restrictive.

      We know that radiation can cause rapid mutation. There seems little doubt that many, if not most, new species arise in this way.

      In my book, there is room for both processes.

    • There is a lot of evidence that dinosaurs did not all die off at the end of the Jurassic Period. The is a good chance the Evolved into Birds. Darwin was not totally correct, but he also was not totally wrong.

    • uh, yeah .. evolution does not say that humans evolved from sponges, sponges are not mammals for one thing. There are lots of intermediate forms in the evolutionary tree of genus/species, most of which are no longer here. This, and an incomplete fossil record leave many gaps in our knowledge of what creatures led to development of subsequent creatures. It is pretty absurd to look at the structural similarities between various life forms, and come to the conclusion that evolution played no part. I am sure it did. And that does not preclude rapid jumps or mutational changes too, the evidence supports both possibilities. And keep in mind the earth is some 4.5 Billion years old. For most of that time, about 3.5 Billion and more of those years Earth was cooking up the rudiments of which eventually became more complex life forms. And once that complexity began, it took off and diversified rapidly. Fossilized examples of early earth life(Sponges, Algae) do not appear in the Geologic record until about the late Proterozoic or Early Cambrian at best, which was only about 600 Million years ago. 1000 Million is a Billion, so even if the earth is only 4 Billion Y.O., life on Earth has been for less than 25% of Earths geologic history.

      • Sorry, but not quite so.

        …The earliest evidence that we have of life on earth is in the form of microscopic fossils of bacteria that lived as early as 3.6 billion years ago. Evidence of blue-green algae were found in 3 billion year old rocks in the 1980’s

        The evidence thus far is that the first living things probably evolved within a billion years or so of the Earth’s formation…

  3. That was a very good presentation. Cosmic catastrophic events have punctuated earth’s history be it comets (feared by many ancient peoples)floods and tempests and coronal mass ejections hitting the earth not out of the question either. Dinosaurs were wiped out some 65 million years ago by such cosmic scale event, now it appears much more recently the Mega Fauna were similarly wiped out by a cosmic and global scale event some twenty thousand years ago or so. I agree with the Electric Universe Model and this video’s suggestion that DNA responds instantly to electromagnet perturbances makes a whole lot of sense to me. The question I posit is what does all the radio noise manufactured by our current civilization do to the DNA on the planet? Are we forcing evolution by making living DNA adapt to our artificial radio frequency pollution?

  4. I will believe in evolution if I can find one day, something simple, say like a silwer teaspoon inside a rock that developed by itself…….

    • Did you ever think that Creation and Evolution are the same thing? Creation talks about WHO, Evolution talks about HOW. They are not necessarily exclusive. You have to admit, man is not the same as he started, Evolution. Some people like to think we are here on purpose, some like to think we here by chance.

  5. Scientists are often, if not usually, some of the most closed minded people in on earth. They become psychologically and emotionally invested in their theories and what they “know” to be true, and they are unwilling to consider anything that contradicts them. All of which is the polar (no pun intended) opposite of the way they should be.

  6. There obviously has been many catastrophes, and always will be. I don’t see the link with magnetic reversal, and I don’t see where it supports an assertion that “Darwin got it wrong.”

  7. I don’t think we will have to wait for a magnetic reversal to trigger evolution and or mutation.
    Thanks to the 311 event there will be lots of mutation, evolution and extinction.
    If people and nations don’t start behaving themselves and start being more cautious about what they say or do magnetic reversals and even Fukushima will be the least of everybodies problems.

  8. Every person on Earth has a right to their opinion as long as they understand their purpose for even being alive?No one person will ever answer that!That’s why I BELIEVE in a much bigger entity,namely Christianity which preaches good values because science will not,can not answer every question,everyone here do not even imagine it is possible to know all.

  9. Hello to you all, heart warming seeing folk make sense of truth.

    Um, shouldn’t this be called a Polar reversal? This scenario would have to involve the Arctic circle borrowing a prefix from, oh i don’t know, somewhere.

    Now that would be an impressive wobble and quite likely unpleasant but what-the-hey! Who’s planning on living forever?

    Enjoy the ride because after this solar, cough, max i’m picking the people won’t need the News to tell them that it’s getting colder.

    I live in the roaring forties and am tingling for the day we realise that we can’t stay in New Zealand. I can’t wait to see all 7.5 billion of us squeeze into a narrow strip, say, 20 degrees either side of the equator.

    It pains me greatly that there would be plenty of room for all, and some to spare, but who’s going to bet that we can all get along?

    Good luck and be well.

  10. I believe that Darwin is partially right. Robert is I believe correct in as much as the magnetic pole shift allows cosmic radiation to bombard the planets surface which in a short space of time will mutate genes of all living things on the planet. Those that survive the radiation will in a short period of time see these mutations appearing in the animals and fauna that reproduce quickly. Humans of course may take a little longer. This is when Darwin’s theory of ‘survival of the fittest’ come in. If a creature is born with three legs or two heads and if it can out think or out run a predator then it may survive and pass its new genes on, if it can’t, it dies out. That is evolution for you.


  11. There is no evidence of evolution in the fossil record. Species appear suddenly. However Joe Public thinks evolution is completely real,let this be a warning to all those who think the myth of CO2 Global Warming will soon go away…… wont.

  12. Many evolutionists confuse adaptation for evolution. When a plant or animal adapts to their environment, it is not evolving into something else. Where are all the transitionary life forms, alive or in the fossil record? There should be millions of them.

  13. Robert: Note that the site has apparently been hacked. The pages have been modified with garbage links for “generic viagra”, etc.

      • Robert: I checked the site again today, same problem. An extra section containing the garbage appears at the top of each page.

      • Robert: I checked the site again today, same problem. An extra “div” section at the top of each page contains the garbage. I’m not sure why you aren’t seeing it.

  14. Here we go. Absolute Darwinian evolution (although Darwin dint invent the idea) isnt the whole story. It is more likely that the environment programs changes in the DNA of plants and animals that means that something one great grandmother did may change the DNA in her descendants. This has been shown by some researchers research into blood diseases that dont follow normal hereditary lines. ..Just an idea. Also life dint start on Earth..its a cosmological issue not a geological one. Look more closely at supernova for your origins.

  15. We have been taught that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. How do we know that for a fact?? We were taught that isotope radiological decay rates are constant, now there are studies indicating they might vary. Logically it makes no sense to me that this cosmos we take for granted just happened as an “oops.” The preponderance of visible evidence shows that the universe we live in had to have a designer. Entropy dictates that complex processes devolve, not the other way around. Yes, organisms and fauna adapt to their habitat, but I echo, where are all the fossils of the supposed intermediary organisms??? A dog will still begat a dog, and a cat will still begat a cat. People, I submit have not changed. They have been killing their brothers and sisters because of cosmetic differences and the assumption of property and things for the entirety of recorded human history. People were and still are killing each other over promiscuity and infatuation. Our recorded history is a history of war after war after war after war. The only way we have changed is that we have learned how to kill each other much more efficiently…

  16. “Catastrophic evolution” is an oxymoron. If he means that there was a punctuation event in the sense employed by Gould, perhaps. What really makes my teeth itch is the sad fact that not even many biologists have enough familiarity with Darwin to realize that he never discussed a “theory of evolution, EVER. Darwin advanced a theory of speciation – On the Origin of Species y’know. His proposal was that species emerge out of a breeding population’s response to selection, natural or human. The only fallacy is the isolation of human selection from natural selection.

    Both Darwin and Wallace noted that populations of domesticated animals and plants respond to the selecting behaviours of agriculturalists. Darwin argued that living examples of “natural selection” were to be seen in groups of species like the Galapagos finches. “Evolution” was a Victorian word for the emergence of apparently new forms from parents of different appearance – new from old as it were. Children do not look exactly like their parents and are precisely talented the same either. That is “evolution” in the Victorian sense. The very few times Darwin employs that word in Origin, he is using it in that specific sense: new generations do not precisely replicate parental generations.

    In short, all Darwin’s theory argued was that a known fact of animal and plant populations – their response to selective pressure – could account for the appearance of new species. We still employ that same property under the rubric of “selective breeding” today. Selective breeding is isomorphic with evolutionary change.

    Herbert Spencer was the lout who coined the “law of evolution” and slathered the language, along with an assumption that newer was better than old, all over Darwin’s theory of speciation. So, properly speaking, it would be “Absolute Spencerian Evolution.” If you doubt this about Spencer see First Principles by Spencer, published in 1896.

  17. Did you people know that the Earth’s magnetic field has moved 161 miles from January thru June of this year alone ? That also should explain the increases in Noctulucent clouds this year.
    The field is now speeding up towards Siberia much faster than last year. So at that rate it would be moving at 30 miles per month !
    Sitting around bars and restaurants and complaining about worthless movie stars and politics certainly won’t stop this anytime soon. The average person better wise up fast to all of this or risk certain extinction.

Comments are closed.