In the first installment of this series I examined the "Planet X Theory" that dominates a large part of the 2012 Doomer's attentions and tried to show why I believe it is nonsense. Still, this is only one of the many differing ideas that attempt to pinpoint the nature of what form the supposedly approaching apocalypse will take. In today's article, I will delve into another of these ideas, complete with my own research and opinions.
Another theory of the "2012 Apocalypse" asserts that a shifting of Earth's magnetic poles could be triggered as a result of a reduction of Earth's inherent magnetism. And, oddly enough, scientific findings seem to indicate that such a reduction or shrinking is actually occurring and has been for quite some time. In fact, it is accepted that the intensity of our planet's magnetic field has been weakening for the past 2,000 years and has declined better than 10 percent over the last 150 years alone (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/earth_magnetic_031212.html).
One part of this theory that can be immediately discarded is the frequent mention on online sites claiming NASA sources have admitted to something of this nature being predicted to occur in 2012. Like most untruths, this one finds its basis in a kernel of fact. The shift to which NASA is referring to is in regards to the sun, which shifts its polarity about every eleven years (this occurred last in 2001 and will occur next in 2012). It is a wholly normal event that very rarely affects our lives at all, mostly being a nuisance for satellites and radio operators. Still, that small bit of debunking only removes a piece of information that proponents of this theory use to try to cement their beliefs; it does not discredit the theory itself, and so we must continue in our examination.
The Earth has an iron core that creates a magnetic effect as it spins, much like any electromagnetic motor. Believers in this theory pose the question: what happens when you switch the polarity on such a motor? The answer being that it results in a reversal of rotation. Armed with that, their theory asserts that the Earth's metallic core would follow this same rule. I must admit that does, at the very least, sound logical to me, but I say that with the caveat that the science involved is way above my head. Next, they remind us of the fact that our planet's iron core is surrounded by a molten liquid layer and then a hot plastic layer that moves easily under pressure. It is for these reasons that they believe that - rather than total destruction of all life - this sudden reversal would create massive coastal tsunamis, huge Earthquakes and other phenomena for a short period as the planet rights itself.
In detail, they theorize that when the inner core reverses directions the liquid mantel will act just like any other liquid in a similar situation and start to swirl, eventually causing tension in the crust and resulting in major earthquakes and volcanic eruptions all over the world. Then, cue the hurricane-like winds caused by the facts that the winds would now be blowing in an opposite direction to the earth's spin. Then come the tsunamis as the crust and the core spin out of sink with each other, causing the oceans to buffet first the leading edge of the continents moving in new directions and then recede back into their basins and wash up over the opposite shore of each continent.
On the surface, this theory sounds not entirely outside the realm of possibility. Unlike many others, it is strengthened by seemingly accurate or at least plausible science, even though the debunking I accomplished above could be argued to remove this theory from the 2012 discussion altogether by destroying the NASA/2012 connection. Still, it seems perhaps to hold water as a generic Doomsday scenario. The problem here is that the people who espouse this theory also often try to strengthen their argument by pointing to the ancient worldwide flood myths, et al. There is where it sort of falls apart for me. Unless science is completely off its rocker and missing this call big time (which I'll admit is possible), the last time Earth experienced a pole-shift was around 780,000 years ago (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal) long before it is commonly-accepted that man has existed upon the earth. The point being that, even if you believe in the possibility of the flood (which I do), it is a bit of a stretch to blame it on a pole-shift. Also, it is interesting that none of the major scientifically-accepted historical extinction events coincides with the times of previous pole-shifts.
In my opinion, the only way you can give credence to this theory is if you also subscribe to at least one of the many "hidden history of mankind" theories that claim previous civilizations existed and were lost to memory long before the blossoming of what we currently believe were the first great societies of man. To my mind, that would be necessary in order to explain how people were here to observe an occurrence as remote as the last pole-shift. It simply isn't logical to believe in one and not the other. You must be willing to accept the one before you even consider the other.
With that being said, and in addition to the facts stated earlier in this article regarding the false NASA information, I don't consider this particular theory as a viable one any more than I did all the Planet X mumbo-jumbo. Honestly, I do have to confess that I've been intrigued by some of the things I've read on the "hidden history" subject, so I won't totally discount the possibility. For me though, any time the likelihood of an idea being proven true is dependent on so many other things also falling into place the odds are not in its favor. My advice would be to file this one away with the many other possible but unlikely doomsday scenarios, such as comet impacts, supernovas, et cetera.