I propose to consider this "emptiness" and the unimportance of such a thing as "desert".
Of course, to consider what seems to be considered, to question what seems to be confirmed by everyone and chewed on us in school, the program was written by people unknown to us, who in turn studied other people who read it in some books, which were written by some other people, whom no one saw in their eyes either, and whether they were really their books or they were replaced, no one can say … for many it is unreasonable and stupid. It's easier to believe, believe, believe.
And I will give an example of why you cannot believe anything. Take the Sphinx. We all know how, that the Russian-Ukrainian media, that the European, that the American, they all work in the same vein: “The Sphinx is hollow! This is a sensation! We must find this entrance! We are looking! He's under the feet! And stuff like that. Tell me, why is the world media lying like that? Look at a photo of it before restoration and pay attention to the head:
Is the world media and government "scientists" not aware of the state of the restoration of the Sphinx? Or if the Russian-Ukrainian media is separate from the American-European one, then why did not at least one of them voice the stupidity of government scientists?
Also, take a look at the Sphinx after restoration:
It can be seen that the beautiful head was turned into a wretched shading before restoration. But still, you can easily see that the restorers left the hatch and you can go down to the Sphinx even today. And if the government media and government scientists pretend that they are idiots and do not understand the obvious, then, in fact, the contents of the Sphinx have not been removed anywhere. And the contents of the Sphinx have long been known to all governments. A reasonable comparison? Decide for yourself.
Promotional video:
What the “desert” is like was shown very well in the feature film Forbidden Kingdom. When a group of people was heading to the desert, there was such a dialogue "wow, it's hot in your desert." The Chinese man objects "this is not a desert … this is a desert" and points to the side of a heap of sand piled on an even "carpet" of fertile soil. Screen from there, this episode is about 54 minutes:
It is clear that this is Hollywood. Moreover, its owners, it seems to me, are the mafia that imposed generally accepted dogmas and now laugh at people's "knowledge" with entertaining films. I say it again, it seems to me.
And so, we have the Hollywood version of the desert. Now let's read how the appearance of the desert is described in the CHILDREN'S encyclopedia:
“Deserts are formed as a result of uneven distribution of heat and moisture. And this happened because above the equator the air heats up more and, rising up and cooling, loses a large amount of moisture, which falls in the form of tropical showers. After that, in the uppermost layers of the earth's atmosphere, the equatorial air begins to spread north and south, into the subtropics. Gradually, the air masses descend to the heated earth's surface, heat up even more here, but there is no moisture in them. Such circulation of air masses occurs all year round. The whole article is here.
The average person has the usual reaction from what he reads: "Well, there seems to be an explanation, whether I understood or not, it doesn't matter, it seems to be written in a clever way, which means you can believe." But I hold on to my head and one words: "our poor children"! Well, why can't you write in a simpler way and make it clear for children? Why is even the "children's encyclopedia" written exactly the way they wrote the Bible, which was read by many, but at least someone understood what they read, nobody knows? The same gibberish! As if the author of the Bible and the Children's Encyclopedia is one and the same.
Did you understand from the encyclopedia what a desert is? From this description, you will never understand, since each desert has a different origin. To understand this, it is enough to know the "variety" of deserts. For example, the same official science classifies the mainland of Antarctica as a "type" of deserts. Moreover, this is one, according to official science, from the great deserts on Earth! And here we already have different origins. Moreover, most of these origins are not natural, but man-made. Is this so, we eat further and look out the window.
Now compare the Antarctic desert with this photo:
How can such a pile of sand naturally pile up? Let's see what the "children's" encyclopedia tells us:
“Most deserts are surrounded by or bordering mountains. Mountains provide deserts with water - rivers flowing down the slopes irrigate foothill plains and then disappear into the sands. Rivers carry a lot of sand, clay, and fine gravel to the flat areas of deserts, which form the surface layer. Over time, in some places there is a meager soil cover, saturated with salts and poor in organic matter. But more often the surface of deserts is covered with sand or stony."
Let's take a ride on our planet and try to find at least something that matches this description.
1. Colored Desert, USA.
Official explanation: “The Colored Desert in the state of Arizona in the United States is a vast expanse of hills, plateaus, and individual steep hills. It is a dry land with sparse vegetation that has been heavily eroded. The name "Colored Desert" refers to the variety of colorful sedimentary layers that are visible against the backdrop of this rugged landscape. The relief of the Colored Desert is often compared to the multi-colored layers of a cake. The variety of shades of sandstone and mudstone layers is a result of the content of various minerals in sedimentary rocks and the speed at which they were deposited.
By alternative views, Pavel Ulyanov in his article showed how this "miracle of nature" can be achieved today. The article is titled "The Grand Canyon in the United States - An Ancient Uranium Mine" wakeuphuman.livejournal.com/1877.html
Dump of the Krasnooktyabrsk bauxite deposit. Kazakhstan:
Iron ore:
2. National Park Lencois Maranhenses (Lencois Maranhenses National Park) - located off the coast of the Atlantic Ocean in the northeast of Brazil, about 100 km northeast of the city of São Jose de Ribamar and 125 km from São Luis, in the state of Maranhao.
I do not know how anyone, but I am impressed by the contrast and sharp distinction. It seems to me that if this is a long-term phenomenon, not to mention a centuries-old one, then the drop should not be so impressively sharp. It should be smoother.
Also Brazil and also a picture.
And a couple more photos from Brazil:
3. The Atacama Desert in Chile does not fit into the "children's encyclopedia", it even breaks it a little, since the official science is recognized as the driest, but it is located far from the equator.
“According to NASA reports, the Atacama Desert in Chile is the driest desert in the world. It is 50 times drier than Death Valley in California in the United States. The desert covers more than 105,000 square kilometers and is mainly composed of salt pools, lava flows and sand. Average rainfall in this region is only 1 mm per year. Some weather stations never recorded any precipitation. The weather here is so dry that there are no glaciers even on the tops of the mountains, whose height reaches 6,500 m."
This is how the "authoritative" NASA described the situation and sighed with a light heart, calming down: the desert is empty and we have nothing more to study. But the "desert" itself categorically disagrees with this and decided to say her opinion and add a little resonance:
She just came to life! I wonder why all of a sudden such a miracle in our lifetime, do we want to think?
This is, according to the official statement that scientists, that NASA, the most disastrous place. But the Atacama Desert does not agree with this belief. I will put forward the assumption that this desert was made not so long ago, once in our time, for no reason at all and unexpectedly for the "minds", it suddenly came to life.
Those who like to brag that they know the word "photoshop", it's time to get active and shut up right away, since there is no Photoshop in terms of "falsification". Perhaps in terms of color correction, but then "photoshop" almost all modern photographs.
Official sources say: This reinforced concrete sculpture "Mano de Desierto" ("Mano de Desierto") with a height of 11 meters was erected in 1992, 75 km from the city of Antofagasta with financial support from the corporación Pro Antofagasta corporation.
salik.biz/articles/44205-gigantskaja-ruka-mano-de-deserto-v-pustyne-atakama-chili.html
4. Blooming Desert Anza Borrego, California.
Again we see the same picture and on the same continent. Only if the Atacama Desert bloomed relatively recently, then Anza Borrego began to bloom, again, I suppose, a little earlier, although not much. From that Anza Borrego does not cause such a resonance, although from the same opera. In general, I am sympathetic to the hypothesis that the "skin" was cut off from North America in many places, from which these places did not germinate for a long time, since the earth was removed from the roots of everything growing there before. It took time for new seeds to get to this place. If this turns out to be true, then Anza Borrego and Atacama can cease to be called "deserts".
5. Desert of White Sands (White Sands Desert). In the southern United States, in the state of New Mexico:
It is located almost on the border with Mexico. The desert is famous not so much for the white color of the sands, but for their composition. Usually desert sand consists of quartz with various impurities. However, the White Sands Desert is composed of gypsum, a natural calcium sulfate. Gypsum is one of the most abundant minerals on Earth, but large accumulations of it on the surface are not common (since calcium sulfate is noticeably soluble in water). In fact, the desert is the largest gypsum deposit.
Of course it looks very nice.
6. Another non-classical and the largest salt "desert" is the Uyuni Salt Flats, Bolivia.
This desert, located in Bolivia, can significantly change the way you think about deserts. According to the official versions, which can be reckoned with, but one should not believe one hundred percent (there is an alternative and very interesting hypothesis of the origin of this "desert"), this is a dried salt lake, whose relief is absolutely flat, and it is so large and transparent that it seems as if the sky is reflected, creating a landscape of different shades of blue. Another attractive aspect of this desert is the many colorful lakes that take on their color from the variety of minerals.
The Uyuni Salt Flats is the largest wet salt flats, stretching over 10,582 sq. km. The salt marsh contains large amounts of sodium, potassium, lithium, magnesium, and borax. It is estimated that it contains about 10 billion tons of salt, of which about 25,000 tons is mined annually.
But what the authors of alternative views are trying to draw your attention to is these hexagonal "cells":
The official science was afraid to seek out the reason for them, or rather to voice at least some explanation. If they comically called the "path of the giants" or "the tower of the Devil" "volcanic formation", which in fact is not, then of course they preferred not to see anything:
But the alternative showed itself boldly, even very much. Calling these cells, cells of a large and very large animal of the flint era.
Do you hardly believe this? But in vain. In search and research, one must be able to be not biased and ready for the most unusual, but which may ultimately turn out to be the most true.
The Uyuni salt marsh is certainly gorgeous in its appearance. Simply indescribable and beautiful.
7. Black Desert, Egypt:
Official version: Black Desert is an area where volcanic hills are covered with a lot of small black stones. The pebbles lie on top of the orange-brown earth, and therefore the desert is not completely black.
Personally, I am generally skeptical about the existence of volcanoes. In any case, when I talk with geologists or just with supporters of official explanations, instead of simple answers, I get copies and links, where the formulations are in the same biblical gibberish as we read in the "children's encyclopedia." Explain on my own and in accessible words, with colorful comparisons, which will confirm the knowledge of the subject from the inside, and not according to the method "I memorized and believed, I understand, but I cannot explain", the people who came across, as it turned out, are not quite capable. Maybe I'm just unlucky with geologists so far and will still meet with smart ones. Who will listen to me and express themselves, and are able to calmly and without nerves to answer quite simple, as for geologists, questions. I will not be harsh and say that volcanoes do not exist at all. I will only say if they are,then they may have the same story as with deserts - different origins, different reasons. And just the desire of geologists not to study volcanoes, but to cover up everything inconvenient with them, this leads to complete disappointment in such a science as "geology".
See for yourself. More like not traces of a former volcano, because the affected area is very large and no lava, but like a scorched forest of flint trees. If someone doubts that trees can be not only carbon, but also stone, I recommend that you familiarize yourself with Trovanty.
“The southern part of Romania has recently become known for its amazing finds -“living”stones that can grow, breathe and even multiply. The local population began to call them Trovants. Often, these cobblestones are dominated by a rounded shape, without sharp edges. As soon as the rain passes, the stones expand in volume and begin to grow like mushrooms. A small cobblestone weighing only a few grams can grow thousands of times. Full article: "Trovanti - Romanian" living "stones".
8. In addition to the Black Desert, Egypt also has the White:
Please do me the honor of doubting that you will not guess why the stones are so bizarre and how they even appeared as such:
And by the way, the "Black" desert pushes certain thoughts, with its resemblance to a "scorched forest". Plus, with the given example from Trovante, we get what we have. This is what scientists are afraid to say out loud. Namely, that the "flint life hypothesis" is not so unfounded, but in many places it is logical and quite convincing.
***
Well, we were convinced that the wording of the children's encyclopedia “rivers carry a lot of sand, clay, small gravel, forming the surface layer to the flat areas of deserts”, through no gate, with such a variety of “deserts”?
If not, we are not convinced, then we sit down on the bus of our excursion and go on. And this time let's look at the "classic" deserts, are rivers or nature in general capable of applying so much sand. And I want to emphasize that it is the beginning of the deserts that attracts my attention! I'm already silent about what's next.
Gobi Desert:
It's no big deal that the first photo is unconvincing and unimpressive since we're just getting started.
Also Gobi. Now pay attention to the level of the ground and how much sand is piled on it in the "small" Gobi desert:
Gobi again and the same picture:
But the next photo is a very big indicator that it is not that the rivers are not able to wash up so much, but also a natural disaster, since we do not observe smooth transitions. It even seems that this bulk of sands was dropped not so long ago, please pay attention to this in the lower photographs. Gobi Desert:
Chile. Desert Atacama. Here the photographer overdid it a little with color correction, but the signs are the same:
Altai, Mongolia:
Takla Makan: Desert of Death (China):
The same desert, estimate the scale:
Sahara:
Desert in Tunisia:
Photo from Google. I don't know where, but it fits very well with our theme. Note the two different carpets, one on the surface of the ground and on the other, sharply distinguished by the bulk of sand. Naturally, this cannot be done, it is clear that the sand was piled up:
The Lut Desert is located in the southeastern part of Iran:
Unfortunately, I didn't keep where I got the description, but it's very interesting: in the Lut Desert there are the world's highest sand pyramids - dunes. The tallest dunes recognized in the world, which are located in Libya, have a height of no more than 400 meters, but in the Lut Desert the height of some sand pyramids sometimes reaches 480 meters. There are 40 volcanic cones on the surface of the Lut Desert:
And this is the beginning of the Namib Desert. Here many things draw attention to themselves. Firstly, there is a sharp contrast at the junction of two carpets … well, what kind of catastrophe or river washing out can cover such a layer and stop abruptly and not merge into smoother transitions for millennia? Secondly, the height is very high. And thirdly, the lines are too straight, don't you think?
I showed the next photo to people and asked what it looked like. One said "isosceles pyramid lines", the second "looks like a man-made one." And it seems to me that the structure was covered with sand. Anyway, even if scientists are right that they do not see a pyramid there, this photograph is still not very convenient for their version of the origin of the deserts, since we see a huge pile of sand with a great difference with an even layer of earth.
Well, the final one. The last photo was recently thrown in a personal. I don't know where it is, but the photo shows that the level of the surface of the earth is "sandy", and other sand was piled on it. The fact that the sand is different is clearly visible in the photo:
Read the continuation here.
Best Regards, Snowfall Bullets
