# The same river everywhere



## Myrrinda (Apr 26, 2021)

Ah, how beautiful! Going for a hike, and then sitting by the river, watching the water flow by, pondering the beauty of nature and the power of water! Supposedly, the water is forming these awesome rivers all over the world over thousands, naaah, millions of years. Nature is just the best designer, we know it.

(Translation note: „_Schleife_“ is a bow, you can tie it, put it into you hair or decorate a present with it. I would rather translate it as a „loop“. The correct word would be „meander“ which also exists in German with a capital M, but a _Schleife_ is cute so I will go with that. Plural: _Schleifen_)

*Schleifen all over the World!*​Let‘s start in good old Germany: The Moselschleife of the river Mosel in Rhineland-Palatinate  - super great wine from the Mosel, I highly recommend it!

_photo by a Christoph Partsch on Pixabay_

The Saarschleife of the river Saar in Saarland (photo by a Phrontis on wiki):


Now let‘s move a little to the West, to Spain to be exact: The beautiful river Alagón with it‘s Meandro del Melero, here we have our meander again, but Meandro sounds more profound, like everything in Spanish! 

_photo by a Jesusccastillo on wiki_

Ok let‘s rather go east and a little southwards, what about beautfiul Montenegro?
There we have the city of Crnojević and the very nice Rijeka (river) Crnojevića (photo by a Nicolas Vollmer on flickr)


Oh wait, we need to catch our plane and go to the USA!

How about visting the Horseshoe Bend (there we have another word for Schleife!) in the Colorado River:


Let‘s stay a little in the USA. I couldn‘t find a CC image, so you will have to click this link https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/forellen-flussschleife-76267610.jpg to look at a nice river in Franklin County, Malone, New  York (it said it in the search result, I couldn't find another picture but you get the idea, this could really be anywhere).

You can put pictures like these into Google and reverse-find all kinds of rivers that look like this. I put these pictures together in half an hour or so, I‘m sure there are rivers like this in Asia and everywhere else, South America, you name it, they have it – a river with a nice _Schleife_ in it!

Ok, let‘s get back to Germany again. As you may or may not know, Germany has coal. In the West, but also in the East.

This is near Leipzig, Saxony:



For me, these rivers are completely artificial. They all look the same. Once you see it, you can‘t un-see it.

I was wondering (a few years ago already) about the Moselschleife and that it totally looks like the Saarschleife, and the Horseshoe Bend. Then, on one of these Russian Livejournals (I think most of you know what I mean) they were talking about how the whole world is a big mine, and I thought the _Schleifen_ come from this, from the mining. I'm totally convinced by now.

_Who did it?* I don‘t know!*

What materials were they mining?* I don‘t know!*

Where did it all go? *I don‘t know.*_

But looking at the surface mining operations in Eastern Germany (and elsewhere), I think – should „we“ survive what is coming next – „we“ are going to have great places to go for a hike with great views, and market for tourists in the future, where we can sit and look and contemplate how awesome rivers are!

But maybe the signs will say „This Schleife/Meandro/Bend is brought to you by XY Mining Corporation, enjoy the view and don‘t forget to buy a bow in the gift shop!“





> Note: This OP was recovered from the Sh.org archive.





> Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: TonepDate: 2020-01-26 06:09:44Reaction Score: 3


That's a good observation.


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: jd755Date: 2020-01-26 10:32:38Reaction Score: 9


Interesting idea. Are you suggesting all rivers are man made after strip mining creations?
Here'sa famous curve in Yunan.


----------



## Myrrinda (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: MyrrindaDate: 2020-01-26 11:29:00Reaction Score: 2


No, not all, but certainly some, with these characteristic bends/meanders. It would be sad if all rivers were because of mining, I wouldn't want it to be this way, also the mountains. Some look like electric discharge patterns (there is a thread for that) but some mountain ranges are leftovers from mining operations, too. Luckily not all. That would suck!


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: jd755Date: 2020-01-26 12:28:59Reaction Score: 3


Thank you. If I don't ask I don't find out.
The strip mining is something I discuss on occasions with ice nine as where she is in this plane she sees evidence everyhwere yet where I am I see none so I do have an interest in it ut from the angle of why no strip mining here on this island.
Do uou have a set of features of these horseshoe river curves which ay help to distinguish man made from natural when looking at photographs or better yet sat down 'on the spot' to try and figure it out.
Reason for asking is the coal stripper in Germany doesn't create a peak in the middle but the spoil forms 'hills' to the sides parallel with its direction of travel, unlike the horseshoes in the photographs above.
I do clearly see the siilarity between the process you show at the mine and the look of some of the hills in the photographs and the lack of vegetation is marked, although that could also simply be overgrazing and deforestation or being above a tree line for example, but still it is intriuging.


----------



## Myrrinda (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: MyrrindaDate: 2020-01-26 15:22:51Reaction Score: 1


I couldn't find a better photo to be honest! On the russian livejournal he had one, but I even forgot which website it was, and it has been a few years ago, at least two. I'm sorry, I didn't think this through it seems. Should have taken more time to research but I finally wanted to start a thread here, reading so much never contributing any ideas made me feel a little bad, but now even worse because I can't show you better pictures! 
Maybe I'm totally on the wrong track with my thinking about the rivers, but if I am, this won't change the thing itself (large mining leftovers everywhere)


----------



## KD Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: KorbenDallasDate: 2020-01-26 15:37:14Reaction Score: 10


I believe patterns mean a lot. We are trained to think “natural”, and more than that, we are trained what direction of thought will label us as a crazy person.

In my opinion, your observations are consistent with your line of thinking.

_Could our planet Earth be one huge quarry?_


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: jd755Date: 2020-01-26 17:21:25Reaction Score: 2




Myrrinda said:


> I didn't think this through it seems.


Bullshit. The overthinking of things is far more dangerous to one's sanity in my experience. First impressions are spot on more often than not and they require zsero thought.
Can you get to see any examples of horsehoe rivers or coal miming tailings in your immediate area to get an on the ground feel in 3D so too speak for them both and share here?


KorbenDallas said:


> I believe patterns mean a lot.


We are pattern recognisers first and foremost in every respect from visuals through all the senses to the immune syatem and likely all other bodily system such as bacteria balance. It is the way we experience the world around us.


----------



## Myrrinda (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: MyrrindaDate: 2020-01-26 17:27:33Reaction Score: 0


They made the Rhine straight, nothing to see here, but I plan on a day trip to the Mosel in spring or summer with my husband, I want to see it and feel into it, and also... The wine... I tell you it's the best 

Edited: we live on top of loess here, far and wide. I used to think from a mud flood but wait a minute, what if it is the spoil from something else?! They mined something and just dumped all the leftover stuff here...


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: jd755Date: 2020-01-26 18:04:58Reaction Score: 1




Myrrinda said:


> They made the Rhine straight,
> we live on top of loess here, far and wide.


The two things river and loess are intimately connected. Straightening the river is about the worst thing they could do to the fertility of the land. The replenishing of the fertility  by deposition from the flooding of the river no longer happens hence year by year the quality of the food produced falls and falls. Unitended or intended consequence?
Now that would be something to figure out!


----------



## conductor (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: conductorDate: 2020-01-27 00:18:13Reaction Score: 1


That reminds me of the official explanation of how oxbow lakes form. This short video is an example.



Nearby me, there is a small stream in the woods that I sometimes go hiking to. There is a meander/curve in the stream that looks like it is going to become a miniature oxbow lake. I often stare at that spot and wonder what made the stream curve in the first place? I wonder if it is natural.

Rivers are sometimes diverted for mining operations, both big and small. I've seen actual mining operations that have done this in Alaska. When I was there, I thought "I wonder if curves in rivers are from mining operations?"

Perhaps the answer is BOTH can be true.


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: BrokenAgateDate: 2020-01-27 02:06:13Reaction Score: 6


Once humans are done with a place, nature takes over. Erosion softens the angles, rain fills up the basins and makes rivers, vegetation covers the evidence that humans were ever there. So maybe we are seeing both man and nature when we look at a river. Sylvie, in one of her New Earth videos, showed pictures of mountains in Antarctica that look exactly like a Bagger machine took huge bites out of the landscape.


----------



## Myrrinda (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: MyrrindaDate: 2020-01-27 19:14:15Reaction Score: 6


The Rhine is a story in and of itself! Germany is not natural anymore, except for small areas in Bavaria or so, and even there... We don't have wilderness anymore. We can't even begin to understand places like Canada or Alaska without going there. I have never been there, would love to!  

Rivers need space, water needs to flow naturally and the humans think they make everything more efficient, when in reality they screw it up. Viktor Schauberger had a lot to say about that, he's worth looking into!


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: hendyDate: 2020-02-01 14:34:09Reaction Score: 0


It's just self-similarity within nature. These formations happen at big scales like you've shown and much smaller ones. They're fractal.


----------



## KD Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: KorbenDallasDate: 2020-02-01 15:52:20Reaction Score: 1


Is nature natural though? Did it create itself?


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: hendyDate: 2020-02-01 16:08:49Reaction Score: 1


I believe in a creator, so it makes sense to me. Nature is a big analog computer and is all encoded.

A couple of really good books that might you make think twice about what we're seeing with water (and two that blew my mind to bits). 

(Links to search results so as to not favour a site over another)

"Hidden Messages in Water" Dr. Masaru Emoto
"Fourth Phase of Water" - Dr. Gerald Pollack


----------



## iseidon (Jan 20, 2022)

I'm not even more interested in the rivers themselves, but in the structures they create. After all, the presence of a clear structure, already 100% indicates the anthropogenic origin of rivers.

I was lucky. Yekaterinburg is in the very center of such a figure. The Iset and Pyshma (+ Tura) go to it. So I didn't even have to look for a long time to find an interesting area. 

But the same is found all over the world. You only need the computing power to put it all together and shape it into complex layered maps and databases.



Spoiler: River structures



Ural watershed




Yayva and Kosva structures



Connection Vishera – Kosva



Yekaterinburg is at the junction of the Eurasian divide and the Chernozem top line.



Sky Blue – Tura. Pink – Iset.￼


----------



## iseidon (Jan 23, 2022)

Cast your eyes on one system. Understand it. And create your own system. Or develop the one you already have.

Let me try to describe the structure of the world's rivers. Given that the period of water (its current value) for humanity is coming to its gradual end, it is important to understand the structure of the resource. Because structure is the only thing that is useful to us before the coming changes. Only the resource will change.

Rivers are not chaotic entities in their totality. They are created by an intelligent force, from a rational standpoint. What that rational force is, again, does not matter. But I think it is the same force behind the creation of conditional trees, blood and nerve systems, etc.

The mountains were created first. By whom, when, and of what, in this case, does not matter. The fact is only that mountains were assembled. Their purpose is to create conditions for the formation of a huge amount of condensate. This condensation is what serves as our water. Our healing fluid. This condensate is reached by a relatively "natural" means. Alternatively, there are some mechanisms inside the mountains to "produce" water. Again, in this case, not so important. But the numerous rumors of bunkers in the headwaters of rivers, hints us mildly at this. That makes the water in the mountains the cleanest. But it is difficult for more people to live in the mountains. From what immediately follows the conclusion that this water must be brought over the entire surface. But it is dangerous to let the water down the open canals alone, as the speed of the huge amount of condensate is also great, which will lead to constant outflows of water from the river beds at the sources, which can lead to the destruction of the mountain structure. The water should be distributed smoothly over the whole surface. And let it down gradually. The lines of river watersheds play the role of these distribution lines. Under them, there are "natural" analogues of pipes, from which gradually (each stage lower than the previous one) flow more and more rivers. The lower the river, the farther it is from the source of the basins, the weaker such a river is. This is what we observe in life. The weakest rivers from major watershed lines are at the very end of the rivers that feed the major rivers.

But since huge streams of rivers can carry not only a drinking function, but also a logistical and energy function, in addition to underground distribution lines, we need visible lines. Plus, it is possible to distribute the load to replenish the system with water resources, thanks to "natural" precipitation. That's what rivers are. In order not to disturb the mountain structure, the rivers near the mountains were laid quite narrow, so that, in theory, it is more profitable to place small hydroelectric power plants there, because the pressure there is high enough. But the capacity there will be small because of the small volumes of water. (That is why large hydropower plants are located at the junction of the interests of the width, slope angle and flow velocity of the river). When the water flows down from the mountains, then the riverbed can already be widened. In addition to the pure mountain channel river, tributaries from the distributary watershed lines are already joining it. The lower the river descends, the greater the number of such tributaries becomes. At a certain point, there comes a stage when another extension of the river is necessary. On all sides, tributaries are still being connected. And thus, a huge river is formed, which flows into a large body of water. The lower the river descends, the lower the speed of its flow, but the wider its channel. The dirtier the river, if no efforts are made to prevent pollution.

All rivers in the world, or the vast majority of them, flow from the top down. From the reservoir mountains (or their distributary elements) to the ocean (or other large body of water). Knowing this, can the idea of turning rivers be pushed through to you? It is impossible to turn rivers without changing the whole structure of river water formation. And no one is talking about it. Until we learn to control and change such structures under ourselves (is it necessary?), any talk about turning the direction of the rivers is the ravings of a madman, which will only lead to... I don't even know what it would lead to. What economic need can justify disrupting a system that has already been established before us? The only need is to reduce the number of consumers of critical resources and destroy the area economically. After all, even an idiot can see that to make water flow from the bottom to the top requires additional costs.

At a certain point, the system failed and began to deliver more resource than the system could handle. It was impossible to widen the rivers in all sections, so they started to make new channels in the necessary sections with the help of a rotary excavator or its analogues. Thanks to that, it was possible to moderate both the speed of the current and the pressure. The water was more evenly distributed than before. Later, when they were convinced that the water had receded "forever", they began to build cities in these areas, and the islands were created accordingly, as it turned out to be extremely advantageous from an economic and logistical point of view. Some more time passed, and the rivers began to give out more of the resource again. The energy industry needed more and more water. And the rivers, as they were, could no longer withstand it. Once again, "consumption increases, but production lags behind." Again the flood... Once again from universal greed, avarice, stupidity and pride.... Where is the line that separates these concepts... This time already, huge rivers had to be widened. They have become even more enormous. I think the reader understands that the earth's resource will sooner or later come to an end. By gutting the land in the lowlands of the huge rivers where the huge cities used to be, leaving only a void there, we will remove one of the constraints. In so doing, we weaken the overall structure. Its limit will become closer to the source, which will increase the pressure on the rest of the systems. What will humanity do then? Sooner or later, there will be nowhere to expand. We'll destroy continent after continent, as we've done before. But we need energy too. So what to do? Drive most of humanity into the Stone Age to give the system time to recover while the "best minds of humanity" decide what to do next? The scheme is old. Unworkable. Allows only to postpone the inevitable, but no more. Find a new approach to solving the problem concerning our energy supply? But in any case, it will be connected with the withdrawal of a resource from the higher "nature". Consequently, it will lead to the same problems that mankind had before with water. 

And the most important question comes out next. Will mankind be able to safely transition to another energy source? After all, the conditional water system will still produce the same volume of water. But only it will no longer be needed. Mankind will no longer be able to digest it. Even if every person on the planet is provided with water. And in order to reduce this water output, which anyway cannot be recycled, it will be necessary again (for the umpteenth time), to destroy water-breathing systems. And then bury them in the sand. Of course, reducing the number of consumers will make the energy transition smoother, but what next? After all, if the transition is successful, what will it be like to live on a planet with even more deserts? 

If we talk about the long-term prospects, the way out is, unfortunately, obvious. Mankind will not be able to solve the tasks set by life with the tools it currently has. What other tools can life offer us? What will the new human beings have to adapt to in order to survive? My answer is the nervous system. It is to the development of the capabilities of the nervous system that the remnant of humanity will need to throw all available resources at once, when most people will no longer have enough resources. And this realization will reach the majority of people only then. If they develop these abilities, not only will the majority that followed the shepherd be buried, but the shepherds themselves will be buried because they will be unprepared for the new reality. It will not be better-no illusions needed. It will only be different. Man will become dependent, to a greater extent, not on air and water, but on the waves surrounding him. And sooner or later there will be a force that will also claim the rights to the waves, as now the rights to water and air are claimed. But mankind will find a way out again. This is how mankind will evolve in small steps. By doing so, it will be destroying itself. And resurrecting again. This is the path of humanity.

And don't have any illusions about the unification of all mankind. As much as I, for example, would not like this. The forces that advocate such unification are too insignificant and weak. Whereas the forces advocating disengagement, from one angle or another, are too global and strong. This does not mean that we should give up. It only means that what is needed are people who want this unification themselves. They see it as a vital necessity. They understand that the coming changes will put modern man in the position of a man walking on all fours during the transition of man to two-legged mobility. And that it is possible to survive these coming changes only by providing a new perspective and a new branch of development of both man and humanity. And this possible branch is mentioned in the article. Only it, so far, is not yet under the full control of superior, above man, technogenic forces. In order to have more such people - and it is necessary to strive for the unification of mankind. Strive for the impossible - you will reach the maximum.

Take care of yourself and look for common ground with the people around you. In these times of atomized society - this is very important, in my opinion.


----------



## Lazy (Jan 23, 2022)

Where I mainly grew up, Durham, County Durham, land of the palatine princes, had its own army and currency (kind of) until about 1840. Another one of those river bends, but with an eff-off scary looking monolith crowning the peninsula. The river banks are full of coal outcroppings, and County Durham IS coal.

I'll leave this without any links I'm a bit pre-occupied with another one of my music heroes escaping hmmm.

Lots and lots of monks. They apparently straightened the river further upstream. 

Hope this ramble adds to this thread! And the photos may look similar to what has been posted before

<edit to add photos and restructure sentences>


----------



## Myrrinda (Mar 19, 2022)

Thank you  all for finding this thread,  i had forgotten about it!

@iseidon  thanks for your input,  I really enjoy reading your posts on the forum, do you have a blog or website?


----------



## iseidon (Mar 19, 2022)

Myrrinda said:


> Thank you  all for finding this thread,  i had forgotten about it!
> 
> @iseidon  thanks for your input,  I really enjoy reading your posts on the forum, do you have a blog or website?


Only a page in VK and an account in one of the Russian political sites (where I have only 9 articles, and I don't plan to write more, unless inspiration strikes). I have no access to a computer at the moment (only my phone), which makes me feel very limited. And it will last somewhere till June-July. That is why I cannot write anything serious.


----------



## Myrrinda (Mar 19, 2022)

iseidon said:


> Only a page in VK and an account in one of the Russian political sites (where I have only 9 articles, and I don't plan to write more, unless inspiration strikes). I have no access to a computer at the moment (only my phone), which makes me feel very limited. And it will last somewhere till June-July. That is why I cannot write anything serious.


Allright,  glad you write here,  because you really made me think! Always a good thing


----------

