Polar ice advances

The Forum is provided for both SIS members and non-members to discuss topics relevant to the Society's work. It also provides the opportunity for non-members to ask questions about the Society’s work and/or published material.
All posts are moderated before inclusion. No attachments are permitted.

Re: Polar ice advances

Postby Peter » Thu 04 Apr 2013 3:15 pm

I introduced this forum subject while I was preparing for an SIS study Group discussion / investigation into how the North American Laurentide ice sheet formed and carved out the Great Lakes in the comparatively short time since the Arctic had a temperate climate (see report on page 3 of SIS Workshop 2013:1). The evidence for a recent temperate climate in the Arctic is beyond doubt, but so is the evidence for a recent American ice sheet. My presentation to the study group was my attempt at a solution to this problem within the confines of my World Age chronology (see my paper in SIS Workshop 2011:1). I prepared a hand out paper for the study group meeting and can supply a copy if requested.

Evidence for a recent temperate Arctic climate can be found in Derek Allan’s posthumous SIS Review 2001:2 paper, An unexpected Arctic Catastrophe, and Immanuel Velikovsky in Earth in Upheaval and Dwardu Cardona in God Star both wrote convincingly about the Arctic having a temperate climate in the quite recent past. Allan in his paper in SIS Review 2005 and Cardona in his 1999 SIS conference paper (SIS Review 2000) both tell of the terrible catastrophe that they say brought to an end the Arctic’s temperate climate and saw the dumping of the Siberian and Alaskan permafrost “muck” deposits. In my chronology the 1st World Age was ended by this catastrophe.

Recently William Thompson reminded me that Donald Patten had written about an “ice epoch” that post dated the Biblical Flood and dated to 2,800 BC plus or minus 500 years. Patten’s book was published in 1966 long before Peter Warlow demonstrated how the Earth could experience axis shifts and inversions if subjected to a large enough external force and Wal Thornhill developed his Electric Universe theory that can provide the external force required and consequently his analysis conclusions differ from mine. However, his listing of the problems to be addressed in chapter 6 of his book, The Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch (Online: html - http://www.creationism.org/patten/), include most of the ones that I believe must be resolved. Warlow’s ideas can be read in his book, The Reversing Earth, published by Dent in 1982 while Thornhill’s can be found in his book, The Electric Universe, published by Mikamar in 2007.

Patten says that “according to uniformitarian theory, the ice was supposedly formed by snow, which had been transported by wind systems from moist, warm regions. The snow was to have fallen for many eons, until conditions changed and the processes of build-up were exceeded by the processes of out-flow and melting. However, this hypothesis does not agree with the manner of the flow of the ice mass; neither does it agree with the direction of the ice flow.”

Although I have no idea of his information source on the thickness of ice sheet he states that “there were several nodes on the Canadian Shield, from 15,000 to 17,000 feet in elevation, generally about 3 miles deep at these apexes. From these areas, the ice flowed outward in a radial pattern and in every direction, corrected only by coriolis forces or local topographical features. It flowed over hills hundreds and even over a thousand feet high and swept on over valley and dale for hundreds of miles. As it flowed it gathered rocks, timber, and other debris which were ground and ultimately dropped at its edges forming lateral and terminal moraines. The extent of the ice flow is determined from and orthogonal to the terminal moraines; the direction of the flow was parallel to such formations as drumlins and the lateral moraines. The path of flow is also plotted by locations of erratic boulders, striations and other methods.”

“The flow of ice, following its deposition in the Ice Epoch, was largely oblivious to topography until the flow feathered out at the fringes. In the more central portions it flowed en masse over hills hundreds and thousands of feet high with seeming indifference. This is a radial pattern of flow. A radial pattern of flow occurs when material flows outward in all directions from the centre until a new equilibrium is established.”

Thus we have to account for the following features: recent formation; central location in North America; considerable depth of ice and a radial pattern of ice flow. We must also account for several nodes or centres and for terminal moraine evidence of advances in different directions and recessional moraine evidence of stable situations experienced after the greatest advance in a number of directions. I am confident that an extra-terrestrial source for the ice, as suggested by Patten and Frank Wallace, can’t account for these features.

At the recent study group meeting I showed maps dating from the Middle Ages that, in addition to showing central Greenland without an ice sheet, told me that when they were drawn a Warlow axis shift had moved the Canary Islands 3 degrees 40 closer to the equator, Greenland some 6 degrees closer and Panama around 9 degrees closer; with Panama at around 80 degrees west there would have been only a nominal change in European latitudes from such a Warlow axis shift. I told the meeting that if the centre of Greenland that now supports an ice sheet up to 3 kilometres deep was ice free in the first half of the 15th century AD all current estimates of the rate of build-up of ice sheets must be wildly inaccurate; I referenced an Alasdair Beal SIS Workshop 1992:1 paper that says exactly that. I also said that it is ridiculous to use current climate models to calculate rates of ice build up in a world that experienced Warlow axis shifts and Warlow inversions.

While an Arctic catastrophe, such as suggested by Allan and Cardona, could explain both a recent change in climate in the Arctic from temperate to frozen and the dumping of the permafrost material, it cannot explain the characteristics of the American ice sheet noted above nor the ice sculpting of the American Great lakes. I do, however, agree with Patten’s dating of the American ice “epoch” to after the Biblical Flood. In my chronology a critical feature of the Flood catastrophe that ended my 2nd World Age involved a Warlow axis shift that saw the Yukon moved to the North Pole and the Middle East moved close to the equator; the centrifugally raised sea level near the equator causing the sea to well-up as reported in the Bible.

Charles Hapgood in his Path of the Pole, Adventures Unlimited, 1999, not only has the Yukon once located at the North Pole, but says that the pole then moved to approximately the middle of the Hudson Bay. This locates the pole at virtually the centre of the Laurentide ice sheet and many of the American terminal moraines to within around 20 degrees. Of course the World’s climate would have been very different with the Hudson Bay at the pole, because the Drake Passage would have been in the 30s where climate conditions are mild compared to the roaring 60s where currently no land mass blocks the circum-polar winds and circum-polar ocean currents.

I claimed at the meeting that the Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot and Exodus Venus catastrophes together with the Mars catastrophes I identified in my World Ages paper could account for quite a number of movements in the location of the poles and hence in the nodes of American ice and the moraines limits. I also claimed that the frequency of the catastrophes must have caused regular climate change that accelerated the ice build up.

I acknowledge that my chronology requires an enormous amount of North American landscape ice sculpting in a limited period, but I believe that it accounts for the known characteristics of the American ice “epoch”.


Return to SIS Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest