An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

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.

An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Sat 01 Aug 2015 6:00 pm

Electret Discharge Tectonics

The Earth as an Electret: the driver of Global Tectonics

The current favoured geological paradigm, Plate Tectonics, has many detractors and their writings can be found in print and/or online in publications such as the New Concepts in Global Tectonics Journal (1). From works published in the NCGT Journal and others, it is clear that since its inception not all geologists accepted the new Plate Tectonics paradigm, some went down the path of retaining the Plate Tectonic notion of continental ‘fits’ and produced Expanding Earth models whilst other geologists produced entirely different models altogether.

For the supporters of Plate Tectonics however, one question that has remained unanswered is why Plate Tectonics is unique to the Earth. No other terrestrial planet or natural satellites show any evidence of the alleged mobile plates.

Most terrestrial bodies have intensely cratered surfaces, of the inner planets only Venus and Earth display a distinct lack of craters. Indeed, Venus a planet only slightly smaller than Earth, our so-called ‘twin’ is one that would be most likely to exhibit Plate Tectonics yet shows no signs of any plates. Planetary geologists explain this evidence, that something may be wrong with our current understanding, away with ad hoc suggestions that usually involves Venus having a thicker crust or lacking convection in the mantle but with no seismological measurements taken on Venus this is complete guesswork.

The exploration of the solar system over the last 50 years has revealed a huge amount of information about the individual planets and their satellites but none of the terrestrial planets or satellites exhibit anywhere near the amount of geological activity evident on the Earth.

From this exploration we now know that the planets and their satellites are immersed in an electrified plasma and it is from this perspective that we should seek a cause of planetary geological activity.

In 1972 Ralph Juergens suggested that the Sun was powered by means of an electric discharge, in that paper Juergens described some of the features of plasmas:
‘Up to this point I have neglected to mention two most important facts about space-charge sheaths and plasmas:
1. An isolated body whose alien potential is not continually renewed by means of electric currents will quickly acquire the potential of the surrounding plasma, and its sheath will disappear; and
2. A plasma does not necessarily possess an intrinsic electric potential. Where plasmas form in electrical discharges, however--and this is the connection in which Langmuir studied them--they do acquire non-zero potentials.
These are clearly matters of immense importance. I will return to them later.
For now, we can say that in a solar system pervaded by plasma, each charged planet with a potential unlike that of the local plasma must have its electric field bound up in a space-charge sheath of limited volume. When no orbital conflict exists, the system operates serenely under the direction of forces accounted for in conventional celestial mechanics.’(2)

What Juergens called ‘space-charge sheaths’ are popularly known as magnetospheres and of the terrestrial bodies immersed in the solar plasma only two have intrinsic magnetospheres, Mercury and the Earth.

The innermost planet Mercury has a global dipolar magnetic field nearly aligned with the planet's rotational axis about 1.1% the strength of Earth's. Measurements from the MESSENGER spacecraft indicate that the field is offset north of the planet’s centre by 300miles, when compared to measurements taken by Mariner 10 in 1975 the field is 7% weaker today. MESSENGER also found areas of a stronger remnant magnetic field of opposite polarity to the direction of today’s field in Mercury’s northern plains.

Today’s field is somewhat of a puzzle, Mercury’s small size and slow 59-day-long rotation provide a challenge for the popular dynamo model for the generation of planetary magnetic fields and conventionally the planet has had plenty of time to cool down.

Venus has no intrinsic magnetosphere but does interact with the solar wind. A recent report of on-going volcanic activity on Venus is inconclusive as the Venus Express spacecraft only observed a number of ‘hotspots’ in a rift system that varied in intensity over a period of (Earth)days. (3)

Both the Moon and Mars have no intrinsic magnetospheres but both bodies do exhibit patches of what is called crustal or remnant magnetism. Like Mercury this crustal magnetism is mainly found in the heavily cratered highlands. (4)

From these observations and to paraphrase Juergens we can infer that the Moon, Mars and Venus have acquired the potential of the surrounding plasma and their sheaths have disappeared; remnant magnetism on the Moon, Mars and Mercury may be due to electrical scarring events at some time in the past.

These observations would also indicate that Mercury and the Earth have not acquired the potential of the surrounding plasma, are Mercury and the Earth recent arrivals in their current orbits, perhaps after having gained additional charge following a close encounter with bodies unknown?

If Mercury is still adjusting to its solar environment does it show any signs of activity today? Images from the MESSENGER spacecraft revealed what planetary geologists call ‘hollows’ on the surface and attributed their formation to ‘something sublimating’. Now, I suggest a more likely explanation is that ‘hollows’ are a formed by spark discharge or electric discharge machining. A similar more energetic process has been suggested as a cause of the ‘volcanoes’ on Jupiter’s moon Io. (5) Given that Mercury lacks any atmosphere to speak of and has an intrinsic but weakening magnetic field, geological activity is now at a minimum- a trickle discharge is all that remains to drive Mercurian tectonics. (6)

The Earth however does have a substantial atmosphere and magnetic field, is far more geologically active and has yet to ‘acquire the potential of the surrounding plasma’.

What drives the Earth’s magnetic field? The current mainstream explanation involves a dynamo effect generated in the Earth’s core. Seismic studies have led geologists to believe that the outer core is a conducting fluid (liquid nickel/iron) whilst the inner core is believed to be solid iron. The motion of the inner and outer cores generates an electric current which in turn generates a magnetic field. As simple as this sounds there are problems however, Joseph Cater explains: ‘Scientists are somewhat vague as to how a magnetic field could extend 2,000 miles beyond an electric current. It requires a very powerful current to produce even relatively weak magnetic effects a very short distance above the flow. The electrical resistance of iron, at the alleged temperatures of the core, would be staggering. A steady flow of electricity requires constant potential differences. How are such potential differences produced and maintained in this hypothetical core?
‘The magnitude, width, and depth of such currents would have to be unbelievable to extend the magnetic field even a small fraction of the distance required, and the EMF [electromotive force] required to produce it would be even more incredible. Where could such an EMF come from? So far, scientists seem reluctant to explain this, especially since these currents are confined to a ball and would therefore follow closed paths.’(7)

For a planet to have a magnetic field a dynamo is not necessary. Juergens reminds us that in the opinion of Velikovsky: ‘the Earth and the other planets, as electrically charged bodies, create their proper magnetic fields by their rotation…Let us assume, with Velikovsky, that the Earth carries a significant electric charge. Let us further assume, as suggested elsewhere, that this charge is actively imposed on our planet by the demands of an electrified cosmic environment.’(8)

The Earth as a rotating charged body will generate a magnetic field indistinguishable from the hypothetical dynamo, this field is ‘actively imposed’ and will remain active until the Earth ‘acquire(s) the potential of the surrounding plasma’. (2, 8)

Do we have any evidence that the Earth is adjusting to its electrical environment? Dr Thomas Barnes noted that measurements taken between 1835 and 1965 revealed that Earth’s magnetic field was decaying at a rate of 5% per century. (9) Other researchers estimate that the field will disappear altogether in just 2000 years. (10) This would seem to indicate that the Earth is discharging to meet the electrical demands of its environment, if so how is this process driving global tectonics?

The Earth is a hollow electret; (11) this may seem a ludicrous suggestion, after all we have plenty of seismic data that tells us otherwise but a degree of caution is needed when interpreting that data. The researcher and author Jan Lamprecht has devised a model of the Earth’s interior which is consistent with known seismic data with one important difference- the Earth is hollow. (12) In Lamprecht’s model a cavity, about the size of the currently hypothesized inner core, exists at the centre of the Earth. How might such a cavity form?

The conventional account of the formation of the Earth, through accretion, would rule out a hollow planet, as planets are assumed to be assembled slowly piece by piece. However, it has been suggested that if terrestrial bodies are formed in an electric discharge then the bodies may very well be hollow. (13)

In link No. 13, researcher and author Peter Mungo Jupp asks: ’How homogenous is the earth? Is it moulded within by strict boundaries or is it perhaps like the illustration of the internals of a classic thunderegg with a 3D star shaped interior? Plasma pioneers, such as C.J Ransom, recreated spherical Martian rock blueberries in the lab with electrical discharge techniques. Were thundereggs created by similar means? And if electrical effects are scalable could our larger earth body perhaps replicate a thunderegg formation with its gaseous enclosures and spiky outreaches that may, perhaps, resemble the jets of a comet?’

In this image of a sliced thunderegg (14) we see the cavity is not smooth as in Lamprecht’s model but has projections that appear to reach the inside edge of the thunderegg, in this image (15) the projection are more pronounced and form a regular pentagram or five-pointed star pattern. For a more spherical body such as the Earth we could imagine the cavity to take on the appearance of a great icosidodecahedron. (16)

Could it be that what geologists refer to as spreading centres (mid-ocean ridges) and subduction zones are actually surface puncturing fractures related to deep polyhedral structures within the Earth and that these fracture lines provide ‘discharge channels’ for the transmission of electric charge from the Earth to its ‘electrified cosmic environment?’

Our understanding of the Earth’s interior is very limited and what we do know came as a surprise to geologists. Findings from the Kola Superdeep Borehole near Murmansk, Russia which reached a depth of 40,220 feet (7.6 miles) and the super-deep borehole at Oberpfälz, Germany which reached a depth of 29,860 feet (5.6 miles) were not anticipated.

At the Kola hole the Soviet Minister of Geology stated, ‘with increasing depth in the Kola hole, the expected increase in rock densities was therefore not recorded. Neither was any increase in the speed of seismic waves nor any other changes in the physical properties of the rocks detected. Thus the traditional idea that geological data obtained from the surface can be directly correlated with geological materials in the deep crust must be re-examined.'

Deep drilling also revealed the presence of hydrogen, helium, methane, and other gases. Rock density failed to meet expectations instead strongly mineralized water was found circulating through fractures at pressures of more than 3000 bar. At the Oberpfälz hole hot fluids in open fractures at a depth of 11,150 feet (2.1 miles) were found. The brine was rich in potassium and twice as salty as ocean water. Temperatures recorded in super-deep boreholes came as a surprise. Temperature was found to increase with depth far more rapidly than predicted. In the Kola borehole, at 32,810 feet (6.2 miles) deep the temperature was 180°C not the expected 100°C. Overall, the rate of temperature increase rose from 11° to 24°per 3,281 feet, down to a depth of nearly 22,970 feet (4.3 miles) and then started to decline. (17)

Deep drilling suggests that overall the Earth is far more porous than currently understood. Indeed, Thomas Gold in his Deep Earth Gas theory proposed that helium and various hydrocarbons well up from great depths through pores and channels in the mantle and crust. (18) Not only a variety of gases originate at great depth but water also appears to originate from great depths as well. (19)

Charge carrying material drifting up from depth takes the form of liquids, gases and nearer the surface, molten rock. At the surface charge transfer takes the form of volcanic activity. To explain the observed electrical activity associated with volcanic activity it is now postulated that silica, an ingredient of magma is highly charged before it even enters the atmosphere. (20, 21) Basalt, an igneous rock, covers large areas of the Earth’s surface, most of the ocean basins are covered in basalt. Results from the Deep Sea Drilling Project indicate that the basaltic ‘basement’ layer had been subjected to sub-aerial weathering, meaning oceanic basalts formed in terrestrial or shallow sea conditions. (22) If the outflows of basalt occurred during a time of global upheaval then it is likely that electrical discharges left their mark before the crust collapsed, forming the deep ocean basins. Interestingly, most basalts on the ocean floor are tholeiitic basalts which are relatively rich in silica which as was noted earlier is now regarded as being highly charged. Perhaps, the expansive outflow of basalt was triggered by a change in Earth’s gravity as a result of its new electrical environment. (23) The process, still continues today but at a reduced pace, as the demands of the environment, on the Earth, diminish.

Earthquake activity is another form of charge transfer. Most earthquakes occur no deeper that 15.5 miles, however, nearly one third occur at depths greater than 43.5 miles with the deepest reaching 435 miles. Conventionally, earthquakes are said to occur at ‘plate boundaries’ but many are recorded far from the nearest plate boundary and the most violent can leave the Earth ‘ringing like a bell’. (24)

Rather than lateral movement earthquakes indicate vertical movement, geomorphologist Lester King wrote: ‘So the fundamental tectonic mechanisms of global geology are vertical, up or down and the normal and most general tectonic structures in the crust are also vertically disposed…But one must bear in mind that every part of the globe- on the continents or in the ocean basins- provides direct geological evidence that formerly it stood at different levels, up or down…’ (25)

It would appear then, that entire sections of the Earth’s crust have collapsed mainly along fracture lines related to structures deeper within the Earth, as the main collapse ensued magma, saline water, hydrocarbons and other gases were expelled in great quantities, this activity was linked to the charge transfer process, moreover, most geologists agree that mountain formation took place fairly recently, conventionally placed in the Pliocene – Pleistocene Epochs, uplift in certain parts of the crust could well have been a consequence of the complete collapse of the crust in other areas.

If charge is being conducted today through these discharge channels/ fracture lines then we would expect to find accounts in the literature of unusual atmospheric phenomena associated with earthquake activity, recorded phenomena include: bulging of the Earth’s surface, changing well water levels, ground-hugging fog, low frequency electromagnetic emission, earthquake lights from ridges and mountain tops, magnetic field anomalies up to 0.5% of the Earth’s dipole field, temperature anomalies by several degrees over wide areas as seen in satellite images, changes in the plasma density of the ionosphere, strange animal behaviour and unusual cloud formations. Temperature rises have been recorded before earthquake activity and it is speculated that this is due to the movement of charge within the crust. New Scientist magazine reported that: ‘Geophysicists Guangmeng Guo and Bin Wang of Nanyang Normal University in Henan, China, noticed a gap in the clouds in satellite images from December 2004 that precisely matched the location of the main fault in southern Iran. It stretched for hundreds of kilometres, was visible for several hours and remained in the same place, although the clouds around it were moving. At the same time, thermal images of the ground showed that the temperature was higher along the fault. Sixty-nine days later, on 22 February 2005, an earthquake of magnitude 6.4 hit the area, killing more than 600 people.’(26)

As the Earth has yet to reach the potential of the surrounding plasma it is still subject to fluctuations in the Sun’s output via a more direct electrical link, this link can also influence earthquake activity. (27)

We have seen that it is becoming increasingly recognised that both volcanic and earthquake activity are both accompanied with electrical activity. Rather than being secondary phenomena I suggest that electrical activity, in the form of charge transfer, is the driver of global tectonics. A vast reservoir of chemical elements at the centre of the Earth is impelled to drift towards the surface, mainly through deep ancient structures and more recent fracture lines, as part of the discharge.

Having left the body of the Earth, charge accumulates in the oceans and atmosphere- here it drives a wide variety of atmospheric phenomena. Over the oceans we find electrified events ranging from hurricanes to St. Elmo’s fire on the continents we find a similar range from tornadoes to lightning. However, the discharge doesn’t end in the atmosphere as Wal Thornhill and David Talbott explain: ‘If the Earth is continually interacting with an external electric field, the terrestrial lightning surely involves something more than wind-driven charge separation in storm clouds in a circuit restricted to the lower atmosphere. In recent years it has been found that lightning storms are often accompanied by strange flashes, playfully called elves, sprites, and gnomes, radiating into space high above the clouds… If the Earth is a charged body connected to the Sun’s electric field, then the storm, the lightning and the sprites will be manifestations of a single phenomenon…Lightning is the spark of a celestial current as it connects to the Earth.’(28)

To summarise; both the Earth and Mercury have yet to reach to potential of their respective plasma environments. The Moon, Venus and Mars all appear to be at electrical equilibrium with their plasma environments and display no intrinsic magnetic fields or magnetospheres and appear geologically inactive. The magnetic fields of the Earth and Mercury are showing signs of steady decay. Deep within the Earth a cavity exists from which water and other volatiles migrate to the surface- this migration is part of a global discharge that powers tectonic activity- the like of which is not seen on any other planet.

The Earth will remain a geologically active planet until such a time that it meets ‘the potential of the surrounding plasma’ then, to quote Velikovsky: ‘And the Earth would go on shuddering for centuries, slowly quieting down, and as time passed one after another the volcanoes would burn themselves out.’ (29)


2. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1972. Reconciling Celestial Mechanics and Velikovskian Catastrophism. Pensée Vol. 2 No 3.
8. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1977. On the Convection of Electric Charge by the Rotating Earth. Kronos Vol. 2 No 3.
18. Gold. Thomas. 1999. The Deep Hot Biosphere. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
22. Ioganson. Lidia. 2014. Beloussov’s View of the Origin of Oceans. NCGT Journal Vol. 2 No 2.
23. Thornhill. Wallace. 2008. Electricity or Gravity: Which Rules the Universe? SIS C&C Review.
25. Oard. Michael. J. 2015. How did the Waters of Noah’s Flood drain off the Continents? Creation Vol.37 No3.
28. Thornhill. Wallace, Talbott. David. 2007. The Electric Universe. Mikamar Publishing, Portland.
29. Velikovsky. Immanuel. 1955. Earth in Upheaval. Doubleday. New York.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Fri 11 Dec 2015 3:36 pm

Planation Surfaces, Mountains and Archean Anticlines

Planation Surfaces

Large areas of the continents are remarkably flat; this is somewhat of a problem to geomorphologists as researcher Michael Oard explains: ‘…the uniformitarian paradigm, has great difficulty explaining the origin of landforms. One of these landforms, most of which were once much larger, is the planation surface. Planation surfaces are common and worldwide. They are not forming today but are being destroyed.’ (my emphasis)

But just what is a planation surface? Oard continues: ‘An erosion surface is a rolling surface with slight relief. A planation surface is generally considered a flat to nearly flat erosion surface. Some planation surfaces are extraordinarily flat. The definition includes erosion by water because many surficial erosion and planation surfaces are capped by a veneer of generally rounded rocks—rounded by the action of water…Planation surfaces of many sizes, usually carpeted by cobbles and boulders, are common on all the continents.’

The fact that planation surfaces exist today is rather confusing as some planation surfaces are supposedly hundreds of millions of years old; however, two geomorphologists, Ollier and Pain, concluded that planation surfaces must have formed recently- late Cainozoic- and must have been much larger than today. The renowned geomorphologist Lester King reached a similar conclusion. As I have mention before King also concluded: ‘So the fundamental tectonic mechanisms of global geology are vertical, up or down: and the normal and most general tectonic structures in the crust are also vertically disposed … But one must bear in mind that every part of the globe—on the continents or in the ocean basins—provides direct geological evidence that formerly it stood at different levels, up or down, and that it is subject in situ to vertical displacements.’ (1)

This is the conclusion of researchers in the field, incredibly large areas of the Earth’s surface have (geologically) recently experienced huge vertical movements forming planation surfaces, mountains and basins. Why recently? As Michael Oard points out: ‘Some planation surfaces are dated to well over 100 million years old, despite the fact that current erosion rates should have destroyed the surface within a few million years at most. Physical evidence of erosion indicates the uniformitarian dates are highly inflated.’ (2)

But just how inflated are uniformitarian dates? Given the known rates of erosion on Earth today and the estimated age of the continents, the continents should have eroded to sea-level long ago, Twidale and Campbell concluded: ‘However, in all cases, assuming no further major uplift or lowering of sea-level, it has been estimated that a small area like New Zealand, although mountainous, would be base-levelled [reduced to sea level] in about 11 million years. Larger land areas, like the continental United States, sub-Saharan Africa, peninsular India or Australia, would be reduced to base-level in 33 million years or so.’ (3)

Current geomorphological explanations for the continued existence of planation surfaces fall short. Michael Oard being a creationist attributes the existence of planation surfaces to the Biblical Flood, the continents being levelled during this event. Might planation surfaces have an explanation other than that offered by Oard and more along the lines of that suggested by King? And what about the age paradox of supposedly old landforms appearing young- can that issue be resolved?


Geomorphologist Cliff D. Ollier has concluded: ‘Mountains result from uplift of former plains to make plateaus, which are dissected to various degrees. There are no ‘fold mountains’. When folded rocks underlie mountains the folding pre-dates planation and uplift.’ And: ‘Mountains occur not only on folded rocks, but on horizontal rocks, granite, and lava flows. Ollier and Pain (2000) assembled evidence that most mountains are the products of uplift of a plain to form a plateau, which may or may not be extensively dissected…This uplift of mountains appears to be a global phenomenon. It affects so-called Alpine mountains, mountains on passive continental margins, and those in deep continental interiors. The period of uplift is known as the Neotectonic Period.’ Commenting on the mountains of Tibet Ollier notes: ‘According to Gao (1998) there was one vast plateau over much of Asia, which has been divided by normal faults into several great plateaus…’ (4)

Mountain ranges are not hundreds of millions of years old, like existing planation surfaces they have formed recently and the process of vertical displacement was independent of the make-up of the mountain.

Recall that it is believed that planation surfaces were once much larger, now we have a reoccurring theme- plateaus followed by mountains formed from originally much larger flat surfaces and all formed recently. Is it possible that the surface of the Earth was radically different prior to a ‘recent’ event that has fragmented an originally much larger flat surface, and would any evidence remain of this former surface?


A curious topographical feature of the planet Mars is a noticeable hemispheric dichotomy. (5, 6) ‘The so-called hemispheric dichotomy was first observed by NASA's Viking missions to Mars in the 1970s. The Viking spacecraft revealed that the two halves of the planet have a very different topographical appearance, with relatively young, low-lying plains in the north and relatively old, cratered highlands in the south.’ As usual the ubiquitous massive impact in the distant past is proposed to ‘explain’ this curious feature. (7) This is just a fudge; planetary scientists don’t really have an explanation for the hemispheric differences on Mars. Provided that planetoid, asteroid and meteorite impacts happen in the distant past then they are used to ‘explain’ just about every feature of the solar system. Could it be that the Martian hemispheric dichotomy is simply a relic from the planet’s formation? If so, do we have any other examples in the solar system?

Iapetus, Moqui Marbles and Concretions

Images returned by the Cassini spacecraft in orbit around Saturn revealed that one of the planet’s moons, Iapetus, possessed a curious topographical feature that was termed a ‘ridge’ that coincided almost exactly with the geographic equator. (8) Conventionally, the origin of the ridge system is unexplained, a recent paper by Erika J. Lopez Garcia et al. favoured an exogenic origin but could not rule out an endogenic one. (9) However, Electric Universe advocates have experimentally produced remarkable concretions that bear a striking resemblance to Iapetus. Not only that but many of the concretions are hollow, in line with the theme of this forum post. (10, 11, 12, 13)

If the terrestrial planets and satellites formed electrically then they are simply variations on a theme, just as in the links given above not all concretions, marbles, geodes and thunder-eggs look the same so we can expect the planets and satellites to exhibit different topographical properties just as we find with Mars and Iapetus. But what of the Earth, does it possess any of these electrical topographical characteristics?

Hemispheric dichotomy and a global anticline

In a series of papers published in the New Concepts in Global Tectonics journal, Dong R. Choi et al. detailed the formation of the Pacific Megabasin from a viewpoint sceptical of the mainstream Plate Tectonics paradigm. In one of those papers the authors using gravity measurements from the GRACE satellite identify what they call the Global Low Gravity Belt. In their concluding remarks the authors write: ‘…in the global gravity field a distinctive low-gravity belt is recognized around the Pacific hemisphere. It runs from Antarctica, through Australia and India, to Siberia, Canada and Brazil and forms a globe-encircling ring structure, named the Global Low-Gravity Belt. This belt forms the tectonically stable outer ring of the Great Pacific Ring Structure. It consists of: 1) the outer ring, characterized by a broad low-gravity belt, and 2) the inner ring, occupying the present circum-Pacific mobile belt. The mega-ring structure appeared in the Jurassic in association with the activation of the Western Pacific Deep Mobile Belt (Choi, 2005; Choi and Vasiliev, 2008b). In this area the magmatic activities were most active until Cretaceous to Paleogene time, and regional subsidence became most active from the Neogene to the Quaternary. This structure is one of the most outstanding, global-scale structures and affected the tectonic development of the entire globe.

‘In interpreting the deep mantle structures and in formulating geodynamic models of the Earth, this great tectonic feature cannot be ignored. The Global Low-Gravity Belt is one of such features and is very interesting from global geodynamic point of view. It forms a ring around the Pacific, and, together with the Wadati-Benioff zones and the positive gravity anomalies (mountain ring), distinguishes the Pacific from the other parts of the Earth. This confirms the idea that the Pacific is a primary old structure which reflects the division of the Earth into two hemispheres with high and low relief (continental and oceanic hemispheres). The same division is typical for other planets too (Moon and Mars).’ (14) (my emphasis)

Here we have recognition that the Earth itself displays a similar hemispheric dichotomy like that observed on Mars. The Pacific Megabasin and continents are analogous to the Martian lowlands and highlands. Not only that, this topographic feature is ‘a primary old structure’, which has probably existed since the formation of the Earth. We can now see why planation surfaces ‘were once much larger’ - they previously covered an entire hemisphere!

Earth’s current ‘highland hemisphere’ is now a patchwork of continents, all that remains of a former much larger land surface that underwent in situ vertical displacements; that is why planation surfaces still exist today, for most of their existence they were hemispheric in extent and postulating different electrical, gravitational and climatic environments in the past, probably suffered very little erosion.

Further research by Choi et al. had, initially, revealed the existence of an anticlinal (15, 16) feature stretching from Siberia to the South Pacific, the South Pacific-Siberian Super Anticline (SPSSA). (17) Later, a similar anticlinal feature was identified in the Americas, the North-South American Super Anticline (NSASA). (18) From this paper we read: ‘The North-South American Super Anticline is an Archean-origin geanticline structure developed on the Earth surface. It formed in parallel with an antipodal geanticline – South Pacific-Siberian Super Anticline.’ Both of these global scale Precambrian geanticlines formed early in Earth’s history and apparently both connect in the Arctic Ocean. Remarkably, this global structure closely follows the Global Low-Gravity Belt- which itself divides the Earth into two hemispheres. Is it possible that this globe encircling anticline is a relic equatorial ridge, dating from the Earth’s formation similar to what we see on Iapetus today?

If the global anticline is a former equator then the Earth has experienced a drastic shift in its axis of rotation since its formation. Looking at Mars we see that the hemispheric dichotomy is aligned North-South whereas on Earth it is East-West, perhaps this is an indication that, at least, in the case of Mars and the Earth, only two stable rotational configurations are possible should the rotational axis be disrupted. Curiously, Choi et al. note ‘The axis of the NSASA pass through the west of Devon Island and enter the (Arctic) Ocean. There the N(orth)-S(outh) trending older rocks, Ordovician and Silurian, distribute. This trend is disrupted by overlying Devonian formations which takes an E(ast) - W(est) structural direction, harmonious with the Arctic Ocean trend.’(18)

As I have mentioned elsewhere experiments in stratification by Guy Berthault found that where a water current is present rock strata can form laterally and vertically at the same time and strata are not always a measure of chronology. With this in mind the change in structural direction of rocks in the Arctic during the ‘Devonian’ may well indicate an axial shift and following Berthault, this shift would have been rapid.

Vertical displacement of the ‘highland hemisphere’: A Mechanism

Seismic studies have revealed the existence of a ‘low velocity layer’ in the Earth’s crust at a depth of 10 to 20 kilometres. Traditionally, through theoretical modelling the cause of this layer was thought to be due to high temperatures and partial melting of crustal rocks. However, Russian scientists have been able to combine seismic data with actual findings from the Kola Superdeep Borehole. What was found was not partial melting of the rock but increased porosity of the rock plus an increase in the salinity of pore water that permeated the rock; this resulted in a layer of high electrical conductivity with a resistivity of 0.03 Ohms/ metre. The study centred on the Baltic and Ukrainian shields but: ‘The low velocity and high conductivity layers were also discovered in the middle crust in other platform regions: in the Indian and Canadian shields, in the American ancient platforms (Berdichevsky et al., 1984; Jones, 1992; Pavlenkova, 1996; Padilha et al., 2000). In the young West-European plates the correlation between the low velocity layers and the high conductivity layers is also the same as in East-European platform (Aichruth et al., 1992). Such correlation allows the conclusion that this low velocity and high electrical conductivity layer in the middle crust has a global significance.’ Not only does this layer have global significance but: ‘Several structural features are typical for the layer: a change in velocity inhomogeneity where the block structure is transformed into a subhorizontal layering, changes in the reflectivity pattern and earthquake number. These properties of the middle crust layer mean that it can be associated with a weakened zone and it suggests a rheological stratification of the crust…This suggestion is confirmed by the Kola superdeep borehole data.’(19)

This research suggests that large areas of the ‘highland hemisphere’ were structurally weak and I propose that it is these areas that subsided forming the Atlantic and Indian Oceans of today. During this process vast quantities of saline water were expelled from the aforementioned conductive layer (perhaps, compelled to do so in an exchange of charge).

Ancient continental type rocks as well as samples of dried cracked ‘Cretaceous’ mud have been recovered from large areas of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, some researchers attribute these findings to changes in sea level but equally it could mean that these oceans were either much smaller than today or non-existent.

Passive Margins, Evidence of Subsidence?

There are two types of continental margin, the Atlantic or passive margin and the Pacific or active margin. Passive margins are found only in the relic ‘highland hemisphere’ and are absent from the Pacific Ocean. (20) Moving away from a continent a typical passive margin consists of a Continental Shelf, Continental Slope and Continental Rise descending to the ocean Abyssal Plain at an average depth of 4 kilometres; with the exception of the Abyssal Plain these features are blanketed in vast quantities of sediment. Buried under the sediment fill are listric normal faults, uplifted and down-faulted blocks of the crust that give an appearance of a giant staircase rising from the ocean floor. Salt layers seem to be common at the base of these faults; this would not be unexpected, as the crust fractured, subsided and brine was released from the porous rock beneath. All in all, these structures are highly suggestive of large scale subsidence.


A growing understanding of Earth’s geological make-up is increasingly problematic to the various geological disciplines, including geomorphology. Geologists, even those connected with the NCGT organisation, are still wedded to a fictitious millions of years timescale. Berthault has experimentally demonstrated otherwise.

Earth may very well be much older than currently accepted theories, but its surface has recently undergone major upheavals primarily disrupting the ‘highlands’ hemisphere, fragmenting an original generally low relief surface forming plateaus and basins in the process (the formation of mountains will be considered elsewhere). Is it possible that until recently, Earth once looked like this? (21)


1. Oard. Michael. J. 2011. The remarkable African Planation Surface. Journal of Creation Vol. 25 No. 1.
3. Twidale, C.R., and E.M. Campbell. 2005. Australian Landforms: Understanding a Low, Flat, Arid and Old Landscape. Rosenberg Publishing PTY Ltd, New South Wales, Australia.
4. Ollier. Cliff. D. 2006. Mountain uplift and the Neotectonic Period. Annals of Geophysics, Supplement to Vol. 49 No. 1.
14. Choi. Dong. R. et al. 2009. Geology and tectonic development of the Pacific Ocean. Part 5. NCGT Newsletter No. 50.
16. For example, Sheep Mountain, Wyoming, USA:
17. Choi. Dong. R. 2013. An Archean Geanticline Stretching from the South Pacific to Siberia. NCGT Journal Vol.1 No. 3.
18. Choi. Dong. R. et al. 2015. North-South American Super Anticline. NCGT Journal Vol.3 No. 3.
19. Pavlenkova. Nina. I. 2004. Low velocity and low electrical resistivity layers in the middle crust. Annals of Geophysics, Vol. 47 No. 1.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Thu 17 Mar 2016 2:50 pm


At the summit of Mount Everest is a layer of Ordovician Limestone which contains fossils of a variety of sea creatures such as trilobites and crinoids. Beneath this layer is a belt of metamorphic rock whilst at the base of the mountain we find granite. What are the fossilised remains of sea creatures doing at the summit of the highest mountain on Earth? (1)

We have considered the possibility that the Earth’s surface was in the past radically different than that of today. In the approach outlined previously and absent Plate Tectonics how did today’s mountain ranges form?

The Flat Earth

Geomorphologist Cliff Ollier writes: ‘Before most mountains were uplifted there was a period of tectonic stillstand or at least quietness when planation surfaces were eroded…One of the biggest obstacles to our hypothesis of widespread Plio-Pleistocene mountain building is that the period of time available for the preceding planation is too short. Only further investigation can clarify this point.’ (my emphasis) (2)

Given the global extent of sedimentary deposits we can surmise that: ‘The topography of the submerged continents must have been very subdued because the layers deposited over the flooded landscape generally show extremely high lateral continuity and flat basal contacts. In some cases, even thin beds only a few centimetres thick can be followed laterally for tens of kilometres.’ (my emphasis) (3)

I have posited the existence of a former global hemispheric sized continental surface- a relic of Earth’s formation- that had formerly existed for aeons largely unchanged. This removes the ‘one of the biggest obstacles’, the time available for planation. Billions of years ‘of tectonic stillstand or at least quietness’ were available, not only that but the topographic relief of this surface was largely flat. There existed no deep valleys and no high mountains as we would understand today, what relief did exist probably existed at the boundary between the two hemispheric types, with the exception of the occasional shallow-sea perhaps, cutting into the continental surface; this lack of relief, however, meant continental areas were susceptible to marine transgression during any periods of instability.


Cliff Ollier observes that: ‘Mountains result from uplift of former plains to make plateaus, which are dissected to various degrees. There are no ‘fold mountains’. When folded rocks underlie mountains the folding pre-dates planation and uplift…The age of a mountain or mountain range is then the age of plateau uplift, not the last age of folding of rock…This uplift of mountains appears to be a global phenomenon. It affects so-called Alpine mountains, mountains on passive continental margins, and those in deep continental interiors.’ (my emphasis)

Globally what do we find? From Asia: ‘As an example, consider the timing of uplift in Tibet and its bordering mountains. Gansser (1991) wrote: “...we must realise that the morphogenic phase is not only restricted to the Himalayas but involves the whole Tibetan block. This surprising fact shows that an area of 2,500,000 square kilometres has been uplifted 3000-4000 m during Pleistocene time and that this uplift is still going on.”’

‘According to Gao (1998) there was one vast plateau over much of Asia, which has been divided by normal faults into several great plateaus that may be correlated by plant and animal fossils.’ (my emphasis)

From Europe: ‘The European Alps have become a type area for ideas of mountain genesis in regions of folds and nappes. But the nappes have very little to do with the present Alpine topography. The whole region was planated in the Pliocene, and then broadly uplifted and eroded to the present spectacular topography.’ (my emphasis)

From North America: ‘In Western North America there are many uplifted blocks loosely called the Rocky Mountains…The name ‘Rocky Mountains’ is misleading, because they consist essentially of several dissected plateaus, with ‘ranges’ at the edges.’ (my emphasis)

From Japan: ‘…conventional plate tectonic explanation of Japan as an island arc created by subduction completely ignores the very obvious planation and vertical uplift.’ (my emphasis)(2)

I could go on but the pattern remains the same, regardless of where we look. We find evidence of former vast plains- a single planation surface. To form the mountains we see today large areas of this vast surface were uplifted to form plateaus then parts of the newly raised plateaus were eroded to form mountains.

Not only that but the uplift was global, simultaneous and recent Cliff Ollier concludes: ‘…the conclusion presented here suggests that at least the latest uplift was roughly synchronous over a large area of the world. We are seeing the results of a distinct and remarkably young mountain building period. This is a deviation from strict uniformitarianism…Uplift occurred over a relatively short and distinct time. Some unknown process created mountains after a period with little or no significant uplift. This is a deviation from uniformitarianism…The same rapid uplift occurs in areas where hypotheses such as mantle plumes are not appropriate. We do not yet know what causes this short, sharp period of uplift, but we can exclude naive mountain-building hypotheses that are on the wrong time scale.’ (my emphasis)(2)

This incredible global phenomenon was unique nothing like it in Earth history had happened before or since. Cliff Ollier is no catastrophist catastrophic processes are not considered, so despite the evidence and unable to deviate from uniformitarianism, in the final analysis mountain building remains mysterious: ‘We do not yet know what causes this short, sharp period of uplift…’ it is due to: ‘Some unknown process…’ I propose that the ‘unknown process’ was an electrical event during the final stages of a global cataclysm one that began with subsidence on a massive scale.

Berthault’s Hypothesis

Guy Berthault has suggested that the continental sedimentary rock record resulted from a series of marine transgressions and regressions brought about by a shift in the rotational axis of the Earth; the shift in the rotational axis being due to ‘mountain orogenesis’ which in turn was due to ‘periodic mantle plumes’. (4)

Berthault’s research on how sedimentary layers form is exemplary but I have to respectfully disagree with his hypothesis linking it to mountain formation. As we have already seen mountain formation occurred in a single synchronous global pulse, therefore, it could not be due to ‘periodic mantle plumes’. However, I believe Berthault is correct in one aspect- continental surfaces did suffer massive marine transgressions and regressions- but this was prior to mountain formation not because of it. This is why we find limestone and fossilised sea creatures at the summit of Mount Everest- a massive marine incursion had previously deposited them on a relatively flat surface prior to the uplift event.

The marine incursion event must have occurred during a time of global upheaval, this would imply mountain formation too was associated with this period, uplifted sedimentary layers suggest that mountain formation occurred during the final stages of the cataclysm but how and why?

Johnson and Anderson a Synthesis

In the paper ‘Massive Solar Eruptions and their contribution to the causes of Tectonic Uplift’ (5)- Robert Johnson demonstrates that massive electric discharge currents flowing through the Earth’s surface following a massive coronal mass ejection (CME) on the Sun could offer just to kind of uplift mechanism required for the formation of mountains. Uplift would occur due to thermal expansion and/or phase change of the original rock as well as the in situ formation of granite. Indeed looking at Mount Everest again this is just what we find: ‘marine sediments lie atop sedimentary and igneous rocks which have been baked by high temperatures and pressures into crystalline metamorphic rocks. Many rocks around the base of Everest are unique granites containing unusual minerals such as tourmaline, garnet and mica.’(6) Robert Johnson has provided a mechanism of uplift which I am in broad agreement with, however, along with thermal expansion and phase change we can consider a third possibility. Assuming gravity to be an electrical phenomenon then any change in Earth’s gravity resulting from an exchange of electrical charge, would surely lead to a vertical rearrangement of crustal rocks, especially if their density had been altered during the discharge event?

Recall that: ‘Mountains are created by the vertical uplift of former plains’; following Cliff Ollier’s work, the uplift that occurred via the ‘Johnson Mechanism’ must have raised large areas of former plains to form plateaus. But mountains are not plateaus, what process shaped the iconic mountain form that surrounds many plateaus?

Writing in the ‘Proceedings of the NPA’, Dr. Paul E. Anderson’s paper ‘Electric Scarring of the Earth’s Surface’ looks at geological features that exhibit characteristics which are typical of electric scarring events on a dielectric medium. (7, 8)

Paul Anderson uses fractal analysis to determine what process –fluvial or electrical- shaped the various landforms on the Earth, the main focus being canyons and riverbeds. This analysis is then compared to electrical discharge patterns recorded in laboratory experiments. In concluding he writes: ‘Just as water flows and collects in the tire tracks of a mud road, it is the author’s hypothesis that water on earth flowed into the remnants and the surfaces carved by electrical events in the recent past. Water flow does not appear to form structures with as many branches, particularly perpendicular branches, as do electrical events. While the mechanisms of discharge formation are still under study by those in the EU (Electric Universe) community, the current from the source must have been higher than it is today in the present auroras. The auroral process would have extended well beyond the current northern and southern locations, and once the atmosphere could not support the ionization it would break down in the form of electric discharges.’

The fractal signature of an electrical discharge is the Lichtenberg figure, (9) not only is this figure associated with canyons and riverbeds (10) it is also apparent in mountain ranges (11, 12). If the major canyons and riverbeds on Earth’s surface were carved out electrically then it is reasonable to assume that the iconic mountain form must have been also- possibly during the same electrical event.

One property of electric arcs is to preferentially strike raised surfaces, now, combining Johnson and Anderson we see that mountain formation was not only due to electrical uplift but also due to electrical erosion. In this image of the Tibetan Plateau -from the International Space Station- (13), we notice the uplifted plateau the rim of which has been eroded to form snow-capped mountain ranges.

This is the pattern we see the world over and now we have an explanation. During a period of global upheaval immense electric currents swept across and penetrated deep below the surface of the Earth. As immense blocks were raised from a former flat planation surface high points became a focus for electrical erosion. What strata escaped being metamorphosed were eroded, pulverised and scattered by intense electrical winds (something similar but on a vastly reduced scale still occurs on Mars today (14)).

Ashes and Dust

Large areas of the Earth’s strata and surface record what geologists perceive as ‘massive volcanic eruptions’ quite often these prehistoric eruptions dwarf any recorded eruption. For example, Dinosaur National Monument (Utah, USA) is part of the Morrison Formation which covers some 700,000 square miles. Part of the formation is: ‘dominated by silica-rich volcanic ash representing explosive volcanism on a colossal scale…A staggering quantity of volcanic materials, estimated at more than 4,000 cubic miles, occurs within the thin but widespread Brushy Basin Member in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. No volcano is known within the boundary of the Morrison deposit, no local lava flows are known within the Morrison boundary, and geologists place the nearest explosive volcanic source vents in southern California or Nevada. How these coarse volcanic materials in such colossal quantities were distributed on so wide a scale remains a mystery.’(15)

The Worzel Deep Sea Ash is another mystery. Following the discovery of the ash researchers noted: ‘The ash consists of colourless shards of volcanic glass with an index of refraction of 1.500 and varying in size from 0.07 to 0.2 mm. There is no particle size sorting. Most of the shards are in the form of curved, fluted, or crumpled films of glass. A minority are nearly equidimensional fragments of silky pumice. No crystalline minerals have been found. In all important respects it is similar to material which has been classified as volcanic ash in the deep-sea deposits of the world. On preliminary examination, the ash of the Worzel layer appears to be quite similar to the ash layer which occurs in a suite of cores from the Gulf of Mexico. Rex and Goldberg have found quartz particles of continental origin in abundance in Pacific sediments as much as 2,000 miles from the nearest continent…The ash is entirely unlike material described as meteoritic dust.’ (16)
The researchers concluded: ‘Apparently we require either a single very large volcanic explosion, or the simultaneous explosion of many volcanoes, or conceivably a cometary collision similar to that suggested by Urey as a "last resort type explanation" for the origin of tektites.’ In other words a global cataclysm is required to account for the ash. However, if we look at the chemical composition of the ash (17) we find it shares similar chemical properties with granite (18).

Loess covers about 10% of the Earth’s land surface and is according to Michael Oard: ‘…difficult to define, but it is generally considered to be wind-blown (Aeolian) silt. It is composed mostly of quartz grains, with minor portions of clay and sand often mixed with the silt. Loess is commonly intermixed vertically with ‘paleosols’, which are supposedly fossil soils that have been preserved in the geologic record or buried deeply enough that it is no longer subject to soil forming processes. Scientists previously believed the silt particles in loess were derived from ice abrasion, but they now believe that loess has both a glacial and non-glacial origin.

‘Loess covers much of the mid and high latitude continents, forming a thickening belt in Europe from the Atlantic coast east into Russia and the Ukraine in areas generally south of the Scandinavian Ice Sheet. It also covers a large portion of the Midwest of the United States, the lowlands of Alaska, southeast Washington and eastern Idaho and some 440,000 square kilometres of central China, where it is up to 300m thick. Millions of woolly mammoths and other Ice Age animals are mostly entombed in loess in non-glaciated areas of Siberia, Alaska and the Yukon Territory of Canada. Wind blown material is common within the Ice Age portion of the Greenland ice cores.

‘Despite the large number of studies, there are many problems associated with loess from a uniformitarian view: ‘Few problems in Quaternary geology have raised so much controversy as loess’.’(19)

Whether it be ‘volcanic ash’, deep sea ash or loess the origin of this material is mysterious evoking massive eruptions of missing volcanoes or in the case of loess: ‘(1) hot deserts, (2) cold deserts, (3) drowned sources covered by late-glacial sea level rise and (4) glacial grinding.’ A more encompassing explanation would be that all this material is the by-product of the electrical erosion that occurred during the mountain forming period. Depending on exactly when the material was eroded determined its ultimate classification. For example, material eroded in the early stages may have been deposited whilst marine incursions were still ongoing- this material would have been incorporated into marine strata and interpreted as ‘volcanic’. During the latter stages when marine transgressions had subsided electrical dust storms would have scattered the material globally- eventually to settle on the ocean floor or entrap ‘Ice Age’ mammals.

Furthermore, marine sponge spicules have been identified in loess, we have already seen that the fossilised remains of sea creatures have been found atop Mount Everest- it is likely that the remains of sponges originated from the uplifted uppermost sedimentary strata which, as mentioned previous, was pulverised and scattered as an electrical discharge carved out a mountain.

Subsidence and Great Escarpments

Volcanoes aside, one mountain type that has not been considered so far are mountains found at passive margins. (20) As we have previously seen passive margins display evidence of wide-scale subsidence, why would we find mountains there?

Cliff Ollier and Colin Pain note that mountains on passive continental margins are: ‘generally ignored by plate tectonic theory…’ this is because: ‘the mountains are not as grand as Alpine mountains, and as generally perceived they did not fit any grand theory.’(21)

The authors note: ‘Many continents exhibit spectacular landforms along their passive margins – Great Escarpments. These are landforms on the grand scale, thousands of kilometres long, and often up to 1000 metres high.’ They go on to document Great Escarpments found on Australia, Africa, India, Brazil, North America, Scandinavia, Greenland and Antarctica. The authors note that in general: ‘many passive margins date back long before the Late Miocene to Pleistocene age of many other mountains.’ Considering the Appalachian Mountains as an example the authors write: ‘In general the seaward side sank while the land side rose, culminating in the Appalachian Highlands or Plateau.’ The authors finally consider a number of possible causes of these features, interestingly one possibility considered is; ‘Subsidence of basins on each side of an originally high continental margin.’

These mountains are considered to be ‘old’, Plate Tectonic interpretations push their formation into the distant past, tens or hundreds of millions of years ago. But, these features are closely linked with subsidence as I have previously suggested. They are considered old because large scale subsidence took place before the main period of uplift; Great Escarpments are relics of that subsidence.


Mountains formed late in Earth history during a ‘recent’ period of global upheaval. ‘Old’ mountains and escarpments formed during an early phase due to the subsidence of surrounding crustal areas. In the latter phase energy was more focussed and led not only to uplift but erosion in areas of the continental surface that did not suffer subsidence. Viewed in this light, mountains are the result of a catastrophic vertical rearrangement of the Earth’s surface, not the result of slowly moving tectonic plates.


2. Ollier. Cliff. D. 2006. Mountain uplift and the Neotectonic Period. Annals of Geophysics, Supplement to Vol. 49 No. 1.
4. Berthault. Guy.2013. Orogenesis: cause of sedimentary formations. – Open Journal of Geology Vol 3, Number 28, April 2013.
5. Johnson. Robert. 2014. Massive Solar Eruptions and their contribution to the causes of Tectonic Uplift. NCGT Journal Vol.2 No.1.
7. Anderson. Paul. E. 2012. Electric Scarring of the Earth’s Surface. Proceedings of the NPA Vol.9.
16. Ewing. Maurice. Et al. 1959. Significance of the Worzel Deep Sea Ash. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Vol. 45. Issue 3.
19. Oard. Michael. J. 2007. Loess problems. Journal of Creation Vol. 21 No. 2. (
21. Ollier. Cliff. D. and Pain. Colin. 2000. The Origin of Mountains. Routledge, London and New York.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Mon 24 Oct 2016 6:07 pm

Subduction Zones or Vertical Tectonics?

In a recent paper Uplift rate transients at subduction margins due to earthquake clustering (see: we learn that many areas of the Earth’s surface have been uplifted by tectonic forces. Somewhat counter intuitively many of these areas lie at what in mainstream Plate Tectonic literature refer to as subduction zones. Within the Plate Tectonic paradigm at subduction zones oceanic plate is allegedly disappearing in a conveyor-belt like fashion, under continental plate.

The odd clustering of ‘recent’ uplift events recorded by ‘paleoshorelines’ didn’t fit the current global tectonic paradigm and could not ‘be accounted for by plate-boundary processes, as previously thought.’ According to researchers this required an explanation.

‘Asked what's new with these findings Vasiliki Mouslopoulou explains: “For the first time temporal clustering of great-earthquakes is shown on active subduction margins, indicating an intense period of strain release due to successive earthquakes, followed by long periods of seismic quiescence.”’

A ‘time temporal clustering of recent great-earthquakes’, a cataclysm perhaps?

As I previously wrote: ‘Not only that but the uplift was global, simultaneous and recent Cliff Ollier concludes: ‘…the conclusion presented here suggests that at least the latest uplift was roughly synchronous over a large area of the world. We are seeing the results of a distinct and remarkably young mountain building period. This is a deviation from strict uniformitarianism…Uplift occurred over a relatively short and distinct time. Some unknown process created mountains after a period with little or no significant uplift. This is a deviation from uniformitarianism…The same rapid uplift occurs in areas where hypotheses such as mantle plumes are not appropriate. We do not yet know what causes this short, sharp period of uplift, but we can exclude naive mountain-building hypotheses that are on the wrong time scale.’ (my emphasis)(2)’. (reference in original 'Uplift' post)

We now have further evidence of recent global ‘time-temporal’ events, uplifted coastlines and mountain building. Unlike the authors of the paper I consider it equally likely that raised coastlines are just as much a product of subsidence as uplift.

Evidence continues to mount that the Earth ‘recently’ suffered a global cataclysm. Prior to the cataclysm Earth’s surface was very different to the one we see today. During and shortly after this epoch Earth’s surface was reshaped by vertical tectonic processes, mountains rose ocean basins subsided. Today’s tectonic activity originates from this time as the Earth now receives electrical energy from the Sun and continues to adjust to its new electrical environment.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Thu 26 Jan 2017 3:12 pm

The Electric Earth

I have suggested in this thread an electrical alternative to both Plate and Expansion Tectonics. Gathering the works of other researchers in one place I have attempted to synthesize a new approach to understanding global tectonics. I have suggested that the decreasing strength of the Earth’s magnetic field is due to the Earth electrically adjusting to its environment and that either the Earth has ‘recently’ arrived at its present orbit or the environment has ‘recently’ changed.

I have indicated that the Earth could well be hollow and described surface features that would be problematical to mobile tectonic theories if, as I suggest, they are relics from the formation of the Earth itself.

I have suggested that the Earth carries a significant electric charge and this charge is responsible for the planet’s magnetic field; furthermore it is a charge exchange process that powers tectonic activity but it doesn’t stop there earthquakes and volcanoes are just the beginning we also find all manner of atmospheric activity participating in the discharge.

Such a view may be considered unique perhaps to some distinctly odd.

Imagine my surprise to find that ideas very similar to my own had been published some 40 years ago!

The author of this work was Michael Csuzdi. The author passed away in 1995 but his work can be found at 'The Electric Earth’ website (

An interesting paper in pdf format, similar to my own proposal can be found here ‘Geomagnetic and Reversal of Geomagnetic Fields’: (

‘International Stop Continental Drift Society’, I’m not too sure what happened to this particular society but nevertheless they published the author’s paper ‘Electrical Plate Tectonics’, interestingly, if we look at the large figure on page 5 we find that the broken lines approximately correspond to the South Pacific-Siberian Super Anticline (SPSSA) and the North-South American Super Anticline (NSASA) of which I have previously commented on: (
I agree with many of the author’s comments in this paper but I feel that the need for mobile tectonics is not a requirement, the pentagonal pyramid structure may, as I have suggested, be related to deep earth structures, charges are more likely to move than continents!

Overall, anyone with an interest in the electrical nature of the Earth will find this website very interesting.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Tue 21 Feb 2017 5:34 pm

Earth and Venus: a comparison

Does Electret Discharge Tectonics have any applicability beyond Earth? Planetary geologists have struggled to apply Plate Tectonics elsewhere in the solar system, with this in mind, how might we approach Earth’s Twin- Venus? How might this proposal explain features associated with our nearest planetary neighbour?

First we will take a look at the Earth’s past and present electrical environment.


The Earth is collecting charge from its environment from an initial or earlier electron deficient state. During its formative period and for most of Earth’s history the Earth possessed a low internal polarisation accompanied by low surface gravity. We can speculate that as the Earth was deficient in negatively charged electrons, any magnetic field present would have arisen due to the rotation of a positive ‘ionic’ magnetic field if you will - the polarity of this magnetic field would have been opposite to the magnetic field we find at the Earth’s surface today.

It was under conditions present during this initial and prolonged electron deficient state that life arose, speciated and evolved.

Furthermore, Earth’s interior contained and still contains vast quantities of hydrogen, hydrocarbons, helium, ammonia, oxygen and water. Over time these chemical elements have welled-up through the porous structure of the Earth’s mantle and crust transforming the planet itself.(1) Today we find hydrocarbons continue to well-up, issuing from ‘recently’ rejuvenated fractures and volcanoes in the upper crustal layers, at the surface they are oxidised forming water and leaving behind pure carbon (i.e. coal). Silane along with methane emerges from great depths, like methane silane is oxidised in the upper layers but forms silica and releases hydrogen.

I have previously suggested that large areas of a pre-existing hemispheric sized continent collapsed due to a possible series of encounters with an errant celestial body. These formerly stable areas collapsed due to serpentinite dehydration triggered by electrical instabilities. Accompanied by vast basaltic outflows or ‘traps’, huge quantities of saline water from the lower crust flooded the new depressions.

The low gravity environment of the past is no more. Earth, somehow, has experienced a large increase in charge, this has resulted in amongst other factors and following on from Wal Thornhill’s work, an increase in internal polarisation and an increase in surface gravity. The increase in surface gravity proved problematical for many species of large land/ air animals leading to their extinction. (2)

Given the radial alignment of charge in the inner Earth it is not unreasonable to assume that Earth’s deep interior is still electron deficient. Due to the Earth’s rotation this inner ‘shell’ would continue to produce a magnetic field of opposite polarity to the one we find at the surface an ‘ionic’ magnetic field. The far more mobile electrons are to be found, not exclusively, but predominately in the Earth’s upper layers, atmosphere and magnetosphere their movement with the rotation of the Earth generates the normal polarity ‘surface’ magnetic field, we can think of this magnetic field as an ‘electronic’ field. Indeed, as we have already seen the oxidisation of upwelling hydrocarbons forms water, free saline water in the lower crust would be an excellent conductor.

But we have already speculated that this was not originally the case, is it possible that the Earth functioned as an anode during a period of solar system instability?

If an errant celestial body that carried a more negative charge, with respect to the Earth, approached and their respective plasma environments clashed then a period of charge exchange would ensue. Electrons would be drawn from the approaching body, on impacting the Earth’s surface they would ionise whatever they came into contact with. The liberated ions would rush back to the electron source. Vast quantities of surface material would be removed from the Earth’s surface. As the number of electrons penetrating the Earth’s upper layers steadily increased the internal polarisation and surface gravity would increase. Areas of the Earth’s surface affected by the initial removal of material would be susceptible to structural failure as the surface gravity gradually increased.

As the newly arrived electrons diffused through the Earth’s upper layers the rotation rate would have slowed with disastrous consequences with large areas inundated by ocean tidal waves (the rotation rate would have slowly increased following the encounter due to charge being ‘leaked’ back to the Earth’s environment provided the environment had not altered too much).

On resumption of a ‘normal’ rotation period it would be noticeable that the magnetic field was now reversed- the ‘electronic’ field we see today, the new magnetic field would leave its mark upon the old magnetic field in time geologists would erroneously see this change as multiple reversals and attach magnetic anomalies to a fictional timescale.

Of course, as I have previously suggested this event may not have occurred in a single encounter, a number of such exchanges may have occurred. If the relative potentials between the two bodies changed as a result of the previous encounter then sometimes Earth would act as an anode other times as a cathode. What we can say is that Earth, once electron deficient is no longer so and such an encounter has left the Earth at least ‘peaceful’ if not totally ‘at rest’ with its environment.

To look for a suitable candidate as a cause of this disruption in my opinion we need look no further than the Moon but the inner solar system shows plenty of anomalies if, as we are told, nothing has happened for 3 billion years or so, perhaps we should look farther afield.


Venus has long been considered Earth’s ‘twin’ during the 20th Century one estimate put the surface temperature at 47 degrees Celsius and it was even considered an abode for earth-like amphibians. Venus eventually transpired to be a very strange twin; can Electret Discharge Tectonics be applied at Venus?

In this thread it is assumed that terrestrial type planets are not formed by accretion from a solar nebula- instead terrestrial planets are formed in electrical discharges occurring in larger parent bodies. Venus is understood to have formed in this way.

The present characteristics (density, surface gravity etc.) ascribed to Venus would indicate that Venus is electron deficient, at least when we consider the body of the planet. The anomalously slow retrograde rotation period suggests Venus is presently unable to generate an internal ‘ionic’ magnetic field. However, this may not always be so as Venus is currently collecting charge directly from the heliospheric plasma, mainstream astronomy perceives this as a detrimental process- we find such statements as the Venusian atmosphere is being ‘stripped away’ or the planet is ‘losing water’- neither is detrimental and may lead to the development of an ‘electronic’ magnetic field (3). To understand why, we have to look at the structure of Venus itself.

Given Venus’ size I suggest that the planet’s interior is not too dissimilar to Earth’s as suggested in this thread. With Electret Discharge Tectonics we do not have to postulate a different internal structure for each planet. It is known that Venus exhibits a cometary type discharge, this suggests that despite a shared internal structure slightly different processes are occurring inside Venus.

Venus’ interior contains hydrogen, hydrocarbons, helium, ammonia, oxygen and water and as with Earth these chemical elements are upwelling from the Venusian interior.

Venus’ atmosphere of carbon dioxide provides a clue as to the process occurring inside Venus, surprisingly it turns out that Venus has too much oxygen.

As upwelling methane diffuses through oxygen rich layers of the upper Venusian crust it is oxidised- unlike Earth the oxidised products in this oxygen rich environment are water and carbon dioxide, similarly the products of upwelling silane would be silica and water.

This process is likely to continue until sufficient quantities of oxygen are locked away in surface and subsurface rocks, at least until Venus has suitably ‘rusted’. If suitable quantities of hydrocarbons remain then the oxidized products of methane- water and carbon will come to dominate; this suggests that oceans have not boiled away on Venus.

Recently, water-rich clouds above Aphrodite Terra were discovered the so-called ‘fountain of Aphrodite’. Aphrodite Terra lies at the Venusian equatorial regions and is criss-crossed by snaking faults, from the perspective of this thread it is more likely that these faults are actually discharge channels created during a period of solar system instability. Moreover, an unusual stationary wave was observed in the Venusian atmosphere by the Japanese spacecraft Akatsuki. The 10,000 kilometre wave remained stationary over Aphrodite Terra! (4, 5)

Venus now presents itself as an analogue of a homopolar motor with Birkeland currents focussed at the north and south polar regions (the northern di-pole revealed by Pioneer Venus Orbiter and the southern vortex revealed by Venus Express) (6) and volatiles issuing from fractured ground at the equator. At the Earth we find similar structures in the magnetosphere- the Polar Cusps, is the Venusian atmosphere acting like a compressed magnetosphere? If so, features normally associated with the Venusian atmosphere such as super-rotation and stationary waves may find analogues in Earth’s magnetosphere.

Planetary geologists attribute many Venusian surface features to volcanism, in my opinion this is questionable- it is typical of mainstream thinking, any ‘hotspot’ or raised surface is due to volcanism; processes unique to Earth are projected to other worlds- even if those worlds are tiny worlds supposedly made of ice! Radar images of the Venusian surface suggest a topography formed by electrical discharges. (7) The observation that the surface consists mainly of extensive flat plains shows no crustal subsidence has occurred, another indication that oxygen has yet to be ‘locked away’ in sufficient quantities.

Plate Tectonics fails at Venus. Electret Discharge Tectonics can be applied at Venus once we understand that the mode of discharge takes a different form. But why stop at Venus? We don’t have to, Electret Discharge Tectonics could equally be applied at Mars or Titan or any other terrestrial body in the solar system- terrestrial bodies that show no evidence of Plate Tectonics.


1. Hunt. C. Warren, ‘Dual geospheres’, NCGT Newsletter, December 2001
2. Thornhill. Wallace, ‘Newton’s Electric Clockwork Solar System’, April 2009
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Tue 12 Sep 2017 6:01 pm

The Tectonic Circuit- a proposal

Over 40 years ago Ralph Juergens wrote: “Let us assume, with Velikovsky, that the Earth carries significant electric charge. Let us further assume, as suggested elsewhere, that this charge is actively imposed on our planet by the demands of an electrified cosmic environment.” (1)

Today we no longer need to assume, the Earth’s electrical nature is clear to all who choose to see it. On this thread, following Velikovsky and Juergens, I have suggested that the Earth carries a significant electric charge and this charge is responsible for the planet’s magnetic field; furthermore it is an electric discharge that powers tectonic activity but it doesn’t stop at earthquakes and volcanoes, we also find all manner of atmospheric activity participating in the discharge. But where is the source of the discharge?

Earth’s Magnetotail

It is commonly assumed that the Earth and Sun are somehow electrically ‘connected’ but is this an accurate depiction?

The continuous arrival of positively charged cosmic rays on earth suggests that our planet carries and continually renews a strong negative charge. Indeed, experiments performed some years ago by Quinn and Chang (Journal of Geophysical Research, 71, 1966, 253 and 72, 1967, 1611) indicate, in spite of the experimenters' pointed disclaimer, that the earth behaves as a secondary cathode in the solar discharge. By making a magnetized steel sphere the cathode in a laboratory discharge, Quinn and Chang produced miniature Van Allen belts, auroral discharges, and other recognizable "geophysical" effects. I would speculate, therefore, that the earth's negative charge represents that of electrons intercepted on their way to the sun by the earth's tail-like sheath, and that this charge is built up to a point where the earth re-emits electrons into the solar discharge. If so, variations in earth-sun electric currents may be held accountable for such phenomena as geomagnetic disturbances, ionospheric disturbances, high-altitude expansions and contractions of the terrestrial atmosphere, and variations in the cosmic-ray flux reaching the earth.” (2)

As a secondary cathode Earth usurps electrons powering the solar discharge; the electrons are sourced from a ‘virtual cathode’ located in a more electron rich region of the solar system. Taking the form of Birkeland currents, electrons continually arrive from the anti-sunward direction, focusing at Earth’s poles, indeed, spacecraft such as Cluster have detected intense field-aligned currents when crossing the night-time auroral zone- in its entirety, astrophysicists refer to this structure as the magnetotail. (3)

Closer to Earth, the arriving current deforms concentric double-layers (4) surrounding Earth forcing them to adopt torodial belt-like structures, pervaded by a magnetic field astrophysicists refer to the whole structure as the magnetosphere.

Both Earth and the Sun are immersed in the heliospheric plasma, now should a disturbance occur on the solar surface and radiate out into the solar system as an Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejection (ICME) then we can conceive of a ICME not only as a radiating disturbance in the heliospheric plasma but also as "waves of potential gradient". “These ripples are transitory fluctuations in plasma potential, and they propagate outward from their sources "at speeds approaching that of light." It follows that electrical disturbances on the Sun must send waves of potential gradient throughout the region pervaded by the interplanetary plasma.” (5)

If such a wave of differing potential gradient encounters Earth then no disturbance of any significance should occur until the passing differing potential gradient disturbs the ‘virtual cathode’ beyond the Earth. The disruption of the customary potential of the ‘virtual cathode’ will result in a disruption of the customary electron flow to Earth. If tectonic activity (and atmospheric activity) is the result of a discharge between Earth and its environment as proposed here, then tectonic (and atmospheric) events should be more likely to originate on the anti-sunward hemisphere i.e. during the hours of local night-time.

Things That Go Bump in the Night

From ghoulies and ghosties
And long-leggedy beasties
And things that go bump in the night,
Good Lord, deliver us!

So goes the traditional Scottish poem, but it may be more than long-leggedy beasties that appear at night could it be that we can trace the origin of tectonic activity, electrical storms, hurricanes and typhoons to the night?

In the 1970’s meteorologists discovered what they called ‘supernova storms’.

“They appear from nowhere in the middle of the night -huge thunderstorms that reach their full-blown might, sometimes in less than two hours, briefly thrashing the tropical Atlantic with explosive rage before disappearing as quickly as they came.

“So rapid and violent is their life cycle that meteorologists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration call them 'supernovas' after the sudden, brilliant flaring of a star before it collapses into death.

"But where do they come from? The supernova storms were discovered only last summer, during the huge, multinational weather study known as the GARP (Global Atmospheric Research Program) Atlantic Tropical Experiment, or GATE. They were pinpointed thanks to the Synchronous Meteorological Satellite, SMS-1, whose infrared cameras enable it to photograph the developing clouds by their own heat, even during the darkest night.

"Are the storms causes -significant contributors to tropical weather dynamics -or mere symptoms, visible signs of some much larger and even more mysterious process? At this stage of research, all bets are open. We cannot yet explain why and how they form over the ocean, at night." (6)

Intense electrical storms appearing “from nowhere in the middle of the night” detected “by their own heat” , “visible signs of some much larger and even more mysterious process”.

Perhaps the process is not so mysterious- I have suggested that Earth is sourcing electrons from a distant ‘virtual cathode’ located in the anti-sunward direction. Electrons arriving from this region will arrive preferentially at Earth’s night-time hemisphere (as detected by the Cluster spacecraft); current entering the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and crust has its origin from the anti-sunward direction. If so developing hurricanes and typhoons may be identifiable by infrared observations of the night-time hemisphere.

It is not only electrical storms that appear mysteriously in the night, earthquakes are known to preferentially occur during the night. “Analysis of earthquake catalogues on 14 world regions has revealed a distinct diurnal periodicity of seismic events in all of them. The amplitude of the diurnal variations usually decreases with an increase in earthquake energy, although in some regions, the time series of strong earthquakes also demonstrate diurnal periodicity. Earthquakes are more frequent at night”. (7)

Not only earthquakes but volcanic activity also displays the same pattern: “we have clearly demonstrated the existence of a 24–h cyclical modulation of the seismicity of the Mt. Vesuvius with maxima during the night time”. (8)

Cycles within Cycles

Diurnal cycles are but a part of still larger cycles. “…it is seen an anti-correlation between number of sunspots and number of earthquakes, with a small increase in quakes at solar maximum.” And “These trends are applicable to volcanic activities too. Casey (2010), who studied volcanic records from the last 350 years and seismicity in the last 300 years within the continental United States, found a strong correlation between solar activity, the largest volcanic eruptions and the strongest earthquakes; the latter two have occurred during the solar activity lows with the strongest ones during the major solar minima. However, another study by Gregory (2002) who compared the historical volcanic eruptions especially Mt. Etna and Vesuvius since 1550 AD and the solar cycles found synchronous relation between them.” (9)

Earthquake activity appears to peak at solar minimum which at first sight may seem somewhat unexpected, why should this be so? During solar minimum galactic cosmic rays (positive charges) accumulate in the heliospheric plasma. (10) However, as we have already seen Earth is continually accepting negative charge from its environment- during solar minimum cosmic rays reaching Earth not only deliver more positive charge, slightly altering Earth’s potential (and internal polarisation) but the potential of the ‘virtual cathode’ region too. The resultant adjustment to the relative potential differences disrupts the discharge and Earth’s internal polarisation- leading to more earthquake activity.

(It is known that the global electron content of the ionosphere falls to a minimum during solar minimum (11)).

Tectonic activity and Earth’s Length of Day

“That the Earth's rate of rotation is slowing perceptibly with the passage of time appears to be an established fact. This secular retardation is generally laid to tidal drag by both the Sun and the Moon. But Munk and MacDonald pointed out years ago that such a mechanism presents problems; in particular, it offers no satisfactory explanation for the dissipation of rotational energy. And more recently Rochester has pointed out that "the 'modern' rate of secular deceleration due to tidal friction is probably close to twice the value used by Munk and MacDonald . . . [and] in turn nearly doubles the problem of accounting for the accompanying energy dissipation . . ." Thus the phenomenon is imperfectly accounted for by tidal friction.

“Could it be that the Earth's electric charge increases with time?

“This is precisely what one would expect if, as suggested, the Sun derives its energy from the outside by way of an electric discharge. We may suppose that the current sustaining such a discharge could flow only so long as the Sun could be induced to accept ever more charge and an ever-increasing electric potential. But as long as the potential of the Sun increased, that of the interplanetary plasma would also increase, and so would those of the individual planets that are immersed in and grounded to the plasma.

“In keeping with matters already discussed, a secular increase in the Earth's electric charge must to some extent secularly increase its polar moment of inertia and gradually slow its rotation”. (12)

By collecting more negative charge Earth’s rotation is slowing and length of day (LOD) increasing but this process is far from smooth. Earthquakes can interrupt the secular deceleration and actually shorten the LOD. (13, 14) As we have seen earthquake activity preferentially occurs during solar maximum when the customary accumulation of negative charge is disrupted. In this light, tectonic events causing transient changes to Earth’s rotation period are due to electrical effects and not due to the displacement of the crust.

Tectonic activity and Earth’s Gravity

Somewhat more contentious are studies of variations in the measurement of G at Earth’s surface which seem to indicate possible cycles. (15)

It is assumed on this thread that gravity is an electrical phenomenon- as Earth is accumulating charge over time after an initial or previous electron deficient state, G should increase too implying an initial or previous reduced gravity state- this would be problematical for proponents of Earth Expansion Tectonic hypotheses.

This is obviously an area for further study but as I mentioned earlier in this thread there is an abundance of evidence for vertical tectonics- due to an increase in G perhaps?

The Tectonic Circuit

The tectonic circuit extends far beyond Earth and the simple Plate Tectonic cartoons we find in textbooks fail to grasp its complexity. Earth’s tectonic activity is powered externally something consensus geologists have yet to realise- the question is, will they ever?


1. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1977. On the Convection of Electric Charge by the Rotating Earth. Kronos Vol. 2 No 3.

2. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1973. On Cosmic Electricity. Pensée Vol. 3 No 3.

3. Russell. A.J.B. et al. 2015. Magnetospheric signatures of ionospheric density cavities observed by Cluster. Journal of Geophysical Research Issue. 120. (

4. Dimitriu. D. G. et al. 2006. Generation and Dynamics of Multiple Double Layers in Plasma. 33rd EPS Conference on Plasma Physics. ECA Vol. 30I.

5. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1977. On the Convection of Electric Charge by the Rotating Earth. Kronos Vol. 2 No 3.

6. Csuzdi. Michael. 1980. Breakthrough in Energy. Core Publishing. Ontario, Canada.

7. Sidorin. A. Ya. 2010. Diurnal periodicity of earthquakes and its seasonal variations. Seismic Instruments. Vol. 46 No 3.

8. Mazarella. A, Scafetta. N. 2016. Evidences for higher nocturnal seismic activity at the Mt. Vesuvius. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 321 (

9. Choi. D. R, Maslov. L. 2010. Earthquakes and Solar Activity Cycles. New Concepts in Global Tectonics Newsletter. No 57.


11. Afraimovich. E. L, et al. 2008. Global electron content: a new conception to track solar activity. Annales Geophysicae. 26 (

12. Juergens. Ralph. E. 1977. On the Convection of Electric Charge by the Rotating Earth. Kronos Vol. 2 No 3.



15. Anderson. J. D. 2015. Measurements of Newton’s gravitational constant and the length of day. Europhysics Letters April 2015. (
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Fri 15 Sep 2017 2:09 pm

Venus goes Bump in the Night

Earlier in this thread, following Juergens, I suggested that tectonic and atmospheric activity are powered by an electrical circuit connecting the anti-solar hemisphere to a distant ‘virtual cathode’ forming what astrophysicists refer to as the magnetotail.

Now, with data returned by the Venus Express spacecraft, we learn that the night time Cytherean atmosphere is very different to the daytime atmosphere. (1)

I had earlier suggested that we can think of Venus’ atmosphere as a ‘compressed’ magnetosphere and that we should look for analogues in Earth’s magnetosphere to describe the activity found in the Cytherean atmosphere.

Venus Express has confirmed this premise.

“The study shows that the atmosphere on Venus' night side behaves very differently to that on the side of the planet facing the Sun (the 'dayside'), exhibiting unexpected and previously-unseen cloud types, morphologies, and dynamics - some of which appear to be connected to features on the planet's surface”. (1)

“Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves”. (1)

"These waves are concentrated over steep, mountainous areas of Venus; this suggests that the planet's topography is affecting what happens way up above in the clouds." (1)

Venus displays very little topological relief but its atmosphere is incredibly dense. The concentration of “waves” is probably due to an input/output of electrical energy from previously discovered ‘stringy-things’ or Birkeland Currents focussed on the anti-solar hemisphere. (2)
The glow associated with ‘The Shiny Mountains of Venus’ (3) is probably the Cytherean equivalent of earthly earthquake lights, sprites, elves etc. in a more compressed form, part of the Cytherean tectonic circuit.

Other Planets

I realise the robotic exploration of the solar system is very difficult but where possible present and future planetary missions should focus on the night-time hemispheres of the planets as that is where they connect to the external circuit.

For example, such a study at Jupiter may very well reveal that the Great Red Spot is an electrical phenomenon associated with a deeper surface feature, the atmospheric bands in which the spot resides are the ‘cables’ connecting the spot to the external energy source in the distant Jovian magnetotail.


Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby John » Sun 26 May 2019 10:31 pm

Unfortunately I am not good at planetary electronics, consequently I feel unable to comment on Jurgens type theory. I can handle most ideas about planetary geology and while the existence of plates seems probable, I think were created umpteen thousands of years ago by forces acting upon Earth during interplanetary discharges. This was combined with huge internal pressures generated by those 'contacts', effectively fragmenting the Mantle.
Nonetheless, I dismiss the idea of plate tectonics as an impossible foil seized upon (eventually) with hysterical eagerness by the then desperate anti-Velikovsky brigade. It has no known geological mechanism – not then – not now.
My thinking is that the shape and borders of such plates, reflect the material weakness of material under those borders, little more. Their relative 'looseness' allows them to grind, one against the other, resulting in marginal subduction. Some of these borders are lined by dozens of volcanic hot spots. The quieter plate borders may exemplify Velikovsky's comment that volcanos are dying out.
It is, I think. in line with my suggestion, that volcanos appear at the borders of geological plates because they are – relatively – weak spots.
Of course, there are volcanos in areas other than plate borders. These can number among the most violent – Thera and Yellowstone spring to mind. Their devilish power reflects the probability that theirs were not weak zones and they had to build up a mammoth explosive force to smash through to the surface – and beyond!
What I find amazing is that those who baffle me (quite easy!) in related discussions, simply ignore the obvious!
Mother Earth is believed to be billions of years old. We just don't know about the gas giants. Not one of the others lays claim to such a 'life span'. Not even Mars!
How the Dickens can Earth's peculiarities be expected to be reflected in the distinctly recent state (only a few thousand of years) of other planets geology? Things have happened to Earth, perhaps in cataclysms that produced these other planets, etc. There may have been several such as suggested by Egyptian history.
The geology of Mars is shattered, quite probably in giving birth to Mercury. Venus is a 'new girl', virtually liquid, hot enough to melt lead. The Moon is also a 'new boy', possibly born along with Venus, though it may simply have wandered into the Solar System two or three millennia ago.
Either way, their known histories bear no true parallel to Earth whatever.
So- please enlighten me.
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2012 9:03 am

Re: An Alternative to Plate Tectonics

Postby Robertus Maximus » Mon 03 Jun 2019 6:10 pm


I too am not a fan of Plate Tectonics- (or Expansion Tectonics) to my mind the original impetus behind the whole enterprise was based on a ‘fit’ between Africa and South America which was equivalent to seeing faces in the clouds.

Please see my ‘Of Geotectonic Wizards And Geomagnetic Reversals’ at for a look at the origin of ‘evidence’ for this modern myth.

In support of Velikovsky Juergens wrote: “We have seen that a close look turns up little, if any, evidence from the sea bottoms pointing to geomagnetic reversals, and none at all for sea-floor spreading. To the contrary, patterns of rock magnetism beneath the oceans point to global upheaval and turmoil.” Indeed, following the discovery of seafloor ‘magnetic anomalies’ it was noted that they shared "…a striking resemblance to the patterns that appear in Bakelite and Lucite when they are placed under stress. This suggests that the present structure is the fossil record of ancient stresses."

I would consider ‘plate boundaries’ to be discharge channels, the forces evoked to move ‘plates’- ‘ridge push’ and ‘slab pull’ simply do not exist, hence the continents are not drifting. Most of the discharge activity- what we see as earthquakes and volcanoes-is occurring near the surface but not exclusively, some earthquakes occur at depths of up to 700 kilometres suggesting possibly that electric double-layers occur deep within the Earth itself.

Volcanoes are certainly ‘surface’ phenomena, the principal “…composition of volcanic gases (analyses of gases from fumaroles and of gases preserved in solidified lava and in a fresh tephra) show that the most important among them are H2O, H2, CH4 (and other hydrocarbons), O2, CO, CO2, COS, N2, NH3, Cl, H2S, SO2, SO3,S, He, Ar, Xe, boric and arsenic acid, chlorides and fluorides of metals."

It would seem that most volcanic eruptions have very little to do with the popular picture of molten rock.

If we look at the Pacific Ocean we find it is surrounded by the ‘ring of fire’ I do not think this is coincidental but probably due the availability of free electrons in and their ability to move through the ocean water. If not located on earthquake discharge channels that is the so-called ‘plate boundaries’, we find volcanoes on loops extending off the main channel- for example the Horn of Africa or the Mediterranean.

To my mind all this activity is powered externally, Earth is not at rest, in an electrical sense, with its environment that is, its present location in the solar system. On the other hand the moon is at rest with its environment- the difference in electrical potential between the two bodies proved to be a nuisance for the Apollo astronauts, the lunar dust simply clung to everything!

Why is this so? A number of possibilities present themselves. One is the ‘Saturn Theory’ which is popular in the Electric Universe community, however, I have suggested an alternative. I feel my alternative better fits our observations of the solar system plus it offers a reason why Venus was ejected from Jupiter and why families of comets are associated with the so-called gas giant planets.

See my post here:

Unfortunately we have no way of knowing just how old the planets of the solar system are but I would certainly consider Venus to be a new edition. The various sizes of the magnetospheres of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune suggest that all these planets- like Earth- are not at rest with their environments, Jupiter especially. It is this observation that would indicate a global change in the Sun’s environment that affected the planets. A planet such as Jupiter would initially eject material- comets, asteroids, Venus(?) catastrophically in an attempt to reach equilibrium with its new environment, over time the discharge would become less energetic and leave earthly astronomers puzzled as to why the distant planets’ atmospheres are so active given the little amount of thermal energy they receive from the Sun.

Mars does appear to have been devastated by electrical interactions with another body, although I would consider it unlikely that a terrestrial planet will eject another terrestrial body- I don’t see how the parent body would survive. The ejection of terrestrial type planets, in my opinion, is a job for the gas giant planets.

The case of the moon is a strange one, I would regard the moon as a captured body, the question is did Earth wander into the moon’s orbit about the Sun, or vice versa?

Celebrity astronomers give the appearance of ‘knowing’ the history of the solar system but it is just that – an appearance; the real history we may never know. The electric/plasma view offers alternatives to the cosy 4.6 billion year old history of the solar system, unfortunately when we look at the evidence- the ‘recent’ history of the solar system is far from cosy.
Robertus Maximus
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun 05 Oct 2014 5:08 pm

Return to SIS Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests