In honor of the fact that I will be speaking tomorrow evening at the Norwegian Club of San Francisco, it seemed appropriate to bring up the subject of Antarctica.
There is much to say about Antarctica, some of which must wait for future posts, but in conjunction with the Norwegian Club it is fitting to begin by mentioning the achievement of the great Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen (1872 - 1928), who led the first team to successfully reach the South Pole, 90o south, which he reached in December of 1911 -- one hundred years ago this December.
In Fingerprints of the Gods, author Graham Hancock points out that modern scientists were not even aware of the existence of the continent of Antarctica until 1818, and he includes a reproduction of an otherwise modern-looking map from the early 1800s showing a big blank space where Antarctica actually should be. He also points out, however, that maps from the sixteenth century, most likely relying on knowledge preserved from ancient sources, clearly indicate Antarctica. Many of these old maps show surprising knowledge of the coastline beneath the ice sheets of today, indicating the possibility that humans with the ability to make maps were around before the ice reached its current extent.
This article, entitled "Ancient turtle bones reveal that Antarctica was once a rain forest" details the surprising discovery of the bones of tropical and subtropical animals on Seymour Island (one of the islands located in the long tip projecting from the main continent of Antarctica in the upper left quadrant of the image above).
Even more surprising is recent evidence that Antarctica once supported forests and even animals that could not survive the current frigid conditions that prevail there today. This article, "A forest grows in Antarctica," outlines the revisions to theories that scientists are having to make upon the discovery of the buried remains of an extensive forest less than 400 miles from the South Pole. Keep in mind that Amundsen's route to the South Pole from the Bay of Whales was over 800 miles (each way -- over 1,700 miles round trip), which gives some perspective as to how close this buried forest was to the pole itself. The article makes mention of the fact that the wood from this forest is not fossilized, and that chunks of it will float in water and even burn in a campfire.
This evidence presents conventional theorists with some challenges, such as explaining how wood could still be in such condition after millions of years. The second article also mentions mountain ranges and faults on Antarctica that displace sediment layers by as much as 1000 meters (over 3,280 feet), indicating that the Transantarctic Mountains must have been forced up much more rapidly than conventional tectonic theory usually allows.
This discovery also has scientists trying to come up with new smaller tectonic plates underneath Antarctica to explain these violent upheavals, whereas the previous consensus was that the entire continent was riding on one plate (an explanation central to their idea that Antarctica drifted there from warmer climes). If Antarctica is actually not on one large plate, explaining how it drifted from temperate latitudes that could support forests and turtles becomes complicated.
While the tectonic theory has great difficulty dealing with this evidence (which is not surprising, given the other evidence that it has great difficulty explaining), the hydroplate theory of Walt Brown does not. In fact, all these findings are in perfect accord with what we should expect under the hydroplate theory.
As detailed in Dr. Brown's book, and discussed in some detail in the Mathisen Corollary as well, the events surrounding the cataclysmic global flood (the existence of which flood is supported by evidence around the globe) would have first laid down the sediments we see on earth (including in Antarctica) and then initiated a compression event which resulted in the violent buckling that created the earth's highest mountain ranges.
The highest of these ranges, the Himalayas, actually would have initiated a roll in the earth due to the principles of physics (primarily centrifugal force). This roll would have moved the previous North and South Poles by as much as 45o -- and simultaneously rolled parts of the earth that had been at much lower latitudes into the current position of the South Pole and North Pole. This event explains the discovery of the wood and animals in Antarctica, as well as the evidence of lush forests in very northern islands such as Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago at latitude 79o north.
The principles of physics surrounding this "big roll" of the earth also initiated the phenomenon of precession, which is extremely important for understanding the clues left to us by ancient cultures in their mythology and monuments.
Dr. Brown's theory also explains how Antarctica would later have become covered in snow and ice in the aftermath of the flood and events surrounding it. This is important, because (as the articles above point out), Antarctica today receives less precipitation than any other spot on earth.
All of these fascinating aspects of Antarctica support the assertions of Dr. Brown and his theory, and that theory also opens up a completely new perspective on the mysteries of mankind's ancient past.
There is much to say about Antarctica, some of which must wait for future posts, but in conjunction with the Norwegian Club it is fitting to begin by mentioning the achievement of the great Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen (1872 - 1928), who led the first team to successfully reach the South Pole, 90o south, which he reached in December of 1911 -- one hundred years ago this December.
In Fingerprints of the Gods, author Graham Hancock points out that modern scientists were not even aware of the existence of the continent of Antarctica until 1818, and he includes a reproduction of an otherwise modern-looking map from the early 1800s showing a big blank space where Antarctica actually should be. He also points out, however, that maps from the sixteenth century, most likely relying on knowledge preserved from ancient sources, clearly indicate Antarctica. Many of these old maps show surprising knowledge of the coastline beneath the ice sheets of today, indicating the possibility that humans with the ability to make maps were around before the ice reached its current extent.
This article, entitled "Ancient turtle bones reveal that Antarctica was once a rain forest" details the surprising discovery of the bones of tropical and subtropical animals on Seymour Island (one of the islands located in the long tip projecting from the main continent of Antarctica in the upper left quadrant of the image above).
Even more surprising is recent evidence that Antarctica once supported forests and even animals that could not survive the current frigid conditions that prevail there today. This article, "A forest grows in Antarctica," outlines the revisions to theories that scientists are having to make upon the discovery of the buried remains of an extensive forest less than 400 miles from the South Pole. Keep in mind that Amundsen's route to the South Pole from the Bay of Whales was over 800 miles (each way -- over 1,700 miles round trip), which gives some perspective as to how close this buried forest was to the pole itself. The article makes mention of the fact that the wood from this forest is not fossilized, and that chunks of it will float in water and even burn in a campfire.
This evidence presents conventional theorists with some challenges, such as explaining how wood could still be in such condition after millions of years. The second article also mentions mountain ranges and faults on Antarctica that displace sediment layers by as much as 1000 meters (over 3,280 feet), indicating that the Transantarctic Mountains must have been forced up much more rapidly than conventional tectonic theory usually allows.
This discovery also has scientists trying to come up with new smaller tectonic plates underneath Antarctica to explain these violent upheavals, whereas the previous consensus was that the entire continent was riding on one plate (an explanation central to their idea that Antarctica drifted there from warmer climes). If Antarctica is actually not on one large plate, explaining how it drifted from temperate latitudes that could support forests and turtles becomes complicated.
While the tectonic theory has great difficulty dealing with this evidence (which is not surprising, given the other evidence that it has great difficulty explaining), the hydroplate theory of Walt Brown does not. In fact, all these findings are in perfect accord with what we should expect under the hydroplate theory.
As detailed in Dr. Brown's book, and discussed in some detail in the Mathisen Corollary as well, the events surrounding the cataclysmic global flood (the existence of which flood is supported by evidence around the globe) would have first laid down the sediments we see on earth (including in Antarctica) and then initiated a compression event which resulted in the violent buckling that created the earth's highest mountain ranges.
The highest of these ranges, the Himalayas, actually would have initiated a roll in the earth due to the principles of physics (primarily centrifugal force). This roll would have moved the previous North and South Poles by as much as 45o -- and simultaneously rolled parts of the earth that had been at much lower latitudes into the current position of the South Pole and North Pole. This event explains the discovery of the wood and animals in Antarctica, as well as the evidence of lush forests in very northern islands such as Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago at latitude 79o north.
The principles of physics surrounding this "big roll" of the earth also initiated the phenomenon of precession, which is extremely important for understanding the clues left to us by ancient cultures in their mythology and monuments.
Dr. Brown's theory also explains how Antarctica would later have become covered in snow and ice in the aftermath of the flood and events surrounding it. This is important, because (as the articles above point out), Antarctica today receives less precipitation than any other spot on earth.
All of these fascinating aspects of Antarctica support the assertions of Dr. Brown and his theory, and that theory also opens up a completely new perspective on the mysteries of mankind's ancient past.