Simultaneous Impacts Configured Earth’s Landforms and Instilled Its Obliquity

There are two major events in Earth history that geologists have wrong. The first is “no flood, ever” – an indisputable mistake committed nearly 200 years ago, and the primary subject of this website. The second major error is the subject of the present post, a recapitulation of a paper I submitted to Geomorphology several years ago. The editor actually sent the paper our for “expert” review, but they thought it too radical for publication. I held onto it nonetheless.

My plan was to have The Worldwide Flood gain acceptance by the scientific community and then present this material. However, I might not live that long.

So, here is a paper that corrects the other fundamental error in geology that has us believing that, somehow, subsurface flows mysteriously reach up thousands of miles to move solid bedrock through solid bedrock. Such thinking is the fake-science equivalent of the notion that subsurface flows somehow carve submerged river systems.

Here is the majority of my correspondence with editor at Geomorphology:

“This article identifies the energy source and the sequence of events that configured the tectonic plates, continents, ocean basins, and major mountain ranges, and it describes how the planet’s obliquity was instilled. The Simultaneous Impacts Hypothesis invalidates Continental Drift and therefore constitutes a significant advance toward forming a more correct understanding of Earth history.

To paraphrase R. Thomas Chamberlain’s critique of Alfred Wegener, “If we are to believe in Jaye’s hypothesis, then we must forget most of what has been learned in the past 60 years and start all over again.” This hypothesis won’t require a complete restart, for much that has been learned while trying to support continental drift will likely fit into the Simultaneous Impacts Theory. However, this explanation will excite world-wide interest, new inquiries, realignment of old findings, and the discarding of others, etc.”

And now for the paper:

Simultaneous impacts configured Earth’s landforms and instilled its obliquity

Keywords: simultaneous impacts; obliquity; tectonic plate creation and movement

ABSTRACT

The simultaneous impacts of two eastward moving, immensely energetic objects configured the Earth’s land masses and instilled its obliquity.  The Simultaneous Impacts Hypothesis refutes and replaces Continental Drift.

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

For most of the past half century geologists have been searching for the source of energy that could move the continents over great distances. Based on the information available for most of this period, the only logical place to search was and has been Earth’s interior – hence, Continental Drift. But new data provide sufficient evidence to nullify that hypothesis. Visual Analytics, the science of reasoning facilitated by interactive image processing interfaces, applied to Google Maps and Google Earth data, leads to a novel hypothesis that replaces presently accepted assumptions, presuppositions, and myths formed on inaccurate interpretations of previously incomplete information. This paper assumes that Google Earth and Google Maps data are accurate. That data is analyzed to conclude that a brief and energetic event configured the Earth’s continents, ocean basins, and major mountain ranges, and it instilled the planet’s obliquity. While retaining the accepted hypothesis that many of Earth’s large land forms were once connected, the Simultaneous Impact Hypothesis refutes and replaces Continental Drift.

SIMULTANEOUS IMPACTS

The energy required to configure Earth’s landforms to their current positions was approximately 1029 Joules (two spherically shaped impacting objects with 320 km radius, 2800 kg/m3 density, and impact velocity of 15 km/s). This energy was delivered by the simultaneous impacts of two eastward-moving, massive objects whose remnants measure approximately 800 km in diameter. Impact remnants frame the northern and southern extents of South America forming the Caribbean and Scotia Seas, respectively. The origin and nature of the objects is unknown; however, the shallow impact angle that led to the creation of remnant troughs might indicate that the objects could have suffered decayed orbits. The forces imparted by the simultaneous impacts separated land masses and configured the continents, the ocean basins, the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the major mountain ranges, and the tectonic plates as they are today. Land mass movements and collisions caused by the simultaneous impacts instilled the planet’s obliquity. The duration of this event was approximately 20 minutes, and it caused a mass extinction.

The objects’ shallow impact angles created troughs (rather than craters), and they are easily detected in Google Maps (satellite view) or Google Earth. Remnant troughs are identified in red ovals in Figure 1. The northern object (1N) initial strike location was in the equatorial region northeast of Australia and the southern object (1S) strike location was southeast of New Zealand.  Impact locations are identified by faded red circles in Figure 1.

Figure1 5Nov2018Figure 1. Red ovals identify the simultaneous impact remnant troughs.  Impact locations are identified by faded red circles.

 2.1 AFRICA AND INDIA

The simultaneous impacts severed and propelled formerly conjoined India and Africa from their original locations. By event termination the movement of these land masses would create basins for the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. India, immediately to the east of the 1S impact, acquired the most kinetic energy. Due to the impacting objects’ initial directions, the more massive and slower moving African continent slid eastward and northward (Figure 2a). India’s velocity would eventually cause it to shear off of Africa; as it proceeded northward (Figure 2b), India collided with a land mass and dragged it from its original location (Figure 2c), creating what is now known as Malaysia. This collision induced a torque to the moving Indian landmass that sheared Madagascar off of Africa as well as India (Figure 2d). India’s momentum carried it northward and into the Asian sub-continent, creating the Himalayan range. Land mass transits formed terrestrial wakes, scrapes, and gouges that remain as evidence on the ocean floors; Ninetyeast Ridge is one such remnant. India’s path follows a great circle route on the sphere (Figure 3).

Figure2 10Nov2018Figure 2. Arrows indicate (a) Africa’s movement relative to South America; (b) India’s transit; (c) Malaysia’s creation by India’s impact and transit; (d) Madagascar is shorn from Africa and India due to torque induced by India’s impact with Malaysia.
Figure3 5Nov2018Figure 3. The arrow in this Google Earth image identifies India’s transit on the sphere as a great circle route.

2.2 NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA

The simultaneous impacts also compressed, severed, and then released what are now North America and South America from their original locations and then dragged them across the Pacific Ocean basin, which their movements created. Outlines of the continents’ western boundaries remain discernable in the bathymetry (Figure 4). Forces from the dual impacts deformed and compressed terrain topographies, creating both the Andes and Rocky Mountain ranges, before impact forces released the continents on their eastward transits. The compression lasted until impact forces overcame the continents’ static friction forces. The Andes are tightly formed along South America’s western coast due to land mass compression from both 1N and 1S. However, North America’s western mountains, valleys, and faults were formed by a more complex sequence of events due to the influence of only 1N.

Figure4 5Nov2018Figure 4. The simultaneous impacts severed and released what are now North America and South America from their original locations and dragged them across the Pacific basin.  Outlines of the continents’ pre-impacts positions are identified in the bathymetry by NA and SA on the left of this Google Maps image.  White arrows are of equal length to convey event simultaneity.

The Rocky Mountains were created by 1N initially tearing and compressing land from the western Pacific (white double arrows, Figure 5a). The landscape was compressed to a “release line,” now a series of volcanoes (Figure 5b), most of which are submerged; the northwest extent of the “release line” is in the Pacific Ocean near Kamchatka. 1N’s eastward movement eventually imparted sufficient force to overcome the continent’s static friction force; once released, the continent’s transit formed the northern Pacific Ocean basin. The latitude-like arc stretching from Kamchatka along the Aleutian Atoll to the Gulf of Alaska is a remnant of North America’s shearing at the onset of its release.

Figure2 11Nov2018Figure 5.  (a)  White double arrows indicate North America’s land mass compression region, forming the Rocky Mountains; (b) North America’s release line; (c) scours created by (d) drag locations (white circles) which unfurled compressed landscapes during continental transit, creating valleys, gulfs, and faults along the western coast; prior to the simultaneous impacts, the red circled regions along the western Pacific boundary were connected to the white circled drag locations found along the west coast of North America.  The Mexican Peninsula is particularly disfigured by North America’s transit; faults and consequent earthquakes persist due to landmass deformation; (e) black double arrows indicate the region unfurled by westward-acting drag forces during North America’s transit.

Valleys, gulfs, and faults along the west coast of North America were created by drag mechanisms which unfurled compressed landscapes during transit. These drag locations (Figure 5d) created a set of four essentially parallel west-to-east remnant scrapes in the Pacific Ocean floor (Figure 5c). The Rocky Mountain chain was partially unfurled by the westward acting forces from these drag mechanisms (black double arrows, Figure 5e), creating California’s Central Valley as well as the Gulf of California. The westward acting drag forces on the eastward moving continent weakened the compressed landscapes resulting in the faults found along North America’s west coast. Because of the drag locations, the west coast of North America halted while 1N continued eastward. This created southeasterly terrain elongations that formed the Baja Peninsula and produced the region’s faults that remain active to the present. It should be noted that the drag locations found along the western coast of North America correspond to their readily identifiable original locations now in the bathymetry of the western Pacific Ocean. Their locations are identified by red circles in Figure 5.

2.3 INSTILLING THE PLANET’S OBLIQUITY

India’s impact into the Asian sub-continent or Africa’s halt, or both, induced the planet’s obliquity. Evidence remains in the impact troughs, each of which has a southern turn (or rightward turn relative to the objects’ travel direction): as the two impacting objects traveled straight in their reference frames, India’s collision and/or Africa’s halt caused the planet beneath them to tilt northward; as the objects continued to plow eastward their remnant troughs consequently bend southward, shown in Figure 6.

Figure6 5Nov2018
Figure 6.  The white lines are superimposed over the impacting objects’ transit remnants.  The paths curve southward because the objects traveled straight in their reference frame while the planet beneath them tilted northward.  The northward tilt was induced by the halt in Africa’s transit, or when India collided into the Asian subcontinent, or both.

2.4  OTHER EFFECTS

The Mid-Atlantic Ridge, erroneously thought to be a mechanism causing continental separation, forms as a consequence of continental transits coming to a halt: the ridge and its deformations buckled as North and South American eastward transits ceased. Hence the ridge nearly uniformly bisects the Americas to the west and Europe and Africa to the east.

Volcanic fissures that eventually would lead to the formation of the Hawaiian Island system were created by movement of one of the drag locations. Evidence in the form of scrapes in the Pacific basin can be traced to major volcanoes in the Hawaiian Island chain, shown in Figure 7. Assuming that the deepest or largest fissure would be created nearest to 1N, then fissure dormancy time would be expected to increase as a function of distance northward. Thus we find Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea presently active, whereas dormant islands (Maui, Lanai, Molokai, and Oahu) extend to the northwest in the island chain. The Hawaiian Islands are not migrating over some hypothesized hot spot.

Figure7 5Nov2018
Figure 7. Scrapes left by drag mechanisms correspond to volcanoes in the Hawaiian Islands.

The dual impacts and their immediate effects took place over a span of time measured in minutes. The mass extinction caused by the impacts places the event at least 65 million years before present. Boundaries and tectonic plates created during the event remain seismically active as the planet continues to recover.

In addition to instilling the planet’s obliquity, the simultaneous impacts imparted sufficient energy to affect the rotation of the planet, resulting in the current “day”.  The planet’s increased rotational velocity and its newly induced tilt are likely to have created conditions resulting in the planet’s chaotic magnetosphere. Asymmetries in impact sizes, locations, and effects could be the source of Milankovitch cycles. Prior to the simultaneous impacts, the Earth’s axis would have been perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic, and warmer climates are likely to have extended closer to its poles. Finally, materials ejected by the massive and energetic collisions are likely to have escaped Earth’s gravitational pull and eventually cratered its moon.

3. CONCLUSION

The simultaneous impact of two massive and energetic objects configured the continents by moving them to their present locations, creating the Earth’s ocean basins as well as its major mountain ranges and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Landmass movements and collisions induced by the simultaneous impacts instilled the planet’s obliquity. The movements also created the planet’s tectonic plates as well as their boundaries that remain seismically active to the present. All this took place on a time scale measured in minutes. The impacts and their effects caused a mass extinction, placing the simultaneous impacts at least 65 million years before present. The Simultaneous Impacts Hypothesis refutes Continental Drift, and the many works based upon that assumption are therefore invalid.

 

Articles and their descriptions

Dear Reader,

My intent in establishing this site was two-fold: (1) chronicle findings regarding the worldwide flood, and (2) find someone or some entity with assets capable of investigating the deep ocean bottom for signs of human activity (or financing such an investigation), because finding remnants of human activity in the deep abyss would immediately and forever end the flood/“no-flood ever” debate. In addition, it would put to rest the bad science that geologists propagate as a consequence of their nearly 200-year old “no flood, ever” error.

About which, please be mindful that the following statement is indisputable: geologists erred 200 years ago when they concluded that there was never a flood. From the evidence before them, they could only have concluded that presently exposed landscapes were never flooded by a common event, something that is undeniably true. Instead, they concluded that there was never a flood thereby assuming that all Earth’s waters have been here since the beginning. Upon reflection, you will likely agree that “no flood, ever” is the biggest mistake in the history of science. Sadly, it persists to the present.

To undo geology’s mess, the following posts capture and augment materials in my book. Some posts are directed at the science (and the error) whereas others address matters from a somewhat more anthropological standpoint.

Retraction Request Made to the Geological Society of London – I present an email exchange that demonstrates geologists’ intransigence regarding their commission of the most profound error in the history of science.

Letter to the Editors, Journal of Geology – I write to the editors of the journal that published “Extraordinary Biomass-Burning Episode and Impact Winter Triggered by the Younger-Dryas Cosmic Impact ~12,800 Years Ago” to identify two very important shortcomings in the article.

Galileo’s Telescope, Google Earth – As the telescope led to the end of geocentrism, so the new data (e.g. Google Earth) nullify geology’s prevailing paradigm that has us all believing that there was never a worldwide flood.

The Flood Waters: Source, Analysis, Remembrances – I use maps, recent scholarly publications, and some basic mathematics to determine the amount of water delivered by a cosmic impact nearly 13,000 years before present; we augment the analysis with historical accounts of the incident.

Scientific Paper: The Younger-Dryas Extraterrestrial Impact – My submission to the Geological Society of London, 6 Jan 2018. In an earlier post, I presented an email exchange with the journal’s editors, requesting that they retract their predecessor’s historic error. They refused, claiming that such matters are left to be superseded by evidence. This paper presents such evidence, so I submitted it to them. They refused to publish it, not because of its content but rather because of its style.

It Would Look Exactly Like a River System – A geologist describes the submerged topographic features: they are submerged rivers. Yet they think that they were carved by sub-surface processes, an act of anti-science as they are fitting observations (the submerged rivers) to geology’s theory that there was never a worldwide flood – a theory  shown to be erroneous.

Expedition Atlantis – I complement Plato’s description of Atlantis with map data to lay the foundation for an expedition to discover the city’s remnants and forever put to rest the idea that there was never a worldwide flood.

Eyewitness Account of the Impact that Delivered the Worldwide Flood – Cave paintings found near Fouriesburg, South Africa, depict an eye-witness’s account of the object that delivered the flood. The painting captures the impacting object’s split as it neared impact – which led to the gap in the impact crescent.

A Submission to Anthropologists – I submitted a paper to an on-line journal dealing with anthropology. It was declined; however, it might be of interest since anthropology is as wholly screwed up as is geology.

“What are your thoughts on Noah?” – I recently appeared as a guest on a TV program, and its host pressed me on the Noah legend (instead of concentrating on the science, much to my chagrin). It dawned on me that some might be interested in the matter, viewed from a scientific standpoint, and it is found in this essay.

Two Interviews – I appeared as the guest on two radio programs, and they can be accessed at the following links:

  1. http://midnightinthedesert.com/michael-jaye/
  2. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/earthancients/2018/08/03/michael-jaye-phd-the-worldwide-flood

 

“What are your thoughts on Noah?”

This past weekend I was the guest on a TV program that will air in a few months. I spent quite a bit of time preparing for my appearance, and I assumed that the host would have prepared for it, too. I had provided to the show’s staff an outline, including pertinent questions, for how I envisioned that the interview might proceed, so it was not an unrealistic expectation.

Unfortunately for me, the host was unprepared. As a consequence, he did not grasp the importance of my primary finding, the unambiguous and historic error committed by Sedgwick nearly 200 years ago that has all of science believing that there was never a worldwide flood. I was very clear: “no flood, ever” is not the same as “presently exposed landscapes were never flooded.” I was looking the host in the eye as I explained this important matter, and what I observed was a complete lack of comprehension, if not utter vacuity. (I’m shaking my head as I type this.)

Perhaps half way through the interview, the host stated enthusiastically, “I love the Noah story!” Rather than focusing on the science, he instead pressed the matter by asking, “What are your thoughts on Noah?”

I am somewhat amazed by the speed at which possible responses – and their consequences – went through my head (Refuse to answer? How would that appear? Do I want a confrontation?). Turns out that I had anticipated such a question, so I decided to convey my thoughts on Noah as concisely as as possible. I hope that the producers will retain it for broadcast.

This incident got me to thinking that it might be worthwhile to share my thoughts about the legend of Noah. Here they are:

– If biblical time is taken to begin roughly 3000 years before present, then the legend of Noah precedes it by 10,000 years.

– Although flood legends are found in cultures around the planet, the Noah story,  essentially that of a flood survivor with a large craft, originates from the Mediterranean Sea region.

– About which: a 2009 article in Nature identifies that the Med flooded through the Strait of Gibraltar. Several news articles (such as this) depict the region’s appearance prior to the flooding, and it is shown in the figure, below. Notice that there was a sea at the bottom of the pre-flood western Med.

Western Med flood image associated with Nature paper 16Oct2018

– I had prepared this next figure for the show. It contains two identical maps of the western Mediterranean Sea. On the lower map I have superimposed a white outline that approximates the pre-flood shoreline in the previous figure. Note that river drainage systems from formerly upland regions can be identified in the blue areas above the white outline. All of them became preserved in the bathymetry after the Med flooded through the Strait. Furthermore, we note that the rivers’ erosive action ceased at the white outline. This is important, for it establishes a contradiction in published articles – Nature correctly recognizes that the erosion stopped at the former sea level, yet, in contradiction, we are expected to believe that submerged systems everywhere outside the Med were carved by phantom subsurface flows…. But I digress. Back to Noah.

Western Med flood image w ouline of former sea extent 17Oct2018

– Note: although the Nature article captures the correct mechanism by which the Med flooded, the authors have the timing of the event grossly incorrect. The Med flooded through the Strait of Gibraltar 12,800 years before present at the Younger-Dryas boundary as a consequence of the IO’s impact in the Southern Ocean and the subsequent worldwide flood brought by its melted ice (IO? see first sentence of second paragraph here).

– I contend that Noah floated his boat in this pre-flood western Mediterranean Sea. Perhaps he traded animals and moved them to various ports? Whatever commerce he might have practiced is immaterial, for he did not save all the animals on the planet.

– Much like the Haida Gwaii, Noah survived because he was a pre-flood seafarer with a craft.

– Due to the altitude of the Strait’s flood water passage region, roughly 200m below present sea level (identified in the Nature article), the Med would have been the last major basin on Earth to flood.

– While the Med flooded, there would have been a cessation in the rise of the flood waters elsewhere around the planet.

– Related: the Haida Gwaii survived by keeping up with the eastern migration of the Pacific Ocean’s shoreline. While the Med flooded, the Haida Gwaii survivors would have recognized the cessation in the waters’ rise, and, perhaps thinking that the flooding had ceased, they set up camp about 100m above the shore. (Wouldn’t you?) This would put the campsite about 100m below final (present) sea level where their artifacts were recently discovered (mentioned in the link, above). Then, once the Med was completely flooded, the worldwide rise in all contiguous seas and oceans began again, so they returned to their survival crafts until present sea level was attained.

– After the IO’s impact, yet before the flooding through the Strait, human inhabitants of the western Med would have noticed dramatic environmental changes that included earthquakes, prolonged cold, and rains. I suspect that it took a bit more than forty days of melting before the flood waters reached the Strait, but it was somewhere on the order of months. During this time Noah would have observed the rains and other post-impact effects. But let us be clear: it was the IO’s melted ice that caused the flood and not the rain.

– Once the sea waters attained their present state, Noah eventually landed on some island in the post-flood Mediterranean Sea. Candidate locations include Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta, etc. Perhaps one of these islands was previously known as Ararat?

Eyewitness Account of the Impact that Delivered the Worldwide Flood

Recently, I came across a Linkedin post by Jim Davidson titled, “10,000 BC – A Cosmic Event” (available here). In the post he shows photos of cave paintings taken near Fouriesburg, South Africa. One of the paintings depicts what he calls a “two-headed comet” as it enters Earth atmosphere, just prior to impact. The image, below, is taken from his post, and it shows a very long comet tail (light horizontal line near top third of image), as well as the two-headed comet. Note that the painting depicts the object moving from right to left – an important observation!

Cave painting Fouriesburg South AfricaHere is a closer look at the bifurcated comet – it is somewhat difficult to discern the second head, but it is moving downward (below) the more easily identifiable upper head.

IO split captured on cave in South AfricaOn the close-up image, I overlay yellow circles on the bifurcated heads, as well as lines over the comet’s lengthy tail.

Split with overlain pathsNext is a Google Earth map depicting the impact site, as well as the location of Fouriesburg, South Africa (white cross). Note the gap in the impact crescent.

Fouriesburg SA with impact site 17Aug2018In earlier posts I ascribe the impact crescent gap to the loosely packed nature of the IO (impacting object). It is loosely packed due to relatively small gravitational accelerations induced by its solid, dense central core in the Oort Cloud where the IO formed. (The IO’s solid core carved the trough that we see in the central part of the impact crescent.) The loosely packed IO’s interaction with Earth’s atmosphere, compounded by its acceleration caused by Earth’s gravity, are the primary causes of the IO’s breakup into two major parts as it approached impact. Thus, the crescent gap and its disjoint arcs.

By the way, this impact delivered the worldwide flood, and caused the many (documented) environmental changes to presently exposed landscapes that geologists ascribed to a Younger-Dryas impact. They will eventually realize that the worldwide flood induced the YD ecosystem changes.

On the previous image, I’ve overlain the impact crescents (white arcs) and the IO’s central core’s path (red arrow).

Fouriesburg SA with impact site and overlays 17Aug2018To an observer in Fouriesburg, South Africa, the IO would have approached Earth from the observer’s right to left, as in the cave painting. Thus, the cave painting is an eye witness account of the IO impact.

Its very long tail was caused by IO break-up as it approached impact, its many fragments illuminated by the sun (the IO was tens of thousands of times larger than a typical comet, so imagine how its tail appeared on final approach). A corroborating recollection in the human tradition is the Chinese New Year dragon, an illuminated serpent above the clouds with water emanating from its mouth. Like the cave painting, the dragon also commemorates the worldwide flood that the IO delivered.

Chinese New Year Dragon w water coming from mouthAs mentioned in earlier posts, IO ice fragment impact craters can be found along the impact path, which we can identify by back-propagating the impact trough. Thus, we find the craters not only in North America (that geologists wrongly ascribe to some phantom ice sheet impact) but in South America, too, particularly in southern Argentina, as shown on the next map.

SA impact cratersIn closing, there was a worldwide flood, and it was delivered by a cosmic impact roughly 12,800 years before present. Its waters, more than two miles worth, flooded the planet from the former abyss upward. The worldwide flood that the IO delivered completely changed the ecosystems on presently exposed landscapes (Younger-Dryas effects), and it nearly killed our species.

Yet we recognize none of this because of geology’s erroneous yet pervasive “no flood, ever” paradigm.

“…it would look exactly like a river system….”

The publication of Google Maps/Earth enables us to see the topography of the ocean basins where we find structures that look exactly like river systems, many of which extend hundreds of miles away from continental shelves and into abyssal plains. Those familiar with fluid flow would immediately realize that it is impossible for concentrated flows to persist over such distances through the dense, watery medium. Yet geologists would have us believe that the submerged rivers were carved by subsurface processes….

Such a belief is bunk masquerading as science.

Geologists screwed up nearly 200 years ago when they concluded that there was never a worldwide flood. As a consequence, all of science misunderstands not only the mechanism by which the submerged rivers formed, but Earth and human history as well.

This post’s title is in quotation marks because it is taken from a geologist’s comment about Monterey Canyon. I wrote to that individual, as well as several other geologists, a version of the following letter:

In a relatively recent BBC article (http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170706-the-mystery-of-the-massive-deep-sea-rivers), geologist Daniel Parsons is quoted as saying about Monterey Canyon (off the coast of California), “If you drained all the water away, it would look exactly like a river system with bends and meanders, except there are not trees along the banks.” This is quite an observation, one I made nearly ten years ago when Google Maps (satellite view) were published.

It is disappointing that Parsons and other geologists (like Peakall, mentioned in the linked article) attempt to fit the structure’s formation into geology’s prevailing “no flood, ever” paradigm. Thomas Kuhn would call this the practice of anti-science.

When I first saw Monterey Canyon, my thought was: how did that river system become submerged? (I am a mathematician – not a geologist, so I was free to ask such an impertinent question.) Certainly, subsurface flows could not remain concentrated over such distances, and straight, gravity-induced flows could never carve the submerged oxbows…. And what process would cause the subsurface flows to “organize”?

The claim that subsurface flows created Monterey Canyon and other similar structures found around the planet prompted me to understand geology’s ‘no flood, ever’ claim. Adam Sedgwick is largely responsible for the belief, formed roughly 200 years ago, and it is based on his search throughout parts of Europe for a common deposit layer, something that could not be found. No deposit layer meant no worldwide flood.

Here we are, nearly two-hundred years later, and all of science is affected by this celebrated finding, hailed as the triumph of science over religion (a misnomer as it would be better described as the triumph of science over the human narrative tradition since flood stories are found in cultures from around the planet). You see, Sedgwick was not only a Cambridge prof, he was also president of the Geo Soc of London, as well as an ordained minister. Such a courageous recantation….

The celebration of ‘no flood, ever’ as such a triumph is quite the irony, for, from the evidence, Sedgwick instead should have concluded: presently exposed landscapes were never flooded by a common event. That presently exposed landscapes were never flooded by a common event is absolutely true, but it is far different from the prevailing belief that there was never a worldwide flood. Sedgwick erroneously passed judgment on landscapes that he could not observe.

That the submerged rivers could not be observed until only recently explains ‘no flood, ever’ longevity and associated, deeply rooted condescension toward anyone thinking otherwise. (Thought exercise: imagine a journal editor’s reaction upon receiving a paper that mentions a worldwide flood.)

By claiming that subsurface flows carved Monterey Canyon and other submerged structures, geologists are fitting data/observations (submerged rivers) to the ‘no flood, ever’ theory (which, as shown, is based on a logical error). This is the practice of anti-science, or fantasy. The new map data should have caused geologists to question the ‘no flood, ever’ belief and to correct all the bad science that has followed from it. Sadly, that has not happened.

There was a worldwide flood, it occurred 12,800 ybp, and it was delivered by a cosmic impact. Among its effects are those associated with the YD event. And the flood’s waters quickly preserved the many submerged canyons that we all can observe in the new maps. The flood forever changed the planet, and it nearly killed our species. We find ourselves ill-adapted to the post-flood ecosystem; hence, our need for clothing, shelter, and warmth.

‘No flood, ever’ is unquestionably the most profound error in the history of science. You might read more about the matter at my website: https://theworldwideflood.com/  Or, you could purchase my book, The Worldwide Flood: Uncovering and Correcting the Most Profound Error in the History of Science. It is available at Amazon.

Let’s be clear, though: this is not about money. Rather, it is about getting humanity to realize that we wholly and completely misunderstand Earth and human history because of geology’s incredible error. Among the profound consequences is that two branches of science, Geology and Anthropology, are fundamentally wrong.

Perhaps you might help to expose the error?

Regards,

Michael Jaye, PhD