My paper, “The Flooding of the Mediterranean Basin at the Younger-Dryas Boundary,” is now available here.
It is no small matter, for it corrects the most profound error in the history of science. As such, I hope that you will share it with others.
My paper, “The Flooding of the Mediterranean Basin at the Younger-Dryas Boundary,” is now available here.
It is no small matter, for it corrects the most profound error in the history of science. As such, I hope that you will share it with others.
The primary intent of this website was to chronicle my findings regarding the worldwide flood. This has been accomplished: an article I authored, “The Flooding of the Mediterranean Basin at the Younger-Dryas Boundary” will be published in April 2019. I will post a link to it once it is published.
As a consequence, I am removing many posts. Nonetheless, a few will remain, and links to them are found, below.
It will take some time to undo geology’s mess, but doing so will have its official start upon the article’s publication. The foundations of a new scientific era will be found in the article, as well as in my book.
Remaining flood and/or science-related posts:
Simultaneous Impacts Configured Earth’s Landforms and Instilled Its Obliquity – This is a non-flood article regarding the configuration of the continents. Continental drift is nearly as big an error as “no flood, ever.”
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.
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.
TV Interview – Working under the theory that any publicity is good publicity, I agreed to appear on George Noory’s show, Beyond Belief, back in October. The interview is now available here.
Radio Interviews – Within the past year, I appeared as the guest on two radio programs. The interviews can be accessed at the following links:
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:
Keywords: simultaneous impacts; obliquity; tectonic plate creation and movement
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
Here 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.
On the close-up image, I overlay yellow circles on the bifurcated heads, as well as lines over the comet’s lengthy tail.
Next 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.
In 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).
To 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.
As 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.
In 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.
For almost 200 years geologists have accepted that the Earth has had all its water since nearly its beginning. This paradigm finds its origin in the early decades of the 1800s when European geologists began the process of determining whether or not the whole of the Earth suffered a deluge. The early geologists set about various landscapes seeking a common deposit layer, but they could not find it. Instead, it became apparent that diluvial gravels belonged to multiple, distinct events. Therefore, because there was not a common event in the observational record, the early geologists concluded that there was never a worldwide flood.
In his 1831 president’s address to the Geological Society of London, Adam Sedgwick renounced his belief in a worldwide flood. He stated, in part:
The vast masses of diluvial gravel … do not belong to one violent and transitory period. It was indeed a most unwarranted conclusion when we assumed the contemporaneity of all the superficial gravel on the earth…. Having been myself a believer [in a worldwide flood], and, to the best of my power, a propagator of what I now regard as a philosophic heresy, … I think it right … thus publicly to read my recantation. (Sedgwick, A. 1831. Address to the Geological Society of London, on retiring from the President’s Chair, February 18.)
It was a celebrated pronouncement, for Sedgwick was not only the Society’s president, but he was also a Cambridge University professor as well as a clergyman in the Church of England. Sedgwick’s recantation had lasting effect: to this day, all of science accepts that there was never a worldwide flood.
Interestingly, today’s lettered geologists staffing the science’s premier journals do not know the source of their fundamental “no flood, ever” tenet. They simply accept it as an article of their faith, and they immediately discount anyone thinking otherwise. I know this because I have dealt with them. Many of them. I have found that the very few aware of the history are wholly uncritical of the conclusion relative to its supporting evidence.
Uncritical? Indeed: the early geologists’ “no flood, ever” conclusion is indisputably wrong. From the evidence, Sedgwick and his peers instead should have concluded: presently exposed landscapes were never submerged by a common flood. Whereas it is undeniably true that where we are now was never flooded by a common event, that is not equivalent to the claim that there was never a worldwide flood. Sedgwick and the other early geologists mistakenly passed judgment on vast, submerged landscapes that they could not observe; they assumed that all of Earth’s waters have been with us since the beginning. The error precluded the possibility that now-submerged landscapes were inundated by some event, something that Google Maps data strongly imply (examples shown on Figure 1).
Geology’s incorrect finding has persisted for two reasons: (1) there was little contradictory evidence on presently exposed landscapes that would call into question the prevailing theory, and (2) we could not see into the bathymetry to observe submerged landscapes until only recently. Today, however, the new maps allow us to observe the topography of ocean floors where we find former rivers. The new maps unequivocally reveal well-preserved drainages under more than three kilometers (km) of water, and they are ubiquitous. Their existence implies that there must have been a worldwide flood.
Please note that we are applying the scientific method: new data (maps) caused us to review theory. And what we find immediately is that geology’s ‘no flood, ever’ paradigm is erroneous. The new data should evoke new thinking, which in our case would result in the restoration of the belief that the Earth suffered a devastating flood. That geologists have failed to review their fundamental belief in the presence of this new data is powerful testament to the constraining effect that ‘no flood, ever’ holds over science, related disciplines, and rational thought.
The drainages in Fig. 1 imply that the Earth had much less water than the present. As such, it is interesting to consider pre-flood Earth, a model for which is shown on Figure 2. It was created in ArcGIS by removing an estimated average depth of 3 km from the present sea level, thereby exposing the former river systems.
With the removal of so much water, the atmosphere would have covered the former abyss. Thus, the dark tan areas on Fig. 2 experienced increased atmospheric pressure, which would have led to higher temperatures. Humans evolved in these regions, and we are furless as a consequence. We find evidence of pre-flood human activity nearly exclusively in tropical latitudes because, at more than 3 kilometers (two miles) above the former sea level, most of the yellow regions on Fig. 2 were too cold for human habitation. In the context that there was a worldwide flood, humanity’s relationship with its planet might be better understood this way: our environmental abuse is a consequence of a maladapted, sentient species endeavoring to survive. We would be extinct were it not for our brains.
What is now coastal California would have been more than 3 km above the former sea level, and winds uplifted by the nearly vertical continental shelf condensed to create persistent rainfall that eroded and rounded the hills. The Salinas Valley was once an inland lake, and it drained to the northwest and then down the nearly vertical slope where its waters acquired sufficient kinetic energy to carve what we now call Monterey Canyon (upper left, Fig. 1).
We will leave for another day the identification of the water’s source, though we can state with certainty that it must be cosmic, for such a volume could not be stored at the poles. Until then, let us all recognize that geology’s “no flood, ever” tenet is an immense mistake: two branches of science, geology and anthropology, are fundamentally incorrect. This renders Google Earth as the historic equivalent to Galileo’s telescope – each ‘device’ revealed data that led to overturning incorrect scientific paradigms.
The task remains: how do we get geologists to recognize their error? Should we treat them with derision? Do we mock them for adhering to an incorrect tenet as if it were religious dogma? I am not sure, but this much is certain – they must recognize their error. They must be asked: Why do you believe there was never a flood? and Do you not recognize the logical error committed by your predecessors? We must make them reform. We must carry out the task of correcting the most profound error in the history of science.
PS – I submitted this essay in Nov 2017 to the National Association of Scholars who declined to publish it because it “did not fit within our current editorial plans for Academic Questions.”