Author Topic: G.WMS: PAST SEA LEVELS  (Read 656 times)

Admin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
    • View Profile
TILTED EARTH
« on: September 12, 2021, 03:12:57 pm »
Our Tilted Earth [Journals] [SIS Workshop]
_From: SIS Chronology and Catastrophism Workshop 1994 No 1 (Jan 1994) Home | Issue Contents
_Our Tilted Earth A Geomorphic Analysis of Crustal Momvement About the Poles, North America and Australasia by Gordon P. Williams
_Preface When the subject of continental movement is introduced its association with the science of geology is almost automatic. However, the science dealing with land movement is geomorphology. The short definitions of each are: Geology - The study of the origin, structure, composition, and history of the Earth, together with the processes that have led to its present state. Geomorphology - The scientific study of the origin of land forms based on a cause and effect relationship. The particular macroscale (= large) land forms being studied are those associated with land movement in the Earth's lithosphere (the crust), and comparing them to the mesoscale (= medium) shapes made by soil movement on a hill slope [1 ]. The first geographers were in fact geomorphologists who attempted to explain the shaping of the continents and the creation of their features by movement. The analysis of a catastrophe (? ) should follow a set procedure. For example, the investigation of a serious road accident should identify: 1) the movement of the vehicles etc. involved, e.g. direction of travel, 2) the forces involved, e.g . speed, weight, transitory influences such as ice, light, 3) the effect forces have had on the objects involved, their age, make, etc. In a geographical context this would entail: 1) the geomorphologist to determine the movement involved from an analysis of the forms created, 2) the geophysicist to determine the forces involved and 3) the geologist to determine the age of and effect on the minerals of the mass moved. Although one person may be qualified to investigate more than one field an orthodox procedure should be observed even if unorthodox sources and methods are employed. Study already done reveals that there were two main phases of movement, the second being more in the nature of an aftershock. The hypothesis is that in the Recent or Holocene Epoch a tilt of the Earth's axis (the second episode) caused considerable movement of the Earth's crust near the poles and in North America and Australasia. In this paper the work of the geomorphologist is undertaken. If the movement identified from the of shapes left behind is accepted as correct, the way is opened for other disciplines to continue the investigation.
_Introduction
_Against the opinion prevailing at the time, Heinrich Schliemann's interpretation of Homer's Iliad led to the discovery of Troy. A similar approach led to the discovery of Knossos in Crete. Could the ancient records do the same for geomorphology? Fortunately, we are able to put that to the test by identifying a pattern (or assemblage) of land forms created by the action of forces released within the Earth and determine the direction and extent of movement. Where would we begin the search for evidence of continental movement? Even though the adopted geological time scale developed by conventional geological research has precluded mythology and the ancient recordings being accepted as relevant because the source is considered too recent, they give a strong indication as to where to look. Both provide information worthy of further investigation. An Extract From Ancient Records. Thomas Burnet [2], writing in the late 1600s before the geological timetable was established to suit the Uniformitarian School, found the following observation or doctrine among the Ancients': They say, The Poles of the World did once change their situation, and were first in another posture from what they are now, till that inclination happen'd; this the ancient Philosophers often make mention of, as Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Diogenes, Leucippus, Democritus; [3] as may be seen in Laertius, and in Plutarch; and the stars, they say, at first were carried about the Earth in a more uniform manner. [4] It is unlikely that such a change occurred over an extended period of time for had it done so this would have reduced the likelihood of it being recorded. A relatively sudden change could not have been ignored and is more likely to be found in the historical record. A shift of the poles would imply a change of climate. Burnet refers to such observations on the part of the Ancients and also in the works of the Ancient Poets [5 ]. The change recorded was a transition from a perpetual spring' to a cyclic weather pattern consistent with the difference in the angle of the Earth's axis to the equatorial plane of the Sun changing throughout the year. Should the proof presented of a change of the Earth's axis of rotation be accepted, the climate is but one of several topics that would require to be re-evaluated. Foremost amongst others would be migration and changing sea levels.
_The Effect of Some Forces Involved in a Change of Axis
_The basis of the hypothesis is that the Earth is a composite body consisting, in a simplified form, of a crust, a mantle and a core, not a solid unit. A shift of the rotational axis caused by a tilt of the core would require a change in the rate of movement of every part of the Earth other than the pivot about which the Earth tilted and the composite sphere adjusted to the new axis.[6 ] In both hemispheres, as the crust near the old pole increased its speed of movement, that near the new location of the pole would have to slow down until the speed of movement at the pole itself reached zero; the crust between the two pole positions would have to reverse its direction of movement (fig. 1). While the viscosity of the interior of the Earth would allow the change to occur as a flowing movement, the crust, because of its rigidity, would be subject to stress and strain. Because any translocation of the poles would be subject to the action of inertia, Coriolis force and centrifugal force, the movement to the new position would not be direct and the effect on the Earth's crust would be found over an extensive area. A. Movement affecting the Earth's crust at North Pole after a tilt of the Earth's axis. The Coriolis Force deflects movement to the northern hemisphere. B. Movement affecting the Earth's crust at South Pole after a tilt of the Earth's crust. The Coriolis Force deflects movement to the left in the southern hemisphere.
_Figure 1. Forces activated by a shift of the Earth's axis.
_Figures 1a and 1b show diagrammatically the direction of the movement about the poles resulting from the forces involved. Given the present direction of rotation, Figure 1a refers to the northern pole and Figure 1b to the southern pole of an Earth rotating as it does today. It is probable that internally there would have been sufficient fluidity for this change to have taken place but at the Earth's surface the inflexibility of the crust would cause rupturing, especially where the need for sudden changes in speed and/or direction was greatest. Initially, change would have occurred about the axis and then been transmitted through the inner material of the Earth to the lithosphere. The high latitudes, being nearest the axis, would have been the first part of the surface to be affected and the low latitudes the last. An important effect of the movement within the Earth would have been the generation of heat beneath the continents, which would have facilitated movement of the crust as the lithosphere responded to the active forces. If we look at the physical changes likely to follow from a polar shift over a time period short enough to be readily observed, we find we have an adequate force to account for much of the continental movement that has occurred within the study area. The area of greatest change would be between the old and the new pole positions, where the linear movement at the surface within the area reversed. The action of the opposing forces would be converted to a shear force between the old and new poles before the new axis of rotation established itself within the lithosphere.
_Complementary Movement About Both Poles
_There is a similarity in the movement about both poles. If Figure 1a were to be placed over the North Pole (Figure 2), the tension and pressure zones could be appropriately related to the theoretical forces of the proposed polar shift. The stress features in those zones are the oceanic depths of the Arctic, Norwegian and Greenland Seas and the mainly pressure-formed mountains about the bend in the northern Canadian Rockies and Siberia respectively. The crust near the old North Pole, while in the process of changing its speed of movement, would tend to veer to the right (as far as crustal strength would allow) in accordance with the Coriolis Force. The land to the east of the Arctic Oceanic Basin would continue to move to the east while veering to the right (south). North America would move to the west while veering to the right (north). The combined movement would be a folded form, such as there is in the Canadian Rockies near the Alaskan border: the Alaskan Orocline. _Figure 2. The North Pole - direction of forces active at or near the pole. Recent movement caused by forces generated by a shift of the Earth's axis. The tension zone is indicated by the oceanic depths. The compression zone is indicated by the Alaskan Orocline (the bend in the northern Canadian Rockies) and the mountains to the west. The shear force may have offset the oceanic depths of the Arctic Ocean relative to the Greenland and Norwegian Seas, along the line of the Nansen Fracture Zone. The force generated by mantle movement would take longer to have an effect on massive continents such as Asia and North America than on smaller land masses such as those around the South Pole. Consequently, the shear and compression features have been displaced from about the present pole in the line of inertial movement towards the Pacific Ocean. Whilst the tension and compression zones are easily identified, the shear zone appears to have no distinguishing features. In North America the inertia of the continent would have resisted the acceleration imparted via friction by the mantle beneath it. The venturi effect of the mantle passing beneath the continent would have drawn, not pushed, the oceanic crust with its burden of sediment under the continental crust. This process differs from the conventional subduction theory that has been generally accepted. The Canadian Rockies, which are regarded as a recent formation, may have been lifted by the action described [7].
_Figure 3. The South Pole - direction of forces active at or near the pole. Recent movement caused by forces generated by a shift of the Earth's axis. Although much of the continental crust has been drawn away from the area some evidence of relevant movement may be found.
_The Transantarctic. Although much of the continental crust has been drawn away from the area some evidence of relevant movement may be found. The Transantarctic Mountains, the Ellsworth Mounts and the Pensacola Mounts indicate the action of a shear force. The easterly displacement of the islands of the S.W. Atlantic and the apparent displacement of the ridge south of Australia appear consistent with effects of inertia and the proposed forces. In the southern hemisphere (Figure 3), the shear zone at the pole is more obvious. The dominant feature of the Antarctic Continent is the Transantarctic Range complex, strong evidence of the action of a shear force in the area where hitherto little evidence of tectonic activity has been noted. Perhaps because the extensive continental coverage of the northern hemisphere is replaced by the oceanic depths which surround the Antarctic Continent, the tension and rift formations are not so easily identified. Similar movement in the south would place the rift formation in the South Pacific Ocean with the overrun being to the east and veering to the left (north) and the inertial lag in the region of southern Australasia being to the west and veering to the left (south). The v-shaped forms of the Ross Sea and the Ronne Ice Shelf, together with the Lady Bird Range, may be additional features of a shear formation, the creation of which was facilitated by the absence of a surrounding land mass. In the area of the expected overrun we find the South Sandwich Island Arc and the broken submerged Kerguelen Plateau in a morphological form which suggests movement to the northeast, as may be expected. In Australasia the same resistance to an increase in speed of movement would have applied but because there was less continental crust in the active zone there is no visible evidence of subduction'. However, it would have taken place along the Macquarie Trench to the west of the submerged Campbell Plateau south of New Zealand. To the east of the trench is the Macquarie Ridge, with Macquarie Island being the only visible feature.
_Complementary Morphology Shows the Global Extent of the Movement Within the Lithosphere
_The effect of the polar shift would have been global in extent. Crust in both the north and south high latitudes, because of its proximity to the axis, would reach its appropriate speed of movement earlier than that in the lower latitudes. The identification of similar movement in both hemispheres would help in establishing the short term duration of the change. Some movement about the poles has already been identified. If the deductions made are correct we should be able to use the known to find the unknown', i.e . to identify land forms attributable to a change of axis beyond the polar regions and by replacing slope of mesoscale movement with the inertia in the macroscale movement, account for their formation as part of the overall pattern of events. If the situation existed as we have reconstructed it, it should improve understanding of the polar regions by either serving as a framework into which further discoveries may be slotted or by suggesting a direction for further research.
_An Empirical Analysis of Other Movement About the North Pole
_Because the inertia of the lithosphere resisted a change in the rotational velocity, the mantle moved beneath it, as in the continental undertow theory' proposed by Alvarez [8 ]. Any surface debris in the northeast Pacific (e.g. continental fragments) would have been pushed against the west coast of North America. Are these the formations that are now recognized as terranes' and the pressure the driving force required by Pollitz?[9 ] The deep continental roots that Alvarez suggested in his first presentation of his theory[10] appear to be an unwanted qualification. Because of the width of North America, the direction of apparent movement caused by inertia would differ across the continent, with the angular difference between east and west being the difference in longitude, approximately 45o. The Montana-Florida Alignment, a dextral displacement extending from the northwest to the southeast, may be the physical evidence of that stress. A contributing factor may have been the deflexion of the east of the continent to the right, caused by the Coriolis Force as the land mass began to move faster as required by its new position further from the pole (Figure 4). The basin and range morphology of central western United States of America, which lies southwest of the suggested northern extension of the Montana-Florida Alignment, indicates that the base on which the continental crust rests has been stretched. A. Continental overrun through intertia to increased easterly mantle velocity B. C. Southeasterly Continental Movement affected by intertia and Coriolis force.
_Figure 4. Movement of North America. The increased speed required for North America resulted in movement being deflected to the right. The lower latitudes, being further from the axis of rotation, were the last to reach this speed. This gave an apparent clockwise rotation to the continental crust in the mid to low latitudes, where North America is located. The combined forces moved the crust to the southeast. By this movement the southern part of the continent has been forced into the western end of the West Indies Island Arc, causing crushing. Note the displacement of the Montana-Florida Alignment, overthrust forms in the midwest and the basin and range morphology of the western states. Through inertia, Alaska and Eastern Siberia continued to move. This would have been the force required by Jackson et al [11] to move Alaska to the south. As the surface movement became restricted and pressure forms developed, the western equivalent of the Queen Elizabeth Islands may have been carried by sub-crustal flow and compressed on the northern Alaskan coast to become the terranes identified by Howell et al [12]. The abyssal depths of the Arctic Ocean are the equivalent of the scar in the mesoscale movement and the mountains of eastern Siberia are the restricted front of the flow. The full extent of this movement may have reached deep into southern Siberia where it would appear that it has encroached on the morphology of a previous movement which will be explained more fully in another paper [13]. The transverse fractures of the northern sector of the North Atlantic Ridge appear to conform to the westerly movement of Northern Europe and North America. The Highlands of Scotland appear to have moved from the northeast, with the Glen Mor Shear as the dividing line. Whether Ireland and Scotland were parted by this movement is worth further investigation. The position and shape of the Hatteras Abyssal Plain (east of the Bahamas) suggests that it may have been the position of the continental margin off the southeastern states of the USA before it was moved by the rotation of the continent when North America was pushed to the southwest and the Gulf of Mexico was closed. The crush zone in the West Indies is where a folding movement consistent with the clockwise rotation of North America has caused shearing stress along the northern margin of the Caribbean Plate (see Figure 4). Both Carey[14] and King[15] recognized this zone as an area of crustal stress and adjustment.
_An Empirical Analysis of Other Movement About the South Pole
_In the southern hemisphere, where the abyssal depths left by an earlier movement surround the Antarctic Continent, there was not the same restriction on continental movement. The Antarctic-Australia Discordance discussed by Alvarez[16] is part of the movement to the east, with left hand deflexion. This would be caused by Australasia being placed in an area of faster movement, where it initially lagged (because of inertia) until such time as the movement of the underlying mantle was matched by the lithospheric crust (Figure 5). This would be a further example of Alvarez's continental undertow'. The forces involved would probably be the cause of the anticlockwise rotation of Australia as noted by King[17]. A. Continental overrun through intertia to increased easterly mantle velocity B. C. Southeasterly Continental Movement affected by intertia and Coriolis force.... Continental penetration - - - - Former shear Line. Melanesian Megashear.
_Figure 5. The movement of Australasia. The increased speed of movement required in Australasia resulted in deflexion to the left in the southern hemisphere. The lower latitudes, being further from the axis of of rotation, were the last to attain their final speed. This gave an apparent anticlockwise rotation to the continental crust in the mid to low latitudes, where Australasia is located. The combined forces moved the crust to the northeast. The thrust to the north carried into the Melanesian Megashear morphology, an area vacated by S.E. Asia in its 10,000 + km shift to the west by an earlier movement of the continents. In the Australasian zone, where we should expect the Earth's crust to have lagged behind until it had accelerated sufficiently, we find that there has been apparent movement of the crust to the northeast. What movement there was would have been deflected to the left by rotation, which is consistent with the morphology of the area. Northern Australia has forced New Guinea to the north and, with inertia providing a westerly component, the combined movement has intruded into the area of the relic form of the broad flow behind the Sumatra-Sunda Island Arc front. Pressure from the southwest on southeastern Australia probably caused the northwest-southeast aligned ranges in the states of southeastern South Australia and southwestern Victoria. These are low-lying ridges in an extensive limestone formation, seldom more than a few metres high and separated by wetlands. The compressed form of the geological formations lying NNW/SSE through New South Wales to the border with Victoria at the coast are also indicative of pressure from the southwest. Further east, the submerged New Zealand Plateau (the combined Chatham Rise and Campbell Plateau) shows some morphological evidence in its shape of having been forced to the northeast. North of New Zealand there are faults already identified which are strongly concordant with the movement of New Zealand to the northeast.
_Similarity of Development and History
_Yeats and Berryman [18] noted the similarity of the development of the New Zealand fault zone between the Indian and Pacific Plates and that of the western North American fault zone between the North American and Pacific Plates. Both areas lie in zones where similar forces were present, i.e. inertial lag followed by subcrustally generated acceleration. This similarity has been shown to be far more extensive than these authors envisaged from the fault symmetry. It is to be found in the complementary features created by polar shift about both poles and even in the Caribbean and the Banda Loop of the East Indies. The big difference arises from the amount of continental crust in the active area. California is part of a large land mass and this has limited its movement. New Zealand, a fragment of continental crust in an area of similar submerged forms, lies to the south of an area greatly disturbed by a former upheaval which shifted the crust north of New Zealand some 1300km (810m) to the north-northwest, as evidenced by the displacement of New Caledonia. This has allowed New Zealand to move on a subcrustal flow into the relic morphology of that earlier episode. There are many large overthrust formations in consolidated sediments in mid-west USA that appear to have been created by movement of the crust to the south [19]. The equivalent north-sloping forms found in the south of the North Island of New Zealand are much smaller, through being created in mudstone and softer rocks more recently raised from a submerged seabed.
_Conclusion
_Continental movement is the macroscale equivalent of blocks of material sliding downhill under the force of gravity. In the global model, where the minimal effect of gravity is limited to what is acting on the slight difference in the length of Earth's radii in the mid-north and south latitudes (the pear shape) - negligible in the short term - an alternative force is required. This is provided by the inertial reaction of the lithosphere to movement within the mantle, the cause and extent of which will not be fully known until all movement is analysed. In hill slope processes the destabilizing factor is an outside agent, e.g. artesian water, heavy rain, earthquake, etc. If the comparison between scales is maintained the factor which destabilized the Earth would also be an outside force, which may be identified by further research. With this substitution for gravity, the forms created by continental movement become similar in form to those arising from material sliding down hill slopes. In accepting this, it becomes possible to determine the direction and extent of continental movement in the macroscale with a high degree of accuracy, especially where the contours of the ocean beds may be considered as part of the movement. The general pattern of movement that created the geomorphology attributed to this recent phase is shown in Figure 6.
_Figure 6. The general pattern of movement of the Earth's crust resulting from a change of its axis of rotation.
A. General pattern of movement in the low latitudes showing the complimentary nature of the two zones (Mercator Projection).
B. Movement in the high latitudes (Polar projection).
_In this paper, I have shown how much of the evidence provided in the high latitude morphology of the lithosphere may be related to a shift of the Earth's axis of rotation and the sliding continents', two ideas presented by early geographers to explain the Ice Age or ice ages which were proposed as agents contributing to the change of the Earth's surface[20]. The argument presented in this paper attributes the end of the Ice Age in northern Europe and North America to the same forces. The reason for the ice age morphology being so widespread lies in the earlier episode of continental disruption. In times of disaster or crisis, our mind has a valuable facility, the ability to obliterate a traumatic experience[21]. However, it works to the detriment of the researcher and historian. Without the brief reference in the ancient records to a tilt of the Earth's axis being accepted at face value, the analysis of the extensive record in the shapes of the land and its features, confirming its accuracy, might not have been presented as it has been in this paper. The way is opened for a new look at many things, foremost of which is the climatic change and migration of races on a global scale from about 1500BC, which coincides with a period of high erosion activity, 1-2000 BC, (conventional dating). Out of this introductory appraisal of the empirical evidence of continental and oceanic forms it has been established that extensive continental and oceanic crust movement has taken place. It has also been established that the movement intruded upon relic morphology of an earlier phase of continental shaping. The complementary nature of the evidence presented demonstrates its global extent. Though fieldwork may modify or alter some of the deductions made, the hypothesis that the features identified have been created over a short period of violent change appears to be well supported by the evidence. Acceptance of the theory opens the way for a promising new look at the past. Further papers are being prepared examining the relic land forms noted in this paper. The conclusions reached affect many disciplines and will require an open mind in order to be accepted, for they differ radically from those provided by the uniformitarians whose teachings we have been conditioned to accept.
_Notes and References
_1. W.D . Thornbury: Principles


----------------------

Our Tilted Earth by Gordon Williams [Journals] [SIS Workshop]
_From: SIS Chronology and Catastrophism Workshop 1993 No 2 (Jan 1994) Home | Issue Contents REVIEWS Our Tilted Earth by Gordon Williams (Available from the author, 11 Camellia Court, 280 Grey Street, Palmerston North, New Zealand)
_Like most scientific outsiders with unorthodox views, Gordon Williams expresses the difficulty in obtaining intelligent comments on his non-uniformitarian work from professional scientists in the field, so the reader has to judge if any or all of his views are valid and reasonable. In this case there is little doubt that this admirable illustrated booklet of 56 size A5 pages is a serious work. It is based on years of study and practical experience in New Zealand, where there is an amazing variety of striking geological features. The preface states that the copywrite (1993) 'paper was prepared, printed and presented' by the author and it has some minor flaws, such as the confusion between write and right, and a few misprints which would probably have been avoided if it had been a commercial publication. The type is very small and the page footer notes and some captions require the visually challenged to use a strong lens. Some words are very technical and a glossary would be very helpful. For instance the subtitle is An introductory geomorphic analysis of crustal movement about the poles, and the correlation between the polar zones. 'Geomorphic' is easy compared with many other terms, but they do at least indicate that Williams knows his subject. These are all minor points and now the big question. Suppose a rotating solid sphere in space is covered with a layer of plastic putty and the axis of rotation is tilted quickly by an external force which does not impinge directly on the putty. Viewed from a fixed position outside, parts of the surface would experience a rapid change of velocity (speed and direction) after the tilt. The acceleration requires a force and this should cause the layer of putty to be compressed in some places and extended in others, seen as folding, ridging and other changes in the levels of the surface. Williams believes this has happened to the Earth and he describes the evidence for past movements of the Earth's crust in both hemispheres in convincing detail. But to an observer on the surface the sphere would continue to rotate at the same angular velocity and there would be no forces on the surface caused by the new position of the axis, only those needed to tilt the axis, which would have quite different effects. Is there a definitive answer to the question which view is correct? The effect on the surface would also depend on the nature of the external force. If it does act mainly on the surface zone, causing it to slide over the relatively liquid magma below, then the force causing distortion of the surface layer would be the difference between the external imposed force and the frictional force at the interlayer, plus that due to inertia of the moving mass. Much more study of these aspects is required. Williams accepts the Velikovsky claim that an external force was caused by the close passage of a cosmic body, Venus. He does not discuss the question of the age of Venus and the possibility described in SIS literature that the erratic body might have been much smaller than Venus and collided with that planet. He rejects the idea that tectonic plate movement might be due to convective effects but does not mention another view published by SIS that the action of tides on the Earth's crust could be the driving force where slow changes are involved. Another surprising omission is that there is no reference to Peter Warlow's book The Reversing Earth [1] which describes how the axis could be tilted and what effects it could have, or had. Fossils of trees swept away by raging sea currents and powerful wind storms in world wide devastation indicate the direction and extent of the forces. It would be interesting if Williams had compared this to his analysis based on the study of the dynamics of hill slope morphology applied to the morphology of the lithosphere. Williams claims that current views of tectonic plate movements are wrong because of the types of instruments used and there is a law of physics which states that a moving object takes the path of least resistance which for sea floor movement must be up and over an obstructing land mass in spite of the fact that it is the heavier material. In the absence of further information it is hard to believe that the lighter land mass would not float on a slow moving denser sea bed plate and that the correct explanation has not been ascertained by drilling and other evidence. Right or wrong, the booklet is instructive and interesting. It has an excellent title and cover diagram representing the tilted Earth. Williams is too modest to include his name on the cover or give any personal details other than his address. Williams has more papers in preparation on Earth's Greatest Earthquake and The World Mountain, involving even more unorthodox views about Saturn. It is hoped he can persuade a publisher to produce a book with the title Our Tilted Earth containing revisions and a combination of all these views. It would be well worth having. As I happen to know he is a Clive James lookalike, I'm sure his picture on a cover jacket in colour may also help to sell a good many copies. Eric W. Crew
_Reference 1. P. Warlow, The Reversing Earth (J. M. Dent, London, 1982) Editor's Note A condensed version of Our Tilted Earth will appear in C&C Workshop 1994:1.

-----

Drayson's hypothesis: the Earth's tilt cycle [Journals] [SIS Review]
... , though there was a more interesting and theoretically sound debate running parallel to the Drayson debate, of which Drayson appears to have been unaware [53]. In comparison with some modern proposals on the rate of movement of the Earth's rotation axis, Drayson's observed' rate lies between the very slow movements conjectured by Dauvillier [54] and Williams [55], and the very fast shifts proposed by Velikovsky [56] (see Huggett [57, 58, 59]). Drayson was undoubtedly an original and independent thinker who stuck doggedly to his beliefs. His ideas, though apparently flawed, deserve to be more widely known than they are at present. Table 1

-----

Letters [Journals] [SIS Workshop]
Tilted Earth? Gordon Williams is to be congratulated on his attempts to relate distortions of the earth's crust to shifts of the geographical location of the pole(s ) ( 'Our Tilted Earth', C&C Workshop 1994:1 , pp. 9-15). I suggest he may still have a very long way to go before his arguments will be at all widely accepted, however. Whilst I have still only seen the abridged version of his study, it does appear that his approach may have been to accept Dr. Velikovsky's claim of a pole shift from the neighbourhood of Greenland as gospel, then try to relate actual tectonic features to this hypothesis. Sooner or later, he will probably have to deduce the true' shift of the pole from the actual tectonic features. This is obviously no easy task. I also suspect that he is starting from a false hypothesis - namely that the core of the earth is caused to tilt and that the effects of this tilt are transmitted to the crust by viscous forces in the more or less molten magma surrounding the core. I find it more probable that the core has a strong tendency to maintain a fixed direction and rate of spin. This is at least partly deducible from the Ninsianna tablet analysis. Extra-terrestrial forces could then be expected to cause the crust to roll away from its original alignment with the core, the crust afterwards being dragged back again by the spinning core once the extra-terrestrial force had passed by. Other forces would also be involved, not least those due to the equatorial bulge (which forms part of the crust and which would not be expected to deform very rapidly). It would be at least largely in the course of the dragging back process that the geographical position of the pole (on the crust) would become displaced. It is thus probable that the direction of drift of the pole will be around 180 different from the direction of roll of the crust which was its original cause. This proposed change of hypothesis probably does not materially affect Williams' styles of computation, however. Probably the only available analysis of actual rolls of the earth is that presented in my Ninsianna tablet article (C&C Review XV, pp. 2-22). This was described as a preliminary reconstruction and it can certainly be developed further yet. The only measures of earth roll to be found in it are the repeated changes in the obliquity of the ecliptic. Obliquity of the ecliptic is defined as the angle between the plane of the ecliptic and the plane through the terrestrial equator; changes in it do not materially limit the possible directions of roll, however. If the earth is not a solid entity, changes in the obliquity will indicate the extent of roll of the earth's crust (even if they do not determine its direction), which may or may not be paralleled by the (assumed) solid core. I have recently developed the equations which tie direction of roll (of the crust) to rates of change of obliquity and position of vernal equinox and, sooner or later, these will have to be reconciled with the observed changes in these parameters. Direction of roll is defined (for this purpose) as the (stellar) longitude towards which the north pole tilts. A full reconciliation can be expected to result in some modification of the detail of Figs. 1, 2 ,3 & 4 of the Ninsianna tablet analysis but it calls for lengthy re-calculations, as yet barely started. It also involves reconciliation of the direction of roll with actual gyroscopic forces, as the direction of roll will not always be the same for every possible type of extra-terrestrial force (the current indication is still that the force principally concerned at the time of these disturbances was one of electrostatic repulsion - as is consistent with orbit expansion and as was first mooted in SIS Review V:3, p. 97, 1980/81 - and it should eventually be possible to confirm this). It was stated in the Ninsianna article (p. 6) that ... changes in the obliquity of the ecliptic and position of the vernal equinox have been co-ordinated, at least to some degree ... but it is clear that a greater degree of co-ordination than this must be possible in the long run. The full reconciliation will probably take years to accomplish, however; the analysis so far published has already absorbed some 10 years of work (the 1986 C&C Workshop article having already been several years old at the time of its publication) and it could well be that another 10 years or so will be required for the next step. Meanwhile, I hope that Mr. Williams will continue his studies as they could eventually lead to something very worthwhile. There is unfortunately still a very wide range of possibilities and it will be a major task to narrow the field down until the actuals can be distinguished from the possibles with any degree of certainty. Our principal object, after all, is to discover what actually happened, not what ought to have happened or what might have happened, and the methodology must presumably be to examine as many possible solutions (or scenarios) as possible, then gradually home in on the more viable ones. To attempt to achieve a final solution in a single step, as has apparently been Mr. Williams' approach as yet, can be risky, opening the way for interminable objections on points of detail. Note also that evidence deriving from deformations of the earth's crust must usually be rated more trustworthy than evidence deriving from Babylonian astronomical records; both must be preferable to evidence deriving from interpretation of ancient myth, though this can often guide us as to what to look for in the first place. Even when one can disentangle what the ancients were actually saying, it can still turn out that their interpretation of events was misguided (e.g. their attribution of an aggressive nature to Mars seems to have become particularly deeply embedded in folk lore but a Court of Appeal would almost certainly exonerate the Martians, who could more reasonably claim that it was Earth which was displaying aggression towards them). Michael G. Reade, Checkendon, Oxfordshire
« Last Edit: September 14, 2021, 11:37:55 am by Admin »