Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
« Last post by Admin on November 28, 2019, 04:31:02 pm »
_The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
_TIDAL FORCE. what if [the cause of tides is] the electric force, where there is a concentration of positively charged plasma in the interplanetary medium, to which the negatively charged planets, and the Sun, are attracted? The first implication is that at least some of the "gravity" that keeps the planets in orbit is actually the electric force. (At the very least, gravity anomalies will trace back to fluctuations in electric fields.) The second implication is the surface of the Sun and the planets will get warped by the selective action of the electric force on the surfaces, producing tides. The third implication is that tidal forces flex the crusts of the planets, and the surface of the Sun, resulting in fluctuations in pressure at depth, and this drives electric currents at the boundaries between charged double-layers. So tidal forces are a source of heat, far beyond just the thermalization of crustal deformation. ...
_TORNADIC LEVITATION. In the EMHD model, the tornadic inflow is positively charged, and the surface of the Earth has an induced negative charge. This means that particulate matter from the surface that is getting blown in the wind will be negatively charged. Objects exposed to the tornadic inflow (such as people, cars, etc.) will be sandblasted with this particulate matter, and will therefore develop a net negative charge. The objects will then be attracted by the electric force to the positively charged air around them. Since there is more air above them than below them, the net force will be upward. And if the strongest positive charge in the storm is in the RFD, objects will be subjected to the most powerful uplifting force after the tornado passes.

_EVAPORITES, MEDITERRANEAN. Multiple layers of evaporites exist in the Mediterranean and Red Sea floors --
_"The Mediterranean, Dead and Red Seas are the most saline in the world. Drilling reveals that repeated complete evaporation deposited multiple layers of salt on the sea bottoms, even in the deepest areas. Each layer was due to the evaporation of the residual water left when priori-mars drew the water out of the Med and Red Seas, toward northern India."
_"the purpose for building the pyramids in Egypt, the tells in the Levant and the ziggurats was to avoid the sudden floods caused by the capture of priori-Mars every thirty years. The low-lying areas along these courses, particularly in the Tigress and Euphrates valley remained inundated for months or years after each flood. During the encounters, the Mediterranean and Red Seas were almost completely emptied, and whatever residual water remained, evaporated during the fifteen year encounters. Evidence supporting this view comes from multiple layers of evaporites which cover the bottom of the Mediterranean and Red Seas. These layers are currently misdated and thus called the `Messinian Salinity Crisis' by geologists, who cannot imagine what caused many complete dessications of such a large body of water could occur by evaporation."
_ASIA HIGH TIDE MARK. "The most disruptive transient events for human cultures, particularly in the Mediterranean, the Middle East and the Indus Valley (where a large fraction of the ancient population lived), was tidal flooding at the time of the capture and release of priori-Mars. Its mass was about 0.16 times that of the Earth and its center approached to within 44,000 kilometers of the center of the Earth. As a result, it produced an enormous ocean tide, some 5000 feet high, which inundated northern India. Its altitude is recorded by a unique horizontally bedded layer called the Siwalik, containing the bones of animals, the habitats of which range from sea level to a mile high, in the foothills of the Himalayas.  These deposits exist because unlike the tides we experience today which sweep around the globe as it rotates, this tide remained fixed for fifteen years at a time. This high tide was formed by the drawing of water from the periphery of the hemisphere facing priori-Mars. As a result, the ocean depth was greatly reduced in a band which included the northeastern Atlantic between Iceland and the British Isles and the area of the Aleutian Islands, which would have facilitated human migration between continents. But the most significant areas were those of relatively large populations, such as the Mediterranean and Red Sea."
"H. G. Wells published an ancient map showing Northern India completely inundated while the Mediterranean is almost emptied. Tibetans claim that great lakes existed in the mountain basins as recently as 2500 years ago"
_ASIA MARS FOSSILS. "There is considerable controversy concerning the location of fossils in the geologic section in the Himalayas. I maintain innumerable fossils are present from animal and vegetable life which fell to Earth with the water from priori-Mars."
_MARS HEMISPHERES. "the northern plains of Mars are six kilometers lower than the rest of the planet."

ERROR: SEAFLOOR MAGNETIC STRIPES. "In ancient times, the Earth was thought to be like a bar magnet, with a frozen-in polarization of unknown origin. We now know from the study of magnetic striping moving away from mid-ocean ridges that the polarity flips every several hundred thousand years on average. So the field can only be generated dynamically, by the motion of charged particles." [The dating of reversals is wrong; they occurred every few minutes, not every few hundred millennia. See Distinti's article.]
Updates / MYTHS
« Last post by Admin on November 26, 2019, 12:05:56 pm »
On Saturn and the Flood (Immanuel Velikovsky)

The Jupiter Myth
by kauranos » Sat Nov 16, 2019 7:19 pm
Hullo from newbie. John.
The Greek Antikythera mechanism for astronomy is a fact. The eclipse prediction calendar, a dial on the back of the mechanism includes a solar eclipse that happened May 12, 205 B.C. It used Babylonian maths not Greek trigonometry._ Smithsonian. By way of speculation: Egypt may have had telescopes.
The implications for the identification of glass production sites, for the organisation of trade and for the supply of natron within and outside Egypt are discussed in the light of Pliny’s accounts.

by kauranos » Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:22 am
Antikythera may have been motivated ( not by DC) by Egypt's alleged telescopes which hypothetically were >20x mag.  The intense visible plumes of Io and Jupiter's corona may be what Pliny was on about. The eye of Horus , the red spot of Jupiter ?

Re: Ancient Technologies
by JP Michael » Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:45 pm
The Antikythera mechanism may very well have accurately predicted eclipses and the like, but its apparent dating between 200 BCE and the shipwreck, 70-60 BCE, implies that it was utilised to observe the modern sky. It's bearing or usefulness regarding questions on the wild heavens of the recent past thus becomes suspect.
_It neither surprises me that Galileo Galilee observed electrical interaction between Jupiter and Io. Volcanism is an electrical phenomenon and to be expected on that moon, being as close as it is to the ex-brown dwarf star Jupiter. It may be that Jupiter (and Saturn, being the other prominent ex-star in our solar system) is still siphoning a small measure of electrical current from the galactic filament that is powering our sun, thus the resulting outbursts of volcanism on Io which is apparently unrelated to CMEs from the sun. That is a separate study in and of itself and I am not qualified to comment further. This is just an idea floating in my mind about Io's volcanism.
_Your quotation of Pliny is interesting, though, that Pliny knew to differentiate between terrestrial lightning and Jupiter's past interplanetary arc-plasma discharges. I think it is Homer's Illiad that said Zeus blasted Aphrodite (the moon) in the chest for attempting to interfere in Pallas-Athene's (Venus) celestial tiff with Ares (Mars). Kind of explains why our moon is a ghostly, scarred, electrically cratered and chasmed entity if that was indeed how the scene unfolded in the recent past.
_Mars' Olympus Mons and Valles Marineris might also be further evidence of direct contact between the Red Planet and Jupiter in the past. Ever since reading about the possibility of iron oxide (rusty, red dust) being a central component to Jupiter's Great Red Spot, it made me wonder if that was the precise location from which the arc of plasma shot forth from Jupiter to Mars in the past and electrically 'hoovered' vast quantities of magneto-charged Fe2O3 or Fe3O4 particulate from the Martian surface which has remained in that spiralling synchrotron of a storm ever since. Velikovsky's supposition of fights with Venus and/or Earth with Mars must also be considered in the overall reconstruction.
_I also disagree with the conclusion that the ancients required telescopes to perceive Jupiter's past polar plasma plumes. You are maintaining the false uniformitarian assumption that their skies were the same as our skies, a manifestly false a-priori. If this assumption were true, then you would be correct to suppose the ancients required telescopes to perceive Jupiter and its various phenomenon. There is significant evidence to the contrary, however:
1. Was much closer to the Earth in the past, so close that ancient art depicts Jupiter's patterns of equatorial banding.1 This was done without the use of telescopy.
2. Has an immense plasmasheath (jovesphere? as opposed to our sun's heliosphere) of its own. If you can locate Jupiter in the night sky tonight, place your hand over it and that is the approximate size of Jupiter's plasmasheath from a terrestrial perspective. If this plasmasheath had polar-oriented glow-mode tails (plasma plumes) on it, they would be visible from earth today without any need for a telescope. In fact, these plumes might somewhat resemble a squashed, thinner version of the Bali Thunderbolt image you posted above. How much more visible, then, would they have been in the past when Jupiter was much closer to the Earth?
_[1]I found it incredibly difficult to source the images of Jupiter's bands in ancient art. The best I could do was to screencap The Juptier Myth, part 2 @09:08. I do not know where Jno Cook sourced these ancient drawings from.
(at 9:08 / 24:06)

… by Lloyd » Wed Nov 20, 2019 1:50 pm
I started a thread on my website on theories at . Below is how I'm starting it out. I may modify it eventually. If anyone has info or suggestions for collaboration etc, feel free to reply. I need to add one or more questions re Ancient Tech.

… by Lloyd » Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:19 pm
John, kauranos, you should provide references, but I agree that those are good evidence. My impression is that there was very advanced civilization over 4,000 years ago, which produced the ancient maps shortly after the greatest cataclysms, but that later civilization lost a lot of tech, until the Renaissance.

by kauranos » Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:34 am
Here we go: …

by Lloyd » Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:01 pm
Thanks, John. Good job with listing your sources there (or I assume so, since I can't check them out easily). What do you think of the ancient maps that indicate that there was advanced tech much earlier, at the time of the Great Flood and other cataclysms, that allowed people then to make accurate maps before, during and after the ice sheets formed? Have you studied any of that?

Catastrophic Modelling Site
Sent: Thu Nov 21, 2019 10:15 pm
From: JP Michael
To: Lloyd 
Hi Lloyd,
_I can help fill in some of the Creationist materials/questions if you require. I've been following many of the arguments of Oard/Baumgartner (to which I would also add Andrew Snelling and Steve Austin) and their RATE Project and Runaway Subduction catastrophist models for the last ~15 years.
_As far as I am aware, they utterly resent and abhor any and all theories that invoke celestial or planetary origins of terrestrial catastrophism. Their a-priori reticence is clearly crystalised in the creationist Genesis commentary of Dr. Jonathan Sarfati:
_“Bible based flood models should be deep-first, not heaven first... I accept as legitimate only those models that follow Scripture in teaching that the Flood began with a disturbance in the ocean, and reject those that have a first cause in the sky.” (The Genesis Account, p. 530)
_That this is a catastrophic error in current creationist thinking is manifest and I am currently compiling evidence to collate into a book to specfically address this untenable uniformitarian assumption regarding the skies of the ancient past.
_Let me know if you need anything. Many hands makes light work, afterall!

Sent: Fri Nov 22, 2019 10:59 am
From: Lloyd
To: JP Michael 
Hi JP. Be glad to work with you. Many Creationists are likely to remain disinterested in mythology, since they tend to believe that the Bible is God's word while other myths are man's word. Mythology shows that the "Great Deep" referred to the sky, not the oceans, but the Creationists seem unlikely to consider that possibility. I haven't looked into what the original Hebrew terms were for the "Fountains of the Great Deep", have you? Maybe that would have some good clues. Do you use the site? I used it some years ago for a while.

Sent: Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:40 pm
From: JP Michael
To: Lloyd 
Hi Lloyd,
_I quite agree that there is resistance to utilise mythological sources as reliable history amongst Creationists. As a creationist myself, this is one of the barriers I've had to overcome in my own thinking and it was not easy.
_Whilst I won't renege on my commitment to the Scriptures as the Living God's authoritative word, I believe there are many portions of it, particularly early portions, that have been routinely misinterpreted due to uniformitarian cosmology (let alone uniformitarian geology, but creationists are usually decent with catastrophist geology). For example, Genesis 1:14 says there were two 'great lights' in the ancient sky. These lights are never identified as the sun and the moon. That is an interpretation foistered on the text from observations of the current sky by all past and present Biblical interpreters.
_I have training in Biblical languages so I can actually comment further here. Mention of the 'sun' (shamash) does not occur until Gen 15:12, and the moon (yareach) until Gen 37:9, and in both cases translating them "Saturn" and "Crescent" (following David Talbott's The Saturn Myth, pp.276-280) respectively does little violence to the text, but much violence to the imposition of the modern sky upon the ancients'. Gen 15:12 is especially interesting, because the verb used there, also in 15:17, bo, means to come or come out, or emerge. It literally says in v.12, "It came to pass as shamash (Saturn) was emerging..." and v.17, "When shamash had emerged...". This is exactly in line with Talbott's thesis that ancient Saturn, being fixed in its place at the polar North as it was, "came out/appeared/emerged" at night and "went back/disappeared" during the daytime. A similar phenomenon exists today: compare the brightness of the moon seen during the day, and then compare it to the night (a phenomenon best noticed when moonrise occurs in the hours before sunset so one may watch the moon's 'emerging' brightness). The moon always appears brighter at night, it "comes out" (in brightness) at night, the same way Polestar Saturn did as recorded accurately and faithfully in Genesis 15.
_Notice English translations say, "When the sun had set," because they're forcing the modern sky on Abraham's and changing the meaning of bo from come (appear) to set (go, disappear) simply because they've started with a faulty assumption about the ancient sky and have no recourse but to force interpretations of the modern sky back on the ancient text. I agree wholeheartedly with Talbott that the Hebrew word shamash came to be used to describe the current sun after the disappearance of Saturn from the sky, hence the perpetual confusion of the two. I surmise, with Velikovsky, that that departure occurred at the time of the Exodus. Thus, I believe Abraham and Joseph very much witnessed Saturn in their ancient sky, not our current sun. All references to shamash after the Exodus of the Hebrews refer to the current sun, not Saturn.
_I think that the deep (Hebrew: tehom; Greek abysos) of Gen 1:2 is space, as you say. This same word is used of the fountains of the great deep in Gen 7:11 speaking of the flood (mayanot tehom rabbah: literally gushing fountains of the great deep). I find it significant that the term 'gushing fountains' is etymogically related to the Hebrew word for eye (ayin), sharing exactly the same root. I believe that the Hebrew language preserves in much of its etymology/roots and word associations fragments of memory of the ancient Saturnian configuration. Why are the words for 'spring' and 'eye' the same (ayin)? Mayanah, the singular form of mayanot of Gen 7:11, is a causative form of the same root: springs caused to gush, or fountains. What have these to do with eyes? I believe the association is because the eye, with its fountain of water (tears), was reminiscent to the Eye of Heaven configuration, with its fountains of waters that destroyed the world in the Deluge.
_In terms of resources, I find Jeff Benner's Ancient Hebrew Lexicon one of the best etymological resources available for such studies. Not only does he break down each word in its original ancient Hebrew root, he gives the most mechanical/concrete translations for them. Abstract thought is non-existent in ancient Hebrew and all Hebrew words have concrete meanings. The word tehom (#8415) is actually derived from a family of similar words related to the verb hom, roaring, wild and tumultuous, loud noise, destruction. Even the 'window' in 7:11 (arubbah, #699) is a chimney by which smoke can exit a place. The 'chimneys of heaven' sounds awfully similar to a column of interplanetary plasma carrying an abundance of water from Saturn to Earth at the time of the Deluge. Notice that the word for 'window' (chimney) in Gen 7:11 & 8:2 is a different word to the 'window' Noah opened in the ark (chalon, Gen 8:6, #2474, a word that has to do with the twisting, or boring, of an implement to make a hole in something).
_I also use E-Sword as a personal Bible app on my laptop (iPhone edition also available) simply because it is free (although I do donate) and it has all the essential resources I need to undertake my Biblical studies. I also do not need to depend on a website to make notes. Additional resources, such as specialist grammars, lexicon of the Septuagint, Louw-Nida's Semantic Lexicon for the New Testament, and so-on, I have in my personal library or via various smartphone apps.
_I'm not even scratching the surface when it comes to the preservation of concepts of the ancient sky preserved down the millenia in the Hebrew language. The ancient Hebrew letters themselves originate from an assortment of celestial imagery, both of the Saturnian configuration and also arc-mode plasmas that were all present in the sky at the time, but that is another thesis I am currently working on in my very limited free time and may, in a few years, find the light of day in a printed book.
_Sorry for this essay, but it feels good to talk about such things with someone who understands the issues at hand rather than dismissing them without critical analysis like most of the theologians and creationists I talk to.

Sent: Sat Nov 23, 2019 12:18 pm
From: Lloyd
To: JP Michael 
Hi JP. What does JP stand for? It's fun talking to you too.
I learned from that there are a lot of different meanings for each word in Hebrew. But I haven't studied Hebrew or Biblical Greek etc in detail, as you apparently have. What you have stated about some Hebrew words is very interesting and I'm sure some of the Thunderbolts team would be interested in discussing or collaborating with you, if you like. I worked with the team a little about ten years ago, but not a lot. I mostly just write independently on their Forum. I met Charles Chandler there in about 2011 and find his work on the electric universe to be far superior to that of Thornhill or Don Scott et al. He was developing his model at that time and has completed it pretty thoroughly since about 2014, though he continues to improve it. I tried to get the Thunderbolts people to have a friendly debate with Charles to improve the electric universe model, but they weren't interested. So I lost some respect for them. Charles' model is at
_Mike Fischer is somewhat of a Creationist, I think, but is open to other models. He has an excellent website at where he shows that the continents were formed when a supercontinent was struck by a large asteroid that split it up, causing rapid continental drift a few thousand years ago. John Baumgartner's article on Noah's Flood is also excellent IMO, but his explanation of continental drift is very inferior to Mike Fischer's. John's model has Earth's entire mantle churning to move the continents apart, but Mike's has just the crust moving, i.e. sliding, over the Moho layer in the crust.
_I'd like to share a lot of our discussion on the forum. Would you like me to start a new thread for a discussion there? Maybe it should be on the comparison of catastrophist models, like I started discussing on the Ancient Technologies thread. Maybe we can write a book together, or we can help each other write separate books.
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 10, 2019, 07:04:35 pm »
Fossil Bed, Japan
Hadrosaurs and Turtles
29 Sep 2019
At ... Robert forwarded this interesting post - another mass kill event with an out of place dinosaur. Each time a fossilised creature with legs is found mixed up with fossil marine life there is a quandary. When the same situation repeats itself several times over it becomes even more of a quandary. The author of the piece is referring to the discovery of a new and relatively complete skeleton of a hadrosaur that has been found in Japan (the so called duck billed dinosaur). It had teeth adapted to eating plants and walked on hind legs or on all fours - and is very similar to fossils of hadrosaurs found in Russia, China and N America. One was found recently in Texas and is described as a marsh inhabiting dinosaur that munched on aquatic vegetation. Hence, its association with the ocean is not so surprising - see for example. However, the link is a Creationist web site and they presumably wish to make a link to Noah's Flood. This is because the fossil was found amongst mainly marine fossils. The researchers, uniformitarian in outlook, have said (among other things) the hadrosaur floated out to sea and subsequently became fossilised. If it was an inhabitant of an estuary and then that is quite possible from a gradualist perspective but one must wonder if both the marine life and the dinosaur (and any other terrestrial fossils in the cache) were overwhelmed by a tsunami wave rushing up a riverine estuary location and producing a mass of dead animals that were buried in sand and silt and subsequently fossilised. This situation is not impossible as scientists have suggested something similar for other fossil beds (with mixed marine and terrestrial animal life). One does not have to accept the idea of a universal flood as the agent of fossilisation as tsunami waves appear to be common occurrences in localities such as Japan. In fact, such an explanation removes any notion of a mystery.
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 10, 2019, 06:56:54 pm »
Edom's Copper Industry.
22 Sep 2019
At ... a paper on the emergence of the kingdom of Edom in the Iron Age has been published in the open access journal PLOS ONE by an Israeli team of researchers - see ... It concerns excavations of copper mines in the Wadii Arabah and central Timna Valley locations. They advance the theory there was a sudden and rapid 'leap' in 'technological knowhow' and seek to understand how it came about. They propose a comparison to the 'punctuated equilibrium' model for evolutionary change characterised by long term stasis punctuated by shor lived episodes of rapid change. This idea was in stark contrast to the original evolutionary theory, a model of gradualist and constant change and update. In this instance, the sudden leap in technological innovation in Edom's copper mining industry was preceded by a long priod of established smelting techniques.
Vigilant readers may recognise another possibility - the arrival of new immigrants with a superior technology as we are talking about the period immediately following the end of the LB age (or even a technology that came into fashion in the dregs of the LB age and was carried on over into the early Iron Age). ONe might think in terms of Solomon - but more pertinently one might think of Ramses III who claims to have campaigned in Edom (and the only reason he might have done that was to renew Egyptian interest in the copper mines). Peter James made just this point in one of his papers and that was that Ramses III regained control of Edom and the Transjordan valley after the vicissitudes of the late dynasty 19 period. In other words, it might have been overrun by tribes from the desert (including Arabia). The campaign therefore can be seen to re-establish the Egyptian empire in the southern Levant - and the copper mines may have been an addition, not previously exploited by Egyptian technology. One might also bear in mind that at the end of the LB age the Levant was in upheaval, throwing people up from regions in Anatolia and the Aegean with technology foreign to Edom - and to Egypt. One should not jump to the conclusion it was a home grown innovative technology as it could equally have been introduced from abroad. Solomon, for example. was closely aligned with the Phoenicians, and sea peoples became an element in their population at the end of the LB age - and the same goes for peoples washed up in what became known as Philistia (SW Canaan). Significantlyh, the authors of the study see a possible correlation with Shoshenk I who also appears to have campaigned through the Transjordan valley (and therefore Wadi Arabah etc). They subscribe to the mainstream dating of Shoshenk , in the second half of the 10th century BC. In Peter James 'Centuries of Darkness' scheme Shoshenk I would have been active in the 9th century BC, somewhat later. It would be interesting to know what dates these innovations actually were introduced. For example, if Iron IIA is implicated and then no connection with Solomon is possible (in a revised chronology). If, on the other hand, the innovations are earlier than Iron IIA and then we have a variety of permutations.
The story is also at ... we have a slightly different slant, which begins by quoting Genesis 36:31 which says of Edom, they had ... 'kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned.' The PLOS ONE paper says the kingdom of Edom flourished in the Arava Desert in the 12th and 11th centuries BC (much closer to Ramses III). They attribute the change in technology to Shoshenk I (or the aftermath of his campaign which in mainstream chronology is dated mid 10th century BC, an Egyptian excursus into Arabah (both Timna and Faynan).
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 10, 2019, 06:49:26 pm »
Chicxulub Crater
13 Sep 2019
William sent in a couple of nice links to the following story - go to and ...which concerns the K/T impact that contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs - and 75 per cent of life on Earth (an estimate). Rocks near the asteroid crater tell a story after being analysed by scientists. Geologists are saying that a mile high tsunami wave, wild fires, and the release of many tons of sulphur (blotting out the Sun and creating a nuclear winter scenario) came in the wake of the asteroid strike. The Chicxulub asteroid was around 6 miles wide. Within a minute it had bored a hole 100 miles wide on what is now the sea floor - creating a bubbling pit of molten rock and hot gases. The contents of that fiery cauldron shot into the sky, creating a large plume. Within further minutes the plume collapsed and solidified into rippling peaks of lava and rocky material. These peaks were then mothered my more rocks, along with traces of the scorched landscape, and charcoal.
The space rock most likely vapourised the surrounding land and sent ocean water rushing from the impact point at the speed of a jet aeroplane. Although many animals did die at the impact site it is evident that the mass extinction was caused by what happened in the atmosphere (gases such as sulphur). See also ... where we learn that in the Chicxulub crater geologist found that hundreds of feet of sediments built up rapidly - 130m in a single day. It ocurred on the scale of minutes and hours (and this is a geologist telling us). As the hours  passed a backwash of waves added more and more finely graded debris.See also ... evidence of all this comes from small pieces of charcoal embedded in rocks, jumbles of rocks brought in by the tsunami back flow and an absence of sulphur (denuded at impact and blown into the sky).
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 09, 2019, 06:54:39 pm »
Volcanic Hot Spot, Australia
At .... a previously unknown 'Jurassic World' of about 100 ancient volcanoes buried deep in the Cooper-Eromanya Basin of central Australia, where oil and gas are produced (but at a somewhat lower level in the rocks), has been uncovered. The volcanism is said to date back 180 to 160 million years ago and is found underneath hundreds of feet of sedimentary rocks. In other words, lots of things have been happening since the volcanism. However, it seems that although volcanoes are usually associated with plate boundaries, on this ocassion they are not. Instead, a volcanic hot spot is being invoked and the volcanism is being compared to the Deccan Traps. See also ... which is written by a very mainstream thinking geologist who spent most of his career in the oil industry. The first link doesn't really get into the hot spot but this link does.
At ... where we have a big impact crater beneath Chesapeake Bay attributed in this news release to an asteroid strike - at 35 million years ago.
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 09, 2019, 06:28:34 pm »
Asteroids and Meteors
… Gary sent in a link to ... it seems that scientists researching the Tamiami Formation in Florida came across a lot of fossilised clams - and tiny silica rich glass spheres up to 5mm in size, even inside the clam shells. They are thought to have got into the clams as they keep their mouths open and filter the sea water passing across them. These clams were clammed shut and were prised open in a lab. They were forged in heat (no wonder the clams pulled the shutters down) and they can be created by volcanoes and even by industrial processes. In this case there is no volcanic rock in the vicinity of the Tamiami Formation and human activity is discounted as the formation is prior to the Holocene. It is said to possibly go back as far as the Pliocene or Pleistocne, somewhere between 5 million years ago and 12,000 years ago. The researchers have drawn the conclusion that the most likely explanation is that an impact event was responsible. Or perhaps an atmospheric explosion. Something capable of ejecting lots of debris into the air.
   ... The glass spherules are, in effect, mini tektites - but therein lies a problem as uniformitarian geochronology insists the formation was lain down in a number of layers - and the fossilised clams were found in four different locations. The implication, in the gradualist model, is that there were four impact events - which seems a trifle unlikely. No doubt if a nearby volcanic source had been found they could point a finger at multiple eruptions - as volcanoes tend to blow at irregular intervals. In this case that is not possible and as Gary says, the evidence appears to be that the sedimentary layer was laid down quickly and in one go. This is itself unsurprising as impact events would involve a lot of sediment production - and this even occurs with big volcanoes. The researchers are of course trapped in the uniformitarian straightjacket and are forced to think in terms of more than one impact - at the same spot on earth.
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 09, 2019, 06:04:56 pm »
The day the sea invaded the Sahara
10 Jul 2019
At ... in the Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History (summer of 2019) we have a paper based on an accumulation of 20 years of research in what is now the Sahara desert. It is set between 100 and 50 million years ago = the Late Cretaceous and the early Paleogene (on the geological ladder). It concerns what is described as a sea way and the blame is placed squarely on rising sea levels. It is an established fact of mainstream that the Cretaceous period was extremely warm as trees are known to have been growing near the North Pole. It is assumed the poles have not shifted - even though an asteroid crashed into the Yucatan at the K/T boundary. The easiest way to get trees growing at the current North Pole is to have the pole situated elsewhere in the Cretaceous - which gets rid of the problem of trees growing where it is darkness for six months of the year. A pole shift might even explain why the sea invaded what is now the Sahara - a redistribution of the geoid and its ocean water.
However, the article doesn't touch that possibility and works within the mainstream gradualist model - which one would expect they would. This is not an article about rocking the boat it is primarily a classification of the fossils found in the process of three separate expeditions to the Sahara (primarily with a focus on Mali). As it included a great number of marine animals the logical explanation is that the sea invaded the land - and as geologists and others think the Cretaceous was inordinately warm they have the perfect mechanism - global warming in the dinosaur era. In the modern world we have a self regulating atmospheric system that has evolved to shunt excess heat out into space. Did the atmosphere behave differently in the Cretaceous?
Three expeditions, mainly to Mali, in 1999, 2003 and 2008, looked at rock exposures in West Africa. Giant sea snakes and catfish were recorded (but gigantism was a feature of the late dinosaur era). Giant fish of various kinds, tropical invertebrate and long snouted crocodilians are mentioned, and various mammals and even mangrove forest (all buried in the rocks). The seaway is said to have changed in size and geography on several occasions - which may indicate different channels of water. However, the feature I found most striking is the fact the K/T boundary event is smack in the middle of the period in question. As such the impact could have created huge tsunami waves on the opposite side of the pond. In this instance, West Africa. Is the seaway a relic of uniformitarianism? Was the seaway, and its fossils, the result of massive tidal waves generated by the asteroid - or by pole shift (or any other factor)? Were the sedimentary layers at the K/T boundary event laid down quickly rather than over millions of years? By avoiding catastrophism mainstream loses out on a lot of out of the box thinking - and alternative explanations. Merely keeping the uniformitarian paradigm alive and kicking seems to be a primary motive of certain kinds of research. This is not the case with this article. The researchers are working within the geological model they have been bequeathed. This is no different to oil explorers working within the system to search for possible new sources of the black stuff. How the layers were laid down is neither here nor there as it doesn't affect the oil deposits, as such, or the fossil classification. They are simply there and that is all there is to it. However, if oil is produced by vegetation that has been super heated and by other processes one can get an even better picture of catastrophism in the rocks.
One problem for catastrophism and not for the mainstream position is the presence of mangrove forest in the rocks in central West Africa. Mangroves grow on the coast. Were they growing in Mali or had they been uproooted by a wall of water and transported to Mali?
Updates / Re: NEW UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on October 09, 2019, 05:54:46 pm »
Tilted Lakes
2 Oct 2019
Gary sent in this link to ... archaeologists claim that a range of mysterious man made stones submerged beneath the surface of Lake Constance, on the Swiss side, are 5000 years old. They have done some exploratory C14 dating, they say, and confirm (roughly so) that they were constructed around 3000BC (or thereabouts). Do they have a connection with the drowned pile dwelling on Swiss lakes? These were overwhelmed in a catastrophic manner - but it has been all quiet on this front in recent years (or at least as far as the UK is concerned). That is a trifle surprising as it has been recently confirmed that crannogs and lake dwellings in the UK go back as far as the Neolithic - and we even have a well known excavation of such a pile dwelling in the Fens. The archaeologists say the stones go back to the Neolithic period but it is not clear what they are. It has been suggested they might be cairns (a row of them) minus the earth (washed out by the lake waters). Basically, what is left is a pile of stones - and they stretch some distance as if following a former contour ...   [[See 2 Images.]]
   ... They are currently 15 feet below the surace of Lake Constance. Geologically, the stones rest on post glacial banded lake deposits and are situated above the underlying upper edge of a morraine (presumably dating back to the Late Glacial Maximum). A source described them as cairns which is interesting as in the UK earthen mounds sometimes contain a stone (megalithic) construct - such as the chamber at West Kennet. Cairns are usually a more solid type of structure with an outward facia of stones (big and small) without the earth cover. THe piles of stones appear to run parallel with the shoreline. Finally, we are told that lake dwellings may be much deeper under the water. They may exist out in the lake or they may have been eroded away by water action.
PS ... Velikovsky in 'Earth in Upheaval' mentioned lake dwellings (erected on wooden piles driven into the ground). Remains of them exist in Scandinavia, Germany, Switzerland and northern Italy he told us and at some point a 'high water' catastrophe occurred and the villages were overwhelmed and covered in sand and silt etc. They remained abandoned for centuries until rebuilt during the Bronze Age - until they were overwhelmed once again at the end of the LB period. Velikovsky's dating is well out of sync with modern dating. The book was published in 1955 but the research was carried out in the 1940s. Gams and Nordhagen made a survey of German and Swiss lakes (and fens) and they concluded that strong tectonic movements were involved. The lakes suddenly lost their horizontal position, one end often being tilted upwards - and the opposite end of the lake, downwards. The old strand line, they said, ran obliquely to the horizon. The water level of Lake Constance rose by 30 feet - and there is evidence of the lake tilting. The high water catastrophe, they proposed, was accompanied by climatic change. These shifts in climate are known to have occurred at the back end of the 4th millennium, mid to late 3rd milllennium, and towards the end of the 2nd millenniums BC.
Note ... Velikovsky's dates often go back prior to the development of C14 methodology and it is a fact that he favoured dates of 1500BC and the 8th century BC in order to comply with his timeline in 'Worlds in Collision'. Once C14 dating came in things changed and Velikovsky's 1500BC became 2300BC in the articles of Euan MacKie (and taken up subsequently by Moe Mandelkehr). The 1500BC date was derived from Biblical numbers and was never a purely archaeological or scientific date. In spite of this both side may be wrong if the stones go back as far as 3000BC - pushing it further back in time. We know there was considerable uplift in the Alps at that point in time as Oetzi was left stranded on top of the mountains and engulfed in a glacier as temperatures plummeted.
Updates / Re: UPDATES
« Last post by Admin on September 15, 2019, 08:53:40 am »

1. Goals
2. Letters
3. Falls of Blood from Venus
4. On the Orientation of Ancient Temples and Other Anomalies
5. When Was the Lunar Surface Last Molten?
6. Venus Before Exodus
7. Comets and the Bronze Age Collapse

1. Goals: 1. Popularize optimum scientific method & scholarship (See TB Forum).
a. Improve Mike Fischer's model.
b. Add 2 articles (Ancient Maps & Scientific Evidence) that support a date of just over 4k years ago for the Great Flood & Meteor Bombardment (See TB Forum) to correct Mike Fischer's date.
c. Add JB's article on Noah's Flood to prove that the Flood caused the geological column (seen in 24 or more basins) of 6 megasequences caused by an orbiting body, like the Moon, on a briefly elliptical orbit.
d. Add Creation article evidence that basins were formed by impacts before the Flood.
e. Add that the breakup of the Saturn system produced the meteors and dust that produced impacts and destroyed much of the biosphere (See Saturn Theory).
f. Add that the Moon and Mars were impacted at about the same time as Earth (Saturn Theory).
g. Add that the impacts caused electrical effects, including radioactivity, on Earth (See WB, TB and CC's Astrophysics).

Scientific Evidence for A Major World Catastrophe About 11,500 Years Ago: A Preliminary Selection [SIS C&C Review]


1.vein: lead (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Derbyshire, UK
2.cave: iron-oxide (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Gailenreuth, Germany
3.breccia: iron-ore (+fossil) ---  --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Kesslerloch, Switzerland
4.rock-fissures: iron-ore (+fossil) (up to 720 ft deep) -- --- --- --- --- --- --- Carniola, Austria
5.caves: ore cement (+fossil) ---  --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Wellington Valley, Australia
6.cave breccia: iron stain (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Tea Tree Cave, Queensland, Australia
7.drift sand & gravel: metal (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Turnham Green +Acton, Middlesex, UK (1800s)
8.iron-sand: iron patina/stain (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Vilyui, Siberia, Russia
9.glacial deposits: iron-oxide stain (+artifact) --- - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Nampa, Idaho, (late 1800s)
10.drift stones and sand grains: iron oxide stain ---  --- --- --- --- --- --- --- South Yorkshire +Wiltshire +Humberside, UK (=<15 ft thick)
11.drift gravels: manganous stain --- ---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Radley, UK +other places around Abingdon, UK (formation of 'brief duration')
12.drift deposits: iron-oxide stain +gold +platinum +diamonds ---- --- --- --- --- France +Germany +Poland +western Russia +other European +near-eastern countries
13.drift: iron-oxide stain +manganese +copper +asphalt +oil --- -- --- --- --- --- Israel +Jordan
14.drift: gold flakes +platinum +lead +zinc +iron ore ---- --- --- --- --- --- --- Indiana +Michigan +Minnesota +Virginia +the Carolinas (sometimes at great depths occupying the uneven surfaces of the underlying bedrock)
15.drift: nickel +nearly pure copper pieces +metals --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- Sudbury, Ontario
16.irony-clay deposits: copper pieces (one 3,000 lb) +good quality diamonds -- --- Ontario to Ohio
17.drift: diamonds (in silicate rocks associated with volcanism) --- - --- --- --- southern margins of Hudson Bay (where no recent volcanic activity has occurred)
18.loess: manganese nodules (Pisolites) --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Northern China
19.loess: metal nodules --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- other regions, China
20.loess: silica +heavy minerals +up to 20.26% aluminium +up to 7.80% iron --- --- Nebraska
21.drift gravel: manganese +cobalt +iron +lead +zinc +copper --- - --- --- --- --- mouth of Fraser River, British Columbia
22.fossil beds: immense banks +lenses of frozen volcanic dust +ejecta: fossil ---- Siberia +Alaska fossil beds
23.sea bed clays +muds: much oxidised ferric iron particles --- -- --- --- --- --- the Arctic
24.sea bed clays +muds: much manganese oxide - --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- White Sea +Barents Sea, Siberian coast
25.floor sediments: volcanic ash +much nickel +radium (both rare in sea water) --- Pacific Ocean
26.patchy young radioactive clays in much of the ocean floor:
much radioactive ferromanganese nodules +cobalt +nickel +copper +other heavy ores --- oceans
_Oceanographers concluded that the nickel and iron in sea floor deposits were of meteoric origin


Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Mon Sep 02, 2019 7:45 pm
The Major Cataclysms Occurred Less Than 5,000 Years Ago

An article by C. Ginenthal about Ancient Maps shows that Antarctica was apparently largely ice-free 6,000 years ago, based on drill cores at the Ross ice shelf and probably other measurements. If it's true that it was ice-free at that time, I think this means the Shock Dynamics impact and rapid continental drift occurred shortly before that, like within years, because the Arctic lands and Antarctica moved toward the frigid poles due to the impact, and the ice sheets built up soon after. An ancient map also shows Greenland without its ice sheet.

The article is at:

_Here's the quoted portion:
"Not only do these cartographers say the map is accurate, but they point out that, during the 1957 to 1958 Geophysical Year, other teams of seismic scientists, like that of Paul Emile Victor, went into Antarctica and made soundings of the topography under the ice, and that these soundings confirmed the accuracy of the Oronteus Fineus map. Therefore, we have the Piri Re'is map of Antarctica confirmed as accurate by the U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office and the Norwegian-British-Swedish Expedition of 1949, and the Oronteus Fineus map of Antarctica confirmed as accurate by Strategic Air Command's map office and the International Geophysical Year teams of 1957 to 1958. These findings are further corroborated by other evidence. According to Hapgood: During the Byrd Expedition of 1947-1948, Dr. Jack Hough, then of the University of Illinois, took three cores from the bottom of the ocean off the Ross Sea, and these were dated by the ionium method of radioactive dating, of the Carnegie Institution in Washington, by Dr. W. D. Urry, ... one of those to develop this method. The cores showed alternations of types of sediments.... There was a coarse glacial sediment, as was to be expected, and fine sediments of semiglacial type, but there were also layers of finer sediments typical of temperate climates. [These were the sort ...] carried down by rivers from ice-free continents. Here was the first surprise, then. Temperate conditions had evidently prevailed in Antarctica in the not distant past. The sediment[s indicated that, no fewer than three times during the Pleistocene Epoch, a temperate climate had prevailed in the Ross Sea. Then, when this material was dated by Urry, it was revealed that the most recent temperate period had been very recent indeed. In fact, it ended only about 6,000 years ago. Hough wrote: "The log of core N-5 shows glacial marine sediment from the present to 6,000 years ago. From 6,000 to 15,000 years ago, the sediment is fine-grained, with the exception of one granule at about 12,000 years ago. This suggests an absence of ice from the area during that period, except for a stray iceberg 12,000 years ago." (19) This evidence is further corroborated by Reginald Daly, who informs us that "[carbon-14] dating has shown that Antarctica's ice is less than 6,000 years old. (Emphasis added.) [Arthur Holmes writes: `Algal remains dated at 6,000 BP [Before Present] have been found on the latest terminal moraines.'" (20) Thus, in addition to the accuracy of the Piri Re'is map and the Oronteus Fineus map of Antarctica, we have measurements from cores in the Ross Sea and from the last glacial deposits containing a temperate species of algae that also show that Antarctica was not covered by ice 6,000 years ago. The evidence indicates that the Piri Re'is and Oronteus Fineus maps of Antarctica, published in the 16th century, are accurate and authentic representations of the continent as has been confirmed by scientists in the fields of seismic soundings and cartography. This shows that Antarctica was largely ice-free 6,000 years ago and is corroborated by evidence of cores from the Ross Sea and by the dating of algae in terminal moraines. The only way that such accurate maps could have been made prior to the 16th century is if Antarctica was not buried under thousands of feet of ice, when its climate had to be tremendously different."
_End of quote.
(Note: I assume that the object found at "12,000" years ago was not from an iceberg and the sediment dated older than 6,000BP was not older than that. See below.)

Mike Fischer of proposed that the Shock Dynamics impact event (in which an asteroid from 33 to 78 miles in diameter struck the former supercontinent, Pangaea, north of Madagascar, and caused the continents to split off rapidly to their present locations) occurred shortly before the time of the Younger Dryas impact maybe 11,000 years ago, though he said privately that it could have occurred as recently as 4200 years ago. So if Antarctica was ice-free less than 6,000 years ago, the Shock Dynamics event must have occurred shortly before that. And the Younger Dryas impact must have occurred about the same time, i.e. less than 6,000 years ago.

I've since read Melvyn Cook's article, Earth Tectonics Viewed from Rock Mechanics at:
_Here's the relevant part.
"Dating the Rupture of Pangaea, Continental Drift, and the EGRR [Earth-girdling rift and ridges]
Farrand and Gajda determined, by the equilibrium radiocarbon method [10] that the beginning of the 'uplifts' in Canada occurred 7,500 to 10,500 years ago (8700 +/- 765 years before present: this date is the average value read from the 'isobases' surrounding Hudson Bay, the maxima for these uplifts). To obtain this result they used the equilibrium radiocarbon values of Libby [33] who at first found a value of 0.78 for C14/C.o14 [C14 is the biospheric radiocarbon concentration and C.o14 is the expected value based on the known intensity of galactic cosmic rays. Libby interpreted the difference simply as lost radiocarbon. In 1963, Lingenfelter [34] of the Libby school reduced this value to 0.73 and in 1964 he and Flamm [35] found a still lower value of 0.675. If Farrand and Gajda had used the 1964 result, the maximum equilibrium radiocarbon date for the uplifts in northeastern Canada would have been 7550 +/- 655 years BP. However, this date would have been only 4740 years BP if they had used the 1964 result and interpreted it, not by the equilibrium radiocarbon method, but by the non-equilibrium radiocarbon dating model [36], dictated by the actual observations of 1964 without assuming C14 loss from the atmosphere and oceans. Heiskanen and Vening-Meinesz studied the uplifts in Fennoscandia [11] by the observed gravity anomaly, which they found obeys the same exponential decay law as radioactivity. They found for the uplifts in the Bay of Bothnia ... [that] The beginning of the uplifts was ... about 4300 years before the date of their investigation, or about 4345 BP."
_End of quote.
Note: the uplifts began when the ice caps were removed.

The reason I said above that the sediments below the less than 6,000 year old sediments were not older than that is because the sediments must have mostly all been deposited at about the same time, as I explained in this thread 2 years ago at in a post I titled: Sedimentary Rock Strata Prove Catastrophism.

There I said: "Re: Sedimentary Rock Strata: What brief explanation is there for the fact that sedimentary rock strata covering large continental areas are generally sorted into different rock types, i.e. esp. sandstones, claystones, and limestones? I.e., assuming that millions to billions of years of erosion and deposition occurred, how was it possible for only one rock type to be deposited over large areas for thousands of years, followed by thousands of years of another rock type, etc? The only plausible means I know of for separation of strata into such individual rock types is by major flooding over short time spans, as demonstrated by Guy Berthault. The geologic column is said to consist of 6 megasequences worldwide, each containing many conforming sedimentary strata, and each megasequence occurring over an unconformity. The best explanation seems to be that each megasequence was deposited during major flooding over a short time span of days or weeks. Since the unconformities between the megasequences seem to show mainly only sheet eroision, there must have been only short time spans of days, weeks or months between each megasequence deposit."

Early in this thread I showed evidence that major cataclysms occurred about 4240 years ago, including a Great Flood. The Shock Dynamics event seems to have been the cause of the flood and of rapid continental drift and of mountain building and most fossil formation and extinctions and it now appears that the best evidence is that it occurred less than 5,000 years ago and the Younger Dryas event occurred after that. Only one large asteroid caused the Shock Dynamics Pangaea splitting event etc, but that asteroid was accompanied by numerous other objects, many of which also struck the Earth and the Moon at that time, maybe over a period of centuries. And the Ancient Maps article by Ginenthal above suggests that civilization was highly advanced before the event and for some time after.

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by moses » Mon Sep 02, 2019 8:55 pm
I am pretty sure now that all those 10,000 BC, or so, datings are in error and should be around 4,000 BC. This is because of Noah's flood event which introduced a large amount of carbon to Earth and changed from a 360 day year to the 365.24 year commemorated in the Great Pyramid.

Thus Gobekli Tepe would then be just before the Sumerian civilisation and things make a lot more sense.
Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:58 pm
Thanks, Mo. Yes, Gobekli Tepi makes more sense at just over 4,000 years ago because of familiar astrological symbols used there, I think, which may refer to a date. As for the Flood event adding C14 to the Earth, can you provide any authoritative references for that? Maybe I'll have time to look for info on that before long myself.

By the way, I think the mythological evidence etc for the Saturn Theory is also something that needs to be incorporated into the ancient global cataclysm model. Maybe it will help us identify the source of the meteor stream/s etc that caused the cataclysms. Maybe the unusual minerals mentioned in one article came from the meteor stream or one of the planets of the polar configuration. I'll check out the relevant article I just read lately real quick.

Maybe this article: "Scientific Evidence for A Major World Catastrophe About 11,500 Years Ago: A Preliminary Selection D S Allan" at:

And this article: "The Flood" at:

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:20 pm
The first article I listed in the previous post is the one with the info about minerals. Following is a quote.

"The Metal Factor
Especially noteworthy are the numerous instances of 'drift'-age animals and plants found agglutinated by, embedded within, or unexpectedly associated with, certain ores. Examples include a nearly complete rhinoceros skeleton entombed in a vein of lead in Derbyshire [35], thousands of agglutinated bones in a cave at Gailenreuth, Germany [36], many more cemented together in red iron-oxide stained breccia at Kesslerloch, Switzerland [37], those within nearly pure iron-ore infilling rock-fissures descending to 720 ft [220m below ground level in Carniola, Austria [38] and ore-agglutinated masses of bones occupying cave after cave in Australia's Wellington Valley [39]. Many cave breccias are strongly ferruginised. That of Tea Tree Cave in Queensland is an outstanding example [40]. Animals remains from 'drift'-age sands and gravel also often exhibit external metalliferous staining. Typical examples were the mammoth and other mammal bones found at Turnham Green and Acton, Middlesex, last century 'loaded with manganous oxide' [41]. Molluscs possessing a pronounced ferruginous patina occurred in blue-grey iron-sand overlying the celebrated frozen rhinoceros carcass of Vilyui in Siberia [42]. Even a small soapstone idol exhumed from 'glacial' deposits over 280 feet (86m.) below ground level at Nampa, Idaho, late last century was found invested with reddish iron oxide [43]. At many localities the stones and sand grains constituting much of the 'drift' itself have been similarly ferruginised."

Numerous examples of metal or mineral staining or contents in the "drift" is mentioned in addition to the above. The paragraph after that says "loess" also contains such things and appears to have originated at the same time as the drift etc. Drift is defined as: "In geology, drift is the name for all material of glacial origin found anywhere on land or at sea, including sediment and large rocks (glacial erratic). Glacial origin refers to erosion, transportation and deposition by glaciers." Loess is defined as: "Loess, an unstratified, geologically recent deposit of silty or loamy material that is usually buff or yellowish brown in colour and is chiefly deposited by the wind. Loess is a sedimentary deposit composed largely of silt-size grains that are loosely cemented by calcium carbonate."

Charles Ginenthal had another article about so-called glacial deposits actually being flood deposits, often over a fractured ice sheet, if I understood him correctly.

So I hope to come to understand better how the staining etc came about in the drift and loess etc.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10