This article has been edited for spelling and typographic errors.

From - Sun May 12 17:53:01 1996
Path: news.intersurf.net!usenet
From: Heinrich 
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,alt.archaeology
Subject: Re: Earth Crust Shift - Revisited
Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 17:41:04 -0600

Subject: Re: Earth Crust Shift - Revisited

 Dan Doner, (dan@lance.colostate.edu) on March 20, 1996 wrote:
>Paul J. Gans (gans@scholar.chem.nyu.edu) wrote:
>: In article <4ikn8o$393k@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>, 
>:dan@lance.colostate.edu wrote:
>: >Paul,
>: >
>: >I'm new to this discussion, but I have been reading a fair  
>: >amount dealing with the ECM theories.  Your statement 
>:>implies some rather interesting calculations and associated 
>:>assumptions.  Would you mind posting these?
>
>: I don't have any, really.  My statement, I think, stands 
>:on its own.
>
>I'm sorry, I must disagree (about your comments standing on 
>their own). There is just too much about any possible ECD 
>that geologists just cant know, including rate.  What if it takes 
>100 years, or 1000 years?

If a person takes the time and trouble to collect data and do the 
research instead of dismissing everything as being impossible, 
there is an amazing amount of data can be collected and used 
to test whether earth crustal displacement (ECD) actually 
occurs and at what rates.  For example, detailed analysis of lake 
deposits dated by either varves, radiocarbon dating or 
combination of the both can give a person detail paleomagnetic 
data that will clearly demonstrate whether, when, and at what 
rates it occurred.  Whether it takes a 100 or 1,000 years, 
paleomagnetic data from lake and deep sea cores and volcanic 
deposits would give a definitive record of any ECD that has 
occurred during the Late Quaternary.

 >How is it that a 90' fruit tree is preserved in Siberia, along  
>with a sabertooth tiger?  

The 90 ft fruit tree is nothing more than creationist folklore 
created by distorted reporting of a 20 foot alder tree buried 
70 feet deep in Pleistocene deposits and a spelling error in
the species name..  The details of this are given in a
FAQ titled "Creationist Tall Tales!" by E. T. Babinski at:

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/3/part3.html

According to Babinski, the sources of this story are Grady 
(1985) and Dillow (1981, p. 316), both of which are 
creationist tracts.  As the FAQ indicates, the source 
references that they both cite, which are Digby (1926) 
and Tolmachoff (1929), clearly state that the tree was 
only 15 to 20 feet tall including its roots and is an 
alder tree, "Alnus fruticosa."  It is certainly not a 
plumb tree.  This species of alder is currently found 
growing in  northwestern Siberia.  Furthermore, the 
alder was found lying horizontal relative to the strata.  

The sabertooth tiger fossils consisted of a single bone.  
That a single sabertooth tiger bone was found in the same 
"frozen sandy clay" as the alder lacks any significance.  
Saber-tooth tigers could have either adapted to the cold 
climate of the New Siberian Islands or have been following 
the summer migration of large animals when the island was 
connected to the mainland as a result of low sea level.

For more information, see:
   http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/3/part3.html

>Why are the core samples from the seabed around 
>Antarctica suggestive of recent soil erosion on the 
>continent?  

This refers to Exhibit 7 of Hancock (1995) [Fingerprints 
of the God], and the Ross Sea cores of Hapgood (1979).  
The problem is that the interpretation of recent soil 
erosion is based solely upon the presence of layers 
composed of well-sorted, fine-grained sediments within 
the cores without other supporting evidence, e.g. 
paleontological, palynological, clay-mineral data.  
Since similar well-sorted, fine-grained sediments can 
accumulate in variety of environments, including 
glacial and glacio-marine settings, and are currently
accumulating in the modern Ross Sea in front of the 
modern Ross Ice Shelf (Anderson et al. 1984), the 
interpretations of Hancock (1995) and Hapgood (1979) 
that claim that these deposits suggest recent soil 
erosion on Antarctica are without any basis in fact.  

>Maybe the ice core samples that suggest a 200k year history 
>of ice on the continent only suggest that "some" of the ice 
>has always been there.

There is other evidence that collaborates the ice core data. 
They include 8 million-year old glacial ice in the dry valleys 
(Sugden et al. 1995), 15 million-year old *unweathered* year old 
volcanic ash (Marchant 1966), palynological studies from the 
southern tip of South America (Heusser 1989), and many 
more studies (Denton et al. 1991; van der Wateren and 
Hindmarsh 1995).

>It is, after all, the highest continent on the planet, 
>with an average elevation of over 6k feet.  

Most of this elevation is the result of a 5,000 to 10,000 
foot thick ice cap.  Some ice cores were taken in areas 
where the subglacial bedrock surface is either close to 
and, even, below sea level.  Thus, elevation and 
mountain glaciation cannot be used to explain the local 
persistence of the ice in these areas.

>And finally, why in the world are there maps of Antarctica
>(regardless of their depiction of ice on the shores) that use a 
>complex sperical projection and seem to be project from Giza?

The primary maps that have been used as evidence of a ice-free 
Antarctica by Hancock (1995), Hapgood (1970, 1979), and others 
have been the Buache, Orontius Finaeus, and Piri Reis maps.  
As I have stated in another post;

"1. The Buache map shows little, if any, resemblance to 
the subglacial topography and any hypothetical ice-free 
topography of Antarctica.  The latter differs from the 
former because of 50 to 500 meters of uplift due isostatic 
rebound if the ice was to be removed. The Buache map
lacks any resemblance to an ice-free Antarctica and, thus,
fails to be evidence for it."  ........line omitted.....

"2. Hapgood's interpretation of the Orontius Finaeus map is
full of circular reasoning, force fitting, and rubber-sheeting of
the map to fit his interpretations.  Even the partially glaciated
interpretation is full of contradictions and gross errors that
Hapgood can only explain away as being the result of the primary 
source map being compiled from many other source maps made 
of different parts of Antarctica at different times thousands of 
years apart.  As best, it is poorly drawn map of a fully glaciated 
Antarctica to which someone has added imaginary stream 
valleys (Even coastlines that had to made of glacier ice have 
the river valleys drawn on them.)  I will explain all of this 
in a post that I am working on.  (It possibly represents the
work of some unknown, early Portuguese explorer.)

3. The identification of Antarctica on the Piri Reis map is made
from a single 1948 seismic section.  This is very shaky evidence 
to use for such a determination."

Thus, none of these three maps show any evidence of having 
been made of an ice-free or even partially ice-free Antarctica as
you and others claim.  I have prepared a post concerning the 
Buache map and am working on posts concerning the other maps.

>Maybe ECD's don't happen, but something has certainly happened 
>in the past, and an outright dismissal of a theory without 
>propperly addressing it will never help shed light on any 
>potentially new theories. 

Excluding the myths about an advanced civilization lying buried
beneath Antarctica, something did happen.  The climate changed
between 16,000 and 10,000 BP, the Antarctic ice cap melted slightly, 
and sea level rose.  What happened in Antarctica is approximately the 
opposite of what the ECD model claimed happened in Antarctica.
In terms of the crust of the Earth, plate tectonics is what is happening.

References

Anderson, John B., Brake, C. F., and Myers, N. C., 
1984, Sedimentation on the Ross Sea Continental Shelf, 
Antarctica. Marine Geology. vol. 57, pp. 295-333.

Denton, G. H., Prentice, M. L., and Burkle, L. H., 1991, 
Cainozoic history of the Antarctic ice sheet. in R. T. 
Tingey (ed.), pp. 366-433, The Geology of Antarctica. 
Claredon Press, Oxford.

Dillow, J., 1981, The Waters Above. Chicago: Moody Press.

Digby, B., 1926, The Mammoth and Mammoth Hunting 
in North-East Siberia. London: H.F. & G. Witherby

Grady, L, 1985, The mystery of the frozen giants. 
Bible-Science News, vol .23, no. 4, pp. 1-8. 
[April 1985].

Hancock, G., 1995, Fingerprints of the Gods, Evidence 
of Earth's Lost Civilizations, Crown Publishers.

Hapgood, C. H., 1970, The Path of Pole, Chilton Book 
Company, Philadelphia.

Hapgood, C. H., 1979, Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, 2nd
Edition, E. P. Dutton, New York.

Heusser, C. J., 1989, Climate and chronology of Antarctica and
adjacent South America over the past 30,000 years. 
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, vol. 76,
no. 1/2, pp. 31-37.

Marchant, D. R., Denton, G. H., Swisher, C. C., and
Potter, N., 1996, Late Cenozoic Antarctic paleoclimate 
reconstructed from volcanic ashes in the Dry Valleys 
region of southern Victoria Land. Geological Society
of America Bulletin, vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 181-194.

Sugden, D. E., Marchant, D. R., and others, 1995, Preservation 
of Miocene glacial ice in East Antarctica. Nature. vol. 376, 
no, 6539, pp. 412-414.

Tolmachoff, I. P., 1929, The Carcasses of the Mammoth and 
Rhinoceros Found in the Frozen Ground of Siberia. Transactions 
of the American Philosophical Society Held at Philadelphia For 
Promoting Useful Knowledge, New Series, vol. 23, Part 1, pp. 1-76.

van der Wateren, D., and Hindmarsh, R., 1995, Stabilists
strike again. Nature. vol. 376, no. 6539, pp. 389-391.

Copyright (c) 1996-2002 Paul V. Heinrich All rights reserved.