Wow, took me back to grade one and Mrs. Grumbly letting me know who is boss, it didn't work then either ......
the layers in ice cores were once thought to represent annual deposites, this false assumption has been corrected to individual precipitations, storm by storm, so the time frames often quoted for core records are wildly inaccurate.
I agree and if the center of the icecap was like Antarctica then it never snowed to begin with and the accumulation would have been snow-flakes brought in by just the wind from the costal areas wher there would have been much snaw and much wind. The layers might be from one storm bot that storm could have been 1,000 miles away and if it blew arounds awhile before being trapped in the ive each thin layer could be years apart from when the snow first fell. The pic below shows lateral cracking due to the slope, eventially that snow is pushed furthe along until it it hits the melting point and then it heads of the oceans. In the pic of NYNY at the height of the ice they say the marks were left because the ice was 2 miles deep. Ice doesn't have the strength to hold itself up so there would be the slugging and cracking as seen in the photo from the toe back to where the ice is a single unit that still 'flows towards the ocean but as a single unit.
If the marks were caused by ice that was much thinner it means much more ice would have had to flowed there to leave the marks found today. If all the snow fell near the leading edge and only a percent got blown inland the the amount of ice could be much higher that 2 miles if the speed was increased do the main river of ice is moving at 1km/ century and the leading edge is moving at 10km/century at a dept that is 1/10 that of the main flow. Lets say 25% was blown in and 75% returned to the oceans to be evaporated again and the cycle saw snowfall that is 3 times higher than what we promote today.
Secondly cold so intense to freeze fresh animal and plant matter is like the cold of space,
Wouldn't that create 'freezer burn'? Killed quickly but without a great deal of weight on you would allow a perfect preservation or fossil if conditions were right. Most fossils are 'flat' and that is because decaying flesh cannot hold a form unless it is frozen first.
huge electrical atmospheric currents will do that as well as instant fossilization of plant material, you might goggle fossilized crabs which are frequently found oblate shaped stones,
If the precip is 3 times the volume the storms that bring the moisture would be more thunderous, would that increase the 02 level any amount, would that minor increase help or hinder out intelligence. Perhaps that is why we had greater civilizations in the past, the people were smarter because in the ice-age there were more plants in the areas that man could inhabit and being 400 ft lower the amount of air we took in would also have been greater.
To throw some God part into it there are two time mankind got less intelligent and that was after the flood and at Babel so the flood would have taken away the plants and the ones that grew back were less than the ones before the flood and the Babel incident was the rseult of the 02 content dropping even more to the point we lost the ability to communicate effectively and 'misunderstanding' was unheard of just because the plants were more from the time of the flood to that event and today it is much less so the 02 content is even lower today and that is the reason mankind is so inept at doing what they know is right.
these fossils are amongst the most perfect ever found and they mean instant fossilization.
What about if a layer of ash/dust landed on the water and settled to the bottom and then the minerals leached in and it was only when that was done that the cold came alone and moving it around after that would not have changed as an alternative that follows known science.
If lighting was a big part of the storms I don't have any issue with the lightening hitting a tower and then into a capacitor to be released slowly wouldn't have been possible and should we enter another 'cold snap' that should be possible, right now there aren't enough lightening strikes that one tower can collect many hits. What could you run at 115V from the power in one large lightening bolt and what would a large one look like back then if the Atlantic was 84F all year long Miami (or NY) would be under a constant line of super storms by our current standard.
Was the volcanic explosion of Santorini that destroyed Minoan civilization an example of climate change? Probably not.
However, climate change and the inability to adapt to it was probably the cause of the destruction of the Mayan and Anasazi civilizations.
If Africa colliding with Europe is happening then why id the Med Sea so deep, it should be a shallow sea, it isn't it looks like the rift in Africa that is spreading instead? That would explain the volcano.
The uplifting of the west coast mountain range altered that canals they had built and if that altered the rainfall the repair may not have solver the problem, you had to follow the rain or you dies and without global eyes you could not adapt quickly.
Gradualism Versus Catastrophism I
The seas, it is said, have not left their basins in time spans that have no meaning to the human mind. The Atlantic Ocean has bridged the distance between Africa, Europe, and the Americas for a period greater than the human species has existed on Earth.
((200M years is the age of all the oceans basins and it only gets newer from that point.))
Rivers, deserts, canyons—all appear to our modern eyes just as they would have appeared to Alexander the Great, Goyathlay, Sargon, or Khufu. The cyclic processes of erosion or
sediment deposition are the same today as they were long ago. Most of the current methods for dating artifacts, geologic layers, or fossils are dependent on that presumed gradual, uniform action.
((Land deposits date back to 4BYA and at that time oceans and water didn't exist on the planet. What did exist was a molten ball of lava spinning at a rate that 1 day was 6 hors long and that spinning action acted like e centrifuge and the rocky elements settled into layers based on their specific density so the surface was not rocking and rolling it was a smooth surface with neither ripple or wave and any incoming would be 'preheated' before impact and impact would be a slight dimple with no splash at all. To help with that layering we had the moon as being much closer and as thick as magma is it would have bulged the material just like tides of water today and the only difference other than that is today we have shorelines that interrupt the water, back when there was no interruption to the 'tidal surge'))
What if the uniformitarian hypothesis is incorrect? What if the topography of Earth was created in a time so short that ancient civilizations were able to record it? What meaning would the Neolithic, or the Jurassic, or the Precambrian eras have? Would evolutionary theory suffer for the lack of a chronological map?
((To help that molten ball cool it became large enough that it could attract ice and that would have fallen as 'snow' eventually and it would have floated down rathet than coming in as an intact ice-cube. This is a decent vid on the subject.
BBC Horizon Snowball Earth (2001) - YouTube
Electric Universe theorists postulate that between 5000 and 10,000 years ago (perhaps sooner), the Earth and its sister planets were engulfed in a catastrophic interplay of celestial forces that have not been seen since. Clouds of electrified plasma and electric arcs described by the ancients as “thunderbolts of the gods” dissected the continental geography, creating what traditional theories say are ages-old structures in an instant of time.
((Already covered in the increase in storms due to an ice-age being in effect. Coming out of one is just as harsh as entering one if you are un-prepared))
“Evolutionary theory is based upon the belief that a succession of fossil species in a scale of geological time demonstrates that evolutionary progress has taken place… As we have shown in the laboratory, layers of incoming sediment have been wrongly identified as being strata. The scale of geological time and the chronological succession of fossils have been calculated on this mistaken belief: that strata are successive layers of sediment. So the position of fossils, rather than sharing evolution, merely indicates the distribution of marine species which lived at different depths.” (
Guy Berthault:
((I can live with the rocks being able to form with an ocean of water being around.))
