Re: Pole Shifts vs Ice Ages (Revisited)

"John Shakespeare" wrote:
> Ian wrote:
>>
>> And you should get your head up from the books, go out in your local area
>> (i.e. the Nordic region) and start looking at all the signs that it was
>> once a lush equatorial area.
>
> Which evidence did you have in mind, and for what era? Where I live, the
> upper strata were all scraped clean by ice about 20000 years ago (lots of
> boulders etc dropped by the receding moraine), and several times in
> previous periods of glaciation.

This thread started out by the discussion about the flash frozen mammoths
found in Siberia. Siberia was never covered with any ice cap like the rest
of Scandinavia and contintal Europe down to Berlin & Paris.

Then we have the coal in Svalbard, the oil in the North Sea, fossilized
tropical plants, and the coral reefs outside of Norway.

Note: This issue has yet to be addressed:
Why such a huge ice buildup on Greenland, and no icecap in Siberia?

<snip>

> A spectacularly rapid and violent build-up, as in the Siberian traps or
> Deccan traps, takes more than a million years. It did not measurably
> accellerate tectonic movement. Geologists have accumulated a great deal of
> observational data, and general rates of tectonic drift are not in
> dispute.

Were the continents ripped apart by a few inches per year? Do mountains
build by a few inches per year, taking a million years?

<snip>

> Unfortunately, Nancy has repeatedly shown that she does not comprehend
> angular momentum.

Nancy has repeatedly shown that she dares challenge the current theories
(declared as "truth" by today's scientists) and that she does not back off
even when people go after her instead of the message she relays.

And you have shown that you dare not open your eyes to the possibilities
that today's theories are not perfect, and that indeed Polar Shifts can
happen.

Your inclination to go for the player instead of the ball has also been
duly noted.

Ian