mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
This page is part of the [1]main catastrophism WWW system maintained
by Ted Holden.

This page gets a great deal of activity and for good reason; it is an
article of faith amongst establishment scientists that the story of
the flood was some sort of a fairytale or an agrandized account of
some regional flood, and the work which you find on this page just
demolishes that, and there is nothing else really comparable, to my
knowledge at least, on the WWW. Charles Ginenthal is a first rate
scholar with whom the public will generally be unfamiliar. He is the
publisher and editor of the [2]Velikovskian Journal; he is the author
of a book detailing the struggle over catastrophism in academic
circles and of Carl Sagan's role in that struggle, _Carl Sagan and
Immanuel Velikovsky_, available in major bookstores; and he is the
editor of a truly magnificent work by several of the leading scholars
involved in the neocatastrophism movement, [3]Gould and Velikovsky,
The Continuing Velikovsky Affair.

The Flood

Charles Ginenthal

Copyright Charles Ginenthal

One of the problems in Velikovskian research has been the inability to
distinguish between catastrophes that occurred close in time to one
another. It is also difficult to distinguish the different time frames
of the worldwide floods. Immanuel Velikovsky documented mythological
and geophysical evidence of a worldwide flood occurring 3,500 years
ago.1 He also spoke of earlier catastrophes that produced immense
global floods; such floods would have left distinctive evidence.

The evidence I present below is a mlange of data regarding more than
one global flood. Apparently, the earlier global floods occurred when
major icecaps covered the continents and later floods occurred after
these were destroyed. Recent findings verify that such global floods
occurred and negate the uniformitarian argument that the flood
evidence indicates only local flood episodes. The basic uniformitarian
argument is that the great floods were unique events caused by
ice-dammed lakes unleashed when the ice dams broke. However, if
individual, localized floods occurred repeatedly during the last Ice
Age, they would have washed away the whale fossils found on or near
the earth surface. However, whale bones and other marine fossils have
been found far inland, without having been either destroyed or eroded
down to tiny fragments. This strongly supports the global flood
hypothesis and contradicts the local flood theory. This evidence fully
supports Velikovsky's hypothesis.

If the Earth's axis tilted or the crust suddenly, violently, moved
over the mantle, then the oceans would move en masse, as immense tidal
waves, away from the equator and toward the poles. On the rotating
Earth, due to the Coriolis force, these tide waves would move not only
north and south but also counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere
and clockwise in the southern hemisphere. Since the Pacific Ocean lies
between the continents of North America and Asia in the northern
hemisphere, and the continental coastlines form an inverted V (/ \)
with its apex at the Bering Strait, the tidewater would veer east,
over Alaska and Canada, and west, over Asia. In the Atlantic Ocean,
the tidewater would flow more easily near the poles, covering a larger
area; this would create smaller continental floods. Any icecaps in
these regions would be swept away from their landlocked moorings out
into the northern Atlantic Ocean and would break up, depositing large
amounts of detritus on the sea bed. Since neither eastern Siberia nor
Alaska were covered by such a continental ice sheet, minute amounts of
glacial detritus should have been deposited in the Pacific Ocean
compared to that laid down in the Atlantic Ocean.

The tidal waves flowing over the northern ice sheets would flow south
and, in a return flood, where they swept back onto the continental
surfaces, would produce stunning evidence of their rampage over the
land: signs of violent flood erosion. Wherever mountains formed
basins, these regions would fill up, forming immense lakes that would
discharge their water, through passes, into rivers which would carve
deep channels and leave ghost shorelines at higher elevations.

This has already been confirmed by geological observation. According
to Reginald Daly:

Beaches, all over the world, have been raised by forces shoving up
from below. At each place the receding waters left an abandoned
beach line, the raised beach theory postulates a local uplift. This
theory requires uplifts, not only around all the world's oceans,
but around all the world's lakes, and also along the banks of all
(or almost all) the world's rivers; for there are raised terraces
along the banks of all major rivers and abandoned shorelines around
the world's lakes....Often the highest terraces of such rivers as
the Seine or [the] Elbe, when followed down to the mouth, are seen
to blend with old shorelines which border the oceans at levels
considerably higher than [those of] the present beaches. This
blending of river terraces with ocean shorelines established the
fact that the general recession of water levels is a worldwide
phenomenon common to both rivers and oceans, which cannot be
reasonably attributed to a multiplicity of local uplifts.2

This evidence indicates that nearly all the lakes, drainage basins and
rivers had greater reservoirs of water which flowed back to the ocean
recently, leaving a worldwide system of relic beaches as evidence of
this flood. If these flood beaches were ancient, they would have been
eroded away. Most of the ocean would have flowed over the icecaps and
back to the sea. The icecap would have been swept southward to lower
latitudes and would have melted within a few years. The remaining
ocean water would drain away, while the melting glaciers would produce
immense runoff to replace it. Sea water would only be kept in
extremely large collecting regions without outlets, such as the
Caspian Sea or Lake Bonneville. Small lakes would then be diluted by
the freshwater that melted from the residual icecaps.

Most of the detritus carried by the water would have been left as a
ring in, near and around the polar regions as a heavy silt or mulch,
containing material such as trees or animals that were swept off the
continents. The flowback material would have contained mostly the
lightest silts, which would form a second ring-like or annulus-like
deposit containing additional animals and trees. Forests would be
swept away and buried. The water would then flow into and down river
valleys, leaving masses of this secondary silt in its wake. In regions
where mountain ranges obstructed the return flow of water, the
secondary silt would build up as the water slowed and dropped its
load.

All of this rampaging flood violence would have occurred in a very
short time. To the human survivors of this deluge, it would have
appeared as if the ground had opened up to a subsurface ocean pouring
out of the Earth and inundating the land. If the continents were
flooded, then the remaining water filling up all basins would have to
be discharged. The ground water level would have risen. A stunning
example of this flood-ground water relationship is found in Egypt.

Egypt and North Africa

The evidence for such a flood is clear. If such an oceanic flood
poured onto the African continent, it would have left clear traces and
would have raised the ground water level immediately. Over hundreds of
years, the ground water level would fall. This has been documented. In
1988, Joseph Davidovits and Margie Morris reported the following:

Geological studies of the Sphinx have kindled more than debate over
[its] attribution and age. The established history of the evolution
of civilization has been challenged.

A study of the severe body erosion of the Sphinx and the hollow in
which it is situated indicates that the damaging agent was water. A
slow erosion occurs in limestone when water is absorbed and reacts
with salts in the stone. The controversy arises over the source of the
vast amount of water responsible.

Two theories are popular. One is that ground water slowly rose into
the body of the Sphinx. This theory produces irreconcilable problems:
A recent survey carried out by the American Research Center in Egypt
(ARCE) determined that three distinctly separate repair operations
were completed on the Sphinx between the New Kingdom and Ptolemaic
rule, that is, during a period of roughly 700 to 1,000 years. The
study also indicates that the Sphinx was already in its current state
of erosion when these early repairs where made. No appreciable erosion
has occurred since the original damage, nor is there further damage on
the bedrock of the surrounding hollow, an area that never underwent
repair.

Knowing this, one must consider that the inundating Nile slowly built
up levels of silt over the millennia, and this was accompanied by a
gradual rise in the water table. During Khafra's time, the water table
was about [30] feet lower than it is today. For the rising ground
water theory to hold, an unbelievable geological scenario would have
to have taken place. It would mean that from [30] feet lower than
today's water table, water rose to about two feet into the body of the
Sphinx and the surrounding hollow, where it caused erosion for roughly
600 years, and then stopped its damaging effects.

Historians find the second theory...offered more unthinkable. It
suggests that the source of water stemmed from the wet phases of the
last Ice Age--c. 15,000 to 10,000 BC--when Egypt underwent periods of
severe flooding. This hypothesis advocates that the Sphinx necessarily
existed before the floods. If it could be proven, well-established
theories about prehistory would be radically shaken. The world's most
mysterious sculpture would date to a time when historians place
humanity in a Neolithic setting, living in open camps and depending
largely on hunting and foraging.3 (Emphasis added.)

Richard C. Hoagland discussed the Sphinx and John A. West's analysis
of the evidence for its geological age:

On researching a book in the mid-seventies about the philosophies
and cosmologies of Ancient Egypt, West came upon a comment from
another scholar, R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz: "The Great Sphinx shows
evidence of severe water erosion...." To which West internally
responded with the obvious question:

"In a desert?!"

West's curiosity, prompted by de Lubicz' casual reference to the
"anomalous erosion" of the Sphinx, was based on the following hard
facts:

To create "severe water erosion" on the Sphinx, the Sahara Desert
must at one time NOT have been a desert. Readily available
climatological data for Ancient Egypt make it abundantly clear that
the Sahara has been in place from [7 to 10,000 years]...since the
end of the last Ice Age. Meaning that both the carving of the
Sphinx and its "severe water erosion" had to have taken place
sometime before...!

Such an age, if established, would, of course, automatically
preclude an Egyptian Pharaoh by the name of Chephren from ordering
the carving of the Sphinx only 4,500 years ago--if the Sphinx's
current state of weathering could a) be traced unambiguously,
geologically to a period of massive rainfall on the Gizeh Plateau
(as opposed to wind or sand erosion), and b) that period could be
independently dated by geological (as opposed to "Egyptological")
techniques, to before Chephren's reign during Egypt's so-called
"Old Kingdom."

In 1991, both of these results came together for West's
privately-funded Sphinx Project Team--resulting in the Team's
highly significant, radical conclusions:

Based on this chain of reasoning...we can estimate that the initial
carving of the Great Sphinx (i.e., the carving of the main portion
of the body and the front) may have been carried out c. 7,000 to
5,000 BC. This tentative estimate is probably a minimum date; given
that weathering rates may proceed non-linearly...the possibility
remains open that the initial carving of the Great Sphinx may be
even older than 9,000 years ago....

Privately, West's geologists suspect an even greater age for this
remarkable Egyptian effigy....

This is required to produce the "advanced state of water
weathering" they detect (in part, via seismological
techniques)--not merely on the Sphinx--but in the walls, and under
the "floor," of the carved "ditch" which separates the Sphinx from
the limestone of the Gizeh Plateau proper. This pronounced state of
deep erosion is also readily visible in the "Sphinx Temple"--the
massive construction...a few hundred yards from the Sphinx,
composed of 100-ton limestone blocks. It has long been presumed
that these were excavated from the "ditch" at the time of the
carving of the Sphinx itself.

All these features...show evidence of such severe water weathering
that eroded fissures 12 feet in depth are visible inside the ditch;
similar manmade excavations (to the ditch), in similarly hard
limestone on other parts of the Plateau (for Old Kingdom tombs,
dated by other methods to 5,000 years), show literally no
erosion....

The remarkable conclusion?

According to John [A.] West: If the Sphinx predates dynastic
Egypt,...we would have to rewrite the history of when advanced
civilization began....4 (Author's emphasis.)

It is a well-established fact that, during the Ice Age, the amount of
rainfall was much greater than at present. Historians believed and
accepted that the Egyptian civilization emerged long after the Ice Age
ended. Under these circumstances, it is clear that, after the Ice Age
ended (supposedly 10,000 years ago), the amount of rainfall over
Africa decreased and, therefore, the ground water level would have
also decreased. However, the damage to the Sphinx indicates that the
water table rose more than 30 feet and remained high for about 600
years. Geologically, an immense amount of water would have had to
flood Africa after the Sphinx was constructed. Water tables simply do
not rise over 30 feet and remain at a high level under the present
gradualistic or uniformitarian conditions. This clearly indicates that
a flood of extraordinary magnitude inundated Africa during the time of
Egyptian civilization.

A temple was uncovered at Abydos, over 250 miles south of Gizeh, in
the 19th century. The main temple complex, built of red granite, is
located in a swamp 30 feet beneath the surface. According to David H.
Childress, "[its] foundations are cut many feet below the current
level of the water table, which has risen some [20] feet since the
temple was built."5

When the Egyptians built this temple in the desert and laid its
foundation, it seems obvious that the water table was at least 20 feet
lower. The water table would not have risen 20 feet since then unless
an enormous amount of water had, somehow, been added to the desert
region and had, thus far, not subsided fully. Whale bones discovered
in the Sahara Desert offer even more evidence of a flood in Egypt.

Derek Ager argued against Velikovsky's concept of a flood by saying,
"The idiocy of some of [Velikovsky's] dogmatic pronouncements is
illustrated, for example, in the transport of vast numbers of large
vertebrates from the tropics to the Arctic by a great wave that did
not, apparently, carry with it a single marine organism."6

The following descriptions about marine organisms found under Egyptian
sand dunes and all over the Earth answer Ager's dogmatic
pronouncement:

According to James Trifil, some 243 fossilized whale skeletons and
loose bones were discovered in a large valley 150 miles southwest
of Cairo (100 miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea and more than
200 miles from the Red Sea). These skeletons are of Zeuglodon
whales, like those found all over the southeastern United States.
The Egyptian whale bones were scattered among the sand dunes; when
the wind exposed them, the paleontologists rapidly dug out as much
of the fossilized whale as possible because windborne sand erodes
exposed bones.7

It is generally accepted that the Sahara Desert was created only after
the Ice Age ended and the climate became arid. Therefore, whales had
to have embedded themselves into the desert sand after the Ice Age
ended and sand formed to cover them. The whales must have been left
there recently. If Zeuglodons were lying on or near the surface for
about 40 million years, as some paleontologists submit, their bones
would have eroded away. If they were encased in rock, over time, and
the rock became sand, their bones would have become sand.

Thus, two pieces of information point to a recent oceanic flood in
Egypt: water damage on the Sphinx, its surrounding niche and temple,
and the presence of whale bones both 100 miles inland from the
Mediterranean Sea and 200 miles inland from the Red Sea. Whale bones
were also found in other regions of North Africa. Allan O. Kelly and
Frank Dachille said, "In Tunisia and Algeria, there are a number of
salt lakes, some of them below sea level, which show elevated
shorelines of Pleistocene age. The University of California's
expedition of 1947 [to] 1948 found the bones of whales along with
those of present-day mammals in these old lake beds."8

Presently, whales are not found in landlocked inland lakes in Africa.
If Zeuglodons lived 50 million years ago and became extinct soon
thereafter, they would never be found in strata containing present-day
mammals. The implication is that Zeuglodon whales were deposited into
these lakes, along with mammals, by an enormous flood. The trapped
whales died alongside the mammals that were swept into the salt lakes
with them.

North America

Sir Henry H. Horworth presented evidence that a tremendous flood had
flowed over the North American continent. He discussed Hartman's Cave
in Pennsylvania, whose contents were described by a Professor Leidy.
Both extinct animals and human artifacts were found, one of which was
a "remarkable relic...a cone shell bored through the axis as a bead.
The shell [was] a marine species, Conus torquatus, found on the
western coast of Central America."9

How does a marine shell from Central America find its way north to a
cave in Pennsylvania with Ice Age fauna? Trade routes at this time are
out of the question, but an oceanic tidal wave would carry such a
shell northward.

Horworth told of Don Matias de la Mota Padilla, who affirmed that
bones found in the Valley of Los Cincillos, Mexico, appeared to be "of
fishes or other marine animals, such as whales...."10 Padilla also
described

"great beds of oyster shells raised above the sea and extending, at
intervals, from the Mississippi [River] to North Carolina....The shore
of the Atlantic must have [been filled,] nearly in a line, with these
remarkable deposits.... Within this bed, or nearer to the sea, are
found fossil bones of elephants which cannot have been fossilized
[before] the existence of the soil out of which [the shells were]
dug....11

If the oyster shells had turned to stone, then so would the strata in
which they lay. The soil has not turned to stone and contains
innumerable oyster shell beds, along with mammoth remains, which
indicates that the mammoths and the shells were deposited together
recently--most likely by a gigantic tidal wave sweeping up from the
Gulf of Mexico.

In Cuba, according to Horworth, the remains of a giant sloth, giant
extinct rodents, a crocodile and a tortoise, Testudo cubensis, were
found together with the relic of a mastodon.12

In 1984, William R. Corliss stated that a bone bed had been discovered
south of Tampa, Florida, with paleontologists declaring it one of the
United States' richest fossil deposits. This bone bed yielded bones of
more than 70 species of animals, birds and aquatic creatures. About
80% of the bones belong to plains animals, such as camels, horses,
mammoths, etc. Bears, wolves, large cats and a bird with an estimated
30-foot wingspan [were] also represented. Mixed in with all the land
animals are sharks' teeth, turtle shells, and the bones of
[freshwater] and salt water fish. The bones are all smashed and
jumbled together, as if by some catastrophe. The big question is how
bones from such different ecological niches--plains, forests,
oceans--came together.13 (Emphasis added.)

The fact that marine and terrestrial animals were buried in the same
soils and sediment level where human bones or artifacts have been
found suggests that an immense, recent flood occurred. Horworth also
described an Arctic island off the coast of North America: "At Port
Kennedy, Mr. Walker found [marine] shells of the present period at a
height of 557 feet above the sea; a bone of a whale lay at a height of
164 feet."14

In Earth in Upheaval, Velikovsky stated that two whale skeletons had
been discovered in Michigan bogs which covered glacial deposits:

Whales are marine animals. How did they come to Michigan in the
post-glacial epoch? Whales do not travel by land. Glaciers do not
carry whales and the ice sheet would not have brought them to the
middle of a continent. Besides, the whale bones were found in
post-glacial deposits. Was there a sea in Michigan after the
glacial epoch, only a few thousand years ago?

In order to account for whales in Michigan, it was conjectured
that, in the post-glacial epoch, the Great Lakes were part of an
arm of the sea. At present, the surface of Lake Michigan is 582
feet above sea level.

Bones of a whale have been found 440 feet above sea level, north of
Lake Ontario; a skeleton of another whale was discovered in
Vermont, more than 500 feet above sea level; and still another in
the Montreal-Quebec area, [at] about 600 feet above sea level....

A species of Tertiary whale, zeuglodon, left its bones in great
numbers in Alabama and other Gulf States. The bones of these
creatures covered the fields in such abundance and were "so much of
a nuisance on the top of the ground that the farmers piled them up
to make fences."15

He continued:

In Georgia, marine deposits occur at altitudes of 160 feet and, in
northern Florida, at altitudes of at least 240 feet. Walrus are
found in Georgia deposits. Pleistocene [Ice Age] marine features
are present along the Gulf coast east of the Mississippi River, in
some places at altitudes that may exceed 200 feet. In Texas,
mammalian land animals of the Ice Age are found in marine deposits.
These areas were not covered by the ice which, advancing from the
north, reached only as far as Pennsylvania.

A marine deposit overlies the seaboard of northeastern states and
the Arctic coast of Canada; in this deposit walrus, seals and at
least five genera of whales are found.16

According to Kelley and Dachille, "Lake Champlain has around it
elevated beaches containing numerous marine shells, with the bones
of seals and whales."17

Twenty-two years later, in 1976, the complete fossil skeleton of a
baleen whale was uncovered in Lompoc, California, in a bed of
diatomaceous earth along with a small seal, other small whales, fish
and birds.18 In Central America, Mexico, the Caribbean islands,
Vermont, Michigan, the southeastern United States, California and
Ontario, fossil marine organisms have been found far from the sea, in
strata, or on the surface.

The evidence of marine animals that has been found could only be
created by immense, recent, oceanic tidal waves. If the floods across
North America were caused by ice-domed lakes, they would have washed
away all evidence of these whale bones and other marine materials;
none of the floods would reach Mexico or the Bahamas.

J. Harlan Bretz suggested and proved that an enormous flood swept down
from the north onto the land surface of North America. Stephen J.
Gould outlines the nature of Bretz' evidence, the scientific
community's response to it and its eventual acceptance under strict
uniformitarian boundaries:

In 1923, J. Harlan Bretz proposed a striking and unorthodox
explanation for the channeled scablands of eastern Washington. This
peculiar topography is developed within a series of elongated
basins called coulees....They are traceable up gradient to the
southern extent of the last glaciation and down gradient to the
Snake or Columbia Rivers....[T]he peculiar features [of the area]
suggest...that the channels were once filled with water to a great
height; the deep gouging of basalt within the channels [and other
evidence] does not look like the ordinary work of rivers....

Bretz concluded, therefore, that the coulees had been carved by a
single gigantic flood that had filled them to a depth of more than
1,000 feet, had cut through hundreds of feet of basalt in places
and had ended in a matter of days. He envisioned the scope of the
events as follows:

"Fully 3,000 square miles of the Columbia plateau were swept by the
glacial flood, and the loess and silt cover removed. More than
2,000 square miles of this area were left as bare, eroded, rock-cut
channel floors, now the scablands, and nearly 1,000 square miles
carry gravel deposits derived from the eroded basalt. It was a
debacle which swept the Columbia plateau."

Bretz' hypothesis evoked from the geological establishment a flood
of commentary, nearly all of it negative. The common theme running
through all of this criticism was the rejection of his ideas in
favor of gradualistic explanations, often on a priori grounds.19

The scientific establishment only accepted Bretz's catastrophic flood
scenario on the grounds that the deluge was caused when the glacial
ice had melted behind the ice front and had formed an enormous glacial
lake. Eventually, this ice dam broke, releasing a wall of water over
2,000 feet deep. There are fundamental problems with such a concept
because the lake has to form in defiance of fundamental geophysical
constraints. Glacial lakes do form, but are generally not very large;
for example, small seasonal lakes form on the Greenland glacier--such
as that at Sndre Strmfjord, but they freeze up in the winter.

Water, surrounded by ice except from above, can only melt to a certain
depth. For example, in Siberia, "People at Yakutsk have no wells, they
have tried them to 500 and 600 feet deep, but they freeze."20 The same
process restricts the depth to which a glacial lake can melt. Most of
Greenland is north of the Arctic circle and, every summer, has
sunlight and heat produced 24 hours a day for four to five months.
Given this long summer period of sunlight and heat, one would expect
very deep lakes to form, but Greenland's glacial lakes do not melt to
a great depth. In winter, the lake water refreezes. This is
essentially what would happen to the icecap north of the Washington
scablands.

According to geologists, the ice dam that formed the lake that flooded
the Washington scablands did so about 16,000 years ago, while the Ice
Age was still in full force. No volcanic regions north of the ice
sheet, where the lake supposedly formed, are found there so as to heat
the ice. There is evidence of a relic shoreline for the lake, but the
oceanic water flowing under the ice could have lifted it to create a
short-lived lake. In addition, the ice front facing south would always
melt first.

We are expected to believe that the area behind the ice dam, north of
the ice front, melted to a depth greater than 2,000 feet and that the
warmer ice front to the south did not melt. However, ice and snow melt
gradually, from south to north, in springtime; exactly how the icecap
would have melted at the end of the Ice Age. Such a large body of
water would be a heat source to tunnel its way through or under the
ice. Some of these giant lakes supposedly formed north of the
midwestern states, where there are no mountains acting as barriers to
the lake water. This is true with regard to the drumlins, elongated
mounds of glacial material sorted by water action. Smaller ice dams,
which generate floods, do exist.21 Of more importance, however, no
geologists have explained the presence of whales in postglacial
material, which contradicts the theory of freshwater, glacial dam
flood formation.

Any long-lived, large, deep body of water in a glacier would melt a
channel either under or through the ice and would flow away as a
river. Such rivers are found in the icecaps of Greenland and
Antarctica,22 and no such immense, deep glacial lakes have ever been
seen in either region.

Scientists have invented an ad hoc process, for the creation of a
lake, which contradicts climatic and geophysical thermal conditions.
However, Warren C. Hunt exposed another problem related to such an ice
dam. He claimed that it would be impossible for an ice dam to hold
back a lake of water 2,100 feet deep.23

According to Hunt, since modern engineering employs bedrock grouting
for securing the footings of 500-foot...dams, it must strike any
reader as...frivolous to suggest that chance emplacement of glacial
ice might have dammed Clark Fork across a 7-mile...span lacking in
intermediate abutments and then retained water at four times the
pressure of modern, engineered, concrete dams!24

In fact, Hunt proved the dam was emplaced elsewhere and "would have
had an unsupported length of approximately 50 [miles]...."25

He said that "[i]ce has no effective tinsel strength"26 and would
break under the stresses created by the pressure on an ice wall over
seven miles in length. Consider picking up a block of ice measuring
100 feet long x 20 feet thick x 40 feet wide at its ends. The weight
of the ice block will cause it to snap and break. The longer the
length of the dam, the easier it is to break.

Mark L. Lord and Alan E. Kehew were able to show that, in plain
regions where there are no mountains to impound water, [g]lacial-lake
outburst floods were common in the northern Great Plains during the
Pleistocene Epoch. Sedimentologic and paleohydraulic
interpretations...support geomorphic evidence of large magnitude,
highly competent discharges from glacial lake outbursts. Large-scale
bars consisting of matrix-supported, poorly sorted, pebbly cobble
gravel were deposited by hyperconcentrated flows, probably between 20%
and 40% sediment by weight.27

According to their paleohydraulic calculations, between 60,000 and
900,000 cubic yards of water were discharged per second. Of course,
they do not discuss having found whales in nearby regions. To admit
this would destroy the ice dam-lake bursting concept.

John Shaw, of the Department of Geography at Queen's University,
Kingston, Ontario, claimed that drumlin fields, regions covered by
many long hills with their long slopes facing the ice sheet and their
short slopes facing away from the ice sheets, were created by immense
subglacial floods, and that entire sections of the ice sheet were
literally lifted and moved southward, carving innumerable drumlin
fields across North America.

Isaac and Janet Asimov described the research as follows:

[I]n 1975, Casare Emiliani, of the University of Miami, studies the
fossil remnants of microscopic organisms under the sediments of the
floor of the Gulf of Mexico. From his studies, he concluded
that...[11,000] years ago,...the Gulf of Mexico contained water
that was much less salty than it is today. He suggests that the ice
sheets had undergone sudden melting and that a vast flood of water
had entered the Gulf of Mexico and raised the sea level markedly.

The suggestion was largely ignored because it was difficult to
imagine the ice melting that fast, but, in 1989, John Shaw...made a
suggestion as to...how such floods might come about.

The region where once the ice sheets were found have a scattering
of low hills called "drumlins." These are usually supposed to have
been formed by [the] grinding action of glaciers as they came and
went. Shaw, however, feels [that] they may, more easily, have been
formed by a rush of water.

He suggests that the ice sheets did, indeed, melt very slowly but
that the water did not necessarily run off, soak into the ground,
pour into rivers and reach the sea as rapidly as it formed.

Instead, water might have slowly settled down to the bottom of the
ice sheet, soaked into the ground until it reached the bedrock and
slowly accumulated there. There would, thus, form what was,
essentially, a lake of water under the ice sheet, and this would be
prevented, by ice dams, from spreading outward.

Eventually, though, as the glaciers continued very slowly to melt,
sections of the ice dam would waken and...break. The lake of ice
water that had been pent up would then pour out seaward in a vast
flood that beggars anything we can imagine.

Shaw has calculated that something like [20,000] cubic miles of
water may have poured out of the ice all at once to form the
drumlin fields of northern Saskatchewan....

The Amazon River, the largest on Earth, takes ten years to
discharge [20,000] cubic miles of water into the Atlantic Ocean,
but the ice lake may have discharged it in a matter of a few days
only.

Human beings retreating inland before the inflowing water may have
reminisced and exaggerated afterward, giving rise to tales of
drowned continents and universal flood.28

Scott Fields has stated that

a series of catastrophic floods thousands of years ago may have
produced the vast drumlin fields of southeastern Canada and the
steplike patterns found in dead coral reefs off the coast of the
Grand Cayman Islands....

Although drumlins are usually thought to be chiseled by glacial
ice, these drumlins must have been formed by floods, Shaw says. The
reason: other ice-related forms, such as moraines, are missing in
the area....

As the oceans swelled, colonies of the coral Acropora palmata
started to die, says geologist Paul Blanchon, also at the
University of Alberta. Because this coral can grow only when it
receives plenty of light, it "drowns" in water deeper than 33
feet....The reefs Blanchon studies drowned so quickly that they
formed three distinct steps, one for each flooding peak.

If sea levels had risen slowly, Blanchon says, the reefs would have
crept toward shallower water as corals built homes at depths they
like best. Instead, entire colonies of A. palmata suddenly perished
and were replaced entirely by other species. Using previously
established radioisotopic dates, Blanchon found that the events
causing corals to drown coincide with the floods that produced
Shaw's drumlins.

Blanchon then estimated how quickly the sea would have to rise to
overtake the coral's growth rate. "We worked out that it would have
to be at least a five-meter...rise to drown them," he says. But
Shaw [believed] the extra rise was caused by huge pieces of ice
that slid into the sea from eastern Canada and then melted.29

The implication may also be drawn that there were at least three major
floods created by other catastrophes in the recent past. However, the
sudden death of corals happened swiftly and, therefore,
catastrophically. The drumlin fields described are found all across
North America and Europe, not just in Saskatchewan, and this drumlin
topography would also require immense flooding.

Four years ago, C. Warren Hunt commented on Shaw's work:

Shaw observed, as have others including me, that huge fields of
these [drumlin] features occur. The drumlins are found side by side
in fields [50 kilometers] in width and length, with [50-meter]
heights and 1-to-2 [kilometer] lengths, and parallel orientation so
perfect that only a massive water flow could have produced them....

Shaw's work was in northern Saskatchewan and southern Ontario.
Drumlin fields of this sort occur elsewhere. My observations in
northern Alberta and northeastern British Columbia led me to
consider the drumlins I observed on air photographs as fluvial
features because of the regularity in orientation, spacing and
length--the same characteristics attributed by Shaw to flood
deposition...

Curiously, Shaw does not contemplate (in print, at any rate) where
the water could have originated, apparently assuming it to be
sub-glacial meltwater. But how could such melting take place
without a heat source such as volcanic heat, which precipitates
Icelandic jokulhaups [(glacial floods in Iceland produced by
volcanic melting of subglacial ice)]? What climate regimen would
allow such melting in the first place? What containment mechanism
would allow accumulation of a great under-ice lake, 84,000 km3
[(cubic kilometers)] of water 18 times the volume of the Bonneville
flood release beneath [3,000 meters] of ice? And would not water
beneath the maximum ice thickness tend to escape the lesser
confining pressures under peripheral areas of the ice sheet? Is
there any possible way such a huge under-ice chamber of water could
accumulate?

Ice has no effective tensile strength. Thus, any unconstrained
portion of an ice sheet above a moving torrent would move with the
water, breaking up and flowing as icebergs with it. Any rock load
that might be encased in the ice would go with the flood.
Catastrophic emergence of flood waters from under an ice sheet
would rapidly destroy the ice sheet....

Earth heat cannot have melted continental ice to produce floodwater
in the volumes required for drumlin formation. A cometary heat
source could have served the purpose.30 (Emphasis added.)

He admitted that there is no evidence of cometary debris in the
regions where such evidence should be found. Nevertheless, there is
clear evidence that drumlins were formed by water action. Even during
floods, water tends to lay down sediment as stratified deposits.
Neither glacial action nor the pushing of surface materials into long
narrow hills will separate the materials deposited into separate
strata, according to their natural grain size and mass.

This is crucial! Only water action will segregate materials into
distinctly separate, stratified deposits which are oriented in the
direction of the water's flow. A typical drumlin, in cross-section,
will have an inner core of sand. There will be gravel above the sand,
at the longer slope, over which glacial till will be found. Often, a
sandy deposit will cover the entire front of the drumlin. See Figure
1, below:

Figure 1. WATER ACTION DRUMLIN.

If the drumlin were deformed by glacial action, it would look like
Figure 2, below:

Figure 2. GLACIAL ACTION DRUMLIN.

[for pictures and other excellent articles, purchase a copy of Sagan
and Velikovsky by Charles Ginenthal, New Falcon Press, due out early
Spring of 95]

The drumlins show distinctly stratified deposits. Because of this,
Shaw said, "It is simply not possible for drumlins to form by
pervasive subglacial deformation and, at the same time, contain large
thicknesses of undeformed, but highly deformable, fine-grained,
laminated sediment near the landform surface."31

However, if the flood was an oceanic tidal wave flowing back south
after its northward flow, it would leave whale remains and other
evidence of its marine nature. This evidence is found in the
topographical glacial feature known as an esker, a very long ridge
that runs down, up and over hills; is made up of sand, clay and rocky
debris; and is found in both North America and Europe. Eskers may
exceed 100 miles in length, giving the impression of a railroad
embankment; some are 60 yards high and 40 yards wide. It has generally
been assumed that eskers were formed from glacial rivers that
deposited sand and gravel under the ice. However, rivers do not run up
hills. Hills under the ice sheet would halt the natural river flow;
therefore, rivers would have to either erode or flow around the hills.
If eskers were created from cracks in the ice sheet, into which water
and detritus poured, then evidence of this should be found. This is
supported by the fact that marine shells have been found in North
American and European eskers: In North America, "fossils [were]
discovered in an esker-like glacial ridge of sand and gravel. It is
suggested that the deposit was formed as a crevasse filling....[T]he
fossils are mostly intact, many with both valves together, in
place...."32 In Scandinavia, eskers containing gravel, sand (ripple
marks), clay and "Baltic [Sea] shells" were found.33

Horworth explained that the European eskers found across glaciated
areas of Europe and Russia contained, in their uppermost layers,
"stiff blue clay or...finely sifted and laminated brickearths
containing, in places, [many] diatoms and marine shells, but never, so
far as [he knew], freshwater debris or land mollusks."34

Obviously, marine shells should not be found either in North American
or European freshwater glacial deposits. Like the whale fossils found
on the surface of these regions, the marine nature of oceanic life
forms in eskers has been ignored in order to avoid dealing with the
fact that these deposits were laid down by an oceanic flood over both
land and ice.

Lake Bonneville, a reservoir of water estimated to cover 19,000 square
miles through Utah, Nevada and Idaho, left great salt deposits
covering 100 square miles and discharged itself suddenly, after
filling up, to produce a tremendous flood. The general public believes
that the lake filled gradually from rainfall during the Ice Age, then
suddenly discharged its water when its north-facing earthen dam burst.
The dam presumably collapsed during the same general period as did the
ice dam which formed the Washington Scablands. According to Robert D.
Jarrett and Harold E. Malde of the United States Geological Survey (U.
S. G. S.), the discharged water is now reckoned to have amounted to
"2.2 times the discharge previously reported and is the second largest
flood known to have occurred in the world....Other recent studies of
the history of Lake Bonneville show that the volume of water released
was 4,700 km3.35

However, Hunt showed that the flood did not discharge itself northward
from the lake but flowed from the north into the lake:

The fundamental problem with the popularly held, simplistic idea of
outflow drainage [from Lake Bonneville] cutting down Red Rock Pass
[at the northern end of the lake] shows clearly in the
geomorphology. The landforms should show evidence supportive of the
outflow, features apparent to a layperson. It does not take a
geologist to recognize that erosional downcutting of a spillway
from one level to a lower one [found where rushing torrents of
water cut deep channels] must have created a V-shaped gully at the
pass, a gorge which today should be highly visible.

What we find on Red Rock Pass is different. The Pass is not
V-shaped as it should be, but wide and flat-floored. Its
16-[kilometer]...length is flanked by low depositional terraces
made up of fine clastic materials characteristic of quiescent
deposition.36 (Author's emphasis.)

If the flood had come from the lake, the gorge formed would have cut a
V-shaped valley. Since the valley is broad and not V-shaped, this
strongly suggests that the flood water flowed from the north into Lake
Bonneville, through Red Rock Pass. Furthermore, a flood out from the
lake would have removed most of the material in the valley running
through Red Rock Pass. However, fine rock sediments, the kind laid
down in water not highly turbid from currents, were found. If the
water flowed from the north into Lake Bonneville at Red Rock Pass, it
would slow down at this point and rise, dropping its load of fine
material in the Pass--precisely what is found.

Also relevant is the erosion left by the water-laden material on the
rock formations. Hunt stated that

[another] feature...one would look for in any vigorous fluvial
process [would be the] impact-polishing and scouring of channel
walls. Entrained sand and gravel [in flood waters] act as cutting
agents to scour and polish such obstacles. The resulting impacted
and polished rock surfaces should be visible today.

What [he] found in a gravel excavation just east of the two-lane
highway...on the Pass [was] most revealing--a polished vertical rock
surface facing north. Turbulent water has flowed south, past this
obstacle, across the Pass and into Lake Bonneville. No comparable
south-facing rockface demonstrates northward flow.37 (Author's
emphasis.)

Had the flood originated at the lake, flowing northward, it could only
polish the south-facing side of the vertical rock in its path within
the Pass. Since the north-facing rock surface was the only one
polished, this proves conclusively that the flood flowed southward,
into the lake.

Also, according to Hunt, the chlorine content in the salt beds
indicates that the water was of oceanic origin:

Concerning salinity, Broecker, Walton and Eardley et al. attempt to
show that the chlorine content could have arrived by wind from the
ocean. Their rationale is most erudite and intriguing, but the
explanation is superfluous. Fete gives the sodium-to-chlorine ratio
as .92 and points out its similarity to that of the Pacific Ocean,
which he gives as .86. The .92 ratio may be above the Pacific
figure because of post-Bonneville contributions of local salts.
That is what would be expected, in any case, as much higher ratios
characterize indigenous waters of the cordillera region. Interior
drainage and evaporation give rise to gypsiferous and carbonate
deposits rather than to halite [salt]."

[Broecker, Walton and I] consider an oceanic source essential to
explain the presence of the quantity of chlorine found in the
surface environment of the Bonneville basin.38

Velikovsky described the muck beds across Alaska and Canada, which are
hundreds of feet deep along river valleys.39 The river valleys contain
hundreds of feet of frozen muck, comprised of the shattered bones of
Ice Age fauna and man, splintered forests and artifacts--all of which
is highly indicative of an immense flood. As this water reentered the
ocean at the Bering Strait, it would have carved immense submarine
canyons in that region.

One would expect an immense backflow off the land, based on having a
tidal flood flow north in the Pacific basin and into the inverted V
created by the meeting of Asia and Alaska at the Bering Strait. This,
of course, is well supported by the muck-filled river valleys.
However, some of the world's largest submarine canyons are also found
on the Bering Sea's continental margin. The detritus carried by flood
water would cut deep canyons.

According to Paul R. Carlson and Herman A. Karl of the U. S. G. S.:

Seven large submarine canyons cut the Beringian [Bering Sea]
continental margin. Three of these are among the world's largest
submarine canyons. Bering is 400 [kilometers] long. Navarinsky and
Zhemchug are each 100 [kilometers] wide at the shelf break and
volumes of sediment removed from these three canyons range from
4,300 to 5,800 km3, an order of magnitude [ten times] larger than
any submarine canyons incised in the margin of the lower 48
states.40

The problem with the uniformitarian turbidity current concept is that
the major melting of the icecap should have been at the southern end
of the continental glacier. Over millions of years, water flowing into
the ocean from this outflow would have created many mud and water
flows to cut submarine canyons. Since the greatest glacial outflows
supposedly came from the continental United States and not from Alaska
or Eastern Siberia, which were not glaciated, the longest, widest and
largest canyons should have formed south of the ice sheets and not at
the north, where there was little ice melt. The sediment transported
from the continental shelf and ocean slopes, far into the Aleutian
basin, forms a layer about a mile deep on the sea bed.41

Gigantic ripple marks offer more topographic evidence for an immense
flood all across North America, Europe and elsewhere. Uniformitarians
have argued that such marks are terminal moraines left by the ice
sheet's repeated regressions and advances. But this concept does not
stand up to scrutiny. An ice sheet would remove the moraine over which
it passed. However, the ice sheet's advances would have to have been
progressively shorter, over millions of years, in order for the ice
sheet to leave regularly large systems of ripples or ridges. The major
problem with the terminal moraine concept is that the interior plain
of western Canada was not glaciated and, therefore, could never
produce series of ripples. According to J. W. Dawson, who researched
this region:

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the region is that immense
series of ridges of drift piled against an escarpment of Laramie
and Cretaceous rocks, at an elevation of about [2,500 feet above
sea level], and known as the "Missouri coteau." It is, in some
places, [30] miles broad and [108] feet in height above the plain
at its foot, and extends north and south for a great distance,
being, in fact, the northern extension of those great ridges of
drift which have been traced south of the Great Lakes,...through
Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and which figure on the geological
maps as the edge of the continental glacier--an explanation
obviously inapplicable to those western [Canadian] regions where
they attain their greatest development.42

This, of course, supports the view of an oceanic tide flowing north
over the ice sheet. In Iowa, these ripple marks rise from 10 to 15
feet, extend as far as a mile, separated rather evenly, and cover
close to 10,000 square miles.43 A final proof that ripple marks are
flood evidence is that they are found in the Washington Scablands,
definitively known as a flooded region. According to Stephen Jay
Gould, the first good aerial photographs of the Scablands revealed
that several coulee floor areas were "covered with giant stream-bed
ripples, up to 22 feet high and 425 feet long. [Bretz, who had
explored and explained the flood cause of the Scablands,]...had been
working on the wrong scale. He had been walking over the ripples for
decades but had been too close to see them."44

V. R. Baker had argued, in 1973, that giant ripples 425 feet in chord
length and 15 to 22 feet high, found near Lake Missoula and on the
gravel beds of the scablands, substantiated that a powerful flood
produced the scabland topography.45

According to most geologists, the Washington Scabland flood occurred
13 to 18,000 years ago. What is required to create these ripple
markings is, literally, impossible. The ice sheet had to advance and
recede continuously, after the flood, so as to emplace layers of
terminal moraine in the scabland valleys without destroying the
topography over which it moved. To suggest that, over 5,000 years, an
ice sheet would advance and retreat repeatedly to create ridges, but
would not obliterate the scablands' flood topography so as to push the
moraine before it, is a geophysical absurdity! This evidence clearly
indicates that ripple marks found all over North America, Europe and
elsewhere were produced by an immense, oceanic tidal wave flowing off
a continental glacier and covering areas which formed ripple fields at
their interfaces.

Geologists have employed a double standard for giant ripple marks: In
the scablands, ripple marks are evidence of heavy flooding; in many
other regions, ripple marks are evidence of glacial flow.

Drumlins, discussed previously, have an interrelationship with
ripples; drumlins either point away from a glacier or in the direction
of glacial flow. Douglas E. Cox showed that ripple marks--signs of
flooding--were found north of the drumlin fields in Ontario's Bruce
Peninsula.46 This evidence supports the concept that drumlins were
created by a subglacial flood which forced the icecap to move en masse
over the terrain, producing drumlin fields. If drumlins were produced
by glacial action, the terrain would gradually be flattened as the
glacier advanced and would not exhibit drumlins composed of glacial
moraines.

What glaciologists are saying is contradictory: First they claim that
ripples running horizontally to glacial motion are produced as the
glacier front bulldozes the land before it. Then, regarding drumlin
fields, they claim that the glacier does not flatten the terrain it
encounters but pushes detritus under the ice front, forming long rows
of hills pointing in the direction of the drumlins and that these
ripple marks are signs of flooding.

Gradual glacial movement, on its own, cannot, concurrently, create
terrain features both perpendicular to and parallel to the direction
of glacial flow; water action is also needed.

While Alaska, northwestern Canada and eastern Siberia were not under
glacial cover, the same is not true of eastern North America. Here,
the continental icecap covered the entire region as far south as New
York City. If an oceanic tidal wave had fallen upon this ice field, it
would have broken the icecap into innumerable pieces, dislodging it
from its continental moorings. Icebergs would have surged into the
northern Atlantic Ocean and melted as they drifted southward, dropping
whatever detrital material they had gouged from the continents. Under
such conditions, continental debris would sink to the ocean floor,
creating distinct layers of heavy rock on the sea bed covering much of
the North Atlantic. Named the Heinrich layers, they are present in the
North Atlantic sea bed.

So as to explain these detritus layers, one must propose that the ice
sheet suddenly surged off the continent and into the Atlantic Ocean.
Uniformitarians assume that the bottom of the ice sheet contained
soft, muddy material which acted as a lubricant permitting the ice
sheet to slide off the continent. The problem with this scenario is
that the wet, soft sediment would rise and flow around the glacier,
never allowing for the creation of glacial topography. If the ice
sheet was lifted and moved by subglacial water, one must explain how a
sea of water formed below the ice--deep inside the continent.

The major problem, however, was explained by Mark Maslin, who showed
that "sediment deposited by icebergs in the Labrador Sea...[contained]
rocks of the type found in the middle of the North American continent,
as well as at its edge."47

Douglas MacAyeal, a researcher, suggested that the buildup and surges
between Heinrich events take 7,000 years.48 However, this is difficult
to accept because the ice sheet is millions of years old and should
have generated hundreds of Heinrich layers, instead of the few
discovered.

Furthermore, in Iceland and South America, it has been found that,
during the last Heinrich event, the glaciers broke up and moved. This
suggests that the Earth shook violently, causing North American, South
American and Icelandic glaciers to break up and slide away at the same
time.49 However, if all these glaciers slipped from their land
moorings and broke up at the same time, is it reasonable to suggest
that the Greenland glacier remained intact?

The argument raised against the global flood concept is that these
layers were laid down during the Ice Age, 10,000 or more years ago,
and cannot support Velikovsky's theory. This is based on data from
deep sea cores which use foraminifera,50 to date the sediments.
Different species of foraminifera represent different evolutionary
stages. By finding different species at different sediment levels, one
can conclude that much time has passed for the new form to evolve.
However, an investigation of this evidence revealed that the same
foraminifera fossils, when found in different layers of sea sediment,
were given different names or placed into different families; by
changing their names, they became different species. However, if they
were found in the same sedimentary level of oceanic ooze, they were
represented as belonging to the same species. To get around this
circular reasoning, evolutionists suggest that this is really
"iterative evolution"--some foraminifera cyclically become extinct and
then re-evolve.51 This dating method interprets the findings to always
fit the model, via circular reasoning. More than a dating method, it
is a confirmation method; like in other dating schemes, what is
expected is found.

In agreement with previously noted evidence from the North American
continent, the above data indicates that much of the icecap broke up
suddenly, moving en masse into the ocean, and, thus, supports a
global, tidal, oceanic inundation of the land.

Europe and Asia

As mentioned earlier, the size of the icecap was so great that the
ocean was a few hundred feet lower than at present. This means that
the Strait of Dover, which links the English Channel with the North
Sea, used to be a landbridge between England and France. Alec J.
Smith, a geologist, studied the topography of this region and
concluded that an immense flood had flowed down the Strait of Dover
and had carved out a series of deeps, or canyon-like formations, the
largest being the Hurd Deep, which is over 93 miles long and, in some
places, over 330 feet deeper than the surrounding sea floor. Another
deep, containing banks, is located near the eastern end of the English
Channel. Smaller tidal current features are found above the deeps,
which indicates that the flood was created before the strait was
filled as an arm of the North Sea. Many of these paleovalleys connect
with the Seine, Somme and Bthune Rivers, and the Spithead Channel.

This flood system is assumed to be quite recent, though its age is
unknown. The erosion pattern of the eastern English Channel valleys is
similar to that of the channelled scablands of Washington and Idaho.
Smith does not invoke an ice dam to impound water since there were no
mountains in the North Sea to act as water barriers. He assumes that a
land barrier--formed by anticlines, downward-sloping, parallel folds
in stratified rock--crossed the Dover Strait and then water built up
behind it. This is highly unlikely, because anticlines are made up of
arch-shaped walls of rock. Such rock would breach gradually and the
water would be released gradually in a stream. Over time, the stream
would cut a gorge into the anticlines so that the dammed water would
not build up higher than the bottom of the gorge. Furthermore, the
impounded water would have access to the North Sea. It is more
probable that the water would flow back to the sea at this point.

Supporting this is the clear evidence of a "broad erosional feature
extending northward from the Lobourg paleovalley [in the English
Channel at Dover] to a more elevated part of the North Sea floor,
south of the Dogger Bank [about 185 miles long and from 12 to 32 miles
wide]."52

Because the area behind the Hurd Deep is also long and deeper than the
surrounding sea bed, Smith interpreted this feature as one "created by
erosion as waters swept out of the North Sea, scouring the sea floor
toward the gap in the [anticlinal] barrier."53 What impounded
sufficient water behind this dam so that it would rush into the breach
to cut and scour the sea floor for 185 miles? If there was a lake
behind the barrier, lake water would empty from the surface downward
and not scour the sea floor. To scour the sea floor requires that the
water move en masse, which is not in accord with the gradual cutting
down of a barrier.

Smith claimed that the "creation of the banks of the [English]
Channel...was clearly post the events described here and reflects a
pattern which could only be created after the opening of the [Strait
of Dover]. The sediment distribution pattern is, likewise, a
reflection of very recent events."54 (Emphasis added.)

When whales become beached and die, either whole carcasses or bones
decompose and are washed away. Fossilized whale remains, found inland
at Antwerp, Belgium, directly opposite the 185-mile-long scoured sea
bed in the North Sea, support the oceanic wave hypothesis. The number
of whales at Antwerp was so great that, in discussing their numbers, a
paleontologist drew the conclusion that "recent whales, whose true
habitat is in oceans, are almost invariably doomed if they strayed
into the North Sea."55 This discovery affirms that an immense flood
hit the English Channel and concurs with that of the midwestern United
States, where large numbers of whale remains were left in the wake of
floods.

Velikovsky described the Cromer forest beds in Norfolk, England:

In Cromer, Norfolk, close to the North Sea coast, and in other
places on the British Isles, "forest beds" have been found. The
name derives from the presence of a great number of stumps of
trees, once supposed to have rooted and grown where they are not
found. Many of the stumps are in upright positions and their roots
are often interlocked. Today, these forests are recognized as
having drifted: The roots do not end in small fibers, but are
broken off, in most cases one to three feet from the trunk.

Bones of [60] species of mammals, besides birds, frogs and snakes,
were found in the forest-bed of Norfolk. Among the mammals were the
saber-toothed tiger, huge bear, mammoth, straight-tusked elephant,
hippopotamus, rhinoceros, bison and modern horse....Two exclusively
northern species--glutton and must-ox--were found among animals
from temperate and tropical latitudes....

Immediately above the forest-bed, there is a freshwater deposit
with arctic plants--arctic willow and dwarf birch--and land
shells....

Astarte borealis and other mollusk shells are found "in the
position of life with both valves united." These species "are
arctic, but, as the bed seems in other places to contain Ostrea
edulis, [a mollusk] which requires a temperate sea, the evidence is
conflicting as to the climate."

What could have brought together, or in quick succession, all these
animals and plants from the tundra of the Arctic Circle and from
jungles of the tropics, from lush oak forest and from desert, from
lands of many latitudes and altitudes, from freshwater lakes and
rivers, and from salt seas of the north and south?56

Velikovsky proposed the existence of an immense tidal flood. This is
confirmed by the whale remains found in this mass of animal debris. H.
N. Hutchinson said, "Remains of the gigantic sperm whale...are found
in the forest-bed of Cromer...[and] remains of the curious narwhal,
with its long, spear-like tusk, are found in the Norfolk
forest-bed."57

Charles Worth said that fish "were depicted by Paleolithic man...and
their remains are found in cave and other deposits, and interglacial
accumulation, e.g., the Cromer forest-bed."58

According to James Geikie, "[b]elow a deposit of till at Woodhill
Quarry, near kilmaurs in Ayrshire (Scotland), the remains of mammoths
and reindeer and certain marine shells have, several times, been
detected....[I]n the valley of the Endrick, about four miles from Loch
Comma...an antler was found, associated with marine shells...."59

According to Asa Elfstrm, a catastrophic flood flowed down from
northern Sweden and washed away the surface soil, leaving a vast delta
of bare rocks across the region.60 Like other scientists, he claimed
that an ice dam burst and left this bare cobble field behind.
Nonetheless, south of Lapland, in the provinces of Halland and
Gotland, Sweden, whale remains were found:

At a recent meeting of the Scientific Society of Upsala, [Sweden,]
Dr. C. Aurivillius read a paper on the skeleton of the so-called
Swedenborg whale...discovered last November in the province of
Halland, in a layer of marl [a loose, unconsolidated surface
mixture of clay and calcium carbonate derived from and including
shell fragments] 50 feet above the sea. Remains of this species of
whale have only been found once before,...early [in the] last
century, when some parts of one were discovered in the province of
Western Gotland, 330 feet above the sea, and 70 miles inland. It
was at first believed that they were the bones of some giant, but
it is said that Swedenborg discovered their true nature.61
(Emphasis added.)

Horworth also stated that an entire whale species was reported at
Stockholm, Sweden: "[Testaceans were] found [70] feet above the sea
level, being identical with those found in the adjacent sea...."62

A 1925 New York Times article reported:

The skeleton of a prehistoric whale has been discovered [24] miles
inland from the North Sea coast, imbedded [six] feet down in a bog
of North Schleswig.

Experts of the Institute of Geological Research, at Copenhagen,
have taken charge of the excavations of the skeleton, hoping to
find an answer to the puzzle of how the giant sea mammal got so far
from the sea. They advance the theory that some great tidal wave
may have swept the whale inshore several thousand years ago, since
the skeleton is pronounced to be of a species long since extinct.63

A bog, of course, like the deluge lakes of Africa, would be the last
place in which an aquatic life form would survive before the bog
became a mire of mud; therefore, if a tidal wave deposited whales on
continents, they would have to be found in surface lakes, ponds and
bogs, for example. However, whales would, more commonly, be found
stranded on land.

In Vestspitzbergen, Norway, a whale was discovered in the permafrost,
a physical impossibility based on geological uniformitarianism.
Permafrost is as hard as rock and will not allow a floating whale to
enter it. D. L. Dineley and P. A. Garrett reported the following:

The ice core of the moraine rises to about 20 feet above the
high-water mark and the dirt cover is probably about [three] feet
thick. Near the top of the ice core, and within the adjacent
moraine, the bones and (now decomposing) flesh and [the] skin of a
whale were found. Melting of the ice and the removal of moraine
seem to be uncovering more of the carcass each year and, from what
could be seen, much of the body behind the shoulder
region...remain[s]. Several of the posterior vertebrae are exposed
on the upper surface of the moraine, so that their dorsal surfaces
have suffered some damage. The head and shoulders have been carried
away during...erosion of the moraine, which consists...largely of
water-worn pebbles and small boulders, and muck containing `raised
beach' fossils....The length of the existing part of the animal is
about 30 feet, so that its length when complete must have been
about 60 feet.

The question of how and when the animal became entombed is a
difficult one.64

According to Horworth, [?] Lamont discovered whale bones and driftwood
"several miles inland [from the Spitsbergen Islands, north of Norway]
and, high above [the] high-water mark, skeletons of whales [30] to
[40] feet above the sea level."65

Whale remains similar to those in the permafrost of Vestspitzbergen,
Norway, were also found in Siberia. Horworth reported that N. A. E.
Nordenskjold had described whales found in Siberia:

Special attention was drawn to a skeleton belonging to the Balaena
mysticetus [because it was] still partially covered with skin, and
[because it had] deep red, almost fresh, flesh adhering to those
parts of it. [The whale] was frozen in the ground. This skeleton
lay at a place where the dune sand had recently been washed away.66

Horworth also reported the discovery of marine fauna all across
Siberia:

Similar evidence is forthcoming from the deposits where the
Mammoths' remains occur further inland, and where we find marine
shells which [give] evidence [of] the former presence of the ocean.
This was known to Pallas, and has been confirmed amply by
Middendorf and others. Thus, [Pallas] describes the occurrence near
Ust Tatarskoi on the Irtish of numerous shells, mostly fossilized,
but others preserving their horny pellicles, and, in some cases,
retaining traces of the mollusk itself. In the same layers were
found the bones of elephants and many other animals. [He adds,]
"This undoubtedly...has come from a great inundation...." Pallas,
himself, found several remains of both elephants and buffaloes
(bison and musk sheep?) in situ, and also heads of great fishes....

Nordenskjold gives figures and the following list (omitted) of
sub-fossil marine shells from the Yenissei tundra, where Mammoths'
remains abound....Murchison describes Pleistocene marine shells as
occurring a long way south of the White Sea. Similar marine shells
are found mixed with Mammoths' remains in the valley of the lower
Somme and in the deposits of the English Channel.67 (Emphasis
added.)

According to Gideon A. Mantel, Zeuglodon whale remains had been found
near Bordeau and in Malta.68 H. N. Hutchinson reported finding a few
Squalodon whale teeth in Italian cave deposits.69 He also said that
cetaceans had been found frequently "in the marine European deposits
of Miocene age--especially in the Vienna Basin, many parts of France
and the crag formations of Antwerp and Suffolk."70

Boucher de Perthes, who excavated in Picardy, France, found that above
the coarse sand characteristic of the Ice Age's diluvian period--sand
containing the bones of mammoths, woolly rhinoceroses, the ancient
bison, the ancient wild horse, elks, cave lions and other animals--lay
the topmost layer, dated as modern. "It consisted of a fine sand in
which innumerable shellfish had been buried."71 (Emphasis added.)

A cave in France's Vzre Valley, located about 65 miles from the
Atlantic Ocean and 250 miles from the Mediterranean Sea, revealed
chipped flint, reindeer antlers, human skeletons and "shells of marine
snails, pierced with holes."72 Apparently, the flood survivors found
these marine snails on the surface and pierced them to make necklaces.
This indicates that the snails were brought inland by a flood.

What then of Siberian topography? Does it exhibit the same
characteristics as the Washington scablands? Victor R. Baker, Geraldo
Benito and Alexey N. Rudoy described evidence of catastrophic
superflooding in the Altay Mountains of southcentral Siberia. They
claimed that this topography verified that this was the site for the
Earth's greatest flood. Originally, it was thought that the landforms
were formed by glaciation, but further examination showed
flood-scoured channelways, gigantic bars or ripples and gravel wave
trains. The investigators estimated that the impounded water flow over
the surface was 7 kilometers wide. So as to achieve this amount of
flooding, the water level behind the ice dam had to be more than 1,900
meters (over 6,270 feet) deep. This, I submit, is hardly credible. The
force and pressure of this much water would float an icecap dam long
before it achieved a depth of 6,000 feet; and, if the 7-kilometer-wide
dam of the scablands could not hold back a 2,000-foot-deep lake, a
similar dam would not hold back a 6,000-foot-deep lake (three times
the depth and pressure). The peak flow was estimated at 18 million
cubic meters of water per second!73

Thus, there is evidence of oceanic flooding across the entire northern
region of the Earth, provided by the presence of whale remains and
other marine organisms found in inland regions. If the floods
originally flowed north from their equatorial ocean basins and into
the Arctic Ocean, then flowed back over the land, they would produce
the above-mentioned topography and would generate the burial of
Pleistocene fauna hetacombs. However, if such ocean floods flowed into
the Arctic, they would carry along an immense amount of detritus. The
Arctic Ocean would still retain this load of material and, compared to
the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans, would contain greater depths
of sediment. This has been proven: "The Arctic [Ocean] contains four
depressions of oceanic depth which, unlike other oceans, hold large
volumes of sediment."74 (Emphasis added.)

Why should only the Arctic Ocean basin be covered by great amounts of
sediment if these were produced, by uniformitarian processes, in
exactly the same way as in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans?
The Arctic Ocean is no older than the other oceans. Only a global,
oceanic tidal wave, flowing northward, would carry along additional
sediment to be added to that of the Arctic Ocean.

Due to recent findings from Greenland ice cores, scientists have
concluded that the temperature of the Atlantic Ocean has fluctuated
greatly, even wildly, throughout the Ice Ages and, perhaps, throughout
the last interglacial period. The fluctuations occurred over very
short periods of time.

Two theories explain the fluctuations: The first theory claims that
the ocean currents changed direction over different timespans. The
second theory suggests that every temperature fluctuation may have
been caused by glacial floods pouring from the icecap. If an almost
endless succession of floods cooled the oceans, then the detritus and
sediment which poured into the Arctic basin would have left a high
amount of sediment in the Atlantic. However, compared to the Arctic
Ocean, the North Atlantic seabed contains less sediment.

The evidence speaks eloquently for a massive inflow of water carrying
sediment into the Arctic Ocean and shows that this sediment could only
have been produced by an oceanic tidal wave. This evidence also
contradicts the impact concept as the cause of such a flood. If a
comet or an asteroid fell into the Atlantic, Pacific or Indian oceans,
it would remove much of the impacted ocean sediment load, causing the
sediment to overflow into the surrounding ocean basins. An impact in
the Atlantic Ocean would have created a tidal wave that would send
sediment into the Arctic Ocean, as well as into the southern Pacific
and Indian oceans. This has not been observed. An impact in the
Pacific or Indian oceans would create a tidal wave that would dump
sediment into the Arctic through the Bering Strait and additional
sediment into the southern Atlantic. The only type of impact that
would affect all the oceans would either affect the rotation of the
Earth or tilt the Earth's geographic axis so as to cause the waters in
the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic oceans to rush away from the equator
and toward the poles. I suggest that the evidence of little sediment
in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans, compared with that found
in the Arctic Ocean, points unambiguously to the concept Velikovsky
outlined in Worlds in Collision--not to a single impact event.

Muck found filled to great depth with Pleistocene animals and smashed
forests, forming an annulus at the northernmost reaches of the
northern continents around the Arctic Ocean, corroborates this. Where
does so much detritus come from? According to an article in Pursuit:

A world map of the distribution of this frozen soil and muck
reveals several very interesting things, the most outstanding
aspect being that it lies low, on level plains or tablelands.
Unless it was caused by some cosmic forces that we have not yet
detected, it would appear to be a subaerial [flood] deposit derived
from massive erosion of higher grounds and with steeper slopes.
However, its depth in some places, and over enormous areas, has
always caused even the most open-minded geologists to boggle. The
Russians, who own the major land areas covered by this substance,
have conducted prolonged studies on it for half a century and have,
in some places, drilled down to over 4,000 feet, but still without
reaching solid rock. The conundrum is, of course, [H]ow do you get
that thickness of what is manifestly surface-derived material if it
is the result of run-off?75

All the supposed glacial floods described above flowed south but did
not generate either the amount or depth of muck found around the
Arctic Ocean. Again, this indicates that the original flood flowed
northward and dropped most of its debris and sediment into and around
the Arctic Ocean. The backflow traveled southward, breaking up the
icecap, over the land and into other oceans. This backflow has been
described as the floods occurring from the Washington scablands to
Siberia's Altay Mountains.

However, this backflow carried with it less massive sediment
particles, or loess. The loess is found south of the Pleistocene
icecaps as a broad band across Europe, Asia, the United States and
parts of southern Canada--between the 40 and 70 north latitudes.
Southern hemispheric loess deposits are found in the Argentinean
pampas, southwestern Australia, New South Wales and New Zealand. The
band of loess in the northern hemisphere is broken in many places and
is missing from the far eastern end of Siberia, which experienced the
largest flood. However, south of the Siberian flood, in China, some of
the largest loess deposits on Earth are found. This, of course, would
be congruent with a large Siberian flood.

There are two theories for the formation of the loess: The
establishment consensus theory, based on uniformitarian concepts,
suggests that loess originated from glaciers and was laid down by wind
currents over tens of thousands of years. However, boulders too large
to have been carried by the wind are found all through loess deposits.
Aeolian theory advocates suggest that, after the loess was deposited
by wind currents, massive glacial floods moved it to new areas--thus
explaining the nature of boulders, freshwater clams and snails found
in deposits.

However, there is decisive evidence that the loess was not laid down
gradually over tens of thousands of years. The loess contains Ice Age
animal remains. Since loess had to have been the source of herbivore
and snail plant food, then plants and trees had to have grown on the
loess over long timespans. Today, in rainfall and temperate regions,
grass, shrubs and trees are found growing in the loess' top layer--as
can be seen in photographs taken of these regions. Loess is well known
as a promoter of plant growth and is the source of China's river
valley fertility. Therefore, over time, the loess soil in which these
plants grew would produce a rich, dark humus or loam throughout the
entire deposit. Over these large timespans, as the loess built up,
layer upon layer of vegetation would decay into humus to be buried
gradually by new aeolian-borne loess. But this is denied by the
evidence. As J. K. Charlesworth pointed out in 1957, there is "some
dissent [with the aeolian theory of loess formation] because the
entire profile should resemble a humus horizon, [yet] the tubes [in
the loess] have scarcely a trace of vegetation."76

Even if some of the loess, after being built up, had been moved by
gigantic glacial floods to its present locations, it would be filled
with humus and plant remains from top to bottom. What the aeolian
advocates expect one to accept as probable is that glacial floods
washed away the loess from the humus and vegetative remains, leaving
these behind. Only by ignoring the evidence which supports a strictly
fluvial origin for loess have the aeolian proponents been able to
maintain their theory. No aeolian, gradualistic production of loess
will create deposits nearly devoid of humus and other decayed
vegetation, even by invoking later floods.

Before any critics address the question of the loess, they must
explain how fertile material, which built up year after year during
the Ice Age, would create a strata hundreds of feet deep, either moved
by floods or filled with humus and decayed plant remains. They must
also explain how only the loess was washed away by glacial floods.

Once again, regarding marine life and remains found in continental
lakes or seas, if the ocean carried whales onto and deep into the
continents, it would also carry other forms of sea life; wherever
these life forms fell into lakes or inland seas and could adjust to
new conditions, they would survive, reproduce and be present today.
Lake Baikal, in eastern Siberia, is the largest freshwater lake in the
world. Although it has a smaller surface area than the Great Lakes, it
is so deep that it contains more water than the Great Lakes combined.
Lake Baikal is located 1,000 miles from the Pacific Ocean and 1,000
miles from the Arctic Ocean. According to Kelly and Dachille, "Lake
Baikal, in Siberia, also contains herring, salmon, marine sponges and
seals."77 They also said,

The fact that lakes like Baikal...are very deep would add weight to
the [oceanic flood] theory because large quantities of ocean water
could have remained for a long time in these lakes with a very slow
change to freshwater. This would have allowed the marine forms to
have lived and to have adjusted themselves gradually to the new
conditions. Then, too, salt water, being heavier than freshwater,
might be concentrated at the bottom of these lakes.78

Although a lake, over time, may fill up mostly with freshwater, an
island sea would preserve its salinity.

Kelly and Dachille also showed that the landlocked Caspian Sea of Asia
has waters whose contents and dissolved salts "are very [much] like
[that of] the ocean."79 Now, supposedly, the Caspian Sea has been cut
off from the ocean for many millions of years and receives its water
from rivers. Over these years, its original salinity should have
changed, however, the change is relatively small and bespeaks of a
great, recent inundation from the ocean. Kelly and Dachille also
showed that the Caspian Sea's "fauna bears distinct evidence of a
former, but recent, mingling of the ocean with its waters for it
includes salmon, herring and other ocean fish, with...porpoises and
seals."80

According to Alfred M. Rehwinkel, "The seals found [in Lake Baikal]
closely resemble [those] now found at Spitsbergen. It also seems
significant that very similar seals are found in the Caspian Sea.
Their remains have been found in the Aral Sea [in Soviet Central Asia,
east of the Caspian Sea] as well."81 In East Africa, Lake Tanganyika
is 4,700 feet deep and is far inland, forming the boundary between
Tanzania and Zaire. It contains marine jellyfish and gastropods
(snails) of a much earlier geological period. Kelly and Dachille
emphasized that "jellyfish and gastropods could scarcely have mounted
the falls of the Congo to get into Lake Tanganyika."82 Lake Onondaga,
one of the Finger Lakes in New York State, near Syracuse, is inhabited
by marine squids.83

More of this evidence will be presented in the following units on
South America, Australia and Antarctica.

South America

Whale fossils found at or near the surface of the Andes Mountains in
South America caused surprise in the scientific community. Mountains
rising from below the sea surface make the finding of such marine
fossils literally impossible. A group of whales and other marine
organisms must have died in the ocean, become bloated with gas and
floated on the surface water for weeks. Under ordinary circumstances,
such organisms become prey to other scavenging marine life and are
devoured. But even if we assume that this did not occur and that these
life forms settled to the bottom of the sea, scavenging organisms
still would have consumed the organic materials. One must assume that
silt gradually covered the bones left on the sea bed. The sea bed must
have been raised by tectonic action over millions of years, so as to
form the Andes Mountains. Although this is uniformitarian in
conception, meaning gradualistic, it is not uniformitarian in the
sense that each area moves up at a uniform rate. The ground twists,
bends and tilts repeatedly over millions of years, until there is
little left of the original fossil bones. This entire scenario is not
based on any reasonable, plausible or probable geological foundation.

As reported in The New York Times:

Scientists have found fossil whales and other marine animals in
mountain sediments in the Andes, indicating that the South American
mountain chain rose very rapidly from the sea....Nearly all the
fossils were embedded in surface rock and easy to pick up....Best
of all, despite weathering, many of the smallest fossils were
remarkably intact and will be easy to study....Assemblages
comparable to these are virtually unknown in the Andes, since
geological upthrusting generally destroys fossil beds.84

Oyster shell beds like those found all across the southern part of the
United States are also found in South America. These unfossilized
shells share the same ground level as the fossilized whales. According
to Charles H. Hapgood:

Not long after the appearance of Cuvier's great work, Professor
Charles Lyell was shown, in the Museum of the American
Philosophical Society at Philadelphia, a block of limestone from
Santas, in Brazil, obtained by Captain Elliott of the [United
States] Navy at about 1827.

The block contained a human skull, teeth and other bones, together
with fragments of shells, some of which still retained traces of
their original colors. Remains of several hundred other human
skeletons were dug out of similar...tufa at the same place, where
the presence of serpulae [shells] in the rock suggested that all
the remains were deposited through marine action, for, as Lyell
observed...the shell[s] would not have been brought so far inland
by natives for food. Dr. C. D. Meigs, who wrote an account of this
discovery, said:

"A question naturally arises as to the date of that catastrophe,
which enclosed several hundred individuals in that tufa of the Rio
Santas....

It seems unlikely that these remains were formally buried by
sorrowing friends. It is unlikely that so solid a stone should have
been formed at so great a distance from the sea....No doubt they
are coexistent with the emerged land; they are not to be considered
as the results of human industry.

The shore of the Atlantic must have formerly swept nearly in a line
with these remarkable deposits....Within this bed, or nearer than
it to the sea [as in the southern United States], are found fossil
bones of elephants, which cannot be so old as the unfossilized
oyster shells, since they could not have been fossilized [before]
the existence of the soil out of which they are dug, unless you
consider them as boulders, which is inadmissible."85

The problems with this discovery are similar to those of the whale
find in Lompoc, California. Whales should not be found, largely
intact, in the Andes Mountains; the raising of the mountains should
have obliterated them and only small organisms would survive the
twisting, bending and shaking inherent in earthquakes that supposedly
lifted these mountains to their present heights over many millions of
years. Earthquakes shake and shatter rock, and the thousands of
earthquakes needed to lift the Andes Mountains to their present
heights would never leave such a large assemblage of whales and other
marine life forms in such an extraordinarily good condition.

With respect to the loess or Pampas mud deposits in South America,
Alcide d'Orbigny stated that they were laid down by a flood
catastrophe which destroyed the megafauna and rapidly lifted the Andes
to their present heights:

It would seem that one cause destroyed the terrestrial animals of
South America and that this cause is to be found in great
dislocations of the ground caused by the upheaval of the
Cordilleras.

If not, it is difficult to conceive, on the one hand, the sudden
and fortuitous destruction of the great animals which inhabited the
American continents, and on the other, the vast deposit of [Pampean
mud or loess].

I argue that this destruction was caused by an invasion of the
continent by water, a view which is completely en rapport with the
facts presented by the great Pampas deposit, which was clearly laid
down by water.

How, otherwise, can we account for this complete destruction and
homogeneity of the Pamp[ean] deposits containing bones? I
find...evident proof of this in the immense number of bones and of
entire animals whose numbers are greatest at the outlets of the
valleys, as Mr. Darwin show[ed]....

This hypothesis necessitates that the Pampas mud was deposited
suddenly, as the result of violent floods of water which carried
off the soil and other superfluous debris, [mingling] them
together. This homogeneity of the soil in all parts of the Pampas,
even in places 200 leagues apart, is very remarkable.

These are not different strata differently colored, but a
homogeneous mass, which is more or less porous and shows no signs
of distinct stratification. The deposit is also of one uniform
color, as if it had been mixed in one muddy flood slightly tinted
by oxide or iron....

Another argument may be drawn from the fact that the Pampas mud is
identical in color and appearance with earth in which the fossil
remains occur in the caverns and fissures of Minas Gerais in
Brazil....86

The Pampean loess deposits, like those in Europe, Asia and America,
were supposedly laid down over many thousands of years and, therefore,
should be loaded from top to bottom with vegetative loam; but such is
not the case.

Australia

Charles Laseron reported that, "whale and dolphin remains have been
found in many places, notably in the Grange Burn area, near Hamilton,
and at Beaumaris, near Melbourne."87 He also said, "Teeth and earbones
of extinct sperm whales are very common...."88

The ridges in the Simpson Desert Outback, which are hundreds of miles
long, are one of the strangest topographical features found in central
Australia.89 These ridges are not blown into the normal barkan sand
dunes; they are covered and held in position by small rocks and
pebbles. What would scour a desert floor to move billions of tons of
rock debris and detritus into ridges running parallel to each other
for hundreds of miles? Where the ridges bend, one can trace the ridge
path as it gradually changes direction, over many miles, from north to
southwest, as would be produced by an immense flow of water.

The ridges occupy approximately 475,000 square miles. They run
southward, then veer slightly to the southwest, as if the
above-mentioned flood had been influenced by the Coriolis force. It
appears that an immense oceanic tide, flowing south over Australia,
scoured the land and left over a thousand ridges in its wake. Wind
would never create long ridges of such material running for hundreds
of miles. The whale remains and loess deposits described above are
found south of this terrain.90 Ridges pointing southward to the sites
of whale bones and loess deposits make the concept of an immense flood
almost certainly correct.

Antarctica

If an oceanic tide debouched itself upon the Antarctic continent, then
some evidence of such an episode would exist. Instead of debouching
into an ocean basin such as the Arctic Ocean, the tidal deluge would
flow onto a single continent, carrying with it sea silt and all manner
of marine life. If these materials were quickly frozen at or near the
surface, this matter would be encased in ice and would flow gradually
with the ice back to the sea. In fact, evidence of this was
discovered; both sponges and giant fish are found in Antarctica's Ross
Ice Shelf:91

This discovery consists of a number of corpses of giant fish,
together with other marine specimens, which they found on the
surface of an ice sheet over 100 feet thick and more than a mile
from its seaward edge. The fish were up to six feet in length and
well preserved, though some had lost their heads [as had the giant
fish found in Siberian muck] and had been pecked by skua gulls....

Interest quickens when we learn that no less than six of these
large fish were found by the two Scott Expeditions over [50] years
ago, five in [1902 to 1903] and one in 1911. Five of them were on
top of the ice and headless, and quite recognizable though
obviously a long time dead.

The sixth was caught by accident in the spring of 1903 and was also
headless.92

Other explorers also discovered small "schools" of headless fish, on
the Ross Ice Shelf, often attached to rocks..93

A few problems cannot be explained by gradualistic processes. In
addition to sponges, which are bottom-dwelling organisms, and fish,
which live from the surface water to great depths, large crystals of
Glauber's salt were also found. Now, if the ice scraped the sea bed to
trap the sponges, they would not have been found on the surface of the
ice shelf. The Ross Ice Shelf is being built up on the top by snowfall
at the edge of the sea, but, even if this melted away in the summer,
it does not explain the fish, which could easily swim away from the
gradually advancing ice. The headless fish were apparently decapitated
when they struck land, as they moved with the current.

The Ross Ice Shelf is also moving outward, away from the continent and
calving off huge pieces of itself as icebergs. If, in 1903, the Scott
Expedition found fish in the ice, and, over the last 30 or so years,
other icebound fish were found, this clearly indicates that the ice
was exuded from the Antarctic continent, which must have contained the
fish. In essence, it is known that fish, sponges and salt crystals are
found throughout the ice. This points to a flood which deposited these
organisms and material deeper inland, and which, as ice under
pressure, moves toward the sea.

Saline water is being discharged, from beneath the Antarctic glacier,
into a dry valley:

A saline discharge from beneath Taylor Glacier has abundant halite
(NaCl), aragonite (CaCO3) and other salts. The quantities and
varieties of salts in the discharge, and in lakes and soils of
other places in Victoria Land, are too great to reflect present
weathering. No simple origin of all salts is indicated.94

Lakes freezing over and receiving either snow from precipitation or
windblown snow from the glacier, which then melts in the Antarctic
summer, would be mixed with freshwater over thousands of years. This
would dilute the content of such lakes. Victoria Land lakes reflect
this.

How does one explain not only the saline discharge, but the fact that
these salts are found in inland lakes and in the soils of other places
in Victoria Land? The implication is clear: The salts reflect the sea
water trapped on the land, which either settled into the soil or was
kept in lakes. The scientists' general belief is that the Antarctic
icecap was created by snowfall over millions of years. Snow melts to
freshwater. Over four Ice Ages, the icecap should have melted many
times and washed away any salt on the land or in the lakes; thus, why
is there so much salt in this subglacial stream? According to Robert
F. Black et al., "The total volume of the discharge, which may not be
all salt-rich, is 3,000 [to] 6,000 cubic meters."95 In this case, an
immense amount of salt has been issuing from the Taylor Glacier for
thousands of years. Since the geologists admit that weathering of rock
from the interior of the continent will not generate this much salt,
one is left with the alternative that this salt-rich flow stems from
sea water trapped far inland.

Salt seeps down and out of sea ice. According to Edwin Muller, "Sea
ice is salty when it first forms, but it loses its salt and, in six
months, is fit to drink. In a year, it cannot be distinguished from
freshwater ice."96 Therefore, the great outsurging of water with salt
in solution is fully compatible with the concept of an oceanic tidal
incursion over the Antarctic continent.

If much of the Antarctic ice formed recently, the youthful nature of
the ice should be clearly discernible. John G. Weihaupt, a geologist,
came to the defense of the Oronteus Fineus map of 1531 and the
Mercator map of 1538, which depict the Antarctic continental features
with remarkable accuracy.97

He was severely criticized for the suggestion that there had been
extremely recent deglaciation of this continent's ice sheet. However,
"Weihaupt responded with a massive bibliography supporting the idea of
recent changes in the Antarctic ice cover."98 He showed that other
researchers have suggested that the East Antarctic Ice Sheet may also
have been deglaciated during the Pleistocene.99 Though the dating does
not conform precisely with Velikovsky's theory, the evidence for
recent reimplacement of new ice in Antarctica is in line with it.

Around the Earth, inland marine organisms, sediment such as muck and
loess, and unusual topographical features indicate an oceanic flood in
recent times.

1 See Immanuel Velikovsky (A), Worlds in Collision (New York, 1950),
pp. 148-152 and Immanuel Velikovsky (B), Earth in Upheaval (New York,
1955), pp. 46-49.

2 Reginald Daly, "Rise and Fall of Floodwaters--Historical Record,"
Earth's Most Challenging Mysteries (Nutley, New Jersey, 1975), p. 117.

3 Joseph Davidovits and Margie Morris, The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved
(New York, 1988), pp. 21-22.

4 Richard C. Hoagland, The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of
Forever (Berkeley, California, 1992), pp. 361-362.

5 David H. Childress, Lost Cities and Ancient Mysteries of Africa and
Arabia (Stelle, Illinois, 1989), p. 128.

6 Derek Ager, The New Catastrophism: The Importance of the Rare Event
in Geological History (New York, 1993), pp. 179-180.

7 James Trifil, "Whale Feet," Discover (May, 1991): 45-48.

8 Allan O. Kelly and Frank Dachille, "Tunisia and Algeria," Target
Earth (Carlsbad, California, 1953), p. 168.

9 Henry H. Horworth (A), The Mammoth and the Flood (London, England,
1887), pp. 321-322.

10 Ibid., p. 297.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid., p. 365.

13 William R. Corliss, Science Frontiers (Glen Arm, Maryland, 1984),
p. 217.

14 Henry H. Horworth (B), "Recent Changes in Circumpolar Lands,"
Nature 5 (1871): 163.

15 Velikovsky (B), op. cit., pp. 46-48.

16 Ibid., pp. 48-49.

17 Kelley and Dachille, op. cit., p. 172.

18 Frederic B. Jueneman, "Workers Find Whale in Diatomaceous Earth
Quarry," Chemical and Engineering News 54 (October 11, 1976): 40.

19 Stephen Jay Gould, "Toward the Vindication of Punctual Changes,"
Catastrophes and Earth History: The New Uniformitarianism, eds. W. A.
Beggren and J. A. Van Couvering (Princeton, New Jersey, 1984), pp.
17-18.

20 John Ledyard, John Ledyard's Journey Through Russia and Siberia,
ed. Stephen D. Watrous (Madison, Wisconsin, 1966), p. 172.

21 J. K. Charlesworth, The Quaternary Era with Special Reference to
its Glaciation I (London, England, 1957), p. 440-45.

22 Velikovsky (B), op. cit., p. 42.

23 Warren C. Hunt, "Catastrophic Termination of the Last Wisconsin Ice
Advance: Observations in Alberta and Idaho," Bulletin of Canadian
Petroleum Geology 25 (1977): 468.

24 Ibid.

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid., p. 119.

27 Mark L. Lord and Alan E. Kehew, "Sedimentology and Paleohydrology
of Glacial-lake Outburst Deposits in Southeastern Saskatchewan and
Northwestern North Dakota," Geographical Society of America Bulletin
99 (November, 1987): 672.

28 Isaac and Janet Asimov, Frontiers II (New York, 1993), p. 110-111.
Also see John Shaw, "Drumlins, Sub-glacial Melt Water Floods and Ocean
Responses," Geology 17 (September, 1989): 853-856.

29 Scott Fields, "Megafloods at Ice Age's End," Earth: the Science of
Our Planet (May, 1994), pp. 12-13.

30 C. Warren Hunt, Environment of Violence (Calgary, Alberta, Canada,
1990), pp. 117-119.

31 J. Shaw, "Book Review of Drumlin Symposium," Quaternary Research 30
(1988): 354.

32 Joseph M. Trefthen and John N. Harris, "A Fossiliferous Esker-like
Deposit," American Journal of Science 238 (1940): 408.

33 P. Kropotkin, "On the Asar of Finland," Report of the British
Association--1897 (London, England, 1897): 648.

34 Henry H. Horworth (C), "The Asar or Osar of Scandinavia and
Finland," Geological Magazine 35 (1898): 200.

35 Robert D. Jarrett and Harold E. Malde, "Paleodischarge of the Late
Pleistocene Bonneville Flood, Snake River, Idaho, Computed from New
Evidence," Geological Society of America Bulletin 99 (July, 1987):
127.

36 Hunt, op. cit., p. 126.

37 Ibid.

38 Hunt, op. cit., pp. 456-467.

39 Velikovsky (B), op. cit., pp. 1-3.

40 Paul R. Carlson and Herman A. Karl, "Development of Large Submarine
Canyons in the Bering Sea, Indicated by Morphologic, Seismic and
Sedimentologic Characteristics," Geological Society of America
Bulletin 100 (October, 1988): 1594.

41 Ibid.

42 J. W. Dawson, "Some Unsolved Problems in Geology," Science 2
(1883): 190.

43 Charles S. Gwynne, "Swell and Swale Pattern of the Mankato Lobe of
the Wisconsin Drift Plain in Iowa," Journal of Geology 50 (1942):
50ff.

44 Stephen Jay Gould, "When the Unorthodox Prevails," New Scientist 79
(1978): 942.

45 V. R. Baker, "Paleohydrology and Sedimentology of Lake Missoula
Flooding in Eastern Washington," Geological Society of America Special
Paper 144 (1973): 79ff.

46 Douglas E. Cox, "Drumlins and Diluvial Currents," Creation Research
Society Quarterly (the CRSQ) 16 (1979): 154.

47 Mark Maslin, "Waiting for the Polar Meltdown," New Scientist
(September 4, 1993): 39.

48 Ibid., p. 40.

49 Richard Monastersky, "Staggering Through the Ice Ages: What Made
the Planet Careen Between Climate Extremes?," Science News 146 (July
30, 1994): 74-76.

50 Taxonomic Note: Foraminiferans (formerly foraminifera) are
protozoans of the rhizopodan order Foraminiferida (formerly
Foraminifera).

51 T. Tosk, "Foraminifers in the Fossil Record: Implications for an
Ecological Zonation Model," Origins 15 (1988): 8-18.

52 Alec J. Smith, "A Catastrophic Origin for the Paleovalley System of
the Eastern English Channel," Geology 64 (1985): 72.

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid., p. 73.

55 A. Brawer, General Paleontology (Chicago, Illinois, 1959), p. 13.

56 Velikovsky (B), op. cit., pp. 56-58.

57 H. N. Hutchinson, "Extinct Whales and Wombats," Extinct Monsters
and Creatures of Other Days (New York, 1911), p. 300.

58 Charlesworth, op. cit., p. 823.

59 James Geikie, The Great Ice Age, 3rd ed. (London, England, 1885),
pp. 149-150. See also Ignatius Donelly, Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and
Gravel, reprint (New York, 1970), p. 50.

60 Asa Elfstrm, "The Bldakatj Boulder Delta, Lapland, Northern
Sweden," Geografiska Annaler, Series A 64A-65A (1982-1983): 201-225.

61 "Whale Bones 330 Feet Above Sea Level," Nature 38 (1888): 134.

62 Horworth (B), op. cit., pp. 162-163.

63 "Prehistoric Whale's Skeleton Found 24 Miles From the Sea," The New
York Times [New York] (December 9, 1925): p. 1.

64 D. L. Dineley and P. A. Garrett, "Whale Remains in Glacial Ice,"
Nature 183 (1959): 272.

65 Horworth (B), op. cit.

66 Horworth (A), op. cit., p. 93.

67 Ibid., p. 188.

68 Hutchinson, op. cit., p. 299.

69 Ibid., p. 300.

70 Ibid.

71 Herbert Wendt, In Search of Adam, trans. James Cleugh (Boston,
Massachusetts, 1956), p. 204.

72 Ibid., p. 212.

73 Victor R. Baker, Geraldo Benito and Alexey N. Rudoy,
"Paleohydrology of Late Pleistocene Superflooding, Altay Mountains,
Siberia," Science 259 (January 15, 1993): 348-350.

74 "The Four Oceans at the Top of the World," New Scientist 21 (1964):
7.

75 "Much About Muck," Pursuit 2 (October, 1969): 68-69.

76 Charlesworth, op. cit., p. 529.

77 Kelly and Dachille, op. cit., p. 172.

78 Ibid.

79 Ibid.

80 Ibid.

81 Alfred M. Rehwinkel, The Flood (St. Louis, Missouri, 1951), p. 189.

82 Kelly and Dachille, loc. cit.

83 John M. Clarke, "The Squids from Onondaga Lake, NY," Science 16
(1902): 947.

84 Malcolm W. Browne, "Whale Fossils High in Andes Show How Mountains
Rose from Sea," The New York Times (March 12, 1987): p. A 22.

85 Charles H. Hapgood, The Path of the Pole (Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, 1970), pp. 289-290.

86 Alcide d'Orbigny, Voyage dans l'Amrique Mridionale, 3 vols. (Paris,
France, 1842), from Hapgood, Ibid., pp. 293-294.

87 Charles Laseron, Ancient Australia (New York, 1969), pp. 225-226.

88 Ibid., p. 226.

89 Medford Taylor, "The Simpson Outback," National Geographic (April,
1992): 66, 67, 74.

90 "Loess," The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology 10
(New York, 1987), p. 164.

91 Samples sent for radiocarbon testing suggest a fish age of 1,000
years, but, as pointed out elsewhere, this dating method is not
reliable, especially in water-logged material.

92 D. L. Dineley and P. A. Garrett, "Whale Remains in Glacier Ice,"
Nature 183 (1959): 272.

93 "The Progress of Science: Discovery in Antarctica Puzzles
Scientists," Discovery 22 (February, 1961): 46 and "Fish Remains
Support Polar Ice Theory," Science Digest 49 (March, 1961): 30.

94 Robert F. Black et al., "Saline Discharge from Taylor Glacier,
Victoria Land, Antarctica," Journal of Geology 73 (1965): 175.

95 Ibid.

96 Edwin Muller, "The Top of the World," Our Amazing World of Nature:
Its Marvels & Mysteries (New York, 1969), p. 168.

97 John G. Weihaupt, "Historic Cartographic Evidence for Holocene
Changes in the Antarctic Ice Cover," EOS 65 (1984): 493.

98 Daniel J. Milton, "Antarctic Ice Cover," EOS 65 (1984): 1226.

99 Ibid.
_________________________________________________________________

References

1. file://localhost/www/sat/Catastrophism/candaa.html
2. http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/velikovskian/
3. file://localhost/www/sat/files/vaffair.html