02.04.2013 Views

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

EARLIER DISPLACEMENTS OF CRUST 305<br />

seen, could account for the widespread Pleistocene extinc-<br />

tions.<br />

Speaking <strong>of</strong> more specific evidences, if the Alaskan Peninsula<br />

were near the North Pole, this would have meant the<br />

deglaciation <strong>of</strong> the Ross Sea and, indeed, <strong>of</strong> all that half <strong>of</strong><br />

Antarctica. What have the Ross Sea cores (Figure XI) to<br />

say? Core N-4 shows deposition <strong>of</strong> nonglacial sediment from<br />

110,000 to 130,000 years ago. This <strong>by</strong> itself provides some<br />

confirmation. Core N-5 shows deposition <strong>of</strong> nonglacial sediment<br />

from 130,000 to 180,000 years ago, implying that either<br />

the pole was situated in Alaska for a long time or else a still<br />

earlier polar position was so situated as to give Antarctica<br />

temperate conditions. Core N-g shows fine glacial sediment<br />

from about 120,000 to about 200,000 years ago. This, too,<br />

implies a climate warmer than the present, but the evidence<br />

is, obviously, inconclusive. Only a great many more cores<br />

from the same area can clarify these ambiguities.<br />

As I have mentioned, with each step backward into the<br />

past, the evidence decreases geometrically in quantity. <strong>The</strong><br />

available indications <strong>of</strong> a pole in Alaska amount to no more<br />

than suggestions for research, but, in my opinion, they can-<br />

not be disregarded on that account. It might be objected<br />

that if Alaska was at the pole only 100,000 years ago, there<br />

should be plentiful evidence <strong>of</strong> a continental glaciation in<br />

Alaska. We must not be too easily impressed <strong>by</strong> this objection.<br />

In the first place, there is a possibility that many <strong>of</strong> the<br />

evidences have been destroyed since that time <strong>by</strong> the glaciers<br />

<strong>of</strong> the Wisconsin period, and <strong>by</strong> the present glaciers. <strong>The</strong>n,<br />

there is the obvious possibility that evidences have been over-<br />

looked or misinterpreted, as seems to have occurred in Brit-<br />

ain. Finally, if widespread subsidence <strong>of</strong> land areas has oc-<br />

curred in the North Atlantic, so may<br />

it have occurred in the<br />

Pacific. Extensive evidence <strong>of</strong> a North Pacific land bridge<br />

(not to be confused with a Behring Strait connection) has<br />

been summarized <strong>by</strong> Dodson (115:373). How long Dodson's<br />

land connection may have lasted is not known, but it could<br />

conceivably have lasted until comparatively recent times.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!