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.

THEICEAGES 53<br />

bottom <strong>of</strong> the Ross Sea 6,000 years ago is not the date <strong>of</strong> the<br />

beginning <strong>of</strong> the last change <strong>of</strong> climate in Antarctica. A considerable<br />

time must have elapsed between the fall <strong>of</strong> temperature<br />

on the continent and the beginning <strong>of</strong> the deposition <strong>of</strong><br />

the glacial sediment. An icecap must grow to a considerable<br />

thickness before it can start to move <strong>by</strong> gravity, and can start<br />

to throw <strong>of</strong>f icebergs at the coast. Moreover, we must suppose<br />

that the change <strong>of</strong> climate must have been gradual at first. It<br />

seems reasonable, therefore, to allow a period <strong>of</strong> the order<br />

<strong>of</strong> about 10,000 years from the time the climate started to<br />

change to the time when the glacial sediment began to be<br />

deposited on the sea bottom. This is all the more likely since<br />

most <strong>of</strong> the coasts <strong>of</strong> Antarctica seem to be bounded <strong>by</strong> moun-<br />

tain chains, which the icecap would have to cross.<br />

Where do these considerations lead us? <strong>The</strong>y lead us to the<br />

conclusion that the melting <strong>of</strong> the great icecap in North<br />

America about 10,000 years ago and the beginning <strong>of</strong> the<br />

massive advance <strong>of</strong> the Antarctic icecap may have been<br />

roughly contemporary; that as one icecap melted, the other<br />

one grew.<br />

Let us pause to consider the implications <strong>of</strong> this astonish-<br />

ing conclusion. For one thing, it is clear that no such change<br />

as the growth or removal <strong>of</strong> even a considerable part <strong>of</strong> a<br />

continental icecap covering 6,000,000 square<br />

miles <strong>of</strong> the<br />

earth's surface can result from purely local causes. At present<br />

the Antarctic icecap pr<strong>of</strong>oundly affects the climate <strong>of</strong> the<br />

whole world. <strong>The</strong> great anticyclonic winds, blowing outward<br />

from the continent in all directions, influence the directions<br />

<strong>of</strong> ocean currents, and the climates <strong>of</strong> all the lands in the<br />

Southern Hemisphere. <strong>The</strong> North American icecap was<br />

equally a factor in k world climate. If one icecap appeared<br />

when the other disappeared, then both <strong>of</strong> these great con-<br />

temporary changes <strong>of</strong> climate must be supposed<br />

to have re-<br />

sulted from some cause operating on the globe as a whole.<br />

But what kind <strong>of</strong> cause could glaciate one continent and<br />

deglaciate the other? It seems quite clear that only a shift <strong>of</strong><br />

the crust <strong>of</strong> the earth such as would have moved America

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!