+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 23

  1. #1
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Why do some top modern scientists believe that the so-called "Ice-Age" never happened? ...

    From the masterpiece, When the Earth Nearly Died, by scientists Alain and Delair:

    In Europe immense herds of diverse animals utterly vanished off the face of the Earth for no
    obvious biological reason...
    ...Coincident with this dreadful slaughter upon the land was the deposition of myriads of
    contemporary marine shells, and the stranding at great elevations of marine mammals, por-
    poises, walruses and seals.
    In Siberia, the picture is everywhere one of appalling disorder, carnage and wholesale
    destruction, with countless animals and plants frozen in positions of death ever since the day
    they perished. As a result, their remains are amazingly fresh-looking and are frequently
    indistinguishable from those of animals and plants that have died mere weeks ago.
    The magnitude of the biological extinctions achieved by the Deluge almost transcends the
    imagination. It annihilated literally billions of biological units of both sexes and every age
    indiscriminately. Only incredibly powerful flood waters operating world-wide could have
    achieved such results, and only a flood produced by the means previously suggested could
    have operated globally.
    ...it is astonishing that such an unscientific explanation ever came to be formulated, yet in a
    short time both it and the concept of immense thick ice-sheets descending from a hypotheti-
    cal northern mountain system, to cover all of northern and eastern North America and west-
    ern and northern Eurasia, was enthusiastically embraced...as virtually established fact.
    The evidence is perfectly unambiguous. Along with the removal of an Ice Age: like that
    which has been hitherto commonly envisaged, the evidence suggests that there is something
    seriously amiss with the last phases of standard geological chronology.
    Evidence thus converges from numerous directions to support the conclusion that, on the tes-
    timony of radio-carbon and other dating techniques, immense physical and climatic changes
    occurred on Earth some 11,000 years or so ago when an Ice Age that probably never
    existed came to an end, and an apparently uniformitarian regime was abruptly terminated.
    The gigantic worldwide tectonic disturbances of the late Pleistocene times occurred almost
    simultaneously on a near unimaginable scale precisely what could be expected from a
    powerful external influence but not from the Ice Age conditions conventionally believed to
    have existed then.
    Significantly, a drop in the strength of the Earths magnetic field appears to have occurred
    sometime between 13,750 and 12,350 years ago...attended by various other important
    changes, including earthquakes, vulcanism, water table fluctuations and large scale climatic
    variations. Of these, severe earthquakes in particular may even induce axial wobble, and
    polarity reversals.

    Studies have shown that at 10,178 BC, or over 12,000 years ago, the celestial Pole was
    inclined at an angle of 30 degrees from its present position. This in turn strongly suggests
    that the terrestrial axis then oriented differently from today.
    Archaeologists all over the world have realized that much of prehistory as written in the
    existing textbooks, is inadequate, some of it quite simply wrong
    What! No Ice Age which came and went, spreading over hundreds of thousands of years as
    all good geologists proclaim? No smothering ice sheets which enveloped the British Isles
    and much of the northern parts of the Continent, changed the climate to Arctic conditions -
    although, strangely enough, much of our fauna and flora survived despite it - and compelled
    all the survivors to flee? No lengthy periods of ice alternated with warm and even sub-tropi-
    cal climatical interludes? No. Nothing of the sort. There was admittedly a tremendous con-
    vulsion of nature, which had the most direful effect upon the inhabitants of Scandinavia, the
    British Isles, and those in Northern Asia. It resulted in giving us, it is true, bitter cold, tre-
    mendous floods, and cruel dampness. That it affected the climate in the north adversely and
    permanently cannot be denied. It did other things as well. But no Ice Age.
    (Comyns Beaumont, )
    Riddle of Prehistoric Britain
    It was an eventsudden, rapid, devastating, and appalling in its magnitude, and destruc-
    tiveness. It was a celestial impact of an immense cometary body It rained or distributed
    rocks, stones, boulder clay, till, gravel, sand, and other material over great areas, utterly
    obliterating certain parts, elevating others, and entirely missing some regions. It created
    islands, drowned others, caused immense tidal waves which swallowed up coastal lands,
    consumed huge spaces with electric waves, set up volcanoes, and swept away cities and
    (Ibid)
    largely populated districts almost in a flash.
    It has been suggestedthat the changes now at work in prehistory herald the shift to a new
    (Colin Renfrew,
    paradigm,made necessary by the collapse of the first paradigm Before
    )
    Civilization

  2. #2
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Louis Agassiz
    In regards the coming of the Ice Age:
    He failed to explain why there had been a lowering of the temperature in the first place, merely allud-
    ing vaguely to some sort of climatological change. (p. 24)
    Despite these shortcomings, Agassizs hypothesis won rapid acceptance in geological circles one sus-
    pects because, to at least some degree, it followed so closely upon the heels of Lyells by then fashion-
    able and beguilingly logical theory of uniformity. (p. 24)
    Although Agassiz and other early advocates of the Ice Age argued that the ice developed before the rise
    of the Alps and other high ranges, modern glacialists all agree that high mountainous land is necessary
    to provide (and replenish) the snow from which glacier ice is derived, to supposedly produce the
    various geological phenomena allegedly characteristic of glacial conditions. If, however, the most of the
    worlds present major ranges attained their existing elevations a mere 11,000 years ago, where was the
    high land attracting heavy snowfalls and providing the ice and the motive power for the alleged ice-
    sheets specifically stated to have preceded the modern uplands. (p. 37)

    Louis Agassiz
    In regards the coming of the Ice Age:
    He failed to explain why there had been a lowering of the temperature in the first place, merely allud-
    ing vaguely to some sort of climatological change. (p. 24)
    Despite these shortcomings, Agassizs hypothesis won rapid acceptance in geological circles one sus-
    pects because, to at least some degree, it followed so closely upon the heels of Lyells by then fashion-
    able and beguilingly logical theory of uniformity. (p. 24)
    Although Agassiz and other early advocates of the Ice Age argued that the ice developed before the rise
    of the Alps and other high ranges, modern glacialists all agree that high mountainous land is necessary
    to provide (and replenish) the snow from which glacier ice is derived, to supposedly produce the
    various geological phenomena allegedly characteristic of glacial conditions. If, however, the most of the
    worlds present major ranges attained their existing elevations a mere 11,000 years ago, where was the
    high land attracting heavy snowfalls and providing the ice and the motive power for the alleged ice-
    sheets specifically stated to have preceded the modern uplands. (p. 37)

    The Ice Age Fallacy
    it is astonishing that unscientific explanation ever came to be formulated, yet in a short time both it
    and the concept of immense thick ice-sheets descending from a hypothetical northern mountain system,
    to cover all of northern and eastern North America and western and northern Eurasia, was enthusiasti-
    cally embraced and came to be regarded as virtually established fact. (p. 24)
    Today, the worlds coldest known land region is north-eastern Siberia. There, if anywhere, we might
    expect huge ice-sheets to have developed if the Ice Age theory possessed validity. Yet comparatively
    very few areas of Siberia exhibit signs of significant glaciation, either past or present. Clearly great cold
    does not itself of itself necessarily promote the development of ice-sheets. (p. 39)
    Again, in start contrast to orthodox Ice Age theory, even many northern areas outside Siberia said to
    have lain under the thickest parts of the alleged ice-sheets afford scant evidence of glaciation or ice-
    sculpturing of any sort, and in numerous cases are actually devoid of it. (p. 39)
    northern latitudes have yielded several unexpected discoveries totally at variance with the tenet of
    vast sprawling North Polar ice-sheets. Their collective message is a singular one. (p. 40)
    Why is glacial evidence absent from parts of mainland Britain and the bed of the North Sea if an ice-
    sheet allegedly mantled the entire region? Was it because, as intimated earlier, glacial action actually
    never occurred there? (p. 42)
    snowfall during Ice Age times was not appreciably heavier than that of today. (p. 42)
    We can scarcely continue to associate the development of massive ice-sheets with mountain systems
    generally too low to have acted as effective causal agents of such glaciation. (p. 42)
    Typical drift deposits occur far outside allegedly glaciated regions, or, conversely, are absent from
    many others believed to have been heavily glaciated. Abnormally buried organic remains in otherwise
    typical drift deposits often occur in latitudes inimical to large-scale ice action. These are inescapable
    facts strongly mitigating against the popular explanation of the origin of these great deposits. (p. 135)
    Thus, if many of todays highest mountains were much lower when the alleged Ice Age was reputedly at
    its zenith, how did so much ice, if it actually existed, manage to accumulate? Indeed we can take a step
    further and ask whether the ice-sheets so beloved of glacialists ever existed at all! (p. 42)
    The underlying problem, of course, has been the continued acceptance of the constraints inherent in
    Lyells uniformitarianism, with its insistence upon terrestrial agencies being the sole generators of
    observable topographical and atmospheric changes (p. 44)
    uniformitarianism, while certainly not a fallacious doctrine, is yet no more than a particular aspect of
    a wider whole (p. 44)
    And when it is discovered that it is possible to produce rock striaeby such dissimilar agents as drift
    sand, fast-moving nuees ardentes (swiftly flowing, high temperature, gaseous clouds erupted from vol-
    canoes)snow, mud-slides, and high pressure grit-charged steam, we are obliged to seriously question
    the alleged glacial origin of the striae generally, particularly when, as in numerous instances, they too,
    occur far outside the furthest traceable limits of supposed bygone ice-sheets.(p. 46)
    The gigantic worldwide tectonic disturbances of the late Pleistocene times occurred almost simulta-
    neously on a near imaginable scaleprecisely what could be expected from a powerful external influ-
    ence but not from the Ice Age conditions conventionally believed to have existed then. (p. 262)
    Impossible Ice Action
    Ice is much softer and more easily crushed than the great majority of rock, and would itself be crushed
    and reduced to slush by its own pressure long before the rock upon which it stands could itself be bro-
    kenwe are asked to believe that the same ice which thus shattered such intractable materials in situ

    after passing on a few yards traveled over beds of laminated and stratified sand and loam with such a
    gentle touch as not to disturb the laminationsthe word impossible is not a favorite of mine, but I am
    bound to say that, if it is applied to any physical operation, I know none where it seems so applicable
    as to the process appealed to by the ultra-glacialists for the manufacture of drift by an ice-sheet smash-
    ing its own bed. (quote from Howorth, p. 53)
    Thus ice on level terrain, beingunable to move in any direction of its own volition, would tend to
    actually protect rather than abrade any land surface it mantled.(p. 53)
    Yet, during so called Ice Age times, great ice-sheets like that of Antarctica are stated to have caused
    spectacular land surface damage on virtually a hemispheric scale! (p. 53)
    Numerous lines of inquiry converge upon the startling fact that the Ice Age of orthodoxy is no more
    than the shaky theory it has always been and its alleged former reality, as conceived by its advocates,
    just a wonderful myth.(p. 55)
    If, as demonstrated, the great ice-sheets so beloved of the glacialists never existed, because the uplands
    so necessary for their development and maintenance were either too low or non-existent during the
    alleged Ice Age times, and because ice, even very thick ice, cannot behave in the manner required by
    glacial theory, it follows that the other geological phenomena commonly ascribed to ice action were
    caused by some other agency or combination of circumstances. (p. 55)
    Not One, Many Ice Ages
    Inevitably, the length of the Pleistocene epoch hosting these events increased every time writers multi-
    plied the number of separate glacial and interglacial episodes. (p. 25)
    The Pleistocene Epoch
    the end of the Pleistocene epoch, approximately 11,000 years ago, was characterized by gigantic and
    violent crustal convulsions which, viewed globally, were nothing short of cataclysmic. (p. 37)
    Sinceice action is by nature very slow, the time allocated for these glaciations and the resultant drift
    accumulations has been correspondingly long. Accordingly, it has been common to reserve a span of
    two or more million years for the duration of the Pleistocene period. Such concepts are seriously at
    variance with the field evidence, for if the glaciations of orthodoxy (the Ice Age) never really existed,
    and if the singular drift deposits accredited to them were accumulated at comparatively great speed,
    then the duration of the Pleistocene epoch must actually have been unexpectedly brief. (p. 135)
    Instead of being a distinct geological epoch of appreciable duration, the Pleistoceneappears therefore
    to have been little more than a rather brief stage. The time allegedly occupied by the glacial and inter-
    glacial episodes of conventional Pleistocene chronology was actually non-existent. Conversely, the
    Pliocene period persisted to very much more recent times than has been hitherto been commonly sup-
    posed. (p. 136-7)
    The term Pleistocene is therefore retained as a stage rather than as an epoch (p.137)
    (p. 136)
    michael tsarion
    www.michaeltsarion.com

    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=MLBJ6EV1
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=G25NRFLE
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2G8Z2P2D
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=UCGOPODA
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=FUXASMSR
    88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 888888888

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,736

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    No real scientist thinks the most recent ice age didn't happen, that's ridiculous.

  4. #4
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    No real scientist thinks the most recent ice age didn't happen, that's ridiculous.
    First of all there was no ice age.
    This was discovered by top geologists from Oxford and cambridge university.

    The thing that science can not stand is that one of its own sacret cows is leveled.
    they hate it more when the top brass from their own totem pole coming out and refuting their sacret cows, so they must keep things quite.

    There has been ice action in the world, ice drift.there was no ice age

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,736

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    First of all there was no ice age.
    This was discovered by top geologists from Oxford and cambridge university.

    The thing that science can not stand is that one of its own sacret cows is leveled.
    they hate it more when the top brass from their own totem pole coming out and refuting their sacret cows, so they must keep things quite.

    There has been ice action in the world, ice drift.there was no ice age
    You don't know what you're talking about.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    838

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    ...The thing that science can not stand is that one of its own sacret cows is leveled.
    The leveling of the sacred cows actually coincided with the last ice age. The onset was so sudden that green plants froze before they could dropped their leaves with the effect being that sap and leaf sugars crystalized in the ice. Bursting cows, sugars, and ice were thus frozen in time for thousands of years. This era is often refered to as the great "Ice Cream Age".
    Last edited by phlipper; 02-26-2007 at 10:02 AM.

  7. #7
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    You don't know what you're talking about.
    I waznt aware I had a blind spot the last time I was at Harvard.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,736

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    I waznt aware I had a blind spot the last time I was at Harvard.
    For one thing, you didn't study at Harvard, and for another thing, it's just a school and it has dropouts and slackers and people who don't know what they're talking about just like any other school.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,736

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    At Harvard they would kick your ass for "waznt"

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,167

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    I waznt aware I had a blind spot the last time I was at Harvard.
    I waznt awair Harvard tort u how to spel lyk dat

    Or are you talking about the "Harvard school of bad hip hop wanna be gansta rap?"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,167

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Awww...beat me to it!

  12. #12
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Watch yo be talkn bout cuz?

    Meza blindz spotz actin up again, vision kikn d hip hop ya cant stop hitn me ballz and takle while me crew turn it up just 4 u homes.

    yo baby yo baby looks lik dats how all d coolest mofo and me b talkin it G, cumn down 2 d me crib and kikit wit it p-dilly fish cakes.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    512

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    I waznt aware I had a blind spot the last time I was at Harvard.
    last time you were at Harvard, your blind spot was VERY apparent. After all, you only managed to get the fries onto the plates about 1 time in 10.

  14. #14
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    *!;th-ere/* 2 d2* d */1,<< be hot fries>> on... the/// VVVV !"%$%&()_+ector 7 underscore .com*universe* city* to*{:} ni*ght*;)`*
    G-i-2v-e otohoeo `l`il ~pigys .s...umin* (:2[[]]-)` eat
    crew blow that joint
    :) :(

    and the last one was me :eek:
    Last edited by Fizban "The Fabulous"; 02-26-2007 at 05:25 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    26,286

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    gotta be true!?i saw both movies,......and.......LIKED THEM!?and i never went to harvard,(ha'vud)but i got the "jacket"(pawnshop!?)works wonders during "last call" at my local dance pub!?hehe!!...just askin...
    Last edited by lexx; 02-27-2007 at 02:23 AM.

  16. #16
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: Did the Ice Age really happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by SubJunk
    At Harvard they would kick your ass for "waznt"


    At the tender age of three
    I was hooked to a machine
    Just to keep my mouth from spouting junk.
    Ha! Must have took me for a fool
    When they chucked me out of school
    coz the teacher knew I had the funk.
    But tonight I'm on the edge -
    Fellas, shut me in the fridge
    'Cause I'm burning up! (I'm burning up.)
    With the vision in my brain
    And the music in my veins
    And the dirty rhythm in my blood!

Similar Threads

  1. What should happen to the Whale?
    By SnappyDan in forum General Chat
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 08-05-2016, 11:45 PM
  2. What Happen To.......
    By need2know in forum Internet Scams
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-11-2010, 08:15 AM
  3. So, what would happen?
    By Mike! in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-19-2009, 08:52 AM
  4. Could this really happen....????
    By StormyRay in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 12-16-2008, 12:38 AM
  5. What would happen if...
    By Yeah Well Fine Then in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-06-2008, 08:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •