No seriously Ireland as Atlantis?

a reply to: bluesfreak

A comet, the "Dis aster,] the "bad star." A dragon-like construction with a long tail is seen for weeks in the sky, unlike a meteorite. Then if you are unlucky it impacts somewhere on Earth causing great disruption. It is still in our language, and China had records for centuries watching the skies for these events. The higher probability of them impacting in the sea than on land because there is more of it would be the best bet for the short historical memory.

a reply to: bluesfreak

For a more dramatic look at isostatic rebound look at beaches in Scandinavia, some of them are now extremely higher than they were during the ice age depression of the continents.

London is actually perversely Sinking slowly as is some of the south of the UK but this is probably just compensation for the uneven rebound happening elsewhere.

(0f course the Med is sinking under the weight of the sea and that is why there are so many sunken city's there as well as due to world wide sea level rise, it exists between Africa and Europe of course and some think they are starting to move away from one another as well so?, either way it's a good example of water depressing the crust beneath it as well)

Hudson bay is also a prime example of dramatic rebound occurring and there are several other locations around the world.

Other than ice India is a prime example of another form of uplift and depression of a continental mass as it collides with and rides over the Asian plate, the south of India has perhaps seen some very large reduction in it's altitude in part due to the mechanical pressure applied by the uplift of northern India and it is quite perceivable especially with some studies that show the Amazon once flowed and drained to the west instead of the east that something akin to this may have happened to that region of the world also, in fact I had a pet theory that it would explain the find of a sunken city that under ordinary rates of subsidence would have taken over fifty thousand years to get there off of Cuba but one that Sonar shows to be similar to some Mayan city's on the mainland, a city that is ignored by many and that apparently the mainstream want us to forget about.

So there are many causes of continental altitude fluctuation, one of the most rapid is of course the influence of having a second continent sized mass atop one such as during the ice age when a virtual continent made of ice crushed the underlying northern areas of our planet.

I also believe that subcrustal magma play's a big part, push the continent down it has to go somewhere right, so usually that is under the ocean pushing that upward, allow the continent to become light enough to no longer push it down that magma must draw magma back under it and away from those other regions allowing the also heavier ocean (From all the melt water) to sink even deeper in places.

For me there are several culprits at play, the ice age ending causing this magma displacement.

A possible build up of geological energy due to south America likely drifting over the remains of a Proto Continent that has long sunken into the mantle on it's eastern side but that mantle therefore being much thicker than usual while the much younger Atlantic side has a much younger and weaker/thinner mantle and a possible cometary or similar strike at that time.

These combined may have led to a SUDDEN tilting of the south American plate pushing the eastern sea board of south America in places perhaps even thousands of feet lower than it was before while the western seaboard that may have been coastal mountains with fjord like inlets was pushed dramatically and cataclysmically upward, throwing the stones of Puma Punk around like a child's playing block's, sinking that city near to Cuba very deep and likely many other sites up and down that side of the south American plate.

Two tidal waves of unimaginably magnitude enough to wipe out any surviving coastal civilizations would have raced out across the pacific and the Atlantic inundating far inland.

Meanwhile a second tidal wave of displaced magma would have sped across subcrustal regions of the Atlantic pushing west Africa higher than it was but of course as parts were pushed higher other parts became depressed.

A period of hell on earth far more severe than simply the melting of the ice sheets, this would also likely have altered the course of the Atlantic conveyor as well and likely was accompanied by the sinking of many islands in the Atlantic at that time, the wave in the pacific probably wiped out most human settlement at least on smaller islands across the pacific as well and and impacted all major continents with huge back and forth water displacement as ocean sized tidal waves swept out from this massive geological upset then swept back but slightly less severe on the return tidal waves.

Humans survives somehow, probably because we are adaptable but food would have been scarce, humanity probably took a ninety nine percent loss in it's population which even today is mostly coastal.

Atlantis is not the worst of it and compared to this was a piddling loss of life.

And think about how much land may have been lost in south America on it's eastern seaboard, how much further out it once spread and how much narrower the Atlantic with more islands may then have been in some places than it is today.

During the second world war near to St Peter and Paul rock's which are part of Brazil's maritime claim but in the centre of the Atlantic between Africa and Brazil several war time pilots ferrying cargo across reported seeing what looked like ruins on a sunken island.
www.beforeus.com...

Nice post .
Plato states that the Atlantic ‘was more navigable then’ .
He talks of islands just outside the Pillars of Hercules that were part of this Atlantic powers’ kingdom.
Here’s an interesting map showing a relief of the Atlantic as if the water were removed .
It shows raised seamounts outside the POH, the Azores seamounts .
Have a zoom in to see.


Using my finger in a draw app on my phone, so excuse the roughness , you can see where the triple plate junction crosses the Azores plateau, a late Pleistocene Atlantic could have looked Something like this below.
Ice sheets over uk etc and North America/Canada lift the central section of the mid Atlantic ridge through isostacy.
Sea level is 400ft lower .

Let’s not forget that Plato says that the island was “the way” to other islands then ‘ the other continent ‘ .
Plato must be the first Greek to know of the Americas, yet we don’t celebrate him for this .

Bear in mind that dredging on the mid Atlantic ridge in 1947 found limestone cobbles that were eroded sub- aerially ( by air, not water) , shorelines and shallow water fossils and fauna from the Late Pleistocene.
The first team to dredge the MAR concluded that it had been through episodes of “ vertical uplift “.
Fascinating stuff…



a reply to: LABTECH767

a reply to: LABTECH767

The actual physics of a Cometry impact would be dire in many ways. The pressure on the mantle at the impact point would cause a pressure wave which would literally blow the top off of volcanoes and areas where the mantle was thinner. Then there would be a slump that would fill the areas affected, and vast tracts of land could go under the water very quickly, and even keep rising and falling until the magma wave subdued.

a reply to: bluesfreak
Only a fool would deny that if that was actually above water it would be a very good match the land area and rough shape of Atlantis so maybe it really was.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: LABTECH767

The actual physics of a Cometry impact would be dire in many ways. The pressure on the mantle at the impact point would cause a pressure wave which would literally blow the top off of volcanoes and areas where the mantle was thinner. Then there would be a slump that would fill the areas affected, and vast tracts of land could go under the water very quickly, and even keep rising and falling until the magma wave subdued.

I don't think you can support this idea.

The Earth's been hit by impactors (really, you shouldn't call them comets) billions of times in its history. Even the Chixulub impactor didn't cause the "pressure wave" that "bl(ew) the top off volcanoes and areas where the mantle was thinner." It did not cause the Deccan Traps to explosively erupt although they're roughly on the opposite side of Earth from the impact.

There's no such thing as a "magma wave." Magma doesn't travel that fast. It's more like a very stiff liquid plastic than water and its top speed is around 6-10 miles per hour.

a reply to: Byrd

Depending on depth it CAN have the hardness of steel but it is still a liquid albeit a very viscous one, waves therefore DO travel through the medium although displacements are far more serious than a wave that ripples and does NOT displace the magma.

One argument against Hapgood's theory was the fact that sites such as the Hawaiian island which are situated over what is thought to be a deep thermal plume, an upwelling of thermal energy and magma that rises from deep in the earth far below the crust has evidence that it has remained static more or less with the slow movement of the plate over this subcrustal plume leaving sunken islands that were once former Hawaiian islands with the ones we see today being only the latest in a long line of said islands pushed up by the formations of Volcano's over this plume but of course in isolation it does not prove this.

Lava flood's like the Deccan's are also intriguing as you point out but I am on the wall as to whether or not the Dino killer contributed to activity in the formation of the trap's but in fact as the dino killer was said to be about 65 million years ago and they are said to have been formed 66 million years ago, well on that time scale there is not much between the two event's but there is still the question of a million years even though the dating is largely estimate and indeed guestimate on when and where and how.

I do wonder though if Yellowstone may create a lava flood in the US should it ever erupt and I also wonder if that is the result of friction heating or a subcrustal plume as that may give a clue as to how long that feature will remain active, it a thermal plume it can last for millions of years - look at those former Hawaiian islands forming a long chain of sea mounts getting shorter due to there slow sinking back into the ocean plate as you move back along them and of course back in time, or if it is a friction feature were one plate is riding over another and the rock's are superheated by this geological pressure melting and breaking out on the surface in volcano's well given its size I would guess it is the result of a deep plume rather than a friction plate created as the north American continent rides over some other ancient plate.

As you know throughout the earth's history it is believed that continents have been created and utterly destroyed, swallowed by the crust of our planet several times over, maybe more than eight in fact and our continents are merely the youngest in a long line of continents, this is not to be mistaken with supercontinents I am actually talking about the very continent's themselves.

There is currently a fragment of a former continent believed to be riding under Europe for example.

Smaller volcano's such as Pompeii are thought to be friction volcano's, that is they are formed by the interaction of the continent and the underlying material and other plates underlying the continental plate as opposed to thermal plumes which are thought to upwell from far deeper beneath the mantle of the planet and in fact to be a part of the energy that keeps our continents in motion as they are really just like the skin on a still bubbling pan of gruel you are making were periodically the skin will break and the material beneath will burst forth on the surface and sometimes the skin as it forms will even break apart some of it sinking back into the hotter fluid beneath and being recycled.

Our planet is still very much a liquid planet but make no mistake waves in magma are entirely possibly, it just requires a sufficient force to create them and I am surprised you would even think to deny it given how much you undeniably know.

You can’t deny the physics of a pressure wave on a sphere meeting at the opposite point to an impact.
The Deccan Traps debate isn’t settled either , the dating is still an ESTIMATE. a reply to: Byrd

a reply to: Byrd

Just look at Newton's cradle on how a wave propagates. Or when they crashed the lander on the moon.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Byrd

Depending on depth it CAN have the hardness of steel but it is still a liquid albeit a very viscous one, waves therefore DO travel through the medium although displacements are far more serious than a wave that ripples and does NOT displace the magma.

Yes, you can get waves in magma but given the viscosity of the magma, they don't go very far.

One argument against Hapgood's theory was the fact that sites such as the Hawaiian island which are situated over what is thought to be a deep thermal plume, an upwelling of thermal energy and magma that rises from deep in the earth far below the crust has evidence that it has remained static more or less with the slow movement of the plate over this subcrustal plume leaving sunken islands that were once former Hawaiian islands with the ones we see today being only the latest in a long line of said islands pushed up by the formations of Volcano's over this plume but of course in isolation it does not prove this.

A nice description of what the current thought is. The islands are not the only place where volcanoes are sited over a deep thermal plume. Galapagos islands is another area, and so are parts of Iceland (etc)

Lava flood's like the Deccan's are also intriguing as you point out but I am on the wall as to whether or not the Dino killer contributed to activity in the formation of the trap's but in fact as the dino killer was said to be about 65 million years ago and they are said to have been formed 66 million years ago, well on that time scale there is not much between the two event's but there is still the question of a million years even though the dating is largely estimate and indeed guestimate on when and where and how.

The Deccan Traps (like the Siberian Traps) weren't a short term eruption... the event went on for at least 350,000 years

I do wonder though if Yellowstone may create a lava flood in the US should it ever erupt and I also wonder if that is the result of friction heating or a subcrustal plume

Plume, as I understand it.

As you know throughout the earth's history it is believed that continents have been created and utterly destroyed, swallowed by the crust of our planet several times over, maybe more than eight in fact and our continents are merely the youngest in a long line of continents, this is not to be mistaken with supercontinents I am actually talking about the very continent's themselves.

Yup. I'm familiar with this.

Our planet is still very much a liquid planet but make no mistake waves in magma are entirely possibly, it just requires a sufficient force to create them and I am surprised you would even think to deny it given how much you undeniably know.

The mechanics of a magma wave on the surface would be very different than subsurface (for one thing, the lower pressure and MUCH colder temperature means that the magma/lava cools quickly rather than remaining plastic almost indefinitely.

a reply to: bluesfreak
Only an insignificant portion of the Azores Plateau would have been above sea level even at the very height of the last Ice Age.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: bluesfreak
Only an insignificant portion of the Azores Plateau would have been above sea level even at the very height of the last Ice Age.

Harte

You really do NOT know that Harte, you were not there and neither was I,. The static model of sea depth rise is obviously wrong though as during the glacial maximum the sea altitude relative to modern sea level of the bottom of the Atlantic may have been higher, it could even have undergone crustal rebound due to reduced ocean weight coupled with the increased weight of the continents slowly displacing magma from beneath the crust of the continental plates to beneath the crust of the younger, thinner and much lighter ocean plates pushing them upward.

True sea level rise relative may therefore be much greater than the simple level's predicted on STATIC models of the earth's topography during the period, also there are other affects that may have come into play that may have affected the sea bed's relative altitude and that of any seamount's upon it and therefore I dispute your opinion as outdated and biased.

The Laurentide ice sheet certainly added some amount of weight to the upper North American continent. If the weight is removed, the ground underneath would probably rise a little. And some land mass somewhere else would go down a little to balance that.

A spinning globe must spin around the center of its mass. If part of that mass shifts, then either another part must make an equal and opposite shift, or the globe will have a new center of mass, and have to change its spin slightly.

Try spinning a basketball on your finger tip, then imagine if you added or removed a small weight to any part of the outside of that ball. What happens to the spin?

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Byrd

Depending on depth it CAN have the hardness of steel but it is still a liquid albeit a very viscous one, waves therefore DO travel through the medium although displacements are far more serious than a wave that ripples and does NOT displace the magma.

Yes, you can get waves in magma but given the viscosity of the magma, they don't go very far.

Agreed.

If a wave encounters friction, then the mechanical energy of the wave gets converted into heat, and the wave slows down, and if it encounters enough friction it stops.

I don't think a lava wave would travel very far before all of its mechanical energy was gone.

a reply to: Harte

Scotland is still rising, and the south coast of Britain is going down because of the isostatic balance because of the weight loss from the disappeared ice sheet. If the whole of the area from north of London to the pole was groaning under ice, it would tend to push the ice-free areas upwards. It is a slow process. In fact, the interglacial periods are short compared to glaciations, so it will still be rising when the next load of ice settles for the next ninety thousand years.