POLESHIFTS

Theosophy and Science Contrasted

David Pratt
Jan 2000, May 2013
Part 2 of 5
Part 1: Astronomical cycles
Part 2: Science, psychics, and myths
1. Axial shift
2. Polar wander
3. Crustal slippage
4. Psychic predictions
5. Ancient traditions
Part 3: Poleshifts and theosophy
Part 4: Climate change
Part 5: Appendices
PART 2: SCIENCE, PSYCHICS, AND MYTHS
1. Axial shift
There are two basic types of poleshifts:
axial shift: a change in the inclination of the earths axis caused by the entire planet
altering its axial orientation in space (the position of the geographic poles and equator is
unaffected);
polar wander: a change in the location of the geographic poles and equator caused by
the entire earth, or its outer shell, moving relative to the spin axis, whose inclination
remains unchanged.
This section looks at the phenomenon of axial shift.
Scientists disagree on the changes that the inclination of the axis has undergone during
the course of the earths history. Whatever the long-term changes, however, the idea
that the axial tilt undergoes a slow oscillation has long been accepted. During the past 5
million years, the earths obliquity, which is currently 23.44, is said to have varied
between about 22.1 and 24.5 with a mean period of 41,000 years.
1
These values are
based on calculations of the gravitational interaction between the planets.
2
The earths
tilt is currently decreasing; scientists believe it reached its last maximum in 8700 BCE
and will reach its minimum value around 11,800 CE. Since it is the tilt of the axis that
produces the cycle of the seasons, this means that the differences between the
seasons are less extreme now than they were 10,000 years ago other things being
equal, summers are a little cooler and winters are a little warmer.
The axis of each planet in our solar system has a different angle of inclination: Mercury
0, Venus 17721', Earth 2326', Mars 2512', Jupiter 307', Saturn 2644', Uranus
9746', Neptune 2752', and Pluto 11937'.
3
Venus, Uranus, and Pluto are therefore
upside down to some extent, and have a retrograde rotation about their axis, i.e. they
rotate clockwise as viewed from above the solar system. The suns axis is tilted at an
angle of 715' to the ecliptic. The moons axis is tilted at an angle of 1.5.
Modern astronomy claims that all the planets we now see in our solar system formed
around 4.6 billion years ago following the collapse of the primordial solar nebula.
4
The
contracting cloud of gas and dust developed a dense, slowly rotating core, which was
destined to become the sun. It was surrounded by a rotating disk of dust grains, which,
as a result of tiny density fluctuations, formed into small clumps or planetesimals (about
the size of asteroids), the largest of which accreted matter and eventually grew to the
size of planets.
5
The four inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars) formed
predominantly from dense, rocky materials as heat from the sun caused the volatile ices
to evaporate. In the outer regions of the solar system, the four gas giants (Jupiter,
Saturn, Uranus, Neptune) formed, which were sufficiently massive to retain large
amounts of hydrogen and helium.
Joseph Silk believes that the modern accumulation theory outlined above provides a
natural explanation of the direction of revolution and rotation of the planets.
6
He says
that although most planets formed from the accretion of many small bodies, Uranus is
an exception.
It apparently formed from the coalescence of a few perhaps only two
large bodies. This would result in a random orientation of the axis of rotation,
and could account for its tilt of about 90 degrees to the ecliptic. Only planets
that formed from many smaller bodies whose individual directions of spin
and motion average out, would result in a planet whose spin axis was
parallel to that of the sun.
7
Luke Dones & Scott Tremaine
8
argue that the spins of the four inner planets were
probably determined by impacts with a few large bodies while the planets were being
formed by the accretion of planetesimals. Gerrit Verschuur
9
speculates that during the
earths formation, a large neighbour, about the size of Mars, slammed into the proto-
earth, shaking it from pole to pole, and smashing it sideways so that after the chaos had
subsided its axis was tilted. Some of the debris from that awesome planet-shaking
impact blew outward and was slowed by the planets gravitational pull to be trapped in
orbit to gather into what would someday be called the moon.
10
Around the same time,
similar impacts between protoplanets and objects in nearby orbits allegedly occurred
throughout the solar system.
Uranus was impacted so violently that it ended up tilted sideways. Venus
was struck so hard that it began to spin in the opposite direction. Something
smashed into Mercury with such violence that its outer layers were torn
away and, lost to space, fell into the sun. And Mars? An impact tilted its axis
but in the aftermath no moon was formed.
Verschuur says that if today the earth were struck by a large asteroid a few hundred
kilometres across, it would trigger global earthquakes but would not alter the tilt of the
axis. It would take the impact of a Mars-sized object to have a noticeable effect.
In addition to the theory that Venus retrograde rotation is due to a collision or near-
collision with a large asteroid or planetesimal that reversed the direction in which it
rotates, other astronomers argue that a close encounter with another celestial body
tilted its axis almost upside down.
11
George Williams
12
challenges the widely held view that the obliquity of the primordial
earth was less than 10-15 and has slowly increased during earth history under the sole
influence of tidal friction. He says that this view does not consider possible geophysical
mechanisms within the earth, such as dissipative core-mantle coupling, which would
tend to move the axis towards an upright position. He postulates that the primordial
earth acquired an obliquity of about 70 from the alleged giant impact that produced the
moon, and that the obliquity remained above 54 for most of the Precambrian. This
means that the polar regions would have received more solar energy than the equator
and glaciers would have grown in low latitudes while the poles stayed ice-free; during
the late Proterozoic glaciation (800-600 million years ago), continents at low
palaeolatitudes
13
were apparently glaciated.
14
He holds that the obliquity decreased
relatively rapidly from about 60 to about 26 between 650 and 430 million years ago,
but has not changed much since then. He claims that this scenario is supported by the
climate record.
Although the general view is that during the Phanerozoic (the last 540 million years
according to science, or the last 250 million years according to theosophy
15
), there is no
evidence that the obliquity has significantly exceeded the supposed current limits of
about 22.1-24.5, this is not universally accepted. According to some scientists,
palaeoclimatic and palaeontological data suggest that in the Mesozoic and early
Cenozoic the earths tilt was between 0 and 15.
16
Like several other scientists, Williams maintains that many of the other planets are
subject to significant changes in obliquity, and he rejects the view that plausible physical
mechanisms for substantial changes of obliquity are unknown. Some scientists hold that
the inclinations of planetary spins axes have undergone large random, or chaotic,
variations, due to the gravitational pulls of the other planets. On the basis of detailed
orbital calculations, J. Laskar, F. Joutel, & P. Robutel
17
reached the following conclusion:
None of the inner planets (Mercury, Venus, the Earth and Mars) can be
considered as to have primordial obliquities, and all these planets could
have been formed with a near-zero obliquity. The obliquities of these planets
could have undergone large-scale chaotic behaviour during their history.
Mercury and Venus have been stabilized by dissipative effects, the Earth
may have been stabilized by the capture of the Moon, and Mars is still in a
large chaotic zone, ranging from 0 to 60.
Other estimates of the variation in Mars tilt are 15-35
18
and 11-49.
19
Regarding the
outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune), Laskar et al. argue that their
obliquities
are essentially stable, and can thus be considered as primordial, that is, with
about the same value they had at the end of the formation of the Solar
System. Nevertheless, chaotic behaviour of the obliquities under planetary
perturbations could have occurred in an earlier stage of the formation of the
Solar System ...
They believe that in the absence of the moon and the torque it exerts on the earth, the
chaotic zone for the earths axis would extend from 0 to 85.
The views of a few catastrophist writers who oppose the scientific consensus and have
argued that the earth has undergone sudden, large axial shifts in the recent past will be
considered in section 3.
Notes
1. A. Berger & M.F. Loutre, Insolation values for the climate of the last 10 million years,
Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 10, 1991, pp. 297-317. A. Berger calculated that the
earths obliquity varies between 22 and 24.5 with a very prominent and stable quasi-
period of 41,000 years, and additional significant periods of 54,000 and 29,000 years
(A. Berger et al. (eds.), Milankovitch and Climate, Reidel, 1984, p. 35). J.J. Hidore &
J.E. Oliver say that the tilt varies between 21.6 and 24.6 over a period of 41,000 years
(Climatology: An atmospheric science, Macmillan, 1993, p. 369). Occasionally, a larger
variation of between 21.8 and 28.3 is mentioned (e.g. Patrick Moore, Encyclopaedia of
Astronomy, 1986; Brockhaus Enzyklopdie, 1968, 5:382-3).
2. Gravity is the least understood of the four recognized forces of nature. See Gravity
and antigravity, http://davidpratt.info.
3. Sterrengids 2000, Nederlandse Vereniging voor Weer- en Sterrenkunde, p. 170.
4. Theosophy, on the other hand, asserts that after the initial birth of the sun and its
family of planets, the physical globes of the individual planets (and subsequently their
corresponding astral globes), die and disintegrate when they reach the end of their
respective lifetimes and, after a certain interval, reembody on a higher or lower
subplane; they reappear in the solar system as comets, before settling down into stable
orbits, and condensing and growing into planets. Planets reembody several times
before their parent sun reaches the end of its own lifetime (see Trends in cosmology,
section 10, http://davidpratt.info). The earth in its current embodiment is about 2 billion
years old (see The age of earth, http://davidpratt.info).
5. Astronomer Tom Van Flandern points out several problems with the planetesimal
hypothesis (Dark Matter, Missing Planets & New Comets, North Atlantic Books, 1993,
pp. 329-31). It is also criticized from a theosophical standpoint by G. de Purucker
(Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy, Theos. Univ. Press (TUP), 2nd ed., 1979,
pp. 79-80).
6. This is not true. If the density of matter is distributed in a spherically symmetric
manner inside the celestial bodies, then the orbital planes of the planets around the sun
should be randomly oriented in three-dimensional space, and the direction of motion of
the planets in their orbits should be random. Yet all the planets orbit the sun in planes
which form only small angles to the suns equatorial plane, and in the same direction as
the suns sense of rotation. The probability of this spatial arrangement occurring by
chance is extremely small.
7. J. Silk, The Big Bang, W.H. Freeman & Company, 1989, pp. 357-8.
8. L. Dones & S. Tremaine, Why does the earth spin forward?, Science, vol. 259, 1993,
pp. 350-4.
9. G.L. Verschuur, Impact: The threat of comets and asteroids, Oxford University Press,
1996, pp. 69, 89.
10. This big splash theory of the moons origin has been in and out of scientific fashion
for over a century. Theosophy rejects the theory and says that the moon is the remnant
of the former embodiment of the earth (H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, TUP, 1977
(1888), 1:154-6, 2:64; Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy, pp. 527, 548-50; G. de
Purucker, Fountain-Source of Occultism, TUP, 1974, pp. 341-5).
11. See D.A. Pearlman (ed.), Stephen J. Gould and Immanuel Velikovsky, Ivy Press
Books, 1996, pp. 211-3.
12. G.E. Williams, History of the earths obliquity, Earth-Science Reviews, vol. 34,
1993, pp. 1-45.
13. Palaeolatitudes are past latitudes determined on the basis of the dubious science
of palaeomagnetism; see next section.
14. See also Darren M. Williams, James F. Kasting & Lawrence A. Frakes, Low-latitude
glaciation and rapid changes in the Earths obliquity explained by obliquity-oblateness
feedback, Nature, vol. 396, 1998, pp. 453-5.
15. See Geological timescale, http://davidpratt.info.
16. See part 4, section 3, The climate record.
17. J. Laskar, F. Joutel & P. Robutel, Stabilization of the Earths obliquity by the Moon,
Nature, vol. 361, 1993, pp. 615-7; J. Laskar & P. Robutel, The chaotic obliquity of the
planets, Nature, vol. 361, 1993, pp. 608-12.
18. Nature, 18 February 1993, p. 610.
19. J. Touma & J. Wisdom, The chaotic obliquity of Mars, Science, vol. 259, 1993, pp.
1294-7.
2. Polar wander
There are two types of polar wander:
geographical (or true) polar wander: a shift of the entire earth or some part of it
(lithosphere, lithosphere + mantle, or the mantle alone) relative to the spin axis,
resulting in a change in the position of the geographic poles and equator on the earths
surface;
magnetic polar wander: the movement of the magnetic poles with respect to the
geographic poles.
The north and south magnetic poles are believed to drift slowly westward around the
geographic poles, returning to their original position after a period of a few thousand
years.
1
But how far from the geographic poles do the magnetic poles move over
geologic time? Palaeomagnetism involves the study of the direction and inclination of
the magnetic field of rocks of different ages; this information is then used to ascertain
the location of a virtual magnetic pole at the time the rocks were formed. Pole locations
calculated from measurements on rocks younger than about 20 million years do not
depart significantly from the present poles, but as we go further back in time, the virtual
poles move further and further away from the present poles. Joining the averaged pole
positions for different periods generates an apparent polar wander path. Different
continents yield different polar wander paths, and from this it has been concluded that it
is primarily the continents that have wandered rather than the magnetic (or geographic)
poles; the apparent wandering of the magnetic poles is allegedly caused by the actual
wandering of the continents over the earths surface, though some degree of true polar
wander is also recognized.
Palaeomagnetism has many pitfalls, and it is well known that it often yields unreliable
and inconsistent results. For instance, palaeomagnetic data imply that during the mid-
Cretaceous Azerbaijan and Japan were in the same place. Palaeomagnetic studies of
rocks of different ages suggest a different polar wander path not only for each continent,
but also for different parts of each continent. When individual palaeomagnetic pole
positions, rather than averaged curves, are plotted on world maps, the scatter is huge,
often wider than the Atlantic. The further back in time we go, the greater the scatter,
suggesting that fossil magnetism becomes less stable with time. Rock magnetism is
subject to modification by later magnetism, weathering, metamorphism, tectonic
deformation, and chemical changes. This undermines the assumption that the fossil
magnetism found in ancient rocks provides an accurate record of the earths magnetic
field at the time the rocks were formed.
Palaeomagnetic data provide an indication of a locations latitude with respect to the
former magnetic pole, and it is simply assumed that over long periods of time the
magnetic poles will tend to coincide with the geographic poles. However, the
geomagnetic field at the present time deviates substantially from that of a geocentric
axial dipole. The magnetic axis is tilted by about 10 to the rotation axis, and on some
planets much greater offsets are found: 47 in the case of Neptune, and 60 in the case
of Uranus. In the earths present magnetic field, the magnetic latitude may therefore
deviate from the geographic latitude by up to 4400 km. It is possible that the magnetic
poles have wandered considerably with respect to the geographic poles in former times.
And if in the past there were stable magnetic anomalies only slightly more intense than
the present-day East Asian anomaly, this too would invalidate the geocentric axial
dipole hypothesis. Geological, palaeoclimatic, and palaeontological data provide
powerful evidence against continental-drift models, and therefore against the current
interpretation of palaeomagnetic data.
2
Palaeomagnetic studies show that some rocks have been magnetized in a direction
opposite to that of the present magnetic field. The scientific consensus today is that this
means that the global geomagnetic field at the time the rocks formed had a reversed
polarity. In at least some cases, however, other explanations are conceivable, such as
self-reversal and the existence of regional magnetic anomalies. For instance, a set of
palaeomagnetic anomalies from northern and central Europe, eastern Canada, the Gulf
of Mexico, and New Zealand, with dates clustering around 12,500 BP, has been
interpreted as a global geomagnetic fluctuation (the Gothenburg flip), but the event is
apparently not recorded in sedimentary sequences of the same age in southern Europe,
the Mediterranean Sea, and western North America.
3
Even today there are isolated
spots of opposite magnetic polarity in both the northern and southern hemispheres.
4
Whether they occur or not, magnetic reversals should certainly not be confused with
inversions of the earths spin axis.
In addition to the magnetic axis, three other earth axes can be distinguished: 1. the
geographic axis: the line joining the north and south poles, the points of origin for the
lines of latitude and longitude; 2. the rotation axis or axis of instantaneous rotation: the
line drawn through the earth about which it is actually rotating at any instant; the points
where it cuts the earths surface are called the rotation poles; 3. the axis of figure or axis
of maximum moment of inertia: the axis of symmetry of the earths spheroid, determined
by the distribution of mass within the planet.
5
For everyday purposes, these three axes are so close together that they can be thought
of as coinciding. In reality, however, the axis of figure is not exactly coincident with the
axis of rotation, and this gives rise to tiny polar motions. These motions produce slight
latitude variations, which can be measured as the difference between the geographical
latitude and the true astronomical latitude, as measured from the rotation axis. Two
discrete periodic oscillations can be distinguished:
one, called the Chandler Wobble, has about a 14-month period [435 days],
and the other has a 12-month period. The combination of these two wobbles
causes the poles to trace spiral paths out of, around, and eventually back
into their mean positions over a period of about 6.5 years. The separation
between the actual and mean poles was exceptionally large in about 1952,
when they were separated by 12 m (37 feet), or 0.37 arc second (0.37").
Their maximum separation during the 6.5-year period averages about 0.25".
6
The Chandler wobble is thought to be related to earthquakes, surface wind loads, solar
activity, and geomagnetism. However, there is disagreement on whether the wobble
excites earthquakes, is partly caused by them, or whether they both have a common
cause.
7
The only perfectly stable state of rotation for a planet occurs when it rotates about its
axis of figure. An internal redistribution of mass, or a comet or asteroid impact, drags
the axis of figure away from the rotation axis, creating an unstable condition. The
rotation axis then tries to realign itself with the figure axis; the figure axis precesses
about the rotation axis in an ever-decreasing spiral until the two axes again coincide.
Strictly speaking, the position of the figure axis is never exactly constant: the weather
systems, ocean tides, and even the movement of animals and humans all alter the
earths mass distribution and therefore the position of the figure axis.
This slight axial wobble is not in dispute. However, the occurrence of systematic, large-
scale migration of the geographic poles or true polar wander is highly controversial.
Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, polar wandering was frequently invoked
to explain the evidence for former warmer temperatures in the polar regions and former
ice sheets at low latitudes. Although nowadays such phenomena tend to be explained
primarily in terms of continental drift, some scientists believe that polar wandering has
also taken place. Opinions differ on the extent to which changes of mass distribution in
or on the earth can alter the position of the spin axis and at what rate, depending mainly
on the assumptions made about the inner structure of the earth.
In the 19th century a number of prominent scientists, including Sir George Airy, Sir
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin), and Sir George Darwin (son of Charles Darwin) argued
that large-scale polar wandering was impossible owing to the assumed rigidity of the
earth and the stabilizing effect of the equatorial bulge.
8
Evidence that the earth is not
perfectly rigid was provided by minor tides in the earths crust caused by the influence of
the moon and sun, and by the discovery of the Chandler wobble in 1884-85.
In 1955 Thomas Gold
9
postulated that large-scale polar wandering could be expected to
occur over geological periods of time in a plastically deformable earth: the rotation axis
could migrate 90 over a period of about a million years. He stated that if the earth were
a perfect sphere instead of a flattened spheroid, the smallest beetle walking over it
would be able to change the axis of rotation relative to markings on the sphere by an
arbitrarily large angle; the axis of rotation in space would change by a small angle only.
If the material forming the earth yields by flow under stress differences of arbitrarily
small magnitude, then polar wandering will occur in response to any exciting force,
however small. However, if the material has a non-zero yield stress, polar wandering will
take place only when the excitation stress is sufficient to exceed the threshold. W.H.
Munk & G.J.F. MacDonald
10
pointed out that if the mantle were anelastic enough to
permit significant polar wandering, the poles should move so as to place the continents
as well as possible on top of the equatorial bulge. The present distribution of the
continents ought to place the pole in the vicinity of Hawaii in the equatorial Pacific
about as far from the present pole as it can get. The fact that the pole is not in the
Pacific nor travelling towards it at the expected rate suggests the earth (or at least its
outer shell) has sufficient finite strength to withstand the stresses imposed by the
continent-ocean system. However, this conclusion can be avoided by assuming that the
stresses in question are balanced by mantle inhomogeneities. Changes in the
distribution of mass in the earth could conceivably trigger polar wandering, though it is
also possible that the earth has enough strength to prevent this. The fact that major
gravity anomalies are associated with Palaeozoic mountain chains indicates that major
stress differences can persist for very long periods.
The debate on the extent of polar wander over the course of geologic history, and on
just what moves if true polar wander does occur, is still in progress. The general
consensus, based on palaeomagnetism, is that polar wandering has been small
probably no more than about 30 over the past 200 million years.
11
In this view, most of
the wandering of the (magnetic) poles implied by palaeomagnetism is explained in
terms of continental drift/plate tectonics. An alternative model (wrench tectonics) has
been developed by Karsten Storetvedt, who accepts the validity of palaeomagnetism
(while admitting it faces many problems) but rejects continental drift. He explains
selected palaeomagnetic data in terms of in-situ rotations of continental blocks and true
polar wander; he argues that the poles have wandered 70 since the mid-Palaeozoic,
including a 35 latitudinal shift around the Eocene-Oligocene boundary, but his theory is
open to serious objections.
12
As already noted, palaeomagnetic data are not reliable enough to support theories of
large-scale continental drift or polar wander. Moreover, the evidence that the earth
possesses sufficient strength to make significant polar wandering impossible is largely
ignored. It is true that the polar motion record collected by the International Latitude
Service (ILS) since 1900 indicates that in addition to the 14-month Chandler wobble and
the 12-month annual wobble, the rotation pole has a secular drift of about 1 per million
years towards eastern Canada. But there is no certainty that such motion will continue
in the same direction for many millions or tens of millions of years.
J.L. Kirschvink et al.
13
argued that true polar wander occurred from 535 to 520 million
years ago, during the early Cambrian, as a result of a major reorganization of tectonic
plates that changed the balance of mass within the earth. The entire lithosphere and
mantle rotated about 90, so that the regions what were previously at the north and
south poles were relocated to the equator, and two antipodal points near the equator
became the poles. This hypothesis is based mainly on palaeomagnetic data and is
therefore highly dubious.
The ill-conceived views of two unorthodox researchers deserve a brief mention. Hugh
Auchincloss Brown
14
, who died in 1975, believed that the eccentric force of rotation of
the growing south-pole ice cap would eventually become so strong that it would cause
the earth to tip over like an overloaded canoe. As it did so, the spin axis and equatorial
bulge would rapidly migrate through the earth in the opposite direction, so that the
inclination of the axis would remain the same. The cataclysm would take place in a
single day, in which time the present poles would travel about 80 of latitude, or some
8800 km, so that the ice caps would end up near the equator. The result would be
tremendous deluges and seismic activity and the destruction of civilization. Brown
believed that similar cataclysms caused by gravitational and centrifugal forces
recurred about every 7000 years. There is no serious evidence to support this theory,
which will not work anyway because the Antarctic icecap could not develop sufficient
momentum to capsize the earth.
Peter Warlow
15
argued that a near-collision with large cosmic bodies (comets, asteroids,
or stray planets), 1000 km or more in diameter, could cause the geographic north and
south poles to exchange places on the spin axis, in as little as one day. He held that if
the earth turned upside down within the magnetic field, this would explain apparent
magnetic reversals. However, Victor Slabinski calculated that a 180 inversion of this
type would require a close encounter with a celestial body 31% more massive than
Jupiter.
16
Several scientists see evidence of polar wandering on the moon and Mars. For
instance, Kirschvink et al. state: The Tharsis volcanic province on Mars, with the largest
positive gravity anomaly known from any planet, appears to have reoriented the martian
lithosphere to place Tharsis on the equator; similarly, the lunar mascons all lie facing
Earth symmetrically about its equator.
Peter Schultz
17
points out that several large regions of layered and stripped terrain near
the present martian equator, roughly 180 apart, bear many similarities to the present
polar deposits, and proposes that they represent locations of ancient martian poles. He
favours the polar-wander interpretation over the alternative explanations that they are
either pyroclastic deposits, or aeolian deposits accumulated during periods when Mars
had a very high obliquity. He argues that polar wandering occurred in starts and stops,
and that the last major shifts of the poles are related to the formation of the large
volcanic shields of Tharsis and Olympus Mons. His scenario depicts a cumulative polar
migration of well over 90 over about 4 billion years, each change in pole position
involving a shift of less than about 30 over about 100 to 1000 million years. His views
have not been universally accepted, and scientists hold differing opinions on the degree
of rigidity of Mars and the amount of polar wandering this would permit.
18
The global
fractures or lineaments on the surface of Mars, as on earth, consist of four main
systems oriented approximately E-W, N-S, NE, and NW in relation to the present
rotation poles.
19
This casts doubt on theories of large-scale polar wander.
In conclusion, polar wander remains today what it has always been: a speculative and
unproven hypothesis.
Notes
1. The dipole field drifts westward at a rate of about 0.08 per year (equivalent to 4500
years for a complete circuit of the earth), while the nondipole field, which makes up
between 5% and 20% of the total field but is believed to be chiefly responsible for
secular variations, drifts westward at a rate of about 0.18 per year (2000 years for a
complete circuit). At the north magnetic pole, the north pole of the compass points
downwards, which is usually interpreted to mean that this location is actually the south
magnetic pole. (A. McLeish, Geological Science, Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1992,
pp. 131-3; see Theosophy and magnetism, http://davidpratt.info.)
2. See Palaeomagnetism, plate motion and polar wander, Sunken continents versus
continental drift, http://davidpratt.info.
3. William R. Corliss (comp.), Unknown Earth, Sourcebook Project, 1980, p. 752.
4. Journey to the centre of the earth, Inside Science no. 134, New Scientist, 14
October 2000, figure 2; Nicola Jones, Anomalies hint at magnetic pole flip, 10 April
2002, newscientist.com.
5. See Paul Dunbavin, The Atlantis Researches: The earths rotation in mythology and
prehistory, Third Millennium, 1995, pp. 51-64.
6. Polar motion, britannica.com.
7. William R. Corliss (comp.), Earthquakes, Tides, Unidentified Sounds, Sourcebook
Project, 1983, pp. 120-3.
8. John White, Pole Shift: Predictions and prophecies of the ultimate disaster, A.R.E.
Press, 1991, pp. 54-7; Immanuel Velikovsky, Earth in Upheaval, Delta, 1955, pp. 111-4.
9. T. Gold, Instability of the earths axis of rotation, Nature, vol. 175, 1955, pp. 526-9;
Pole Shift, p. 60.
10. W.H. Munk & G.J.F. MacDonald, The Rotation of the Earth, Cambridge University
Press, 2nd ed., 1975, pp. 275-85. See also Harold Jeffreys, The Earth: its origin, history
and physical constitution, Cambridge University Press, 6th ed., 1976, pp. 478-81.
11. R.G. Gordon, Polar wandering and paleomagnetism, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci.,
vol. 15, 1987, pp. 567-93; J. Besse & V. Courtillot, Apparent and true polar wander and
the geometry of the geomagnetic field over the last 200 Myr, Journal of Geophysical
Research, vol. 107, no. B11, 2002, pp. 61-31.
12. K.M. Storetvedt, Our Evolving Planet: Earth history in new perspective, Alma Mater,
1997. See Palaeomagnetism, plate motion and polar wander (Wrench tectonics),
http://davidpratt.info.
13. J.L. Kirschvink, R.L. Ripperdan & D.A. Evans, Evidence for a large-scale
reorganization of early Cambrian continental masses by inertial interchange true polar
wander, Science, vol. 277, 1997, pp. 541-5.
14. Pole Shift, pp. 65-86.
15. Ibid., pp. 133-42, 417-8.
16. V.J. Slabinski, A dynamical objection to the inversion of the earth on its spin axis,
Journal of Physics A, vol. 14, 1981, pp. 2503-7.
17. P.H. Schultz & A.B. Lutz, Polar wandering of Mars, Icarus, vol. 73, 1988, pp. 91-
141.
18. See B.C. Murray & M.C. Malin, Polar wandering on Mars?, Science, vol. 179, 1973,
pp. 997-1000.
19. G.H. Katterfeld & G.V. Charushin, General grid systems of planets, Modern
Geology, vol. 4, 1973, pp. 243-87.
3. Crustal slippage
A catastrophic form of polar wandering is rapid crustal slippage or lithosphere
displacement. This hypothetical phenomenon amounts to an accelerated, global-scale
version of the official plate-tectonic scenario, in which individual lithospheric plates
(rather than the entire lithosphere) move at a rate of a few centimetres per year in
relation to one another and to the earths poles.
One of the main proponents of crustal slippage was Charles Hapgood,
1
who died in
1982. He argued that there had been three lithosphere displacements during the past
100,000 years. The north pole was allegedly in Hudson Bay during the last ice age, and
moved the 30 (3300 km) to its present location between 17,000 and 12,000 years ago.
The pole supposedly shifted to Hudson Bay from the Greenland Sea between 55,000
and 50,000 years ago, and to the Greenland Sea from the Yukon district of Canada
between 80,000 and 75,000 years ago.
More recently, the idea of crust displacement has been put forward by populist writers
Rand and Rose Flem-Ath,
2
and the idea has been picked up by Graham Hancock
3
and
Colin Wilson.
4
The Flem-Aths assert that before the last supposed crust displacement
some 11,500 years ago, Lesser Antarctica (the part pointing to South America) lay
further north; it was partly ice-free, had a temperate climate, and was the home of an
advanced civilization Atlantis! The earths lithosphere then supposedly underwent a
sudden displacement of some 30, moving the whole of Antarctica into the southern
polar circle, resulting in the destruction of Atlantis, whose remains are now buried
beneath several miles of ice. While Hancock claims that the cataclysm took place
between 14,500 and 12,500 BCE with massive aftershocks continuing until 9500 BCE,
the Flem-Aths believe it took place extremely rapidly around 9600 BCE.
The theory of lithosphere displacement ignores masses of contrary evidence about the
history of the Pleistocene ice age. There is no evidence of any lithosphere
displacements in deep-sea cores, the palaeomagnetic record, glacial chronologies,
pollen records, and a wide range of other geological, palaeoclimatic, and
palaeontological data.
5
The claim that a large part of Antarctica was deglaciated prior to
12,000 years ago is unfounded. Paul LaViolette writes:
data from ice cores penetrated through various parts of the antarctic ice cap
show that all parts of this continent have been continually glaciated back
through the last ice age and that Antarcticas temperature was as much as
9 Centigrade colder during the last ice age. This invalidates crustal shift
theories which instead claim it was warmer.
6
The crust-shifters also maintain that the north pole was situated in the Hudson Bay area
before the last displacement, which caused North America to become deglaciated while
Siberia and Alaska became colder. This is contradicted by the fact that during the last
ice age the major glacial and interglacial periods in North America, Alaska, Siberia, and
Antarctica were more or less synchronous. The final, very cold stage, the Younger
Dryas, began around 12,700 BP, and ended around 11,550 BP, with the onset of the
Preboreal period of global warming and meltwater flooding.
7
Crust-shifters associate the
last supposed crust displacement with the extinction of mammoths and other mammals
in Siberia and Alaska, and subscribe to the popular myth that these creatures were
instantly frozen in a sudden cataclysm of immense proportions. However, the majority of
the frozen remains of mammoths, horses, bison, etc. predate 12,000 BP by up to tens
of thousands of years, and the claim that large numbers were flash-frozen and perfectly
preserved is false.
8
Hancock and the Flem-Aths tend to confuse the earths crust with the lithosphere (in
contrast to Charles Hapgood, who was more precise in his use of terms). In modern
geological theory, the crust comprises only the upper part of the rigid lithosphere, down
to the Moho discontinuity, at an average depth of about 7 km under oceans and 40 km
under continents, but it is firmly welded to the underlying mantle. The lithosphere, on the
other hand, comprises the crust and the upper layer of the mantle. In plate tectonics, the
lithosphere is said to be fractured into separate plates that move with respect to one
another on an underlying plastic layer known as the asthenosphere. There is powerful
evidence however that this model is untenable.
9
The lithosphere is said to average 70
km in thickness beneath oceans, and to be 100 to 250 km thick under continents.
However, seismic tomography (which produces 3D images of the earths interior) has
shown that the oldest parts of the continents have very deep roots extending to depths
of 400 km or more, and that the asthenosphere is absent or very thin beneath them.
Even under the oceans there is no continuous asthenosphere, only disconnected
asthenospheric lenses. These facts render the large-scale movement of individual
plates impossible to say nothing of the rapid movement of the entire lithosphere!
Modern crust-shifters claim that lithosphere displacement is caused primarily by an
imbalance of ice at the polar caps, whereas Hapgood, their mentor, came to reject this
mechanism as inadequate. Instead he hypothesized that they might be caused by
gravitational imbalances (uncompensated masses) within the lithosphere or immediately
below it, but was unable to provide any concrete evidence for this. The Flem-Aths have
suggested that the entire mantle and crust might move rapidly and as a unit over the
earths core, but they are merely clutching at straws, and have no idea how the physics
of such an unlikely event might work.
Finally, mention should be made of a few catastrophist writers who postulate a
combination of axial shift and crust displacement. Immanuel Velikovsky
10
(1895-1979),
for example, argued that about 4000 years ago Venus was born as a comet ejected
from Jupiter and proceeded to wander the solar system. The earth was supposedly
involved in near collisions with Venus and Mars around 3500 and 2700 BCE, resulting in
devastating catastrophes, including poleshifts and crustal slippage. To support this wild
tale, Velikovsky offered evidence from ancient literature, traditions, and folklore, and
some geologic evidence of past cataclysms.
11
However, there is no evidence of global
catastrophes at the times he claimed. For instance, the debris allegedly deposited in
earths atmosphere by Venus 3500 years ago, which supposedly caused 40 years of
darkness, left no trace in the worlds ice caps or ocean sediments.
12
Paul Dunbavin
13
has argued that around 3100 BCE the earth suffered a comet impact in
the oceans which caused the rotation poles to wander by up to 1 and the axial tilt to
oscillate between about 20 and 26 until settling down to its modern value around 800
BCE. Over the same period, the number of days in a year supposedly increased from
360 to 365.25. Dunbavin sees evidence for this scenario in the pattern of sea-level
variations, climatic and geological changes, and ancient myths and legends. He even
claims that Platos Atlantis was really the British Isles, including the surrounding shelf
areas and a former small island in the Irish Sea, which were submerged as the sea level
rose some 5000 years ago.
D.S. Allan and J.B. Delair
14
have argued that around 9500 BCE an astronomical body
(Phaeton), projected by a supernova explosion, passed through the solar system
causing untold havoc. It resulted in a displacement of the earths crust, a shift of its axis,
the sinking of large landmasses in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, and widespread
extinctions and climatic change. They believe that the axis was virtually upright before
this cataclysm. They abolish the whole of the Pleistocene period, claiming that the
succession of glacial and interglacial periods is an illusion; the fairly mild climate of the
Pliocene was supposedly brought to a close by the Phaeton catastrophe, which ushered
in a very brief ice age of a few hundred years at the start of the Holocene or Recent
period. The evidence they cite, however, is not sufficient to support this extreme
catastrophist scenario.
Notes
1. Charles H. Hapgood, The Path of the Pole, Chilton Book Company, 1970; John
White, Pole Shift: Predictions and prophecies of the ultimate disaster, A.R.E. Press,
1991, pp. 87-107.
2. Rand & Rose Flem-Ath, When the Sky Fell, Stoddart, 1995.
3. Graham Hancock, Fingerprints of the Gods, Heinemann, 1995.
4. Colin Wilson, From Atlantis to the Sphinx, Virgin, 1996.
5. See Paul Heinrich, The Mysterious Origins of Man: Atlantis, mammoths, and crustal
shift, www.talkorigins.org, and Fingerprints of the Gods, www.oocities.org.
6. Paul LaViolette, Earth Under Fire, Starlane Publications, 1997, p. 316.
7. Ibid., pp. 142, 180.
8. Sue Bishop & Philip Burns, Woolly mammoths: evidence of catastrophe?,
www.talkorigins.org; Earth Under Fire, pp. 189-218; R. Dale Guthrie, Frozen Fauna of
the Mammoth Steppe: The story of blue babe, University of Chicago Press, 1990.
9. See Sunken continents versus continental drift, http://davidpratt.info.
10. I. Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision (1950), Pocket Books, 1977; Velikovsky, Earth in
Upheaval; Pole Shift, pp. 109-32.
11. For a critique of Velikovskys (mis)use of myths and legends, see Bob Forrest, Guide
to Velikovskys Sources, Stonehenge Viewpoint, 1987.
12. Leroy Ellenberger: Top ten reasons why Velikovsky is wrong about Worlds in
Collision, http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/vdtopten.html; An antidote to Velikovskian
delusions, http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/velidelu.html. Sean Mewhinney: Tree rings,
www.pibburns.com/smtrerng.htm, 1996; Minds in ablation, part 1,
www.pibburns.com/smmia.htm, 1998/2000.
13. Dunbavin, The Atlantis Researches.
14. D.S. Allan & J.B. Delair, When the Earth Nearly Died: Compelling evidence of a
world cataclysm 11,500 years ago, Gateway Books, 1995.
4. Psychic predictions
A number of psychics, with the help of their spirit guides, have offered dramatic and
generally conflicting accounts of past and future poleshifts. All their prophecies have so
far failed to come true.
According to one interpretation of his obscure writings, Nostradamus
1
prophesied that a
poleshift would occur in 1999 or 2000. At the end of the 20th century the world was also
supposed to be in the throes of a terrible war, Armageddon.
Edgar Cayce
2
(1877-1945) was highly successful at giving medical diagnoses while in a
trance state. He also provided information mostly unverifiable on the past lives of his
subjects and made prophecies for the future. He asserted that the earth had undergone
many cataclysmic shiftings of its poles by which he appears to have meant some form
of crust displacement rather than a change in the inclination of the axis. He suggested
that another poleshift would occur at the end of the 20th century. It would be preceded
by several decades of increasingly severe seismic disturbances, including the
submergence of most of Japan, much of Northern Europe, and many parts of the
Atlantic and western coasts of the US, and the emergence of new land in the Atlantic
and Pacific oceans. And it would be followed by the reappearance of Christ! Cayce
stated that 10.5 million years ago the present polar regions turned to where they
occupied more of the tropical and semi-tropical regions. Many earth changes,
extending over a period of 200,000 years, are said to have occurred during the
Atlantean culture, including a displacement of the spin axis. A changing of the poles
around 50,772 BCE is said to have led to the destruction of the giant animals that had
allegedly overrun the earth.
Aron Abrahamsen
3
maintained that a major poleshift would occur in 1999 or 2000 within
the space of a few days, resulting in the displacement of the present polar regions by
about 90. It would be followed by the return of Christ. He stated that poleshifts are
caused by interplanetary forces (especially electromagnetism) and human thought
forms; if enough people improved the quality of their thoughts and deeds, such
disasters could therefore be averted. The most recent major poleshift allegedly occurred
in 70,000 BCE, and another took place about 147,000 years ago.
Paul Solomon
4
predicted that there would be a poleshift on 5 May 2000, involving a
crustal displacement of about 40, in which the close passage of Mars would play a key
role. It would be followed by the Second Coming of Christ. Ruth Montgomery
5
asserted
that the last shift of the axis occurred around 48,000 BCE, when Lemuria was
submerged. Atlantis was relatively unaffected and continued as the worlds foremost
civilization for another 20,000 years, before being destroyed by a technological disaster.
She forecast another poleshift for the late 1990s, followed (of course) by the return of
Christ.
Michio Kushi,
6
founder of the East-West Foundation in Massachusetts, claimed that
there had been thousands of poleshifts (crustal displacements), including shifts of a full
90. Several had occurred in the last quarter of a million years, most recently 12,000
years ago, prior to which the north pole was in the north Atlantic, slightly southwest of
the British Isles. Another poleshift was predicted for the near future, but failed to
happen.
The Stelle Group
7
claims to be descended from Lemuria (or Mu), where civilization
supposedly began 78,000 years ago and which was submerged 26,000 years ago as a
result of a poleshift. There were also poleshifts in 8500 BCE and 5000 BCE, involving a
minor crustal slippage of 30. The Group say they are following the instructions of
higher intelligences (Masters) under the direction of archangel Melchizedek. After the
battle of Armageddon (which was supposed to begin in 1998, but has apparently been
postponed!) there will be a poleshift (crustal slippage) of 90 in the year 2000, caused
mainly by a rare planetary alignment. After this wholesale destruction, Melchizedek will
establish the Nation of God on Lemuria, which will reappear above the waters of the
Pacific.
The ideas of submerged continents and lost civilizations, and of global cataclysms
(including poleshifts) ushering in a new golden age of spiritual regeneration, are clearly
in the air. However, as the above selections show, the accuracy of the visions and
predictions of ordinary (untrained) psychics leaves much to be desired. In general, the
more remote the issues being considered are from individual peoples lives, the more
the information provided by such psychics tends to degenerate into psycho-babble!
In the run-up to the supposed end of the Mayan calendar on 21 December 2012, the
doomsayers were again out in force, predicting all manner of cataclysms, including
poleshifts.
8
Once again, reality refused to cooperate but not before many books were
sold.
Notes
1. John White, Pole Shift: Predictions and prophecies of the ultimate disaster, A.R.E.
Press, 1991, pp. 307-11.
2. Hugh Lynn Cayce, Earth Changes Update, A.R.E. Press, 1980, pp. 59-60, 69, 71, 84,
87, 98; Pole Shift, pp. 193-207.
3. Pole Shift, pp. 209-25. Abrahamsen was more successful in giving clairvoyant advice
on places in Arizona where archaeological evidence of ancient civilization would be
found; he achieved a 78% success rate (David Hatcher Childress, Lost Cities of North &
Central America, Adventures Unlimited, 1992, p. 325).
4. Ibid., pp. 227-41.
5. Ibid., pp. 245-7.
6. Ibid., pp. 252-4.
7. Ibid., pp. 313-23.
8. See 2012 and the Mayan calendar: facts and fantasies, http://davidpratt.info.
5. Ancient traditions
References to many different types of cataclysms, including poleshifts, can be found in
the literature and mythology of numerous nations and peoples, as the following
examples show. This does not of course mean that the descriptions are intended as
literal descriptions of historical events; mythology is a complex mixture of fact, allegory,
and symbolism, often woven into a dramatic narrative.
In the Book of Enoch (64:1, 3),
1
we read: In those days Noah saw that the earth
became inclined, and that destruction approached. ... And he said, Tell me what is
transacting upon earth; for the earth labours, and is violently shaken.
In the Bible (King James Version), we find the following:
Behold, the Lord maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it
upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. ... The earth
shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and
the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise
again. (Isaiah 24:1, 20)
2
Immediately after the tribulation of those days [prior to the Second Coming]
shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the
stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken
... (Matthew 24:29)
The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God: even
Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God ... (Psalms, 68:8)
3
The last two quotations could refer to a change in the declination of the stars, as would
result from a poleshift.
4
According to Ovids account of the deluge catastrophe, the chariot of the sun, driven by
Phaeton, changed direction, the horses pulling it broke loose from their course and
rushed aimlessly, knocking against the stars, and the constellations of the Cold Bears
tried to plunge into the ocean.
5
In the Timaeus Plato says that this signifies a
declination of the bodies moving around the earth and the heavens. In the same work
he describes a cataclysm in which the earth moves forwards and backwards, and again
to right and left, and upwards and downwards, wandering every way in all six
directions.
6
The paradisal Eden, Asgard, Meru, or Airyana Vaejo are said to have enjoyed a
perennial springlike climate, despite their traditional northern or polar location
indicating that the axis must have been more or less upright. The Greek astronomer
Anaxagoras taught that during the Golden Age the stars revolved in a tholiform manner
(i.e. in a horizontal plane), a belief shared by another Greek astronomer, Anaximenes.
Diogenes Laertius added that at first the polestar always appeared in the zenith, but
afterwards acquired a certain declination. Similar references can also be found in
ancient Japanese cosmogony and Chinese traditions.
7
For the Egyptians, a large fiery circle symbolized the cosmos, and a serpent with a
hawks head represented the pole. When the latter was placed across the diameter of
the circle, it symbolized the pole of the earth lying in the plane of the ecliptic.
8
The Harris
Magical Papyrus speaks of a cosmic upheaval of fire and water when the south
becomes north, and the earth turns over.
9
Hopi mythology speaks of the creation of four worlds, three of which were destroyed in
succession. The first world was destroyed by fire and volcanoes. In the creation of the
second world, land was put where water was, and water where the land was. When the
time came for its destruction, the pole twins left their posts at the north and south ends
of the worlds axis, where they were stationed to keep the earth properly rotating. The
world teetered off balance, spun around crazily, then rolled over twice. Mountains
plunged into seas, the land was inundated, and the earth froze into solid ice. Eventually
the pole twins were ordered back to their stations at the poles. With a great shudder and
a splintering of ice the planet began rotating again. As the ice melted, the world began
to warm to life, and the third world was created. It was destroyed by waves higher than
mountains which rolled in upon the land. Continents broke asunder and sank beneath
the seas. The present (fourth) world will be destroyed by a poleshift and flooding, unless
we change our nature sufficiently to prevent it.
10
The Pawnee Indians of North America preserved memories of a remote time when the
north and south polar stars changed places or went to visit each other.
11
They
believed that a similar cataclysm would happen at the end of the world, when there
would be a great flood, the skies would move, and the stars would come to earth.
12
The
Eskimos of Greenland recalled a time when the earth tilted over and all people were
drowned in the sea.
13
The Andaman Islanders fear a repetition of a great natural
disaster that occurred in the days of their remote ancestors when the world capsized.
14
The Norse Edda refers to shifts in the position of the Midgard serpent, Midgard being
our planet, and the serpent denoting the equator, ecliptic, or Milky Way.
15
According to a
Norse legend, the wolf Fenrir, who had been chained up by the gods, managed to break
his bonds and escape. He shook himself and the world trembled. The ash tree
Yggdrasil (the earths axis) was shaken from its roots to its topmost branches.
Mountains crumbled or split from top to bottom, and the stars came adrift in the sky.
16
One ancient Chinese work, consisting of 4320 volumes, tells of the consequences that
followed when mankind rebelled against the gods and the universe fell into disorder:
The planets altered their courses. The sky sank lower towards the north. The sun,
moon, and stars changed their motions. The earth fell to pieces and the waters in its
bosom rushed upwards with violence and overflowed the earth.
17
Many legends refer to long periods of darkness when the light of the sun vanished from
the sky,
18
while others speak of the sun not setting for long periods of time. One
possible interpretation is that such stories refer to a period when the earths axis was
tilted at 90, when there would be continuous darkness during the winter months and
continuous daylight during the summer months. Norse mythology teaches that before
the present order of things, the sun rose in the south, and it places the frigid zone in the
east, whereas now it is in the north.
19
This, too, could be a graphic way of referring to a
time when the earth was inclined at 90.
Notes
1. The Book of Enoch (1883), Wizards Bookshelf, 1983, p. 78 (translated by Richard
Laurence); see SD 2:145, 314, 533-4, 726. Alternative translation by R.H. Charles
(1917): And in those days Noah saw the earth that it had sunk down and its destruction
was nigh. ... Tell me what it is that is falling out on the earth that the earth is in such evil
plight and shaken ... (65:1, 3), sacred-texts.com.
2. New Revised Standard Version (biblegateway.com): Now the Lord is about to lay
waste the earth and make it desolate, and he will twist its surface and scatter its
inhabitants. ... The earth staggers like a drunkard, it sways like a hut; its transgression
lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.
3. New Revised Standard Version (biblegateway.com): the earth quaked, the heavens
poured down rain at the presence of God, the God of Sinai ...
4. Stars falling to earth can also symbolize the descent of spirit into matter.
5. Allan & Delair, When the Earth Nearly Died, p. 153.
6. Ibid., p. 191. In the Timaeus, the earth is said to wind about the axis of the universe
(Dunbavin, The Atlantis Researches, p. 158), which could refer to the precession of the
equinoxes and the changing inclination of the earths axis.
7. When the Earth Nearly Died, pp. 14-15; William F. Warren, Paradise Found: the
cradle of the human race at the north pole (1885), Health Research reprint, 1964, pp.
191-2.
8. H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, TUP, 1977 (1888), 2:356-7; Samson Arnold
Mackey, Mythological Astronomy of the Ancients Demonstrated (1822/23), Wizards
Bookshelf, 1973, pp. 41-2.
9. Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision, p. 120. According to Velikovsky, the Ipuwer papyrus
refers to a time when the land turns round [over] as does a potters wheel, and the
Ermitage papyrus speaks of a catastrophe that turned the land upside down. However,
in Faulkners translation of the Ipuwer papyrus we read: the land turns round as does a
potters wheel; the robber is a possessor of riches, and the rich man is become a
plunderer. According to Bob Forrest, this is simply a metaphorical description of the
upheaved social order, and the expression upside down as used in the Ermitage
papyrus simply means topsy turvy (Guide to Velikovskys Sources, p. 11).
10. Frank Waters, Book of the Hopi, Penguin, 1977, pp. 14, 16, 18; Pole Shift, pp. 284-
5.
11. When the Earth Nearly Died, pp. 153-4.
12. The Atlantis Researches, p. 105.
13. Ibid.
14. When the Earth Nearly Died, p. 191.
15. Elsa-Brita Titchenell, The Masks of Odin: wisdom of the Ancient Norse, TUP, 1985,
pp. 143, 149-50.
16. Hancock, Fingerprints of the Gods, pp. 204-5, 247.
17. Ibid., pp. 193-4.
18. E.g. ibid., pp. 164, 202-4; Fred J. Dick, The Theosophical Path, Dec. 1915, pp. 447-
8, Aug. 1925, pp. 120-3.
19. The Secret Doctrine, 2:535. There is one place on earth where the sun rises in the
south even today: namely, at the north pole.
Poleshifts: Part 3
Poleshifts: Contents
Homepage