This transcription, by Pam Robinson, is of Straight Talk number 110. If you see any glaring typos that I've missed, please give me a shout. Thanks
Today we are going to clear the air of traditional thinking regarding the Earth’s history and Darwin’s theory of evolution. I call this show “Blowing Darwin,” or “The Rock ‘n’ Roll Earth.” Now, there are two premises I want to discuss here. The theory of evolution hangs in the balance between the theories of uniformity and catastrophism. Nowadays science holds – and only by faith – to the theory of uniformity. It says that things have always been the way they are today. No catastrophes. On the other hand, the catastrophist says that the Earth has, several times in the past, rocked and rolled and even shifted its pole out of place.
One of the things we’re trying to do here is to clear up some of the mud involved in this whole creation and evolution thing that has been a point of contention between the church and the secular world for centuries, millennia. The church, mainly from a guy named Archbishop Usher, most of them used to hold that the creation of the Earth and everything else happened 6,000 years ago. They even have a date of May 5th, or some date like that, 4,004 B.C., I think it is. But there is no way that you can reasonably walk out the door and look around and see that that makes sense – it just doesn’t make sense. And archaeology and dating systems and so forth – and even as error-ridden as Carbon 14 might be, it’s still not so error-ridden that it can’t tell 10,000 years ago, which is clearly before the creation of everything. Well, those people who base that, that creation was 6,000 years ago, evidently aren’t aware, or refuse to accept for some reason, the alternative translation to Genesis 1:2. And when you go to the original Hebrew language you find that the second verse of Genesis 1 can be equally and as validly translated as, “the earth became a waste and a desolation. ” The way the King James, which is the most popular book used, reads, and most of the other versions I’ve ever seen, Genesis 1:1 says, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was void and without form – without form and void. The “was” is what’s at issue here, because that concept that it became a waste and desolation fits perfectly with things being older than 6,000 years.
So, sometime God created all this stuff, the whole universe. At another time – probably many other times – but this particular one time is the only one that God is willing that we should know about, that this particular one time the Earth again was hit by a catastrophe. The whole Earth moved and shook and maybe shifted its poles, and all life, however advanced or not it was, was completely wiped out. So the earth was there and it became a waste and a desolation. And that fits in perfectly. It makes everything just fine, and there’s no big contention. But as we’ll see a little bit later, evolution just doesn’t really work.
Also, there’s this thing about a day being a thousand years to God. So maybe he didn’t create the earth in six days, 24-hour days. Maybe they were thousand-year days. That’s another thing that throws mud in the barrel of water. How can you seriously research some of these subjects without coming to the conclusion that these absolute statements, like the earth being created 6,000 years ago? It’s impossible. They just don’t work.
Another thing it says in Genesis that I would like to put in at this point to kind of debunk all the talk about the “missing link” and how man, over the evolutionary theory, progressed from whatever we were, amoebas to human beings. And they’re always trying to find the intermediate link that links it from those man-like creatures, like Cro?Magnon and Neanderthal and those guys, to the next step up that becomes what we call homosapiens. Let me tell you what it says in the Bible. It says that God created Adam. It doesn’t say God created man. When you look through all those chapters of the creation, every time you see the word “man,” just cross that out and write “Adam” over it. It’s a special kind of creature called an Adam. It was the Adam race. They were completely different kinds of things than Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon, because God did a special thing with that particular humanoid creature. There were lots of humanoid creatures around, is my belief. But with this particular humanoid creature, God did a special thing and created a new thing. And you spell “Adam” h-u-m-a-n r-a-c-e. That happened 6,000 years ago, not the creation of the earth.
But what we really want to do here is investigate the physical evidence. This is the kind of evidence that anybody can check on, the physical events which can only be explained by catastrophism. Now, we’re not offering explanations of how this actually happened. There are a lot of different theories of how it happened. You can make one up on your own easily. But all we want to do here is evidence that it did happen, not how it might have happened or what might have caused it, but that it did happen. The earth actually shook and shifted its poles. Oceans left their basins and swept across continents. So we have to prove catastrophism before we can dispose of uniformity, and then Darwin with it. So let’s try to define catastrophism and show physically what it might look like.
I’ve got three books that I’m going to be referring to and reading from. The first one, and the main one that I’m going to take most of this stuff from is called Earth in Upheaval by Immanuel Velikovsky. I’m also going to refer to his book, Worlds in Collision. He’s written three different books on this same subject of cataclysmic things that have happened to the earth and catastrophes throughout the past earlier on in recorded history, but two or three of them within recorded history. And he’s approached the subject from two or three different aspects. In Worlds in Collision, he’s gone to the writings, the legends, the traditions, the histories and those kinds of things, of different cultures all over the earth to see what they have said and written down and passed on about certain periods of time in history and events that happened. So that’s the word aspect.
In Earth in Upheaval, he does the strictly physical examination of the evidence. If indeed some kind of catastrophe happened, then what kind of things would you look for? You would look for things about mass destruction. I mean, if the whole Earth was shaking around, cracks would form and lava would come pouring out, and miles and miles and miles of lava flow, big lava sheets. There would be evidence that at one time underneath the glaciers was really a tropical forest. Things like that. Well, he has gone around the Earth and uncovered a lot of those kinds of things and put them all down and said, here are the facts. He doesn’t even give a theory in Earth in Upheaval of how these things might have happened. He stays strictly away from that stuff to give you no editorializing at all, just the bare facts of what can be found by anybody who wants to take the time and money to go and do it. In Worlds in Collision, he gives his theory of how this happened, but we’re not going to get into that.
So we have those two books, and also a third book I’m going to refer to in a little bit, is a wonderful book called Pole Shift. And it’s about this cataclysm thing, that in the past there has been evidence of the poles shifting, along with other things that went along with that, and he summarizes a lot of different authors on the subject. He has a big section on prophecy, sections on psychics, and there’s a lot of really good evidence in this book and a lot of books that you can travel on to from this if you want more details. This a very good book: John White, Pole Shift. And you can get all of these things through your local book store.
Okay, we are going to try to define “catastrophist,” and get a little more of a handle on what it is, and then we’ll understand it a little bit better.
The theory of sliding continents.
Having been shown to be built on infirm foundations, there remain but three theoretical changes in the position of the terrestrial globe or its shell in relation to the sun that could cause great variations in climate. What he’s doing here is disposing of the traditional thinking as far as changes in climate being responsible for the ice caps going to different places and that kind of thing, and those things causing these physical evidences:
- A change in the form of the orbit or the path the Earth follows around the sun; that’s one way that climate can be changed radically.
- A change in the astronomical direction of the axis; instead of 23-1/2 degrees, it would go to maybe zero.
- A change in the position of the terrestrial shell in relation to the core, and thus the position of the poles, a sliding shell.
Those are the three theories of how a part of the surface of the Earth gets to a different place: a change in the axis itself; a change in the orbit; or this shell sliding on the core for some reason.
At present, the elliptical form of the orbit changes by a very small amount, so we’ll rule that one out.
In 1943, Vining Meinesz analyzed “the stresses brought about by a change in position of the Earth’s rigid crust with regard to the axis of rotation of the Earth.” In this analysis he surmised the crust “to have the same thickness everywhere and to behave as an elastic body.” He pointed out that if we assume that the crust happened to move clockwise in relation to the core by over 70 degrees, the expected effect “shows a remarkable correlation to many major topographical features and also to the shearing patterns of large parts of the Earth’s surface,” as an example, the North and South Atlantic, the Indian Ocean, the Gulf of Aden in Africa, the Pacific, etc. If the correlation is not fortuitous, it just happened by itself somehow, and this does not appear to be probable, we have to suppose that the Earth’s crust at some moment of its history has indeed shifted with regard to the Earth’s poles and that the crust has undergone a corresponding block shearing. So these guys have done a lot of research on it and topographical features around the Earth, and the only thing that can explain some of those features is the shifting of the crust in relation to the spin of the axis. So either the axis changes and the thing starts spinning in different places, or the crust spins around on the core and winds up in a new place, and then that’s how those things happen.
Some of the manifestations of this kind of an action:
You’ve got to get it out of your mind that the smallness that we all carry around as far as earthquakes and natural disasters occurring; that definition is totally inoperative. Don’t be thinking of the kind of earthquake that you’ve ever seen on TV or experienced yourself. Every time you go up one full number on the Richter scale, you jump by a multiple of ten. So a 6 is ten times what a 5 is. A 7 is ten times worse than a 6. Think in terms of 25’s. Hundreds of millions, hundreds of billions of times more intense than any earthquake that we have known in history. The whole globe shaking at one time, everything vibrating, the whole earth. Try to burn that in.
Let us assume – Velikovsky again – as a working hypothesis, that under the impact of a force or the influence of an agent – and the Earth does not travel in empty space – the axis of the Earth shifted or tilted. At that moment an earthquake would make the globe shudder. Air and water would continue to move through inertia. Hurricanes would sweep the Earth and the seas would rush over continents, carrying gravel, sand, marine animals, and casting them on the land. Heat would be developed. Rocks would melt, volcanoes would erupt, lava would flow from fissures in the ruptured ground and cover vast areas. Mountains would spring up from the plains and would travel and climb on the shoulders of other mountains causing faults and rifts. Lakes would be tilted and emptied. I love that image of Lake Superior tilting 17 degrees and emptying out! Rivers would change their beds. Large land areas with all their inhabitants would slip under the sea. Forests would burn, and the hurricanes and wild seas would wrest them from the ground on which they grew and pile them branch and root in huge heaps. Seas would turn into deserts, their waters rolling away. And if a change in the velocity of the diurnal rotation, slowing it down, for instance, should accompany the shifting of the axis, the water confined to the equatorial oceans by centrifugal force would retreat to the poles. And high tides and hurricanes would rush from pole to pole carrying reindeer, seals to the tropics, and desert lions into the Arctic, moving from equator into the mountain reaches of the Himalayas and down the African jungles. And crumbled rocks torn from the splintering mountains would be scattered over large distances, and herds of animals would be washed from the plains of Siberia. The shifting of the axis would also change the climate of every place, not just a little place here or a little place there – the whole world – think in terms of the globe – leaving corals in Newfoundland and elephants in Alaska, fig trees in northern Greenland, and luxurious forests in Antarctica. In the event of a rapid shift of the axis, many species and genre of animals on land and in the sea would be destroyed, and civilizations, if any, would be reduced to ruins. So that’s the kind of the physical manifestations of a cataclysm like this, with the poles shifting and the crust going around the core and winding up in a different place. You have all that momentum to overcome. The ocean just sits there. The core or the crust revolves underneath the ocean because the ocean is inertly in its bed until the land moves underneath it.
Okay, so that sets you up for this section out of Pole Shift, this writer called Chan Thomas, who has done a lot of work and research in this area. And he’s written a more graphic scenario down into the details of what it looks like, putting flesh and blood, if you will, on that working hypothesis that I just read. It makes it very dramatic, and it’s a lot of fun.
"With a rumble so low as to be inaudible, growing, throbbing, then fuming into a thundering roar, the earthquake starts...only it's not like any earthquake recorded in history. In California, the mountains shake like ferns in a breeze, the mighty Pacific rears back and piles up into a mountain of water more than two miles high, then starts its race eastward. With the force of a thousand armies the wind attacks, ripping, shredding everything in its supersonic bombardment. The unbelievable mountain of Pacific sea water follows the wind eastward, burying Los Angeles and San Francisco as if they were but grains of sand. Nothing, but nothing, stops the relentless, overwhelming onslaught of wind and ocean. Across the continent the thousand-mile-per-hour wind wreaks its unholy vengeance, everywhere, mercilessly, unceasingly. Every living thing is ripped into shreds while being blown across the countryside. And the earthquake leaves no place untouched. In many places the Earth’s molten sublayer breaks through and spreads a sea of white-hot liquid fire to add to the holocaust. Within three hours, the fantastic wall of water moves across the continent, burying the wind-ravaged land under two miles of seething water coast to coast. In a fraction of a day, all vestiges of civilization are gone, and the great cities, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, New York are nothing but legends. Barely a stone is left where millions walked just a few hours before. A few lucky ones who managed to find shelter from the screaming wind on the lee side of Pike’s Peak watched the sea of molten fire break through the quaking valleys below. The raging waters follow, piling higher and higher, steaming over the molten earth fire and rising almost to their feet. Only great mountaiss such as this one can withstand the cataclysmic onslaught.
"North America is not alone in her death throes. Central America suffers the same cannonade: wind, earth, fire and inundation. South America finds the Andes not high enough to stop the cataclysmic violence pounded out by nature in her berserk rage. In less than a day, Ecuador, Peru and western Brazil are shaken madly by the devastating earthquake, burned by a molten earth fire, buried by cubic miles of torrential Pacific seas, and then turned into a frozen hell. That’s because that’s where the South Pole is going to wind up. Everything freezes. Man, beast, plant and mud are all rock hard in less than four hours. Europe cannot escape the onslaught. The raging Atlantic piles higher and higher upon itself, following the screeching wind eastward. The Alps, Pyrenees, Ural and the Scandinavian mountains are shaken and heave even higher before the wall of water strikes. Western Africa and the sands of the Sahara vanish in nature’s wrath under the savage attack by wind and ocean. The area bounded by the Congo, South Africa and Kenya, suffers only severe earthquakes and winds, no inundation. Survivors there marvel at the sun standing still in the sky for nearly half a day. See, they’re on a pivot point there, so the sun just stands still.
"Eastern Siberia and the Orient suffer a strange fate indeed. As though a giant subterranean scythe sweeps away the Earth’s foundations, accompanied by the wind in its screaming symphony of supersonic death and destruction. As the Arctic basin leaves its polar home, eastern Siberia, Manchuria, China and Burma are subjected to the same annihilation as South America: wind, earth, fire, inundation and freezing; that’s where the North Pole is going to be soon. Jungle animals are shredded to ribbons by the wind, piled into mountains of flesh and bone, and buried under avalanches of sea water and mud. Then comes the terrible, paralyzing cold. Not man, nor beast, nor plant, nor earth is left unfrozen in the entire Eastern Asian continent, most of which remains below sea level. East of the Urals in Western Siberia a few lucky people survive the fantastic winds and quakes. Antarctica and Greenland with their ice caps now rotate around the earth in the Torrid Zone, and the fury of the wind and inundation marches on for six days and nights. During the sixth day, the oceans start to settle in their new homes, running off the high grounds. On the seventh day, the horrendous rampage is over, the Arctic ice age has ended, and the new Stone Age begins." The new Stone Age – I love that!
"The oceans, the great homogenizers, have laid down another deep layer of mud over the existing strata in the Great Plains as exposed in the Grand Canyon, Painted Desert and Badlands. The Bay of Bengal Basin just east of India is now at the North Pole. The Pacific Ocean just west of Peru is at the South Pole. Greenland and Antarctica, now rotating equatorially in the Torrid Zone, find their ice caps dissolving madly in the tropical heat. Massive walls of water and ice surge toward the oceans, taking everything from mountains to plains in gushing, heaving paths creating immense seasonal murrains. In less than 25 years, the ice caps are gone, and the oceans around the world rise over 200 feet with the new-found water. The Torrid Zone will be shrouded in fog for generations from the enormous amounts of moisture poured into the atmosphere by the melting ice caps. New ice caps begin to form in new polar areas. Greenland and Antarctica emerge with verdant, tropical foliage. Australia is the new unexplored continent of the North Temperate Zone, with only a few handfuls of survivors populating its vastness. New York lies at the bottom of the Atlantic, shattered, melted by earth fire, and covered by unbelievable amounts of mud. Of San Francisco and Los Angeles, not a trace is left. Egypt emerges from its Mediterranean inundation new and higher still, still the land of the ages. The commonplace of our time becomes the mysterious Baalbek of the new era.
"The New Era. Yes. The cataclysm has done its work well. The greatest population regulator of all once more does for man what he refuses to do for himself, and drives the pitiful few who survive into a new Stone Age. Once more, the Earth has shifted its 60-mile thick shell, with the poles moving almost to the Equator in a fraction of a day. Again, the atmosphere and oceans, refusing to change direction with the Earth’s shell, have wiped out almost all life."
Oooh, that’s a bedtime story, for sure!! If it’s the last time you’re going to bed!
One of the things that is in Worlds in Collision that I want to point out to you is a thing called a shadow clock. It was found over in Egypt in a place called Faijun. This clock originated from the period between circa 850 B.C. and 720 B.C. – sometime in that 130-year period, starting with 850 B.C. – that’s within recorded history, folks. Recorded history goes back further than that. Between circa 850 B.C. and 720 B.C. was found in Faijun in Egypt, at latitude 27 degrees, one of these shadow clocks. A horizontal slab with hour marks has at one end a shadow-casting vertical hob. There is a footnote here I want to read to you: The Egyptian day was divided into hours that represented equal portions of time between the sunrise and sunset independently of the length of the day. It’s just a little bit different, but it still measures the same way, by the sun casting its light on this object and then that throwing a shadow. It acts like a sun dial, but it’s not called a sun dial; it’s called a shadow clock. This shadow clock cannot show correctly the time in Faijun or elsewhere in Egypt. Egypt is a pretty good-sized country. A scholar who investigated its workings came to the conclusion that it must have been kept with its head to the east in the forenoon and to the west in the afternoon. Hey, it’s time to change the sundial!! And several scholars agreed that this was the way to use the clock. But this arrangement by itself did not make it possible to read the time. Here’s a quote: “Since all actual hour shadows lie substantially closer to the hob than the corresponding marks of the instrument, the shadow-casting edge must have been higher over the shadow-receiving plane than we find it to be. The upper edge cannot be the shadow caster of the instrument. It must have been on a parallel line above this edge.”
You’ve got a sundial that won’t tell time because it was constructed wrong. Well, that’s stupidity on the face of it. You don’t construct a sundial wrong, you know, you do it right! Two sticks in the ground – any child can make a little sundial with two sticks in the ground, who has the understanding of how they work. You don’t put a six-inch stick in one place and the other six-inch stick four feet away. How do you tell time by that? You construct a sundial the proper way, and you put it in the proper place, at the proper angle so it works. You don’t do it the wrong way. The only explanation for this sundial – I keep calling it – to tell time – see, if you moved the sundial to a different latitude, up a little bit higher, it would work. All you have to do is move it north until the shadow started touching the hour marks, and then it would work. Now, you may have to move it east or west for noon, but basically what you need to do is go north to make the shadow long enough to make it indicate properly. So if it was built as they say here in this book, a lot earlier than 850 B.C. – let’s see, it was built in Faijun under the Libyan dynasty between those two dates, 850 and 720 B.C. Since that time, sometime since 850 B.C., there’s been some kind of a change in the clock’s latitude. And if the Earth shifted its crust by 20 or 30 degrees, then this thing wouldn’t tell time. If the North Pole started to come down over the top and wound up at a different latitude, at the Arctic Circle or down even a little bit lower, then this shadow clock, which used to be up near the top of the Temperate Zone, moved down into the Equatorial Zone and doesn’t tell time any more.
Okay, let’s get some evidence piled up here. I sincerely hope I just bore you to tears with all this evidence. This only scratches the surface, as they always say. There’s a whole book of this stuff, and I’m just going to read a paragraph here and there about the evidence. I call this section “body count.” This is the body count. And we’re going to go around the world and see what happens to all the bodies. It’s just incredible.
In Alaska, to the north of Mt. McKinley, the tallest mountain in North America, the Tenana River joins the Yukon. From the Tenana Valley and the valleys of its tributaries, gold is mined out of gravel and “muck.” This “muck” is a frozen mass of animals and trees. This “muck” contains enormous numbers of frozen bones of extinct animals. Extinct animals. Try to flash the concept of an animal species going extinct; how long does that take? We’ll just go on from there. Enormous numbers of frozen bones of extinct animals, such as the mammoth, mastodon, super bison and horse. Oh, yeah, those animals, they lived about 12 or 15 thousand years ago, right!
F.C. Hibbon of the University of New Mexico writes, “Although the formation of deposits of muck is not clear” – I’m not sure how they got there – “there is ample evidence that at least portions of this material were deposited under catastrophic conditions. Mammal remains are, for the most part, dismembered and disarticulated, even though some fragments yet retain in their frozen state portions of ligaments, skin, hair and flesh. Twisted and torn trees are piled in splintered masses. At least four considerable layers of volcanic ash have been traced in these deposits, although they are extremely warped and distorted. The entire mingled mass is in great heaps scattered all over Alaska, the coast of which is longer than the Atlantic seaboard from Newfoundland to Florida.” What could have caused all that? “In various levels of the muck, stone artifacts were found.” Stone Age stuff in the muck. “Frozen in situ in great depths and in apparent association” – they happened at the same time and there’re big, big, high, deep piles of this stuff – with the ice age fauna, all of these stone artifacts, found right in the middle of all these animal remains. Which implies that, “Men were contemporary with extinct animals in Alaska.” Well, that kind of throws some of those theories out the window. Some of those big super-animals supposedly lived before man, and here you’ve got artifacts. So I don’t know, the dates don’t quite line up that way.
This is great stuff. High in the north above Siberia, 600 miles inside the polar circle – that’s pretty far north, right up in there – in the Arctic Ocean lie the Lyakhov Islands. Lyakhov was a hunter who, in the days of Catherine II, ventured to these islands and brought back the report that they abounded in mammoth’s bones. “Such was the enormous quantity of mammoth’s remains that it seemed that the island was actually composed of the bones and tusks of elephants cemented together by icy sand. The New Siberian islands discovered in 1805 and 1806, as well as the islands of Stolbovoy and Byelkov to the west, present the same picture. “The soil of these desolate islands is absolutely packed full of the bones of elephants and rhinoceroses in astonishing numbers.” Another quote: “These islands were full of mammoth bones, and the quantity of tusks and teeth of elephants and rhinoceroses found in the newly discovered island of New Siberia was perfectly amazing and surpassed anything which has yet been discovered.” Here is another quote: “The contents of the stomachs have been carefully examined. They showed the undigested food, leaves of trees now found in southern Siberia, but a long way from the existing deposits of ivory. Microscopic examination of the skin showed red blood corpuscles, which was proof not only of a sudden death, but that the death was due to suffocation either by gases or water. Evidently the latter was the case.”
On Kotelnyi Island, “Neither trees nor shrubs nor bushes exist, and yet the bones of elephants, rhinoceroses, buffaloes and horses are found in this icy wilderness in numbers which defy all calculation.” Hedenstrom, a scientist, described them as follows: “On the southern coast of New Siberia are found the remarkable wood hills piles of trunks. They are 30 fathoms” – that’s 180 feet – they are 180 feet high. That’s big; that’s bigger than a forest, piles of trunks of trees – “and consist of horizontal strata of sandstone alternating with strata of bituminous beams or trunks of trees. On ascending these hills, fossilized charcoal is everywhere met with, covered apparently with ashes. But on closer examination, this ash is also found to be a petrifaction” – it was petrified already. “And so hard that it scarcely be scraped off with a knife.” This is just the layer of ash on the charcoal which had petrified.
Here’s another quote about New Siberia. “In New Siberia, the island, on the declivities facing the south lie hills 250 to 300 feet high formed of driftwood, the ancient origin of which, as well as of the fossilwood of the tundras anterior to the history of the Earth in its present state, strikes at once even the most uneducated hunters.” In other words, even very simple folks know that this stuff is way more ancient. Back to the quote: “Other hills on the same island and on Kotelnyi, which lies further to the west, are heaped up to an equal height with skeletons of pachyderms (elephants, rhinoceroses), bisons, etc., which are cemented together by frozen sand as well as by strata and veins of ice. On the summit of the hills, they (the trunks of the trees) lie flung upon one another in the wildest disorder, forced upright in spite of gravitation, and with their tops broken off or crushed as if they had been thrown with great violence from the south on the bank and they are heaped up.” So we’ve got these piles of things all around the world. Piles and piles and piles. We’ve got piles of piles.
In the Victorian cave near Settle in West Yorkshire, England, 1450 feet above sea level, under 12 feet of clay deposit, containing some well-scratched boulders, were found – that’s signs of men, right? – under 12 feet of stuff in this 1400-foot high cave, were found numerous remains of mammoth, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, bison, hyena and other animals. Numerous remains of all of that stuff, in a 1450-foot above sea level cave in England. How interesting. The most striking phenomenon among those observed by Prestwich (Joseph Prestwich is a professor at Oxford in geology) was the fissures in the rocks. These are in mountain ranges, the fissures in the rocks, the big cuts and crevasses, so to speak, in the neighborhood of Plymouth on the channel – this is England again – clefts of various widths of limestone formations are filled with rock fragments, angular and sharp, and with bones of animals, mammoth, hippopotamus, rhinoceros, horse, polar bear, bison. The bones are “broken into innumerable fragments. No skeleton was found entire. The separate bones in fact have been dispersed in the most irregular manner and without any bearing to the relative position to the skeleton. Neither do they show wear, nor have they have been gnawed by beasts of prey, though they occur with bones of hyena, wolf, bear and lion.” In other places in Devonshire, and also in Pembrokeshire in Wales, ossiferous brecchia or conglomerates of broken bones and stones and fissures in limestone consist of angular rock fragments and “broken and splintered” bones with sharp, fractured edges in a “fresh state,” and in a “splendid condition showing no signs or traces of gnawing.”
On the Mediterranean Coast of France – just so we don’t leave the European continent out – there are numerous clefts in rocks crammed to overflowing with animal bones. The Rock of Gibraltar is intersected by numerous crevices filled with bones. Prestwich says, “A great and common danger, such as a great flood alone could have driven together the animals of the plains and of the crags and caves.” That kind of stuff just doesn’t happen automatically; it’s a big outside force. These beaches indicate – and this is near Gibraltar – that at some time the waters of the sea lapped the rock at the 600-foot mark. The rock now rises over 1,370 feet above the sea. It was therefore “in Quaternary times, or the age of man, an island no more than about 800 feet high, or maybe less, which rose by successive stages to its present height. It is more than probable, however, that at some time before it settled at that level, the whole of the area was upheaved to such an extent that a land passage was formed to the African coast.” And I’ve done a little bit of study in that area and have found out about the quake that filled up the Mediterranean into its present situation. It used to be a whole lot smaller, because the Atlantic Ocean couldn’t get in, and then this quake happened, and I think it was the last one, the flood in the Bible is associated with, that pulled that apart, moved that and put some space in there and allowed the Atlantic to spill in. And there’s a lot of happenings going on in that area and all around the Mediterranean that proves that.
In the village of Choukoutien near Peiping, or Peking, in northern China – this is in China, so we’re getting around the whole world here – in caverns and fissures in rocks, a great mass of animal bones was found. These rich ossiferous deposits occur in association with skeletal remains. And we talked about that before, these stone implements found with these extinct animals that are supposed to have gone extinct before man was around to do that stone stuff. Well, here’s another guy, Weidenreich. As Weidenreich began his studies, other amazing, nearly unexplainable features appeared, besides all these animal bones and stuff. The fractured bones of several human individuals were found there, in that cave in China. A European – this is what’s amazing – this is a cave in China, they dig up and they find, along with all these animal bones, a European, a Melonesian, and an Eskimo type, lying dead in one close-knit group in a cave on a Chinese hillside. Explain that, the theory of evolution and all that; there haven’t been any catastrophes. Where does that stuff come from?
The Shiwalik Hills are in the foothills of the Himalayas. Now we’ve moved over into that area. Animal bones of species and genre living and extinct were found there in most amazing profusion. The carapace shell of a tortoise 20 feet long was found there. There must have been some agent that carried these animals and deposited them at the feet of the Himalayas and, after the passage of geological time, repeated the performance. For in the Shiwalik Hills, there are animals of more than one age and signs of more than one destruction. If you can wrap your mind around one worldwide cataclysm, it’s pretty obvious when you get to that point that there have been a lot of them. And I might mention the priest who talked to Solon in Plato’s writings about Atlantis, and he says that the Egyptians have kept track of all the different cataclysms, not just one or two here and there.
Okay, I want to single out one of those things. That’s the end of the body count section. I think I piled up enough, if you pardon the pun – evidence about piles of animals and bones and all those things. And they’re in good condition; remember that. A lot of them have flesh and hair on them, things that aren’t supposed to survive. We’ll get into a little more of that. But now I want to bust up some traditional thinking here about coal. I’m sure that a year or so ago, if anybody had asked me how we make coal, I’d give the basic outline that we all came away with from school. Vegetation lays down, it gets covered by stuff, and it gets covered by more stuff and more stuff, and it rots, and more stuff covers it, and it finally gets pressed down so hard that it gets transformed into this black stuff called coal. That’s the basic outline that I would have given you. But that’s not true. That’s not how coal is formed. I love this book, Earth in Upheaval; it blows traditions one after the other!
Seams of coal are sometimes 50 or more feet thick. So you’re talking about coal mines, and you get a 50-foot seam of coal, that’s good. No forest could make such a layer of coal. Okay, let’s see why. It is estimated that it would take a 12-foot layer of peat deposit to make a layer of coal one foot thick. Okay, 12 feet for one foot of coal. And 12 feet of peat deposit would require the plant remains of 120 feet high. So now we’ve got 120 feet of vegetable matter, forest material, to make one foot of coal. What do you do with five times that much? 120 times 50, is that anything near 6,000 feet of vegetation, to make a 50-foot coal seam? And it has to be piled up all at one time; the seam is 50 feet thick. It isn’t a seam of two feet and another seam of four feet and another seam that goes down another 50 feet separated by even small seams of sediment. This is 50 solid feet of coal. How tall and thick must a forest be then in order to create a seam of coal not one foot thick, but 50? The plant remains must be 6,000 feet thick. In some places there must have been 50 to 100 successive huge forests, one in place of the other, since so many seams of coal are formed. Not only do you get it one time, there’s a lot of those kinds of seams, they’re all over the place. And you’d have to have a lot, a myriad of 6,000-foot piles of vegetation. You see how it starts to break down? But it is further questionable whether the forest grew one on top of the other, because a coal bed, undivided on one side, sometimes splits on the other side into numerous beds with layers of limestone or other formations between.
Apparently the coal was not formed in the ways described. Forests burned. A hurricane uprooted them, and a tidal wave or a succession of tidal waves coming from the sea, fell upon the charred and splintered trees and swept them into great heaps of 250 feet high, like the islands up there, tossed by billows and covered them with marine sand, pebbles and shells, and weeds and fish. Another tide deposited on top of the sand more carbonized logs, threw them in other heaps, and again covered them with marine sediment. The heated ground – remember the Earth gets hot in this cataclysm, in this pole-shifting, earth-crusting move – the heated ground metamorphosed the charred wood into coal. And if the wood or the ground where it was buried was drenched in a bituminous outpouring, bituminous coal was formed. Wet leaves sometimes survived the forest fires and swept into the same heaps of logs, and sand left their design on the coal. You find those fossil leaves in the coal. Thus it is that seams of coal are covered with marine sediment. For that reason also, a seam may bifurcate and have marine deposits between its branches. See, it isn’t only that these seams of coal have sediment deposits between them or on top of them; they’re covered with marine deposits also. Explain that stuff! Two hundred feet below the surface begins a 50-foot seam of coal, and on top of that seam of coal, there’s a six-inch layer of marine sediment, shells, and all that kind of stuff. So evolution, you can’t make that work when you’re talking about the theory of uniformity causing that stuff. It just doesn’t make it.
Besides dominating the tropical flora in Geiseltal – that’s in Germany –we’re still talking about coal here, and now we’re talking about these wide ranging coal deposits in Germany. Besides the dominating tropical flora in Geiseltal, tropical flora in Germany, plants are represented there from almost every part of the globe. The associated insect fauna of Geiseltal coal is found “in present Africa, in east Asia, and in America in various regions preserved in almost original purity.” The coal of Geiseltal is rated as belonging to the beginning of the tertiary time – that’s the age of mammals. “As to the reptilian, avian and mammalian fauna, the coal is a veritable graveyard. Apes, crocodiles and marsupials” – those are the pouched animals like kangaroos – “left their remains in this coal. An Indo-Australian bird, an American condor, tropical giant snakes, East Asian salamanders left their remains there too. Some of the animals are of the steppe habitat. And others, like crocodiles, come from swamps. Not only do the origin and the habitats of plants and animals offer a very paradoxical picture, but also does their state of preservation. Chlorophyll is preserved in the leaves found in the brown coal. The leaves must have been rather quickly excluded from contact with air and light or rapidly entombed. These were neither leaves falling off the plants in the fall nor leaves exposed to the action of light and atmosphere after being torn off by a storm.” See, the chlorophyll goes immediately, boom, no more, it turns brown. Entire strata of leaves from all parts of the world, counted by the billions, though torn to shreds, but with their fine fibers, their nervous structure, intact, in many cases, still green, are found in Geiseltal lignite.
It is not different with the animals. If exposed after death for any length of time to natural conditions, the structure of animal tissue loses its fineness, the muscle and the skin and so forth. And the animals of the brown coal of Geiseltal were found to have retained their fine structure. Also, the colors of insects are preserved in their original splendor. The very process of fossilization with silica invading the tissues must have occurred fast, “immediately fast,” almost instantaneously, in Nilson’s opinion (a researcher on this stuff). While the membranes and the colors of the insects are preserved so well, it is difficult to find a complete insect. These are just little insects, not big rhinoceroses. Mostly only torn parts are found. Nilson is convinced that the animals and plants found in Geiseltal coal were carried there by onrushing water from all parts of the world, but mainly from the coasts of the equatorial belt of the Pacific and Indian oceans, from Madagascar, Indonesia, Australia, and the West Coast of the Americas. One thing is, however, evident: coal originated in cataclysmic circumstances.
He has the same thing to say about fossils, the same exact thing. Listen to this. You know how fossils were made, sure! Sure! Animals wandered around in the swamp and in the water, they waded in there, and then pretty soon maybe the ashes, the dirt filled in the holes, and then they got pressed down and made into rock, and then when you split the rock you find a footprint. Not! – as they say. The evolutionary theory of the formation of fossils makes certain conditions obligatory. Let me go back. With fossils, they take a long, long, long, long time to form, because the theory behind the formation of fossils is based on the theory of uniformity. And in today’s world, under today’s conditions, the kinds of fossils we dig up would have to take “X” millions of years to be produced. That’s what the theory of uniformity does to us. So this fossil I hold in my hand here of this leaf or duck’s footprint must be three million years old, when in reality, it can be as old as or as young as three thousand years. It changes everything. The evolutionary theory of the formation of fossils makes certain conditions obligatory. You’ve got to have this stuff in order to conform to today’s theory.
Sedimentary rock is formed in a slow process on the bottom of the sea. And the bones of animals buried in the sediment become fossilized. The land animals wade in the shallow waters of the sea or the lakes, die when wading, and their bones or their bodies are covered with sediment. The sediment must quickly cover the animals, and this is most possible when the ground subsides, when the ground sinks. Therefore, Darwin postulated such subsidence of the sea bottom as a condition for the formation of fossils. On the other hand, the subsidence or emergence of the ground in the theory of uniformity revolution is a very slow process. I mean, the land either raises or lowers at half an inch a year, something like that. The really fast moving places go two or three inches a year, a whole year, longer by far than the time necessary for a cadaver to disintegrate in water. How many months can a deer lie in the water before there’s nothing left? Not years, certainly. And if you’ve got a tremendous drop of three inches in one year, that carcass is going to be long gone.
The explanation of the origin of fossils by the theory of uniformity in evolution contradicts the fundamental principles of these theories. This is the theory: Nothing took place in the past that does not take place in the present. But, today, no fossils are formed!
Finally, the very process of settling formation is not without problem. The thickness of the sediment on the bottom of the ocean is supposed to give a time table for the age of the ocean. But, contrary to expectation, in some places on the bottom of the ocean, core samples have detected almost no sedimentary rock, indicating that the bottom of the ocean was formed in those places only recently. Those ocean beds are brand new; they are very recent.
More fossils: Both these phenomena are explained by cataclysmic events in the past. The floor of the ocean was lifted in some places and dropped in others. The sediment was violently shifted, the content of the ocean depths was spilled onto the land. Land animals were engulfed and buried by enormous tides carrying debris. In many places avalanches of sand and volcanic dust entombed the aquatic life. Fish skeletons remaining in poses of death, undevoured and undecayed.
In numerous places and in various formations are found footprints of animals of prehistoric times. These are the ones we know. Those of dinosaurs and other animals are clearly impressed in rock. The accepted explanation is that these animals walked on muddy ground, and their imprints were preserved as the ground became hard and stony. This explanation cannot stand up against critical examination. What?! I learned all that stuff in school and it was wrong and won’t stand up to critical examination? Well, let’s give it some critical examination here. The imprints must have been made like impressions in soft sealing wax. The vestiges could also remain in muddy, unheated ground that was soon covered by lava, which filled the imprints and later disintegrated on being weathered away. The footprints actually show that the animals, in most cases, were fleeing. Now, don’t ask me how they do that. Not waiting or loitering about. Sometimes the configuration of the impressions indicates that an animal was indecisive, probably trapped by some peril closing in from all sides. So it is that we do not find the tracks of animals that peacefully walked 100 or 300 years ago. But we do find traces of the vestiges of animals that walked and ran many thousands of years ago.
A little bit more on fossils. There’s a fellow named Flint who wrote Glacial Geology and the Pleistocene Epic. “A considerable group have become extinct” – animals – “virtually within the last few thousand years.” Few? What, three, four, five is just a few. That makes it 3,000, 4,000 B.C. The large mammals that died out in America include all the camels, all the horses, all the ground sloths – the large animals – two genre of musk ox, peckaries, certain antelopes, a giant bison with a horn spread of six feet, a giant beaver-like animal, a stag moose, and several kinds of cats, some of which were lion-sized. These species are believed to have been destroyed “to the last specimen” in the closing Ice Age. That’s what they believed to be. Animals strong and vigorous suddenly died out without leaving a survivor. The end came not in the course of a struggle for existence, with the survival of the fittest. Fit and unfit and mostly fit, old and young, with sharp teeth, with strong muscles, with fleet legs, with plenty of food around, all perished. All of the reasons, in other words, why animals become extinct couldn’t have happened with these, because they weren’t sick; they all died at once. There was food around in different places. There’s just no explanation of why they all died at one time. Even a sudden climatic catastrophe all over the world could hardly have been adequate by itself to account for extermination so wide and for so many species and to be so complete. Many ages of destruction must have united their forces with the sudden revolution of the climate to wipe out a major part of the animal population of the Earth with many genre and species leaving no survivors. The extermination of great numbers of animals of many species in their entirety was the effect of recurrent global catastrophes. Of some species, every animal was exterminated in one part of the world, but a number of animals succeeded in surviving in another part of the world.
So the horses and camels of the Americas were destroyed without a survivor. Yet in Eurasia, though decimated, they were not exterminated. But many species were completely extinguished in the old world as well as the new. Mammoths and mastodons and others, they expired not because of a lack of food or inadequate organic evolution, inferior build or lack of adaptation, plentiful food and superb bodies and fine adaptation and solid procreation, but no survival of the fit. They were all fit, and none survived. They died as if a wind had snuffed the life out of them, leaving their cadavers with no sign of degeneration in asphalt pits, in bogs, in sediments, in caverns. And some of the decimated species probably endured for a while, possibly for a few centuries, being represented by a few specimens of their kind, but in changed surroundings amid climatic vicissitudes, with pastures withered, with plants that had served as food or animals that had served as prey, all gone. These few followed the rest in the losing battle for existence, surrendering at last in the survival of the species. Burning forests, trespassing seas, erupting volcanoes, submerging lands took the major toll. Impoverished fields and burned-down forests did not offer favorable conditions for the frightened and solitary survivors, and claimed their own share in the work of extinction.
These animals didn’t go extinct over a long period of time. The theory of evolution says that, for a full species to go extinct, takes a long, long time, hundreds of thousands of years. Also the same is true for the emergence of a new species, and yet – he’s got a whole chapter in here how new species have popped into existence. All of a sudden they weren’t, and all of a sudden they are. How do you get around all that?
Well, we’ve got a lot of evidence going down. Now let’s tackle evolution and see what happens with evolution. A lot of Velikovsky’s argument here is straight out of Darwin’s own mouth. His thesis of the origin of the species by natural selection Darwin supported by reference to three things: 1) variations in domestic animals, especially when the breeder deliberately develops a certain desirable feature, breeding; 2) the anatomical similarity of many related species; and 3) the geological record. The possibilities of breeding, the similarity between species, and what we find in the rocks. However, though breeders have created new races or variations, they have created no new animal species. In the anatomy of living creatures, “The distinctness of the specific forms and their not being blended together by innumerable transitional links is a very obvious difficulty.” That’s what Darwin said. The distinctness of forms and their not being blended together causes a problem. And thus, the entire weight of proof was placed on the geological record. This record shows, however, from another one of the sections in The Origin of Species, Darwin writes: “Scarcely any paleontological discovery is more striking than the fact that the forms of life change almost simultaneously throughout the world.” They don’t change over long periods of time. Baffling, he says. This appears baffling because, according to his theory, “the process of modification must be slow and will generally affect only a few species at the same time. For the variability of each species is independent of all the others.” That’s what the theory says, and then he writes a letter to somebody else and says, oh, I can’t explain this.
Could it not have been a sudden change in the physical conditions that alter the forms of life at one and the same time throughout the world? Darwin answers no. “It is indeed quite futile to look for changes of currents, climate and other physical conditions as the cause of these great mutations in forms of life throughout the world under the most different climates.” If the climate or other physical conditions changed in one part of the world, how could this alter the forms of life in the other parts of the world? That a change in physical conditions could have occurred over all the world at one and the same time Darwin did not even take into consideration, what kind of an answer to his problem, therefore, could Darwin propose? He proposed blank intervals of geology! Well, there were times when no fossils were laid down, and that confuses the issue, so we have to – what??!!
Here’s some more Darwin. Since the first scientific observations were made, no truly new animal species has been observed to come into being. Now, let me interject here. If you make a new breed, that new breed, to be a species on the level of species, that new breed can’t breed with its parents and produce young. Mules are a cross between a horse and a donkey, and they can’t breed with themselves. They can’t breed with anybody; they’re sterile. The new breed has to be able to breed with itself and not be able to breed with its parents. That’s how the shift has to happen. And right away you’re confronted with the immediacy of that. One generation can’t breed with a previous generation. A dog can’t breed with its mother or father and produce any offspring. And we know that happens all the time.
The year after publication of The Origin of the Species, Thomas Huxley wrote, “But there is no positive evidence at present that any group of animals has, by variation and selective breeding, given rise to another group which was even the least degree infertile with the first.” A few years later Darwin wrote in a letter, “The belief in natural selection must at present be grounded entirely on general considerations.” Natural selection theory has to be grounded on general considerations. When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed. Nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of all the theory. He denies that his theories are true himself, practically! At the end of the century Huxley found himself compelled to make this statement: “I remain of the opinion that until selective breeding is definitely proved to give rise to varieties infertile with one another, the logical foundation of the theory of natural selection is incomplete. We remain very much in the dark about the causes of variation.”
Thus – this is an explanation of how some species come into existence rather than being extinct – thus, increased radioactivity coming from outside this planet or from the bowels of the Earth could be the cause of the spontaneous origin of new species, as radiation, electric shock, or some big change like that, could cause that spontaneous origin. They’ve done that in a laboratory, in other words; they’ve found that that kind of stuff works. Should an inter-planetary discharge – a big lightning bolt between two planetary bodies – take place between the Earth and another celestial body, such as a planet or a planetoid or a trail of meteorites or a charged cloud of gases, with possibly billions of volts of potential difference and nuclear fission or fusion, the effect would be similar to that of an explosion of many hydrogen bombs, with ensuing procreation of monstrosities and growth anomalies on a large scale. We are led to the belief that evolution is a process initiated in catastrophes. Initiated in catastrophes. Numerous catastrophes or bursts of effective radiation must have taken place in the geological past in order to change so radically the living forms on Earth, as the record of fossils embedded in lava and sediment bears witness. The fact that the geological record shows a sudden emergence of many new forms at the beginning of each new geological age does not require the artificial explanation that the records are always defective. The geological records truly reflect the changes in the animal and plant worlds from one period of geological time to the next. Many of the new species involved in the wake of a global catastrophe at the beginning of a new age were entombed in the subsequent paroxysm of nature at the end of that age. A lot of them that came about at the beginning of the age were dumped off in the sediment at the end. The fact that in many cases the intermediary links between present-day species are missing, as well as those between various species of the geological record – a vexing problem – is understandable in the light of sudden and multiple variations that give rise to new species.
The objection to the theory of natural selection that the developed plan in the new species must appear suddenly or the race would expire, as in the case of the kangaroo pockets, is answerable within the framework of catastrophic evolution. However, the purposefulness of animal structures will remain a problem deserving as much wonder as, for instance, the purposeful behavior of leukocytes in the blood that rush to combat an obnoxious intruder. A fact stressed by Agassiz (a scientist) that numerous earlier species of fish showed a more highly developed organism when compared with later species of fish can be explained by the destruction of earlier forms, not in the process of competition, but in upheavals against which a superior structure is no defense. The observation that healthy species of animals like mammoths with no sign of degeneration suddenly became extinct greatly troubled the evolutionists. This fact is unexplainable by natural selection or by the principle of competition. Not so in the catastrophic intervention of nature.
The theory of evolution is vindicated by catastrophic events in the Earth’s past. The proclaimed enemy of this theory proved to be its only ally! The real enemy of the theory of evolution is the teaching of uniformity or the non-occurrence of any extraordinary events in the past. This teaching, called by Darwin, the mainstay of the theory of evolution, almost set the theory apart from reality. Great catastrophes of the past accompanied by electrical discharges and followed by radioactivity could have produced sudden and multiple mutations of the kind achieved today by experimenters but on an immense scale. The past of mankind and of the animal and plant kingdoms too must now be viewed in the light of the experience of Hiroshima.
I urge you to get Velikovsky’s Earth in Upheaval and Worlds in Collision, and also this book called Pole Shift. Research might be a tedious task, but there’s really strength in knowing the truth. It’s worth the time and effort. Put your nose in a book, but not a mystery novel. Do some research. It’s so rewarding. The only thing that the Bible demands is that 6,000 years ago, of our kinds of years, a man-like creature was quickened with the spirit of God and became the progenitor of what we call the human race. Why complicate things? I hope I’ve set some of you free from the traditional thinking. You don’t really have to turn in your brain or turn it off to be a Christian, you know. In fact, the more you study the truth, the closer you’ll get to God.
God is real! And you can trust Him! It’s the only thing that’s going to save us!
I love mail.