Some Comparative Overlays
Each continent, each spatial demarcation on the face of the Earth appears to be unique and distinguishable from one another. The shoreline boundaries of the continents appear to follow specific patterns, however, that reflect the different forces at work within the Earth, on the Earth, and even above the Earth. The force of gravity; the electromagnetic forces; the force of water currents and flows; the spreading of the sea floors; the activity around the trenches in the oceans; volcanic activity; earthquakes; winds; atmospheric conditions and weathering; climate; compression, divergence and convergence of continental drift; the motion of the tectonic plates; among others, are some of the factors to be reckoned in the analysis.
The random action of all of these forces would suggest that the contours and shapes of the continents would themselves be equally random. Yet, there appears to be patterns of symmetry within the shape and formation of the continents, in spite of a contrary belief. If we compare certain views of the continents, we may be able to discern such a symmetry and explore a modification of the theses proposed by Wegener.
Let us look first at the continents of Africa and South America, since these were the two main continents that spurred the idea of continental drift in the mind of Wegener.
| South America Continental Shelf View |
Africa Continental Shelf View |
 |
 |
Now, let us begin our analysis by overlaying these two distinct images upon one another in order to visualize the forces that may have created their shapes and outlines.
Africa/South America Overlay
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
In this view, we see that by overlaying the semicircular aspect of South America and Africa on their western rim, the eastern rim of South America lies along the line of the Nile River in Africa. Furthermore, the continental shelf of South America at its eastern tip stretches towards the island of Madagascar off of the eastern tip of Africa. In other words, the two continents reflect a similar spatial design.
Africa/South America Overlay
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
The previous outline view reflects the same correspondence in geographical design, whereby the two continents appear to have been formed out of the same/similar kinds of forces acting upon them. One can imagine the eastern part of Africa, to the east of the Nile River, as having remained, while that corresponding eastern section of South America was swept away by the Atlantic Ocean forces.
Africa/South America Overlay View
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
In the previous view, we have simply moved the overlays to a somewhat distinct angle, in order to observe the lines of correspondence better. It is noteworthy to observe the similar length of the western bottom portion of the two continents. And, always note the placement of the two tips of both of these continents in relation to one another as of the general size of both.
In the previous view, notice the correspondence of the mouths of the Nile and Amazon Rivers and the southern tips of the two continents. Also, from this angle, one can imagine the forces acting upon either side of these continents and how they may have been affected in weathering.
In the previous view, one may distinguish the placement of the Nile River better in relation to the outline of the continent of South America, and thereby note the line of force relating to these two corresponding areas.
Such a duplication of design would suggest the fact that the same/similar forces are at work in the creation of these continents, which are placed in similar positions on the globe. It is almost as though we are witnessing the original symmetry of the uniform crust, which was weathered away in different places by the internal and external forces of the Earth's make-up.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
As we view both continents out of context, and at a distinct angle to one another, their similarity appears to be more recognizable. It seems hard to believe that two continents, that were ripped apart, would ultimately settle down and offer a very similar, corresponding design. One would rather suspect that they would have been totally distinct, and not similar at all.
The fact that they are relatively similar, in our mind, suggests the possibility that each was formed, in situ, under the influence of the many forces within and about the Earth, which create similar patterns in this respect.
Africa/South America Inverted Symmetry
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
In the previous view of "inverted symmetry', one should note the correspondence of the mouths of the Nile River and the Amazon River, and the contours of the southern tips of both continents, along with the symmetrical outline on either side. I like to call this one, the African Elephant.
Again, one would expect the random motion of the continental drift to produce asymmetrical, unrelated patterns of the continents. But, again, the forces of the Earth are at work, and most likely we are simply witnessing their effect upon the land masses in situ.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
From the previous view, and after taking into consideration the imaginary line of the Ecliptic, then one may better visualize the symmetry of the western curvature of both continents.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
By bringing the lines of the Ecliptic and the Earth's Axis into view, the underlying forces of the formation of the continents seem to make a little more sense. Our common-day view of the continents on a map or on a globe, do not allow us to visualize the relationship of the western curvature of both of these continents. But, as we see that the two curvatures lie in relation to one another along the Ecliptic of the Earth to the Sun, we may begin to comprehend a possible relationship of gravity and other factors, such as that of the Earth's axis, and all of the implied forces therein.
When we stand a globe of the Earth straight up, and look at it head on, we see South America as being down and to the left of Africa. But, when we look at it as above, in relation to the plane of the Ecliptic, then, the western curvature of both continents, and their general configuration, appear to be more related. Bring in other factors, like the Equator of the Earth, and even more symmetries make their appearance.
Observations
Some of the points raised in this essay would appear to substantiate the question as to whether Wegener was wrong in his interpretation of the fit between South America and Africa. There are distinct ways in which one may compare the configuration of the different continents, and those presented in this essay would suggest that contemporary theoretical interpretation of continental drift may require more analysis and meditation.
No doubt the continents are in motion, as contemporary measurements have shown. But, the question is one of how far do they move, and exactly far have they moved for the past 200 million years. The question boggles our mind. From our perspective, it would appear that the spherical shape of Earth would have produced a more uniform configuration for the continental crust, and for the ocean floors, whose interplay might have given rise to the distribution of land masses and water on the face of the Earth. But, the facial configuration might not be as radical as proposed by Alfred Wegener and his contemporary followers.
A comparison of the continental shelves and their outlines may assist us in resolving some of these questions. Such an analysis would be helpful in innumerable ways and fields of study. Intriguing questions like that corresponding to the Great Pyramid of Giza, and its placement on the Earth's grid, would make more sense were we to learn that the continents do not and have not drifted as much as suggested by the Wegener interpretation.
Anyone who looks at a map of the ocean floors and the continental shelves, should be able to discern the different factors that have gone into the make-up and configuration of the more visible aspects of the continents. And, in any event, any analysis of continental drift must take into consideration some of the points of debate that we have raised here, since a prima facie analysis of the visible continents above the oceanic water line does not seem to satisfy many of the questions raised over time.
In our mind, if the Earth is a sphere (or thereabouts), with a molten inner core, based on chemical reactions, then the product of that activity, logically enough, should be manifested in a spherical manifestation. In other words, it is logical that the core-mantle emanating from that inner, molten core, which creates the continental crust should be manifested in a uniform (or thereabouts) layer of crust. And, it is logical that this residue crust emanating from the core would have then undergone weathering and wear from the resulting forces within and around the sphere (all of the forces cited earlier). The configurations of the continents would then reflect the interplay of these symmetrically related energies and forces created thereof.
It is difficult for me, personally, to conceive of a spherical energy such as the molten core of the Earth, producing a lop-sided ball, with a blob of land mass on about one-fourth of the surface of the globe, and something undetermined on the other three-fourths of the sphere's surface. Such an imbalance on the surface of the Earth, especially in terms of the physics of such a planet, would surely have been thrown completely off balance, and possibly thrown out of its orbit.
A geophysicist may be able to tell us what celestial mechanics are involved with a split in the land mass, according to Wegener's theory, whereupon the point of separation cited lies close to one of the nodes of the meeting of the Ecliptic, the Equator and the Prime Meridian.
Obviously, someone is going to contend that these three force lines did not line up in this same, exact manner 200 million years ago. But, one would have to invoke such a relationship in order to be able to discuss the possible separation of the Proto-continent, its breaking-up, and its wandering around the globe.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
The trenches appear on a little more than half the surface, in distance, of the Earth. The ridges appear on the opposite hemisphere. This causes some theorists to propose the idea that molten matter arises from the depths through the ridges, and is then channeled back into the interior of the planet through the trenches on the other side. They see this phenomenon as a reason to suggest the confirmation of the Wegener thesis.
We see no reason for this. One can obviously comprehend the circular motion of the internal movement of the molten core towards the surface of the Earth, and an intake on the other side through the trenches. But, one does not have to have the continents wandering around intact on the face of the Earth for 200 million years, whereby we can recognize a perfect match between two continents. Our reasoning would suggest that the activity of the ridges and the trenches, along with all of the other geo-activity and cited energies and forces involved, would obviously produce movement in the continental crust, but not to the degree referenced by the Wegener thesis. It is reason to consider that the continental crust of the Pacific Ocean has undergone such drastic destruction, that basically very little continental mass exists in that region anymore. And, it is easily reasonable to comprehend that the continental mass within the area of the trenches is more predominant today, as of this build-up process.
But, in order to comprehend this dynamic interplay of forces and energies within the Earth and about the Earth, one does not have to have the continents existing as one, and then walking around on the face of the Earth with all this activity going on. In our minds, it simply contradicts what we know about the symmetry of energy and forces, and their consequences upon matter.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
The two previous views show opposite sides of the globe. The first image reflects the area of major ridge activity, and opposite to that is a major area of trench activity.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
To offer a theory that would propose that the continental land mass that exists today is relatively the same as that which existed 200 million years ago, offers an extremely static view of matter and energy. It would suggest that the Earth is in a steady state of existence and reveals no wear and tear. The Earth now consists of almost 3/4ths water on its surface area, which suggests major wear and tear, with an ever-diminishing land mass.
In our studies of ancient artwork and monumental-pyramidal structures, we are concerned with the placement of sites such as that of Giza.
©2001 Charles W. Johnson
From the previous view, one may notice how the Giza Plateau lies at a forty-five degree angle from the converging point of the Prime Meridian, the Ecliptic and the Equator of the Earth. In our minds, the Great Pyramid is possibly much older than the cited 4600 BP date offered by most archaeologists. BY many indications, it would appear that the Great Pyramid may have been built with knowledge similar to some of the ideas expressed herein.
Authors who study ancient knowledge, like Carl P. Munck, have utilized the Great Pyramid as the prime meridian, with the Great Pyramid representing the center-point of the geo-grid system. However, from the perspective presented herein, the ancient kemi may have built the Great Pyramid with a distinct concept in mind. They may have chosen their spot quite well, as we can see from the previous illustration. The Giza Plateau represents a significant point in relation to the Ecliptic and the Equator, as of the cited Primer Meridian of today. Just as so many other aspects of the Great Pyramid seem to defy happenstance, and represent a conscious design, so too it would appear that the placement as shown represents a higher knowledge of the earth's geographical configuration. Just what that historical significance may mean shall concern us in future essays within the Earth/matriX series.
But, before such theses may be discussed, we have at least presented some of the doubts raised when considering the interpretations of tectonic plates and continental drift associated with present-day theories.
***
©2001-2005 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved.
Reproduction prohibited.
johnson@earthmatrix.com
To receive your
copy of
Was Wegener Wrong?
Tectonic Plates, Continental Drift and The Symmetry of the Continents
ISBN 1-58616-199-7 ---- PC-disk ---- Price: $25.00
|
We are now
accepting payment by credit cards:
|
|
|
|
|
Master
Card
|
Visa
|
American
Express
|
Be sure to
specify book titles and their price,
with your contact information: e-mail address preferred.
Thank you for your order.
|
|
|
