The Expanded Earth
Copyright 2003, 2005, 2007 by F. David Fry

This document explores the probability that the Earth of the historical past has expanded to more than twice its original size but its mass has remained about the same.

1)  Chapter one exposes the defects in today’s plate tectonic theory, then shows evidence that the earth has expanded.
2)  The second chapter explains how the earth could expand and its cause.

3)  Chapter three outlines the consequences of such an expansion.

4)  Fourth is the evidence of expansion during the era of humankind.

Chapter 1

The Present Tectonic Theory and its Weaknesses
In 1974, while accumulating data from sea floor maps, the impression struck me that the ocean floors have expanded from nothing. This was a time when United States geologists began accepting the theory of plate tectonics and the separation of continents. However the big drawback was a concept called “subduction”. It was obvious that the continents of Africa and South America had at some previous time separated from each other. What seemed to be causing this separation was a large crack or deep chasm extending north and south along the Atlantic Ocean floor, a crack which encircled the globe. This Mid-Atlantic Rift, exudes hot magma from the bowels of the earth’s mantle and lavishly deposits them along each side of the crack. It is easily observed that this long split in the ocean floor sufficiently widened over time and that this widening effect has created the Atlantic Ocean basin.

Are these deposits the result of forces pushing the earth apart (surface pressure), as currently believed by scientists, or is this crack, and subsequent deposits, the result of some force pulling, or stretching the earth apart.  In either case the rift appeared to be creating more sea floor. U.S. scientists were pushing a theory that the earth’s surface was composed of moving plates and as the Mid-Atlantic Rift exuded more molten rock, the more the Eastern plate separated from the Western plate. This theory resulted in the idea that the Atlantic sea floor pushed laterally against the Americas to the West and eastward against Europe and Africa. Yet the problem was that if the Atlantic plates were growing, then where is this surface pressure being relieved? Researchers were in a quandary because the western Atlantic plate would be pressing against the American continent, while the eastern Atlantic plate would be pushing eastward against the European plates and against western Africa. Because there existed no evidence of clashes of ocean plates along the eastern Americas or western Europe and Africa (clashes displayed by mountain ranges, earthquake zones, and or overthrusted tectonic plates), geologists were forced to geographically delay the inevitable clash. They chose to make the western Atlantic the same plate as the American continents, and the Eastern Atlantic the same plate as Africa. This effectively delayed the clash point of the earth’s surface pressure to the Pacific rim of fire.

When this theory of tectonic plates began it was naturally thought that the continents were plates and that the ocean floors were plates of a different type.  But because there was no evidence of the Atlantic Ocean plate clashing against Africa or the Americas, geologists were forced to connect the western Atlantic plate with the Americas and connect the eastern Atlantic plate with Africa.  Therefore, the North American plate started at the West Coast of the United States and continued through America and then halfway through the Atlantic Ocean.  The same goes for Africa. The African plate begins at the Indian Ocean and extends westward across Africa to the mid-Atlantic Ridge. This awkward configuration of plates made the American plate include half ocean floor and the African plate the other half of ocean floor.
Yet, it was well-known that the ocean floors where geologically very different from the continents.  The continents possess hundreds of geologic layers, while the oceans are basically one layer plus modern sediment, so how could they be the same plate?  The continents are thick and rigid compared to the ocean floors which are much thinner and comparatively more pliable, so how could they be the same plate?  The continents contain the shallow seas where fossils of seagoing dinosaurs are found. They are not found in the ocean floors.  Again, the continents have little in common with a oceanic basin, so how could they share a common tectonic plate?

The results of this viewpoint is that the surface pressure created along the mid-Atlantic Ridge had to continue pushing westward across the American continent until the pressure is relieved along the eastern Pacific Coast.  The same goes for the pressure in the eastern Atlantic expanding and pushing eastward through the continents of Africa, Europe, and Asia, until the pressure is relieved at the Pacific Ocean plate.  Therefore according to present thinking, all the continents float to relieve their lateral pressure toward the Pacific rim.  This floating theory of continents conflicts with their other theory that Africa is the one relatively stable and unmoving mass on the earth’s surface.

To expand the plates on one side of the earth requires that the plates be destroyed in some other location. Without such a destruction the total global surface would be growing. Geologists trained in the uniformitarian mind set, where all conditions of the past are the same as today’s conditions, could not tolerate an expanding earth. Therefore, they had to invent some method to prevent the oceanic plates from constantly expanding as a result of this lateral surface pressure. (According to present thinking only the ocean floor surface expands, the continents may drift but they remain the same size.)

For years Geologists had observed overthrusted mountain ranges where continental pressure pushed up mountains and in some cases, one side of a mountain range would overlap the other side.  By using this same pattern, geologists invented what they call subduction zones where one tectonic plate would override another. Because the continental plates were thicker and more rigid than the ocean floor plates, the continental plates would override the thinner ocean floor plates. The thinner ocean plate would then be subducted and pushed downward toward the center of the earth and melted.  With this current model, the whole surface of the earth is under lateral pressure and it’s only relief was these subduction zones.

Leo Maslov published the results of the meeting of the American Geophysical Union which met in San Francisco in 2004. Ten thousand geophysicists from all over the world had convened and Maslov reported that support for plate tectonics was seriously dwindling. There were numerous facts obviously contradicting the plate tectonic model, while at the same time there exists phenomenon which plate tectonics cannot and does not try to explain. In particular, results of seismic tomography do not correspond well with that “remarkable” picture of subduction and convection drawn by plate tectonics. He continues that reviewers and journal editors are afraid to rock the boat by publishing alternate concepts or models. (L. Maslov, “Plate tectonics is slowly and inevitably dying,” New Concepts in Global Tectonics, #33;2 December 2004)

The Fracture Zone Enigma
Then Larry, a friend who agreed with my theory of an expanded earth, comes to me with another surprise. He supplies me with an article in Discover Magazine showing the newest and most accurate sea floor maps made by satellite plotting of gravity measurements across the oceans (1999). (Figure 1)

With the aid of this newer gravity satellite mapping of the ocean floors, we now clearly see the east-west stretch lines extending from Africa’s west coast to South America’s East Coast. Geologists were excited to see the stretch marks (fracture zones) because they exactly mark the points of contact between the two separated continents. This proves that the two continents had separated from one another, and furthermore gave the precise point locations of separation of an African shoreline matching the specific South American shoreline.

However, if fracture zones prove that continents had separated, then what about those same type stretch marks across the Pacific plate? This would mean that the Pacific plate had stretched or expanded rather than compressing and subducting as is claimed by the United States geologists.

Geologists like to mention how this new map displays a line of underwater seamounts (submerged volcanic mountains), which are marching in line into the abyss of a major subduction zone (Tonga Trench) directly east of Australia and New Zealand. However this line of seamounts (Louisville Ridge) later transforms itself into the Elianin Fracture Zone line and becomes these stretch marks (called “fracture zones”). Unfortunately for their model, this line of seamounts proves the very opposite of what geologists claim. The seamounts are not marching in a line toward the so-called subduction trench, but rather seem to be stretching away from the trench.

Not only do fracture zones run perpendicular to the continents and trenches but they also run perpendicular through the mid-ocean ridge.  The mid Atlantic Ridge has fracture zones cutting across it causing the Ridge to shift in a sawtooth fashion. Strangely the fracture zones cutting across the Atlantic Ridge are not shifted by the more dominant Ridge. Thus the fracture zone lines stay intact when crossing the larger ridge while the ridge is often shifted when severed by the fracture zone. The fracture zones run straight and uninterrupted through the Ridge and in most cases the fracture zones tend to fade out as they approach a continent.  About half of the earth’s fracture zones cross ocean floor ridges. Usually the ridges run parallel to the continents and the fracture zones run perpendicular from the continents and cut through the ocean ridges. (Figure 2)

(Figure 2)
Notice how the Mid Atlantic Ridge is not only severed into short segments by the Fracture Zones but why and how do the Fracture Zones force offsets in the Ridge by more than a thousand miles in a few cases.

Geologists say that the Atlantic Rift (ridge) is still spreading apart because of the hot vents melting the plates apart.

Therefore, their logic says that after millions of years the tear will gradually continue to widen, thus pushing the sea floor apart and creating surface pressure across the earth’s crust. Yet, simple physics demonstrates that any molten plate edge is too soft and pliable to push and move the more rigid plates, which eventually collide, overthrust, and then subduct, at some other remote location. (Yes, the Atlantic Rift did tare apart but it was due to subsurface pressure resulting in lateral surface tension, not lateral surface pressure. The Earth had expanded from below.)

I propose that today’s geologically active zones are, for the most part, dormant compared to ancient geologic events. Rather than being a slow and constant geological movement, I contend that the geological activity of the Earth’s crust occurs in quantum jumps where there is a severe period of activity and then things settle down to almost a dormant state.

Fracture zone lines are seldom found on the continents, however Lynn Sykes, a prominent founder of today’s plate tectonic theory found that alkaline magmatism and earthquakes occasionally extend for hundreds of kilometers inland from the oceanic ends of fracture zones (1978). (Strange that earthquakes are not common to Fracture Zones.) On the other hand, the mid-ocean rifts commonly run through both ocean and continents. Geologists loosely define the edges of a tectonic plate as a Ridge or rift, and the ridge is defined by linear earthquake zones, linear trenches, volcanic lines, or any geological activity which runs along linear paths. These paths extend across both ocean floors and continents. (Figure 3)

(Figure 3)
Generally, active geologic zones are consideded to be the edges of tectonic plates. Unfortunately, to complete several proposed plates, geologists must fudge nonactive areas to complete the plate. (Dashed lines)

Geologists define the edges of tectonic plates by geologic activity, but do fracture zones also produce geologic activity? Fracture zones possess sea mounts (extinct undersea volcanos) and rare earthquake activity but the strings of fracture zones seem thicker and deeper than its adjacent sea floor. They seem to penetrate deeper through the earth’s crust than a Rift.
 The reason I say that the fracture is deeper is because the fracture can cut across the rift and even displace the rift, but a rift never severs or displaces a fracture zone. The fracture lines are so dominant that we observe many parallel fracture lines causing shifts in the mid-Atlantic Rift. If fracture zones lines are so deep and dominating then why do they not exude their own molten deposits? Actually, fracture zones did produce molten deposits in the distant past as displayed by old dormant sea mounts. However, today fracture zones display little-to-no geologic activity. This is in contrast to the rift ridges which are geologically active. This hints that the fractures are more ancient than the rifts. (Current geology teaches that fracture zone lines are cooling cracks developing in the direction of plate motion. If true then fracture zones are more shallow than adjacent crust. If true, then why was the plate continuously cooling in the same spot as the plate moved across the ocean floor, thus leaving a straight line? While it appears true that the ocean floor was once molten just below a very thin crust, cooling lines cannot be lab duplicated which trail in straight lines from a slow moving island (plate). If fracture lines are cooling cracks developing where continents split apart, then our new model of global expansion is not jeopardized because that explanation works for either model.)

These Fracture Zones are always seen stretching between the continents and never seen running parallel to the landmasses. This gives evidence that these geological lines are created by the landmasses pulling apart and leaving this mysterious scratch line. Because these fracture zones radiate in long lines away from each continent, they give the impression of webs connecting all the landmasses. This expressly shows that expansion within the earth had forced the earth’s rigid crust to crack and separate into individual continents which at some previous time had all been connected. By reverse engineering of the fracture zones, we detect planetary expansion rather than lateral continental plate movement.

Fracture Zones and Time
The Earth has expanded in volume (but not in mass) and the stretch marks prove it. We must clear our minds of the “Drifting Continent” concept. The continents virtually remain in position as the oceans enlarge around them. We must abandon the idea that continents are forcing themselves around like billiard balls, colliding with one another. The evidence displays that the continents have mostly held their position and the Earth has swollen under them.
We must discard our thinking that the continents separated over millions of years. Again the fracture zones demonstrate that these scratches across the ocean floor occurred rapidly and are recent in origin. Had the fracture zones been created over eons of time, one end of the fracture would display more erosion than the other end. This has not been observed. The fracture zones lay on top of only one type of deposit, which displays that they occurred recently and suddenly in geological terms of time.

Expanded Ocean Floors
Images produced by the new gravity sensing satellite used to map the sea floor, proves that the continents have always been dry landmasses (except for shallow seas and temporary flooding), and that continents do not rise from the ocean bottom, neither do they sink into the ocean plates. The more appropriate concept is to say that as the earth expanded, separating the continents, the new filler between the continents created the ocean floors. So if one insisted on a plate concept the only existing plates would be the continents. The ocean floors should not be considered plates but rather a thin crust of magma which had melted and then flowed out from beneath the continents.

Both the Pacific Rim ring of fire and the mid-Atlantic Ridge expansion, have another explanation of their existence. That explanation is that the earth had expanded from beneath these ocean floors. Expansion from beneath would account for the surface tension seen in the Pacific Basin.  It is surface tension rather than surface compression which created the Pacific’s the ring of fire, it’s deep trenches and volcanic ridges. The Pacific floor is being torn apart rather than pressed together. It is also Earth expansion, not surface pressure which caused the Atlantic floor to be pulled apart exposing the vast mid-Atlantic Ridge. Therefore the mid-Atlantic Ridge is not creating lateral compression, as is currently proposed by geologists, but rather the expansion pressure from beneath the Atlantic floor has forced the Atlantic Ridge to widen its split.

The ocean floors expanded from beneath, resulting in surface tension but the solid and more ridged continents were under pressure, so continental surfaces were under lateral compression. It is this continental surface pressure which created overtrusting of mountain ranges. How could the continents have internal pressure yet the ocean floors be pulling apart? We will address continental pressure momentarily.

It is quite preposterous to think that the molten mid-Atlantic Ridge at the surface is pushing the continents apart. Therefore, to justify what is observed, geologists propose two enormous deep flowing currents of magma colliding deep beneath the Ridge and the two opposing currents then upwell and divide along the ridge crack. One problem with this model is that nowhere in the annals of fluid motion does two colliding walls of liquid uplift and then reverse direction and still maintain a collision boundary extending thousands of miles long and remain stable and unmoved for millions of years. In reality, colliding liquids always create a vertical whirlpool, even in extreme slow motion. Another problem with the molten current theory is how to get these deep currents to oppose each other, and still a third problem is what propels these powerful currents. Tidal effects from the moon would not create opposing currents. The dominant theory for creating the molten current is concentrations of nuclear radiation.

Though flowing currents of magma in the Earth’s mantel may exist, perhaps caused by a plasma core, it does not seem to propel continents. But from today’s data, there is little evidence supporting the existence of these flowing currents except that they could explain the Earth’s geomagnetic field. However, because the geomagnetic field is rapidly depleting, would it also mean that the currents are slowing down? If the geomagnetic field reverses, (as it has done many times), does this also mean that the subterranean currents have reversed directions? No geologist would dare make such a proposal, so these types of questions are never published.

The Pacific plate is much larger than the other ocean floors, which likely is evidence that it was created in a different manner and at a different time. The Pacific floor is mostly deposits of basalt which contains large amounts of iron, the other ocean floors are not primarily basalt. Because the heavier iron deposits are found in the Pacific Ocean floor, I propose that the original crack which later became the Pacific ocean floor was a much deeper cut than the mid-Atlantic Ridge. Therefore the Pacific floor had a thinner crust which allowed iron in the earth’s mantle to emerge and flood between where the continents had split apart. Another difference in the Pacific Ocean is that it is outlined by the ring of fire which the other oceans do not possess. It is here proposed that the Pacific’s ring of fire shows that when the earth expanded in that region, the raw magma slid away from the continents. Unlike the Pacific ocean floor, the raw magma of the mid-Atlantic Ridge expanded and flowed from both sides of its crack.

Revised Mechanics of Seafloor Spreading
A quick glance at the continents and their associated tectonic plates gives the impression of dropping eggs onto a frying pan. Spreading out in all directions from a continent, like the white of an egg spreads from its yolk, the continents were melted from underneath and this thin melted material spread out to form the sea floors.  Unfortunately, this impression cannot work unless there existed another surface below the continents which allowed the continents to melt and spread across. If three eggs are fried in a pan the whites generally spread enough to meet the white of an adjoining egg. This is what the continental plates look like.  Where the egg whites contact each other leaves a weak line of separation which correlates with the mid-Atlantic Ridge. Unfortunately, this description does not satisfy the observation that the continents have separated from each other. For example: if the egg yolks represented the continents and the egg whites represented the sea floors, then how did the Eastern coastline of South America fit the coastline of western Africa?  Originally the two egg yolks were together and later separated from each other.  The evidence proves that the egg yellows had been joined and then widely separated rather than being originally separated and having the egg whites spread out to join.

Please understand that this egg pan example is not advocated by the plate tectonic theory nor by our revised model. It is simply how the plate tectonics look according to today’s geologically active zones.

The egg white model cannot explain how fracture zones extend across the Atlantic from the shores of Africa to the shores of South America in one continuous line.  Even the mid-Atlantic Ridge fails to disrupt these fracture zone lines.

Ocean Floor Trenches
Upon gazing at the undersea maps I could easily see how the mid-Atlantic Ridge had expanded, pushing the sea floor apart, but there was no sign of pressure points along either side of the Atlantic Ocean. At that time (late 1960s), United States geologists noted the same thing, so they placed their theoretical subduction zones in the Pacific Ocean area. I remember reading how Soviet researchers adamantly objected to the whole idea of continental separation because they found no evidence of subduction anywhere on the earth. If one plate was overriding another then the scraping of the top of the submerging plate should display vast amounts of debris at the subduction site. Deep-sea drilling rigs, such as the Glomar Challenger, tested for subduction scraping and have found none. Indeed, had the scraping action of subduction really occurred, there would be high mountains at that location, but actually there exists the very opposite, the world’s deepest trenches.

U.S. geologists proposed that most of the earth’s subduction zones were located within the ring of fire encircling the Pacific ocean. This volcanic ring also included most of the earth’s deep ocean trenches. These intermittent deep trenches follow the ring of fire along the ocean floor extending from the southernmost tip of South America and traverse along the western coast of the Americas, then westward across Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. It then descends southward along the eastern coast of Japan toward New Guinea and fading east of New Zealand. This is the perimeter of the Pacific plate.

Even though United States geologists conceded to the Russians that there was no direct evidence that these sea floor trenches was where subduction occurred, it was known as the Ring of Fire, where geological activity is abundant. Unfortunately, for today’s geologists, subduction areas are only five percent of the other locations where the earth is expanding.  In other words, there is not nearly enough subduction areas to compensate for the expanding areas. Yet because the United States had the funding to promote the subduction theory, it became dogma in less than a decade.

The real mechanics of the trenches circling the Pacific plate is the opposite of subduction. These trenches are not pressure points where one plate is pushing against another. Obviously a trench is caused by something pulling apart rather than pushing together. A trench is created where one plate has separated from the other due to surface tension pulling the plates apart. This is easily explained by an expansion of the earth’s mantle below the plates. That expansion from beneath separates the continents with their more cohesive surface, and as they separate, new ocean floor is created. Proof for this is observed at the ring of fire where trenches run parallel to the continents. Then extending perpendicular from the trenches are the fracture zone lines extending toward mid ocean. Because these fracture lines extend from the ocean side of the trench, further demonstrates that a pulling action is occurring rather than a pushing force.

Current geology tells us that the Pacific Ocean floor, with its many theoretical subduction zones, causes linear tension across the Pacific Basin. Yet, at the same time they say that the Atlantic Ocean Basin does the opposite by its linear expansion against its opposing continents. Therefore, the Pacific Basin has lateral tension because of its sucking subducting zones, while the Atlantic floor is under pressure. Unfortunately, for this viewpoint, the Pacific Ocean Basin contains just as many theoretical lateral expansion zones as it does theoretical subduction zones. This means that the Pacific Ocean floor is not absorbing lateral surface pressure from across the globe as geologists propose. The Pacific Basin has only enough proposed subduction zones to absorb its own expansion zones, much less absorb the expansion for the remainder of the globe.

Fracture Zone and Trench Relationships
Most all trenches have long fracture zones extending from them. Geologists think these fracture lines, many of which stretch for several thousand miles, are being pushed into the trenches, but, maps show that the fracture zones are extending from the trenches.
The only method by which these fracture zones could be falling into trenches as is currently maintained is that the trench is sucking them in. As to how one small section of subduction sucks vast regions of sea floor, ten to fifty times the subduct zone size, falls outside the processes of known physics. Therefore, the string of seamounts seen in the South Pacific Louisville Ridge is not being sucked or pushed into the Tonga Trench. A string cannot be pushed.
I think it strange that these fracture zones never seem to extend across a trench but always stop at the trench. They are not found on both sides of a trench. These fracture zones are seen throughout all the oceans, most of them where no trenches exist. Clearly the fracture zones extend between the continents but are seldom found on continents.
It is also interesting that even though these stretched out fracture lines do not cross trenches they commonly stretch across the mid-ocean rifts. Perhaps the reason we do not see the stretch marks across trenches is because most all trenches run along, the edges of the continents, thereby allowing only one trench side to face the fracture zone, while the other side of the trench is the continent’s coastline.  If the linear fracture zones are really stretch marks, how could they have been created? The exact physics of how fracture zone lines are created is not only unknown, geophysicists remain silent on the details of this phenomenon.

Subterranean Currents
It is obvious that the continents have moved in the past. If we can find the cause of that motion, we might determine if these continents are still in motion or if the movement is now somewhat dormant.

The most popular proposal by Geologists is that there exist liquid currents below the tectonic plates. This hot magma rises from the earth’s center climbing up to the bottom of the plate then moves slowly across the bottom of a given tectonic plate and in doing so the current cools and finally descends toward the core of the earth where it reheats.  Therefore, the tectonic plates and continents drift laterally because the liquid currents from below the are carrying them along.

(The theory of convection is where hot magma circulates vertically under the earth’s crust and as the magma upsurges from the earth’s core it tends to move laterally below the Earth’s crust which pushes the continents which ride of this liquid magma.)

As the new field data accumulates geologists seem to desperately be adding new ad hoc theories to support the traditional tectonic plate model. NSF supported scientists have discovered the presence of an ancient conduit in the earth’s mantle beneath Brazil. The conduit appears to have remained geographically fixed with respect to the overlying continent despite the theoretical thousands of kilometers of South American plate movement. This new observation runs contrary to the major tenant of plate tectonics — — — that the motion of the lithospheric plates is essentially independent of flow to the upper mantle beneath the plates. (Seismic Evidence for a Fossil Plume beneath South America  and Implications for Plate Driving Forces,” Nature, 1995.)

Another problem for geologists teaching the convection flow model is the source of the heat in the earth’s core and mantle. Their best guess is Primordial trapped heat, or radioactive reactions, or tidal effects caused by the moon. The primordial heat would have lasted only a hundred million years of the earth’s 4.6 billion years.
It has now been determined that the internal stress caused by the moon is not nearly strong enough to liquefy the earth’s interior. This leaves the nuclear reaction theory.

Radioactive icotope concentrations (such as thorium 232, uranium 238, and potassium 40), are only contained in the earth’s outer crust. And their concentrations are equivalent to only 21 ppm. The resulting energy is not nearly enough to melt the elements nor push continents.

As we have seen, the scratch marks (called Fracture Zones) clearly show the points of contact where the continents began to break apart. These long marks, observed in all the ocean basins, prove that there’s no place on earth for subduction to occur. The hypothetical convection current was invented as an explanation for subduction. But if the earth expands, no subduction zone or convection current is needed to move the continents. In our new model the continents do not move laterally; but they are floating upward from the earth’s expansion.

Today’s conventional theory of what causes the continents to slide is without adequate support, both scientifically and observationally.

What Created Fracture Zones?
Noted geologist N. C. Smoot rejects the popular underground convection current theory and thinks that theoretic “surge channels” which open and close over time, transport hot magma through them. Smoot thinks these hot channels are a major contributor to El Ninio seeing that the condition responsible for creating surge channels, is located at the precise El Ninio address in the northern Pacific.

Fracture Zone lines might be ancient surge channels, but I conjecture that because fracture zones (FZ) extend perpendicularly from all the continents, they literally look like scratch marks. But what would create such long scratches across vast ocean floors? Geologists acknowledge that the continents have deep roots (Lowman, 1985; Moores & Twiss, 1995, p-234). The continents are not smooth across their bottom. When the planet’s supercontinent cracked apart the protruding roots left scratches as the magma beneath squeezed through these roots leaving long and deep scratches across the newly created ocean floor. These scratches would leave open wounds in the mantle which caused volcanic seamounts. Geologists understand that these scratched fracture zones are geologically dormant. This shows that Earth expansion no longer occurs accept for perhaps slight oscillations.

These data tend to refute those advocates advancing the idea that the Earth has been steadily expanding for 65 million years and others saying expansion has occurred for over a billion years. Fracture Zones and trenches are evidence that earth expansion had its heyday a few thousand years ago and then settled down to its minor expansion/ contraction oscillations in our era.

Because fracture zone scratches are seldom parallel but fan out from the continents, is visual proof that the scratches were created as the earth expanded in all directions at once and then the process ceased.

Global Positioning Satellites
Obviously the earth is not geologically totally dormant. But what is experienced today in earthquakes, volcanoes and plate movement’s is but a whisper of previous experiences. Thinking in terms of millions of years, geologists assume that what is measured today is what has always occurred. But even what is measured today is confusing and inconclusive and as a whole insignificant by comparison to the ancients. Today’s measurements and movements almost totally mismatch continental and plate positions. Earth movements today are merely incidental and in comparatively small increments.

Plumes and Hot Spots
Geologists are becoming increasingly convinced that enormous plumes of molten substances are upwelling from the earth’s center (Yellow Stone, USA, and the Deccan basalts of northwest India, now dormant). When the hot spots are under the continents they seemed to remain rather stable but under the oceans they tend to all move. Under the Pacific Ocean, like Hawaii, the hot spots are simultaneously moving in a southeasterly direction. Theoretically, these hot spots would be the break-away remnants of the earth’s plasma core which is still depleting.

Defining Plate Edges
The outer edges of tectonic plates are defined by three geological features. Foremost is the mid-ocean rift, or tare, which started all the controversy about moving continents. The premier example of this rift is the Mid-Atlantic tare directly between the Americas and Africa. This rift seldom gets close to continents.

Another plate defining border is the large system of deep oceanic trenches. Unlike the mid-ocean rift that slowly exudes heated magma from the earth’s interior, the ocean trenches prefer to hug the borders of some continents. These trenches do not slowly exude hot magma even if they do reach depths many times that of the surface depth of the mid-ocean rifts.  Another defining edge of a plate is volcanic and earthquake zones.

While ocean trenches lie geologically dormant, in many instances there exist under sea volcanic action and earthquake zones not far from these trenches. Yet, exploration of these trenches shows that no volcanic activity occurs within the trenches itself and also there is no great accumulation of ocean sediments in the trenches. All this points to the fact that the trenches are not subduction zones as claimed.  Had they been subduction zones there would have been debris scraped up and filling the trench. Indeed if anything, they are just the opposite. The presence of a trench proves that the Earth has expanded from the inside and the thin surface has pulled apart, leaving a long and deep trench.

Another feature defining the edge of a tectonic plate is not readily detected because it crosses the continents on dry land instead of the sea floors. These dry land rifts failed to open and spread apart as did the ocean rifts. The rift traveling north-south through the Dead Sea and on through East Africa is the most obvious such a crack. Because there are Middle East historical records predating the creation of the Dead Sea, plus the Biblical story of the destruction of Sodom and Gamorrah which lay in a fertile rich valley where the Dead Sea later existed, we see the probability that at least some of the rift was created rather late in geological history.

The East Africa Rift Valley is a favorite digging place for the Johansons and Lekeys in their quest for the origins and evolution of man. This is where the famed Lucy bones were discovered.

Another example of continental plate edge is where the so-called India plate presses against the Asian plate creating the Himalayan Mountains. Aerial mapping shows curious geological waves extending from the Himalayan Mountains eastward into China and Indo China. Then north of China is another odd swirl of mountains in northern Siberia. These areas do indeed look like Mountains created by compression between tectonic plates. Unfortunately the Siberian Mountains have no known tectonic plate edge at their location. However some geologists maintain the existence of a mid-continent rift there, but it goes nowhere and fades out like the East African Rift fades out at it’s southern extent.

Separating the Siberian swirl of mountains and the Himalayan geologic swirl, is the Tibetan high flat land. This place looks like some enormous asteroid struck the Earth at a low angle and melted the earth for hundreds of miles around. This high Tibetan plane has little to no evidence that it was created by tectonic plates pressing one against the other as is assumed by geologists.

Continental Overthrust Mountain Building
Earth expansion supplies a simple explanation of how these mid-continental mountain ranges were formed. Rather than having the accepted theory that the India Plate (Indo-Australian Plate) is pushing against the Asia plate, the mountains are simply pushed up due to continental loss of their convex profile. This means that there exists no wandering India plate as proposed by geologists. The Himalayan mountains were created from a single plate which included both India and the rest of Asia. When the earth expanded, this Asian Plate buckled in its center and overthrusted due to the difference between the Earth’s enlarged curvature and the more convex curvature of Asia when it was originally formed from a smaller Earth.
(Figure 4)

Today’s accepted theory of mountain building utilizes continental plate movement to explain how the mountains were created. This is because mountains are present at many points of contact between earth plates. For example, the Andes Mountains run adjacent to the long Pacific plate (Nazca Plate). The Himalayan Mountains are thought to be created by two plates pressing against one another. Therefore pressure points on the earth’s moving plates is considered adequate proof that mountains are created by pressure between plates.

(Because the Pacific Rim is thought by geologists to contain most of the earth’s subduction zones, the Andes Mountains of South America are shown as an example where the Pacific plate is subducting under South America because the continent is being pushed over the Pacific plate.

Of course if the earth were expanding, then it would relieve the pressure between the plates and this slacking action would certainly not push up the Andes Mountains. So how would these mountains be created on an expanding earth? First notice that geologists consider the continental plates to be very thick compared to the plates on the ocean floor. If a continental plate pushes against an ocean plate, which plate would first buckle under the pressure and create mountains? Obviously the thinner ocean plate would break first. Yet if this were true why are the Andes Mountains always found on the thicker continental plates and not found on the oceanic plate, the one which should have buckled up into mountain ranges? Virtually no oceanic mountains are ever found at the pressure points between an ocean plate and a continental plate. The mountains are always a part of the continental plate. The only oceanic mountains are either volcanic seamounts or the raised mid-ocean ridges where the ocean plates are growing. No mountains created by linear pressure and over-thrusting are found at the theoretical pressure points.

 Instead of a piling up of over-trusted mountains at certain proposed pressure points, there exists just the opposite, a deep ocean trench. Obviously if pressure is being applied to the ocean’s plates, the thinner ocean plates should be full of overthrusted mountains. But the opposite is true. The oceans contain no overthrusted mountains, but the thicker continents have an abundance of mountain thrusting. What is going on here?

The traditional model of ocean plate movement and its pressure points where subduction occurs, has the logic of pushing a rope. A pushed rope will warp and buckle, yet there exists no sign of buckled mountains on the ocean floor. The only other option is to suck the ocean floor into the hypothetical subduction zones. Actually some traditional geologists visualize such an action in the way they talk; but subduction zones cannot vacuum up the ocean plates. Indeed this whole idea defies their own theories. It appears that mountains are not created by plates pushing against each other.

The Rocky Mountains and Appellation Mountains are not near the edge of any continental plate. The same goes for the Ural Mountains, the Alps, Pyrenees, the mountains of Madagascar, of Scandinavia and many smaller ranges. Yet all these non-plate associated mountain ranges possess over-thrust features. These mountains were pushed up, but not by the clashing of tectonic plates.
 

Continental Surface Pressure
How can lateral continental surface pressure occur in an expanding Earth model? Compared to it’s diameter, the earth’s crust is paper thin. An expanding earth under the continents would place the surface of the continents under tension and therefore the pressure causing overthrusted mountains would be impossible. However, the smaller convex shape of a brittle continent would shatter because of the larger convex shape of an expanding earth.  Therefore, the edges of a continent would be pressed down into the expanding earth while the center of the continent would rise above the Earth’s mantle.  This means that as the earth expanded, the center of every continent would have a low pressure area or vacuum bubble within it. Finally, at some point the continent will collapse in its center, and this sudden collapse will create an area of overthrusted mountains.

If the convex curve of the continents were originally made to fit a smaller earth, then the rigid and thicker continents would buckle and over thrust as the convex curvature began to flatten while the earth’s circumference enlarged. This would explain why the stronger continental plates would generate mountains and why the thinner and less rigid ocean plates did not create over-thrust mountains. Some people might reason that if the earth is expanding, the convex curvature of the continents would be pulling apart under the expanding tension, but this would not be the case due to the time factor.  The expansion of the earth would be very slow in comparison to the sudden collapse of a continent. It is this sudden continental collapse which created the over thrust mountain ranges. This process explains how overthrusted mountains are found in the center of continental plates.

This convex underside of a continent also explains how mountains are created along the edges of continents. As the smaller convex of a continent, which originated from a smaller earth, is subjected to a larger earth diameter, the edges of the continent will dig into the molten mantle and mountain chain’s will be produced due to the downward pressure along the continent’s edges. This explains how the Andes Mountains were formed.

The New Madrid Puzzle
According to traditional geology the New Madrid area has experienced at least three probably four great quakes during the past 2000 years. The puzzle to geologists is that the powerful New Madrid quakes are separated from any tectonic plate boundaries by at least 1500 miles. Therefore according to plate tectonic theory there is no reason for the New Madrid quake activity. However, our new theory of mid continent collapses due to the collapse of high arches under the continents would account for the New Madrid anomaly.

In this matter of collapsing continents, the continents are subject to downward pressure, after the expanding earth weakens the under girthing of the rigid continents. All the continental mountain ranges are young. They are composed of strata which was laid down before they became mountains. There exist no new sedimentary layers overlaying any of the earth’s mountain ranges unless the sediments are volcanic. Therefore, whatever caused the many thousands of feet of old sedimentary layers, the mountains were the last geological event.

Collapsing PT Paradigm
With these explanations we have a healthy model of the separation of continents, all explained in accordance with observation, physics, and the laws of probability. No matter which way we slice the new oceanic map data, the current uniformitarian science of geology is in doubt. This was demonstrated at the 2005 Geological Congress when it was openly admitted that the Plate Tectonic (PT) theory of continental movement was in trouble.

A Superior Interpretation of the Data
While looking at a geological map with a friend, I remarked that the sea floor had the appearance of global expansion rather than expansion in one part and subduction at another part, as explained by the plate tectonic theory. Later in that year (1999), Larry my friend, telephoned me informing that there existed sites on the Internet promoting an expanding earth theory. This was exciting news because I was contemplating some scientific method whereby the earth could expand.
Clearly depicted on my 1995 map were stretch marks (fracture zones) extending across the ocean floors from almost every continent toward an adjoining continent. The impression was clear that all the continents had at one time fit together, and that the stretch marks were tracers indicating the points of separation along the continental shelves.  It appeared obvious that the continents were separated by a pulling action rather than compression. Because the continents themselves are rigid and did not expand, the newly created surface was the ocean floors. The Earth’s surface was not under them lateral pressure but being stretched apart. No, the thicker and more rigid continental masses had not been stretched, but the ocean floors certainly had been pulled apart. (Figure 5)
 
 

(Figure 5)
The white lines are projections of the earth’s major Fracture Zones showing how the continents all moved away from each other as the planet expanded.
 

The consequences of such a model would mean that originally the earth was one megacontinent without oceans. This would also mean today’s Earth diameter has about doubled its original size.
Geologic and Paleolithic literature seems to agree that all the previous geological ages had no evidence of an existing ocean previous to the Pleistocene era. The physical evidence showed that the original earth possessed shallow seas over what is now continents, but there existed no ocean floors. This means that the ocean floors are much younger than the continents, and this is verified by radiometric dating of sea floor samples. This is further confirmed because the ocean floors do not contain the vast geologic layers as do the continents.

Observing the Big Event
If we had time lapse photography of the separation of the continents we would first observe a smaller planet whose interior begins to heat and expand. The supercontinent would began to crack and filling this crack would be the materials melted from under the continents.

This original crack would later be identified as the ridges which separated the continental plates. The mid Atlantic Ridge is the most dominant example. As the earth’s crust stretched apart due to the expansion from beneath, the underpinning material from beneath the continents melted and created more crust which spread out around each continent. This gave the appearance of each continent possessing its own tectonic plate. This thin layer of crustal spreading from the continents will become the oceanic floors.

The exuding of material from beneath the continents explains why the sea floors have no geological layers. As the earth continued to expand, some parts of the heated underpinning of the continents were cooler and therefore thicker than other parts. The original crack (ridges between the continents) did not completely sever in many locations until a later geological disturbance. The thicker continental portions would eventually break upon subsequent astral encounters which came every 140 years. The sawtooth effect of the Atlantic Ridge was caused by the earth’s expansion accompanied by rapid surface cooling and surface contraction. This cooling of the mantle surface did not affect the Fracture Zones, because they had already cooled first. (Exposed scratches of the Fracture Zones cooled rapidly by comparison.)

Scientific Conclusions
In 2000, David Pratt fired a thunderous broadside at the revered paradigm of plate tectonics, and continental draft. This 47 page study including 10 pages of references, is best summarized by quoting from the author’s own conclusions.
Plate tectonics — the reigning paradigm in the earth sciences — faces some very severe and apparently final problems. Far from being a simple, elegant, all in embracing global theory, it is confronted with a multitude of observational anomalies and has had to be patched up with a complex variety of ad hoc modifications and auxiliary hypotheses. The existence of the continental roots and the absence of continuous, global asthenosphere to “lubricate” plate motions has rendered the classical model of plate movements untenable. There is no consensus on the thickness of the plates and no certainty as to the forces responsible for their supposed movement. The hypothesis of large — scale continental movements, seafloor spreading, and subduction, as well as the relative youth of the ocean crust are contradicted by a substantial volume of data. Evidence for significant amounts of submerged continental crust in the present-day oceans provides another major challenge to plate tectonics. ( David Pratt: Plate Tectonics: “A Paradigm under Threat”, Journal of Scientific Exploration. 2000)
Though Pratt’s criticism may be valid, he gives no alternative explanation of geology.

Even though there now exists an increasing swell of researchers jumping on the earth expansion bandwagon all of them maintain that the earth has been expanding and still is. Their ranks are slightly divided, some saying that the expansion began about 65 million years ago, others maintaining a steady expansion since the earth was born.

Today’s paper is the only one advocating that there was no steady expansion and that expansion is now virtually dormant. If the earth’s expansion is internal then the earth’s oceans should become increasingly shallow due to the larger surface area that the waters need to cover. Unfortunately, for their theory, the earth’s surface waters are getting deeper indicating that earth expansion is now extinct. If they maintain that the increase in ocean depths is credited to melting ice, then by extrapolation the whole earth would have been flooded during the pre-Ice Age era unless the earth had far less water than it does today. Today’s global positioning satellites (GPS) show no evidence of an expanding earth as is here maintained, but there is slow oscillations in localized surface areas.
 

Chapter 2

Question 1 and Question 2
How could the earth expand, and what would be the cause?

Question 1
How could a planet enlarge its diameter without increasing its mass?

The only rationale to explain the geological evidence is that today’s earth has somehow expanded from a smaller size. Yet, to expand the diameter of the earth creates a whole new set of problems.

Expansion Physics
Obviously the main question regarding the expanded earth theory, is the question of how the earth could expand to almost double its previous size. Even from the 1920’s it was proposed that the earth had expanded. Finally in the 1950’s  S.W.Carey proposed that the continents, like the design on an expanding balloon, were certainly moving away from each other, but only because the earth’s surface was stretching as the whole planet grew larger — the continents were neither sliding nor drifting. The entire surface of the planet was stretching. Yet as to how the stretching occurred things remained silent.

Graviton Expansion of the Universe
Perhaps the latest and most daring hypothesis of how earth expanded is by astronomer Halton Arp:
Observations seem to show that some active galaxies eject quasars of high intrinsic red shift that ultimately evolve into normal galaxies with their redshifts declining as they age.

Then he proposes:
If this is true, then there must be some mechanism whereby elementary particle masses increase over time from near — zero mass, emitting more energetic photons and getting enough mass to eventually form a whole new galaxy.
Arp proposes that this cosmological stretching was caused by a small wave-particle called a graviton. They pervade space and intercepted gravitons cause the earth to expand, and everything contacted by gravitons. (Halton Arp; “Plate Tectonics and Observational Cosmology,”  Journal of Scientific Exploration, 2006)

If gravitons permeated all mass down to the subatomic level and each atom increased in size, the center atom of a sphere would not have any location problem. However, each atom extending from the center would began to distort the sphere if all the atoms did not get struck by the same amount of gravitons or at different times. Therefore, in this theory, masses would tend to be distorted and gaping crevices would be detected on the sphere’s surface. Such indiscriminate growth would appear more like an uneven and undisciplined cancer. This indiscriminate building of matter is not observed, lending to the conclusion that all gravitons are created within a burst of energy, all making the atomic jump at the same time.

If gravitons caused everything to increase in size equally, then distances between planet’s and other orbiting systems would have to constantly adjust due to gravitational changes. If the earth expanded equally throughout at the atomic level, then there would be little geological difference between a small earth and a larger earth and no one could perceive that the earth had expanded.

If Arp’s theory has validity there exist certain evidence that gravitons burst into existence in collective Quantum’s rather than over long periods of time. This phenomenon would play havoc with scientific radiometric time calculations and would therefore explain why there is such discrepancies between be assigned dates of archeologists, geologists, and atomic dating methods.

The Plasma Expansion Theory
The answer to earth expansion in terms of physics, must certainly have something to do with heat. The primal earth was likely cold and extremely dense. Geothermal heat did not exist. (Some people mistakenly think that heat would be generated in a planetary body due to its own pull of internal gravity. However, gravity does not create heat unless friction is involved. Friction does not occur unless motion is involved. Therefore, even though kinetic energy does produce heat, potential energy does not create heat.)

The Cold Plasma Theory
Oceanographic Geologist N. C. Smoot criticizes the plate tectonic theory in his book, Tectonic Globaloney. Smoot proposes that the center of the earth is a cold plasma rather than a hot plasma. Because deep drilling bore holes experience a change from hot temperatures to cooler at deeper depths, he believes the earth’s center is cool rather than liquid hot. His study of very deep earthquakes supports this theory because earthquakes should not be occurring in the earth’s hot liquid mantle. (Yes, there is such a thing as cold plasma and scientists today are trying to apply it to radar stealth technology and several other applications.)

Smoot advocates that the center of the earth is a cold solid plasma which transforms plasma into earth’s minerals.
The lack of transmission of S waves in the outer core and it’s extremely low dumping (high Q factor) is taken to imply a friction free, superfluid core. These characteristics do not favor a hot iron core model, rather these characteristics favor large amounts of helium in the outer core. Along with its dielectric property, the presence of helium can also explain magnetic reversals.

Called “Excess mass stress tectonics”, or EMST,  the, particle-plasma constantly transform into atoms. Iron is the last atom to form, because it is the atom with the highest nuclear binding energy,. The transformation takes place in the outer core. The newly formed atoms are added, one by one as solid wedges in the preexisting and overlying mantle and crust, the resultant is the density of plasma and therefore, of the outer cold liquid core to be reduced this process will continue until all the plasma of the core is transformed into atoms that are being added in the mantle and in the crust and generate all geodynamics phenomenon including earthquakes and volcanoes. After the completion of this transformation, earth will become magnetically dormant and become a tectonically inactive planet like the Moon and Mars are. (Tectonic Globlony, N. Christian Smoot, 2004)

The field of astronomy is now dealing with plasma in its solid-state. (“The book of future cosmology will be written in the language of plasma.”: David Talbott, Wallace Thornhill, Michael Armstrong.)
Unfortunately for Smoot’s model, there exist good evidence that substances like granite were formed and deposited through extreme heat. However it remains unexplored that substances like these could be formed and injected into the geological stratus through cold plasma reactions.

The Hot Plasma Core Theory
The so-called fourth state of matter, plasma; emulates gas, solids, and liquids. In his book “Atlas of Continental Displacement” (1983), Doctor Hugh Owens proposes that the earth’s core is a hot plasma. While at the British Museum of Natural History, Owens showed that the Earth could contain a plasma core. High-energy lab’s use powerful magnetic fields to confine and contain plasma because plasma can melt and vaporize any mass it contacts. Owens proposed that the pressure and heat generated at the earth’s core could sustain a plasma. Plasma is a super heated ionized gas composed of electrons and positive ions which is electrically neutral. Plasma is detected in nuclear explosions and on the sun’s surface.
By transmitting seismic waves through the earth, scientists say that the earth’s center, or core, is composed of a solid mass of iron, nickel, and perhaps some sulfur. Surrounding this is the outer core assumed to be liquid metals. Dr. Owens, says that the “behavior of waves passing through a plasma core would be similar to that of a solid iron-sulfur core.” He explains that “if the inner core of the earth is plasma, there is potential for expansion when the core changes from a plasma into an atomic state. The earth’s outer core may be molten because it has already changed into its atomic state”.

The strange question is, how can that solid iron core remain unmelted when an outer molten core surrounds it? In other words the earth’s core must be molten liquid rather than a cooler solid. This suggests that the earth’s core is on the borderline between a super heated metal and a plasma. (Liquid iron produces no magnetic field because the north-south polls of molecules cannot remain aligned.)

Mars is thought to not have enough mass to create a plasma core and the earth is borderline. Owens’s points out that a plasma core can generate a magnetic field equivalent to a solid iron core. Because a liquid iron core cannot produce a magnetic field unless the field is electromagnetic, the evidence requires that the core of the earth is either a plasma or that the magnetic field is generated somewhere else on the planet.

The Geomagnetic Field
One of the many dilemmas of modern physics is why the Earth has a magnetic field. Mars has none, even Venus, which is earth size, has no magnetic field. Yet tiny Mercury has a small field. For earth’s size and density, earth has the largest geomagnetic field of all the planets.

Of course the sun possesses the largest field of all and the mechanism which creates the sun’s magnetism is the thing which has created the mystery about why the earth possesses a field. The sun is thought to have convection currents within which cause friction. These currents manifest themselves as sunspots, on the sun’s surface. The friction in these moving currents creates an abundance of free moving electrons and the sun’s plasma, which is an excellent electrical conductor. This allows the free moving electrons to form electrical currents within the sun. These currents enable the sun to produce a giant electromagnetic field.

Seeing the sun’s magnetic field, scientists simply assume that the magnetic fields of Earth, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, are also the result of electromagnetism. These fields could be constantly generated by the many moons orbiting these planets.
The difference between a permanent magnet and an electromagnet is that when the electron flow stops, an electromagnet immediately ceases as a magnet. A permanent magnet, which can be composed of iron, nickel or cobalt, can maintain its magnetism without an electric current but over time it also loses its magnetic properties.

The mistake still being made by scientists is insisting that the earth’s magnetic field is an electromagnetic field. They think that there exists a powerful electric flow circulating parallel to the magnetic equator of the earth. Unfortunately, this electron flow has never been detected. One ideal method for testing for such a flow are the many undersea telephone cables stretching across the ocean’s seafloors. Tests on these cables show no sign of electricity circling in the earth. This test also discourages another favorite theory that the mantle of the earth has convection currents of molten materials that move continental plates.

Shifting Geomagnetic Fields
Dr. Rob Coe has been studying the volcanic Steens Mountain in Oregon and has made startling discoveries in his core samples extracted from its ancient eruptions. One lava layer deviated in its magnetic direction by 60 degrees from its previous layer. Then by taking samples along this layer, it showed that before the lava had cooled, its magnetic direction had been changing six degrees per day and the magnetic field strength dropped by 90 percent. In only a week and a half the magnetic polls had shifted position by thousands of miles while the magnetic field strength dropped to almost zero. This demonstrates how rapidly the whole of the natural world can change in only days or weeks, indeed the many lava flows on Steens Mountain were likely the results of massive earth upheavals likely caused by astral encounters.
When other geologists challenged Dr. Coe’s findings, another team of geologists checked Steens Mountain. Unfortunately for the establishment, the new findings were even more dramatic.

Now three possibilities have been advanced:
- The Steens Mountain rocks are not faithful recorders of the main geomagnetic field. Should this be actually so, the whole field of paleomagnetism, including plate tectonics, is undermined because it depends upon similar measurements.
- The earth’s molten core can change rapidly, at least in some regions, in response to forces still unrecognized. This, of course, is not really a satisfactory explanation.
- The dynamo theory of the origin of geomagnetic field is incorrect.
If any of these three possibilities are factual then the whole science of plate tectonics collapses. However if the earth has expanded due to an counter with a large astral body, all these problems began to disappear.
Now the anomalies of an unexplainable magnetic field evaporate. Now we can explain an Expanded Earth and how it’s continents separate. We can explain magnetic reversals, whether caused by electrical discharges between astral bodies (as witnessed between Jupiter and Io, its moon), or by gravitational jolts from astral bodies. Either model can cause field reversals in permanent or electromagnets. Of course today’s physicists depend upon long geological ages to accomplish the observed phenomenon. So the astral catastrophe model is unacceptable because the long ages are no longer required.
The accumulated data supplies evidence that the Earth, in previous ages, supported a plasma core which may still exist but in a diminished state.
 

Question 2
What Could Cause the Earth to Expand?

Catastrophe vs. Uniformitarianism
Because today’s geology is based upon Lyle’s uniformity theory, which says that geological events have always taken the same amount of time as today’s geological changes, geologists interpret that these moving tectonic plates have always been moving at a near constant rate. Therefore, in another hundred million years these continental plates will have moved considerably from today’s positions.
However the theory of catastrophism says that the continents are not a constant and steady movement of plates but they move in quantum leaps and only then when caused by some extraordinary event, perhaps even the flyby of a large astral body.

Dividing of Opinions
As of now, none of the traditional evolutionists or catastrophists accept this new idea of an Expanded Earth. However within the ranks of those believing the expanded earth theory, their ranks already divide because of the data presented in this study.

Those promoting expansion evolution teach that the globe has always been swelling or began to swell from Jurassic times when large dinosaurs roamed a super continent. Because of their philosophy, they maintain that the Earth is enlarging at a constant rate and continues to this day.

Another aspect of their model is that the Earth is not only expanding in volume but is also gaining in weight and mass. To explain how the earth acquires its extra mass, they simply give the process a name: “Accretion”, by which the earth accumulates space dust and meteoric debris over millions of years. Those with this evolutionary bent use the title “Expanding Earth” rather than my “Expanded Earth”, because they maintain that the earth is still growing and that the continental plates are moving as rapidly today as they were in the past.

So far, I have not seen any of the catastrophists or creationists join the expanding earth argument. As far as I can determine, I am the only one building a creationist model of an expanded earth. The reason I use the word “expanded” rather than “expanding” Earth, is because I propose that the expansion is now relatively dormant compared to the past. Therefore the Earth has essentially stopped growing.

The Extraterrestrial Cause of the Expansion
One could propose that an astral body collided with the Earth supplying the extra needed mass. Unfortunately, the straight lines of fracture zones, which completely surround the planet, would have been displaced by an impact crater of such required enormity. Therefore, the ocean floors show no sign of such an astral impact.

Even though there is no evidence of an actual impact, there is an abundance of evidence that a very large astral body came in close proximity to the Earth, not just affecting the Earth but many of the other plants in our solar system. Indeed, even some of the planets themselves are the fragments of some unimaginable large catastrophe within our solar system. The Kuiper belt composed of icebergs over 100 miles in diameter orbit the sun at about the distance of Pluto. Pluto itself is a suspect of simply being a fragment of a much larger planet, a planet which previously had copious quantities of water. Of course there are those riverbeds on Mars showing that the red planet was inundated at least once with an immense flood of liquid water. Those Saturnian rings now detected around Uranus and Jupiter are more debris which proves some marauder disturbed our solar system at a recent time. (Yes observations show that the Saturnian rings have changed just within the last decade, demonstrating that astral changes and orbits can adjust in years rather than millenniums.)

It has long been known that according to a mathematical spacing of the planet’s, that a planet is missing in the space between Mars and Jupiter where today floats the scattered remains of a large asteroid belt. The moons of our outer planets also show that some horrifying event indelibly marked their surface. Along with their cratored surface, it has now been observed that these moons have been blasted with a dark soot. This soot covers one hemisphere which indicates that the substance collided with these moons and planets at high speed as if it were a shock wave traveling through space.
The evidence is obvious but the interpretation of the evidence is debated. I propose three choices: 1) Did the bodies of our solar system accumulate these wounds as wear and tear over millions of years?  2) Was this a single horrendous disaster suddenly overwhelming the solar system, but the event occurred in eons past?  3) Was this a single epic occurring within the era of human existence?

The answer appears to be (3) as we explore later.
Obviously some astral interference with this planet, such as a passing planet sized object could indeed, cause the continents to separate and even cause the Earth’s diameter to expand.

Physical Evidence of Expansion
Now we get to the first question anyone would ask if they were told that the Earth had over doubled in size from some previous time in history. How? Either the earth must acquire more mass or have the existing mass expand in volume. If the original Earth was the size of all the continents in land area, (and this appears to have been true), then the planet must expand by over 100 percent for it to become its present size.

Here is how the domino’s fell:
1)  Astral flyby which excited the Earth’s geomagnetic field and heated the Earth’s core into a hot plasma.
2)  The Earth’s internal heat expands the extremely dense mantle materials into a hot foam. These lighter foam materials expand and inject themselves into the Earth’s fissures and faults (Granite flows are an example of this foamy material which is much lighter and less dense that its original material. Basalt is another example of this foam.)
3)  The plasma heated core causes the Earth’s mantle to swell and foam to almost twice its size. The expanding plasma pressure within the core adds to the planet’s ballooning effect.
Therefore, with the gaseous expansion of the core, plus the foamy expansion of the Earth’s inner mantle, the Earth can expand rather dramatically over a short period of time, and no extra mass is needed.

Chapter 3
The Physical Consequences of an Expanded Earth
If the Earth has expanded, many are the scientific rules which must be addressed. Rules such as how a plasma can be created within a planet, the change in rotation speed of a planet due to its expanded diameter, geomagnetic field creation, and heat dissipation. Unfortunately these issues require volumes to explain and cannot be comprehensive in a short article. Even so, these issues must be briefly addressed. The main issue is time. When did all this happen, when did the continents separate, and how rapid was the process?

Rotation Dynamics
The laws of physics should give us a guide to exactly what happened when the earth expanded in diameter. Physics demands that if the earth is spinning, then it’s spin rate will be decreased as it’s diameter expands. This means that if the earth’s diameter has enlarged, the number of hours per day must increase. Today, we assign 24 hours for the earth to make one rotation. If the earth has expanded to twice its ancient diameter, then previously the earth’s faster spin rate was from 15 to 19 hours per day.

If the ancient earth had the same radius of orbit around the sun as today, then the faster spinning earth would give us more days per year. Today we have 365.242 days per year. This means that yesterday’s faster spinning earth would have had about twice that many days in a year. To an evolutionist who believes that the earth has existed over millions of years, a change in the length of a day or in the amount of hours per year would have little or no effect upon mankind. This is because an evolutionist using an expanding earth model would say that all of this expansion occurred before humans ever existed. However, an expanding earth theory for a creationist makes explanations more difficult because of shortened time requirements.

A Change in Mass?
Those teaching that the mass of the earth has been increasing encounter an embarrassing dilemma, because if the earth gains mass it’s orbit must change distance from the Sun and loose its angular momentum. Consequently the earth would collide with the Sun or wander into deep space. Evolution teaches that the Earth acquired its mass over 4 billion years ago when the solar system was being formed. Since that time the Earth’s mass has changed very little and its orbit has remained about the same as today’s. Those advocating an expanding earth over millions of years must gradually change the spin rate of the earth’s rotation.

The only realistic model requires the earth to retain about the same mass. To accomplish this task a hollow earth theory could be introduced. Unfortunately for those promoting the old hollow earth theory, they cannot supply the mechanics of how the earth might expand and leave the earth hollow, nor does the laws of gravity allow a hollow earth to maintain its present orbital speed and position.

Another explanation could introduce the idea that the earth’s mass has remained the same but it’s density has decreased. Because of the existence of immense granite floods, geologists understand that granite is a rock which has expanded from a much denser substance. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be enough granite on the planet to represent a 100% growth of the earth (more on this later).

Heat Dissipation
If the earth has expanded, especially as rapidly as proposed in this paper, then the heat created by such an expansion would render life on the earth impossible. Actually, this statement contains a false premise. Expansion causes loss of heat rather than accumulation of heat. Therefore, in this situation the magnetically excited core of the earth could ignite into a hot plasma and cause the elements to expand. But the subsequent expansion creates a dampening effect, cooling the earth’s internal heat. Therefore, if the earth expanded in direct proportion to the heat generated within, the cooling effect of the expansion nullifies the adverse effects of overheating the planet.
This cooling effect due to expansion, could have and probably did, contribute to the ice sheets surrounding the north and south magnetic poles of the earth which gave us the so-called ice ages (explained later).

Radiometric Time Considerations
If a large astral object came in close proximity to the earth it could excite our planet’s magnetosphere to the point of creating a plasma or enlarging an already existing plasma. The earth’s magnetic field would enlarge exponentially which in turn would accelerate many radioactive half-lives. (When Libby initially discovered radiometric dating it was thought that radioactive emissions were steady and constant. Now it is realized that emissions are drastically affected by plasma, material frequency, cosmic rays, and apposing atomic reactions.) At that time, no one considered astral interference which indeed could change radiometric rhythms. Today, evidence is accumulating that natural atomic clocks within the earth’s radioactive materials has changed. In such an excited environment atomic reactions would increase causing daughter elements to form rapidly and samples to read older.

Bumping Radiometric Clocks
C-14 Problems
An astral body assault would create enormous volcanic action (as attributed to the Ice Ages). Multiple volcanos spewing millions of cubic miles of C-12 into the atmosphere would cause the dilution of atmospheric radioactive carbon 14. Plants assimilating this overabundance of C-12 compared to C-14 gas, would read extremely old. (Examples of this can be seen in Mexico where ancient campfires on top of lava flows have C-14 dates much older than charcoal found below the lava flow.)

There is also evidence that  the closer to the geomagnetic poles a C-14 sample, the older it reads. Today’s C-14 readings seem accurate enough after they had been calibrated to compensate for the nuclear testing which occurred in during the 1940s and ‘50s. However, retreating in time from the Greek era there appears to be a gradual acceleration in the antiquity of samples tested. By the time of Egypt’s New Kingdom the C-14 samples averaged twenty percent older. And by the time of Egypt’s Old Kingdom the average percentage of error exceeded 40 percent. (Perhaps if the formulas adjusting C-14 readings were eliminated then this dating method could be vindicated. But I rather doubt it. Indications are that there was a serious depletion of C-14 during the post-Ice Age era. This means that I am recommending the same calibrating approach as I am accusing the establishment of doing, except I am adjusting in the opposite direction.)

Strangely, dinosaur bones are never tested for radiocarbon even though samples submitted to universities occasionally exude a smell of decaying flesh. (The smelly femur of a T. Rex from Hill Creek, Montana, was chemically dissolved at North Carolina State University. They were surprised that the remains were not fully mineralized but rather left a stretchy, fibrous mass of translucent blood vessels and bone cells. To now field paleontologists had ignored such odors. (Discover, 27 : 37, April 2006)

Why submit the sample to a radiocarbon test, when everyone at the lab has been taught that the age of dinosaur bones (65 million years and older) are far too old to be tested by radiocarbon 14 (limited to only thousands of years).

Other Atomic Dating Methods
History of the Radioisotope based Geologic Time Scale
 Before the discovery of radioactivity in the late nineteenth century, a geological time scale had been developed on the basis of estimates for the rates of geological processes such as erosion and sedimentation, with the assumption that these rates had always been essentially uniform. On the basis of being unacceptably old, many geologists of the time rejected these early twentieth century determinations of rock age from the ratio of daughter to radioactive parent.

 In 1925 the establishment of an expanded geological time scale due to increased confidence in radioisotope dating techniques and the demands of evolution theory for vast amounts of time.

 Shortly after World War II K-Ar dating techniques developed, this time scale was then refined to the standard Geologic Time Scale adopted in 1964. The construction of this time scale was based on about 380 radioisotope ages that were selected because of their agreement with the presumed fossil and geological sequences found in the rocks. This was a way to calibrate the science of radiometrics to theory of evolution. Radioisotope ages that did not meet these requirements were rejected on the basis of presumed chemical and/or physical modifications that made the “ages” unreliable indicators of real time. About 85% of the selections were K-Ar dates, 8% rubidium-strontium dates, and 4% uranium-lead dates. Igneous rocks are particularly suited to K-Ar dating. The crucial determiners are therefore volcanic (extrusive igneous) rocks that are interbedded with sediments, and intrusive igneous rocks that penetrate sediments.

 One of the main arguments used in favor of radiometric dating is that so many dates agree with each other, that is, with the date expected for the geologic period. Unfortunately, if a rock dates too old, one can say that the clock did not get reset. If it dates too young, one can invoke a later heating event. Neither date would necessarily be seen as unexplainable. If lava intrudes upon geologic period X, then any date for the lava of X or later will not be seen as anomalous. And even if the date is one or two geologic periods earlier, it may well be close enough to be accepted as non-spurious. If one does not know the geologic period of a rock by other means, then of course one is likely to date it to find out, and then of course the date agrees with the geologic period and this will not be seen as anomalous. So it is difficult to know what would be a reasonable test for whether radiometric dating is reliable or not. The percentage of published dates that are considered as anomalous has little bearing on the question.

It’s not surprising that K-Ar dates often agree with the assumed dates of their geological periods, since the dates of the geological periods were largely inferred from K-Ar dating. And yes, Ar-Ar dating and K-Ar dating are essentially the same method, so between the two of them we obtain a large fraction of the dates being used.
 

As proof of the un-reliability of the radiometric methods consider the fact that in nearly every case dates from recent lava flows have come back excessively large. One example is the rocks from the Kaupelehu Flow, Hualalai Volcano in Hawaii which was known to have erupted in 1800-1801. These rocks were dated by a variety of different methods. Of 12 dates reported the youngest was 140 million years and the oldest was 2.96 billion years. The dates average 1.41 billion years. [48]”

 Slusher states the following:
The remnant of that local big bang is a pulsar called Vela-X (PSR 0833-45), which recent observations have positioned in the southern sky some 1,500 light years away, and which is considered to have given rise to the huge Gum Nebula ... Being so close, the anisotropic neutrino flux of the super-explosion must have had the peculiar characteristic of resetting all our atomic clocks. (Slusher, H.S., 1981. Critique of Radiometric Dating, Institute for Creation Research, Technical monograph 2 (2nd ed.), 46 pp, p. 55) cites F.B. Jueneman (Industrial Research, Sept., 1972, p. 15)
This is significant because it is known that neutrinos do interact with the nucleii of atoms, and it is also believed that much of the energy of supernovae is carried away by neutrinos
 Most all radiometric instrumentation is calibrated to the theory of an old earth. (However, my personal opinion is that the mass of the earth is extremely old but that life on this planet is relatively young.)

 If geological layers represent eras of time, then the continents split apart after all the layers had been laid down except for the late Pleistocene era. (The layers of the earth had already been mostly established when the continents began to separate. We know this because the parameter and order of geological layers on Africa’s West Coast exactly match the East Coast of South America where the continents broke apart.) So according to the evolutionists standard of counting time, the continents split apart very late. According to geologists the continents separated after all the geological layers accept for the Pleistocene era and in this model humans existed in the Pleistocene. Therefore, is it correct to deduce that mankind existed when the continents first separated?

Polonium Halos
For over 40 years Robert Gentry, MS, DSc. has studied radioactive polonium halos, microscopic radiation imprints in Coal and Granite deposits. Since my early twenties I have admired his groundbreaking research in this field. Like fission Track Dating this technology studies radioactive footprints. Unfortunately, upon my discovery of an expanded earth I was caught with a contradiction. Gentry says: “Etched within Earth’s foundation rocks - the granites - are beautiful microspheres of coloration, halos produced by the radioactive decay of primordial polonium...”

Perhaps Gentry mistook granite stone as primordial. In the early 1970’s I saw comparative photographs where chemists attempted to create granite. To me their synthetic product looked identical to natural granite but the article mentions that their attempts were a failure. Yet, from the way granite flawlessly filled geological cracks, fissures, and any possible openings, it is surmised that granite was originally a liquid. Gentry observes that the halos could not survive molten granite so the halos must be created immediately prior to solidification.

Gentry appears to think the halos were created in the Genesis creation story, but in a biblical environment the halos must be created in the Earth expansion process, during and after Noah’s flood.

 Careful scientists have measured variations in halo radii and their measurements indicate a variation in decay rates. The radioactive series then would have no value as time clocks. But these polonium halos do prove that the atomic structure of many elements changed almost instantly rather than over millions of years. Not only is there evidence of instantaneous radiometric change but also changes in the rate of atomic reactions as already mentioned.

 Trouble for Both Evolutionists and Creationists
Upon realizing that evolutionists have no viable explanation for moving continents, what about catastrophists? Up to now those promoting that the earth’s geology was mostly formed by catastrophe, envisioned that the continents were shifted to their various positions when large astral bodies, such as Venus or Mars, passed close to the Earth. This model could only move continents in two known ways. One way was to slide the continents across the globe’s surface, like sliding a plate across a tabletop (This is the standard PT theory). The second model was to find a way to depress the ocean floors with the weight of ocean water and somehow get the ocean floors to sink deeper and somehow push the continents apart (This model fails because water is lighter than stone). In all, there was no physical way to separate the continents without some form of subduction whether caused by a planetary flyby, or caused by the Earth’s natural internal heat. Therefore, the catastrophists had to rely on the basics of the evolutionary model and its plate tectonic theory. As a consequence, both evolutionists and catastrophists must devise a completely new model in order to satisfy the physical evidence that has been discovered.

The Moho Theory is in Trouble
Seismographic data has long convinced geologists that there is a separation between the Earth’s crust and the Earth’s more liquid mantel. This boundary is called the Moho (Mohorovicic Discontinuity), presumed to be the floor of the plates composing the plate tectonic theory. According to the theory it is the Moho on which the PT plates slide to separate the continents.

The world’s deepest scientific drilling project on a continent was the Russian “Kola hole” (12,262 meters, about 7 miles deep,1994). No Moho layer was detected at this site, nor has any other boreholes supplied definitive evidence of Moho existence.

According to seismic data the Moho was shallow enough over the mid-Atlantic Ridge intersecting the Atlantic Fracture Zone, at 30 degrees north latitude, to test drill. In February 2005, the drilling vessel “Resolution” began drilling at this apparent thin spot in the crust. After 54 days the drill had passed through 1,415 meters of solid rock much deeper than the seismic data afforded. The retrieved cores showed no obvious signs of the Moho or the mantel beneath. (Richard A. Kerr, “Pursued for 40 years, the Moho Evades Ocean Drillers Once Again” Science,  307:1710, 2005)

If the continents have no Moho to slide around on, then the whole theory of plate tectonics (PT) collapses. Now if the earth has expanded from its center and the continents have been elevated outward and upward, then there would be no Moho under the continents. Yet, the newer ocean floors would be expected to have a thin hard crust, under-girded by a molten mantel. This likely means that the earth’s outer crust is thicker than expected.

If the earth’s oceanic crust is deeper than the Moho soundings indicate, then the theory of subduction gets into even more trouble because the thicker the crust plate, the less it can fold or buckle downward, and the more power required to drive it.

Defining the Ice Age
Climatologists would have us believe that over the millennia several ice ages have occurred. Climatologists would have us believe that these ice ages lasted for thousands of years. Neither of these teachings should be totally accepted. Contrary to some creationists teaching that the ice ages never existed, both parties need to redefine what the ice age was an how it began (explained later).

Origin of Ice Age Water
As addressed earlier, if the earth had about the same amount of water prior to the ice ages, then the pre-ice age water would have flooded the earth. Therefore the Earth must have acquired copious quantities of water, or ice, during the ice ages.
In our revised model, the Earth acquired most of its water when a water planet in our solar system exploded. That planet which had it’s orbit close to the asteroid belt spewed water in the form of ice throughout the solar system. That water can now be identified as causing the riverbeds on Mars, the hundred mile diameter icebergs circling in the Keiper Belt just beyond the planet Neptune, the ice rings around Saturn, Uranus, and even Jupiter, plus most of the icy comets, the asteroid belt and the blackened hemispheres on the moons of our outer planets. Even the planet where we live did not escape this icy splash.

Sea Level Fluctuations
We know that sea levels have risen even since the time of the Roman Empire. The old city of Alexandria, Egypt was only rediscovered in the 1990s covered by almost 50 feet of Mediterranean Sea. Around the globe more and more ancient cities are being discovered below modern sea level. In France menhors of standing stones built by some unknown civilization proceed into the north Atlantic like marching soldiers into the watery abyss. The submerged two cities in the Gulf of Camby India, the submerged city off the Guanahacabibes peninsula of Cuba, and more being discovered all the time.

This steady rise in sea level is credited to the melting of ice age snows. Unfortunately for modern geologists, there is no adequate explanation of where to put all this water before the ice ages arrived. Traditional geologists now say that if all the ice in the world was converted to water then the continents would be covered except for the mountain ranges. Therefore, prior to the ice ages, where was all this water?

However, the problem is even more critical for the expanding earth advocates. If the original earth was smaller than today then all this water would have covered not just all the continents but even the highest mountains (especially in an era when the highest mountain ranges did not yet exist). The only feasible creationist answer to lower Noah’s floodwaters is for the planet to swell rapidly.

The sea level factor forces both traditional geologists and earth expansion geologists into an uncomfortable situation that there was once a global flood dousing the planet with alien water. Unfortunately, for both sides of the debate, all continents on the earth displayed repeated sedimentary layers proving that everything had at one time been covered with water. So the only argument is whether or not everything was covered with water at the same time.

Because geologists have already admitted that the present abundance of water is enough to cover all the continents if all the ice melts, this makes things even more uncomfortable for modern geologists. Now suddenly they find themselves playing into the hands of a worldwide biblical flood where everything was covered with water at the same time. The expanded Earth theory comes to their watery rescue if they say there existed interglacial epochs. Otherwise, the accepted model of time must have a perpetual ice sheet.
 
 

 Chapter 4
Evidence for an Expanded Earth in the Human Era

Catastrophism
All the ocean floors have expanded in area; this is an observational fact. However there is no evidence that the dry continents themselves have expanded. Now the question is time. Did the expansion occur over millions of years as some say, or within human history, as proposed here? If sudden catastrophes caused the expansion, then it could have occurred within human history. If large astral bodies grazed the earth in the historical past, it would explain not only the earth’s internal heat, but also its magnetic field and many other observed phenomenon.

Let us review some examples of catastrophes which had implications of worldwide disasters, all of which occurred in the era of human kind. These disasters mimic what would be projected if the continents separated quickly by some celestial jolt.

Atlantis
Plato’s story of a large continent existing west of the pillars of Hercules is but one of many legends explaining that vast catastrophes have occurred during the era of mankind. Unfortunately the new sea floor maps give no hint whatsoever that the continent of Atlantis sank into the Atlantic Basin. Because the Americas have obviously separated from Europe and from the pillars of Hercules, the most logical deduction is that if Atlantis did exist, it did not sink but rather it separated further from the Mediterranean Sea because of an enlarging Ocean floor. This means that the large continent mentioned by Plato, called Atlantis, was nothing less than America separating from Europe and Africa. The conclusion is that the city of Atlantis was indeed inundated and destroyed during one of the cataclysmic quantum’s which jerked apart the ocean floors.

Atlantis, the continent, moved further westward from its geographical position leaving the briny Sargos Sea as the only evidence that a continent formally existed at that distance from the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar).  Therefore, the Biminy Islands with their many reports of submerged man-made structures, may indeed be the remnants of towns and cities on the coast of the continent of Atlantis.

In Plato’s story of Atlantis the Egyptian priest explains to the Greek Solome  that the Greeks are but children historically because the lowlands of Greece was constantly being destroyed by floods, leaving only the uncultured highland people. Plato’s story suggests that in the era of Atlantis multiple tsunamis menaced the landscape.

When did Atlantis exist?  Plato says it was 9000 years before Plato’s day (600 B.C.). Yet according to anthropologists, the art of writing was not invented, even in its primitive forms, until 2000 years before Plato. If Atlantis really existed, such a legend would not survive 9000 years, especially if those memories included the history of Greece, as the story implies.
Yet, if we subtract a zero (900 yrs.), then we arrive alarmingly close to the era of the biblical Moses and the stories of Egypt’s ten plagues and the parting of the Red Sea (1500 B.C.); and history’s most violent volcanic explosion (Thera), at the island of Santorini in the Mediterranean Sea. This era of cyclic devastation was what Immanuel Velikovsky called the age of chaos. Though Velikovsky was severely chastised by his peers in the scientific and historical community, his words are now being vindicated one by one, but he does not get the credit. Scientists now say the same thing but couch it in different words.

Lake Titicaca
The South American city of Tiahuanaco, a city still inhabited but it’s ancient ruins still border Lake Titicaca. This lake, in the historical past, has been uplifted from sea level to its present 12,000 feet above sea level. Some salt water marine species still inhabited this now freshwater lake including salt water mollusks and Sea Horse. A river now exists carrying the salt water from the lake into a succession of lower lakes where salt is now found.

Charles Hapgood explains:
“Evidence that this enormous uplifted occurred during human occupation of the area is found in thousands of miles of elevated stone terraces intended for agricultural production built on the sides of the mountains surrounding the Titicaca Basin. Some of these terraces are found at an elevation of 18,400 feet above sea level which is above the level of eternal snow. Even at the present level of the deserted city very little food can be grown. Ears of corn reach a length of only three inches. This is evidence of extreme and recent geological catastrophe and there is much more South American evidence to support it.”
Also discovered is embossed imprints of ancient fishing nets within the hardened rock.
Possible explanation: The Andein mountain range reflects how the continent of South America, with its original convex floor had set atop an expanding planet and finally its edges began to crumble at its borders creating this enormous mountain chain. The opposite coast of South America melted into what is now the Atlantic sea floor. Lake Titicaca was simply pushed upward as the western edge of the South American plate succumbed to expansion from beneath.

The Bering Strait Land Bridge
Archeologists and anthropologists are being bombarded with evidence found in the New World which refutes that the original Americans were the Indians we know today. Here are a few examples of native Americans even older then the Clovis Point people and the dates assigned to them (some of these dates are radiometric and some dated by primitiveness and still others dated by association with geological layers):
- The Lagoa Santa Skulls (7,500 - 11,500 years)
-  The Brazos Texan (11,200 C-14 years)
-  Puebla, Mexico footprints (40,000 yrs.)
-  Tools  (50,000 - 500,000 yrs.)
These earlier dates assigned to the human family challenges the theories of how they arrived from the old world.
With the realization that the oceans were created during the era of mankind, it can now be realized that humans and animals could have migrated to the Americas without crossing the Bering Strait. Realizing that the Andes mountain chain was created in the era of humankind, it can be deduced that the whole of the Pacific Ocean basin is relatively new. It was created over hundreds of years rather than millions. Indeed, there need not have been any waterway to interfere with a migration from Asia, and for that matter, people could have migrated by land from Africa or Europe to the Americas until the continents fully separated and melting ice isolated them.

A detailed study of core samples (journal Geology 2006) reveals that the Bering Straits between Siberia and Alaska was underwater 11 thousand years ago. This new study throws another cog in the long held position that the first Americans moved across the Bering Straits during the Ice Age 10 to 11 thousand years ago. According to geologists the Bering Strait flooded into the Arctic Ocean making it impossible for a land crossing 11 thousand years ago.

Our revised timetable would place this event at about the time of the exodus and the flooding occurred as a result of a global Tsunami associated with the sinking of the city of Atlantis and whole forests and muck swept inland across northern Siberia and Alaska. Only eight centuries before this the Siberian mammoth were suddenly killed by an ice dump which would later be interpreted as ice ages. (The mammoth possessed hair rather than fur about its feet which would have attracted moisture and ice. This, with its narrow trunk, would have made this great animal un-adaptable to freezing climates. Contrary to popular opinion, the great herds of mammoth could not have survived under Arctic conditions. They were caught in a deadly ice dump where subzero temperatures plummeted from cold space.)

The Human Prey Refutes Evolution
The data for interpreting the era of mankind can be interpreted in four ways. One method involves the theory of evolution where mankind emerged from a lower primate over millions of years (Evolution).
The second method says that mankind has existed alongside more primitive humanoid creatures for tens of thousands of years. This interpretation generally involves some type of intelligent creator but usually avoids biblical interpretations.
The third way of interpreting human origins is based upon the Gaia concept. Originating from the Hindu town of Gaya, India and allegedly inspired by a demon of that town. This viewpoint holds that even the earth itself is alive and that all created beings are merely spirits which are covered with flesh. This idea is almost identical with the biblical perspective except for changing the nouns.

The fourth explanation of human origins is from the world’s oldest religion, the Hebrews. The Hebrews account of mankind is the world’s most ancient story. For example: the gods of ancient Egypt were simply Egyptian ancestors and founders of that nation as the ancient Hebrew book of Jasher explains. The Egyptian god Osiris was king Oswiris. The god Ra, was the biblical Ramma, son of Cush, and the god Amon was Egypt’s king Anom (see Book of Jasher).  The Hebrew’s knew not only the Egyptian god’s origin but even the forefathers of Egypt’s founders. Therefore the Hebrew stores predate the foundations of Egypt.

Modern Education
 Anthropology professors tell their young students how early hominoids gradually descended from the trees and began knuckle walking and later walked upright. Obviously it was a dangerous environment because the paleontologists admit that venturing from the trees exposed the early humans to predators like the saber tooth cat, wolves, hyenas and many others which were impossibly large compared to humans.

Recent population studies show that it was impossible, totally impossible, for early man to survive predators after he vacated the trees. Where humans reproduced one child every seven to nine months, the predators could produce at least six to a litter and in less time. The predators possessed superior weapons, speed, strength, sight, smelling, hearing, and stealth. The only way that primitive humans could have survived was evolution in reverse where survival traits and tools could be passed down from sophisticated parents to the younger generation. (In simple terms the Australopithecines such as Lucy are walking primates. Homo Erectus and Neanderthals are degenerated humans of a specialized species. They were troglodyte Canaanites which were genetically changed by isolation, radiation, incest and a disease called acromegaly.)

Because the evolution model breaks down with even the most shallow analysis, we must reduce the era of mankind from millions of years to only thousands of years. But at the same time, we must place the era of mankind coexisting with more ancient creatures. In other words humans coexisting with dinosaurs which the evolution model totally scorns.

There exist numerous examples of human remains and human activities which are contemporaneous with dinosaurs. Unfortunately, physical examples are usually removed from the site without proper documentation. The samples find their way into individual homes when museums refuse to collect them. These artifacts are usually trashed after a household generation. Such artifacts when actually found in the field by acknowledged authorities are not documented and cataloged for museums. Such finds, if acknowledged, would jeopardize research grants.

The War of Celestial Bodies
Ancient historical records referred to the planetary gods as responsible for momentous events on the earth. Much has been written about this type of celestial phenomena and the early writer’s seemed to have written about it in religious and superstitious terms. The bottom line is that the earth can be dramatically affected by planet sized objects passing close to the earth. The question is: did humans witness this? The Bible writers witnessed momentous occasions and placed them within their theological mentality (Noah’s flood, Peleg’s divisions, Abraham’s firepot, Joseph’s famine, Ten Plagues, Joshua’s long day, Debrah’s star war, David’s plague, the retreating sun shadow, ect.).

There exists an abundance of physical evidence that a large planet, consisting of vast amounts of water exploded within our solar system. Some secular scientists say that this astral explosion occurred millions of years in the past, but that opinion is based upon their training in uniformitarian schools. This planetary explosion could well have occurred in historical times according to ancient legends and the Biblical account.

New discoveries that gravity jumps in quantums is forcing astronomers to re-configure their computer programs which will show that heavenly bodies can establish new orbits very quickly, rather than over millennia. That stopping the earth’s crust as Velikovsky proposes would not spill oceans completely over the continents. “If the earth under present conditions were to halt its rotation totally in six hours, that deceleration experience at the equator would be the same as a car traveling at 60 m.p.h. taking 20 minutes to stop. Stopping a car in an easy span of 30 seconds would be equivalent to halting the earth in a cool 8.7 minutes_ not enough to strain a seat belt, never mind throw people off the planet.” (Kicking the Sacred Cow, James P. Hogan, 2004, P.170)

The cause of this exploding planet appears to be the same thing which would later cause the earth to tilt on its axis and swell it’s diameter and change the earth to it’s present day orbit. Some astronomers, led by Van Flandrin of the U.S. Naval Observatory, postulate that a very large comet or a star fragment passed through our solar system or was temporarily caught in our solar system.

The Titus Bodes law of planetary positions shows that there is indeed a missing planet in our solar system where the asteroid belt now exists. It is postulated that a water planet, much larger than the earth, orbited in this position. This water planet was jolted from its orbital position by the passing star fragment. This left our solar system with two astral marauders.
All this is to say that there is an adequate mechanism, which not only could move the earth into its present orbit, but could do so in a matter of decades, not millions of years.

The Rules are Changing
In previous years astronomers have spoofed the idea that the earth could move into a different orbit in only a few centuries, but new discoveries have changed all this.
In attempts to explain anomalies regarding the Big Bang, astronomers are inventing String Theory, Dark Matter and even Dark Energy. The Big Bang theory has encouraged the reintroduction of the old but revised Ether Space theory. New knowledge of how debris in space collects into large globs excluding the force of gravity, plus the fact that there exists some type of energy between vast distances of space other than gravity. There seems to exist some type of electro-gravity phenomenon that excites gravity, increasing its intensity. All this and more shows that the rules are rapidly changing in astrophysics.
Today, the standards for astronomical and even chemical measurements are changing. Astronomers when observing distant quasars, now are questioning their so-called “fine structure constant”. Observed atoms of iron and manganese absorbed energies at different quantized amounts than they do here. This causes astronomers and chemists to now question the consistency which they have long used for measuring. If the atomic constituents of iron changes with age, they wonder if age changes light speed, and the speed of the electron. (“Blinding flash”, New Scientist, page 28, May 11, 2002). Even the relativism of Albert Einstein is being called into question.

Bodes law of planetary alignment is further evidence that some type of controlling energy dictates where orbiting bodies can position themselves in space. This mysterious force enables an object with an unstable orbit to settle into a stable orbit within a few years rather than taking millions of years. This type of phenomenon is observed on the atomic level where electron orbits will either stabilize or be thrown into another orbit and instantly stabilize at the new orbit. The phenomenon of Quantums, where objects and energies jump and then stabilize, is a principal which is now being realized as having an enormous effect in celestial mechanics. Now Quantums have been demonstrated at the atomic level of gravity. When cold neutrons are dropped, they do not accelerate smoothly but jerk in steps of 1.7 cm per second. (Meta Research Bulletin, 11: 16, March 15, 2002)

Centrifugal force decreases in a spinning sphere as its size diminishes. If the ancient earth had a faster span in ancient times, it would have the tendency to throw the sea water away from the planet, yet because the earth’s diameter was smaller this centrifugal force would be the diminished enough to counter this tendency. Therefore, centrifugal force would not affect the ancient earth so much with it’s faster span, especially if the planet had not yet acquired it’s vast body of water.

The Western Perspective of History
Today’s Western world inherited its history from the old world. That inherited history came from a Judeo-Christian viewpoint, which in turn came from early Hebrew records. Copernicus was opposed by the Christian church even when the Bible contradicted the church’s position. Other worlds did exist showing that this was not the only world and not the center of the solar system (Heb. 11:3 & Rev. 12:12). However, new discoveries in background radiation are discouraging the Big Bang theory (By By Big Bang, William Mitchell, 2002) and that this particular galaxy, the Milky Way galaxy, is as close to the center of known universe as can be detected.
Later, along comes Isaac Newton, the greatest scientific and mathematical mind ever, and we are just now discovering that he was heavily involved with Biblical eschatology, and even alchemy (In the early 1980s it was demonstrated that certain biological systems create different forms of alchemy. Shades of the golden egg.).
Western science and technology has its backbone firmly based on Biblical writings. While western law, also biblically based, enabled the flourishing of science and technology, at the turn of the 20th century the institutes of higher learning switched their basis of education to a man based agenda where reductionism, gradualism, and evolution gained priority. Ironically, it was some of the Bible’s own statements which created this unfortunate twist. For example: When the Bible mentions that the Israelites escaped Egypt from the land of Rameses it was naturally deduced that the exodus occurred during Egypt’s New Kingdom when the Rameses Dynasty existed. Thus scholars missed the date of the exodus by almost exactly one millennium (see Hebrew Sages of Ancient Egypt, David Fry, 1976).
Even though it is easily detected how Hebrew writer’s inserted their own theological opinion, the historical record is surprisingly and remarkably objective. Therefore, let us proceed with the evidence so far collected concerning the expanded earth’s theory, to see how it meshes with the ancient Biblical stories.

The Biblical Perspective
Upon acquiring a more refined sea floor map in 1995, I was examining the possible relationships of continental separation with the Biblical stories of Noah’s flood and the days of Peleg when the earth was divided. Did the sea floor reflect evidence of these Biblical stories?
According to the physical evidence, the evolution model is not faring well. There were simply too many points of faith upon which it depended. Fortunately for evolutionists, the God of the Bible loves faith, so I must concede that God loves evolutionists more than anyone.
Even though the Biblical writers showed a distinct prejudice by injecting theological faith into their historical memories, it is those historical accounts which are relied on today more than any other writings of antiquity. The reason was simple, the Bible was the only document to give a continuous chronology covering several millennium.
Though scholarly scorn was poured upon the Genesis story throughout the 18th, 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, now the pendulum of scientific evidence is pointing bibleward.
By adding two factors to the biblical story, the Bible acquires a better scientific position any other discipline.
1)  The earth was enveloped in a protective ice canopy.
2)  The earth experienced a series of celestial catastrophes.
Let us explore these two factors:

The Biblical Canopy Theory
Most all Biblical creationists utilized the earth canopy theory. Some think this canopy was composed of a water vapor, some teach it was ice crystals, but most, including myself, picture it as an ice bubble about 100 to 700 feet thick which encapsulated a much smaller earth.
The canopy theory is the most daring geological model of all the creationists theories. There is nothing like it known in the solar system and until recently there was no natural way to construct such a canopy and no good explanation for how this canopy could exist against the gravitational pull of the Moon. Yet the canopy theory helps explain geological and paleological evidence now observed on earth. Perhaps a canopy did exist, after all our solar system contains equally mysterious ice rings around Saturn, Jupiter, and Neptune.
The Biblical creation story says that the earth’s waters were actively divided and there were waters above and below. If above and below is in reference to a man’s viewpoint, then the waters above would be above and below his head. The waters below would naturally be the shallow seas of which the paleontologists say that the early Earth possessed. (Another application for the waters below is inferred when the river from Eden wells up from it’s subterranean depths.) The waters above are presumed to be rain clouds, but unfortunately for this presumption, Genesis says that there was no rain prior to Noah’s flood. Therefore, the waters above likely refer to the ice canopy surrounding the earth.
The secular scientific evidence for a canopy is that fossils of dinosaurs have been located from Antarctica to northern Siberia and fossilized tropical fauna existing on every continent of the globe. Whether the earth was tilted on its axis or not, these tropical conditions could not exist without a protective canopy.
The only way evolutionists could explain this tropical condition was to move continents like Antarctica from a tropical latitude to its present location. But now we know that the continents stayed in their relative positions and did not slide across the globe like hockey pucks. Therefore, even the evolutionists who believe in an expanding earth must adopt the canopy theory to make their own model match the evidence.

Ancient Earth Experienced Astral Disasters.
The concept of astral disasters is common to both evolutionists and the creationists. The only difference is time. The evolutionists want to push events back into the millions and billions of years where humans cannot wrap their minds around such long epochs of time. Biblical catastrophists who do not accept these long eras are forced to explain geological events within only a few thousand years.
The Titus Bodes law of planetary positions shows that there is indeed a missing planet in our solar system where the asteroids belt now exists. Could that missing planet have moved the Earth’s orbit? All this is to say that there is an adequate mechanism, which not only could move the earth into its present orbit, but could do so in a matter of decades, not millions of years. One would be tempted to say that all these proposed events are too hypothetical and too convenient to explain the Biblical flood and the collapse of the tower of Babel, the dividing of the earth (the continents), the plagues of the exodus, the long day of Joshua where the sun stood still, and where the sundial went back by 10 degrees in the days of Isaiah. Through backward engineering in geology, biology, and astronomy, all these sciences in accord with the laws of physics, shows evidence that these Biblical events are not only based upon fact, but are real events in human history, regardless of the Hebrew’s theological interpretations.

The Genesis Fashioning Process
Before addressing the earth experiencing astral disasters, it is essential to notice what the earth was like prior to the astral disasters.
Some creationists perceive that the earth was created from nothing during the six days of a creation week. Unfortunately, for this concept, Genesis says that the earth already existed as a planet covered with water. The active state of creation began with a spirit moving over the waters which initiated the fashioning process. This gives the impression that the six days of creation resembled a terraforming process. (Because days and nights preceded the creation of the greater light, gives the impression that the sun was just ignited and getting brighter by the day. Some astronomers propose that when a proto-sun reaches a certain mass it will ignite, taking only a matter of hours or days).
In this model the earth was a water planet for eons of time until the fashioning process began. This explains why the Precambrian geological strata contain no life forms yet much of it deposited by water. Therefore, biological life did not exist on this planet until the six day terraforming process began.
The Biblical earth prior to the six-day creation event, was geologically cold, very dense and its surface covered by water. After the six-day fashioning process, this smaller Earth flaunted an enveloping ice bubble which encapsulated the atmosphere. Genesis makes a rather scientific observation by saying that there was no rain in the preflood era. Therefore, to be scientifically correct, the author of Genesis alertly states that the four rivers emerging from the land of Eden watered the earth in a geyser like fashion, each river eventually flowing into deltas which fed shallow seas.
Obviously, if there was no rain, then rivers had to operate in reverse. Their headwaters were the largest source and like a snake whose head is wider than the rest of the body, these rivers depleted as they proceeded. For rivers to flow in this fashion indicates that the early Earth had no high mountains and very few high elevations. Indeed, the land of Eden appears to be one of the highest elevations on earth. This watering system must have supplied its geyser like headwaters by subterranean lunar tides. When geologists finally acknowledge this preflood hydrodynamics, it will help solve several geological anomalies encountered by today’s observations.

Earth’s Preflood Astral Position
Time Discrepancies

The 360 Day Year
We have already explored the physics of expanding the earth which would slow the earth’s rotation. If a smaller earth spun faster in preflood times, is there any evidence? Certain corals of the so called Devonian era (Preflood) produce what are thought to be daily growth layers between annual layers. Subjective evidence showed there might have been 400 days per year in that era. The calculation of preflood years might be difficult in a tropical environment controlled by a canopy, but we do know that Genesis supplies strict accounting of the age of the patriarchs. If the yearly cycle of ancient coral can be trusted, there was 400 days to a year during the life of Adam, Enoch, and Methusalah. The year of the biblical flood can be shown to be 360 days, not 365, much less 400 days. Could there have been a change from 400 to 360 days during the year of the flood?

A study of the growth patterns of mollusk shells since the Ordovician era shows a Earth year of 447 days at 2 billion years ago and decreasing to an Earth year of 383 days at 290 million years ago and then to 365 days in our time.
By extrapolation paleontologists say the Devonian coral rings, display that the day is increasing by 24 seconds every million years which would allow for an Earth expansion rate of about .5 percent for the past 4.5 billion years. (Atomic clocks confirm that the Earth is gradually slowing down but at a much more rapid rate.)

 These extrapolations show a shortening length of the year, but what about the length of a day? During the past 900 million years earth has experienced a slowdown in span rate according to the NASA space physicists. Even now this can be detected, and the rotation rate changes in milliseconds per day. Unfortunately for the evolutionist, today’s slowing rate of earth span extrapolates to an Earth which rotated 1.4 times every hour 200 million years ago. An Earth spinning this rapidly would not only sling any accumulation of water off of the planet but also most forms of life. The rotation rate at 65 million years ago when the dinosaurs became extinct, they would have had to walk on flat land at an angle of 25 degrees from vertical at the 30th parallel to keep their balance. Nothing could have survived on the earth’s equator because everything would have been thrown into the air and landed hundreds of miles north or south of the equator due to the centrifugal force of the fast spinning earth.

Realizing this problem evolutionists re-calibrate the amount of earth spin and say that the Earth has not been slowing down at its current rate but that it has varied in spin rate throughout time. Unfortunately they show no data to support this position.
Notwithstanding, even if we used the evolutionist standard of time, they are supporting the position that the Earth has changed its orbit around the sun and that the Earth has slowed down in its span rate. Well, in the Biblical model of an expanded earth, the same two things must occur but within a shorter time span, hundreds of years rather than millions of years.
One element of the biblical model, is that the earth must expand in size in only a few hundred years rather than millions of years. The second element is the biblical record showing that the earth formally had a 360 day year rather than today’s 365 day year. Unfortunately, in the Biblical record there existed fewer days per year than we have now, not more days as our expanded earth model requires. The calculations for the number of days per year at the time of Noah’s Flood is 360 days per year, but at this momentum a smaller earth requires almost as many as 700 days per year.
To say that the earth has expanded since the 360 day year of Noah, demands an additional factor. That factor is that at the time of Noah, the earth had a tighter orbit around the sun. This smaller orbit would allow fewer earth rotations of the faster spinning earth as it completed it’s yearly orbit. This smaller orbit makes it possible to have the required 360 days per year as the Bible record stipulates. Therefore, all our requirements for an expanded earth are accounted for if the earth in ancient times had an orbit somewhere between today’s orbits of Earth and Venus.
(The one interesting side effect is that the people living on the earth from the time of Adam until Noah would have had shorter life spans than we now think. Adam would still have lived 930 years, but because the days of his life were shorter, the total number of hours which Adam lived would be shortened to about 500 of our years.)

Environmental Considerations of a Smaller Earth
 The bubble encapsulated earth was perhaps 2 to 4 percent closer to the sun than today. This closer proximity to the sun prompts the question of a hot greenhouse effect within the canopy. However, the reflective surface of the ice canopy allowed less infrared radiation to reach the planet’s surface. Had the ice canopy existed during the earth’s present orbit around the sun, the resulting lower temperatures would have created a perpetual ice age.
Upon observing ancient geological formations, fossils, and coal deposits, we wonder what caused things to change from a tropical world to its present condition. Probably the earth’s change was because we lost our canopy plus we moved further from the Sun.

Post-flood Conditions
Genesis insists that Noah’s era had a solar year consisting of 360 days. And the prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation still base their calendars upon this 360 day year. Immanuel Velikovsky showed detailed historical records of where the ancient Egyptians gradually added five days to their 360 day solar calendar. He also shows how other ancient cultures, even in the Americas, eventually changed their calendars to 365 days.
According to Velikovsky and other researchers, the change to our present 365 days to a year, was not adopted until