New Hypothesis Provides A Basis For The Reality Of Atlantis

[Adam Hawthorne]

New Hypothesis Provides A Basis For The Reality Of The Legendary Continents Of Atlantis And Lemuria

The Demise of The Current Sea-Floor Spreading And Plate-Tectonics Theory

by William Hutton (aka Wyman Harrison, Ph.D. a tenured professor of geology)

To geologists it is no longer a hypothesis. It is now a theory. Every Earth scientist believes it is true. Right? And what is “it”? What I’m talking about is the theory of sea-floor-spreading and plate tectonics.

As a result of a comprehensive review published late last year, sea floor spreading and its plate tectonics corollary are shown not to explain correctly the origin of our planet’s ocean basins and continents. And what if the current “theory” is incorrect? If it proves to be wrong, a huge barrier is removed to the acceptance of the Cayce readings’ story on the lost continents of Atlantis and Lemuria.

No longer will it be delusional to consider vertical crustal movements to explain the origin of Earth’s ocean basins. “Elevator tectonics” will be in, and “shuffle-board” (plate) tectonics will be out, almost entirely. Although sea-floor spreading will still have a small place in geoscientists’ understanding of certain aspects of the origin and maintenance of continents and ocean basins, the really big picture, of elevation of ocean floors and - to a lesser degree - continents will rest upon a model that is driven by mantle surges.

Geologists know, for example, that a global surge of Earth’s mantle began in Mesozoic time. At its peak in the Cretaceous period, ocean floors in the Atlantic and Pacific were elevated above sea level. The resulting oceanic continents were full of volcanic terraces. The Mesozoic mantle-surge event was then followed by gradual cooling and collapse of the oceanic volcanic edifices.

To understand this radical departure in our understanding of mantle convective behavior, and its effects on Earth’s crustal structures, we need to review briefly the current model of sea-floor spreading and plate tectonics.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Fig 1. The conventional model of sea-floor spreading.

Current Sea-Floor Spreading Hypothesis

As shown in Figure 1, geologists currently believe that thermal plumes of hot magma are semi-continuously moving upward beneath ridges found in all of the world’s oceans. This semi-fluid basalt rock is exuded here and there along a ridge crest. The process forces sea-floor crustal plates on either side away from the ocean ridge and toward the continents. The continents may either be carried along by the adjacent sea floor, or the spreading sea floor may under-thrust a relatively immovable continent. See Figure 1 for examples of both hypothetical situations.

A given pulse of magma, over a relatively short distance along an ocean ridge, becomes magnetized when the semi-molten material cools below a specific temperature. Iron minerals in the basalt magma are then frozen in the rock and they point in the direction of the prevailing magnetic field. Geophysical survey methods can then used to detect whether the sea-floor rocks were magnetized in a normal geomagnetic field (like today’s) or in a reversed field. Because Earth’s magnetic field is moving and/or reversing through time, magnetic orientation directions of basalt exudations allow the sea-floor rock slabs be correlated with one another. This process results in a sort of “tape-recording” of the formation and movement of rock masses of the spreading sea floor - or so the hypothesis goes.

The crystallized rock of each new exudation then splits in two along an axis coinciding with the central valley of the ocean ridge. In Figure 2, two brown-colored slabs of newly crystallized, ocean-floor basalt are separated by a black line representing the central valley of a mid-ocean ridge.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Fig. 2. Magnetic stripes and the current sea floor spreading model. Sea-floor stripes are formed by ocean-floor magma that cooled and crystallized in a specific magnetic-field orientation. These rock masses may be offset later along transform faults or large-scale fractures that run perpendicular to the ocean ridge.
(Fig. adopted from a page on the U.S. Geological Survey’s website.)

The presence of magnetic stripes on the ocean floor has been thought to be prima facie evidence for sea-floor spreading, and the basis for the plate tectonics (PT) model of crustal motion. Note in the diagram that segments of magnetic stripes of the same age are confined on either end by transform faults that run perpendicular to the ocean ridge. It was assumed early-on in the development of the PT theory that striped segments of the same age were offset from one another due to different amounts of subsequent effusions of magma at the ridge crest. Larger effusions would push the plates farther apart than would smaller ones.

Here then, is an abbreviated description of the sea-floor-spreading and plate tectonics model for the dynamic behavior of the crust and underlying mantle. Most geologists have assumed this model correct for the last 25 years or so. Its acceptance by geoscientists has, quite naturally, caused great difficulty for those who want to accept the Cayce readings’ story of Atlantis and Lemuria. How could there ever have been continents in the Atlantic or the Pacific oceans where there are now ocean floors? For doesn’t all the evidence point to stability of the submerged ocean floors and to the basically horizontal movement of crustal plates the world over?

[Adam Hawthorne]

Problems With The Conventional Model, According to Prof. MacKenzie Keith
(Now Deceased)

Now comes a convincing treatise on what may really be happening in the realm of global crust and upper-mantle dynamics. I will be basing the rest of this article on MacKenzie Keith’s comprehensive examination of sea floor spreading and plate tectonics, published last fall.1 His paper has about 300 references and is the product of Keith’s life of research and teaching in the field, laboratory, and classroom. Upon his death last year he was Emeritus Professor of Geochemistry at Pennsylvania State University.

Dr. Keith begins modestly by saying that although the essential features of the PT hypothesis are widely accepted, some aspects of the model are open to question. Quite simply, they conflict with known properties of Earth’s materials and the global crust/mantle dynamic system. Keith’s first objection is to the hypothesis that the plates are internally rigid. If a stress is applied to one side, it is transmitted to the opposite side with no deformation of the plate interior. But this is inconsistent with the results of experiments on rock strength and with the factors that govern the strength of large masses of rock over geologic time. Actually, large rock masses are weak, and they deform under the influence of heat.

Keith next states that there is a need to re-examine the hypothesis of upwelling of magma beneath the axis of an ocean ridge. Computer models of heat flow beneath ocean ridges are based upon evidence of a wide plume of ascending molten basalt to produce the magma effusions along the ridge. But how, asks Keith, can broad plumes generate the narrow zone of axial ridge volcanism, the “knife-edge” separation of adjacent flow regimes on either side of a transform fault (see Fig. 2), and the unbelievable “overlapping spreading centers” advocated by some geologists?

Further questions are related to the concept of ocean floor spreading and the tape-recorder model for generating the oceanic magnetic stripes. Different rock chemical compositions are often found on opposite flanks of the ocean ridges. The rocks should be of the same composition if they come from the same magma effusion. And what of the failure to find the required narrow zone of crustal accretion, with the property of dividing neatly so that matching halves move to either side?

Keith now moves ahead with certainty to answer these questions. He asserts that no spreading is required to account for the observed sea-floor features. Instead, the oceanic magnetic stripes can be explained by narrowing of a formerly very wide mid-ocean volcanic zone and by consequent crestward migration of something he calls the “blocking temperature,” discussed below. He hypothesizes that a Mesozoic surge of mantle flow and volcanic-zone expansion that peaked in Cretaceous time (between 66 and 144 million years ago) produced a different “volcanic face” on Earth. Elevated ocean floors then began to collapse over millions of years, leading to the features we find today.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Finally, Keith postulates an alternative model of upper mantle flow to the current one. His conceptual model involves mantle upwelling beneath continents, flow of mantle from beneath continents to beneath oceans (for Atlantic Ocean type margins), and convergent sub-ocean mantle flow toward the axes of mid-ocean ridges. He asserts that the mid-ocean ridges are principal boundaries of convection cells in the mantle. He then summarizes a wide variety of information in the rest of his review paper to conclude that “the weight of evidence clearly supports the alternative model [his model] and is contrary to the [sea-floor] spreading model of plate tectonics.”

Alternative Model of Mantle/Crust Dynamics
How the Keith Model Works

We’ll begin by considering what happens relative to the mid-Atlantic ridge (MAR) of the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of the now submerged Reykjanes Ridge south of Iceland. Instead of hot, plastic upper mantle material having flowed away from the mid-ocean ridge, as shown in Figure 1, it has flowed toward it and elevated the entire ocean floor, as shown in Figure 3.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Fig. 3. Simplified sequence of a series of cross-sections representing the cooling and sinking of Reykjanes Ridge, part of the MAR running southwest of Iceland (Fig. 4). This figure is modified from Keith, 2001, Fig. 11. The sections show Keith’s alternative model for generating oceanic magnetic stripes by ridge cooling following a Cretaceous-age peak in volcanic activity. The three early stages of cooling (and migration of blocking temperature isotherm B) represent conditions at magnetic anomaly ages 36, 24, and 16 million years ago (Ma). The blocking temperature isotherm is the temperature at which magnetic minerals acquire either normal or reverse remnant magnetism and thus record the Earth’s geomagnetic field orientation.

I have taken the liberty on Figure 3 of labeling the emerged part of the Reykjanes Ridge “Atlantis.” There is truly no better name to use for this formerly elevated, now- submerged oceanic continent. For actual physical evidence that parts of the mid-Atlantic ridge were above water during recent time, see below.

To continue now to elucidate Keith’s explanation of the origin of the magnetic stripes on the ocean floor, we quote from his p. 268, as follows.

“An essential feature of the proposed ocean ridge system is that all of the abnormal features that resulted from the Mesozoic surge of mantle flow:… uplift of the ridge, accelerated volcanism, broadening of the active volcanic zone, were subject to gradual Mesozoic to Recent relaxation and retreat, toward a steady-state system, a predictable effect of the slowing of convective overturn and volcanism, and the gradual diminishing, via return-flow gyres, of the accumulated large volume of sub-ridge subduction mixtures. The age-denominated sequence of magnetic anomalies, conventionally attributed to sea-floor spreading, is proposed to result, instead, from gradual narrowing of the active volcanic zone.”

[Adam Hawthorne]

Magnetic Banding According to Keith’s Cooling Model. Figure 4 may help to explain the above quote, as it applies specifically to magnetic banding. The basic idea is that a narrowing of the zone of mid-ocean ridge basalt volcanism (Fig. 4, reddish portions of bars) will be accompanied by crestward migration of the blocking temperature isotherm (Fig. 3). This is the temperature at which the magnetic minerals acquire remnant magnetism and thus record reversals of Earth’s magnetic field.

Fig. 4. Idealized snapshots of one side of a mid-ocean ridge, to show the development of oceanic magnetic stripes, from the mid-Cretaceous period of Mesozoic time to the Present, as a result of gradual narrowing of the active mid-ocean volcanic zone. A is the ridge axis. This diagram, modified from Keith, Fig. 10, shows migration of the blocking temperature isotherm B. The reddish color to the right of B indicates the portion of the ridge for which the principal magnetic source remains above the blocking temperature.
[The geomagnetic polarity (normal or reverse) and the geologic time scale are from D. Kent and F. Gradstein,1986, “Jurassic to Recent chronology,” in The Western North Atlantic Region. Geol. Soc. America, Geology of North America, v. M, pp. 45-50, Plate 1.]

Keith proposes that fracture zones and transform faults (see Fig. 2) are ocean-floor surface expressions of the boundaries of “convective rolls” in the underlying mantle. Such rolls are judged to be,

“the principal form of secondary convection within the upper boundary layer of sub-ridge mantle, a low-viscosity region estimated at 75-125 km thick….”

(p. 240).

[Adam Hawthorne]

Translating Keith’s words for the non-geologist reader, imagine that the primary, heat-driven flow of the uppermost mantle is outward from beneath a continent like Africa, and toward the MAR. As the mantle moves there is subsequent heat loss in the oceanic region. In the downstream region of lateral flow and heat loss there is development of an upper mantle boundary layer that eventually becomes unstable and yields a regular pattern of upper mantle “rolls” aligned in the direction of principal flow. Boundaries that develop along each edge of a roll result in ocean floor fractures and transform faults. (A transform fault is merely a near-vertical surface over which one side slips past the other, but is unique in that the displacement suddenly stops or changes form).


To end his description of the formation of magnetic stripes on the sea-floor, Keith cites relevant laboratory, numerical modeling, and field measurements. He concludes by saying that the evidence is consistent with his proposed upper-mantle convergent flow and contrary to the plate tectonics model of mid-ocean upwelling and divergent flow.

To quote Keith on the implications of Figures 3 and 4,

“the proposed ridge-cooling model of magnetic stripe formation does not involve spreading or continental splitting, and there are no implications regarding continental drift, except that the continents are presumed to be floating in the mantle, each focusing one or more upwelling plumes, and free to move in response to changes in the global [mantle] convection pattern. The principal continental drift will be related to mantle surge episodes, and there will be a strong tendency for continents to re-establish their separate positions as part of a return to a steady-state flow regime.”

Keith’s Hypothetical Model of Proposed Mid-Ocean Ridge Dynamics and Structure 

Keith proposes a structure for a mid-ocean ridge to satisfy geophysical observations and his intuition about how, dynamically, the ocean-floor crust and underlying mantle behave. He calls this structure a “flexload syncline.” A syncline is simply a fold in Earth’s rocks, the core of which contains younger material and which is generally concave upward. The adjective flexload is used to emphasize the effects of gravity-produced flexure on the crustal stress regime. In his proposed ocean-ridge model, the structure of the crestal zone is attributed mainly to gravitational deformation that results from two types of loading: crestward-increasing volcanic loading and downward increasing densification. Keith cites evidence that major flexload sinking,

“is not restricted to the near-axial zone but is broadly effective beneath the ridge flanks and formerly extended over the full width of Mesozoic to Early Tertiary ocean ridges.”

[Adam Hawthorne]

What will a cross-section diagram of a mid-ocean ridge structure look like for Keith’s crustal-collapse-under-cooling model? Figure 5 gives us the picture.

Fig. 5. M. Keith’s model of proposed mid-ocean-ridge dynamics and structure, including sub-ridge convergence and downflow, as adapted from Fig. 4 of his paper. The thickness of the crust is greatly exaggerated to show the structure.
This is a “flex load” syncline of former wide extent that reflects a crestward increase in volcanic loading and subsidence.
Red represents the region between the mantle and the sub-axial wedge of subducted crust, and is a zone of melting.
Blue lines represent crustal layering, dipping toward the axial valley. Solid lines are non-specific isotherms (lines of equal temperature). Green represents the low-velocity zone (for seismic wave propagation) that characterizes crust and mantle mixing. Brown indicates basalt-depleted residuum. “M” denotes the “Moho,” a boundary that separates the Earth’s crust from the underlying mantle.

Direct Evidence of An Emergent Atlantis

Incidental, almost, to Keith’s efforts to buttress one of his points about a former emergent continent in the Atlantic ocean is the material that he summarizes on former shallow water or emergent sites sampled by the Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP). The sampling sites are currently underwater in the region of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (MAR). Locations for three of these sites (Keith, 2001, Table 1) are shown by large red dots on Figure 6, in a relief map of the Azores. The red dots are rather large because, while the sampling coordinates that are listed give degrees north latitude, they do not give degrees west longitude. It is understood, however, that the samples were taken in the vicinity of the MAR axial valley, clearly visible on Figure 6.
 

[Adam Hawthorne]

Here’s what was found:

• at point A, at a depth of 12,802 ft: highly vesicular basalt, weathered and oxidized basalt, and a major gap in the basal sedimentary section that indicates subaerial erosion
• at site B, at a depth of 12,440 ft, basaltic pebbles and weathered and oxidized basalt were found. 
• at site C, in 12,313 ft of water, once again basaltic pebbles and weathered and oxidized basalt were found

All of the above findings are strong indicators of a formerly emerged MAR. And they suggest that this volcanic terrain has sunk a minimum of 12,300 ft since being exposed to the atmosphere. Note that Keith’s Table 1 lists six additional MAR sampling sites - to the south of those plotted on our Figure 6 and on down to the equator. Two of these sampling sites show ridge tops flattened by wave erosion, one revealed Tertiary-age shallow water sediment, and another revealed Cretaceous-age shallow water sediment. A final, rather startling finding consists of canyons and a trellis drainage system, quite possibly formed subaerially at a depth greater than 9800 ft. The MAR location is between 26º and 27ºN.

Fig. 6. Physiographic diagram of the Azores region, based on a diagram by B. Heezen and M. Tharp. See text for an explanation of red dots A-C, sites of deep-water sampling of subaerial material representative of an emergent continent.
(Subaerial refers to conditions and processes that exist or operate in the open air on and immediately adjacent to a land surface).

As quoted from Keith (p. 266), additional evidence of former exposure of the MAR consists of,

“…extensive denudation of oceanic crust [and] development of deep canyons and trellis drainage patterns along fault scarps of the MAR (Tucholke et al., 1997). Tucholke et al. attributed the modified topography to sub-ocean mass wasting but erosional features … out to about 300 km [185 miles] from the axis, favor Recent subaerial exposure and erosion of the ridge crest. Former broader subaerial exposure, and progressive subsidence, is indicated by borehole intersections at off-axis sites….The stratigraphy of those borehole sections provides evidence of broad exposure of the ridge followed by ridge subsidence, [and] narrowing of the active volcanic zone….”
(Keith, p. 266).

[Adam Hawthorne]

Example of Cooling, Sinking, and Narrowing of the MAR Through Time

To illustrate the above process in map view, we have modified Keith’s Figure 9 and turned it into our Figure 7.

Fig. 7. Snapshots of a Cretaceous-to-Recent time sequence for a sector of the sinking Mid-Atlantic Ridge (MAR) between the Azores and the Charlie-Gibbs fracture zone, to show narrowing of the active volcanic zone, the proposed mechanism for generating oceanic magnetic stripes. The narrowing color pattern shows the extent of active volcanism at each selected stage of ridge sinking and cooling. The trailing of the crestward-retreating outer limit of volcanism is taken to be associated with progressive cooling of the ridge and with the migrating trace of the blocking temperature isotherm, at which remnant magnetism is frozen-in, thus recording the inclination and reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field. Approximate magnetic anomaly ages in the upper right of each panel are from Kent and Gradstein (1986).
See caption for Fig. 4, for complete citation. Ma = millions of years before the present.

Summary of Prof. Keith’s Proposed Global Model

This article would be too long if I were to go into any more of the aspects of the professor’s marvelous analytical piece of work. The evidence for emergence of Lemuria will be dealt with in a separate article. Keith’s application of the results of his literature review to continental rifts and their associations with oceanic rifts, to oceanic island-chain dynamics in the Pacific, and to a number of other important topics like hotspots must also be deferred.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Suffice it to say that Keith believed that the essence of his proposed global model “is that oceanic crust is a principal reservoir and that selective recycling of its components is a counter to weathering and riverine [sediment] transport from continent to ocean, and a key process in the self-regulating Earth system” (p. 282). He has little to say about the forces that drove the Mesozoic mantle surge, other than to say that there is a strong possibility that it may have been triggered by a cluster of meteorite impacts in the western equatorial Pacific. These impacts may have reactivated lower mantle, during a surge-promoted change from layered to whole-mantle convection. Deep “roll-margin” mantle recycling associated with the proposed impact-triggered change from layered to whole-mantle convection, and resultant mantle surge is deduced to have formed a range of mixtures that apparently constituted a source of Cretaceous basaltic magma and oceanic crust.

References:

Keith, M., 2001, "Evidence for a Plate Tectonics Debate," Earth-Science Reviews, 55 pp. 235-336.

[Adam Hawthorne]

Credit goes to Horus for finding this, as well as the fine work in setting the type and graphics.