The Equatorial Force

I have noticed a force that has had a great effect on shaping the surface of the earth but does not seem to be documented anywhere. It is not actually a newly discovered force but is a further manifestation of the so-called "Coriolis Force". This is the centrigugal force on earth and other planets caused by the rotation of the planet.

This force must have been a factor in diverting the southward movement of glaciers eastward. The centrifugal force produced by the earth's rotation operates in the same way as gravity in that it's force is proportional to the product of the mass and distance.

But where gravity is inversely proportional to the distance between the centers of gravity, the centrifugal force or Coriolis Force is directly proportional. This means that the Coriolis Force counteracts gravity. If the earth rotated about sixteen times as fast as it does now, objects at the earth's equator would be weightless because the Coriolis Force and gravity would be equal.

It is the Coriolis Force that limits the size of planets. For a planet to remain together, obviously the gravitational force must be stronger than the Coriolis Force. Asteroids are different in that they are held together by structural bonds rather than gravity so that the Coriolis Force can exceed the gravitational force.

The banding of clouds in belts parallel to the equator can be seen on Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and, Neptune. Venus is also covered by clouds but displays no banding because it's slow rotation gives it a weak Coriolis Force. The earth spins fast enough for the Coriolis Force to affect the winds and ocean currents as well as the path of glaciers, but not fast enough to cause the banding effect in the clouds.

Now, I would like to expand on the Coriolis Force some more.

I find that it actually has far more of an effect on the earth than is realized. Consider the glaciers that moved from the polar regions during the ice ages to drastically reshape the land. Where did the vast amount of energy to drive these glaciers come from? There must have been a force pulling the glaciers southward. This is where my Equatorial Force comes into play.

Picture a hollow sphere about 15% filled with water. Now suppose the sphere was made to spin faster and faster. The water would cling, by centrifugal force, to the equatorial region of the sphere. This is the portion of the sphere equidistant from the poles where centrifugal force would be the greatest.

I recall a ride at a nearby amusement park years ago in which riders would stand against the wall in a cylindrical room that would be made to spin. The floor would then drop away, leaving the riders stuck against the wall by centrifugal force.

Since the earth is spinning around the axis through it's poles, it means that objects at the poles are under the same gravity as objects at the equator but the ones at the equator are under more centrifugal force, which counteracts gravity. Thus, identical objects at the equator weigh less than those at the poles. If there is a large stretch of fluid on level ground, that which is closer to the equator will weigh less than that nearer the poles and thus the fluid will be pulled toward the equator in the same way as the water in the hollow sphere, as long as the fluid is free to flow.

Now consider the rivers of the world. There are four directions a river can flow: north, south, east or, west. According to the Law of Averages, the flow in the four compass directions should average out about equal in the world as a whole. But I find that to be far from the case.

By far, the preferred direction of flow for rivers in the world is in the direction of rotation and toward the equator. If all the water in all the rivers are considered, far more water flows east than west and far more water flows toward the equator than away from it. The rotation of the earth accounts for the eastward bias of rivers and glaciers, as well as winds and ocean currents. But another manifestation of the Coriolis Force that I am introducing here, the Equatorial Force, accounts for the preferred flow toward the equator.

South America is an ideal example of both manifestations of the Coriolis Force on river flow. The Amazon River is the largest river in the world. It flows near the equator. It's direction of flow is eastward and many tributaries flow from both north and south toward the equator to meet the river. The eastward bias is very apparent as some of the tributaries begin in the far west of the continent near the Pacific Ocean but instead of emptying into that ocean, are pulled eastward across the continent.

The great rivers of Asia, such as the Ganges, the Tigris/Euphrates, Mekong and, Irriwady all show the dual bias in their flow eastward and toward the equator. On a map of India, it is easy to see how there are more river outlets on the east coast than on the west.

The Danube River in Europe clearly displays the eastward and equatorial biases. All of Britain's major rivers flow eastward, except the Severn, which flows southward, toward the equator. The Niger River in Africa actually begins near the Atlantic Ocean but flows east and south (toward the equator) away from the ocean until it joins it further away.

The reason that this Equatorial Force and the eastward bias, caused by the direction of the earth's rotation, are not more apparent is that there are a significant number of rivers that flow in directions opposite to it. It is important to remember that the primary flow of water if from high to low and that the Coriolis Force will only be a factor when water is on level ground. The Coriolis Force cannot overpower gravity, if the ocean is to the north or west and there is highland to the south or east, then the inevitable flow will be north or east and the force will not be apparent.

In Europe, the Rhine, Seine and, Vistula Rivers flow northward and westward, against the Coriolis Force but this is only because of the mountains and high ground of central Europe. Even though the rivers of India clearly manifest the eastward bias caused by the earth's rotation, some rivers begin near the west coast but flow eastward, the Narmanda River still flows in the opposite direction.

The Nile and the Congo Rivers in Africa are two of the greatest rivers in the world and seem to contradict my hypothesis as the Nile flows northward and the Congo westward. But both actually begin in the southern hemisphere and flow into the northern hemisphere. This could mean that the two rivers are pulled toward the equator by the Equatorial Force and then continue northward. The Congo River seems to cross the equator going northward and then is pulled back toward it and loops around.

If the earth had a smooth and uniform surface, the Equatorial Force and the eastward bias of the Coriolis Force would be much more apparent. But it doesn't and I find that this has not yet been pointed out. Some rivers flow westward, opposite the earth's rotation, and away from the equator. But it cannot be denied that if all the water in all of the world's rivers is considered, far more water flows east than west and far more flows toward the equator than away from it and there must be some explanation for this since the flow in each of the four directions should be roughly equal, according to the Law of Averages.

Now, let's go back to glaciers. Since we can see that the rotation of the earth is such a powerful force in the flow of the world's rivers, why should it not be the explanation of the movement of glaciers southward, especially since the lakes created by glaciers clearly show the influence of the eastward rotation of the earth. The glaciers could not have gotten their tremendous force from solar energy alone but were pulled southward by the rotation of the earth.

THE CORIOLIS FORCE AND PLATE TECTONICS

Now, let's go on to the next step. We know that the continents were once all together in one piece. I have made other observations concerning this system as explained in postings earlier on this blog, "The Lunar Shield Zone Hypothesis" and "The Story Of Planet Earth". But something must have pulled these continental pieces apart, just as some force must have pulled the glaciers southward. A vast continent, weighing endless trillions of tons, does not just drift around like a piece of wood on the sea.

What about the Coriolis Force and it's sub-force, the Equatorial Force? I cannot find that this has yet been suggested. The eastern and western hemispheres split apart due to a chain of volvanic activity underground. The result of this is today the so-called Mid-Atlantic Ridge, an underwater mountain chain that runs north-south under the Atlantic Ocean.

In another posting on this blog, "The Lunar Shield Zone Hypothesis", I showed an illustration of how the continents underwent a dramatic shift northward. Since the original one-piece continent would unbalance the weight of the spinning earth, causing one of the poles to migrate to it's center of gravity, we can assume that Antarctica is the remains of this original continent, called Pangaea.

This would mean that when that super-continent broke apart, due to volcanic activity under it, the continental pieces were pulled toward the equator by the Equatorial Force. They continued northward by momentum after crossing the equator until the Equatorial Force, acting in reverse at that point, brought them to a halt. This is why today, the vast majority of the land on earth is in the northern hemisphere.

MACROSCIENCE

.

This is a factor in engineering and certain branches of science that will become more relevant in the future. I have named it "macroscience". This factor concerns objects and projects that are very large or cover large areas of the earth's surface.

When a structure of some kind or a project is large enough, we must begin to consider the effect that the earth's rotation has on it. At our scale, the effects of the earth's rotation are negligible and we have no need to even consider it. But on a very large scale, this begins to change and I thought it appropriate to give it a name.

The earth rotates eastward and thus eastward momentum is added to any object or structure that occupies a large enough area of the earth's surface. Any such structures will also be pulled toward the equator. For example, at the equator, the force will be purely eastward while at the South Pole, it will be purely northward.

This force on the structure will be proportional to it's mass multiplied by the area of the earth's surface that it covers. This force is, in effect, produced by differences over a large area in the Coriolis Force, which is the centrifugal force created by the earth's spin.

An ideal example of macroscience is, of course, the tectonic movement of the continents across the earth's surface over millions of years. The continents are extremely massive and cover a vast area of the earth's surface so that the force produced by the earth's rotation varies from one side of the continent to the other, thus pulling it along.

Glaciers in the northern hemisphere have an eastward, as well as a southward, momentum. Also, it can be seen that if all of the rivers in the world are considered, far more water flows eastward than westward and far more flows toward the equator than away from it. Hurricanes move westward because the earth rotates eastward underneath them and they are pulled somewhat northward, away from the equator because the earth's relative spin becomes greater as we move away from the equator.

This force is extremely slight on our human scale but the truth is that if we carefully balance a pole on it's end, it is slightly more likely to fall either eastward or in the direction of the equator. The force on a radio tower or tall building is likewise slightly stronger eastward and toward the equator.

This knowledge could definitely be helpful if we were planning a canal to move a large volume of water. It could be designed so that the earth's rotation could "help the water along". If the Australian Government ever decided to move Ayers Rock, it would be easier to move it eastward with the earth's rotation or northward to the equator.

If a ship could be built large enough, it could "sail" on the earth's rotational force without any other means of propulsion. Of course, it could only ever "sail" eastward or toward the equator by this force. Likewise if a man-made structure was large enough, the effects of this force on it would have to be considered.

What about erosion? Particularly that of mountains. The highest mountains in the world are eventually worn down by erosion over millions of years. Could it be that the fact that the earth's surface covered by the mountain is heavier than the adjacent areas not covered by a mountain, creating differences in the Equatorial Force from one side of the mountain to the other and thus contributing to the eventual "pulling apart" of the mountain?

Earth's Liquid Interior

I have thought of a simple way to prove that the earth's interior must be at least partially liquid without ever seeing the lava from a volcano. Logic tells us that since the earth is rotating, centrifugal force will be produced that will pull materials toward the equator of the earth. Sure enough, we know that the earth bulges at it's equator so that the circumference around the equator is about 40 km (27 miles) longer than the circumference around the poles.

Now, the same logic should tell us that this centrifugal force caused by the earth's rotation should pull the water in the oceans toward the equator. This means that the water in the tropics around the equator should be deeper than that of the oceans at higher latitudes. But yet there is no evidence that the water in the oceans is significantly deeper at any latitude on average than it is at any other latitude.

If the earth was purely solid, the centrifugal force caused by it's rotation would certainly cause the oceans near the equator to be deeper than at higher latitudes. The continental shelves in the higher latitudes would be dry land and the coastal lowlands in the tropics would be under water. The reason that this is not the case can be easily explained by the fact that the interior of the earth is also liquid and bulges at the equator by centrifugal force in the same way that water does.

This is why the earth's circumference at the equator is greater than at the poles but we see no significant difference in the depth of the world's oceans by latitude. Yet, we can also see that this liquid interior of the earth is much more viscous, resistant to flow, than is water because the gravity of the moon and sun change the ocean depth by tides but have no similar effect on the earth's land surface.

Oil Made Really Simple

The source of oil, as well as the natural gas that is often found close by, is not complicated at all. When segments of continent collide as the original continent of Pangaea broke apart, the rock strata is forced upward along the collision frontier. The result is ranges of mountains.

However, sometimes not all the force of the collision goes into creating mountains. Rock strata adjacent to the ranges of mountains formed by collisions may be forced upward as well but not to such an extent as to form mountains, this creates vast underground pockets. Oil and natural gas collected in pockets under the ground millions of years ago.

The way to find such sources of energy today is to search for these pockets. When vast layers of rock strata are forced upward by the collisions of segments of continent, it creates corresponding gaps in the rock strata under the ground. This is where oil and natural gas collected and is found today. Oil does not collect under the mountains themselves because they weigh too much to allow gaps underneath them but under adjacent rock strata that was also forced upward during the collision that formed the mountains.

The massive northward continental movement of the Caucasus Mountains and the mountains across northern Iran forced up adjacent layers of rock strata. As described in the posting on this blog, "The Story Of Planet Earth", this line of high and extensive mountains from Greece to central Asia is what I call the Original Impact Line from the Second Continental Asteroid. the section of it across Turkey and Iran was pushed tectonically northward by the collision of the Arabian Peninsula and Africa. This created gaps underneath in which oil collected and is why there is an abundance of oil all around the Caspian Sea. In a similar way, Africa collided with southern Europe while drifting northward, forcing rock layers upward resulting in oil in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and, Libya, as well as a field of natural gas in Algeria.

Africa was also moving eastward and the plate collision that resulted formed the mountains of Ethiopia and the oil deposit in it's Ogaden region.

Sometimes, these underground gaps form where entire plates move relative to one another as opposed to simple segments of continent. The oil along the northwest coast of South America formed from such a collision as did that of Sumatra and Java in Indonesia.

The Rocky Mountains are so much higher than the Appalaichians simply because they are younger. But, erosion is not the only factor in the height of mountains. Another factor is the width of the colliding continental segments that formed the mountains and the way that the force of the collision was dissipated in raising adjacent rock layers. I notice that the width of the land undergoing the collision is very important in determining whether rock layers adjacent to the collision frontier will be forced upward in such a way as to leave gaps for oil or natural gas to collect.

If the land mass is narrow, such as India colliding with Asia to form the Himalayas or Argentina colliding with the Pacific Plate to form the Andes, the force of the collision is likely to go entirely into building the mountains instead of being dissipated in raising adjacent rock layers which would leave underground gaps in which oil could collect. This is why India and Argentina have very high mountains but Argentina has only a little bit of oil and India has none. There is no oil around the Alps because most of the force of collision went into forming the mountains.

Thus, I would like to introduce my oil probability formula. The probability of finding oil or natural gas underground is roughly equal to the width of a segment of continent involved in a collision divided by the height of the mountains produced by the collision.

 The tectonic collision of the Arabian Peninsula with Asia caused the force of the movement of the mountains of Turkey and Iran northward to go into raising layers of rock strata where Russia's and Kazakhstan's oil and gas collected. North America's force of collision did not all go into raising the Rockies. This is why there is oil from Texas to Kansas to Alberta, although not as much as there is in Russia and this is also why the Rockies are not as high as the Himalayas, where almost all the force of India's tectonic collision with Asia went into raising the mountains.

There are some special cases that do not fit neatly into this scenario. All along the Gulf Coast in the U.S. and Mexico is an abundance of oil. This has not formed by the kind of collisions that raise mountains but has collected in gaps that were created when the land of Mexico and Central America was curled around because it collided with an eastern portion of the Pacific Plate before the rest of North America did. This can easily be seen on a map.

Another special case seems to be the oil along the coast of Nigeria and neighboring countries and some on the coast of Brazil opposite in South America. My speculation is that this oil collected in gaps that were formed as Africa and South America were thrust apart by the underlying volcanic activity that formed the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

Hopefully now, you find both oil and mountains to be much simpler. Just remember that this process does not cover mountains created by volcanic activity, but those are much less common than those created by continental collisions. In finding out why oil is located where it is, we also uncover a lot about how the earth's surface formed.

Coal Made Really Simple

I pointed out in my posting "Oil Made Really Simple" on this blog that there is a definite pattern to where oil is found under the ground on earth. There is also a pattern to where coal is to be found that I cannot see has been documented anywhere. There is no pattern to where metals are located simply because those were deposited by random meteorites.

Coal is the result of the decomposition, burial and, chemical conversion of plants. Coal only forms in the tropics with the luxuriant plant growth to be found there but since the continents have drifted mostly northward by the system of plate tectonics, all of the northern continents of today were once in the tropics. It is not possible for coal to form in the present day climates of Britain or the Appalachian region of the U.S. Coal has even been found in Antarctica.

The harder coals that are highest in carbon content, such as anthracite and bituminous, are the oldest ones. Lignite, or soft brown coal, is not as old. Anthracite is composed of 80-95% carbon, lignite only about 40%. Peat is the first stage in coal formation and if the coal undergoes extreme pressure for a long period of time, graphite can result. It is the degree of pressure on the coal during burial that determines it's hardness.

My hypothesis is that coal is most likely to be found under the ground on lowland that is adjacent to highland. This is where the greatest plant growth was likely to occur when the land was in the tropics, since water from storms would drain into the lowlands. This will obviously not apply to highland-lowland systems that were not in existence when the land was in the tropical regions.

There are examples of this to be seen across the world. The mountains of south Wales are known to be extremely ancient and have been worn down by erosion over the eons. They must have been high enough once to block weather and so would have taken in a great amount of rain that would have drained to the south and produced lush tropical plant growth. The vast amount of coal that is to be found in the valleys and lowland of south Wales today is the result.

The same process formed the coal in Scotland's lowland "waist" just north of Edinburgh and Glasgow. It is a broad valley with highland and mountains on both sides. There are mountains across the southern part of Ireland but the mountains are more spread out and were not as high or extensive and so only a moderate amount of coal is to be found there.

There is a line from east to west across the southern part of Belgium, south of Brussels, where the continental highland meets the lowland nearer the sea. As you might expect, much coal is to be found on the lowland side of the line. This extends to the vast coal deposits around the French city of Lille and the Ruhr Valley of Germany. It is here, along with Britain, that the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution was powered by this coal. There are smaller coalfields around the Massif Central, the broad plateau in southeastern France.

The extensive deposits of lignite in the eastern part of Germany are on lowland just off the Sudeten Mountains. In Poland and the Slovak Republic, there is a large field of coal north and west of the Carpathian Mountains. This pattern of coal found on lowland adjacent to highland seems to apply everywhere.

In the eastern U.S., the name "Appalaichan" is practically synonomous with coal. This is a long mountain chain with much coal to be found in it's valleys and sorrounding lowlands. The Appalaichans are very old mountains, long worn down by erosion, that have been around long enough for all of this coal to form.

More coal formed in the lowland south of Chicago that lies between two areas of higher ground that would channel in water from tropical storms to grow the plants that would produce the coal. There is another vast stretch of coal from Iowa south to Oklahoma that lies just east of higher ground, which would make it the recipient of a lot of water when the continent was southward in the tropics.

In Australia coal is, as we might expect, found in lowlands alongside the Great Dividing Range. There is large coal deposits in the areas of both Sydney and Brisbane. The low ground in central Nigeria, with highland on either side, has quite a bit of coal. The lowland in the eastern part of China is rich in coal, fed by long-ago water from higher ground to the west. There is no finer example of coal forming on lowland adjacent to highland than China's Szechwan Basin.

The Central Siberian Plateau and mountains to the east of it funneled water to produce a lot of coal on nearby lowlands when it was once in the tropics. The mountainous Korean Peninsula has a lot of coal in both North and South Korea in it's lower areas. India has an extensive coalfield around the eastern part of the Vindhya Mountain Range and also in lowlands from Nagpur southwestward.

The Niagara Escarpment And The Meteorite

The Niagara Escarpment is a wonder of the natural world even without the famous falls that it brought into being and for which it is named. The escarpment extends from near Rochester, New York through the Niagara area to Hamilton, Ontario. From there it turns northward, on a map you can see the Bruce Peninsula in the northern part of southern Ontario and Manitoulin Island that separates Georgian Bay from Lake Huron. From there, the escarpment curves around and forms the northern part of Michigan. It finally extends into Wisconsin and results in the peninsula to the east of Green Bay.

Here is a map link http://www.maps.google.com/

The Niagara Escarpment is known to be what natural historians and geologists call a "cuesta", a ridge formed not by any type of fault line but by uneven erosion. Limestone forms over millions of years when the bodies of microscopic living things, whose bones contain calcium, collect on the bottom of a warm, shallow body of water and are compressed into rock by later such deposits. Limestone is an excellent building material and has been used since the pyramids were made of it. One of the best places in the world to see such layers of limestone created by a long ago sea is in the Niagara Gorge.

Limestone is easily weathered over time and does not last indefinitely unless it is shielded by some harder material. The Niagara Escarpment exists because it is covered by a top layer of what is called Lockport Dolostone, named for the city near the escarpment and Niagara Falls of that name. This dolostone is a form of limestone but is exceptionally hard and resistant to erosion.

The entire area was once a shallow sea but the layers of limestone that formed from it have all weathered away except for those that were under this hard cap layer of dolostone and have thus been shielded from erosion. The escarpment as we see it today has been present for about 200 million years. The layers of strata have become tilted to the south over time so that the extent of the escarpment from Rochester to Wisconsin as described above is only the northern edge of the layer of dolostone.

The question and the object of this posting is why was regular limestone forming at the bottom of this ancient sea and suddenly, Lockport Dolostone began forming over a large and well-defined area before abruptly stopping and going back to regular limestone, which has since eroded away, leaving us the escarpment because the layer of dolostone protected the layers of ordinary limestone beneath it from erosion? The spectacular mesas and buttes in the southwestern U.S. also formed from uneven erosion but these are just single formations and nothing like the escarpment in scope.

The difference between Lockport Dolostone and ordinary limestone lies in it's chemistry. Limestone is calcium carbide, the calcium originating in the bones and shells of tiny creatures in the water. The dolostone, however, is magnesium carbonate. The calcium involved in limestone formation was replaced by magnesium and the result is a much harder and erosion-resistant layer of dolostone. This dolostone is also the reason that the falls exists as it does, the softer layers of ordinary limestone below are worn away by the falling water until the resulting overhand of dolostone breaks off suddenly.

This results in the straight drop of the waterfall instead of the sloping rapids that would exist if there were no dolostone cap layer. This also explains the curious fact that, in the Niagara Region, grapes will grow more easily below the escarpment than above it. The grapes like the calcium in the soil which is replaced by magnesium above the escarpment.

But where did this magnesium come from that replaced the calcium in the limestone forming at the bottom of the sea to form the hard layer of dolostone instead of ordinary limestone? It is easily seen on the map of the Great Lakes area that the outline of the escarpment is roughly circular in shape, centered about where Saginaw, Michigan is now located. The escarpment seems to "frame" the state of Michigan.

The most common shape of a body of water is roughly circular and limestone of any form can only be created at the bottom of a body of water so we can assume that the escarpment forms the outline of a former sea. Magnesium is a reactive element and is always found on earth in combinations such as magnesium chloride, which is found in sea salts. However, magnesium does not react with oxygen or water at ordinary temperatures. It is clear that it must have been water that spread magnesium evenly but how did such a large amount of magnesium appear so suddenly and become dissolved so evenly in water?

My answer is that it could only have been a meteorite. There is simply no other way to explain the sudden appearance of magnesium and it's disappearance when it ran out. The impact crater of this "Niagara Meteorite", as I will name it, has long since been erased by the glaciers that dug the Great Lakes and reshaped the land in much more geologically recent times. The body of water must have contracted in size before the meteor struck, this explains why the layer of dolostone was sorrounded by layers of ordinary limestone that have long since eroded away, leaving the escarpment as it is today.

The semi-circular outline of the escarpment on a map is the ghost of a long ago sea. This could possibly have been a part of a larger sea which would be why the eastern part of the escarpment departs from it's roughly circular form and extends from Hamilton to Rochester. The Great Lakes of today are almost like a photographic negative (from the days before digital cameras) of this former sea.

The Gravity-Magnetism Tide Hypothesis

I have noticed something about deposits of iron ore across the world that I cannot find documented anywhere. Iron is quite plentiful in the Solar System and these deposits of iron ore came from asteroids that crashed into the earth long ago. On resource maps of the world, deposits of iron ore most often consist of two or more somewhat parallel elongated veins in close proximity to one another.

I have concluded that the reason for this is the fact that the earth is the source of both gravity and magnetism. But the earth's gravity is continuous in scope while it's magnetism is concentrated at the two magnetic poles. When an asteroid containing a significant amount of iron falls under the earth's gravitational influence and begins orbiting the earth, this creates a form of tidal tension on the asteroid as the forces of gravity and magnetism on it vary in direction and strength with regard to one another. This often causes the asteroid to break apart before it crashes into the earth, resulting in the fragmented deposits of iron as we find them today.

Around the provincial boundary between Quebec and Labrador, the deposit of iron ore forms several elongated streaks on a map running from northwest to southeast. Very clearly, this is from an iron asteroid moving in the direction of the alignment that broke apart before reaching the surface of the earth. In the area of Kingston-Ottawa-Montreal are several small deposits of iron that, while not as elongated in form, seem certain to have originated from a single asteroid that broke apart.

In the U.S. are several areas with iron ore deposits. All consist of several scattered pockets of ore in close proximity to one another. These are in the Mojave Desert area of southeastern California, in New Mexico northwest of El Paso and, in northern Minnesota and Michigan. I am certain that each of these three areas of deposit is the result of an iron asteroid that broke apart.

Sweden is famous as a source of iron ore. It's iron came from two separate asteroids. In south central Sweden west of Stockholm is one large area of deposit with smaller areas around it. There is also an area of scattered small areas of iron deposit in northern Sweden.

Britain had enough iron to supply the launch of the Industrial Revolution. It's iron is from one large asteroid from which numerous smaller pieces broke off before it hit the earth. The major deposit is in the east central part of the country around Peterborough with a line of smaller deposits going to the north and another line from the large deposit to the southwest. The last one in the southwest line landed in what would become my native Forest of Dean.

In western France between Caen and Nantes, there are several elongated streaks of iron ore all aligned virtually parallel to each other from east north east to west south west. In southern Spain east of Granada, there are several streaks of iron ore all aligned west south west to east north east. The scattered small deposits of iron in Germany do not seem to be elongated or aligned but I consider it probable that they all originated from the same asteroid, possibly including the large contiguous deposit across the border of France and Luxembourg. In south central Poland south of Lodz are two long streaks of iron ore with smaller deposits all around. These are most certainly from the same iron asteroid.

There are also scattered small deposits of iron ore across Iran with no apparent alignment but I believe that these came from the same asteroid. The iron ore deposits in India are very interesting. There is a small area of deposit in the south of the country near the coast south of Madras. Much further north, there are two parallel elongated deposits west of Calcutta. These form a straight line with the deposit south of Madras. This makes it seem certain that part of the asteroid broke off and struck the earth before the rest of the asteroid broke in two and then also struck the earth.

China appears to have absorbed three iron asteroids that broke apart first. There is a group of scattered deposits in the southwestern part of the country, these came from one asteroid. There are two small elongated areas of iron deposit that form a straight line in the southeastern part of China, these came from the second asteroid. Finally, there is a scattering of iron deposits close together in China near the border with North Korea. In Korea itself, there is a scattering of deposits across North and South Korea that could possibly have come from the same asteroid as the one across the Chinese border.

There are exceptions to this fragmentation. Not all iron asteroids that struck the earth appear to have fragmented beforehand. There is a large unbroken area of iron ore southwest of Belem in Brazil. There is the other such area along the border of France and Luxembourg that may or may not have come from the same asteroid as the small deposits across Germany. There is another large unbroken area of iron that is clearly elongated, showing the direction of the asteroid before impact, in northwestern Australia, northwest of the city of Newman. Finally, in addition to the three iron asteroids that struck China after fragmenting, there is another that did not fragment and it resulted in the large area of iron ore extending southwestward from Nanjing.

But the general rule is that asteroids containing a significant amount of iron are likely to fragment before reaching the earth due to the tidal tension created by the fact that the earth is a source of both gravitational force and magnetism. The gravity is nearly continuous as the asteroid orbits the earth but the magnetism is not because it is concentrated from the two magnetic poles of the earth. This leads to the tension that causes the asteroid to break apart.

A detailed resource map of the world reveals clearly that other deposits from asteroids that are not magnetic, such as aluminum, copper or, mercury do not tend toward fragmentation before impact. I find that such a resource map gives us a look at the early Solar System with asteroids coming at the earth from all direction in space.

The Story Of North America

I have several new things to add to our understanding of the geological natural history of North America and I decided that it is best to weave them into my version of the story of the continent, rather than posting the new additions one by one. I will not discuss glaciation here, but only large-scale tectonic movement.

THE APPALACHIANS

The story begins with the Appalachian mountain chain which extends from the area of Atlanta to that of Montreal. This mountain system is very old and it's peaks were once much higher than they are today but have been worn down by erosion. The one thing that differentiates the Appalachians from similar mountain chains is the extensive ridges throughout the system.

I have made many more detailed about the Appalachians in the posting on this blog, "All About The Appalachians".

The reason that ridges are such an important part of the Appalachian system, instead of just mountain peaks, is that the system was formed by the long-ago collision of two continents, but the collision took place at a relatively low angle and not head-on. The friction between the colliding continents produced the ridges. The so-called "Great Appalachian Valley", between ridges, runs nearly throughout the entire system.

A most interesting fact about the Appalachian Mountains is that there are two fragments of the mountains, one from each end, which have been separated from the chain and are now far away from it.

The Anti-Atlas Mountains of Morocco are known to have once been a part of the Appalachians. The chain was obviously formed before north Africa and North America were broken apart by the volcanic activity beneath, which now forms the Mid-Atlantic Ridge running across the floor of the entire ocean from north to south. The reason that Africa is today well to the south of the latitude of North America is that both were drifting northward but Africa collided with the European Plate, preventing it from going any further north. This collision is what forced up the Rock of Gibraltar.

Here is a map link http://www.maps.google.com/ . Notice how the continetal shelf off the east coast of the U.S. fits nicely with the coast of North Africa. The two were once joined. When they were separated by the volcanic activity of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge beneath the land from the Appalachians to the edge of the North American continental shelf, which had been part of north Africa, remained with North America.

The second mountain fragment that was once part of the Appalachians is the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma. These mountains were separated from the Appalachians when the friction of the collision which created them pulled the continent that is now North America apart into two pieces. As the two continental segements were pulled apart, the land in between was pulled upward so that the Appalachians and the Ouachitas are now separated by a wide stretch of lowland.

NEW ENGLAND

The first contact in the collision which formed the Appalachians happened in what is now the Atlanta area and the continent which is now Africa slid northeastward along the collision front, creating the peaks and ridges of the Appalachians. But we can see in a good physical geography world atlas that the ridges of the system curve across eastern Pennsylvania toward New York City. This curve, in my opinion, is the result of the collision front meeting an especially sturdy portion of the Canadian Shield in what is now eastern New York State.

This means that in Pennsylvania, the collision was more directly head-on, instead of at a low angle. The focal point of this more direct collision was right around Harrisburg. This increased pressure of the head-on collision in this area forced land upward on the North America side of the collision front. This land which was forced upward is today known as the Allegheny Plateau. The Catskill Mountains of New York State are actually an eastward extension of this plateau which has eroded unevenly over time so that some areas are higher in elevation than others, thus creating mountains.

This sturdy extension of the Canadian Shield interrupted the southwest to northeast line of the collision front and forced the land on the African side eastward. This land which was forced eastward would have been the first land the make contact with the North American side in the beginning of the collision in what is now the Atlanta area.

This land which had been forced eastward was what is now New England. It later collided with the land of North America further north, most likely following the two continents being split by the volcanic activity beneath. The result of this collision is the Green Mountains of Vermont. For further details, see the section in the posting on this blog "All About The Appalachians", "The Mystery of The Northeastern United States And Eastern Canada".

If we stand a board on it's end and then allow it to fall to the ground, the impact on the board is greatest at the end which had formerly been highest. This is simply because it had further to fall. The same principle applied in this New England collision and we can see that indeed the Green Mountains form a straight line and are higher in the north and fade out as we go southward toward Connecticut.

The White Mountains of neighboring New Hampshire are not quite parallel to the Green Mountains. In fact, the White Mountains display the same type of curve as the Appalachian collision front. This is because these mountains are the same curve on the land that was forced eastward by the extension of the Canadian Shield in eastern New York State and later collided back further north. The St. Lawrence River Valley is an incomplete merger of the two land masses.

When the New England land mass stopped moving north, the momentum of the lower part of this land mass forced it into New England and the result is the continuation of the Appalachian ridge system that had curved across Pennsylvania to Long Island and Martha's Vineyard. Cape Cod is a continuation of this ridge line, but when the New England land mass moved westward, resulting in the collision which formed the Green Mountains, it pulled the ridges with it and the result is the bend of Cape Cod which we now see. At the outside apex of the bend, the land was forced upward and it is now called Nantucket Island.

It is important to remember that this land mass included the broad continental shelves off the east coast of North America which we have today.

I cannot believe the articles on Wikipedia about Long Island and Cape Cod that they are solely the result of a glacial moraine because this was the extent that the glaciers moved. If we look on a map, we see that the southern extension at the east end of Long Island forms a direct straight line with Block Island and the Elizabeth Islands off Massachusetts and the parallel northern extension off Long Island forms a line with Fishers Island, just off the state of Rhode Island.

This fits with my concept of the underlying basis of Long Island, Martha's Vineyard and, Cape Cod as a continuation of the ridges of the Appalachian Mountains. The glacial deposits on the ridges were put there much later.

FLORIDA AND THE BAHAMAS

Now, let's go southward to the state of Florida. Unfortunately, I mean that only figuratively and not literally, as there is a frigid cold wind where I live today.

But Florida is vital to this collision scenario because the longitudinal axis of the peninsula of Florida is actually the axis of direction of what is now Africa on the way to the collision which produced the Appalachian Mountains. Following this line, it collided with the land mass which is now North America about where Atlanta is now, at the southwest beginning of the Appalachians.

Africa slid along the side of the other land mass, it was not a direct collision, and the result is the extensive Appalachian ridges that we see today. Florida was sea floor that was forced upward by the impact of this collision to above sea level. Notice how the directional alignment of the Allegheny Plateau is diametrically opposite to that of Florida. It is because both were forced upward by this same collision front.

By Florida, I mean the wide extent of shallow sea all around the peninsula, particularly off the Gulf coast of Florida, as well as the land. The land area of the state today is no more than about 40% of what it must have been at one time. The lowland has been eroded away by the sea to produce the wide shallow water all around. The whole Florida Platform consists of limestone atop bedrock, the limestone being built up gradually as sediment.

There are many lakes in Florida, but notice how the lakes get larger the further south we go. This shows how the terrain must be somewhat lower in the southern part of the state, which was the furthest from the Appalachian collision, because it was forced up to a lesser extent. Lake Okeechobee is the largest lake and is far to the south. The swampiness of Florida tells us that it is too low and flat for good drainage, which fits with it being a former sea floor, and that the largest swamp of all, the famous Everglades, is far to the south of the state.

I explained in the posting "The Atlas Barrier" on my meteorology blog, http://www.markmeeklife.blogspot.com/ why there is far more shallow continental shelf to the west of Florida than there is on the Atlantic side. It is because the hurricanes which regularly batter the state also build up barrier islands, which stem erosion by waves. Without these barrier islands, Florida would most likely be gone today or would be a chain of small islands.

The Bahamas, to the east of Florida, are a part of this scenario also. The islands of the West Indies; Cuba, Hispaniola and, Puerto Rico, are volcanic in origin and so do not move with the continental tectonic drift. The Bahamas were once a southward extension of Florida, also forced upward by the Appalachian collision until the westward movement of the entire continent caused what is not The Bahamas to collide with the tectonic plate of the West Indies, called the Carribean Plate. This collision held The Bahamas back while North America continued westward.

One piece of evidence to support this scenario is the presence of ridges in The Bahamas. The islands are mostly flat, as we would expect raised former sedimentary sea floor to be, except for a number of ridges up to 15-20 meters in height.

Why would there be ridges on the flat islands of The Bahamas? Remembering how ridges were formed in the Appalachians by the friction of an indirect collision, isn't it logical to presume that these ridges were formed by an indirect collision with the Carribean Plate, as I have described?

Also, notice on the map how the combined length of Florida and The Bahamas is just about exactly equal to the main collision front along the Appalachians.

THE DISSOLUTION OF FLORIDA

The recent fatal sinkhole in the Tampa area provides more proof of the scenario that I presented in "The Story Of North America" on the geology blog, www.markmeekearth.blogspot.com . Sinkholes in Florida are the rule, rather than the exception. They occur all over the state.

Florida is a product of the tectonic collision between what is now North America and what is now Africa that formed the long chain of mountains and ridges known as the Appalachians. When this long-ago collision took place, it forced up trailing sea floor in the same way as the sudden halt of a long train would affect the cars which still have their forward momentum. There is a large area of former sea floor that was forced upward by the collision. What is now the peninsula of Florida is only a minor portion of the total area that can be seen on a map showing the sea depths, there are wide areas of shallow sea on both sides of the state.

Sea floors in warm areas, or that were formed in warm areas before moving tectonically, tend to be formed of limestone. This is a rock formed by the bodies of countless microscopic life forms, and is chemically known as calcium carbonate. Limestone does not last indefinitely, and can be slowly dissolved by flowing water. This is what forms caves. The stalactite formations, hanging like icicles from cave ceilings, are composed of limestone that has been dissolved in moving water and then recrystallized.

Florida consists of a bed of such limestone, covered by a layer of clay because there was once a warm period between ice ages when sea level was higher than it is now so that low, flat Florida was covered by water. South Florida has so much marshland because it is lower in elevation, being further from the Appalachian tectonic collision it was forced upward less than the northern part of the state.

Florida has numerous small lakes, similar to the terrain in Canada or Sweden or Finland, but which are not glacial in origin. Florida's lakes can be seen to be either circular in shape, or elongated along the flow of groundwater, and not elongated from northwest to southeast like glacially-formed lakes tend to be. If these lakes were somehow glacial in nature, maybe formed by glacial ice originating from the Appalachians to the north, the lakes would continue into Georgia. Yet, this is not the case.

The reason is that Georgia was part of the original land mass, while Florida was formed from limestone seafloor being forced upward by the momentum that continued after the collision began. Florida's many lakes  are the result of sinkholes that formed in the same way as caves. Water gradually dissolved limestone to create an underground cavern, until the roof collapses to form a sinkhole. These sinkholes then grow, and may merge with other sinkholes over millions of years.

There is a large lake in south Florida, Lake Okeechobee. Aside from being a good computer password, it is also the future of Florida. Sinkholes will continue to appear, grow and merge until, in the distant future, the entire state is gone.

What do you suppose that Tampa Bay is? It looks to me like two large sinkholes that have grown along the flow of groundwater before merging, with the peninsula remaining between them upon which Macdill Air Force Base is located. You can see in the satellite imagery on the map that traces of the former coastline remain. Sinkholes do not go very deep, you can tell that Tampa Bay is relatively shallow because it is spanned by several bridges with abutments set in the water.

Sinkholes like this are also found in southern Quebec, and in Mexico's Yucutan Peninsula which is a kind of geological sibling to Florida. The Gulf of St. Lawrence and the St. Lawrence Valley is formed by land masses that came into contact, but did not completely merge. But this would have forced seafloor upward that was between them, and that is why sinkholes in the limestone are found here as well.

The Florida Keys, to the south of the state are actually coral and are not related to this.

THE LOWLANDS OF THE U.S. MIDWEST AND SOUTH

The next question becomes; if the Appalachian Mountains were formed by continental collision, why do they stop abruptly in the Atlanta area?

The answer is revealed by the fact that much of America's deep south, like Florida, is low-lying swampy ground. Most of the southern states are former sea floor which was forced upward by this collision which produced the Appalachians.

As I described near the beginning of this article, the sliding collision with the continent that is now Africa tore the continent which is now North America in two. But this was a good thing because the land in between the two pieces of North America was pulled upward and is now the vast lowland region in America's midwest and south shaped approximately like an upside-down V. This lowland is the watershed of the Mississippi River.

The lowland created by the Appalachian collision is approximately bisected by a line from Decatur, Illinois-Memphis-Jackson, Mississippi-New Orleans. On the west side of this lowland are, of course, the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma which were, as I described, one a part of the Appalachians but were pulled away by the friction of the collision.

So, this simple scenario that I have described here explains the Appalachian Mountains with the extensive ridges, the Green Mountains of Vermont, the White Mountains of New Hampshire, the St. Lawrence and Hudson Valleys, the lines of Long Island to Martha's Vineyard and Cape Cod, the curve of the Pocono Mountains, the vast central lowland region of the U.S., the Ouachita Mountains in Arkansas and Oklahoma, the Allegheny Plateau, Florida, the ridges in the Bahamas and the swamps in much of the southeastern U.S.

For more about New England, see the section on this blog of "All About The Appalachians", The Mystery Of The Northeastern U.S. And Eastern Canada".

WESTERN NORTH AMERICA

I will not go into as much detail with the western part of the continent as I have with the east. But all of the Rocky Mountains in the U.S. and Canada are former sea floor, with deep sedimentary layers that were forced upward by tectonic collision with the Pacific Plate. This collision happened far more recently than the one which formed the Appalachians.

These sedimentary layers can easily be seen in the landscape formations across the American west. Such compacted sediment is easily eroded and the region has been shaped by glaciers from the mountains and from rivers. The Grand Canyon demonstrates how readily the landscape is cut away by the flow of a river. The variety of landscape formations are the result of uneven erosion.

The far western U.S. has crossed the expansion zone at the boundary with the Pacific Plate. This expansion zone is basically a line around the world shaped roughly like a W. It is where the earth's crust is spreading which is, I believe, the driving force behind earthquakes. I described this in the posting "Insights Into Earthquakes And Tectonic Plates" on this blog.

The line includes the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, goes around the southern part of Africa into the Indian Ocean, a branch of the lines runs northward to the Red Sea which was created by this sea floor spreading, the line goes south of Australia and meets North America at the Gulf of California (or Sea of Cortez) on the west coast of Mexico. This was formed by sea floor spreading in the same way as the Red Sea.

The western U.S. crosses this expansion line and the result is not only Mexico's Gulf of California, but also the vast San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys of California, the coastal lowland along the coast of Oregon and Washington State and, the Columbia Basin of Washington State.

MEXICO

Now, on to Mexico. There are two distinct branches of the Rocky Mountains here, known as the Sierra Madre Occidental (west) and the Sierra Madre oriental (east). If the mountains all along the west coast of the Western Hemisphere were formed by simple tectonic collision with the Pacific Plate, then why should Mexico have two separate branches of these mountains?

One look at the map provides an obvious answer. The much larger chain, the Sierra Madre Occidental, was formed by the tectonic collision. The somewhat lesser Sierra Madre Oriental was formed because the Pacific Plate extends eastward at the latitude of Mexico and the entire country was thus "pushed" east relative to the rest of North America and the Sierra Madre Oriental was formed by the resulting compression along the eastern side of Mexico. This can be easily seen on a map.

The Yucutan Peninsula in the southeast of Mexico, and the wide continental shelf all around it, was formed when sea floor was pushed upward when this area collided with the Carribean Plate as Mexico struck the Pacific Plate but the rest of North America continued westward due to the curve in the Pacific Plate boundary. There is a similarity in principle between the Yucutan Peninsula and both the The Bahamas and Cape Cod.

THE ARCTIC

The only major non-glacial feature of North America that remains to be explained is the mountains in the far north of Canada and Alaska, which are aligned more east-west than the northwest-southeast of the mountains formed by the great collision with the Pacific Plate. These are from one of the Continental Asteroids, described in the posting on this blog, "The Story Of Planet Earth". At this point, I believe these rocky and mountainous islands to be from the Second Continental Asteroid, which formed the Original Impact Line.

The Story Of South America

A previous posting on this blog was "The Story Of North America". If anything, South America is even more geologically interesting and today I would like to explain my version of South America. I had this posting in the pipeline, but with the recent earthquake in Chile I decided to post it today.

Here is a map link http://www.maps.google.com/

THE FORMATION OF SOUTH AMERICA

The first thing that becomes obvious while looking at South America on a map is that the east coast of the continent forms a perfect fit with the west coast of Africa. This applies to not just the coastlines of the two continents, but their continental shelves. Not only that, if the map shows the depths of the oceans we can see that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge follows the same line as the two coasts and is equidistant between the two.

This is no mystery. South America and Africa were once one continent until being split apart by the volcanic activity of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. The story of this split is very similar to the split between Africa and North America, as I described in The Story Of North America.

However, the motion in the split of Africa and South America was more complex than that of the split of North America and Africa. The reason is the great arc in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge between the area around the equator and about 40 degrees north latitude. This arc functioned as a vast cookie cutter which cut out the bulge of northwest Africa, which is solid underlying rock known as the West African Craton.

The factor which complicates the split of Africa and South America is the location of the arc in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. The north coast of South America is south of this arc. So after the volcanic activity of the ridge split the two continents, South America was actually pushed southward. Africa was pushed northward in the same way.

This southward push to the new continent of South America put it in contrast to the rest of the continents, which were all drifting northward after having broken off Antarctica, in the far south. South America would be blocked from drifting back northward later by collision with the Caribbean Plate.

This complex motion caused a frictional collision between Africa and South America during the process of being split. Africa was being pushed northward due to it's position relative to the arc in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, while South America was being pushed southward. It is easy to see on a map of the world today how far south South America really is relative to the other continents.

The results of this frictional collision are the mountains of Brazil and the range of mountains along the west coast of southern Africa in Namibia and Angola, as well as further inland in southern Africa. If Africa has been moving northward and eastward, then what else could have formed a range of mountains along the continent's southwest coast? The region is not volcanic, although I believe the high rocky lands of eastern Brazil to be from one of the Continental Asteroids described in "The Story Of Planet Earth" on this blog.

In The Story Of North America, on this blog, I described how the vast area of lowland, shaped like an upside-down V, that comprises much of America's midwest, was formed by seafloor being pulled upward when the eastern portion of what was then North America was torn away by a collision with what was then Africa. But this was before those two continents were split apart by the volcanic activity of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. This collision was also at a low angle and so involved more friction than a direct collision. The direct result of this collision that we see today is the Appalachian Mountains.

This collision between the forerunners of North America and Africa happened before the scenario that I am describing involving the split between South America and Africa because the former collision happened before the continental divisions caused by the volcanic activity of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

THE COLLISION LOWLAND REGION OF SOUTH AMERICA

However, the same phenomenon of seafloor being pulled upward to form a wide area of lowland also happened in South America. The similarities between the two are remarkable. Both areas of lowland are vast and both are shaped like an upside-down V with the peak facing north. Both areas of lowland are swampy in places.

In South America, this area of lowland created by frictional collision encompasses northern Argentina, Paraguay and, much of southern Brazil. Part of this South American lowland is called the Gran Chaco or Chaco Plain. You can read more about it on wikipedia if you like.

The Parana River drains this lowland region of South America in a way that is very similar to that of the Mississippi River in North America. I believe the wide continental shelf off Argentina to have once been part of this seafloor that was pulled upward but has since been eroded back into sea.

The long coastal mountain range along the southwest coast of Africa tells us that, unlike in North America, the split caused by the Mid-Atlantic Ridge happened before the frictional collision that formed this area of lowland, as the two separated continents rubbed against each other. Of course, all of this was happening long before South America's most prominent mountain range, The Andes, were formed by collision with the Nazca Plate, adjacent to the Pacific Plate.

THE COMPLEX TECTONIC MOVEMENT OF SOUTH AMERICA

The thing making this situation in the formation of South America more complex than the congruent situation with North America is the number of movements involved. All of the continents were drifting northward after splitting off from Antarctica. Both Africa and South America were being pushed apart by the volcanic Mid-Atlantic Ridge, South America was being pushed westward and Africa eastward. To complicate things, the great arc in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, described above, was pushing South America southward and Africa northward.

The final result was a vector of these three forces pushing South America to the west southwest. You can see on a map that the greatest concentration of peaks in the Andes Mountains is in Peru and Bolivia because these mountains were formed by tectonic collision and that represents the direction of impact.

If there had been no northward movement, all of South America would today be south of the equator because that was where it's east coast was cut. An interesting illustration of South America's northward momentum in relation to it's southwestward momentum created by the Mid-Atlantic Ridge is the relatively short distance from the northeast coast of South America to the Mid-Atlantic Ridge compared to the much further distance from the east coast of Brazil to the ridge.

This complex vector of motions for South America does solve the mystery of why the lowland area of frictional collision in South America is smaller than the congruent area in North America. The volcanic activity of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge was pushing South America and Africa in opposite directions so that the frictional collision that created the lowland by pulling seafloor upward was limited in it's duration. The Appalachian Mountains of North America are long and this shows that the frictional collision that produced them went on for quite some time and the lowland area of North America that was thus created is larger.

As I pointed out, South America was blocked from moving further north by collision with the Caribbean Plate, while Africa continued northward until colliding with Europe.

THE MID-ATLANTIC RIDGE AND THE SOUTH AMERICAN PLATE

I have saved what I think is the most interesting geological feature of South America for last. Both coasts of South America are cut from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and this can easily be seen on any map showing the ocean depths. The east coast of the continent was obviously cut apart from Africa by the volcanic activity of the ridge. The coasts of the two continents fit neatly together and the ridge, from which the seafloor spreads outward, is midway between them.

It is the west coast of South America that I find really intriguing. Has anyone ever noticed how the west coast of South America forms a nearly perfect equidistant line with the Mid-Atlantic Ridge? I find this to be truly amazing and unlike anything else in the world.

The virtually straight line formed by the coast of Chile reflects the ridge from the equator southward and the great arc in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge from around the equator to about 40 degrees north latitude is reflected in the curve of South America's west coast in Peru, Ecuador and, Colombia. Even the curve in the west coast in the southernmost tip of the continent is reflected in a matching curve in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

The reason for this is that the spreading of the seafloor from the ridge literally created the surface upon which South America rests. The spreading westward meets the Nazca Plate, which is in the process of sliding beneath the plate hosting South America. This is why the coast of South America remains essentially equidistant from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

This sliding of one plate beneath another is what is known as a subduction zone. The process forced the coast of South America upward, creating the Andes Mountains. Last week, the world got a reminder of the subduction process with the extremely powerful quake that struck Chile. These tectonic movements take place in increments, which we experience as earthquakes.

The west coast of North America is not shaped in the same way because there is no subduction zone there. Two plates are sliding relative to each other, but one is not sliding beneath the other.

The Mysterious Geography Of Britain And Europe

I have a mystery for Britain to ponder and it has nothing to do with how Stonehenge was built. An even greater mystery is how the entire country came to have the geographic configuration that it does.

The tectonic collision of the plate containing Greece and Italy being pushed northward into the Eurasian Plate by the African Plate explains the Alps Mountains and the plateau across the central part of northern Europe. This small plate collided with Europe in a way congruent to India colliding with Asia. This arrangement of plates is why earthquakes are rare in north Africa and northern Europe, they happen in Italy or Greece instead, since the collision is actually still ongoing. I have concluded that this impact can explain the puzzling geography of Britain also.

(Note-by the way, there is no finer example of how layers of rock are forced upward by tectonic collision than the Rock of Gibraltar.)

The drift of tectonic plates over millions of years was generally in a northward direction. But the forcing of the small plate containing Italy and Greece into the Eurasian Plate by the African Plate added a westward element to the thrust also. It is easy to see that the Iberian Peninsula, containing Spain and Portugal, was also pushed into Europe by the African Plate. The result of the collision is the Pyrenees Mountains along the border of France and Spain, as well as the Rock of Gibraltar. But these mountains are nearly directly aligned east-west, indicating that the force of the collision was virtually entirely northward.

Now let's take a look at the puzzling geography of England and Wales. Here is a map link http://www.maps.google.com/ but a physical world altas would probably be better.

How on earth did this geographical configuration come to be? It is not necessary to be an expert in geology to ponder this, only to have a sense of simple physics.

The Pennine Mountains are a range that run north-south through northern England and terminating at Nottingham-Derby-Stoke-on-Trent. Meanwhile, the mountains of Wales run parallel to the Pennines some distance to the west but extend about 30 km north of the latitude at which the Pennines terminate at their southern end. Both of these mountain ranges are very old, considerably older than the Alps.

The conclusion that I have come to and would like to introduce is that the Pennines and the Welsh mountains were once a single range that were split apart by the great tectonic collision in southern Europe. We can see that the peninsula in northern France on which Cherbourg is located, and which is high ground, is at the same longitude as the Pennines. I claim that the northwestward thrust of the tectonic collision dislodged the Welsh Mountians northward and westward. The Pennines remain approximately in the original location.

If we look at the main axis of the Alps Mountains, which resulted from the tectonic collision, and see how it is from southwest to northeast, it is easy to see that this dislodgement of the Welsh Mountains westward and northward from the Pennines makes perfect sense. Furthermore, the Cotswold and Chiltern Hills have the ideal southwest-northeast axis that they would have if they were formed as a result of this tectonic push. The Cotswold Hills are across the eastern part of Gloucestershire and the Chiltern Hills are northwest of London.

If this is not enough evidence of this collision scenario that fits perfectly together, let's move on to the Mendip Hills just west of Bristol. These hills are lower than the Cotswold Hills and are at a right angle to them by axis, from northwest to southeast. What could create two ranges of hills, not far from each other and at right angles to one another? These ranges of hills are very difficult to conceive as being glacial in origin.

The Mendip Hills are the result of tectonic friction as one piece of land rubbed against another while this tectonic collision was taking place. This is why they are lower in scale than the Cotswold Hills, which were formed by direct collision and are at right angles to them. How else is there to explain this configuration?

I cannot find any reference to this collision scenario but anyone can see that all of the lines and angles fit so perfectly. The article "Geology of Britain" on http://www.wikipedia.org/ gives a good explanation of the island's geology but makes no mention of anything like this.

About half of England, southeast of the line from The Wash on the east coast to the Bristol Channel in the west, is the "new land". There is some differences in geological character between this and the other half as can easily be seen in the colour (color)-coded map in the wikipedia article. Somerset, Devon and, Cornwall, in the southwest of England, were part of the "original land" and this is why the Mendip Hills were formed by tectonic friction as the "new land" moved in parallel to this area.

We can see by the inlet to the east of London that Britain is composed of several pieces of land that were jammed together and that the fit is not quite perfect. But this collision scenario resulted in Britain gaining more land than it would have otherwise. With glaciers converging on the island from both northwest and northeast during the ice ages, had this rectonic collision not occurred, Britain today would likely be as narrow as northern England adjacent to the Pennines is.

I have further proof that this is what took place and how it explains the mysterious geography of Britain. This further proof revolves around parallel and coaxial lines that can be seen today in the ranges of hills in northern Europe.

I described above that the directional alignment of the Mendip Hills, just south of Bristol, from northwest to southeast indicated that they were the result of friction caused by movement during the collision which separated the Welsh Mountains from the Pennines. To support this, I would like to point out that there is another range of hills which are longer than the Mendip Hills and which form a straight line with them. This range is to be found in northern France, east of Rouen and north of Paris. I have looked all over, but have been unable to find out the name of these French hills.

These two hill ranges, formed by friction in the collision, must have been a continuous range at one time before the same glaciation route which carved the English Channel mostly erased it. The land to the north and east of the line formed by these two hill ranges moved to the northwest due to the collision, resulting in friction with the land to the south and west of the line. The range of hills in France is nearly perfectly parallel to the Seine River.

In central Germany, I notice that there are also two ranges of hills which form a straight line with one another and a parallel line with the line across France and England formed by those hills.

The Thuringer Wald runs southeast to northwest from the Sudeten Mountains, which form the border between Germany and the Czech Republic. This range of hills continues for a considerable distance to the area of the town of Eisenach. After a long distance, the midpoint of which is the City of Kassel, the hills continue again in a straight line as the Teutoburger Wald. These hills are much lower than the Thuringer Wald and are more like the hills in France and England.

Now, notice the angle of the Italian peninsula relative to the cardinal directions. The angles formed by the two parallel lines described above are virtually identical to it. The directional line that the Welsh Mountains would have followed if they had once been the southward extension of the Pennines, but had been tectonically displaced, can be seen to be an extension of these lines.

In natural history, straight lines such as these require special explanation and parallel straight lines require even more special explanation. What can this be but proof of my theory that the Welsh Mountains and the Pennines were once a single range, but were split by the tectonic impact on Europe, which also formed the Alps? Notice that the main directional axis of the Alps, from southwest to northeast, is perpendicular to these other lines.

I showed that the Welsh Mountains and the Pennines must had once been one chain. The chain was split in two by the movement of the Welsh Mountains westward during the shift in the terrain caused by the tectonic collision of Italy with Europe, which also produced the Alps.

The shift in the land of Europe to the northwest produced two lines of friction hills parallel to the northwestward direction of the land shift. As I pointed out, the Mendip Hills southwest of Bristol continue in a line with the long line of hills north of Paris and east of Rouen. Also, the parallel line of hills through Germany in a line from the westernmost point of the Czech-German border through Eisenach and Kassel.

Now, let's take this much further and see some amazing things about the physical geography of western Europe that I cannot see have ever been pointed out.

There are two great valleys in western Europe, both are long and broad and host major rivers. The Rhone Valley runs north-south in southeastern France along the line of Dijon-Lyon-Marseilles. The Rhone Valley is basically the gap between this section of the Alps and the Massif Central, the vast plateau region in southeastern France.

The Rhine Valley is to the north, and somewhat to the east of the Rhone Valley. It runs along the French-German border and along to the industrial heartland of Germany, the Ruhr. The Rhine Valley is along the line of Strasbourg in France, Karlsruhe in Germany and then on to Mannheim and Frankfurt-Am-Main.

Here is what I notice that I find so amazing: Look at the map of Britain, at how the Welsh Mountains appear to have once been a part of the Pennines. The two mountain chains would form a straight line, except that the Welsh Mountains have been shifted westward.

Now, look at the map of south-central Europe. Notice that the relative positions of the Rhine and Rhone Valleys is identical to that of the Pennines and the Welsh Mountains in Britain. The Rhone Valley was shifted westward by the tectonic impact of Italy with the continent, in the same way that the Welsh Mountains were.

Is this amazing, or what? It proves my scenario to be correct.

Next, on a physical geography map showing both Germany and Britain, follow the line of friction hills that I described from the westernmost point of the Czech-German border through Eisenach and Kassel, and continue northwestward. You will find that the line ends up at the southern end of the Pennine Mountains, where the Welsh Mountains were split and shifted westward.

Then, in the same way, follow the line formed by the Mendip Hills and the hills north of Paris and east of Rouen, and continue across France to the southeast. This line ends up at the northern end of the Rhone Valley.

Thus, there are three shift zones in western Europe that were produced by the tectonic collision of Italy with the continent. 1) North and east of the line of friction hills from the westernmost point of the Czech-German border to the southernmost point of the Pennines. 2) Between that line and the line of friction hills from the Mendip Hills to the northernmost point of the Rhone Valley. 3) South of that line to the Pyrenees Mountains, which are not only the result of the collision of the Iberian Peninsula with Europe, but are also friction hills as a result of this shift. Notice that the outer hills on the northeast side of the Pyrenees form a straight line that may be the result of this shifting.

The more to the south the shift zone, the greater was the shift. The northernmost zone may not have shifted at all. The Welsh Mountains are in the middle shift zone and the Rhone Valley is in the southernmost shift zone.

I was really pleased to recently notice something about the geography of south Wales that fit with, and confirmed, this hypothesis. There is a puzzling mystery in this area that is neatly explained hereby. It concerns the scenic Brecon Beacons, which is the series of mountain peaks in an east-west line.

The mystery is that, if the mountains of Wales are aligned mainly north-south, why would Brecon Beacons be aligned east-west?

There is a good article about Brecon Beacons on www.wikipedia.org . This is the official web site of Brecon Beacons: www.breconbeacons.org and it has a map showing the position within Britain so that it can be seen how the peaks form an east-west line. This is a scenic holiday area as shown on www.breconcottages.com .

Do not be concerned if you cannot pronounce the Welsh names, relatively few people can. I am mostly English by ethnicity, but I was born within a few km of Wales and have some Welsh ancestry and I cannot properly pronounce the names either. The letter "w" is a vowel in Welsh so that the city of Cwmbran is pronounced "Coom-bran". Double letters are used for certain sounds in Welsh, such as ff, ll and, dd. I have seen the language only on signs in Wales and have never heard it actually spoken, although it is in the remote areas of north Wales that are considered as the "real" Wales.

I introduced the idea that the Welsh Mountains and the Pennines, in the northern half of England, were once one range. Both are aligned in the same north-south direction, but the Welsh Mountains are shifted some distance to the west. This was really puzzling, but then I noticed that exactly the same pattern is found in the Rhine and Rhone Valleys of western Europe. The two valleys are aligned in the same north-south direction but the Rhone Valley, like the Welsh Mountains, is shifted some distance to the west.

Futhermore, there is a pair of geological lines across western Europe that border the zone where the shift of the Welsh Mountains must have taken place. As I pointed out, the line to the southern end of the Welsh Mountains is seen as a line of hills across northern France that are north of Paris and east of Rouen. The line continues on the south coast of England as the Southampton Water, the natural waterway that runs between Southampton and the Isle of Wight. The line then continues as the Mendip Hills to the southwest of Bristol. Remember that the English Channel, which separates England from France, is not geological but is a shallow glacial raceway that was carved during the last ice age.

Here is a map link, although a physical geography atlas may be better: www.maps.google.com .

This entire shift is easily explained, of course, by the tectonic collision of Italy with Europe which also formed the Alps Mountains.

By the way, the correct names of the Welsh Mountains is the Cambrian Mountains. I have always referred to them as the Welsh Mountains and this is not entirely incorrect since Cambria is the old name for Wales, just as Albion is the old name for England and Caledonia is the old name for Scotland.

It was this tectonic collision that displaced the six peaks of Brecon Beacons so that they are aligned east-west, even though the Welsh Mountains as a whole are aligned north-south. Wales is more mountainous in the south, in the general area of Brecon Beacons. This is partially explained as the pressure from the tectonic collision being unequal, and greater in the south than in the north.

Furthermore, I have noticed that the famed Rhondda Valley of south Wales is actually an extension of the geological line described above. It is aligned perfectly as a continuation of the Mendip Hills, across the Bristol Channel. There is an article about this valley on www.wikipedia.org . The Rhondda Valley actually aligns with, and "points" to the western extent of Brecon Beacons. There is a map in the article that shows the directional alignment of the valley.

Here is a physical geography map of Wales. Brecon Beacons can be easily seen as the east-west alignment of mountains in southeastern Wales. The Rhondda Valley is the line of low area to the south of it: www.freeworldmaps.net/europe/united-kingdom/wales/map.html .

In "Coal Made Really Simple", on this blog, I explained that these are very old mountains which have been eroded over time. Coal originates with luxuriant plant life, which becomes buried before it can decay, and plants thrive on water. The reason for the vast amount of coal that there is in south Wales is probably because these mountains were once high enough to block the weather so that the rain fell there.

The origin of the Welsh Mountains and the Pennines, forming a straight north-south line, is explained in "The Story Of Planet Earth" on this blog. This line is an old section of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. If we follow the north-south line of this ridge in the south Atlantic Ocean, and continue northward, we arrive at Britain in the alignment of the Pennines. This line can be seen to continue to the north of Britain with Denmark's Faroe Islands.

THE FORMER CAMBRIA ISLAND

The scenario presented in "The Mysterious Geography Of Britain And Europe" is that the Welsh (Cambrian) Mountains were once one range with the Pennines of northern England. The tectonic collision of Italy, pushed by Africa to the south, with Europe is known to be the tectonic collision which formed the Alps. It also displaced some of the land of Europe to the northwest. I find it amazing that the displacement of the Welsh Mountains from the Pennines to the west, and somewhat to the north, is a mirror image of the displacement of the Rhone Valley, relative to the Rhine Valley, on continental Europe.

I would like to add more to this scenario today. Notice that, on the northwestern corner of Wales, there are two peninsulas which are at right angles to one another. In fact, it appears on the map as a man wearing a hat pointing to the southwest. The northernmost of the two peninsulas is actually an island because it is separated from the mainland by a narrow strait, and is known as Anglesey. The long peninsula aligned from southwest to northeast is the Llyn Peninsula. Llyn is a Welsh name and is not pronounced in Welsh as it appears in English.

(In the Welsh language there are three letters that are written as double letters, "dd", "ff" and, "ll". "W" is a vowel in Welsh so that the city of Cwmbran is pronounced as "Coom-bran").

Here is the map link that I usually use, with the satellite imagery and Google Street View, or you can use a physical geography world atlas. You can drag the map with the mouse and zoom in and out: www.maps.google.com .

Anglesey has a mountainous north coast, with lower land in the south. The Llyn Peninsula also has low mountains in the north but lower land to the south. Both are well-covered by Google Street View, if you want to have a look around. There are articles about both on www.wikipedia.org .

On my travel photos blog of Europe, www.markmeekphotos.blogspot.com , in the posting "Leaving Holyhead Port, Wales" is a photo that I took from a departing ferry with the mountainous northern part of Anglesey in the background. Remember that the photo blogs were completed before Blogspot updated the system. The list of posts on the right side does not show all of the postings. You must click on the one at the bottom, and more will appear. The final posting on the photos of Europe blog should be "Notre Dame Cathedral Door and Arc de Triomphe, Paris. On the blog of North America, the final posting is "Tijuana, Mexico".

The conclusion to which I have arrived is that these two peninsulas were once an island, similar to the Isle of Man which lies directly to the north. Both islands consisted of mountainous spines with lower land on each side. A logical name for this former island would be Cambria Island. Cambria is the old name for Wales, just as Albion is for England and Caledonia for Scotland. When a section of the Pennine Mountains was broken away, by the tectonic impact going on in Europe, and driven to the west and somewhat to the north to form the Welsh (Cambrian) Mountains of today, it collided with Cambria Island and split it in two. One piece is seen today as Anglesey, and the other as the Llyn Peninsula.

Both the former Cambria Island and the present Isle of Man are almost certainly fragments of the Original Impact Line that was described in "The Story Of Planet Earth", on the this blog.

If this were not the case, then why would Anglesey be separated from the mainland of Wales by a narrow strait, which appears no wider than a river? It is known as the Menai Strait. This is not a river which formed by drainage, so why would this strait be there if not for this scenario? The thing that is so striking is how the Menai Strait, between Anglesey and the mainland, forms a line that is perfectly parallel to the long axis of the Llyn Peninsula.

Lines of magma emergence are also a factor here. We know that the parallel peninsulas in southwest Ireland are the result of a line of emergence, and in the satellite imagery there can be seen to be a wide trench in the shallow area of the seafloor to the southwest of these parallel peninsulas in southwest Ireland. Notice that the Llyn Peninsula and the Strait of Menai, between Anglesey and the mainland, are directly in line with these parallel peninsulas in southwest Ireland.

The Wikipedia article on the Llyn Peninsula tells us that it has a mix of rock structure, both of volcanic and also non-volcanic origin but not primarily sedimentary raised seafloor. This is what we would expect if it was a piece of the Original Impact Line, the non-volcanic, in contact with a line of magma emergence.

This makes it more clear how the present configuration came to be. The former Cambria Island was resting against a southwest-northeast line of magma emergence in a line with the parallel peninsulas in southwest Ireland. Wales, driven to the west and somewhat to the north, collided with the island tectonically. The southwestern part of the island remained where it is, resting against the line of emergence and with the resulting pressure drawing some magma emergence. It is the Llyn Peninsula of today.

The northeastern part of the island was broken away from the southwestern part, and pushed to the northwest. This is what we see today as Anglesey. The line of magma emergence then re-emerged as the narrow Menai Strait and separated Anglesey from the mainland which had pushed it to where it is. This is why the Menai Strait forms a perfectly parallel straight line with the long axis of the Llyn Peninsula. it is against the same line of emergence that the peninsula is resting.

NORTH SEA OIL AND GAS DEPOSITS

Some time back, I pointed out how the salt deposits and patterns of sinkholes across the world supported my geological theories because both are found in terrain that was seafloor that was forced upward by tectonic movement. Today, I would like to point out how the pattern of oil and gas deposits in the North Sea supports the geological scenario in "The Mysterious Geography Of Britain And Europe" that the Welsh (Cambrian) Mountains and the Pennines, which run north-south through northern England, were once a single mountain range until the Cambrian Mountains were broken off and pushed somewhat westward and northward by the tectonic impact of Italy, driven also by the movement of Africa, into Europe, which also formed the Alps.

One amazing thing that I pointed out in that posting is that you can see an exact parallel to the westward shift of the Cambrian Mountains on the European continent in how the Rhone Valley has been displaced from the Rhine Valley, to the north and with which it would otherwise form a continuous line, and moved somewhat westward.

We saw in the posting "Oil Made Really Simple", on this blog, how oil and gas collects, over millions of years, in underground gaps between rock strata which formed by tectonic collisions. In my main geological theory "The Story Of Planet Earth", in the section "Other Lines Of Emergence", we saw how the Pennines, the main north-south mountain range through England, are what is known as a longitudinal line of magma emergence on the earth. Land moving tectonically to the northwest, collided with the Pennines and this is what forced layers of rock strata upward to create the gaps in which North Sea oil and gas are found today.

This is why there are periodic sinkholes in the south and east of England. It is because this is seafloor that was forced upward by this clash of tectonic movement. Such terrain tends to be made of chalk or limestone, which can be gradually dissolved by water to form sinkholes. The flat terrain of the East Anglia area of eastern England and that of the Netherlands, on the opposite side of the North Sea, is also the result of seafloor being forced upward by this tectonic movement.

In the following map of the North Sea oil and gas deposits, it is easy to see that there is a heavy concentration of such deposits along an axis from southeast to northwest between the Netherlands and northern England. This is because the axis represents the direction in which the tectonic movement to the northwest was taking place, and the collision with the Pennines forced rock strata upward to leave underground gaps in which the oil and gas could collect over millions of years. Remember that the North Sea, like the other seas around Britain, Ireland and, northwestern Europe are shallow glacial seas that were once dry land.

Here is the map link: http://www.offshore-mag.com/content/dam/offshore/print-articles/Volume%2073/08/NorthSeaMap2013-071713Ads.pdf  The map scrolls from north to south.

Here is the map link that I usually use, with satellite imagery and Google Street View, but it does not show the oil deposits: www.maps.google.com .

But if we move to the south from the heavy concentration of oil deposits in the North Sea, we find no oil at all. Notice that this oil-free zone is directly in a line with the axis along which Wales would have been shifted to the west during the tectonic collision described above. This is because the pressure of the collision went into to breaking off a portion of the Pennine Mountain range, and shifting it to the west where it today forms the Welsh (or Cambrian) Mountains.

This would have forced seafloor upward into dry land, but would not have created the underground gaps in which oil and gas would have collected. To the north, when the tectonic movement met the more immovable Pennines, it did create gaps in the rock strata deep underground.

Now for another question. Notice on the map of oil deposits in the North Sea that there is also another area of deposit on the opposite side of England, in the sea along the coast to the north of Wales. Why would there be deposits here? But if this scenario is correct and Wales consists of a chain of mountains that were broken off the Pennines and forced westward, and somewhat northward, this explains this oilfield as the movement of Wales forced underlying rock strata upward to create the vast underground gaps in which oil and gas would collect over millions of years.

I see this as definite proof of the validity of this theory that the mountains of Wales were broken off the Pennines, and shifted westward and somewhat northward.

That is not all that there is to the fields of oil and gas deposits in the North Sea. Notice on the map how there is also a major deposit to the east of Scotland. It is aligned along approximately the same southeast to northwest axis as the major deposit to the south. but it extends right up to the coast of the northwestern part of Scotland.

In the main geological theory, in the posting on this blog "The Story of Planet Earth", we saw that the northern part of Scotland was a fragment of what I called the Original Impact Line. I theorized that it collided with the north-south longitudinal line of emergence, of which the Pennines are a part, and the impact caused it to break in two, along the straight line of Glen Mor that is the straight line that divides northern Scotland. This would have pushed back eastward the northwestern part of Scotland, so that it would have forced underlying rock strata upward, and this explains the oil and gas field in the North Sea to the east of Scotland and why the field extends right up to the coast of northwestern Scotland.

A while ago, I was looking in and around Liverpool Cathedral on Google Street View. I noticed that there is a low area adjacent to the cathedral, in which there is a graveyard. The sides of the low area have the unmistakable horizontal layering of the rock strata which indicates that it is former seafloor which must have been forced upward into dry land by some type of tectonic movement.

Liverpool is in England, but right at the north end of Wales. This fits perfectly with our scenario of the mountains of which Wales is composed being detached from the Pennines and being driven westward, and somewhat northward. The movement would have forced seafloor upward, to form dry land, as well as buckling the undersea rock layers so that oil could collect in the resulting gaps over millions of years.

We have seen that, when a piece of the Original Impact line ends up positioned over a magma line of emergence that it tends to spread the piece apart so that it forms a set of parallel peninsulas, in the process that I refer to as "tridentation". There are a number of places where we can see this. The Peloponessus, the peninsula which comprises the southern third of Greece, is perhaps the best example. Further north in Greece, there are a set of three parallel peninsulas at the city of Thessaloniki (St. Paul's First Letter to the Thessalonians was the first book of the New Testament to be written). Another prominent example is the southwest of Ireland, where we see those familiar three extended peninsulas. The southeastern end of Baffin Island, in the Canadian Arctic, is another example.

It seems that another likely example, that I have not yet pointed out is the long and rocky peninsulas in the very southwest of Scotland. The mass of the southern portion of Scotland runs east-west and there is a bay which appears to continue on both the north side of this land mass, and also on the south side. The narrow bay on the north side is known as Loch Ryan, and hosts the ferry port of Stranraer.

I once took a ferry from here and remember wondering how such a long bay, resembling a fjord, formed in the midst of high surrounding terrain. The continuation of Loch Ryan on the southern side of the land mass of southwestern Scotland is much wider, and points directly to the gap at Liverpool between the Pennines and the Welsh (Cambrian) Mountains which formed when the mountains of Wales were broken off by the tectonic pressure, and shifted westward.

What I have concluded is that there was magma emergence activity still going on when the collision took place which shifted the Welsh Mountains westward. When the shift took place, it displaced the emergence line which then repositioned itself so that it went through this gap. This would mean that the Severn Vale, through which the river of that name flows, is the remnant of a minor line of emergence which spread the land apart to form the vale and which joins the line of the Bristol Channel in the west of Britain to the Wash in the east, as described in the supporting document of "The Story Of Planet Earth", "The Impact Theory Of Europe".

This helps to explain why the Isle of Man is located where it is. It is a piece of Original Impact Line, which likely broke off the piece comprising the northern part of Ireland and drifted gradually eastward with the momentum of the earth's rotation until it stopped when it impacted this line of emergence. This is much the same way that we can see the island of Corsica, which is also a fragment of the Original Impact Line, came to rest against the longitudinal line of emergence represented by the Rhine Valley to the north and the aligned north-south island of Sardinia to the south.

Finally, this collision scenario of shifting the mountains of Wales westward also provides a neat explanation for the Isle of Wight, on England's south coast. We saw that the straight line inlet at Southampton, adjacent to the Isle of Wight and known as the Southampton Water, forms a straight line with the Rhondda Valley of south Wales. This is because both were formed as a fracture line when the tectonic collision which forced the mountains of Wales westward took place.

In between the Southampton Water section and the Rhondda Valley, to the northwest, lies the flat area known as Salisbury Plain which hosts both Stonehenge and Salisbury Cathedral. In a country where not many areas are flat, this tells us that the plain is seafloor that would have been forced upward by the shift. The Isle of Wight is simply a piece of land which broke off during this shift.

All of this shows that the location patterns of oilfields in the seas around Britain confirm both the theory of the mountains of Wales being detached from the Pennines by tectonic collision in Europe and shifted westward, and also gives credence to the broader theory of the Continental Asteroids and Lines of Emergence, as described in "The Story Of Planet Earth".