by Kurt Johmann
About a month ago, in November 1999, I was reading the book
Cataclysm by D.S. Allan and J.B. Delair. 
This book is somewhat Velikovskyian, in that it concludes that the cataclysms that
happened roughly 11,500 years ago were caused by a planet-sized
object that passed close to Earth, resulting among other things in a
bombardment of the Earth and an axis tilt.
The idea of a recent close-approach planet-sized object, and a
recent axis tilt for the Earth, has been debunked repeatedly by many
others over the last few decades, and I will just say that I agree
with them. However, that the Earth's biosphere experienced some
major changes roughly 11,500 years ago is not disputed; the
establishment explanation is that such changes were due to the end
of the last Ice Age.
At the time of this writing, most educated people know what is meant
by the phrase Ice Age.
The following quote captures the essence of
the Ice Age, as it is commonly taught to society (at least to the
American society of which I am a part):
At the peak of the last ice age... a layer of ice up to 2 miles
thick in places extended all the way from the North Pole down to
where London and New York are today.
So much water was locked up as
ice that the sea level worldwide was about 450 feet lower than it is
now - this opened up "land-bridges" which made it possible for
prehistoric humans to spread around the world. 
The above quoted passage captures what I consider to be the three
fundamentals of the Ice Age belief system:
There were giant ice sheets that covered much of Europe and North
The primary evidence given for the past existence of these
alleged ice sheets is the existence in the affected regions of drift
deposits and directed striations on rock faces.
The claim is that
the ice sheets were, in effect, glaciers whose undersides slowly
dragged along rocks, boulders, trees, and such, resulting in drift
deposits in those places where this dragged debris accumulated, and
resulting in directed striations (in effect, scratch marks) on those
fixed rock faces across which the ice sheet had slid (the scratches
being caused by rocks that were dragged along underneath the ice
There was a greatly lowered sea level, because the water in those
alleged ice sheets had to come from somewhere.
Given the estimated
land area covered by the alleged ice sheets, and given their alleged
average thickness, it is a straightforward procedure to calculate
how much lower the Earth's oceans would have been.
Given the alleged greatly lowered sea level, the Bering Strait
land-bridge makes its miraculous appearance.
This alleged bridge,
connecting Siberia to Alaska, is the alleged means by which the
Americas were populated with its Indian peoples.
One may call these three beliefs
- the alleged giant ice sheets, the
alleged greatly lowered sea level, and the alleged Bering Strait
land-bridge by which the Indians came - the holy trinity of the Ice
For the average educated American the truthfulness of this holy
trinity goes unquestioned.
After all, not only is one brainwashed
with it in school, but that brainwashing is reinforced by the many
books and magazines, and TV shows (including both fiction shows such
as movies, and so-called science shows), that take the reality of
the Ice Age for granted.
And thus, like Pavlov's dog, the mere
mention of the phrase Ice Age should make one salivate the holy
Up until my recent reading of the book
Cataclysm, I had assumed
there were ice sheets, just as the Ice Age belief system teaches,
and just as I had been brainwashed to believe.
However, the authors
of Cataclysm say that the imagined ice sheets are a fiction, because
the drift deposits and scratch marks, which constitute the primary
physical evidence for the ice sheets, are better explained as the
result of moving water (in effect, a great flood), rather than
In terms of physical causation, there is no doubt that moving water
can transport great boulders and all the smaller items found in
drift deposits; and there is no doubt that scratch marks on fixed
rock faces can be made by rocks carried along by water.
So why was
the moving-water explanation rejected in favor of moving ice?
would guess that most readers of this essay can see the answer just
as easily as I can:
a great flood means
catastrophism, whereas a
great ice sheet means gradualism.
This battle of catastrophism
versus gradualism was fought by the establishment in the 19th
century, and the doctrine of gradualism won - presumably because the
doctrine of gradualism better served the interests of the
establishment than catastrophism.
Although catastrophism has been banned by the establishment for more
than a century - giving science-ignorant cranks, such as
Velikovsky, a chance to fill
the void - catastrophism has undergone a recent
rehabilitation, because mass extinctions are now accepted to be the
result of impacts by comets and/or asteroids.
And once the door was
opened regarding large impactors, then the potential effects of all
the smaller potential impactors could be considered.
example, establishment scientists have run simulations of
Atlantic-ocean impacts by an asteroid in the kilometer-sized range,
showing a flooding of large parts of America.
There are thousands of
these kilometer-sized rocks in Earth-crossing orbits.
Given that a great flood washing across large continental regions
now has a simple explanation in terms of oceanic impact, which is
known to happen, then this means that the primary physical evidence
for the alleged ice sheets has an alternative explanation that does
not require the existence of ice sheets.
So what other physical
evidence is there, if any, for there having been these alleged ice
In an effort to determine if the ice sheets had nevertheless been
real, I first focused on the claim of a greatly lowered sea level.
Realizing that I could not recall ever reading of any direct
physical evidence for this claim, I searched the Internet in vain
trying to find such evidence.
Finally, during my Internet searching,
I came upon a document titled as follows:
The Future of Marine
Geology and Geophysics - Draft Report of a Workshop - Ashland Hills,
Oregon; December 5-7, 1996,
...sponsored by the
National Science Foundation, Division of Ocean Sciences. 
In this document, in its
Chapter 4, Report of Thematic Working Group #3, I finally found what
appeared to be a clear answer - albeit shrouded in technical
language - as to why I was unable to find mention on the Internet of
any direct physical evidence for the Ice Age claim of a greatly
lowered sea level:
An important shift in our understanding of the history and mechanism
of sea-level changes has occurred over the last decade.
ideas of global, simultaneous sea-level change, known as
hinged on a direct linkage between the last great ice sheets and the
world ocean level, a concept known as glacio-eustasy.
was generally thought to be a relatively gradual process.
researchers from around the world compared geologic archives of
sea-level change during the 1970's and 1980's it became apparent
that a varied and locally-dominated sea-level history is preserved
in Holocene and post-glacial records at different areas...
middle and end of the 1980's the role of glacio-eustasy as the great
driving mechanism of global sea levels had been supplanted by an
understanding that few coastal margins are truly stable and that the
goal of defining a single, detailed eustatic record of the last
interglacial cycle is unattainable. 
In effect, what the above quote is saying is that there is no clear
physical evidence for the Ice Age claim of a greatly lowered sea
And this explains why my search trying to find a mention
and/or a description of such physical evidence was fruitless; it
appears that such evidence does not exist.
Thus, the claim of a
greatly lowered sea level appears to be nothing more than an
inference, dependent upon the assumption that the ice sheets existed
in the first place.
After my above described Internet search, I realized that the
alleged ice sheets were probably a fiction - but one consideration
remained: from such sources as the Greenland ice cores establishment
science claims to have a good record of average global temperatures
for a long time into the past, including the time of the alleged
last Ice Age.
So, the reasonable question is this:
are the alleged
average global temperatures at the time of the alleged last Ice Age
sufficiently cold to infer that the alleged ice sheets were really
present, at least to some extent?
The short answer to this question
is no, not even close...
Consider the following statement (from an
online document titled Climate Change: Causes, Impacts and
Uncertainties, identified as being the "Testimony of Stephen H.
Schneider," who is a "Professor, Department of Biological Sciences"
at "Stanford University"; dated "July 10, 1997"):
The Ice Age, which at its maximum some 20,000 years ago was about 5º to 7º C (around 10º
F) colder than our current global climate, disappeared in, what
is to nature, a relatively rapid period of about five to ten
of the Ice Age vary, the most popular one being a change in the
amount of sunlight coming in between,
(a) winter and summer
the poles and the equator
These changes in the distribution of
seasonal or latitudinal sunshine are due to slow variations in the
tilt of the earth's axis and other orbital elements, but these
astronomical variations alone cannot totally explain the climatic
If these orbital variations and other factors (such as the
increased reflectivity of the earth associated with more ice) are
combined, our best climate theories (embodied through mathematical
models that are comprised of the physical laws of conservation of
mass, energy and momentum) suggest that the Ice Age should have been
several degrees warmer than it actually was -
especially in the Southern hemisphere. 
As the above statement makes clear, the coldest that the alleged
last Ice Age got was only,
"5º to 7º C (around 10º F) colder than our current global climate."
temperature range is what establishment science believes its
analyses of Greenland ice cores and other physical samples indicate
as to what the past temperatures were.
And it is also interesting to
note that the above statement mentions that computer models for the
time period in question actually estimate that the average worldwide
temperatures should have been,
warmer than it actually was."
Regarding computer models, the reason that I came across Schneider's
above statement is because I was specifically searching for any
claims for the existence of computer models that show that the
alleged ice sheets could have actually formed when given the
environmental conditions believed to have been present during the
time period in question.
However, I was unable to find any such
claims regarding computer models; probably because no reputable
scientist is making such a claim.
That there appear to be no computer models that give us the alleged
ice sheets is not surprising, because simple back-of-the-envelope
calculations do not support the growth of the alleged ice sheets.
For example, in New York City
- an ice sheet is alleged to have
covered New York City - the average temperature for the summer months
of June, July, and August is about 24º C (76º F). Now,
24 - 7 is 17º C, and the freezing point of water is 0º
Thus, obviously, no matter how much it may have snowed in the
preceding months, it will all melt away during those three summer
months whose average temperature is 17º C.
As another example
consider the fact that Siberia, which has average temperatures
roughly 20º C below those of New York City, is not covered
with an ice sheet.
Thus, given such simple considerations, and given
the lack of computer models claiming otherwise, it seems safe to say
that lowering the world's average temperature by 7º C will
not give us the alleged ice sheets claimed by the Ice Age belief
At this point in the discussion it seems safe to conclude that the
alleged ice sheets never existed.
However, given the
brainwashing that educated Americans have undergone with regard to
the Ice Age, I would expect the average person who has received that
brainwashing to grasp at whatever straws are at hand to dismiss what
I have said and cling to his brainwashed Ice Age beliefs.
the power of establishment fiction when it is poured into the minds
of the young, and then reinforced by endless media repetitions
(often these media repetitions consist of nothing more than an
affirmative use of the phrase Ice Age).
At this point I would like to comment on the political reasons for
the great emphasis placed by the American establishment on the
alleged Bering Strait land-bridge and the alleged origin of the
native Indian populations.
Over the course of roughly two centuries
the American Empire reduced
the native Indian population, roughly estimated at 12 million before
the assault began, to a population of only about one-quarter million
at the end of the 19th century.
For the most part the native Indian
population was reduced by means of murder and starvation.
American empire over its long life has a pattern of falsifying the
history of its victim nations, and that is where the Bering Strait
land-bridge comes in.
In the imagination of the average American, by
believing that the native Indians were recent arrivals who came
across the Bering Strait land-bridge, that lessens the Indians'
claim to be here, and it makes them look like vagabond interlopers
who had no more right to America than the European newcomers.
Consider the words of historian
Vine Deloria Jr., a Native American
Scientists, and I use
the word as loosely as possible, are committed to the view that
Indians migrated to this country over an imaginary Bering
Straits bridge, which comes and goes at the convenience of
the scholar requiring it to complete his or her theory.
Initially, at least,
Indians are homogenous.
But there are also
eight major language families within the Western Hemisphere,
indicating to some scholars that if Indians followed the trend
that can be identified in other continents, then the migration
went from east to west.
Tourists along the
Bering straits were going TO Asia, not migrating FROM
Although the alleged Bering Strait land-bridge is specifically aimed
at the American Indians, the Ice Age belief, as a whole, is aimed at
humanity as a whole, because it is a belief that erases human
After all, lands covered by alleged
mile-thick ice sheets
are lands where no one can live.
Thus, by creating the imaginary
fiction of massive ice sheets covering the lands for millions of
years, the Ice Age belief system helps to support the larger
campaign by establishment science to hide the fact that mankind has
been on the Earth for millions of years, instead of the mere
thousands of years that the establishment wants people to believe.
Regarding the physical evidence for mankind's presence on the Earth
for millions of years, see, for example,
The Hidden History of the
Human Race, by Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson; or see my
discussion of the subject in the section The Age of Modern Man
According to Cremo and Thompson, in my book "A Soliton and its owned
Bions - Awareness and Mind".
Allan, D. S., and
J. B. Delair. -
Cataclysm! - Compelling Evidence of a Cosmic
Catastrophe in 9500 B.C. - Bear & Company, Santa Fe, New
Copied from an
online document titled The Vostok ice core data (the
document has no author name or date), at:
The quoted text can be found under the heading titled C. Key
Questions / Unresolved Issues, within the text that answers
its question 1: What are the dominant processes controlling
global sea-level change on the time scale of the late
Quaternary? What is their timing and magnitude?