The Flood

Usher's date for the flood is 1656 years from creation given Usher's date for creation of 4004 BC the date for the flood would then be 2348 BC. The mechanism for the flood was the water vapor canopy and the fountains of the great deep and a planetary flyby or comet . Velecovskey has suggested that at one time the earth may have been a satellite of Saturn ; and this may well be. That the ice age was not coursed immediately by the flood is evident by what happened at Babel. Just before the flood the water vapor canopy collapsed coursed in all probability by a comet or planetary fly by which broke up the water vapor canopy at the time of the flood. If there was an ice planet at this time it fell as rain and not as snow. plus the unleashing of the fountains of the great deep would have coursed the effects of the world wide flood. Now as far as the ice age is concerned the volcanic action after the flood plus cold summers and a planetary fly by at the time of the dispersion this time didn't fall as water but dropped its ice over the celestial poles thereby killing the mammoths. It is my belief that the ice age lasted from 2247 BC until 1500 BC thereby lasting 747 years. This author rejects Oard's mechanism and chronology for the ice age because as far as the author is concerned it is based on uniformitarian thinking where as the astral catastrophism idea fits in with the scripture and there is therefore no need to reject it. It may even have lasted until the final catastrophe of 687 BC which is based on Velekovskey idea and one cannot rule it out . There are Paleolithic/Mesolithic/Neolithic and bronze age remains at the bottom of the north sea plus remains of mammoths. Thus this proves beyond all doubt that Britain became an Island after this catastrophe finally prior to the start of the pre-Roman iron age. The author will state right here and right now that he is a fan and up to a large extent a follower of Velekovskey's and Gunnar Heinsohn's ideas. Editor JohnHXF;

Catasprophism
Some thoughts from Mike Fischer (www.newgeology.com)

Dear John,
Many thanks for taking the time to write a letter with your
views on a number of things.  I could not make out all the
words, but I guess all of us are getting more practice at
typing than lettering these days.  You are indeed on the
way to building a case for your timeline.  As I always say,
one can never have too much supporting evidence,
particularly with controversial proposals.  Regarding the CD,
others as well have wondered what "earlier event" could
have preceded the giant meteorite impact.  I am only
facing the facts that 1) North America apparently overran a
spreading ridge that was already there, and 2) the shape,
make up, and very presence of the protocontinent.  On
the other hand, the starting point of the Hawaii-Emperor
chain in the Pacific starts a little too conveniently at the
place where Alaska spun off to be merely coincidental.
And a recent paper pointed out evidence for numerous
anti-podal effects - where an impact at one point affects
a point on the opposite side of the Earth.  Concerning
the 1961 Radiocarbon report, it is curious that the text
refers to a bone found in 1888, whereas the reports of
Swanscombe Man I have seen on the internet all refer
to skull fragments discovered in the 1930s.  Perhaps
the museum could clear it up.
Mike

P.S. -
It seems to me that Dan Janzen asks some reasonable
questions.  When people have only a few pieces of
evidence to go on, they tend to fill in the blanks with
what they want to see.  But that can make things
interesting too.