The true origin of ice ages

According to this reasoning, we can rather confidently assume that the solid cores of Saturn and Jupiter, undoubtedly larger than the inferior planets, surely rotate no faster than once in twenty-fours hours and very possibly even more slowly. In other words the minerals in their shrouds are revolving around the cores as independent satellites with velocities which prevent them from descending immediately to the cores. The same thing surely must be true also of Neptune and Uranus.

In the case of Venus it would seem more logical to conclude that its colorless shroud, being very much less bulky and hugging close to the planet’s core, is rotating either at orbital speed or with the core, like Earth’s air envelope is doing. If it is revolving at orbital speed, independently of the core, it may continue to do so forever inasmuch as Venus has no satellite, which, revolving more slowly than the core rotates, would pull back against the shroud and reduce the revolutional velocity of the latter until it would eventually descend to the core.

In these tenuous envelopes surrounding and obscuring the cores of the planets we perceive what would seem to be unquestionable examples of primordial aqueous and other mineral matter gradually approaching ultimate incorporation into the crusts of the planets. We see this material losing momentum and revolving more slowly toward the poles than at the equators. Hence it must be gravitating from equatorial regions toward the poles, indicating that it once must have been incorporated in equatorial ring systems. Possibly we even see it falling to the cores of the planets, as evidenced by the flattened, depressed polar portions of the tenuous envelopes. More conclusive proof to substantiate our deductions can scarcely be imagined.

Requirements for Refutation

Exception to the foregoing conclusions would be of little force and effect if based merely upon the statement that “the conclusions have not been proved.” Obviously nothing can be “proved” about such abstruse subjects. Acceptable conclusions can be reached only by weighing more logical interpretations of visible evidence against less logical and less acceptable interpretations. Accordingly, anyone who would refute the above conclusions must produce logical reasons for believing:

1. That Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune have not lost substantially all of their internal, formative heat.

2. That Saturn’s rings are not remnants of primordial atmospheric mineral matter revolving at velocities which prevent their immediate decline to the planet’s core.

3. That the mottled, banded, obscuring clouds surrounding Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus also are not primordial mineral matter, exemplifying declination at a later stage of evolution than the rings of Saturn.

4. That it is erroneous to assume that the minerals in the clouds and rings have never been part of the solidified cores of the planets.

5. That the rings and clouds are not losing velocity due to known forces and will not eventually descend and be incorporated in the cores of the planets.

6. That there is no logic in concluding that Earth evolved in the same way as the foregoing planets appear to be evolving.

In the absence of such controverting evidence, it would seem that we are justified in concluding that, geologically speaking, at a recent period in Earth’s history much of the mineral matter now incorporated in its stratified crust, as well as a large amount of the water now in its hydrosphere, were still suspended in space above, earlier perhaps in the form of disc-shaped rings and later as overclouding canopies or envelopes extending at times from equator to poles like the shrouds of Neptune, Uranus, Saturn and Jupiter.

Water Descended in Increments

In contemplating the probable composition of Earth’s primordial atmosphere, we reasoned that water was a prominent constituent. We reasoned that in all probability it was volatilized first and repelled farthest from the molten core. Conceivably, then, it could have been the last or among the last components to return to Earth. There can be no doubt that evidence supports the latter supposition.

We reasoned that inasmuch as primordial atmospheric matter was rapidly revolving, it would lose momentum and could descend only slowly after heat ceased to repel it. With our telescopes we see on other planets conditions which confirm this reasoning. According to our theory, the atmospheric minerals were more or less separated and segregated into different rings and bands which would gravitate and descend to the core at separate times. Hence we concluded that waters now on and within Earth’s core could not and did not all descend at one time, but, on the contrary, accumulated from increments which descended at widely separated, erratic intervals. This conclusion is definitely supported by physical laws of motion, by the testimony of other planets and by evidence plainly visible on Earth. The realization that the hydrosphere has thus been increased within geological times clearly solves many, many otherwise inexplicable mysteries which have baffled scientists since time immemorial.

If, then, primitive waters descended in increments, it requires little imagination to perceive that at times they descended in sudden, cataclysmic deluges perhaps of rain in or near tropical zones and of ice and snow in and near polar regions. If a fall happened to occur in winter in an area only thirty or forty degrees from the equator, it would very probably be in the form of ice or snow; whereas if the fall occurred in summer, even as far north as Siberia or Alaska, it could conceivably be in the form of rain. No doubt, variations were localized, regional and erratic. It seems logical that if aqueous vapors at a height of only a few thousand feet can congeal into ice even in midsummer, at heights of hundreds or thousands of miles such congellation would be inevitable.

The latter thought suggests that probably at least the major percentage of primitive water which descended from the outer reaches of space was frozen—frozen despite the fact that latitudinal variations in climate were then less than at present and even polar climates were then mild. Does not the thought also offer an explanation of the fact that ice sheets were deposited in and near tropical zones? Does it not suggest that frozen moisture falling into the oceans caused sudden and pronounced chilling of the waters, with consequent extinction of some forms of marine life?