Where did the topsoil go?

[Seven823One]

I was reading this post on KD blog Polar Freezers and the Global Warming and came to this part:

KD opinion: I think the Great Biblical Flood happened fairly recently, i.e. 300-500 years ago. I think so, because of the three undeniable facts which are being grossly misrepresented by the so-called historians.

• Population Growth Chart
• Map Transformations
• Ruin Artists

I wondered, what would I add to the list above and instantly a thought came - the global flood would strip away the black topsoil and carried it away, replacing it with deposits of clay. And this is exactly what I am observing around me in Virginia. I live on a side of a hill in Appalachian mountains area called Piedmont, that is about 1000 feet above the sea level. The bottom of the valley below is at about 500 feet above the sea level. In the past this area was all wooded without any permanent habitations. The trees would fall and be slowly decomposed, replaced by the new generation of trees. This process would be repeated every 50 to 100 years. When a large tree decomposes it creates many tons of soil. But all I can see on my property today is about 10-15 inches tops, before I hit the red clay... 10-15 inches of soil is a product of 1000 years or less.

Everybody heard of the rich topsoils of Ukraine called chernozem (black earth). They happened to stretch down to 30 feet and more thick, I heard. Would it mean that area of the Earth, where Ukraine was established, had been spared by the Great Flood?

How thick is the black topsoil where you live?

 

[OfTheBrave]

I read a book titled Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and Gravel by Ignatius Donnelly in which he makes some pretty compelling arguments that a celestial event (which he describes as a comet) changed the surface of the earth relatively recently. I don't recall when exactly but considering the tomfoolery regarding the age of our earth and scope of our history I've begun taking all dates with a grain of salt.

You should give it a glance.

Cliffnotes are as follows.

In mythology and oral tradition there is an agreement that there was a (or series of) worldwide disaster(s) which changed the topographical makeup of our realm. This is tangibly found in what he (and others) refer to as "the drift".

Here's the into:

"READER,--Let us reason together:--​

​

What do we dwell on? The earth. What part of the earth? The latest formations, of course. We live upon the top of a mighty series of stratified rocks, laid down in the water of ancient seas and lakes, during incalculable ages, said, by geologists, to be from ten to twenty miles in thickness.​

​

Think of that! Rock piled over rock, from the primeval granite upward, to a height four times greater than our highest mountains, and every rock stratified like the leaves of a book; and every leaf containing the records of an intensely interesting history, illustrated with engravings, in the shape of fossils, of all forms of life, from the primordial cell up to the bones of man and his implements.​

​

But it is not with the pages of this sublime volume we have to deal in this book. It is with a vastly different but equally wonderful formation.​

Upon the top of the last of this series of stratified rocks we find THE DRIFT.​

What is it?​

​

Go out with me where yonder men are digging a well. Let us observe the material they are casting out.​

​

First they penetrate through a few inches or a foot or two of surface soil; then they enter a vast deposit of sand, gravel, and clay. It may be fifty, one hundred, five hundred, eight hundred feet, before they reach the stratified rocks on which this drift rests. It covers whole continents. It is our earth. It makes the basis of our soils; our railroads cut their way through it; our carriages drive over it; our cities are built upon it; our crops are derived from it; the water we drink percolates through it; on it we live, love, marry, raise children, think, dream, and die; and in the bosom of it we will be buried."​

I am tempted to copy and paste more from the book but you should just go check it out.

He's an interesting character, this Donnelly, and I think he deserves our attention.
His other book, "Atlantis: The Antediluvian Civilization" was worth the read as well.

Anyway, hope that leads you to some insights.

 

[dreamtime]

Everybody heard of the rich topsoils of Ukraine called chernozem (black earth). They happened to stretch down to 30 feet and more thick, I heard. Would it mean that area of the Earth, where Ukraine was established, had been spared by the Great Flood?

And isn't it strange that, yet, the soil in Ukraine is low in iodine and selenium?

 

[Megalonymous]

Would it mean that area of the Earth, where Ukraine was established, had been spared by the Great Flood?

View attachment 8660​

exactly the opposite. Ukraine is covered in loess which is a result of the end of the ice age and flooding.

 

[Seven823One]

Interesting!

In some parts of the world, windblown dust and silt blanket the land. This layer of fine, mineral-rich material is called loess.

Loess is mostly created by wind, but can also be formed by glaciers. When glaciers grind rocks to a fine powder, loess can form. Streams carry the powder to the end of the glacier. This sediment becomes loess.

Loess ranges in thickness from a few centimeters to more than 91 meters (300 feet). Unlike other soils, loess is pale and loosely packed. It crumbles easily; in fact, the word “loess” comes from the German word for “loose.” Loess is soft enough to carve, but strong enough to stand as sturdy walls. In parts of China, residents build cave-like dwellings in thick loess cliffs.

Extensive loess deposits are found in northern China, the Great Plains of North America, central Europe, and parts of Russia and Kazakhstan. The thickest loess deposits are near the Missouri River in the U.S. state of Iowa and along the Yellow River in China.

The loess description doesn't fit the bill of what is known as Ukraine's chernozem. It is a black humus type soil - likely made from decomposed organic materials. I would imagine a scenario, where the water run offs from glaciers or global floods stripped that black soil all over the continent and deposited it on the bottoms of lakes in low-laying areas. After the water dries out, and vegetation starts growing, one would not have know, that the soil cam from elsewhere. On the other hand, before drying, such water reservoirs would become swamps first. And swamps are known factories of peat. The peat deposits can also be very thick...

 

[Megalonymous]

Interesting!

ukraine is periglacial loess... and black is the mysterious burning that happened for thousands of years.

In Europe, a common paradigm is that chernozem soils developed in the Holocene under grassland steppes, with their formation largely determined by three factors, parent material, climate and faunal mixing. For European chernozems, however, pollen records show that steppes were rare. Here, using high-resolution transmission electron microscopy, electron energy loss spectroscopy, micro Raman spectroscopy and radiocarbon dating, we characterized the nanomorphology and chemical structure of soil organic carbon (SOC) from European chernozems. We identified submicron remnants of burned biomass (15–45 percent of SOC), coexisting as amorphous charblack carbon (BC) derived from pyrolized cellulose or soot-BC. The BC was several millenia in age (1160–5040 carbon-14 years) and up to 3990 radiocarbon years older than bulk SOC, indicating significant residence times for BC in soils.
In black Australian grassland soils, under aboriginal fire management for thousands of years, up to 30% of the soil organic carbon (SOC) was present as BC, whereas adjacent forested soils that were not subjected to regular aboriginal burning were gray and contained little BC..... Max Planck Inst.

 

[NigeWz]

I was reading this post on KD blog Polar Freezers and the Global Warming and came to this part:

KD opinion: I think the Great Biblical Flood happened fairly recently, i.e. 300-500 years ago. I think so, because of the three undeniable facts which are being grossly misrepresented by the so-called historians.

• Population Growth Chart
• Map Transformations
• Ruin Artists

I wondered, what would I add to the list above and instantly a thought came - the global flood would strip away the black topsoil and carried it away, replacing it with deposits of clay. And this is exactly what I am observing around me in Virginia. I live on a side of a hill in Appalachian mountains area called Piedmont, that is about 1000 feet above the sea level. The bottom of the valley below is at about 500 feet above the sea level. In the past this area was all wooded without any permanent habitations. The trees would fall and be slowly decomposed, replaced by the new generation of trees. This process would be repeated every 50 to 100 years. When a large tree decomposes it creates many tons of soil. But all I can see on my property today is about 10-15 inches tops, before I hit the red clay... 10-15 inches of soil is a product of 1000 years or less.

Everybody heard of the rich topsoils of Ukraine called chernozem (black earth). They happened to stretch down to 30 feet and more thick, I heard. Would it mean that area of the Earth, where Ukraine was established, had been spared by the Great Flood?

How thick is the black topsoil where you live?

View attachment 8660​

I'm working on something at the moment that hints at the Biblical flood being some time during (what we know as) the 15th Century
There are excellent researchers 'out there' who demonstrate that the character we know as Christopher Columbus didn't 'discover' America at all, but went there in order to see what was left over after the flood. I'll make a post on here when I'm finished.

 

[Magnetic]

I'm working on something at the moment that hints at the Biblical flood being some time during (what we know as) the 15th Century
There are excellent researchers 'out there' who demonstrate that the character we know as Christopher Columbus didn't 'discover' America at all, but went there in order to see what was left over after the flood. I'll make a post on here when I'm finished.

I have come to the conclusion that in the vicinity of 1486-1492 was the "Great Flood" which arrived from The Deep in the sky accompanied by clay, sand, rocks, burning oils and gases. The topography of the earth changed quite a bit with mountain ranges increased in height, oceans raised mightily covering for instance the shelf of the eastern coast of America and the Doggerlands perhaps. The destruction was uneven around the world and the Old World power centers were affected the most leaving a power vacuum that the Western Europeans filled.

 

[NigeWz]

I have come to the conclusion that in the vicinity of 1486-1492 was the "Great Flood" which arrived from The Deep in the sky accompanied by clay, sand, rocks, burning oils and gases. The topography of the earth changed quite a bit with mountain ranges increased in height, oceans raised mightily covering for instance the shelf of the eastern coast of America and the Doggerlands perhaps. The destruction was uneven around the world and the Old World power centers were affected the most leaving a power vacuum that the Western Europeans filled.

I invite you to read Jeremiah 4:23-28. Verse 23 is a direct correlation to Gen 1:2 in which the word 'was' has been deliberately mis-translated, and should be 'became / came to pass'. I have said for years that the NT pre-dates the OT, and was stunned when I found out that Anatoly Fomenko also asserts this. The 'creation' story in Genesis 1, is a RE-creation. This realm (real-m) was hijacked !

 

[Magnetic]

I read a book titled Ragnarok: The Age of Fire and Gravel by Ignatius Donnelly in which he makes some pretty compelling arguments that a celestial event (which he describes as a comet) changed the surface of the earth relatively recently. I don't recall when exactly but considering the tomfoolery regarding the age of our earth and scope of our history I've begun taking all dates with a grain of salt.

You should give it a glance.

Cliffnotes are as follows.

In mythology and oral tradition there is an agreement that there was a (or series of) worldwide disaster(s) which changed the topographical makeup of our realm. This is tangibly found in what he (and others) refer to as "the drift".

Here's the into:

"READER,--Let us reason together:--​

​

What do we dwell on? The earth. What part of the earth? The latest formations, of course. We live upon the top of a mighty series of stratified rocks, laid down in the water of ancient seas and lakes, during incalculable ages, said, by geologists, to be from ten to twenty miles in thickness.​

​

Think of that! Rock piled over rock, from the primeval granite upward, to a height four times greater than our highest mountains, and every rock stratified like the leaves of a book; and every leaf containing the records of an intensely interesting history, illustrated with engravings, in the shape of fossils, of all forms of life, from the primordial cell up to the bones of man and his implements.​

​

But it is not with the pages of this sublime volume we have to deal in this book. It is with a vastly different but equally wonderful formation.​

Upon the top of the last of this series of stratified rocks we find THE DRIFT.​

What is it?​

​

Go out with me where yonder men are digging a well. Let us observe the material they are casting out.​

​

First they penetrate through a few inches or a foot or two of surface soil; then they enter a vast deposit of sand, gravel, and clay. It may be fifty, one hundred, five hundred, eight hundred feet, before they reach the stratified rocks on which this drift rests. It covers whole continents. It is our earth. It makes the basis of our soils; our railroads cut their way through it; our carriages drive over it; our cities are built upon it; our crops are derived from it; the water we drink percolates through it; on it we live, love, marry, raise children, think, dream, and die; and in the bosom of it we will be buried."​

I am tempted to copy and paste more from the book but you should just go check it out.

He's an interesting character, this Donnelly, and I think he deserves our attention.
His other book, "Atlantis: The Antediluvian Civilization" was worth the read as well.

Anyway, hope that leads you to some insights.

Yes Donnelley is an interesting read, and he gets a lot of things right for the time he is writing in however, he says that a comet was the cause of the drift. Velikovsky says that Venus as a comet was a cause of the periodic destructions of civilizations along with Mars. Anything that can not be explained by current observations of a destructive nature of phenomena a cometary cause is assumed without proof. Our minders do not want any other causation knowledge to be cogitated upon.

I invite you to read Jeremiah 4:23-28. Verse 23 is a direct correlation to Gen 1:2 in which the word 'was' has been deliberately mis-translated, and should be 'became / came to pass'. I have said for years that the NT pre-dates the OT, and was stunned when I found out that Anatoly Fomenko also asserts this. The 'creation' story in Genesis 1, is a RE-creation. This realm (real-m) was hijacked !

The key phrases are : For I am bringing disaster from the north,
Look! He advances like the clouds,
his chariots come like a whirlwind,
This is not a cometary phenomenonon!

 

[NigeWz]

Yes Donnelley is an interesting read, and he gets a lot of things right for the time he is writing in however, he says that a comet was the cause of the drift. Velikovsky says that Venus as a comet was a cause of the periodic destructions of civilizations along with Mars. Anything that can not be explained by current observations of a destructive nature of phenomena a cometary cause is assumed without proof. Our minders do not want any other causation knowledge to be cogitated upon.

The key phrases are : For I am bringing disaster from the north,
Look! He advances like the clouds,
his chariots come like a whirlwind,
This is not a cometary phenomenonon!

No, it's more akin to some kind of plasma event, IMHO

 

[usselo]

I have come to the conclusion that in the vicinity of 1486-1492 was the "Great Flood" which arrived from The Deep in the sky accompanied by clay, sand, rocks, burning oils and gases. The topography of the earth changed quite a bit with mountain ranges increased in height, oceans raised mightily covering for instance the shelf of the eastern coast of America and the Doggerlands perhaps. The destruction was uneven around the world and the Old World power centers were affected the most leaving a power vacuum that the Western Europeans filled.

Oracle posted a very helpful link to Budde's flood list at Climate Change, Floods, Famine and the Black Death – Paul Budde History. It has an unnamed flood event in your date range.

I'm using his list to find correlations between floods and British political/ecclesiastical events. It does miss six or seven European flood events dug up fished out by SH board contributors, so I've collated them all in a spreadsheet at: combined floods and famines spreadsheet.

It will be auto-deleted after 90 days unfortunately but if anyone wants it after that, ping me. Hopefully the sheet is self-explanatory. If not, ping me.

Seems to me this list is critically important for research into European alt history. I will refine that spreadsheet and occasionally check it against Budde's list but it's a pain to do. We could do with a collaborative list available somewhere (no, not Google spreadsheets).

 

[NigeWz]

Oracle posted a very helpful link to Budde's flood list at Climate Change, Floods, Famine and the Black Death – Paul Budde History. It has an unnamed flood event in your date range.

I'm using his list to find correlations between floods and British political/ecclesiastical events. It does miss six or seven European flood events dug up fished out by SH board contributors, so I've collated them all in a spreadsheet at: combined floods and famines spreadsheet.

It will be auto-deleted after 90 days unfortunately but if anyone wants it after that, ping me. Hopefully the sheet is self-explanatory. If not, ping me.

Seems to me this list is critically important for research into European alt history. I will refine that spreadsheet and occasionally check it against Budde's list but it's a pain to do. We could do with a collaborative list available somewhere (no, not Google spreadsheets).

Great spreadsheet, my friend. The 'Irish Potato Famine' has never 'sat well' with me. Millions of people died due to lack of spuds? I'm calling BS on that one.

 

[dreamtime]

In my article Iodine Deficiency, Goitre, and the Biblical Flood I came to a similar timeline - the flood happened during the last 1000 years. It fits well together with the population growth chart and the thickness of top-soil.

Here's a relevant part of the article:

According to the Paper "The Origin of Iodine in Soil: II. Iodine in Soils of Germany" by Schnell et. al in the Journal "Chemie der Erde, Vol. 59" it only takes around 1238 years for the current concentration of iodine in german soil to be deposited by rain. In other words, if the iodine concentration of the soil was zero 1238 years ago, it would have taken the last 1000 years to reach the current concentration via rainfall alone, since rainfall is the primary way soils accumulate iodine. Since the scientists measured the iodine concentraiton on multiple locations with different iodine levels, they arrived at an average time of 1238 to fill up the iodine inventories, but most of the locations indicate that it has taken no more than 1000 years to fill up the soil with iodine, since we can assume that the soil was not 100% iodine free after the flood.

​

In the study, the scientists measured the iodine concentration in rainfall and compared it to the actual iodine concentration in the soil in different german areas. From the available data, they concluded that if the Glaciers in the last Ice Age had washed all the iodine into the sea 10,000 years ago, it would have only taken on average 1238 years for the iodine concentration to normalize again. It is the only study that actually measures rain iodine levels in relation to soil iodine.

However, there is one big flaw with the interpretation of the raw data. It operates in the context that the Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago, and that the iodine concentrations were zero shortly after the ice age was over when the glaciers melted and the soil was washed into the sea.

In light with the other evidence I have provided, the rain distirbution of iodine as provided by this study shows that it only takes a couple hundred years for extremely iodine deficient soils to concentrate the current amounts of iodine.

In other words, the low concentrations of iodine in the soils around the world indicate that the flood happened only a couple hundred years ago, and we are still in the process where an equilibrium between rain iodine and soil iodine has to be reached. This is supported by the fact that iodine concentrations in soils still differ wildly, even in the same country. For example, in the above study, there's a 300% difference in concentration of iodine in the soils between the 5 locations given:

Since over a long enough period of time, rainfall should create an equilibrium of iodine in the soil, this supports the idea that the flood happened relatively recently. If the low concentrations of iodine in the above study were the result of the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, we would see higher iodine concentration in the soil today.

The back-calculated length of time to fill up the iodine inventories is actually a good indicator of the maximum amount of time past since the flood. The study thus sets an upper limit: Given uniform rainfall, we can say that the flood happened during the last 723 years, otherwise the area at Humtrup/Westerland would have way higher iodine levels in the soil. Assuming that the flood did not wash 100% of the iodine in Humtrup into the sea, we can assume that post-flood the concentration of iodine was >0. For example, if the Humtrup iodine concentration post-flood was 50 x10^-2, the flood would have happened around 350 years ago.

To get a better understanding of the date of the flood, we would need to find soil with the lowest amount of iodine and compare it with the average iodine deposition from rainfall. Unfortunately, the data from Humtrup is the closest we have.

There are other signs that the iodine content of land regions has been steadily increasing during the last decades due to rainfall, which is in contrast to the hypothesis that it took 10,000 years for the current equilibrium to be reached.

Not only that, recent studies indicate that the deposition of iodine into the inland areas is actually increasing in an unexpected rate, calling into question the hypothesis that it takes thousands of years for iodine to be deposited into the inland areas. During the last 70 years alone the iodine concentration of the remote Alpine regions at least tripled:

"Here we use seasonally resolved records from an Alpine ice core to investigate 20th century changes in atmospheric iodine. After carefully considering possible postdepositional changes in the ice core record, we conclude that iodine deposition over the Alps increased by at least a factor of 3 from 1950 to the 1990s in the summer months, with smaller increases during the winter months." -
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/48/12136

Of course the scientists actually blame this sudden increase on "anthropogenic climate change". But in my view, these numbers indicate that the iodine concentrations on earth are changing rapidly in favor of more iodine in land areas, since the high concentration of iodine in the sea compared to the land is unnatural, and not in equilibrium. Since iodine is a volatile halogen, it is expected to get transported from sea into land easily.

 

[JWW427]

The Earth has been mined over the eons by visitors from space, why not take some fertile soil?

 

[Seven823One]

The layer of black soil 3+ meters thick was found in tundra on the shores of Pechera river not far from where it enters the ocean
https://zen.yandex.ru/id/5c4afce16ddc3700bdacab52#video (go to 21:17). This is located behind the Polar circle where permafrost is everywhere.
The theories:
- it was formed in this place when the climate was warmer;
- it was brought here by a force that scraped top soil in another place and dropped it here

 

[Megalonymous]

The layer of black soil 3+ meters thick was found in tundra on the shores of Pechera river not far from where it enters the ocean
https://zen.yandex.ru/id/5c4afce16ddc3700bdacab52#video (go to 21:17). This is located behind the Polar circle where permafrost is everywhere.
The theories:
- it was formed in this place when the climate was warmer;
- it was brought here by a force that scraped top soil in another place and dropped it here

if you straightened up the earth [from its 23.5deg tilt], the icecap would be where it was last ice age and your dark soils would be in warmer climate.. tipping over the earth would have melted that icecap and froze these black soils when they ended up far north. mammoths would have frozen too.

if the planet was grazed by an object[s?] at about 45deg north latitude in Central Europe I wonder if that would tip over the planet. the very large scar or scars are there near vrsac Serbia see google maps. being a geologist I do not believe the current explanation for the morass.

peace

 

[Truth Lover]

Everybody heard of the rich topsoils of Ukraine called chernozem (black earth). They happened to stretch down to 30 feet and more thick, I heard. Would it mean that area of the Earth, where Ukraine was established, had been spared by the Great Flood?

How thick is the black topsoil where you live?

View attachment 8660​

Could it be that topsoil was washed to that area?