Charles Lyell
O’Donoghue, Joseph
Joseph O’Donoghue is an Irish author who graduated from University College Cork with a BSc in geology. After a number of years he found that the work of a geologist had lost its appeal. However, his deep-rooted interest in the mysteries and controversies associated with geology drove him to a private investigation of the subject.
A review of O’Donoghue’s work commented “His research reinforced his impression that the geological establishment had bought too far into one theory of natural forces, to the extent that they had to close their eyes to any facts that contradicted it. As a result, they had made themselves blind to obvious and observable phenomena that their theory could not explain.
The theory in question is uniformitarianism, which is the idea that the forces at work in the natural world (like erosion) haven’t changed over time, and so everything we observe must have an explanation that is still at work. It also means that changes happen very slowly and gradually. On the surface, this seems logical, but problems arise because it simply cannot explain everything. There are some events we know happened, like the Ice Age, that are not explainable by this theory, or that can only have occurred by massive catastrophes.” (a)
O’Donoghue has commenced publishing an intended eight books with the series title of The Legend of Atlantis and the Science of Geology. The first two volumes, Atlantis and Catastrophe: Myth or Reality? [2100] and The Geology of Greece: Uniformity or Catastrophe? [2101] are now available.
In the first pages of Volume One he declared his support for the idea of Atlantis as an Atlantic continent. I totally disagree with that idea and my reasons can be read using the links here.
I expect that I shall be returning to Mr.O’Donoghue frequently, as I work my way through the first two volumes.
Lyell, Charles
Charles Lyell (1797-1875) was Scottish-born lawyer and the leading British geologist of his day. He was a enthusiastic proponent of uniformitarianism as expressed in his best known book, Principles of Geology. Daniel Wilson quoted Lyell as concluding that “the entire evidence is adverse to the idea that the Canaries, the Madeiras, and the Azores, are surviving fragments of a vast submerged island, or continuous area of the adjacent continent.” From the same book, R.E. Anderson quotes[1486] Lyell as confessing a temptation to ”accept the theory of an Atlantis island in the northern Atlantic” [1472.141]. He expressed similar sentiments in his Elements of Geology [2090.363].
This view was contradicted by later geologists in the 19th and early 20th centuries, who even suggested landbridges across the Atlantic or a series of islands offering stepping-stones between the Old World and the Americas. Today, supporters of an Atlantic Atlantis offer less dramatic theories suggesting, the Canaries, Azores or Madeiras are remnants of Plato’s Island.
>>2024 saw the publication of the first two volumes [2100/1] of Joseph O’Donoghue’s eight-book series, The Legend of Atlantis & the Science of Geology in which he consistently criticises the work of Lyell and by extension current supporters of his uniformitarianism. My observation is that O’Donoghue overstates the level of support for Lyell’s ideas today, as the acceptance of catastrophism seems to have gained growing support ever since Immanuel Velikovsky published Worlds In Collision and Earth in Upheaval [037/8], which, athough flawed, kick-started a renewed interest in catastrophism.<<
Principles of Geology – Available online: https://wallace-online.org/converted/pdf/1835_Lyell_WS2.1.pdf (Fourth Edition vol 1, 1835) (4 volumes, change pdf number)
Elements of Geology – Available online: Elements of geology : Lyell, Charles, Sir, 1797-1875 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
Dating Techniques
Dating Techniques have improved in leaps and bounds since the 19thcentury when Charles Lyell first gave stratigraphy widespread publicity as a means of dating archaeological finds, if only relatively. Nicolas Steno had laid the foundations of this discipline two centuries earlier(j).
In very simple terms, generally, it means that as you dig, older objects will be found under younger ones. For over a century this was one of the few dating methods available to archaeologists, but unfortunately, it could not offer specific dates.
Another early dating method was ‘typology’(d), defined as the classification of artefacts according to their physical characteristics.
This approach can be traced back to the 16th century when John Leland (1503-1552) began classifying bricks according to size and shape(I).
Arguably the best known uses of the method relate to Stone Age implements and later to pottery. Relating to Atlantis studies, we find that Jürgen Spanuth applied typology to the weaponry and dress of the Sea Peoples as portrayed at Medinet Habu to support his theory that they came from Northern Europe.
However, I would tread warily when accepting the conclusions of such comparisons. Although Spanuth enthusiastically linked the Sea Peoples images at Medinet Habu with warriors from ancient Scandinavia, Jim Allen has produced a series of images that appear to link the Medinet Habu helmets with modern native headgear worn in South America(m). The Vikings, perhaps apart from ceremonial occasions, did not wear horned helmets in battle. With regard to the South American headresses, I find it odd that they have retained the same style for over three thousand years!
The Cogniarchae website maintains that with the assistance of the Atlantic sea currents some of the Sea Peoples were the first to reach Mesoamerica(n). The author offers a number of images to support this idea.
Absolute dating began with the introduction of radiometric dating methods beginning with radiocarbon dating developed by Willard Libby in 1949. Around the same time, dendrochronology was being refined as a dating method with a margin of error less than that of radiometry, which requires expensive equipment and potentially has a greater risk of contamination. This was followed by thermoluminescence (1957) for dating pottery and more recently optical thermoluminescence (1994) has been developed, enabling the dating of building stone.
Dating objects between 50,000 and 100,000 years old has been difficult as most methods have questionable reliability for this period. However, in 2004 a new method, known as quartz hydration dating was developed at UC Irvine(f).
All the above methods have varying margins of error that are continually being reduced and no doubt will improve further. These enhancements together with new exciting dating methods that can be expected to emerge, will undoubtedly have a profound influence on our understanding of prehistory. Consider how improvements in DNA analysis have enabled the solving of crimes years after cases had gone ‘cold’.
More cautionary offerings(a)(c) came from the catastrophist website, thunderbolts.info., in which events involving influences outside our planet might affect the assumptions upon which some of our radiometrics are based. Since these events are not frequent occurrences we do not, as yet, have enough data to develop more reliable calibration charts.
In May 2012, in the journal Nature, Ewen Callaway has an article(b) that further highlights potential weaknesses that may be encountered with radiocarbon dating.
The fascinating CAIS website offers a good overview(e) of the range of sophisticated dating techniques available today. We can reasonably expect it to expand.
A July 2015 article(g) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. has highlighted a new threat that the burning of fossil fuels has introduced into the reliability of radiocarbon dating.
“As carbon-14 decays over time the fraction will decrease so that’s how we use it for dating,” the paper’s author Dr Heather Graven told BBC News.
“But we can also change this ratio of radioactive carbon to total carbon, if we are adding non-radioactive carbon and that’s what’s happening with fossil fuels, we get this dilution effect.”
“At current rates of emissions increase”, according to the research, “a new piece of clothing in 2050 would have the same carbon date as a robe worn by William the Conqueror 1,000 years earlier.”
The latest dating method, proposed by Michael Dee and Benjamin Pope(h) combines dendrochronology with radiocarbon dating and is designed to identify specific years based on spikes in the carbon14 found in specific growth rings, caused by energy discharges during solar storms. Dee and Pope have called this new science ‘astrochronology’ and anticipate that its application will tie down the so-called ‘floating chronologies’ of ancient Egypt and elsewhere.
I must also note that radiocarbon dating is not universally accepted. Atlantisforschung published the following
“In 1997, the long-prepared book “C14-Crash” by the mathematician and science critic Christian Blöss (Berlin) and the professor of history of technology Hans-Ulrich Niemitz (Leipzig) was published.
In lectures at the Berlin History Salon and on various occasions outside Berlin, the two have presented their theses for several years and caused a corresponding uproar.
But it was only with the finished book that the crash happened: C14 has had its day as a chronological aid. The evidence is stunning. When reading, one often has the feeling that no scientist can be so stupid that he would not have previously come up with the blatant errors in the C14 determination method. After all, it has been used (almost) unchallenged for sixty years.”(k)
Obviously this view has fallen neatly into the hands of chronology revisionists and should not be cast aside without good reason. A paper on the Researchgate website offers an insight into possible problems with dendrochronology(l).
(a) https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/041129antarctic-fossil.htm
(b) https://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-date-with-history-1.10573
(d) https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1933.35.1.02a00070
(e) https://atlantipedia.ie/samples/archive-2408/
(f) https://www.spacedaily.com/news/human-04i.html
(g) https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33594658
(j) https://web.archive.org/web/20200302223241/https://homepage.smc.edu/grippo_alessandro/gss1.html
(l) ResearchGate *
(m) https://web.archive.org/web/20200629021253/http://www.atlantisbolivia.org/artefacts.htm *
(n) Earth is my witness… Sea peoples reached Mesoamerica – COGNIARCHAE *