Update Antarctica the Truth Worse than Anything Imagined

I read all the links, and they are interesting but not exactly relevant to the original article because they address the how and the why of how Antarctica formed. I disagree with one of the ECD theory’s claims, that polar regions would experience more volcanic activity than equatorial regions. If anything, they’d experience LESS of them. The one thing that might prove ECD in the south isn’t even mentioned, though, and that’s the shape of the tip of south America and the peninsula of Antarctica, which looks like it was swept eastward by a massive westward ECD event.
Now, be that as it may, and just assuming that theory is correct: if Antarctica was NOT located on the sounth pole 12000 years ago, what was? What part of the earth does NOT have any human or animal or plant artifacts from that timeframe? NONE! You even have shellfish fossils on top of mount Everest. You got fossils all over the earth.
And that global flood event referenced in every culture worldwide around 12 kya? That could have been caused by the close flyby of a massive celestial body OR a rapid warming of the polar regions caused by solar activity. Most civilisations even today are centred around coastal regions, like New York, Guangdong, Los Angeles, Sydney, and London.
When I visited the Giza plateau in 2013 what I found most interesting wasn’t even so much the Great Pyramid but rather the Temple enclosure of the Sphinx because it has all the hallmarks of megalithic constructions with the squashed marshmallow-looking stones fitted in 3D, the same style you see in Sardinia, Machu Pichu, Cuzco, all over basically going back about 10 kya. That to me says it took about 2k years for civilisation to get back up and running.
I have a whole theory that I’ve formulated and written about in bits and pieces on this and other sites that I’ll put together in a video. At this point I HAVE to do a video because the polyneuropathy in my fingers makes extended writing very painful.
I’m not saying the ECD theory is wrong, but that the flyby theory or the polar cap melting theory seems more probable. Just look at the Sphinx itself, which has all the hallmarks of water erosion from rain, where the last time you had rain there was 12 kya.
Mind you, I’m not an archeologist or a geologist. I’m a banker, and basically just a cheerleader of research into ancient civilisations.

Peace out,

Sun Rabbit

Wow, you were down there? I actually considered doing that myself because I know a US Congresswoman whose son had been down there in the 80s in that dome structure.
I’m not saying that the research they do down there isn’t valuable, it’s just that if they allowed coal mining there, it could make the endeavour more cost-effective and have it produce a net profit in time.
Right now, the biggest expense is all the diesel fuel they have to fly in there, and employ a lot of “fuelies” just to get the diesel off the planes and into their storage tanks so they can run their generators. For every planeload of food that comes in, you need like 20 planeloads of diesel.
Now, if you had mining there, you could eventually develop a whole economy around that and even have people like retirees living there permanently, or just tourists wanting to experience the 24-hour nightlife you have for 6 month out of the year. The other advantage to living there (applies to Greenland as well) is that there are no muslims there, so no fear of terrorism. And because the polar regions are both on the edge of the earth when viewed from an equatorial orbit, there’s a statistically lesser chance of it getting a direct hit from a comet or an asteroid because the vast majority of these orbit in the plane of the ecliptic.