Antarctica – once a tropical paradise?

  • The age of the Antarctic ice sheet is no more than six thousand years old
  • The validity of the Vostok Antarctic ice core methodology is disputed

Antarctica today is covered by an ice sheet up to 5 kilometres thick. It is the coldest place on Earth. It is amazingly the driest desert on earth with snow only falling around its wind blasted boundaries.

But it was not always so cold and remote. Geologist Molly Miller of Vanderbilt University discovered, in the Beardmore Glacier area of Antarctica, the remains of three ancient deciduous forests complete with fossils of fallen leafs scattered around the petrified tree stumps These trees are alive today but only grow in warm moist areas such as Queensland Antarctic also harbor’s bones of extinct marsupials and Dinosaurs with massive coal beds full of once flourishing flora and fauna.

antarctica tropical climate mystery puzzle

When did this fabulous age exist and more importantly what caused the dramatic change? It must have been a sudden and dramatic change for there are no intermediate phases with changing vegetation patterns. And how did a five kilometre ice sheet develop inland in Antarctica where there is little snow or precipitation? These are impossible questions that modern geology struggles to answer. Did continental-drift bring Antarctica to the poles or was it a shift in the earth’s axes that not only caused the death of the tropical rain forests, but place a massive ice sheet on the continent?

And when did this occur? Classic geology would have you believe this ice sheet to of been in existence for millions of years. Two powerful facts totally contradict this. One is the existence of two ancient maps – the Antarctica Piri Reis map and the Antarctica Oronteus Finaeus map both hoary with antiquity. Incredibly they show Antarctica Ice free, these maps are reckoned to have their source in the two thousand year old libraries of ancient Alexandria. This would mean that Antarctica may have of been navigable in the not too distant past. Perhaps in the time of the Pharaohs?

Are these maps believable? Professor Charles Hapgood submitted them to the U.S. air force cartography section for evaluation. Lt Colonel Ohlmeyer replied that not only were they accurate but, ‘this indicates the coastline had been mapped before it was covered by the ice-cap. The ice-cap in this region is now about a mile thick .We have no idea how the data on this map can be reconciled with the supposed state of geographical knowledge of this era.’

We have a second line of evidence for a recent ice free Antarctica.The controversial ice core experiments? In Greenland and Antarctica are laboratories that bore through the ice to collect data on the layers of ice. In Antartica there is the Dome C and Vostok stations. In Greenland, the second of the world’s continental ice sheets, there is, for example the GISP 2 and GRIP Eventually they hit rock bottom where in the case of Greenland they hit plant remains. Each layer contains volcanic dust and certain isotopes such as Carbon14 and Oxygen18 that reveal data on the nature of the climate in distant eras.

For instance it is claimed they clearly show the profile of the medieval warming a thousand years ago when the temperatures of the earth exceeded those of today. But if each layer represents a year then Antarctica’s 140,000 layers are not millions of years old as conventional geology claims. But even more controversially Charles Ginthenal in his paper on ‘ice core evidence’ explained that summer melt and the deposition of thousands of layers during chaotic eras totally falsify the year per layer paradigm on which this theory is built. He contends that ocean core and bore hole results contradict the ice core data.

A further controversial contradiction lies in the accepted paradigm that one ice core layer equals one year of snow deposition. This is the basis of all ice core dating. Recently this has been hotly debated . Excavators of the” lost squadron ” in Greenland discovered when they dug deep into the ice to recover old world war two planes that the number of layers relative to the number of years equated to around ten times the theoretical annual number. The layers equated to melt lines separating storms not annual layers. This is a strong argument against equating layers to annual rings. Variance of the isotope Oxygen 18 from layer to layer could be the signature of a storm not an annular separation.

All getting a bit complex? But what it means is the ice sheet is not millions of years old and it also could have been laid down rapidly within a short number of years This could of happened as recently as six thousand years ago. Again at the time of the Pharaohs. The rapidity of the event is supported by the fossilization of the ancient tree forests that Molly Miller discovered.


Fossilization is a process that usually only occurs in catastrophic circumstances such as comet discharge, extreme mass coronal ejections or disturbed planetary motions resulting in magnetic field reversal. Could this scenario happen again in the future? In the film ‘Antarctica once a tropical paradise’ (full version available as DVD on this site or at MUNGOFLIX website) you can see the evidence in detail.

Peter Mungo Jupp

If you like this please share with your friends and followers
  • Ryan Schneider.

    Here is a big fly in the ointment of your theory: global water distribution. Archeological evidence from the shallows all over the world show that the seas were up to a sixth of a mile shallower up to 12,000 years ago, with thousands of miles more coast line. You could walk from the region of modern London to France, from there to Spain, across the Peninsula of Gibraltar to Morroco, all on foot. For Antarctica to have been ice free during the Ice Age would have made the northern ice caps to have been two miles thicker on avarage then the evidence suggests, and reach damned near to the equator. Why the hell would all the ice be in the north and none in the south only to swap suddenly? However, I grant the evidence suggests the freeze in the north was much more sudden and relatively recent then the mainstream thinks. The truth is In between, in my estimation. Putting the timing aside, I think the sudden temperature shift was due to the sudden collapse of the last sliver of the shallow land bridge once connecting the Australian continental shelf to the Antarctica continental shelf. The south end of the Tasmanian isthmus had long since submerged, but was still substantial enough above the abyssal plain to channel tropical water currents from the South Sea to Antarctic waters. Erosion and drift, however, stretched it to a tiny, razor sharp sliver. It was still channeling plenty of warm water right up to the last second, but then a massive earthquake caused at least a half mile section of it to collapse. After the tsunamis subsided, the flow of warm water was suddenly cut off from Antarctica, now redirected through the gap toward the Southern Australian coast. Forever cut off from warm water, a winter that would never end quickly enveloped the continent within a few months or years, a horrible natural disaster that most life had no time to adapt to. For centuries, vast forests were preserved perfectly, almost flash frozen, until the growing glaciers crushed them.