Toward a New Theory of Earth Crustal Displacement

Abstract

Snapshot/Lay Summary—In 1958 Charles Hapgood proposed that mass imbalances created by a buildup of polar ice could displace the earth’s crust over the mantle and that resulting pole shifts were the cause of catastrophic climate changes and ice ages. We contrast the first part of his theory with plate tectonics and true polar wander and propose a new mechanism that is triggered by short-term reversals of the geomagnetic field that “unlock” the crust from the mantle, driven by earth–moon–sun tidal forces, the same forces that move earth’s oceans. It is shown that by combining a modified version of the second part of Hapgood’s theory with elements of existing climate theories it may be possible to account for periodic sea-level changes associated with the buildup and melting of polar ice over past glacial cycles with a combination of Milanković cycles and Hapgood pole shifts.

Abstract—In previous studies of more than two hundred archaeological sites, it was discovered that the alignments of almost half of the sites could not be explained, and about 80% of the unexplained sites appear to reference four locations within 30° of the North Pole. Based on their correlation with Hapgood’s estimated positions of the North Pole over the past 100,000 years, we proposed that, by association, sites aligned to these locations could be tens to hundreds of thousands of years old. That such an extraordinary claim rests on Hapgood’s unproven theory of earth crustal displacement/pole shifts is problematic, even given the extraordinary number of aligned sites (more than several hundred) that have been discovered thus far. Using a numerical model we test his hypothesis that mass imbalances in the crust due to a buildup of polar ice are sufficient to displace the crust to the extent required in his theory. We discover in the process that the crust is not currently in equilibrium with the whole earth in terms of its moments of inertia. Based on a review of the literature that reveals a possible connection between the timing of short-term reversals of the geomagnetic field (geomagnetic excursions), super-volcanic eruptions, and glacial events, we hypothesize that crustal displacements might be triggered by geomagnetic excursions that “unlock” the crust from the mantle to the extent that available forces, specifically earth–moon–sun tidal forces, the same forces that move earth’s oceans, can displace the crust over the mantle. It is demonstrated how such a model, when combined with existing climate change theory, may be able to explain periodic changes in sea level associated with the buildup and melting of polar ice over past glacial cycles by a combination of Milanković cycles and Hapgood pole shifts.

Full text

Journal of
Scientific
Exploration
Anomalistics
and
Frontier
Science
8JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org

RESEARCH
ARTICLE

Mark@Carlotto.us

SUBMITTEDJuly16,2019
ACCEPTEDFebruary3,20
PUBLISHEDMay22,2022

https://doi.org/10.31275/20221621
PLATINUM OPEN ACCESS
CreativeCommonsLicense
4.0.CC-BY-NC.Attribution
required.NoCommercialuse.



Short-termreversalsoftheEarth’sgeomagneticeldmay‘unlock’thecrusttoallowtidal
forcestomoveitinthesamewaytheydotheoceans.Sea-levelchangesmightthusresult
fromthebuildupandmeltingofpolariceoverIceAgesbytheEarth’scyclicalorbitalmove-
mentscombinedwithpoleshis.

Inpreviousstudiesofmorethantwohundredarchaeologicalsites,itwasdiscoveredthat
thealignmentsofalmosthalfofthesitescouldnotbeexplained,andabout80%ofthe
unexplainedsitesappeartoreferencefourlocationswithin30°oftheNorthPole.Based
ontheircorrelationwithHapgood’sestimatedpositionsoftheNorthPoleoverthepast
100,000years,weproposedthat, byassociation,sitesalignedto theselocationscould
betenstohundredsof thousands ofyearsold. at suchanextraordinaryclaim rests
onHapgood’sunproventheoryofearthcrustaldisplacement/poleshisisproblematic,
evengiventheextraordinarynumberofalignedsites(morethan severalhundred)that
havebeendiscoveredthusfar.Usinganumericalmodelwetesthishypothesisthatmass
imbalancesinthecrustduetoabuildupofpolaricearesucienttodisplacethecrust
totheextentrequiredinhistheory.Wediscoverintheprocessthatthecrustisnotcur-
rentlyinequilibriumwiththewholeearthintermsofitsmomentsofinertia.Basedona
reviewoftheliteraturethatrevealsapossibleconnectionbetweenthetimingofshort-
termreversalsofthegeomagneticeld(geomagneticexcursions),super-volcanicerup-
tions,andglacialevents,wehypothesizethatcrustaldisplacementsmightbetriggeredby
geomagneticexcursionsthat“unlock”thecrustfromthemantletotheextentthatavail-
ableforces,specicallyearth–moon–suntidalforces,thesameforcesthatmoveearth’s
oceans,candisplacethecrustoverthemantle.Itisdemonstratedhowsuch a model,
when combined with existing climate change theory, may be able to explain periodic
changesinsealevelassociatedwiththebuildupandmeltingofpolariceoverpastglacial
cyclesbyacombinationofMilankovićcyclesandHapgoodpoleshis.

Earthcrustdisplacement,cataclysmicpoleshihypothesis,truepolarwander,Milanković
cycles, climate change, insolation, geomagnetic excursions, super-volcanic eruptions,
momentsofinertia,theoreticalrotationalaxis,tidalforces.

9
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
thecrustsignicantdistancesoverthemantleinarela-
tivelyshortperiodoftime.Newclimatedatarelatedtothe
secondpartof Hapgood’stheory isreviewedin CLIMATE
EVIDENCEandsupportsourproposedpastpolelocations
(Carlotto,2020b)andrevisedchronology(Ganey,2020).
elastsectiondiscussesreasonswhyHapgood’stheory
hasbeen dismissedbythemainstreamscienticcommu-
nityandsummarizeshowourrevisedtheory,byaddress-
ingtheseconcerns,mayextendcurrentthinkinginclimate
andgeosciences.

Earlyinthe20thcentury,AlfredWegenerandothers
theorized the continents were once a single large land-
mass that broke up and slowly dried apart. Wegener’s
theoryofcontinentaldriexplainedthe complementary
shapeofcoastlinesandthesimilarityin rock formations
and fossils along matching coastlines. His theory, now
knownasplatetectonics,dividesthecrustintoplatesthat
moveindependentlyofoneanotheroverthemantle.True
polarwander(TPW)isthenetmovementofthecrustasa
wholerelativetothespinaxis.eideathatTPWoccursas
aresultofplatemotionwasmotivatedbytheearlyworkof
MilutinMilanković(1932)whoconcludedinhisanalysisof
Wegener’stheorythat“thedisplacementofthepoletakes
placeinsuchawaythat...Earth’saxismaintainsitsori-
entationinspace,buttheEarth’scrustisdisplacedonits
substratum.”
us,TPW,likeplatetectonics,thoughtto bedriven
byconvectioncellsinthemantle(Holmes,1944),isaslow
geologicalprocessthatoccursovertimescalesofmillions
totensofmillionsofyears (Evans,2003).Inferring from
theestimatedmovementofearth’smagneticpoles(known
asapparentpolarwander),Kirschvinketal.(1997)hypoth-
esizedthataTPWeventoccurredbetween534millionand
505millionyearsagothatrotatedAustraliaaquarterofthe
wayaroundtheglobe.eeventoccurredaroundthetime
oftheCambrian Explosionwhenmostgroupsofanimals
rstappearinthefossilrecordandisthoughttohavebeen
afactorinevolutionarychangesthatlatertookplace.More
recently,Daradichet al.(2017)estimateasteady shiof
earth’spolesby~8°overthelast40millionyearstoward
Greenland,whichhasbroughtNorth Americatoincreas-
inglyhigherlatitudesandcausedtheclimatetogradually
cooloverthisperiod.
is idea that changing the latitude of a geographic
regionchangesitsclimatewasthemotivationbehindHap-
good’s theory. Where TPW may explain climate changes
overlongperiods,Hapgoodattemptedtosolvetheprob-
lemoftheiceages,whichhedidnotbelievewerecaused
byglobaltemperatureuctuations.SimilartothewayTPW

In1958,CharlesHapgoodproposedthaticeages are
causedbyclimatechangesresultingfromdisplacements
oftheearth’scrustoverthemantlethatshithelocation
ofthegeographicpoles(Hapgood,1958).Inpreviousstud-
iesofmorethantwohundredarchaeologicalsites,itwas
discoveredthatthealignmentsofalmosthalfofthesites
could not be explained (Carlotto, 2020a) and that about
80%oftheunexplainedsitesappeartoreferencefourlo-
cationswithin30° oftheNorth Pole.Basedon theircor-
relationwithHapgood’sestimatedpositionsofthe North
Poleoverthepast100,000years,weproposedthat,byas-
sociation,sitesalignedtotheselocationscouldbetensto
hundredsofthousandsofyearsold(Carlotto,2020b).
atsuchan extraordinaryclaimrests onHapgood’s
unproven theory of earth crustal displacement is prob-
lematic, even given the extraordinary number of aligned
sites(morethan severalhundred)thathavebeendiscov-
ered thus far. In this paper, we revisit Hapgood’s theory
inthecontext ofrecentdevelopmentsinclimatescience
andshowthathistheorymay be the missinglinkinun-
derstandingnotonlytheriseandfallofpastcivilizations,
aswerstset out to do,butlong-term(iceage)climate
changesaswell.Fordiscussion,wedivideHapgood’stheo-
ryintotwoparts:physicalmechanism(s)thatcouldcause
crustaldisplacements,andeectsofpoleshisonclimate.
eorganizationofthispaperisasfollows:Intherst
section, TRUE POLAR WANDER,we begin by reviewing
thetheoryofplatetectonicsanditsrelationto true po-
lar wander(TPW) to understand how it diers from the
rst part of Hapgood’s theory.e section MILANKOVIĆ
CYCLES describes the extent to which known climate
cyclescanpredictchangesinsealevel,whichisinversely
relatedtotheamountoficeatthepoles.InPOLESHIFTS
ANDSEALEVELCHANGESitisarguedthatbycombining
Hapgoodpole shiswithMilankovićcyclesoverthepast
100,000 years, we can better account for periodic sea-
levelchangesandtheassociatedbuildupandmeltingof
polariceoverthepreviousglacialcycle.enextsection,
GEOMAGNETIC CHANGES, reviews evidence suggesting
a connection between changes in the earth’s magnetic
eld,climate,andTPWevents.InCORRELATEDEVENTS,
datesofgeomagneticexcursions(short-termreversalsof
thegeomagneticeld),super-volcanic(TEI7–8)eruptions,
andsea-levelchangesoverthepast100Kyarecompared
withthetimingofhypothesizedpoleshis.A POSSIBLE
MECHANISMFORCRUSTALDISPLACEMENTS,whichad-
dresses the rst part of Hapgood’s theory, postulates a
physicalmodelofhowgeomagneticexcursionsmighttrig-
gercrustaldisplacementeventsandhowearth–moon–sun
tidalforcescouldprovidethe energy needed to displace

10 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
isthought to haveshied NorthAmerica towardGreen-
land, Hapgood proposed that glacial cycles and ice ages
weretheresults ofamuchmorerecent seriesofcrustal
displacementsdrivenbyphysicalprocessesoperatingover
timescalesoftensofthousandsofyearsthatshieddier-
entgeographicregionstowardandawayfrom theNorth
Pole.

Inthe1920s,MilutinMilankovićproposedthatchang-
esin earth’seccentricity,axialtilt(obliquity),andpreces-
sionresultincyclicalvariationsintheamountofincident
solarradiation(insolation)reachingtheearth.Insolationis
generallyassumedtobeamajordriverofclimatechange
overlongperiods.From1–3millionyearsago,climatepat-
ternswerecorrelatedwiththeearth’s41Ky-longobliquity
cycle.en, about a millionyearsago,patterns beganto
followa100 Kycyclethatisbetween the 95 Kyand125
Kycyclesinearth’sorbitaleccentricity.Whytheperiodof
climatepatternschanged,the originofthe100 Kycycle,
andwhyinsolationlagsratherthanleadsclimatechanges
areamongsomeoftheproblemsthatcannotbeexplained
by Milanković cycles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mila-
nkovitch_cycles).
PerhapsthegreatestshortfallofMilanković’stheoryis
theinabilityofinsolationinitselftoaccuratelyaccountfor
theperiodicbuildupandmeltingofpolariceoverglacialcy-
cles.Figure1plotstheaveragedailymeantopoftheatmo-
sphere(TOA)insolationat65°Noverthepast250Ky.Using
sealevelasaclimateproxy,which isinverselyrelatedto
theamountofpolarice,Figure2plotsglobalsealevelover
thesameperiod.etwotimeseriesareweaklycorrelated
(=0.14).ereisasomewhathigher(=0.33)correlation
betweeninsolationandtemperature,andanevengreater
correlation(= 0.63)betweeninsolation and changes in
sealevelasafunctionoftime.ereasonfortheincreased
correlationisthatasinsolationincreases,temperaturesin-
crease,polaricemelts,andsealevelsrise.Conversely,as
insolationdecreases,temperaturesdecrease,precipitation
freezesand accumulatesatthepoles,andsealevelsfall.
Exploitingthiscorrelation,wecanestimatemeansealevel
change∆asalinearfunctionofinsolationfromthe
time-seriesdata
∆()=()x0.12–58.85
thatwhensummed provideanestimateof sealevelasa
functionofinsolationovertime
.AveragedailymeanTOAisolationat65°Nover
the past 250,000 years. http://vo.imcce.fr/insola/earth/
online/earth/earth.html
.Globalsealevelobtainedbyaveragingrstprinci-
palcomponentsfromshortandlongrecordsoverthepast
250,000 years. https://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/
paleo/contributions_by_author/spratt2016/spratt2016.txt
. Globalsealevelestimatedfrominsolationover
thepast250,000years.
eresultplottedinFigure3showsthatoverthelast
two glacial cycles, insolation tends to underpredict sea
level(overpredictpolarice)atthebeginningofacycleand
overpredictsealevel(underpredictpolarice)attheend.In
otherwords,agreateramountoficemeltsatthebeginning
andaccumulatesattheendofaglacialcyclethanwhatis
predictedbyinsolation.
that when summed provide an estimate of sea level as a function of insolation over time
   


 

 
The result plotted in Error! Reference source not found. shows that over the last two
glacial cycles, insolation tends to underpredict sea level (overpredict polar ice) at the beginning of
a cycle and overpredict sea level (underpredict polar ice) at the end. In other words, a greater
amount of ice melts at the beginning and accumulates at the end of a glacial cycle than what is
predicted by insolation.
Figure 1. Average daily mean TOA isolation at 65°N over the past 250,000 years
(http://vo.imcce.fr/insola/earth/online/earth/earth.html).
Figure 2. Global sea level obtained by averaging first principal components from short and long records
over the past 250,000 years (https://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/contributions_by_author/spratt2016/spratt2016.txt).
Figure 3. Global sea level estimated from insolation over the past 250,000 years.
POLE SHIFTS AND SEA-LEVEL CHANGES
Insolation varies with the cosine of the solar zenith angle and so increases as we move
toward the equator. Allowing the geographic location of the earth’s poles to shift relative to the
rotational axis as Hapgood proposed provides an additional degree of freedom that can potentially
account for the difference between the two sea-level curves in Error! Reference source not
found.. Before the start of a glacial cycle, a large amount of water is stored in an ice sheet around
the pole. If the crust displaces enough to move the ice sheet out of the polar zone, the increased
amount of solar radiation at lower latitudes will cause the ice to melt, raising sea levels. After a
period, an ice sheet begins to form at the new pole, causing sea levels once again to fall.
Error! Reference source not found. shows the displacement of the crust south for five
hypothesized pole shifts (Carlotto 2020b). Sea levels decrease in stages during a glacial cycle
suggesting a continued buildup of ice near the poles. Notice the land area around the pole is
different at different pole locations. Since ice forms and accumulates more readily on land than
over the ocean, if the land area at the new pole is greater than the land area at the old pole, sea
levels after a pole shift should eventually fall to a lower level as there is a greater land area for ice
to accumulate. Based on measurements of land area in the Arctic circle and former polar regions,
there is a strong correlation between the size of the ice sheet (assumed to be determined by land
area) and sea level for the current and four prior pole locations (Error! Reference source not
found.). Successive increases in available land area following the Bering Sea to Greenland pole
shift have led to successive decreases in sea level. This suggests that the magnitude of crustal

11
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
amountofwaterisstoredinanicesheetaroundthepole.
Ifthecrustdisplacesenoughtomovetheicesheetoutof
thepolarzone,theincreasedamountofsolarradiationat
lowerlatitudeswillcausetheicetomelt,raisingsealevels.
Aeraperiod,anicesheetbeginstoformatthenewpole,
causingsealevelsonceagaintofall.
Figure4showsthedisplacementofthe crust south
for ve hypothesized pole shis (Carlotto, 2020b). Sea
levelsdecreaseinstagesduringaglacialcyclesuggesting

Insolation varies with the cosine of the solar zenith
angle and so increases as we move toward the equator.
Allowing the geographic location of the earth’s poles to
shirelativeto the rotationalaxisasHapgoodproposed
providesanadditionaldegreeoffreedomthatcanpoten-
tiallyaccountforthedierencebetweenthetwosea-level
curvesinFigure3.Beforethestartofaglacialcycle,alarge
.Crustaldisplacementscauseformerpolarregionstoshisouthtowardtheequator.(GoogleEarth)

12 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
.Relationbetweensealevelsandlandareasatfor-
merpoles.
acontinuedbuildupoficenearthepoles.Noticetheland
areaaroundthepoleisdierentatdierentpolelocations.
Sinceiceformsandaccumulatesmorereadilyonlandthan
overtheocean,ifthelandareaatthenewpoleisgreater
thantheland areaatthe oldpole,sealevelsaera pole
shi should eventually fall to a lower level as there is a
greaterlandareaforicetoaccumulate.Basedonmeasure-
mentsoflandareaintheArcticcircleandformerpolarre-
gions,thereisastrongcorrelationbetweenthesizeofthe
icesheet(assumedtobedeterminedbylandarea)andsea
levelforthecurrentandfourpriorpolelocations(Figure
5).Successiveincreasesinavailablelandareafollowingthe
BeringSea toGreenlandpoleshihaveledtosuccessive
decreasesinsealevel.issuggeststhatthemagnitudeof
crustaldisplacementsduringaglacialcycle,i.e.,beforethe
lastglacialmaximum(LGM)andpenultimateglacialmaxi-
mum(PGM)weresmallenoughtokeeptheaccumulating
massoficein the polarzone.eprecipitousrise in sea
levelaertheLGMandPGMsuggeststhatlargermagni-
tude crustal displacements shied the ice sheet farther
southtomeltasignicantfractionoftheaccumulatedice.
Itisinterestingtonotethat the current distribution
oficeintheArcticisnotcenteredonthepolebuttendsto
beshiedtowardGreenland,thelargestlandmassinthe
region.isasymmetryexistedevenatthetimeoftheLGM
relativetothecurrentArcticSeapole (Figure6a,b).Ifice
buildupcontinuedduringthe Greenland, NorwegianSea,
andHudsonBaypoles,the spatial distribution ofnetice
canbe approximatedbytheunionofthreecircles—areas
like today’sArctic Circle that were within approximately
23.5°ofthepolesatthetime(Figure6c).Noticetheunion
of the three former northern polar climate zones (areas
above50°Nrelativetotheformerpoles)containsallofthe
iceinthenorthernhemisphereduringtheLGM(Figure6d).

Agrowingbody ofevidencesuggestschanges in the
earth’smagneticeldmayinuenceclimate.Overthelast
83 million years, 183 geomagnetic reversals have taken
place in which the poles changed polarity. Geomagnetic
reversalsoccur,onaverage,450Kyyearsapart.Courtillot
andOlson(2007)showthatlongperiods(millionsofyears)
inwhichthemagneticpolesdonotipprecededthefour
largestextinctionsonearth:theCretaceous-Tertiary(KT),
Triassic-Jurassic(TJ),andthePermo-Triassic(PT)andGua-
dalupian-Tatarian(GT)doublet.Mitchelletal.(2021)report
alateCretaceoustruepolarwanderoscillationaround84
Mya(millionyearsago)wheretheearth’sgeographicpoles
shied about 12° and returned to their original position
overabout6millionyears.MuttoniandKent(2019)report
anevengreatershiduringtheJurassicperiod.
Between geomagnetic reversals, events known as
geomagnetic excursions take placewhere the eld tem-
porarilyreversesforashorterperiod(thousandsofyears
or less). Channell and Vigliotti (2019) argue changes in
magneticeldstrengthduringgeomagneticexcusionslead
tovariationsinultravioletradiation,whichhaveinuenced
mammalianevolution.Rampino(1979)proposesthatthere
is a connection between geomagnetic excursions and
Milankovićcycles, showingthatfourrecent geomagnetic
excursionscloselyfollowtimes of maximum eccentricity
ofearth’sorbitandprecedeperiodsofsuddencoolingand
glacialadvance.
If long-durationTPW events follow geomagnetic re-
versals, could short duration Hapgood pole shis follow
geomagneticexcursions?

Table 1 gives an approximate chronology of recent
geomagnetic excursions, super-volcanic eruptions, and
glacialevents.eBlakegeomagneticexcursionoccurred
15–20 Ky aer the PGM. eVolcanic Explosivity Index
(VEI)isarelativemeasureoftheexplosivenessofvolcanic
eruptions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_Explo-
sivity_Index).enexttwogeomagneticexcursionswere
eachfollowedbymassiveVEI8magnitudevolcanicerup-
tions.e most recentTobaeruption 73–75Kyafollowed
the Norwegian-Greenland Sea excursion. e Oruanui
eruption of New Zealand’s Taupo volcano followed the
LakeMungoexcursion28–30Kya.esomewhatsmaller
VEI7PhlegraeanFieldseruptionfollowedthe Laschamp
event40–42Kya.
Althoughthetriggermechanismforgeomagneticre-
versalsisnotclear,crustalshiscouldprovideanexplana-
tionforearthquakeactivity,volcaniceruptions,andother

13
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
. North polar circles and regions superimposed on estimated ice sheet circle 18 Kya. (Ice sheet visualization,
Zurich University of Applied Sciences. http://waikiki.zhaw.ch/radar.zhaw.ch/bluemarble3000_en.html
. Correlation of Geomagnetic, Super-Volcanic, and Glacial Events with Proposed Pole Shis
   
 
12.3 Gothenburg(Rampino,1979)
22 LGM HudsonBaytoArctic?
26.5 Taupo(VEI8)
28–30 LakeMungo(Barbetti&McElhinny,
1976)
HudsonBaytoArctic?
32–34 MonoLake(Hambachetal.,2008)
40 PhlegraeanFields(VEI7)
40–42 Laschamp(Hambachetal.,2008) NorwegianSeatoHudson
Bay
73–75 Toba(VEI8)
70–80 Norwegian-GreenlandSea(Lan-
gereisetal.,1997)
GreenlandtoNorwegian
Sea
115–120 Blake(Hambachetal.,2008) BeringSeatoGreenland
135 PGM ?ToBeringSea

14 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
eventsthat followgeomagneticexcursions.Figure7pro-
posesasequenceofsixpoleshisbasedontheseevents.
Fourpreviouspolelocationsestimatedfromarchaeological
sitealignments(Carlotto,2019)arelistedinTable2along
with estimated dates. e Blake, Norwegian-Greenland
Sea,andLachampsgeomagneticexcursionsprecedethree
episodesofsealeveldecline/increaseofpolarice.eLake
MungogeomagneticexcursionoccursjustbeforetheLGM
aerwhichglobalsealevelsbegantorisetocurrentlevels.
Accordingtothemodel,crustaldisplacement(s)triggered
bytheMungoLakeandpossiblytheGothenburggeomag-
netic excursions shied most of the ice sheet that had
formeduptotheLGMalmost2,000milessouthwellinto
thetemperatezoneleadingtorapidmeltingandsea-level
rise.eYoungerDryasevent(Firestoneetal.,2006)was
alsolikelyasignicantcontributortoglacialmelt.Allfour
eventsappeartobesomewhatcorrelatedwithMilanković
cyclesevidentintheinsolationcurve.reeprecedemajor
volcaniceruptions.


In his original theory, Hapgood proposed that polar
icecreatesmassimbalancesthat can cause the crust to
slipoverthemantleshiingthegeographiclocationofthe
NorthPole.Einsteinlaterarguedthattheforceoftheice
wasnotsucienttocauseacrustaldisplacement(Mar-
tínez-Fríasetal.,2005).Itisnowpossibleusingmodelsof
thecrustandicesheetsattheLGMtoestimatethedegree
. Hypothesizedpoleshisequencebasedontimesofgeomagneticexcursions,super-volcaniceruptions,and
glacialevents.etopcurve(dottedline)isthepredictionfromFigure3.ebottomcurve(solidline)isthedierence
betweenglobalsealevels(Figure2)andtheirpredictedvaluefrominsolation(Figure1).
TABLE 2. Estimated Locations and Dating of Previous Poles
   
HudsonBay 59.75° –78° 25–42
NorwegianSea 70° 0° 42–75
Greenland 79.5° –63.75° 75–120
BeringSea 56.25° –176.75° 120–135

15
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
towhichtheicecouldhaveaectedtheearth’smoments
ofinertia.AsshownintheAppendix,ifthecrustwerefree
tomove,theicewouldhaveshiedthepolebylessthan
0.25° relative to its present position. If the rst part of
Hapgood’stheoryiswrong,thaticecannotmovethepole,
andTPWistooslowaprocesstoaectglacialcycles,are
thereanyotherwaystosavetherestofhistheory?
Asdiscussedin theAppendix,ananalysisofalterna-
tivemassdistributionmodels(Caputo&Caputo,2012)re-
vealsthecrust’stheoreticalaxis ofrotation(TRA),which
isbasedonitsmomentsofinertia,deviatessignicantly
fromthewholeearth’srotationalaxisandsomaynotbe
inequilibriumwiththeearth.Usinganumericalmodelde-
scribedintheAppendix,we havedeterminedthecrust’s
TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. is location lies in the zone
ofthe tropicsalmostontheequator.Attheequinox,the
equatorisparallelwiththeeclipticplane.Atothertimesof
theyear,theeclipticpassesthroughtheearth’sequatorial
regionbetweenthe tropics ofCancerand Capricorn.e
pathofthesun,moon,andmostotherbodiesinthesolar
systemliesalongtheecliptic.atthecrust’sTRApointsin
thisdirectionsuggeststhepossibilitythecrustaldisequi-
libriummayhaveanexternal(i.e.,extraterrestrial)cause.
einuenceofthemoon,andtoalesserextent,the
sun,areresponsiblefortheearth’stides(Figure8).ebal-
ancebetweengravitationalandcentrifugalforcescauses
theearth(primarilyitsoceans)toelongateinthedirection
ofthemoonby1.34metersandthedirectionofthesunby
0.61 meters (https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/ce-
lestial/Celestial/node53.html).As theearth rotates,tidal
forcescausetheoceanstoriseandfalltwiceaday.ese
forcesalsopullonthecrust.Ithasbeenproposedthattid-
alforcesactingonthecrustcouldbeapossibletriggerfor
certainkindsofearthquakes(Ideetal.,2016).
Tidaltorques actingontheearthandmoondissi-
pateenergyatarate
since> ,where and aretheangularveloci-
tiesofthe earth and moon, respectively (https://farside.
ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html).
Withthecrust“locked”tothemantle,theenergylossman-
ifestsasthefrictionalheatingofthecrustandoceans.If,
however,thecrustbecame“unlocked,”theeectivework
couldresultinadisplacementofthecrustoverthemantle.
e key to crustal displacement thus becomes the
questionofwhetherthereisawayforthecrusttobecome
unlockedfromthemantle.Onepossibilityisthatchanges
inthemagneticeldduringageomagneticreversal/excur-
sionmayaecttheeasewithwhichthecrustcanmove
overthemantle.Magneticdipolesofferromagneticminer-
alsinthe crust normallylineup inthesamedirectionas
those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic
elds (Lorenzen, 2019). It is conjectured that when the
coremagnetic eldipsduringa geomagneticexcursion,
thedipolesinthecrusttemporarilypointintheopposite
directiontoproducea repulsiveforcebetween the crust
andcoreelds(Figure9).Ifthisforce,perpendiculartothe
crust,issucienttoreducethe frictional forcebetween
thecrustandmantle,itmaybepossibleforforcesacting
onthecrustparalleltothesurfacetomovethecrustover
themantlewhilethegeomagneticeldisreversed.When
.Possibleroleoftidalforcesinchangingthepositionofthecrust’sTRA.
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,
Frías et al., 2005). It is now possible using models of the crust and ice sheets at the LGM to
estimate the degree to which the ice could have affected the earth’s moments of inertia? As
shown in the Appendix, if the crust were free to move, the ice would have shifted the pole by
less than 0.25° relative to its present position. If the first part of Hapgood’s theory is wrong, that
ice cannot move the pole, and TPW is too slow a process to affect glacial cycles, are there any
other ways to save the rest of his theory?
As discussed in the Appendix, an analysis of alternative mass distribution models (Caputo
& Caputo, 2012) reveals the crust’s theoretical axis of rotation (TRA), which is based on its
moments of inertia, deviates significantly from the whole earth’s rotational axis and so may not
be in equilibrium with the earth. Using a numerical model described in the Appendix, we have
determined the crust’s TRA is at 1.21°N, 18.52°W. This location lies in the zone of the tropics
almost on the equator. At the equinox, the equator is parallel with the ecliptic plane. At other
times of the year, the ecliptic passes through the earth’s equatorial region between the tropics
of Cancer and Capricorn. The path of the sun, moon, and most other bodies in the solar system
lies along the ecliptic. That the crust’s TRA points in this direction suggests the possibility the
crustal disequilibrium may have an external (i.e., extraterrestrial) cause.
The influence of the moon, and to a lesser extent, the sun, are responsible for the
earth’s tides (Error! Reference source not found.). The balance between gravitational and
centrifugal forces causes the earth (primarily its oceans) to elongate in the direction of the
moon by 1.34 meters and the direction of the sun by 0.61 meters
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node53.html). As the earth rotates,
tidal forces cause the oceans to rise and fall twice a day. These forces also pull on the crust. It
has been proposed that tidal forces acting on the crust could be a possible trigger for certain
kinds of earthquakes (Ide et al., 2016).
Figure 8. Possible role of tidal forces in changing the position of the crust’s TRA.
Tidal torques  acting on the earth and moon dissipate energy at a rate
̇= ( − Ω)< 0
since Ω > , where Ω and  are the angular velocities of the earth and moon, respectively
(https://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/celestial/Celestial/node54.html). With the crust
“locked” to the mantle, the energy loss manifests as the frictional heating of the crust and oceans.
If, however, the crust became “unlocked,” the effective work could result in a displacement of
the crust over the mantle.
The key to crustal displacement thus becomes the question of whether there is a way for
the crust to become unlocked from the mantle. One possibility is that changes in the magnetic
field during a geomagnetic reversal/excursion may affect the ease with which the crust can move
over the mantle. Magnetic dipoles of ferromagnetic minerals in the crust normally line up in the
same direction as those in the core resulting in continental ferromagnetic fields (Lorenzen, 2019).
It is conjectured that when the core magnetic field flips during a geomagnetic excursion, the
dipoles in the crust temporarily point in the opposite direction to produce a repulsive force
between the crust and core fields (Error! Reference source not found.). If this force,

16 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
the geomagnetic eld ips back the crust is once again
lockedtothemantlemaintainingdisequilibrium.
Ifthecrustweretodisplaceoverthe mantle,itsTRA
wouldshiaswell.AsshowninFigure10,thecrust’sTRA
isroughlywithinthezoneoftropicsforallfourpriores-
timatedlocationsoftheNorthPole.Consideringthelast
poleshifromHudson Bay totheArctic,Figure 11 plots
dierenthypotheticalpoleshipathsalongwiththecor-
respondingpathsofthecrust’sTRA.Noticethemostgrad-
ualpoleshipathisassociatedwiththemovementofthe
TRAalongtheecliptic.issuggeststhepossibilitythatif
thecrustdid becomeunlockedduring ageomagneticex-
cursion,tidaltorquescouldhaveshieditalongwiththe
geographicpolesuchthatthecrust’sTRAwouldhavere-
mainedinthe equatorial zoneunderthe inuenceofthe
moonandsun.

Ifthesecondpart ofHapgood’scrustaldisplacement
theoryiscorrect,poleshisshouldcause climatezones1
andhabitatstochangerelativetothenewpoles.Ganey
(2020)tested thishypothesisusingmammalassemblage
zone(MAZ)biostratigraphyinBritainoverthelatePleisto-
cene(Currant&Jacobi,2001,Gilmouretal.,2007).Figure
12plots the approximate dates of ve assemblages.e
oldestintheJointMitnorCave,datedtotheearlymarine
isotopestage(MIS)5,whichbeganabout130Kya,contains
bones of the hippopotamus and spotted hyena, animals
wholiveinsub-tropicalclimates.Accordingtoourmodel,
thisperiodcorrespondstothetimewhen theNorthPole
wasintheBeringSea.With a pole at this location, Brit-
ain’slatitudewouldbeapproximately20°Natthenorthern
edgeofthetropicalzone.
enextassemblage,Bacon Hole, containsbonesof
animalsthat live in temperate climates such as the vole
and woolly mammoth. Its estimated age, 80–110 Kya, is
duringthetimetheNorthPoleisestimatedtohavebeen
innorthernGreenland.Withthepoleatthislocation,Brit-
ain’slatitudewouldbeapproximately57°Natthenorthern
edgeofthetemperatezone.Basedonourestimatedchro-
nology,apoleshifromtheBeringSeatonorthernGreen-
land110–130KyathatshiedBritain’sgeographiclocation
37°northfromthesub-tropicaltotemperaturezonewould
explainthischangeinclimate.
Fossilsinthe Banwell MAZ includeanimalsthatlive
incoldclimatessuchasArcticfoxand reindeer.Itsesti-
matedage,50–79Kya,correspondstothetimewhenthe
NorthPolewasintheNorwegianSea.Withthepoleatthis
location,Britain’slatitudewouldbeshiednorthto75°N,
wellinsidethepolarregion.elasttwo assemblagesat
PinHoleandGough’sCavecontainfossilsofanimalssuch
as horses and woolly mammothswho live in temperate
climates. e dating of these assemblages is consistent
Earth’smagneticeld(top).Bottomletorightshowsthenormalpolarityofcoreandcrust,polarityduringa
geomagneticexcursion,rotationofcrust,andreturntooriginaleldpolarity.

17
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
withsubsequentcrustaldisplacementsthatshiedBritain
south,backintothetemperatezone.
e Arabia Desert, the largest inAsia, and the h-
largest in the world, occupies most of the Arabian Pen-
insula. In the south, between Yemen and Oman, lies the
Rub’alKhali(eEmptyQuarter),oneofthemostextreme
.LocationofcrustTRA(reddot)forpoles(from
toptobottom)inHudsonBay,theNorwegianSea,Green-
land,andtheBeringSea.Dottedlinesdelimitthetropical
zone(23.4°Nto23.4°S).
environmentsonearth.Yet,itisclearfromsatelliteimag-
ery(Figure13) that this part ofthewordhasnotalways
beenarid.Extensiveandwell-developeddrainagepatterns
seeninsatelliteimageryproveriversonceowedthrough-
outamuchdierentlandscape.Crassardetal.(2013)pres-
ent geochronological data supporting the existence of a
paleolakein the Mundafanregionat thewesternedgeof
theRub’alKhali.Lacustrinesamplesdatedusingcarbon-14
andopticallystimulatedluminescencesuggestthepaleo-
lakerstformedduringMIS5(80–130Kya).epresence
offreshwatermollusksindicatesthe lakeexistedoveran
extendedperiod.Signicantchangesinclimate resulting
frompoleshiswouldlikelyhaveaectedhumanpopula-
tionsaswellatthetime.Groucuttetal.(2015)discovered
signsofprolongedhumanoccupationinthisareaduring
MIS5(80–130Kya)that theybelieveconstituteevidence
ofearlyhumandispersalsoutofAfricaandacrosstheAra-
biapeninsula.AccordingtoHapgood’stheory,Arabiawould
havehadawettropicalclimate75–135Kyaduringthetimes
oftheBeringSeaandGreenlandpoles.

Figure14summarizesthekeyelementsofourrevised
version of Hapgood’s theory of crustal displacement.As
statedattheoutset,therearetwopartstohis theory.In
therstpart,whichconcernspossiblemechanisms,were-
placeHapgood’spolarice/massimbalancehypothesiswith
a new model that postulates crustal displacements are
triggered by geomagnetic excursions and driven by tidal
forces.Werenethesecondpartofhistheorybasedona
linearmodel,whichpredictstheextenttowhichMilanković
cyclescanaccountforsea-levelchangesovertheprevious
glacialcycleandhypothesizethatthedierencebetween
whatisobservedandwhatispredictedisduetotheeect
ofcrustaldisplacements thatmodulateincidentsolarra-
diationduringMilankovićcycles.
Ithasbeensuggestedthatincreasedamountsofcos-
micradiationduringperiodsofgeomagneticcollapsecould
leadtoincreased ionizationintheatmosphereandcloud
formation,whichwouldreducetheamountofsolarradia-
tionreachingthesurface.Althoughthisexplainswhythe
climategrowscolderandsealevelsfallduringaglacialcy-
cle,itcannotexplainhowicecanlatermeltandsealevels
riseinacoldworld(Berger,2012).Crustalshisprovide
themissingpiece(nonlinearfactor)soughtinmanyclimate
theoriesneededtomelticeinacoldworldbysimplymov-
ingtheicetoalowerlatitudesothatitcanmelt.
Historically,Hapgood’stheoryhasbeendismissedby
the mainstream science community for several reasons.
Foremostisthelackofaphysicalprocesscapableofshi-
ingthecrustthousandsofmilesovertimescalesoftensof

18 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
.CorrelationofmammalassemblagezonesandclimatezonesinBritainassociatedwithpriorpoles.Datesfor
PinHole,Banwell,andBaconHoleareaveragevaluesofrangescompiledbyGaney(2020).
.Dierenthypotheticalpathsofgeographicalpoleshis(tople)andcorrespondingcrustTRAdisplacement
curves(topright,bottomle,andbottomright).TRAcurves(redlines)thatfolloweclipticpaths(dottedwhiteline)are
consistentwiththetidalhypothesis.

19
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
.ChangesintheclimatezoneoftheArabiapeninsulaandsurroundingareasduetopoleshis.Wettropical
climatesareinthezonebetweenredandorangelines,aridclimatesinthezonebetweenorangeandyellowlines,tem-
perateclimatesinthezonebetweenyellowandgreenlines,andpolarclimatesnorth/southofgreenlines.(GoogleEarth)
.SummaryofanewtheorybuildsuponMilankovićclimatecycles(blackboxesandsolidlines)incorporatinga
revisedversionofHapgood’stheoryinwhichcrustaldisplacementsaretriggeredbygeomagneticexcursionsanddriven
bytidalforces(grayboxesanddottedlines).

20 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto
thousandsofyears.Weaddressthisproblemwith anew
hypothesis—that crustal displacements are triggered by
geomagnetic excursions, which occur over the appropri-
atetimescales,andaredrivenbytidalforcesoftheearth–
moon–sunsystem,thesameforcesthatmovetheearth’s
oceans.
Asecond“problem”withHapgood’stheoryisthelack
of geophysical (paleomagnetic) evidence (Brass, 2002).
Lack of paleomagnetic data does not disprove the exis-
tence of short-duration pole shis, only that such tech-
niquesareincapableofdetectingthem.Radiometricdates
forrocksamplestypicallyhaveatemporaluncertaintyof
ahalf-millionyears,fartoo coarsetotemporallyresolve
events occurring on timescales of tens of thousands of
years.Radiocarbontechniquescannotdatearchaeomag-
netic samples older than 50,000years. In place of geo-
physical evidence, Ganey’s analysis of MAZ data using
marineisotopestagedatingprovidesstrong(albeitcircum-
stantial)evidenceof signicant climate changeeventsin
Britainoverthepast100+Kyathatareconsistentwiththe
poleshihypothesis.
eproblemof“hotspots”—locations ontheearth’s
surface not on plate boundaries that have experienced
activevolcanismforlong periods—isathirdreasonHap-
good’s theory has been rejected by mainstream science.
WhilesomehotspotssuchasYellowstonehavenotmoved,
othershave,resultinginthecreationofchainsofvolcanic
islands. Wilson (1963) postulated that the formation of
theHawaiianIslandsresultedfromtheslowmovementof
atectonicplateoverastreamofanomalouslyhotmagma
risingfromtheEarth’score-mantleboundaryinastructure
calledamantleplume.Assumingthepositionofamantle
plume is xed relative to the earth’s spin axis, hot spot
tracksarerecordsofplatemotionandTPW(Woodworth
&Gordon,2018).
athotspottracksdonotrecordHapgoodpoleshis
isseenasafundamentalproblemwithhistheory(Wilson&
Flem-Ath,2000).Analternativetothemantleplumethe-
oryistheplatetheory(Foulger2010)thatpostulatesthe
mantlebeneathahotspotisnotanomalouslyhot,rather
thecrustaboveahotspotisweakerallowingmoltenma-
terialfromshallowerdepthstorisetothesurface.Ifthis
theoryis correct,hotspottracksresultfromlithospheric
displacementswithinplatesandmovewiththecrust.

If longer-term TPW/plate tectonic events occurred
withperiodsofincreasedvolcanismandmassextinction
eventsfollowinglong-termgeomagneticreversals,corre-
lationsbetweenshort-termreversals(geomagneticexcur-
sions) and super-volcanic events suggest the possibility
thatshorter-termpoleshissuchasthose suggestedby
Hapgood could have occurred.If so, we show how Hap-
good pole shis working in conjunction with Milanković
cyclesprovideapossible explanationforclimate changes
over past glacial cycles. Thatthecrustdoesnotappearto
beinequilibriumwiththewholeearthintermsoftheirmo-
mentsofinertiasuggeststhepossibilitythatanunknown
forcecouldbeatwork.Weproposeearth–moon–suntidal
forces may be responsible, and that these forces, which
movetheearth’soceans,mightprovidesucientenergyto
displacethecrustasignicantdistanceduringageomag-
neticexcursion.Itisourhopethatthepreliminaryresults
presentedinthispaperwillleadtofurtherworkinthese
andotherrelatedareasofresearch.

1eclimatedependsontemperatureandprecipitation,
which depend in large part on latitude. e zone of the
tropics(tropicsofCancerandCapricorn),whichhavewarm
andwetclimates,extend15–25°fromtheEquator.Drycli-
matestendtoexist15–35°fromtheEquator.IntheNorth-
ernHemisphere,thiszone is widerthanintheSouthern
Hemisphere.ArabiatogetherwithnorthernAfrica lieina
drybeltapproximately20°wide(from15–35°N).Australia
andSouthernAfricalieinathinnerdrybeltthatisonly15°
widefrom(20to35°S).Temperateclimatesareonaverage
35–50°fromtheEquator,andpolarclimatesareabove50°.

Barbetti,M. F.,&McElhinny,M.W.(1976,May).eLake
Mungogeomagneticexcursion.

(1305).
Berger,W.H.(2012).Miklankovitchtheory—Hitsandmiss-
es.
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/95m6h5b9
Brass,M.(2002,July/August).TracingGraham Hancock’s
shiingcataclysm.pp.45-49.
Caputo,M.,&RiccardoCaputo, R.(2012).Massdistribu-
tionandmomentsofinertiaintheoutershellsofthe
Earth.(1),38-47.
Carlotto,M.J.(2019,May7).Archaeologicaldatingusinga
datafusion approach.
      

https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2520130
Carlotto,M.(2020a).Ananalysisof the alignment of ar-
chaeological sites.    
(1).https://doi.org/10.31275/20201617
Carlotto,M.(2020b).Anewmodeltoexplainthealignment
ofcertainancientsites.

21
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
(2)https://doi.org/10.31275/20201619
Channell,J.E.T.,&Vigliotti,L.(2019).eroleofgeomag-
netic eld intensity in late quaternary evolution of
humans and large mammals.   ,
,709–738.https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/full/10.1029/2018RG000629
Courtillot,V.,&Olson,P.(2007).Mantleplumeslinkmag-
netic superchrons to phanerozoic mass depletion
events. 495–
504.
Crassard, R., Petraglia, M. D., Drake, N. A., Breeze, P.,
Gratuze,B.,Alsharekh,A.,Arbach,M.,Groucutt,H.S.,
Khalidi,L.,Michelsen,N.,Robin,C.J.,&Schiettecatte,
J.(2013).MiddlePalaeolithicandNeolithicoccupations
around Mundafan Palaeolake, Saudi Arabia: Implica-
tionsforclimatechangeandhumandispersals.
  e69665. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/
article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0069665
Currant,A.,&Jacobi,R.(2001).Aformalmammalianbio-
stratigraphyfortheLatePleistoceneof Britain.
1707–1716.
Daradich, A., Huybers, P., Mitrovica, J. X., Chan, N.-H., &
Austermann,J.(2017).einuenceoftruepolarwan-
der on glacial inception in North America. 
96–104.
Evans,D.A.D.(2003).Truepolarwanderandsuperconti-
nents.303–320.
Firestone, R., West,A., & Warwick-Smith, S. (2006). 
Bear&Co.
Foulger,W.R.(2010).
Wiley-Blackwell.
Ganey,M.(2020).Deephistoryandtheagesofman.In-
dependentlypublished.
Gilmour,M., Currant,A.,Jacobi,R.,&Stringer,C.(2007).
RecentTIMSdatingresultsfromBritishLatePleisto-
cene vertebrate faunal localities: Context and inter-
pretation. 793–800.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jqs.1112
Groucutt, H. S., White, T. S., Clark-Balzan, L., Parton, A.,
Crassard,R.,Shipton,C.,Jennings,R.P.,Parker,A.G.,
Breeze,P.S.,Scerri,E.M.L.,Alsharekh,A.,&Petraglia,
M.D.(2015,July).HumanoccupationoftheArabian
EmptyQuarterduringMIS5:EvidencefromMunda-
fan Al-Buhayrah, Saudi Arabia.  
  116–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quas-
cirev.2015.04.020
Hambach,U.,Rolf,C.,&Schnepp,E.(2008).Magneticdat-
ingofQuaternarysediments,volcanitesandarchae-
ological materials: An overview.  
(1–2).
Hapgood,C.H.(1958).
PantheonBooks.
Holmes, A. (1944).     omas
Nelson&Sons.ISBN0-17-448020-2.
Ide, S., Yabe, S., & Tanaka, T. (2016, September). Earth-
quakepotentialrevealedbytidal inuence onearth-
quakesize–frequencystatistics.
834–837.
Kirschvink,J.L.,Ripperdan,R.L.,&Evans,D.A.(1997).Evi-
denceforalarge-scalereorganizationofEarlyCam-
briancontinentalmassesbyinertialinterchangetrue
polarwander.(25).
Langereis,C.G.,Dekkers,M.J.,deLange,G.J.,Paterne,M.,
&vanSantvoort,P.J.M.(1997).Magnetostratigraphy
andastronomicalcalibrationofthe last1.1Myrfrom
an eastern Mediterranean piston core and dating of
shorteventsintheBrunhes.G
75–94.
Lorenzen, B. (2019). Earth’s magnetic eld—e key to
globalwarming.
,25–38.
Martínez-Frías,J.,Hochberg,D.,&Rull,F.(2005).Areview
of the contributions ofAlbert Einstein to earth Sci-
ences—IncommemorationoftheWorldYearofPhys-
ics. . https://link.springer.com/
article/10.1007/s00114-005-0076-8
Milanković, M. (1932). Numerical trajectory of secu-
lar changes of pole’s rotation. http://elibrary.matf.
bg.ac.rs/bitstream/handle/123456789/3675/mm35F.
pdf?sequence=1;
Mitchell,R.N.,issen,C.J.,Evans,D.A.D.,Slotznick,S.P.,
Coccioni,R.,Yamazaki,T.,&Kirschvink,J.L.(2021).A
LateCretaceoustruepolarwanderoscillation.
(3629).
Muttoni, G., & Kent, D.V. (2019). Jurassic monster polar
shiconrmedbysequentialpaleopoles from Adria,
promontoryofAfrica.
3288–3306.https://agupubs.onlineli-
brary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018JB017199
Rampino, M. R. (1979). Possible relationships between
changesinglobalicevolume,geomagneticexcursions,
and the eccentricity of the earth’s orbit.  
584–587.
Wilson,C.,&Flem-Ath.R.(2000).emechanicsofmantle
displacement.InDelacorte.
Wilson,J.T.(1963).Apossible originoftheHawaiianIs-
lands.863–868.
Woodworth, D., & Gordon, R. G. (2018, October 19). Pa-
leolatitude of the Hawaiian hot spot since 48 Ma:
Evidence for a mid-Cenozoic true polar stillstand
followed by late Cenozoic true polar wander coinci-
dentwithNorthernHemisphereglaciation.
    11,632–11,640. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2018GL080787

22 JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022 journalofscientificexploration.org
NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT Mark Carlotto



Key to understanding the movement of the earth’s
crust relative to the mantle are the moments of inertia,
whichdeterminetherotationalaxis.emomentsofin-
ertiadened inearth-centeredearth-xed(ECEF)coordi-
natesare
whereisthemassdistribution,andare
the centers of mass. In practice, the moments are com-
putedbyaddingupvolumeelements∆θ×∆cosθ×Δof
densityθinpolarcoordinates
whereandaretheECEFcoordinatesas
afunctionofradialdistance,longitude,latitudeθ,and
heightabovetheellipsoid.
A 1° by1°globalmodel, CRUST1.0(https://igppweb.
ucsd.edu/~gabi/crust1.html)providesestimatesofcrustal
thickness(,θ)anddepth(,θ)totheMohodiscontinu-
itybetweentheearth’scrustanditsmantle.issetsthe
latitudeandlongitudequantization,∆θand∆.Griddedel-
evations(,θ)derivedfromtheGlobalLandOne-kmBase
Elevation (GLOBE) project (https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/
mgg/topo/globe.html)arereferencedtotheWGS84refer-
enceellipsoid.Icemaps(,θ)representingtheextent of
icesheetsattheLGMweregeneratedfromglobalclimate
datavisualizations(http://waikiki.zhaw.ch/radar.zhaw.ch/
bluemarble3000_en.html).
emassdistribution(,,θ)iscomputedoverase-
riesofsphericalshells∆=250metersthick,usingdensity
valuesof2.7g/cm3forthecontinentalcrust,3g/cm3for
oceancrust,1g/cm3forwater,and0.9g/cm3foriceaccord-
ingtothelogicinAppendixTable1.
Figure 15 is a cylindrical projection of the summed
massdistributionofthecrust.Also shownareestimated
icedistributionsatthetimeofthelastglacial maximum
(LGM)whentheicesheetswereattheirmaximumextent
andthickness(4500meters)andsealevelswere140me-
tersbelowcurrentlevels.
.Crust/icemodelsusedtoassessHapgood’soriginal
hypothesis.Depthofwaterisdepictedinblue,thicknessesof
thecrustingreen,andicesheetinred.Iceoverwaterappears
pinkandice onlandorange.esmallgapinthe icesheet
attheprimemeridian(middle)isanartifactintheshapele.
Milanković, M. (1932). Numerical trajectory of secular changes of pole’s rotation.
http://elibrary.matf.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/handle/123456789/3675/mm35F.pdf?sequence
=1;
Mitchell, R. N., Thissen, C. J., Evans, D. A. D., Slotznick, S. P., Coccioni, R., Yamazaki, T., &
Kirschvink, J. L. (2021). A Late Cretaceous true polar wander oscillation. Nature
Communications, 12(3629).
Muttoni, G., & Kent, D. V. (2019). Jurassic monster polar shift confirmed by sequential
paleopoles from Adria, promontory of Africa. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid
Earth, 124, 3288–3306.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018JB017199
Rampino, M. R. (1979). Possible relationships between changes in global ice volume,
geomagnetic excursions, and the eccentricity of the earth’s orbit. Geology, 7, 584–587.
Wilson, C., & Flem-Ath. R. (2000). The mechanics of mantle displacement. In The Atlantis
blueprint. Delacorte Press.
Wilson, J. T. (1963). A possible origin of the Hawaiian Islands. Canadian Journal of Physics, 41,
863–868.
Woodworth, D., & Gordon, R. G. (2018, October 19). Paleolatitude of the Hawaiian hot spot since
48 Ma: Evidence for a mid-Cenozoic true polar stillstand followed by late Cenozoic true
polar wander coincident with Northern Hemisphere glaciation. Geophysical Research
Letters, 45, 11,632–11,640. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080787
APPENDIX
COMPUTING THE PRINCIPAL MOMENTS OF INERTIA OF EARTH ’S CRUST
Key to understanding the movement of the earth’s crust relative to the mantle are the moments
of inertia, which determine the rotational axis. The moments of inertia defined in earth-centered
earth-fixed (ECEF) coordinates are
 



 

 











where  is the mass distribution, and  are the centers of mass. In practice,
the moments are computed by adding up volume elements  of density
 in polar coordinatesmm






 

 

 











where , and , , and
 are the ECEF coordinates as a function of radial distance , longitude , latitude ,
and height  above the ellipsoid.
A 1° by 1° global model, CRUST1.0 (https://igppweb.ucsd.edu/~gabi/crust1.html)
provides estimates of crustal thickness  and depth ) to the Moho discontinuity
between the earth’s crust and its mantle. This sets the latitude and longitude quantization, 
and . Gridded elevations  derived from the Global Land One-km Base Elevation
(GLOBE) project (https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/topo/globe.html) are referenced to the
WGS84 reference ellipsoid. Ice maps  representing the extent of ice sheets at the LGM
were generated from global climate data visualizations
(http://waikiki.zhaw.ch/radar.zhaw.ch/bluemarble3000_en.html).
The mass distribution  is computed over a series of spherical shells 
meters thick, using density values of 2.7 g/cm3 for the continental crust, 3 g/cm3 for ocean crust,
1 g/cm3 for water, and 0.9 g/cm3 for ice according to the following logic:
Appendix Table 1
Error! Reference source not found. is a cylindrical projection of the summed mass distribution
of the crust. Also shown are estimated ice distributions at the time of the last glacial maximum
(LGM) when the ice sheets were at their maximum extent and thickness (4500 meters) and sea
levels were 140 meters below current levels.
Figure 4. Crust/ice models used to assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis. Depth of water is depicted in
blue, thicknesses of the crust in green, and ice sheet in red. Ice over water appears pink and ice on land
orange. The small gap in the ice sheet at the prime meridian (middle) is an artifact in the shapefile.
APPENDIX TABLE 1
Above Moho?
Land/water?
Ice? Radius,

Density,
(, , )
 > (,  )
ℎ(, ) > 
 ≤ ℎ(,  )
2.7
(, )> 0
 ≤ ℎ(, )+ (, )
0.9
ℎ(, )≤ 
 ≤ (, )+ ( , )
3
 ≤ 
1
(, )> 0
 ≤  + ( , )
0.9
otherwise
0

23
journalofscientificexploration.org JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION • VOL. 36, NO 1 – SPRING 2022
Mark Carlotto NEW THEORY OF EARTH CRUSTAL DISPLACEMENT
.Locationofthetheoreticalrotationalaxisofthe
crust(reddotincenter)isat1.21°N,18.52°W.Dottedlines
delimitthetropicalzone(23.4°Nto23.4°S).
Error! Reference source not found. is a cylindrical projection of the summed mass distribution
of the crust. Also shown are estimated ice distributions at the time of the last glacial maximum
(LGM) when the ice sheets were at their maximum extent and thickness (4500 meters) and sea
levels were 140 meters below current levels.
Figure 4. Crust/ice models used to assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis. Depth of water is depicted in
blue, thicknesses of the crust in green, and ice sheet in red. Ice over water appears pink and ice on land
orange. The small gap in the ice sheet at the prime meridian (middle) is an artifact in the shapefile.
We are interested in understanding the degree to which the LGM ice sheet could have
affected the crust’s moments of inertia and rotational axis. The inertia tensor
  
  
   
summarizes an object’s moments of inertia with respect to the center of mass. The eigenvalues
of the inertia tensor are the principal moments of inertia, and the corresponding eigenvectors
define their direction. The longitude and latitude of the crust’s rotational axis are



where  is the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue.
To assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis that polar ice sheets created a mass imbalance
that could have caused the crust to move over the mantle shifting the location of the geographic
poles, we estimated the moments of inertia of the crust with and without LGM ice. Using our
implementation of the CRUST1.0 model, the crust’s rotational axes with and without LGM ice
are:
(1.32°N, 18.41°W)
(1.12°N, 18.62°W)
The difference (shift) in the rotational axis is

If the crust were free to move over the mantle, the change in the moments of inertia
caused by the ice could have caused it to move approximately 0.195° or 21.68 km. It thus would
seem unlikely that Hapgood’s hypothesis in its original form is correct.
What is particularly interesting is that the crust’s rotational axis is not where we expected
to find it. In analyzing different crustal mass distribution models, Caputo and Caputo (2012) plot
the value of the maximum moment of inertia (MMI) of the crust as a function of its theoretical
Error! Reference source not found. is a cylindrical projection of the summed mass distribution
of the crust. Also shown are estimated ice distributions at the time of the last glacial maximum
(LGM) when the ice sheets were at their maximum extent and thickness (4500 meters) and sea
levels were 140 meters below current levels.
Figure 4. Crust/ice models used to assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis. Depth of water is depicted in
blue, thicknesses of the crust in green, and ice sheet in red. Ice over water appears pink and ice on land
orange. The small gap in the ice sheet at the prime meridian (middle) is an artifact in the shapefile.
We are interested in understanding the degree to which the LGM ice sheet could have
affected the crust’s moments of inertia and rotational axis. The inertia tensor
  






   
summarizes an object’s moments of inertia with respect to the center of mass. The eigenvalues
of the inertia tensor are the principal moments of inertia, and the corresponding eigenvectors
define their direction. The longitude and latitude of the crust’s rotational axis are



where  is the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue.
To assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis that polar ice sheets created a mass imbalance
that could have caused the crust to move over the mantle shifting the location of the geographic
poles, we estimated the moments of inertia of the crust with and without LGM ice. Using our
implementation of the CRUST1.0 model, the crust’s rotational axes with and without LGM ice
are:
(1.32°N, 18.41°W)
(1.12°N, 18.62°W)
The difference (shift) in the rotational axis is

If the crust were free to move over the mantle, the change in the moments of inertia
caused by the ice could have caused it to move approximately 0.195° or 21.68 km. It thus would
seem unlikely that Hapgood’s hypothesis in its original form is correct.
What is particularly interesting is that the crust’s rotational axis is not where we expected
to find it. In analyzing different crustal mass distribution models, Caputo and Caputo (2012) plot
the value of the maximum moment of inertia (MMI) of the crust as a function of its theoretical
We are interested in understanding the degree to
whichtheLGMicesheetcouldhaveaectedthecrust’s
momentsofinertiaandrotationalaxis.einertiatensor
summarizesanobject’smomentsofinertiawithrespectto
thecenterof mass.eeigenvaluesoftheinertiatensor
aretheprincipalmomentsofinertia,andthecorrespond-
ingeigenvectorsdenetheirdirection.elongitudeand
latitudeofthecrust’srotationalaxisare
where[]istheeigenvectorcorrespondingtothelarg-
esteigenvalue.
ToassessHapgood’soriginalhypothesisthatpolarice
sheetscreateda massimbalancethatcouldhavecaused
thecrusttomoveoverthemantleshiingthelocationof
thegeographicpoles,weestimatedthemomentsofinertia
ofthecrustwithandwithout LGM ice. Usingourimple-
mentationoftheCRUST1.0model,thecrust’srotational
axeswithandwithoutLGMiceare:
(θ1,1)=1.32°N,18.41°W)
(θ0,0)=1.12°N,18.62°W)
edierence(shi)intherotationalaxisis
Error! Reference source not found. is a cylindrical projection of the summed mass distribution
of the crust. Also shown are estimated ice distributions at the time of the last glacial maximum
(LGM) when the ice sheets were at their maximum extent and thickness (4500 meters) and sea
levels were 140 meters below current levels.
Figure 4. Crust/ice models used to assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis. Depth of water is depicted in
blue, thicknesses of the crust in green, and ice sheet in red. Ice over water appears pink and ice on land
orange. The small gap in the ice sheet at the prime meridian (middle) is an artifact in the shapefile.
We are interested in understanding the degree to which the LGM ice sheet could have
affected the crust’s moments of inertia and rotational axis. The inertia tensor
  
  
   
summarizes an object’s moments of inertia with respect to the center of mass. The eigenvalues
of the inertia tensor are the principal moments of inertia, and the corresponding eigenvectors
define their direction. The longitude and latitude of the crust’s rotational axis are



where  is the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue.
To assess Hapgood’s original hypothesis that polar ice sheets created a mass imbalance
that could have caused the crust to move over the mantle shifting the location of the geographic
poles, we estimated the moments of inertia of the crust with and without LGM ice. Using our
implementation of the CRUST1.0 model, the crust’s rotational axes with and without LGM ice
are:
(1.32°N, 18.41°W)
(1.12°N, 18.62°W)
The difference (shift) in the rotational axis is

If the crust were free to move over the mantle, the change in the moments of inertia
caused by the ice could have caused it to move approximately 0.195° or 21.68 km. It thus would
seem unlikely that Hapgood’s hypothesis in its original form is correct.
What is particularly interesting is that the crust’s rotational axis is not where we expected
to find it. In analyzing different crustal mass distribution models, Caputo and Caputo (2012) plot
the value of the maximum moment of inertia (MMI) of the crust as a function of its theoretical
If the crust were free to move over the mantle, the
changeinthemomentsofinertiacausedbytheicecould
havecausedittomoveapproximately0.195°or21.68km.
ItthuswouldseemunlikelythatHapgood’shypothesisin
itsoriginalformiscorrect.
Whatis particularlyinterestingisthatthecrust’sro-
tationalaxisisnotwhereweexpectedtondit.Inanalyz-
ingdierentcrustalmassdistributionmodels,Caputoand
Caputo(2012)plotthevalueofthemaximummomentof
inertia(MMI)of the crust asafunctionofitstheoretical
rotationalaxis(TRA)(Figure16)anddiscoverthattheTRAs
withthelargestMMIstendtobefarfromthegeographic
pole.Ourmodelplacesthecrust’sTRAalmostattheequa-
tor.Apossibleimplication ofthisndingrelativeto Hap-
good’stheoryisdiscussedinthepaper.