The continents was placed together around Equator.

To solve the situation of the problems Wegener's theories involved, it becomes first of all necessary to move Africa. Then we can see the possibility of a collision sufficient enough to explain the large mountain chains that we find on these continents. We also have to make sure that "Gondwanaland" that contains Africa, Antarctic, South-America, Madagascar, India and Australia still are joined together under these transfers. 

In which directions will I then have to move these different areas to? By studying the countless volcanic groups of islands in the Pacific Ocean that has appeared in the transitions between the different ocean plates in the later periods, we see the forming of a quadrant. This stretches itself over the largest section of the Pacific Ocean in a pretty even shape. (fig.1) 

(fig.1) 

 By marking out the volcanic islands in the Pacific Ocean, we get a quadrant that stretches itself across the Pacific. the centre for this will then be in the area of the Yokatan Plate which is a compact plate. I mean that this movement is a possible reason for this.

The islands stretches like pearls on a string from The Easter Islands outside of Chile, and on over the many islands in Polynesia and Hawaii. The rows of islands end up with the Aleutian Islands. They were discovered in 1741 by Bering. The centre for this "circle" will then be the strongly compromised plate that lies in Yokatan in Central America.

Sahara is in the Antarctic area.

By following the accepted rotation axle all the way to the end, something happens that perhaps will clear a lot of earlier mysteries. Some funny coincidences happen:

North-Africa now becomes the southern most area in the world, with Sahara laying in the artic area, without "turning" the globe. (fig.2) we thereby explain an ice cover that covered about 10 mill.km2 of North Africa's northern most area and left behind a desert after having melted away. Now we also get an explanation on why we so clearly find tracks after the ice in this area, without finding corresponding finds in the areas around.

(fig.2) 

 The continents form a belt around the world and divide the oceans in two separate ocean areas. Sahara, that once was covered with several thousand meters of ice, lies now by the earth's south pole. This explains why we don't find any meaningful trace from ice around Sahara on Wegener's model. Antarctica now lies by Equator, something that explains the sub-tropical climate we have found traces from in this area. We can then explain the different climates without having to turn the world around.

From this theory, the Antarctic now lies by Equator. The continents stretches around the world so clearly that we should be able to walk "dry shoed " around the world by Equator. We have got the correct condition in order to explain the earlier tropical climate in this area. Since there also have been found traces from a tropical climate on Svalbard, it can be explained if the continents have been gathered by Equator.

We also see that the moving of the continents must have been done in one definite direction (fig.3), while Wegener's model shows movements from all different directions. 

(fig.3) 

In opposition to Wegener's theory, the continental movements has gone in a definite direction about a centre by Central America. Therefore it does not become necessary to "cut out" Central America in this model.

The bottom of the Pacific Ocean was greatly deformed.

This new theory also sheds light on why the ocean bottom in all of the Pacific Ocean is so thin and so fresh of date. It is through this ocean area, that is larger in area than all the land on the earth above the seas put together, that the movements have taken place. New ocean floor has come about as a result of this. Continuo’s renewal of the ocean floor is taking place due to the ocean floor spreading. I will get back to this later in my theory.

Australia collided with the smaller islands you see in fig.3. In addition to this the northern continents became pressed towards the North Pole and thereafter southwards again, and the ocean floor became very much deformed. This makes it difficult to find traces of this movement.

When Africa moved against the continent where it is today, Europe and Asia got pushed northwards. Thereby we got the ice period on the northern most part of the continent. The ice disappeared as each of the ocean plates melted under the Eurasiatic continent, and the continent pulled back. If we take into consideration that the Earth's floating stone masses are elastic, we can possibly explain why the continents returned. In connection with this we have also found traces from the magnetic North pole up in Northern Norway.

Some of the Geophysics would perhaps mean that this would have been the result of a centrifugal power, that most of the geologists would have repudiated as something non- existing on the earth. There is some talk about something called Centripetal power that counteracts this. This is a topic I have seen discussed between the different trade departments many times. There is no agreements to date.

By studying figure 4, we see that the largest mountain regions in North and South America lies like a hand in a glove. Even though the mountain regions bind themselves in all directions on one continent, they are parallel on the opposite continent, where they meet. The age of the species of rock harmonizes on both sides, and by defining the different minerals on these continents, we see that they go over each other in a definite and determined pattern.

(fig.4) 

The red indicate the mountain groups on these two continents. The blue areas are left over from the ocean floor. The Scientists have thereby supposed that this once was under the ocean, in spite of that these areas are some of the oldest land regions on these two continents. I believe that there is a more natural way to explain this. Note also that the ocean floor areas now lies parallel in proportion to each other.

We also see that in the areas I have coloured in light blue have been under the ocean top during a time in history. I will suppose that they have been either pressed under the top of the ocean when the continents were divided, or that he ocean floor has been thrown up in these areas due to a meteorological downfall. We find in numeral pieces of fossils that had their origins in the ocean in these areas. Did they live there or were they thrown up on the mountains when the continents were divided?

At the tip of South-America there is a large group of islands called the Shanos-Arcipel. We don't find anything like it until we get close to Canada. There we find a similar group of islands, right outside of Vancouver. On this modell that I now have fashioned, both of these island groups are positioned in one and same place. One researcher I spoke to said he had been to both of these places . The likeness of landscapes in these places were striking. We could, according to him, think we were at the same places at once.

 

Another "coincidence" is that some of the largest gold deposits on the earth, in this model can thereby be found gathered in one area, instead of being spread over the whole world like it is today. This could be something worth thinking about.

The continental shelf by North-American and South America's west coasts are completely different from each other. In South-America the shelf slopes out to the ocean. In North-America it slopes in under the continent. Together they glide beautifully into each other when south-America lies upside-down, in comparison to what they do today. 

 

Next page: Life started in north