This objection, again, seems to fail. It is an established fact that
the land sank very considerably during the Ice-Age, and has risen again
since the ice disappeared. We find that the crust in places sank so low
that an arctic ocean bathed the slopes of some of the Welsh mountains;
and American geologists say that their land has risen in places from
2000 to 3000 feet (Chamberlin) since the burden of ice was lifted from
it. Here we have the possibility of an explanation of the advances and
retreats of the glaciers. The refrigerating agencies would proceed
until an enormous burden of ice was laid on the land of the northern
hemisphere. The land apparently sank under the burden, the ice and snow
melted at the lower level and there was a temperate interglacial period.
But the land, relieved of its burden, rose once more, the exposed
surface absorbed further quantities of carbon, and a fresh period of
refrigeration opened. This oscillation might continue until the two sets
of opposing forces were adjusted, and the crust reached a condition of
comparative stability.
Finally, and this is the more serious difficulty, it is said that we
cannot in this way explain the localisation of the glacial sheets. Why
should Europe and North America in particular suffer so markedly from
a general thinning of the atmosphere? The simplest answer is to suggest
that they especially shared the rise of the land. Geology is not in
a position either to prove or disprove this, and it remains only a
speculative interpretation of the fact We know at least that there was
a great uprise of land in Europe and North America in the Pliocene and
Pleistocene and may leave the precise determination of the point to a
later age. At the same time other local causes are not excluded. There
may have been a large extension of the area of atmospheric depression
which we have in the region of Greenland to-day.
When we turn to the question of chronology we have the same acute
difference of opinion as we have found in regard to all questions of
geological time. It used to be urged, on astronomical grounds, that the
Ice-Age began about 240,000 years ago, and ended about 60,000 years
ago, but the astronomical theory is, as I said, generally abandoned.
Geologists, on the other hand, find it difficult to give even
approximate figures. Reviewing the various methods of calculation,
Professor Chamberlin concludes that the time of the first spread of the
ice-sheet is quite unknown, the second and greatest extension of the
glaciation may have been between 300,000 and a million years ago, and
the last ice-extension from 20,000 to 60,000 years ago; but he himself
attaches "very little value" to the figures. The chief ice-age was some
hundreds of thousands of years ago, that is all we can say with any
confidence.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account