My name is Terry Noble. I live in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, on the western shore of Lake Superior. Louis Agassiz refined his thoughts on continental glaciation while paddling on this lake. The lake's hinterland provides an excellent opportunity to study raised shorelines. I have conducted landform and vegetation studies in the Province of Ontario for 30 years. This work involved detailed field surveys, interpretation of aerial photographs covering most of the province, as well as reconnaissance from planes and helicopters. The work, which was for both government agencies and private companies, required that the reports be placed within a contextual framework that followed accepted theory. While not a problem at first my work later led me to conclusions that deviated from those in the research literature. Following two parallel concepts, namely, the accepted one I had to use in my work and the one evolving in my mind, was frustrating.
An aspect of continental glaciation that I grudgingly accepted at first was isostatic rebound or isostacy. I was, however, not comfortable with how tilted shorelines just terminated somewhere in northern Ontario or how smoothly they bent at a supposed hinge line. It had a square peg-round hole feel. In the north half of basins everyone was seeing steeply tilted shoreline profiles that became almost horizontal as they approached the south half. My work centred mostly on the northern portions of the Upper Great Lakes' basins and when I finally had the opportunity to work in the southern portions I didn not see any horizontal or near-horizontal shoreline profiles there. I was not seeing what everyone else was seeing. In 1982-3, while involved in a terrain-mapping project in the Lake Timiskaming area of northeastern Ontario, I detected a shoreline that appeared to be on the same profile slope as a major water body that once occupied the Upper Great Lakes. If I was correct, the sill at North Bay, Ontario, had been underwater, which made the chronology for areas downstream wrong. In later projects I noted shorelines in the Petawawa and Ottawa River valleys that should not have been there based on the literature's scenario.
A major impediment for me was following the sequence of glacier ice events and associated water bodies up the south side of the drainage divide separating the Great Lakes watershed from the Arctic watershed. When I reached a certain elevation there was always a distinct incongruity both in time and sequence. Also, shorelines appeared to pass through gaps in the major watershed divides. Eventually I had an epiphany. The same water events happened on either side of the divide. Further enlightenment occurred when I detected on aerial photographs of the Winnipeg area in Manitoba, a shoreline that appeared to tilt up to the south (i.e., towards the United States). When given the opportunity to view aerial photos of the Minnesota portion of the Superior basin I was certain that below a specific level the shoreline profiles also tilted up to the south. In addition, the upper profile of this shoreline suite truncated much older profiles that tilted in the opposite direction, namely, up to the north. To me groups of shorelines with opposing tilts refuted isostacy.
The impetus for placing my papers on this web site came from watching television science programs whose themes pertained to the pyramids, Atlantis, global warming, etc. I often did not agree with the views expressed in these programs. Those views led to my first paper in 2001. The papers centre on the fact that the Pleistocene Epoch and the present Holocene are not an "Ice Age" or "continental glaciation" story but rather an astronomical one involving eccentricity, obliquity, precession, orbital inclination and maybe even celestrial eposodic events (e.g., rogue planets, asteroids). Evidence of "axis shifts" or "axial shifts" that resulted from these events are etched on the Earth's terrain in the form of these raised shorelines whose tilted profiles reflect a "disconnect" between the Earth's land surface and its water bodies.
I argue that science made a wrong turn when Louis Agassiz was judged to have won the controversial debate with Charles Darwin and Charles Lyell regarding the origins of the "parallel roads of Glen Roy" in Scotland. The blind following of accepted theory for over 150 years by glacial geologists/geomorphologists has unwittingly led them, and other disciplines using their work as a framework (e.g., climatologists, bio-geographers, archaeologists, etc.), up a blind alley. I too accepted this theory as it was taught to me and have regurgitated it to earn a living. My work evoked more questions than it answered. I had to decide to continue hitting my head against a wall or walk away. The upshot was that I stepped out of the proverbial box. I believe the concepts presented in the papers explain the many incongruities in the research literature. Continued research following accepted theory just turns up more anomalies. The concepts have obvious implications for industry and commerce (oil, construction, shipping, insurance, etc.) but it also allows us to understand where we have been and where we are going. Tectonics aside, the disconnection between the Earth and its water, played a major role in shaping the planet's surface. Although there is an inherent awe-inspiring simplicity in this disconnection, it could prove disastrous. It is ironic, in my view, that science is speculating on the evolution of the surface of Mars using Earth as a benchmark when that benchmark may have been erroneously followed for more than 150 years.
Questions and comments can be sent to