Ice Age was caused by shift in polar axis? (climate, snow, day)

[grega94]

I've heard this theory floated around that the northern axis of rotation of the Earth used to be in Greenland which would explain why the thickest glaciers were found on the north eastern side of North America as well as Europe, while Siberia and Alaska were largely glacier free, and not only that but support rich and dynamic ecosystems similar to what you would find on the savannas of modern day Africa. I'm bringing this subject up because I found this interesting interactive map that lets you play around and compare how the latitudinal lines would have shifted.

https://utahgeology.com/bin/iceage/index.html

However one major hole in this theory is it doesn't explain why the glaciers in Patagonia got so large since the south pole would have shifted towards Australia. The tropic of Capricorn would shift from southern Brazil into Patagonia.

So anyway how credible is this theory and how seriously is it being taken? I know that magnetic poles as well as the angle that the earth spins at shifts, but I haven't heard of any hard proven science that explains how the axis of rotation shifts around? Also even if this theory is false, how do you think the current climate would change if the north pole was located in Greenland?


https://utahgeology.com/wp-content/u...g-ice-age.jpeg

*the outer red ring in the image above is 38N, while the inner one is the arctic circle (66.6N)

[Strawhats]

Interesting. I remember hearing somewhere that the magnetic north and south poles are over due to switch. Who knows what will happen when it happens.

[Bisfbath]

Originally Posted by grega94

I've heard this theory floated around that the northern axis of rotation of the Earth used to be in Greenland which would explain why the thickest glaciers were found on the north eastern side of North America as well as Europe, while Siberia and Alaska were largely glacier free, and not only that but support rich and dynamic ecosystems similar to what you would find on the savannas of modern day Africa. I'm bringing this subject up because I found this interesting interactive map that lets you play around and compare how the latitudinal lines would have shifted.

https://utahgeology.com/bin/iceage/index.html

However one major hole in this theory is it doesn't explain why the glaciers in Patagonia got so large since the south pole would have shifted towards Australia. The tropic of Capricorn would shift from southern Brazil into Patagonia.

So anyway how credible is this theory and how seriously is it being taken? I know that magnetic poles as well as the angle that the earth spins at shifts, but I haven't heard of any hard proven science that explains how the axis of rotation shifts around? Also even if this theory is false, how do you think the current climate would change if the north pole was located in Greenland?


https://utahgeology.com/wp-content/u...g-ice-age.jpeg

*the outer red ring in the image above is 38N, while the inner one is the arctic circle (66.6N)

I think the more usual explanation for more glaciation in Europe and eastern North America is that they they get more precipitation. North East Eurasia is generally rather dry and was probably even drier. Without enough snow, you're not going to get glaciation even if it's plenty cold enough.

[grega94]

Here is the article written by the person who created the interactive map above, going into further detail on his hypothesis and makes many convincing arguments, particularly how the Canadian shield lines up nicely with this altered arctic circle.

but the biggest draw back is he seems to ignore the southern hemisphere, and in particular Argentina and Chile. But non the less and interesting read.

https://utahgeology.com/were-the-ice...dering-events/

On top of that I found another article that seems to provide more evidence to a "true polar wander" here on earth based on the Hawaii island chain.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...1119160239.htm

I also found this wiki article on Cataclysmic pole shift hypothesis is a fringe idea, and although the spin of rotation has wandered on Earth, it hasn't occurred as quickly and by as large of a degree as some are proposing.