Disclaimer: This isn’t a bash Ben Davidson post. I think he’s like pretty spot on with the processes at work. There is only one area I feel the geological record doesn’t support. This is merely discussion, not a Ben Davidson hate post.
The 90 degree flip is where I feel his theory breaks down. The process up until that moment is something I agree with. There is some mechanism that unlocks the crust and the displacement does occur. However, I think it doesn’t last long enough to move the full 90 degrees.
My strongest point against it is the wandering pole theory. If the crust does unlock, then yes the weight of the ice will put force on the crust momentum in specific directions and if it remained unlocked long enough the ice would end up at the poles. However, that is not what the geological record supports.
Instead, the unlock stops fairly soon after it starts. The crust will still move thousands of miles, but not all the way. For example, if the last pole was over the Hudson Bay which would explain the mile deep ice sheets over much of North America. The ice sheets would have shifted the crust southward, which would also explain why the pole is where it is now and why that mile deep ice sheet literally all melted at the same time instead of gradually from the southern end to the northern end.
The next move should tilt North America to the south, southeast by my estimation due to Greenland’s ice sheet and Antarctica’s massive ice shelf to the east. Both seem to align fairly evenly to push the crust in that direction. It sure looks like Siberia will end up being the next North Pole if the wandering pole theory ends up playing out again.
Just things I think about. I just never liked the full flip theories. It doesn’t seem to add up with the geological record for me.
