The Origin of the Oceans
by Immanuel Velikovsky
The Immanuel Velikovsky Archive
It must have
been at the very beginning of my occupation with the problems later
developed in my books and in not yet published manuscripts, that
I came upon the question of the origin of salts in seas and oceans.
The common salt is a substantial ingredient of the oceanic content,
or, said differently, the water of the oceans and seas contains
a substantial solution of NaCl, or sodium chloride. Even though
our blood and tissues abound in sodium chloride, man and animals
are not adapted to drink salty water, and life on land could develop
only thanks to the evaporation of the water from the surface of
seas and oceans, or to distillation the evaporating water
is free from salts. Falling as rain or snow or dew, it feeds underground
sources and also glaciers, and through them the brooks and rivers
and lakes, and is delivered to our use usually through concrete
tubes and metal pipes.
Of the salts
of the seas sodium chloride is by far the most abundant. The provenance
of it is, however, a riddle. It was, and still is, assumed that
the salts in the oceans originated mainly through importation from
land, having been dissolved from rocks by flowing rivulets and rivers,
themselves fed by underground sources, and the same process working
on the rocks of the seabed. Terrestrial formations are rich in sodium,
and in eons of time, it is assumed, the sodium washed out of the
rocks supplied its content to the oceans; the seas evaporate and
the concentration of these salts grows. But the rocks are by far
not so rich in chlorine, and hence the problem from where
did chlorine come to contribute its abundance to oceanic water?
There is chlorine in source water, but usually not in significant
amounts. The proportion of salts in the rivers is very different
from their proportion in the seas. River water has many carbonates
(80 percent of the salts), fewer sulphates (13 percent) and still
fewer chlorides (7 percent). Sea water has many chlorides (89 percent),
fewer sulphates (10 percent) and only a few carbonates (0.2 percent).
The comparison of these figures makes it clear that rivers cannot
be made responsible for most of the salts of the seas. Therefore
it is also obvious that there is no proper way of calculating the
age of the Earth by comparing the amount of salts in the seas with
the annual discharge by the rivers; the most that can be done in
this respect is to calculate the rich amount of carbonates in the
rivers in their relation to the relatively poor concentration to
these salts in the seas; but then there will be no explanation for
the rich concentration of chlorides in the seas in comparison with
their poor concentration in the rivers.
A part of the salts could be traced to the washing of lands and
the floor of the seas; chlorine is known also to be discharged by
volcanoes, but to account for the chlorine locked in the seas, volcanic
eruptions, whether on land or under the surface of the seas, needed
to have taken place on an unimaginable scale actually, it
was figured out, on an impossible scale. Thus it was acknowledged
that the provenance of chlorine in the salts of the seas is a problem
unsolved.
Paleontological research makes it rather apparent that marine animals
in some early age were more closely related to fresh-water fauna;
in other words, the salinity of the oceans increased markedly at
some age in the past.
The most obvious
and permanent effect of a deluge of extraterrestrial origin on the
Earth would be the increase in its water volume and of the place
occupied by the seas. Presently four-fifths of the Earth are covered
with water. A stupendous addition of water to the Earth should have
decreased, not increased its salinity, if the water came down in
a pure state. But if the Earth was showered by torrents of hydrogen
and water some other ingredients of the Saturnian atmosphere could
also have swept across the Earths orbit.
In the Buddhist book on The World Cycles, the Visuddhi-Magga,
where the catastrophes that terminated the world ages are described,
it is said:
But when a world cycle perishes by water . . . there arises a
cycle-destroying great cloud of salt water. At first it rains
with a very fine rain which gradually increases to great torrents
which fill one hundred thousand times ten million worlds, and
then the mountain peaks of the earth become flooded with saltish
water, and hidden from view. And the water is buoyed up on all
sides by the wind, and rises upward from the earth until it engulfs
the heavens.(1)
Volcanoes
which were active during the cataclysm of the Deluge and during
other cosmic upheavals vomited sulphur, chlorine, and carbonates,
and contributed to the composition of the salts of the oceans. Carbonates
fell on Earth in large quantities in some of the upheavals, certainly
in the one which took place in the middle of the second millennium
before the present era, at the very end of the Middle Kingdom in
Egypt, an upheaval described in detail in Worlds
in Collision. But a major portion of the chlorine in which
the oceans are so rich must have come from an extraterrestrial source.(2)
My explanation
of the origin of a large portion of the salts of the seas suggests
that Saturn is rich not only in water but also in chlorine, either
in the form of sodium chloride or in some other combination, or
even atomic free. The last solution, of atomic free chlorine, appeared
chemically and biologically somewhat difficult to contemplate, because
chlorine is a very active element, seeking ties with other elements;
biologically because it would be damaging to any plant life, yet
there are other indications which point to the possibility of plant
life on Saturn.
References
-
The
Visuddhi-Magga, transl. by H. C. Warren in Buddhism
in Translations (Cambridge, Mass., 1896), Chap. xiii, p.
327.
-
[The
knowledge that the water of the oceans came from the most part
from Saturn and that the waters were salty was combined by the
Greeks into a metaphor which has the sea being the tear
of Kronos. This tradition originated with the Pythagorean
school and may derive ultimately from Egypt. (Plutarch, De
Iside et Osiride, ch. 32: According to what the Pythagoreans
say, the sea is the tear of Kronos. Clement of Alexandria,
Stromata, V. 8, 20f.: This the Pythagoreans believed
. . . comparing the sea to a tear of Kronos. The same
is found in a fragment of Aristotle in the edition of V. Rose
(Teubner, 1886), no. 196. Cf. Porphyrys Life of Pythagoras
(Nauck ed., p. 39). Cf. also E. Lefebure, Etudes Egyptologiques,
Vol. III: Le Mythe osirien (Paris, 1874), p. 125:
. . . et il faut sans doute regarder comme égyptienne
cette croyance des Pythagoriciens rapportée par
Plutarch, que la mer était une larme de Kronos. . . .
].
Reprinted
from the The
Immanuel Velikovsky Archive.
January
5, 2012
Copyright
© 2012 The
Immanuel Velikovsky Archive
|