Is there room for an island middle of the Atlantic Ocean?

f we ask; “Is there room for an island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean?”, many contemporary scientists we will respond negatively, because such an island isn't supposed to have existed. Our dear scientists base their judgment on todays knowledge, without even questioning it. Why should we, to some extent, question it? On one hand, todays science may be right when it claims that the tectonic plates, those of the North American and Eurasian continent, perfectly fit. But on the other hand, this same science forgets that it will not be by aligning the coasts lines visible on a map, with represent only the sides of the Atlantic Ocean, but the continental bases, ie the Coastal lines in a depth of two to four thousand meters. If we proceed to an examination of the alignment of these coastlines, and that of continental bases, we can see that not all alignment is quite complete. If we align the continental bases of today, we can find small holes between the lines of alignment. These small holes, however, still have a size of several thousands of kilometers and thus leave ample room for an island, even a small continent, with the dimensions given by Plato. We can explain the theory of plate tectonics as well with an island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, then without this island. The two tectonic plates are in fact so large that a slight deformation in drifting away may well explain the presence of an island in the middle, even if the island is today only visible in the form of seamounts.

Before the continents began to drift, the Earth was built of a large super-continent, which began to break into several continents drifting each in a different direction since the last millions of years. It is by re-adjusting all continents into a super-continent, that we find that it lacks a bit of a continental plate that goes from the line Newfoundland – Ireland up to the line Liberia - French Guiana. This piece of continent that fails at this point was certainly not big, but was still a thousand kilometers wide and several thousand kilometers long. This size is not large compared to other continents, but still sufficient to fully cover the Middle East of today and for this reason could very well be the size that Plato had advanced when he spoke of Atlantis.

What is continental drift?

We should watch the drift of continents a little closer, because the reason for this drift remains a little in the dark for most of us. Although the existence of this continental drift should be obvious to most scientists and also for those studying geography, it should not be so obvious to us, the common folk.

We should realize that the Earth is not, in despite of its appearance, something solid. The Earth is a ball of molten rock having in its center a core composed of crystallized iron and nickel. On this molten ball floats a small, rather thin, crust of solidified rock, we call, for the thickest parts continents, while the thinner parts are covered with a layer of salt water, the seas and oceans. Because of the difference in temperature between the center of the earth and this little crust on the outside, convection currents exist, like in boiling water. So, there are places where the current rises, others where it moves laterally, and then places where it goes down again. Some of the places where the current rises are, for example, the Atlantic Ocean and Indian Ocean. Among the places where the current goes down, are places such as Japan and California, both known for their earthquakes. The lateral movement of these currents are mainly under the tectonic plates, which follow those currents. So we see that the continents are not something solid, but plates of solidified rock floating on the surface of a stream, as ice sheets floating on water in a river. Seeing this, we can well imagine that these plates will end up colliding at the place where the magma currents flows down. On the other hand, where the current rise, the continents move away from each other.

So we see that the mid-Atlantic is one of those places where continents diverge. This drifting away from each other has as result that the crust is very thin there and it will remain very fragile. What remains, however, less easy to explain is how something, or even the ocean floor as a whole could have been lowered in a place where currents of magma are rising. We can expect that small pieces of rock, such as islands, moving laterally with the flow of magma, but that they never begin to descend against a moving up current. We can therefore admit that the floor of the Atlantic Ocean has not descended alone, but did because of an external force.

What is a tectonic fault?

What is obvious to some, is not so obvious to others. As we have seen, the Earth's crust consists of plates, each drifting in a different direction. There are, because of this, places where the plates come into collision, and other places where they drift apart. These locations, we know better as faults. There is a third type of fault, a fault where there is a lateral displacement. A famous fault of this type is the one of California, the “San Andreas Fault”. A fault where the tectonic plates diverge, is the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. A place among others where the tectonic plates come into collision, is the Mediterranean region. Here, the African plate slips under the European plate, giving rise to the Alps and Pyrenees. Another one is the Indian plate, which slips under the Eurasian plate, creating thereby the Himalayas. A third example is South America, there is a part of the Pacific Ocean floor which slides under the South American plate, giving rise to the Andes.

The Mid-Atlantic, has it always been under water since the last thirty million years?

Some scientists argue, supported by results of surveys of soil, that the Mid-Atlantic couldn't have been above the waters of the Atlantic Ocean since the last thirty million years. Scientists base here their believes on a few soil samples made in these areas by institutions such as the “Institut Français de la Mer”, competent in such work. We should, however, take into account the difference between the two sentences: “since thirty million years” and “thirty-million years ago.” It goes without saying that the difference is enormous, the first assumes that nothing has moved since, while the second sentence leaves open all possibilities, including the existence of a small continent. We can also give us a small (exaggerated) example, assume that such a disaster occurring in todays France; a large asteroid crashing into the Atlantic Ocean between the islands of the Azores and the French Coast. The first direct result would be a big hole in the floor of the Atlantic Ocean exposing the water to the molten rock, where the temperature exceeds the thousands of degrees. The second direct result would be a great earthquake, certainly something like nine on the Richter scale, or even ten or more. The third direct result would be a tsunami, sweeping away everything in its path. Then come the indirect consequences, the first would be the result of warming ocean water, where the evaporation generates heavy rains and storms on the rest of the continent. The second would be the descent of a portion of the continental plate to a depth of one thousand meters. Assuming now that in a few thousand years, someone would seek Paris. Where seek it? What might still be found? The first thing he would probably do, is that he would drill cores and do ground surveys, which should now be several thousand meters below the waters of the sea. Then he would draw the conclusion, given the analysis these cores, which contain mostly chalk, that this part of the sea has always been below the sea water for several million years and that Paris would never have been there.

The story of Atlantis is like this (a little exaggerated) example cited above. Because the absence of the soft parts of Earth doesn't exclude their presence in the past. The fact that this area is now below the waters of the Atlantic Ocean, as it had probably been millions of years ago, does not exclude the possibility that land could have be found one day above the waters of the Atlantic Ocean.

We should not forget the discovery made during installation of the first transatlantic telegraph cable. During preliminary surveys carried out on the way, we had found, to the surprise of everyone, not just the seamounts, but also solidified lava. It's this lava that had a strange feature; it was in fact a type of lava cooled in the open air, but which was now to several thousand meters deep. Moreover, the fact that this type of lava was there, at the bottom of the sea, proves that it could not be there for more than 20'000 years. The explanation of these twenty thousand years, is that this type of lava slowly dissolves in salt water and that there will be nothing left after this period. This discovery proves that the place where the lava has been found, has been above the sea level in the past and secondly, that this event, which has sent down these mountains to the bottom of the sea, is less than twenty thousand years ago.

The alignment of continents:

The main argument against a large island, in the order of magnitude suggested by Plato, meaning several thousand square kilometers, is that the edges of continental plates seem to fit perfectly, as can be seen on the first illustration. If we create a map of the edges of plates, not following the coastal lines, but the lines of the plates themselves, ie a fictitious line of a depth ranging between one thousand and three thousand meters, an island can be seen in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, as the second picture shows us. What is surprising is that the eastern side of the island resembles a negative imprint of a part of the west side of the Eurasian plate. This island looks to fill the space between the west coast of the Eurasian plate and an imaginary north-south line from the plate at the edge of Celtic plate, Ireland, to the south of Morocco. We can thus see that the tectonic plates fit both with an island in the middle or without this island.