[Prost1]

I always have problems with these discussions....

1.) Science always assumes the Earth today is same model for 10,000s or 100,000s years ago. Yet, they note the Earth has changed dramatically, excepting they postulate it has not changed radically since Man.

2.)Because they have found no great ships from long ago, they assume (per Darwin) that they did not exist ie; nothing was more sophisticated than the Trimene. Yet, as Barry Fell notes, Julius Caesar reports of the great Keltic ships capable of carrying several hundreds over the open oceans...Giant sailing ships defeated by the calm and the Roman grappling hooks.

3.) per 1 above, since no one can investigate Antarctica, it is assumed no civilization ever existed there. Yet, the Phoenicians had maps of the shoreline (without ice! ref; Charles Hapgood.)

So, why is it not possible that in ancient times, the ice amount on the northern hemisphere could have been massive, reducing the oceans by 100s or more feet and Antarctica could have been free of ice?
Such a possibility includes more favorable weather and seas in the south and an easier way for moving from continent to continent...

[blam]

"So, why is it not possible that in ancient times, the ice amount on the northern hemisphere could have been massive, reducing the oceans by 100s or more feet and Antarctica could have been free of ice?"

The oceans were 300-500Ft lower 15k years ago. Some believe there was a brief warm period (warmer than now) during the Ice Age when the Arctic ice melted...who knows?