My Theory Of A Great Flood In The Northern Sahara

[Silhouette]

Satellite technology offers up all sorts of new speculation. It's really fun when ground excavations and other artifacts seem to line up with one's theory.

OK, from this link we have an interactive relief map of the Sahara region in Africa. North Africa -- Physical - David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

I've taken a screenshot.

Why are there areas of normal mountain erosion above a certain elevation and then flat plateaus below that scrubbed like a plane? Normal erosion gives way to gradual foothills, not such radical demarcation zones. Looking at it like you'd look at a formation in your backyard, say, it would be obvious some water flow came in and scrubbed the area and drained out there at Mauritania, where the only significant "notch" exists on the coast of upper West Africa. If we're talking wind-erosion to explain this oddity of sudden demarcation, wind speeds pick up nearer the peaks of mountains, not so much at the foothills. So we'd at least expect even erosion processes and not clean demarcation zones of flattened plateaus at lower elevations.

Take that along with the only large significant mud outflow just off Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean, it fits the theory nicely:

First, Mauritania satellite image showing the notch and strange scraped looking striations along the area in question where I theorize a large flow of water made its way out in an event. Notice surrounding features appear unscathed.

Next an area of large sediment flow spreading up quite a ways north originating from the "notch" of Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean.

There are anomalies in the Atlas Range of the extreme Northwest corner of the Sahara. Large amounts of sediment pile up nearly to the mountain tops (excavations show this) from some type of flood deposit in the Hauts Plateaux. But at the top of a mountain range?

Examining the relief map at the top more closely, especially using the interactive map link, you can see that there appears to be a channel that goes back up the very northeast corner of that range from the Sahara below; even with some standing water left.

My theory is that a great massive rush of water came from the Mediterranean, possibly a colossal tsunami event, and that it hit the old mountain range (ground flat to plateaus by the flood) traversing from the Atlas Range over to the Plateau du Tademait, thence over to the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges. When that great rush of water hit those erstwhile mountains you can still see the remnants of, it shot backwards up into the Atlas at Chott Melrhir & Chott el Hodna into the Hauts Plateaux to fill that great plain there at the top of the range.

While that old mountain range was being scoured flat, the back-pressure sent waters flowing east around the backside of the Ahaggar Range through Libya, Egypt, Northern Sudan, Chad & Niger creating a huge brackish swamp situation. And other theories match with that having been the case at one time in the greater Sahara region. Then as you look down at lower Sudan erosion on the hills begins to look more uniform from their tops to their bases and foothills.

When the main thrust of the flooding finished off that range traversing from the Atlas to Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges, that massive scouring that broke through left many plateaus where there should have been more rounded foothills. The sediment load was carried from there, scouring (literally) the outflow notch in Mauritania and thence to the seafloor of the Atlantic just off that notch.

If this theory pans out at some point, that must have been one massive flood event. Just mind bending to think about.

Enjoy the topic!

 

[Silhouette]

Here's a satellite image of all of N. Africa. The areas where there are blue arrows are the regions where I theorize that the waters swirled around in and settled in some spots as great swampy regions, and others where it appears to have flowed through out and off the coast of NW Africa at Mauritania:

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Satellite technology offers up all sorts of new speculation. It's really fun when ground excavations and other artifacts seem to line up with one's theory.

OK, from this link we have an interactive relief map of the Sahara region in Africa. North Africa -- Physical - David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

I've taken a screenshot.

Why are there areas of normal mountain erosion above a certain elevation and then flat plateaus below that scrubbed like a plane? Normal erosion gives way to gradual foothills, not such radical demarcation zones. Looking at it like you'd look at a formation in your backyard, say, it would be obvious some water flow came in and scrubbed the area and drained out there at Mauritania, where the only significant "notch" exists on the coast of upper West Africa. If we're talking wind-erosion to explain this oddity of sudden demarcation, wind speeds pick up nearer the peaks of mountains, not so much at the foothills. So we'd at least expect even erosion processes and not clean demarcation zones of flattened plateaus at lower elevations.

Take that along with the only large significant mud outflow just off Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean, it fits the theory nicely:

First, Mauritania satellite image showing the notch and strange scraped looking striations along the area in question where I theorize a large flow of water made its way out in an event. Notice surrounding features appear unscathed.

Next an area of large sediment flow spreading up quite a ways north originating from the "notch" of Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean.

There are anomalies in the Atlas Range of the extreme Northwest corner of the Sahara. Large amounts of sediment pile up nearly to the mountain tops (excavations show this) from some type of flood deposit in the Hauts Plateaux. But at the top of a mountain range?

Examining the relief map at the top more closely, especially using the interactive map link, you can see that there appears to be a channel that goes back up the very northeast corner of that range from the Sahara below; even with some standing water left.

My theory is that a great massive rush of water came from the Mediterranean, possibly a colossal tsunami event, and that it hit the old mountain range (ground flat to plateaus by the flood) traversing from the Atlas Range over to the Plateau du Tademait, thence over to the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges. When that great rush of water hit those erstwhile mountains you can still see the remnants of, it shot backwards up into the Atlas at Chott Melrhir & Chott el Hodna into the Hauts Plateaux to fill that great plain there at the top of the range.

While that old mountain range was being scoured flat, the back-pressure sent waters flowing east around the backside of the Ahaggar Range through Libya, Egypt, Northern Sudan, Chad & Niger creating a huge brackish swamp situation. And other theories match with that having been the case at one time in the greater Sahara region. Then as you look down at lower Sudan erosion on the hills begins to look more uniform from their tops to their bases and foothills.

When the main thrust of the flooding finished off that range traversing from the Atlas to Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges, that massive scouring that broke through left many plateaus where there should have been more rounded foothills. The sediment load was carried from there, scouring (literally) the outflow notch in Mauritania and thence to the seafloor of the Atlantic just off that notch.

If this theory pans out at some point, that must have been one massive flood event. Just mind bending to think about.

Enjoy the topic!

My theory is that a great massive rush of water came from the Mediterranean, possibly a colossal tsunami event, and that it hit the old mountain range (ground flat to plateaus by the flood)

A wave wouldn't "grind a mountain flat"

 

[WinterBorn]

Wind, especially in a desert, can create much the same shaping, and do so without the telltale signs of water.

 

[Mousterian]

The Chicxulub impact would have generated a tsunami hundreds of feet high. And it's directly opposite Mauritania.

 

[WinterBorn]

Satellite technology offers up all sorts of new speculation. It's really fun when ground excavations and other artifacts seem to line up with one's theory.

OK, from this link we have an interactive relief map of the Sahara region in Africa. North Africa -- Physical - David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

I've taken a screenshot.

Why are there areas of normal mountain erosion above a certain elevation and then flat plateaus below that scrubbed like a plane? Normal erosion gives way to gradual foothills, not such radical demarcation zones. Looking at it like you'd look at a formation in your backyard, say, it would be obvious some water flow came in and scrubbed the area and drained out there at Mauritania, where the only significant "notch" exists on the coast of upper West Africa. If we're talking wind-erosion to explain this oddity of sudden demarcation, wind speeds pick up nearer the peaks of mountains, not so much at the foothills. So we'd at least expect even erosion processes and not clean demarcation zones of flattened plateaus at lower elevations.

Take that along with the only large significant mud outflow just off Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean, it fits the theory nicely:

First, Mauritania satellite image showing the notch and strange scraped looking striations along the area in question where I theorize a large flow of water made its way out in an event. Notice surrounding features appear unscathed.

Next an area of large sediment flow spreading up quite a ways north originating from the "notch" of Mauritania into the Atlantic Ocean.

There are anomalies in the Atlas Range of the extreme Northwest corner of the Sahara. Large amounts of sediment pile up nearly to the mountain tops (excavations show this) from some type of flood deposit in the Hauts Plateaux. But at the top of a mountain range?

Examining the relief map at the top more closely, especially using the interactive map link, you can see that there appears to be a channel that goes back up the very northeast corner of that range from the Sahara below; even with some standing water left.

My theory is that a great massive rush of water came from the Mediterranean, possibly a colossal tsunami event, and that it hit the old mountain range (ground flat to plateaus by the flood) traversing from the Atlas Range over to the Plateau du Tademait, thence over to the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges. When that great rush of water hit those erstwhile mountains you can still see the remnants of, it shot backwards up into the Atlas at Chott Melrhir & Chott el Hodna into the Hauts Plateaux to fill that great plain there at the top of the range.

While that old mountain range was being scoured flat, the back-pressure sent waters flowing east around the backside of the Ahaggar Range through Libya, Egypt, Northern Sudan, Chad & Niger creating a huge brackish swamp situation. And other theories match with that having been the case at one time in the greater Sahara region. Then as you look down at lower Sudan erosion on the hills begins to look more uniform from their tops to their bases and foothills.

When the main thrust of the flooding finished off that range traversing from the Atlas to Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges, that massive scouring that broke through left many plateaus where there should have been more rounded foothills. The sediment load was carried from there, scouring (literally) the outflow notch in Mauritania and thence to the seafloor of the Atlantic just off that notch.

If this theory pans out at some point, that must have been one massive flood event. Just mind bending to think about.

Enjoy the topic!

My theory is that a great massive rush of water came from the Mediterranean, possibly a colossal tsunami event, and that it hit the old mountain range (ground flat to plateaus by the flood)

A wave wouldn't "grind a mountain flat"

True. A giant wave could move a lot of soil and rattle the rock a bit, but wouldn't grind a mountain flat. Water does it bet against rock over time.

 

[Silhouette]

True. A giant wave could move a lot of soil and rattle the rock a bit, but wouldn't grind a mountain flat. Water does it bet against rock over time.

It depends on the mass of water and the hardness of the mountain range it encountered. I'm suggesting that it was a MASSIVE MASSIVE influx of water that possibly was sustained for some period of time. The straits of Gibraltar and the Mediterranean's sunken civilizations (evidence all around Egypt and other locations under water) may show that the Atlantic rushed in for some period of time. Perhaps this was the event? There was the flooding of the Black Sea which is another curious anomaly. It carved out a bowl, like swirling waters churning around and around.

Some say it was a massive underwater landslide triggered by seismic events near Sicily. I don't know exactly about the time or the source but I just see evidence of a massive flood event in the N. Sahara (and surrounding regions?)

It's a fascinating topic and should prove some fun for some time.

 

[Silhouette]

Colossal Flood Created the Mediterranean Sea

The Mediterranean Sea as we know it today formed about 5.3 million years ago when Atlantic Ocean waters breached the strait of Gibraltar, sending a massive flood into the basin.....Geologists have long known that the Mediterranean became isolated from the world's oceans around 5.6 million years ago, evaporating almost completely in the hundreds of thousands of years that followed.
Scientists also largely agree that the Mediterranean basin was refilled when the movements of Earth's crustal plates caused the ground around the Gibraltar Strait to subside, allowing the ocean waters of the Atlantic to cut through the rock separating the two basins and refill the sea.

OK, so the Mediterranean Sea was isolated 5.6 million years ago and then opened out again to the Atlantic. I wonder if this happened multiple times?

Look at the larger satellite map of all N. Africa in the second post here. Bear in mind that most of the northern shores of the Atlantic are mountainous, steep, but the Sahara was not near as much. Imagine a great wall of water coming in from the Atlantic via Gibraltar, that energy hitting the immovable mountains of Europe and then that energy backflushing south into the Sahara across its more malleable features? This could explain the energy necessary to grind those plateau areas down from old lower mountain ranges.

 

[Silhouette]

Another thing, notice how the Southeast slope of the Atlas Mountains is absolutely scoured with a very abrupt demarcation, almost like the wall of a flood channel. Meanwhile the Northwest slopes of the Atlas look normal with uniform erosion graduating down gently to normal foothills. It's a very stark feature that's hard to deny.

In fact it looks like the Atlas Range used to be twice as wide but a full half of it was scoured away at the Southeast portion of the ridge.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do you think this theory is plausible?

No comment. I haven't the geological/climatological training and knowledge to know or even have a sense of whether your idea is plausible; therefore it'd be irresponsible of me to opine on the plausibility of your idea.

 

[Silhouette]

Do you think this theory is plausible?

No comment. I haven't the geological/climatological training and knowledge to know or even have a sense of whether your idea is plausible; therefore it'd be irresponsible of me to opine on the plausibility of your idea.

So you are saying only experts can debate this & those with a laymans or blue collar interest shouldn't weigh in?

I got interested with a background at college level in physical science. Plus I learned a bit about hydrology & megafloods by building sand castles near the shore break with my brother when we were kids.

Also I learned how to see & notice stuff & patterns in preschool. I remember at a very young age pointing at a globe & telling my physics professor daddy that the continents looked like big puzzle pieces & that they would fit together. I'd trace my little fingers on opposite sides of the Atlantic & say that each notch fitted a jut from Africa to South America. He chuckled & said some silly experts were having the same theory but that it was only coincidence how the continents looked.

A short while later it became accepted fact when experts published geological & fossil proof that they used to fit together like a puzzle. My hope today is that particularly in the Hauts plateaux of the Atlas Mountains they will excavate proof of marine fossils that match in age & type with other sediment backwash areas in the lower Sahara to the east. Or other such matching physical proof.

 

[Silhouette]

Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous continental deposits
from eastern High Atlas (Morocco):
successive paleoenvironments and paleogeographic significance
Les dépôts continentaux du Jurassique moyen au Crétacé inférieur dans le Haut Atlas oriental (Maroc) : paléoenvironnements successifs et signification paléogéographique.

In most of the Moroccan Atlas domain the continental "Red Beds" that succeed the basin fill of the Tethyan Jurassic troughs (du Dresnay, 1979) and precede the Late Cretaceous transgression (Choubert & Faure-Muret, 1960-1962) are very rarely fossiliferous and have been subject to contradictory stratigraphic attributions (du Dresnay, 1969; Choubert, 1973; Monbaron, 1988). In the Anoual and Ksar Jilali areas (du Dresnay, 1969) of the Eastern High Atlas (Fig. 1A-B

), our investigations, enriched by paleontologic information, made feasible a division of these "Red Beds" into three mappable (Fig. 1C-D

) and stratigraphic (Fig. 2

) superposed units separated by two sedimentary discontinuities (D1) and (D2).

So there was a deep sedimentary deposit (water/flood) in which there are discontinuities (clear demarcation zones) between events.

In the eastern High Atlas, the discordance at the base of megasequence S3 provides evidence of the fossilization of the interruptions in sedimentation during the Jurassic epoch (Fig. 7A

). The coarse detrital deposits (Dekkar 1 Formation) are associated with a morphotectonic event of Barremo-?Aptian age. The later reduction in the size of clastics of the domain (Dekkar 2 formation) indicates by a flattening of relief accompanied by a reorientation of fluviatile channels. The development of plains or coastal evaporitic lagoons (Dekkar 3 Formation) announces the Late Cenomanian transgression. The expansion of this megasequence in several sectors (eastern High Atlas, Marginal folds, High Plateaux) shows that this new Early Cretaceous paleogeography greatly depasses the structural limits of the Jurassic marine trough.

So there was a massive flooding event that re-flattened the plain up there. Perhaps there was more than one Sahara flooding event shooting backpressure and sediments up into those mountains as each flood event took chunks out of that transverse range running from the Atlas to the Plateau du Tademait, thence over to the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges.

In any event, at the very top of an arid mountain range we find evidence of large and deep significant flood deposits. Where did that material come from?

Here's the timeline suggested above for that "Megasequence" of flooding deposits and scouring high up in the Atlas Range:

Aptian Stage, fifth of six main divisions (in ascending order) in the Lower Cretaceous Series, representing rocks deposited worldwide during the Aptian Age, which occurred 125 million to 113 million years ago during the Cretaceous Period https://www.britannica.com/science/Aptian-Stage

But what's with the "sedimentary discontinuities"? I wonder if there was any carbon dating done on sediments found from that "Megasequence" (flooding massive deposits) thickness way up high there? Whenever you see a ?? in dating assumptions, you have to ask if they did their homework thoroughly.

 

[Silhouette]

So far all I see are a couple of French studies not so thoroughly peer reviewed. In fact, there's an assumption based on these relatively new deposits that the Atlas Range is somehow much younger than many ranges in Africa, the old continent.

While much of the bedrock of the African continent was formed in the early Precambrian Era, the foundation of the Atlas Mountain range was formed much later. Atlas Mountains - New World Encyclopedia

The theory is it was formed by some series of collisions between the African and European plates. But then we have a curious bit of guesswork about the dynamics of plate tectonics where Africa and Europe meet:

**** Europe's future lies under Africa
The continents are converging; and for many millions of years, the northern edge of the African tectonic plate has descended under Europe.

But this process has stalled; and at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) meeting last week, scientists said we may be seeing Europe taking a turn.

If they are correct, this would signal the start of a new subduction zone - a rare event, scientifically fascinating.

Beneath the Mediterranean Sea, the cold, dense rock at the extreme north of the African plate has virtually all sunk under the Eurasian plate on which Europe sits.

But the African landmass is too light to follow suit and descend.

"Africa won't sink, but Africa and Europe continue to move together; so where is this taken up?" asked Rinus Wortel from the University of Utrecht.

"It looks possible that on the appropriate timescale, we are witnessing the beginning of subduction of Europe under Africa," he told BBC News.

The Mediterranean Sea's geological structure and history are quite complex.
******
Could it be that researchers used the flood deposits high up in the Atlas mountains to theorize incorrectly about what's happening between the African and European plates? "Africa won't sink under Europe" ..."Africa seems to have stalled out moving north"...oh really? "The Mediterranean Sea's geological structure and history are quite complex." Hmmmm...

According to the studies I've read so far, there isn't a consensus on what is going on techtonically in the Mediterranean. Theories range from reversing subduction, to the Mediterranean being it's own little mini-plate. To the region moving in four different directions at once. So it seems the tectonics in the region are up for grabs. So what I'm theorizing here is that maybe the Atlas Range didn't get those deep flood deposits clear up near its peaks, filling the valleys between them, from some ancient seabed uplifting? How can a strong-rocked mountain range form steep peaks and deep valleys while also submerged under a marine environment? And if the uplift was gradual from a marine environment, what's with the preservation of deep valleys and steep peaks they've found to exist there buried under "event sediments" in spite of the theories?

I theorize that the Atlas Range was a normal range that experienced subsequent backfilling with deep fluvial sediments in its valleys, filling it up to near its peaks. And this is the morphology they are finding there. So? They explain it away rather clumsily IMHO.

The Atlas tops look similar in erosion to those of the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges. Yet the current science tells us that the Atlas Mountains are over 80 million years old. Meanwhile the relatively nearby Ahaggar Range also marooned in the Sahara is supposed to be just 2 million years old? With more massive scouring erosion and scrubbed low-lying plateaus than it's much older cousin to the northwest? The massive erosion in the "much younger" Tassili Ajjer and Ahaggar Ranges is suspect to a cousin that's 78 million years older in the same climate situation, so relatively nearby?

And while we're visiting the Ahaggar Range, look at this volcanic extrusion obviously hit by a massive erosion event. I say "event" because the nature of erosion of the softer exterior materials looks to have been wet. I notice there are rounded boulders in the scree/sand rubble at the base. That must have been some wind storm, or ???

The Ahaggar Mountains - Travel to Algeria The Ahaggar Massif Kel Ahhagar:

 

[Silhouette]

As to the Tassili n' Ajjer Range:

Tassili n'Ajjer
Criterion (iii): The rock art images cover a period of about 10,000 years. With the archaeological remains, they testify in a particularly lively manner to climate changes, changes in fauna and flora, and particularly to possibilities provided for farming and pastoral life linked to impregnable defensive sites during certain prehistoric periods.

Criterion (vii): With the eroded sandstone forming "rock forests", the property is of remarkable scenic interest. The sandstone has kept intact the traces and marks of the major geological and climatic events. The corrosive effects of water, and then wind, have contributed to the formation of a particular morphology, that of a plateau carved by water and softened by the wind.

This erosion screams "scouring water" and not wind so much. Ahaggar Mountains

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So far all I see are a couple of French studies not so thoroughly peer reviewed. In fact, there's an assumption based on these relatively new deposits that the Atlas Range is somehow much younger than many ranges in Africa, the old continent.

While much of the bedrock of the African continent was formed in the early Precambrian Era, the foundation of the Atlas Mountain range was formed much later. Atlas Mountains - New World Encyclopedia

The theory is it was formed by some series of collisions between the African and European plates. But then we have a curious bit of guesswork about the dynamics of plate tectonics where Africa and Europe meet:

**** Europe's future lies under Africa
The continents are converging; and for many millions of years, the northern edge of the African tectonic plate has descended under Europe.

But this process has stalled; and at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) meeting last week, scientists said we may be seeing Europe taking a turn.

If they are correct, this would signal the start of a new subduction zone - a rare event, scientifically fascinating.

Beneath the Mediterranean Sea, the cold, dense rock at the extreme north of the African plate has virtually all sunk under the Eurasian plate on which Europe sits.

But the African landmass is too light to follow suit and descend.

"Africa won't sink, but Africa and Europe continue to move together; so where is this taken up?" asked Rinus Wortel from the University of Utrecht.

"It looks possible that on the appropriate timescale, we are witnessing the beginning of subduction of Europe under Africa," he told BBC News.

The Mediterranean Sea's geological structure and history are quite complex.
******
Could it be that researchers used the flood deposits high up in the Atlas mountains to theorize incorrectly about what's happening between the African and European plates? "Africa won't sink under Europe" ..."Africa seems to have stalled out moving north"...oh really? "The Mediterranean Sea's geological structure and history are quite complex." Hmmmm...

According to the studies I've read so far, there isn't a consensus on what is going on techtonically in the Mediterranean. Theories range from reversing subduction, to the Mediterranean being it's own little mini-plate. To the region moving in four different directions at once. So it seems the tectonics in the region are up for grabs. So what I'm theorizing here is that maybe the Atlas Range didn't get those deep flood deposits clear up near its peaks, filling the valleys between them, from some ancient seabed uplifting? How can a strong-rocked mountain range form steep peaks and deep valleys while also submerged under a marine environment? And if the uplift was gradual from a marine environment, what's with the preservation of deep valleys and steep peaks they've found to exist there buried under "event sediments" in spite of the theories?

I theorize that the Atlas Range was a normal range that experienced subsequent backfilling with deep fluvial sediments in its valleys, filling it up to near its peaks. And this is the morphology they are finding there. So? They explain it away rather clumsily IMHO.

The Atlas tops look similar in erosion to those of the Tassili Ajjer & Ahagger Ranges. Yet the current science tells us that the Atlas Mountains are over 80 million years old. Meanwhile the relatively nearby Ahaggar Range also marooned in the Sahara is supposed to be just 2 million years old? With more massive scouring erosion and scrubbed low-lying plateaus than it's much older cousin to the northwest? The massive erosion in the "much younger" Tassili Ajjer and Ahaggar Ranges is suspect to a cousin that's 78 million years older in the same climate situation, so relatively nearby?

And while we're visiting the Ahaggar Range, look at this volcanic extrusion obviously hit by a massive erosion event. I say "event" because the nature of erosion of the softer exterior materials looks to have been wet. I notice there are rounded boulders in the scree/sand rubble at the base. That must have been some wind storm, or ???

The Ahaggar Mountains - Travel to Algeria The Ahaggar Massif Kel Ahhagar:

look at this volcanic extrusion obviously hit by a massive erosion event.

I don't think it's obvious that this took place over a short period of time.

 

[anotherlife]

The Sahara used to be an vast shallow under water sea bed a few million years ago. That is where whales became sea animals from land animals.

 

[Silhouette]

The Sahara used to be an vast shallow under water sea bed a few million years ago. That is where whales became sea animals from land animals.

Again I'm not entirely sure when the great event happened but it seems to have been a rush of water from the sediments deposited back up in the Hauts Plateaux of the Atlas Mountains. I don't think the inundation was gentle in that event. It looks sudden and violent. It does seem like a "morphotectonic" event. (from quote post 12)

 

[anotherlife]

The Sahara used to be an vast shallow under water sea bed a few million years ago. That is where whales became sea animals from land animals.

Again I'm not entirely sure when the great event happened but it seems to have been a rush of water from the sediments deposited back up in the Hauts Plateaux of the Atlas Mountains. I don't think the inundation was gentle in that event. It looks sudden and violent. It does seem like a "morphotectonic" event. (from quote post 12)

What I know is that the north coast of Egypt with all the cities on it suddenly jumped down into the Mediterranean Sea in one earthquake in the 2nd century ad. Maybe something similar happened at the Atlas Mountains then it rose again.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do you think this theory is plausible?

No comment. I haven't the geological/climatological training and knowledge to know or even have a sense of whether your idea is plausible; therefore it'd be irresponsible of me to opine on the plausibility of your idea.

So you are saying only experts can debate this & those with a laymans or blue collar interest shouldn't weigh in?

I got interested with a background at college level in physical science. Plus I learned a bit about hydrology & megafloods by building sand castles near the shore break with my brother when we were kids.

Also I learned how to see & notice stuff & patterns in preschool. I remember at a very young age pointing at a globe & telling my physics professor daddy that the continents looked like big puzzle pieces & that they would fit together. I'd trace my little fingers on opposite sides of the Atlantic & say that each notch fitted a jut from Africa to South America. He chuckled & said some silly experts were having the same theory but that it was only coincidence how the continents looked.

A short while later it became accepted fact when experts published geological & fossil proof that they used to fit together like a puzzle. My hope today is that particularly in the Hauts plateaux of the Atlas Mountains they will excavate proof of marine fossils that match in age & type with other sediment backwash areas in the lower Sahara to the east. Or other such matching physical proof.

So you are saying only experts can debate this & those with a laymans or blue collar interest shouldn't weigh in?

No. I wasn't unclear in what i wrote, and any reader can tell that I did not say that....Well, that's not really so, for you clearly read my statement and suspect I have said something I did not.

 

[Silhouette]

No. I wasn't unclear in what i wrote, and any reader can tell that I did not say that....Well, that's not really so, for you clearly read my statement and suspect I have said something I did not.

OK. Sorry I misinterpreted it. But it did give me an opportunity to describe my background and interest in the topic (post 11).

The point is jump in. Don't disqualify yourself just because you're not an expert.