Posted on 04/11/2002 1:49:22 PM PDT by Phil V.
Ancient geography
A great leap backwards
Apr 11th 2002
From The Economist print edition
Geologists have found evidence for the existence of a new supercontinent
MANY organisations use a map of the world as their logo. So does the journal Gondwana Research - but its logo consists of a bunch of unfamiliar blobs snugly cuddled against each other. This image represents the earth as it is thought to have looked 200m years ago, when all the continents were clustered together in a "supercontinent" known as Pangaea. Gondwanaland was the name given to the southern half of this landmass, the part that includes modern-day Africa, Australia, South America, Antarctica and India. In the latest issue of the journal, a pair of geologists present their idea of what the planet might have looked like long before Pangaea and Gondwanaland had formed.
According to John Rogers, who works at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, and Santosh, an Indian geologist at Kochi University in Japan, geological evidence suggests that, a billion and a half years earlier, another supercontinent existed. They have dubbed this continent "Columbia", because some of the best evidence for its existence comes from the Columbia river region of the north-western United States.
Gathering evidence of events in the remote past is no easy task. In 1912, when Alfred Wegener, a German meteorologist, first proposed that the earth's continents were moving around, the notion was ridiculed. It took 50 years to gather enough data to prove that he was right.
Wegener's idea was prompted by the way the continents seem to fit together like pieces of a vast puzzle: most notably how North and South America fit snugly against Europe and Africa. He also pointed to evidence from the fossil record, which showed that similar animal and plant life had once populated both Africa and South America, and suggested that continental drift could explain how mountains form by collisions such as the one between India and Asia that threw up the Himalayas.
Dr Rogers and Dr Santosh could not marshal the fossil record to support their theory: almost no fossils exist from that era of the earth's history and the distribution of those that do neither corroborates nor contradicts claims about Columbia. Instead, the researchers rely on evidence of geological upheaval to make their case. For example, many places around the planet show evidence of mountain-building activity 1.8 billion years ago. Evidence from these zones suggests that the east coasts of India and southern Australia were compressed against western North America.
The rest of the map of Columbia is equally hard to imagine. According to Dr Rogers and Dr Santosh, western Brazil and eastern North America jointly formed a long continental margin where mountain-building occurred. The eastern coast of South America and the western coast of Africa were also joined, just as they are thought to have been in Gondwanaland.
To bolster their case, the two researchers had to find evidence not only of Columbia's formation, but also of its disintegration. The proof of this came from matching patterns of two pairs of geological rifts in the western United States and India. In India, the rifts are known as the Mahanadi and the Godavari; in North America, they are called the Belt and the Uinta. In both countries, these rifts are about 500km apart. More tellingly, radioactive-isotope dating suggests that they are the same age. Judging from this evidence, the rifts formed about 1.5 billion years ago.
Dr Rogers and Dr Santosh reckon that Columbia began to break up around then. About 500m years later, its pieces reassembled to form yet another supercontinent, called Rodinia. Geologists believe that Rodinia (whose existence is generally accepted) disintegrated about 750m years ago and then reformed into Pangaea after a period of fragmentation that, once again, lasted for roughly 500m years.
This pattern has set Dr Rogers to wondering whether some larger force was at work. Columbia, Rodinia and Pangaea all have quite similar configurations. The period of time that separates one from the next is about the same. Three makes a trend. It cannot, reckons Dr Rogers, be a coincidence that a single supercontinent with a Pangaea-like configuration emerges time and time again. Continental drift could be a periodic process, perhaps driven by convection in the earth's mantle.
Dr Rogers thinks that Rodinia and Pangaea resulted from the aggregation of a few large masses that continually shuffle around. These masses form identifiable blocks within all three proposed supercontinents. If the past pattern holds, Dr Rogers predicts that a new supercontinent will be formed in about 500m years' time. Of course, as he says, even if he is wrong, nobody is likely to be around to know.
Looks like the Rodinians are getting ready to sue the Pangaeans for reparations.
As if The Creator is going to keep trying...until He gets it right.
Kind of like the thing in the Lampoon parody where Sam Ervin asks Segretti or one of his henchmen where he got the bag with the $500,000 in twenties in it and the latter replies "I found it". I don't believe in that sort of thing myself, i.e. I don't believe that #### just happens; I believe that when #### happens, there's a reason for it.
Likewise, the entire continental mass of the planet doesn't just end up in one place for no particular reason; when that happens, there's a major, serious reason for it. The continental mass of the Earth ends up in one place when some major force of attraction, gravitational or electromagnetic or both, pulls it into one place. Such in fact was the nature of the antique solar system. This is the thing about the so-called "Saturn theory" which you see "Junior" and one or two others trying to make into a strawman on FR occasionally.
I'm a more than a little surprised that He got it "Wrong". More likely, every instant - from the distant past and on into the infinite future - is EXACTLY the way it is Supposed to be - perfect in every detail. . . .Except that we small slivers of His Creation fail to appreciate that HE IS STILL CREATING!!!!!!
Amen.
Amusement suggests a foundation upon which one stands, evaluates and smiles knowingly with superior knowlwdge. I admire your faith.
Convection?
Have you ever melted a pot of lead and observed the floating slag converge?
Judging from this evidence, the rifts formed about 1.5 billion years ago. Dr Rogers and Dr Santosh reckon that Columbia began to break up around then. About 500m years later, its pieces reassembled to form yet another supercontinent, called Rodinia. Geologists believe that Rodinia (whose existence is generally accepted) disintegrated about 750m years ago and then reformed into Pangaea after a period of fragmentation that, once again, lasted for roughly 500m years.
I thought Velikovsky put Saturn atop the Earth a few thousand years ago, rather than hundreds of millions.
Or is there some other aspect of Velikovskianism that this aligns with?
I can't figure out where and how life appeared in your scenario. Did it evolve independently on isolated land forms or did it appear on a super continent and the species isolated when the original land mass broke up?
There may not have been the moon at that time and gravity may have affected earth's surface differently, with other forces factored in. In a general sense, the explanation in the bible (probably not six literal days as we know them in our solar system, but rather sort of six epochs) works just as good as anything else the scientists have postulated to date.
Pangea enjoyed prosperous stability until they were balkanized by massive illegal immigration from Gondwanaland.
I'll not quibble with that!
What I find curious is the literal interpretation - the one that suggests that God DID ALL HIS WORK in a short period of time then "cashed in His 401K, sat back and sipped iced tea . . . just observing.
I suppose that I am too influenced by my workaholic father who never saw much use in idle time. He literally died with his "boots on". Work is NEVER done. I find comfort in the notion that God never went into "retirement" - that he is still shaping, refining, (evolving) His Creation. (Just my Wish)
Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.