Pangea or not?

[jakebilbao]

what do you think of neal adams video here :http://www.continuitystudios.net/pangea.html

and his other videos in his website www.nealadams.com

i think he has a point. what do you think?

[Biofungus]

It's still speculation. There are many parts that were likely underwater (near the outter edges) that were forced above water via tectonic shifting after Pangea separated. The only way to really tell what was under water and what wasn't, would basically be to test the soil at certain depths, every so many miles (maybe 10 at most), and even then for mountainous areas, you'd have to get age estimates, and figure out how deep into them you'd have to take samples, etc.

IOW, the specifics *can* be tested, but the cost would be astronomical for such an undertaking. As such, educated guesses are all we really have to go on, and when guesses are involved, theories fly like birds :)

[C. Wallace]

Neal is a wacko and a psuedo scientists at best. Actually calling him that is probably an insult to pseudo scientists.

His theories are easily disproved, but that still doesn't stop him from his lunacy. Being a legend in his own mind has gotten the better of him in his old age.

[Spacious Interior]

It's a good thing his art was so groundbreaking. I guess I can till respect him for that.

Pure speculation. What his site lacks..... fact checking and the support of the scientific community backing up his theories.

Any scientist will tell you. They only support the theories that they do, because noone has been able to prove them wrong beyond reasonable doubt. Darwin's a good example. The scientific community would have sworn up and down that his word was law 100 years ago. Now, however, they'll be the first to tell you he was wrong about soooooooo many things.

I'm not saying he's wrong, but if Neal's theories are correct, why hasn't he submitted them to the Academy of Science in Stockholm? Or even the US?

[JAQ]

Neal Adams is about as credible a scientist as Stephen Hawking is an artist.

He's presenting one (possibly, I'm not an expert) unanswered question about the prevailing continental drift theory. But he's not offering any explanation for all the other evidence in support of it. (Just for starters, how did South America and Africa get matching coastlines composed of the same rock?) The theory that leaves the fewest unanswered questions is almost certainly the correct one.

[Newt]

My computer won't play his videos- can someone give me the gist?

Oh, and Spacious Interior- Darwinism's dogma days were actually from about 1930- mid-1960's. Sorry, not the point I know, but I'm a biology geek. :laugh:

[Spacious Interior]

Thanks for the correction. We're big Richard Dawkins/Edward O. Wilson fans around the house, and as soon as I wrote that, My fiance gave me hell for not knowing the exact dates. She's a research scientist, so she kinda' goes off when I get little things like that wrong.

Bottom line, to me.....
Neal Adams = pioneer in comic design elements and one of those personally responsible for a major shift in the marketable face of comics.

Neal Adams does not = Geologist

[Mwynn]

My computer won't play his videos- can someone give me the gist?

Scientists are crazy there was no Pangea.

[Newt]

Neat! What field is your fiance in? I'm a herpetologist, mainly ecological/ biogeographical, myself.

Oh, and I prefer Stephen Jay Gould. :rolleyes:

[Newt]

Scientists are crazy there was no Pangea.

Scientists are crazy! You should see our symposia- they're much wackier than comiccons.

[Mwynn]

So who wants to start the there was no Dinosaurs movement?

[Newt]

My girlfriend already has.

[Mike225]

Wouldn't it be funny if he were lined up with a folder full of his theories, standing in line and waiting for a scientist to look at them? Oh, and when the scientist does look at them, he throws the theories back in Neal's face and shouts, "This is masturbation!"

[Spacious Interior]

NEWT: She's working in genetics as a molecular biologist. She's currently working towards her PhD.in both genetics and analitical chemistry. And no, I don't like to argue or debate with her on matters of science. She kinda' owns me on that stuff.

Who the better James Bond was, however.....

[jakebilbao]

It's still speculation. There are many parts that were likely underwater (near the outter edges) that were forced above water via tectonic shifting after Pangea separated. The only way to really tell what was under water and what wasn't, would basically be to test the soil at certain depths, every so many miles (maybe 10 at most), and even then for mountainous areas, you'd have to get age estimates, and figure out how deep into them you'd have to take samples, etc.

IOW, the specifics *can* be tested, but the cost would be astronomical for such an undertaking. As such, educated guesses are all we really have to go on, and when guesses are involved, theories fly like birds :)
yeah, i guess.

actually Neal Adams says, this is not his theory. i heard about this in fanboyradio interview #325.

anyway, i like this theory. i'll stick with it. :)

[Buckyrig]

Neal Adams does not = Geologist

But he makes more money than you.

btw...<> = "does not equal" :)

[Newt]

NEWT: She's working in genetics as a molecular biologist. She's currently working towards her PhD.in both genetics and analitical chemistry. And no, I don't like to argue or debate with her on matters of science. She kinda' owns me on that stuff.

Who the better James Bond was, however.....

Awesome.

Again, I can't watch the videos, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather Neal's theory is that Earth is expanding? Does he have any evidence for this? The plate tectonic theory has remarkable explanatory power; I'm not sure I understand why Neal would object to it. In any case, it's an odd area for crackpot-ism; those types are more typically drawn to evolution, paleontology, neurology, psychology, and certain aspects of physics, at least in this day and age.

[Jon Dahl]

Kansas was at one time an ocean I've seen the gigantic fish fossils (http://www.oceansofkansas.com/images2/bmnsxiph.jpg). Perhaps that big island is where the Atlantians hung out.

Thats why we can't find Atlantis, we're on top of it! :laugh:

[JAQ]

My computer won't play his videos- can someone give me the gist?If all the continents were connected, they'd be on the same side of the planet, which would throw its center of gravity off, and the water would all shift to the same side as the land, flooding it. I'd have to look into it further to see what the holes are in this theory, but I'll bet that the planet's rotation and the tides would counteract this to some extent. The continental plates riding a little higher on the mantle would keep them from being flooded as well. Figuring out possible reasons why they weren't flooded is easier than explaining why all the other evidence is misleading. (That is, other than the "God is playing a practical joke on us" explanation.)

[Newt]

Thanks, JAQ!

I'm pretty sure a square mile of continental crust is no heavier than a square mile of oceanic crust, so there's no weight distribution issue. Problem solved.

[jakebilbao]

Thanks, JAQ!

I'm pretty sure a square mile of continental crust is no heavier than a square mile of oceanic crust, so there's no weight distribution issue. Problem solved.
:blink:

[Newt]

What?

Oceans exist because oceanic crust is extremely dense and sinks further into the mantle than do the continents, which are relatively fluffy and bob high on the mantle.

[jakebilbao]

did you mean by volume they were the same in weight? or really just square mile, meaning it doesn't matter how deep the ocean would be?

[Newt]

I mean by square mile. Like I said, continental crust may be thicker than oceanic crust, but it's also less dense. The weight of the water on top of the oceanic crust is probably not very important compared to the weight of the rock itself.

[jakebilbao]

nah, i still liked adams' theory.

i think i read an article on Albert Einstein ( i believe) where he says everything is expanding. i think this was in 2000 time magazine. hit me in the head if this is wrong. :laugh:

well, this is no different from the australian guy's theory which influenced adams. so i'm still sticking with adams. and even if adams is wrong, heck i don't care, it really doesn't bother me either way. :)

it was just an interesting interview at FBR that i thought i'd share it here. :)

[Newt]

You gotta take Einstein with a grain of salt. He was of course a brilliant theoretical physicist, but he was also a wistful romantic, and a lot of things he says that are not directly tied to his work have no grounding in reality. For example, he apparently believed, or at least liked to say, that if a human being ever achieved the full potential of his mental power he would turn into pure energy.

I'm not familiar with the theory Adams is putting forth, but just on the face of it it makes no sense. Besides, geology probably has the firmest theoretical basis of any of the natural sciences; plate tectonics is far more secure than even, say, natural selection or quantum theory.

[theflash]

hey Newt is it your computer that can't play the video or that you just don't have the right stuff installed? quick time player is free for download ya know.

[Newt]

I have Quicktime installed. When I click on the video icon nothing happens. I may not have the newest version of Quicktime; I'll look into that.

[Wayne Drake]

that whacko draws a mean batman! :har:

[Jon Dahl]

It's Atlantas I tells ya! ATLANTIS!

http://wickedstageact2.typepad.com/life_on_the_wicked_stage_/WindowsLiveWriter/PopeyesPissed_12626/90~Popeye-Posters%5B3%5D.jpg

[Jasen Smith]

I wouldn't think that that could happen. Earth is still the same amount of mass all the way around.
Lets say you have a marble and on the inside of the marble is weighted down on one side...on Earth it will roll to the weighted side because earth is pulling it.

Throw the same marble in the air and pause it at its highest point. If according to Neal's theory the marbles weighted side would be facing south towards the earth.

Gravity bounces off of everything in the universe so the earth wouldn't shift.

Gravity (http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newtongrav.html)

[Biofungus]

If all the continents were connected, they'd be on the same side of the planet, which would throw its center of gravity off, and the water would all shift to the same side as the land, flooding it. I'd have to look into it further to see what the holes are in this theory, but I'll bet that the planet's rotation and the tides would counteract this to some extent. The continental plates riding a little higher on the mantle would keep them from being flooded as well. Figuring out possible reasons why they weren't flooded is easier than explaining why all the other evidence is misleading. (That is, other than the "God is playing a practical joke on us" explanation.)
Not to mention, water bouncing off the continental shelves on either side of pangea would roll back until they hit each other, roughly on the opposite side of the globe as pangea, meaning there would be a heavier concentration of water moving towards the opposite end of the globe.

[Raven]

Not to mention, water bouncing off the continental shelves on either side of pangea would roll back until they hit each other, roughly on the opposite side of the globe as pangea, meaning there would be a heavier concentration of water moving towards the opposite end of the globe.

Something about the plates theory never sat right with me. Neal's theory just feels more sensible and I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.

I once tried to contact him about this years ago because I studied a bit of science, but he wasn't responsive. I did get the impression he deals with a lot of crap because of this that he could have simply avoided by not presenting it this way, but he believes it and stands by it and you have to respect that.

[Lord Fejj]

Don't forget the pull of the moon.

[JAQ]

Something about the plates theory never sat right with me. Neal's theory just feels more sensible and I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.When it comes to scientific questions, I've always preferred experimentation and logical analysis to intuition.

[Newt]

That's why you'll never make it in this world, Wonder Man!

You've got to go with your gut and stick to your guns! Never admit defeat or mistakes! If you can't outreason them outshout them! :laugh:

[MattWaterman]

Heh. Tangently related: Discovery had this awesome, bare bones history of the Earth itself, 2 hours I think. It included the Pangea stage once the "lighter" rock had risen to the surface, before it had been carried away on the techtonic plates (...and interestingly, they predicted that millons of years from now, another large supercontinent is expected to form long after everything is dead...).

I found the part where the earth was literally covered in ice so interesting. All because South America ran into North America, cutting off the sea currents at the time. :eek: How fragile everything really is...

[Buckyrig]

How fragile everything really is...

Nah...the Earth's just a pussy!

[MattWaterman]

Love it or leave it, motherfucker!!!

Its colors don't run!

[Mike225]

Unless you mention mudslides.

[Knuckles]

http://www.bartonbrands.com/mudslide/largecasecard.jpg

[MattWaterman]

Heh. I keep wanting to scratch that thing at that bottom to see if I'm "a winner"....

:sure:

[FA]

For some reason I can't read the word Pangea without being reminded of the word vagina and then melding the two into the horrible concept of Pangina.

[Buckyrig]

That's Paris Hilton's nickname. :w00t:

[MattWaterman]

Fun Fact: Every guy has a Mangina where his vagina should have been.

:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

[Newt]

No, Matt, that's just you. Sorry, I thought your doctor would have explained that.

[Mike225]

For some reason I can't read the word Pangea without being reminded of the word vagina and then melding the two into the horrible concept of Pangina.Folks love Pangea.

[Buckyrig]

I have a character named Balsac Cummings.

[MattWaterman]

No, Matt, that's just you. Sorry, I thought your doctor would have explained that.

No really. You know this. We're all naturally female until our twigs n' berries develop. On the bottom of our berries is where the hole would have been...

[Newt]

No really. You know this. We're all naturally female until our twigs n' berries develop. On the bottom of our berries is where the hole would have been...

Key phrase: would have been. If you've still got something there, you could probably make money in the specialized segments of the porn industry.

[Mike225]

No really. You know this. We're all naturally female until our twigs n' berries develop. On the bottom of our berries is where the hole would have been...You mean the taint?

[Newt]

No, he means the bottom of the scrotum. The two halves of the scrotum are ontogenetically homologous to the labia majora, but they fuse together during embryonic development.

[Buckyrig]

ontogenetically homologous

I'm working this phrase into as many conversations as possible from now on. :thumbs:

[MattWaterman]

Agree.

But yeah, at that fusing point is a little bald spot. It's very nice.

[kdmelrose]

It speaks well of you, too, Matt.

[Newt]

Agree.

But yeah, at that fusing point is a little bald spot. It's very nice.

You're rubbing it right now, aren't you?

[MattWaterman]

You're rubbing it right now, aren't you?

Ha! My fused labia majora is best!!! All others are second or worse!

Good day to you all!