e:\doc\web\99\12\magmove.txt Subject: Re: 'Pangea' existed 20000 years ago? was Re: Archaeology in Antarctica Date: 1998/08/24 Author: Heinrich Posting History Message segment 1 of 3 - Get Next Segment - Get All 3 Segments In article <35E076FB.FB202AEC@tschan-partner.com>, David Grayshan wrote: .... stuff deleted ....... + And still nobody has replied to Christer's Four Questions. + Are they Too Difficult? Surely not for a team of genuine + experts such as those who post regularly here? There must + be some conventional explanation? Below are four of his questions that bite the dust. ********* repoted article below this line *********** Subject: Re: 'Pangea' existed 20000 years ago? was Re: Archaeology in Antarctica Date: 23 Aug 1998 22:26:29 -0400 Organization: TTC77777 Lines: 190 Approved: robomod@ediacara.org Message-ID: References: <01bdc28f$26def620$6109060c@default> <6ql4fc$898$1@news.enterprise.net> <6qmc25$52p$2@news.worldonline.nl> <6qna21$t7u$1@nntp.Stanford.EDU> <6qtrgm$82o$1@newshost.cyberramp.net> <6qu55i$df2$1@newshost.cyberramp.net> <6quae5$6pe$1@news.worldonline.nl> <6qudel$j75$1@newshost.cyberramp.net> <35d6eba2.158528576@news.iconnet.com> <6qvndo$scp$1@newshost.cyberramp.net> <6r155g$tm1$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rp7go$33b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin.ediacara.org In article <6rp7go$33b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, bipc@my-dejanews.com wrote: > REPOST! > > On Thu, 13 Aug 1998 14:06:11 GMT, matts2@ix.netcom.com (Matt > Silberstein) wrote: > > >There is evidence of a radical shift of the poles > > Thatīs a fact. > > >many millions of > >years ago. > > This is not. Itīs entirely built upon the assumption that: > > 1. the rate of radioactive decay has not varied, > 2. the rock's content of daughter lead at time zero is known, and > 3. no parent uranium or daughter lead was either added to or taken > from the rock since time zero. > > <...> > >Of course, this took millions of year to occur > > Wrong, the geomagnetic field can shift as much as 6° in one single > day! > > (Coe, R.S., et al; "New Evidence for Extraordinarily Rapid Change of > the Geomagnetic Field during a Reversal," Nature, 374:687, 1995. > Merrill, Ronald T.; "Principle of Least Astonishment," Nature, > 374:674, 1995.) So What? This doesn't alter radiometric dating and the use of paleomagnetism in geology. > Incorrect conclusion. > o > Actually, it has everything to do with it, how else would you explain > the Ice Ages for example? > > 1.Why did the glacial sheet, in the southern hemisphere, move from the > tropical regions of africa toward the south polar region and not in > the opposite direction...? Because between 285 to 360 million years ago during the Early to Late Carboniferous Period, Gondwana, of which Africa was a part, moved over the South Pole as a result of plate tectonics. At that time, global climate was cold enough for glaciation to occur. The direction of glaciation is consistent with the location of the glaciated part of Africa according to paleomagnetic data. This can all be verified in any recent textbook on historical geology, e.g. Figures 11-1 and 11-2 of Wicander and Monroe (1989). References Cited: Wicander, Reed, and J. S. Monroe, 1989, Historical Geology West Publishing Company, NewYork, New York. > 2. Why, in the northern hemisphere, did the ice move in > india from the equator toward the himalaya mountains > and the higher latitudes...? Because Mr. Christer is badly lost in time. The Himalaya Mountains did not rise until India collided with Asia about 40 to 50 million years ago during Eocene Epoch. The glaciation of India occurred during the Late Carboniferous about 285 to 320 million years ago when in was part of Gondwana and lying within the Antarctic Circle. These events are separated by 235 million years and over 60 degrees of latitude. This can all be verified in any recent textbook on historical geology, e.g. Wicander and Monroe (1989).