The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 18    Average: 3.5/5]
53 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 6604
Rating: 3.5
Category: Science
Date: 08/23/13 10:02 AM

53 Responses to Pangea With Borders Of Present-Day Countries [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 9:54 am
    Link: Pangea With Borders Of Present-Day Countries - .... unless you think the world is 6,500 years old in which case this image is the work of the devil.
  2. Profile photo of Fwoggie2
    Fwoggie2 Male 30-39
    1803 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 10:11 am
    OK, that`s cool, I like that.
  3. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 10:22 am
    That`s not entirely accurate.

    New York shares some geology with Scotland they have found.

    Maybe that was before Pangaea?
  4. Profile photo of JadesDitoyr
    JadesDitoyr Male 18-29
    841 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 10:33 am
    Its a nice antediluvian map, though slightly inaccurate.

    Love what they had to do to Mexico to get it to fit.
  5. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2410 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 10:34 am
    i could swim to mauritani! who am kidding, they`d be swimming here
  6. Profile photo of madduck
    madduck Female 50-59
    7562 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 10:48 am
    It`s really quite cool- I often idly wonder how this would be - the maps I have don`t superimpose at all.
  7. Profile photo of bacon_pie
    bacon_pie Male 30-39
    3061 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 11:28 am
    When seeing a map of the world, Yakko`s Nations of the World seems to pop in my head every time.
  8. Profile photo of Nickel2
    Nickel2 Male 50-59
    5879 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 12:00 pm
    Mmm.


  9. Profile photo of ferdyfred
    ferdyfred Male 40-49
    13631 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 1:08 pm
    love to see a modern day satnav work that out
  10. Profile photo of ferdyfred
    ferdyfred Male 40-49
    13631 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 1:11 pm
    @bacon_pie
    Never saw that clip - major funny
  11. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 1:24 pm
    The idea is nice,but pure fantasy. In fact the peninsula of Italy for example didn`t exist at all during that era. It formed millennia after the continents taked the place they have today.
  12. Profile photo of Rizzo71
    Rizzo71 Male 40-49
    427 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 1:45 pm
    The devil told you that!
    The devil told you that!
  13. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 1:55 pm
    piperfawn

    "The idea is nice,but pure fantasy."

    OF COURSE.

    The idea is not that this is exactly what pangea looked like. Obviously land masses and coastal lines were different and especially lakes and rivers were. I mean the great lakes were formed by glacial drift. They wouldn`t even have existed in the time of pangea.

    This is just taking countries as they currently are and putting them in the area they would have been in pangea.
  14. Profile photo of 747Pilot
    747Pilot Male 18-29
    1455 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 2:19 pm
    interesting! maybe it was that way or not, it`s an interesting theory none the less. Too bad we didn`t have time car to go and check it out. Still, you never know!


    p.s. description sucks
  15. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 3:01 pm
    With that trollish tagline, I knew HG had submitted this.
  16. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 3:16 pm
    Crakr

    "With that trollish tagline, I knew HG had submitted this."

    ? It was a joke. Do YOU think the earth is 6,500 years old?

    The people that do don`t think pangea ever existed. I`ve had people tell me point blank that the world is 6,500 years old and anything like fossils, or carbon dating, or pangea are the work of the devil to confuse us.

    If we can`t make fun of those people who can we make fun of?
  17. Profile photo of drawman61
    drawman61 Male 50-59
    7740 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 3:44 pm
    What with this and now the Earth is growing post...this site isn`t just thrown together.
  18. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 3:48 pm
    HG: "The people that do don`t think pangea ever existed."

    And you make fun of my grammar.

    I really don`t care if pangea ever existed and am not going to debate how old the earth is.

    I believe in an all-powerful God that isn`t restricted by any scientific theory. So it matters not, to me, if the Earth is 6500 years old, 13,000 years old or 4 million years old.

    That`s the difference between you and me, You believe that any God would have to be constrained by the rules of science including space/time theory. I believe God created everything, including the rules of science that we experience.

    What you believe is akin to saying that God can`t be a high diver because we live in a wading pool.
  19. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 5:18 pm
    OK! Now find a map that links everything on the PACIFIC side! :-)

    What with this and now the Earth is growing post...this site isn`t just thrown together.
    @drawman61: Sometimes, by accident, it LOOKS like someone here knows what they`re doing.
    Purely by accident. :-)
  20. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 5:28 pm
    Crakr

    "What you believe is akin to saying that God can`t be a high diver because we live in a wading pool. "

    Re-read the description. Where do I talk about God? God could have created the universe billions of years ago. I don`t know.

    The reason I don`t believe in God is because I have not seen anything that makes me believe, it isn`t because I have seen things that make me not believe. Do you get the difference?

    The description has nothing to do with god. God could have made pangea. The description has to do with young earth creationists who take the bible literally and think the earth is 6,500 years old and people rode dinosaurs. They are the ones that deny pangea ever existed.

    I can`t make fun of them?
  21. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 6:14 pm
    I can`t make fun of them?
    @HolyGod: Obviously you can! If bashing the beliefs of others is your idea of fun? Have at it!

    Of course... others might think it`s fun to bash you for bashing others... OH NOES! That`s NOT ALLOWED! It isn`t PC!
    (& etc)

    And if someone wants to bash me for bashing you bashing others? Bash them! Bash `em all!
  22. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 6:42 pm
    HG: "You are going to make a big deal out of a missing comma?"

    Why not? You have before, perhaps it`s better not to act like Mr. Perfect all the time.

    "The description has to do with young earth creationists who take the bible literally and think the earth is 6,500 years old"

    So the bible has nothing to do with God? And you seriously believe that creationists believe men rode dinos?

    Sir, you have a screw loose, if you do.
  23. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 6:59 pm
    Crakr

    "You have before,"

    Bulls.hit. Send me a single example of me correcting you over a comma, or spelling, or really any grammar at all.

    "And you seriously believe that creationists believe men rode dinos? Sir, you have a screw loose, if you do."

    Have you never heard of the Creationist Museum or Ken Ham?

    tinyurl.com/kplmyzt

    Now who is the one with a screw loose?

  24. Profile photo of Runemang
    Runemang Male 30-39
    2676 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:09 pm
    Maybe I never understood the entire story but to me, this whole Pangea thing is a ridiculous conclusion based on circumstantial evidence that ranks right up there with "I can`t see the curvature of the Earth, therefore it`s flat." It doesn`t seem realistic for any point in the Earth`s early formation to result in all the land to be on one side. I`m not saying I`m a scientist or a genius or any such thing, just an opinion I guess.
  25. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:21 pm
    Runemang

    "Maybe I never understood the entire story but to me, this whole Pangea thing is a ridiculous conclusion based on circumstantial evidence"

    I would recommend googling it and reading a bit. I think it is pretty much an accepted certainty in the scientific community based on much more than a little circumstantial evidence.

    The fossil records, rock strata, and coal and mineral distribution line up on continents separated by thousands of miles of ocean.

    Without pangea there is no way to explain how common ancestors for mammals existed on separate continents with no connection.

    Unless you mean "god did it". I can`t really argue against that.
  26. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:25 pm
    HG: Per your own link, "I don`t know where people get the idea that people rode dinosaurs. I mean, there`s no evidence in the Bible that that is so. I mean, when Job was looking at Behemoth, the description there, there`s nothing to do with people riding dinosaurs. We don`t know how people interacted with dinosaurs." - Ken Ham

    I don`t subscribe to his ideas about the bible or creationism anyways. But if you seriously believe that most Christians do then you are seriously mistaken.

    You atheists have exaggerated and parodied that misbelief, for your own personal pleasure, to continue your rhetorical narrative that Christians are crazy. But the more absurd you get, describing creationism, the less believable your arguments are.
  27. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:29 pm
    Crakr

    I read my link man. Did you not get that the whole point of that quote was to show that he has changed his position?

    His museum has a dinosaur with a saddle. His books show dinosaurs with saddles.

    "But if you seriously believe that most Christians do then you are seriously mistaken."

    NO. I don`t. It is probably like 1% if that and those were the ones I was making fun of. I was not making fun of all christians.
  28. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:40 pm
    HG: "I was not making fun of all christians."

    Oh Bullsh|t, you delight in it regularly here.

    He didn`t make the book illustrations, nor is the toy dino at the museum even part of an exhibit.
    I`ve seen a toy rocket ride with a saddle at a science museum, does that mean science says that people ride rockets like horses?

    Get real man.
  29. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 7:42 pm
    Proof that science believes people ride rockets:



    Now see how absurd your rhetoric is?
  30. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 8:03 pm
    Crakr

    "You delight in it regularly"

    Absolutely. But that isn`t what I was doing here. I was making fun of a very specific group.

    Fine forget the saddle if you want to disagree about it. But they absolutely believe people and dinosaurs lived at the same time. You can`t deny that. That is in the exhibits. Is that really all that much less crazy?
  31. Profile photo of Runemang
    Runemang Male 30-39
    2676 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 8:30 pm
    HolyGod, no, didn`t mean "God did it".

    ... and THAT is the strangest sentence I`ve written this week. <.<
  32. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 8:41 pm
    @HolyGod: LOOK! PROOF!



    NOW will you believe in creationism? :-)
  33. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    August 23, 2013 at 11:40 pm
    I am only too happy to make fun of all christians,muslims and any other idiot who believes in a/several "Gods". It`s sad they can`t get medical help. I do believe in creationism-those dinos from the 64 worlds fair were created by Walt Disney studios.
  34. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14622 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 2:21 am
    Well that would have made the slave trade a whole lot faster
  35. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 2:22 am
    @Zeegrr60: But... that would make Walt Disney... God!
    What would that make Mickey Mouse???

    Dinoland Picture Says sculptor Louis Paul Jonas designed them, but Disney Co. may have constructed them.
    Disney had dinosaurs as part of their "Magic Skyway" exhibit: one of 4 they ran at the expo.

    Linky
  36. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 2:26 am
    HG: "Is that really all that much less crazy?"

    As I said before, It doesn`t really matter to me how old the earth really is nor the myriad of dino theories. Looking at fossils to explain prehistory is like taking a few still frames out of an entire movie and trying to derive it`s entire plot from those pictures.
  37. Profile photo of Bakcagain21
    Bakcagain21 Male 18-29
    560 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 12:34 pm
    @CrakrJak were you looking for a fight today?
  38. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 1:14 pm
    Bakcagin21

    "@CrakrJak were you looking for a fight today?"

    Yes. Yes he was.

    On this post he called me a troll for saying ".... unless you think the world is 6,500 years old in which case this image is the work of the devil."

    Then he called me a grammar nazi even though I can`t think of any time I have corrected anyone`s spelling or grammar on here unless their statement was completely incoherent.

    On another post of mine the same day he said I was misleading and a racist because the title was "black guy flips out" for a black gymnast.

    I like debating on here but not over stupid, petty s.hit.


  39. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 2:50 pm
    "@CrakrJak were you looking for a fight today?"

    Nope, I picked up, again, on HG`s trolling and called him out on it, just as I would any other troll on IAB.

    "I like debating on here but not over stupid, petty s.hit."

    Then don`t instigate any stupid petty sh|t.
  40. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 2:58 pm
    Crakr

    "Nope, I picked up, again, on HG`s trolling and called him out on it, just as I would any other troll on IAB."

    If I make any comment about there being no god that means I`m "trolling" in your opinion right?

    So does that mean if a Christian makes a comment that there IS a god then he`s trolling too? Or no because it is only trolling when someone has an opinion that is different than yours?

    If a post of some beautiful scenery had the description. "Proof of God`s power" you`d attack that person for trolling atheists right?
  41. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 3:29 pm
    HG: How would such a post be trolling you?

    Remember you don`t believe in God and find the people that do as silly as believing in Santa Claus.

    So please tell me how someone mentioning a non-existent entity, in your view, be trolling?

    For instance, The movie Thor gets mentioned on IAB. Did you see me get upset at that? Nope.

    Why? Because I know Thor doesn`t really exist.

    Now that I think about, shouldn`t you have disappeared by now? After all you are "HolyGod" and you don`t believe in God, so you don`t believe in yourself and should cease to exist, right?

    (Now that`s how to troll someone intelligently)
  42. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 4:10 pm
    Crakr

    "How would such a post be trolling you?"

    It wouldn`t be. I don`t consider someone "trolling" just because they disagree with me. I disagree with you constantly, I don`t accuse you of "trolling" me.

    "Why? Because I know Thor doesn`t really exist."

    So if I believed in Thor, that statement would be you trolling me in your opinion right?

    "After all you are "HolyGod" and you don`t believe in God"

    I don`t believe in YOUR god, keep in mind there are like 3,000 of them. Silly Christians always think they have the only god. My "holy god" is Zeus and I believe in him strongly. Please don`t tell me you don`t, because that would be "trolling" me.
  43. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6764 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 4:12 pm
    Crakr

    "shouldn`t you have disappeared by now? After all you are "HolyGod" and you don`t believe in God,"

    Shouldn`t you have been s.hit into a toilet by now? After all you are "CrakrJak" and people eat cracker jacks.

    How is 5Cats using a computer? Cats can`t type!

    OH MY GOSH! Draculya really does exist!

    What are you 12?

    "(Now that`s how to troll someone intelligently)"

    If you think that was intelligent then you and I have a VERY different definition of what "intelligent" is.
  44. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 4:15 pm
    On this post he called me a troll for saying ".... unless you think the world is 6,500 years old in which case this image is the work of the devil."

    YES @HolyGod: If you INVOKE RELIGION on a science post? THAT IS TROLLING! = DUH! It`s YOUR post, YOUR description? Man-up and take responsibility! (not `blame` eh?)

    If I make any comment about there being no god that means I`m "trolling" in your opinion right?

    YES! RIGHT! You even admit it? But still deny it?

    It`s NOT a religion thread! Bringing "God or lack thereof" into it is troll-territory.

    Your description is derogatory, that makes it troll-y.

    Thor gets mentioned on IAB. Did you see me get upset at that? Nope.

    SEE? It`s right there in front of your eyes! Yet you continue to... TROLL.
  45. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 4:26 pm
    I don`t accuse you of "trolling" me.
    @HolyGod: You FREQUENTLY accuse others of trolling simply because you are wrong and refuse to admit it.

    So if I believed in Thor, that statement would be you trolling me in your opinion right?
    Not quite: no. HE would be trolling YOU in YOUR opinion. It`s different. Unless he specifically tried to offend Thor Worshipers? HE wouldn`t be trolling, but YOUR OPINION may be otherwise, of course!

    How is 5Cats using a computer? Cats can`t type!
    Sure we can type!



  46. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 10:38 pm
    HG: "Shouldn`t you have been s.hit into a toilet by now?"

    Looks like I hit a nerve folks, he`s "flipping out".

    "What are you 12?"

    No, you should be asking yourself that question after that 2 post long rant of yours.

    I tried to interject a little humor, to lighten the mood, and you go off like a roman candle. The more you protest the worse you look.
  47. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    August 24, 2013 at 11:05 pm
    Point: @CrakrJak!
    Point: CrakrJak!

    The score is: CrakrJak +5 HolyGod -2

    I mean HONESTLY! He cannot tell the difference between "Crackerjacks" and "CrakrJak"???
    BUT!
    BUT!
    He lectures others on the meaning of "HolyGod" doesn`t he!
    And includes "HolyGodS" <S> PLURAL in his wanking rampage!

    Pa-Thetic! Another Brick In The Wall for poor @HG...
  48. Profile photo of MrRugby
    MrRugby Male 30-39
    38 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 2:40 am
    CrakrJak - "Looking at fossils to explain prehistory is like taking a few still frames out of an entire movie and trying to derive it`s entire plot from those pictures."

    I don`t believe that is a fair analogy. Fossil records are just one of a myriad of tools available to geologists. Including superposition of strata, pb/u dating in zircon, geological structures etc. etc. The same reason geologists are able to deduce oil/gas/mineral reserves. For what it`s worth though, the fossil record is however fairly comprehensive.

    Personally, I think that evolutionary theory can still work within the context of creationism, indeed I knew a vicar who subscribed to the theory of evolution.
  49. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 5:09 am
    Mr.Rugby "the fossil record is however fairly comprehensive."

    Not really, no it isn`t. We are missing tens of millions of years and intermediary steps. Not to mention explanations of the pre-cambrian explosion and the post KT boundary explosion.

    It also takes some explanation as to why many of the oldest animal species on earth are still essentially the same as they were, and haven`t evolved, since their introduction.
  50. Profile photo of MrRugby
    MrRugby Male 30-39
    38 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 6:28 am
    The pre-cambrian contains very few fossils (there wasn`t a lot of life back then).

    Fossil records tie in with other means of dating rocks. There are probably dozens of ways to do this. The `gaps` can be fairly.

    Biostratigraphy is just one branch of stratigraphy for example.

    It takes very little explanation regarding why some animals haven`t evolved; they haven`t needed to. I have no beef with creationism, each is entitled to their beliefs. However, one has to be careful when cherry picking at the scientific data and choosing which parts of it you wish to believe and which to dispute. Science relies on empiricism and has a kind of an all or nothing approach. E.g. you can`t claim on the one hand that some fossils show no signs of evolution, but on the other ignore those that do.
  51. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 10:38 am
    "The pre-cambrian contains very few fossils (there wasn`t a lot of life back then)."

    According to evolutionary theory diversity of life doesn`t just explode suddenly, it takes tens of thousands of years of gradual adaptation. But that`s not what the fossil record shows in the pre-cambrian or post-KT boundary layers.

    "one has to be careful when cherry picking at the scientific data and choosing which parts of it you wish to believe and which to dispute."

    Scientists do that all the time and they get away with it. They just keep picking at the data until they get the result they want. It`s called "Experimenter`s bias" and it happens all the time. It`s also not the only bias` that creeps into science there are other influences too.
  52. Profile photo of MrRugby
    MrRugby Male 30-39
    38 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 1:36 pm
    Evolution can happen on numerous time scales (and probably on a larger timescale than the 10`s thousands of years you mention) - it`s all to do with the availability of competing environmental pressures and other species within an ecosystem.

    Naturally, there are biases within some science; we`re all human. However, the broader principles in Geology operate under the theory of uniformitarianism, laws governing the planet now, governed them in the past.

    The principles behind geology are generally robust and interlinking - for example: `theory b relies on theory a to exist, theory c was formulated using scientific laws which were deduced and require a&b to be correct`. It`s a bit like filling in a gaps in a crossword. A number of the arguments used by creationists to denigrate evolutionary theory jump in at accepting theory c, but do not accept theories a&b (which are crucial for c) however theory c cannot exist, without first accepting that theory a&b are c
  53. Profile photo of MrRugby
    MrRugby Male 30-39
    38 posts
    August 25, 2013 at 1:38 pm
    I`m not sure what your point is regarding the KT event? The Permo Triassic extinction is also worth looking at to prove your point wrong.

Leave a Reply