Atlantis Online
October 22, 2019, 04:31:12 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: USA showered by a watery comet ~11,000 years ago, ending the Golden Age of man in America
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050926/mammoth_02.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Sunken Continents versus Continental Drift

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sunken Continents versus Continental Drift  (Read 3833 times)
Mario Dantas
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1376


WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 15, 2008, 04:22:22 am »

Dear Carolyn Silver,

Quote
Do you know how long it takes for landmasses the size of Greenland to move great distances?  Millions of years!  Much easier to say it "sunk" instead.  We HAVE evidence of islands being blown all to hell in a day or so in Krakatoa and Santorini.  We DON"T have evidence of islands travelling fast across the globe!

How should those Geological evidences look like? I mean what does it take for Science conclude that in fact there was a fast dislocation? It is all in our mind (the Scientific impossibility). Geologically Greenland was further South in remote Times. The question of whether the Island performed a 60 degrees latitudinal distance in a short period (24h) or not, depends only in the velocity with which it traveled. This may sound stupid but it is the very truth. Science knows only parts of the inner workings of our Planet, and never did they have the opportunity to study such vast Geological change "in loco", so to deny such possibility is just plain prejudice. We know South America is likely to have been "thorned out"  from Africa but its shape remained the same. For those who don't believe that such large landmasses could travel intact, there is the proof. It is only a question of scaling and mother Nature does the rest. If you assume that of such thing indeed happened, you have to throw away all dating systems for they aren't realistic, they just can't be.

Let's be sensible! Does it seem logic that the dating (absolute or relative) would remain the same if large amounts of energy did in fact influence ALL Geological data in our Planet? The Atlantic is spreading apart, and that is due to the Inertia from that period, like a remnant of the said movement.



Dear Morrison,

I am glad to hear from you again! It's been a long time...

Quote
One of the biggest fallbacks of the Mid-Atlantic Ocean theory is, that if a cataclysm actually happened in recent years (say the last 12,000) to sink so vast a land as Atlantis was (even if it was an object from space striking the Mid-Atlantic Ridge), chances are, we wouldn't be here right now.  It would have wiped out everything.

I couldn't agree more and i surely never said the contrary! The Mid Atlantic Ridge wasn't stricken by the Meteoric(?) event, nor did Atlantis sink. Your assertions are very wise, the "almost collision" occurred in the other side of the Planet starting from South Argentina and going all way to the Himalayas. This change happened in a "smooth" way, and by smooth i mean to be able to bear Life, Ice and fire fought a terrible battle against each other, and Ice won.

Regarding the fact that such event "would have wiped out everything" as you stated, all i can say is that it almost did...

With Regards,

M
« Last Edit: August 15, 2008, 04:43:42 am by Mario Dantas » Report Spam   Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy