My India Challenge

[Ophiolite]

I've assumed that the wealth of evidence for the existence of Pangea can also be applied to reverse engineer its movements over time

But its movements relative to what? There is no fixed point on the Earth's surface: the continents wander and the sea-floor is wholly replaced and subsumed at roughly 200 million year intervals. The selection of Greenwich for the zero meridian is a convenience, not a reflection of reality.

Like you I have a nagging doubt that I might be missing something and invite suggestions as to what it is.

 

[Occams Barber]

But its movements relative to what? There is no fixed point on the Earth's surface: the continents wander and the sea-floor is wholly replaced and subsumed at roughly 200 million year intervals. The selection of Greenwich for the zero meridian is a convenience, not a reflection of reality.

Like you I have a nagging doubt that I might be missing something and invite suggestions as to what it is.

Its movements relative to the current known positions of its components.

OB

 

[Jipsah]

So it moved 559,300,000 cm @ 2cm/year for 120-130 million years?

That would be 137,000,000 years ago this coming Thursday.

JK It only looks that old because everything was created at the same time 6214 years ago but God simply made it look like it was a lot older to give geologists something to do .

(Yes, I'm back. Had to make a quick trip to South London (England) to encourage my favorite football team.)

 

[AV1611VET]

That would be 137,000,000 years ago this coming Thursday.

JK It only looks that old because everything was created at the same time 6214 years ago but God simply made it look like it was a lot older to give geologists something to do .

(Yes, I'm back. Had to make a quick trip to South London (England) to encourage my favorite football team.)

Welcome back!

 

[Kylie]

I'm not sure what you're asking.

If it's about the latitude and longitude of Pangean India, I took it from the map below published in Live Science (see post #49).

I have assumed the latitude and longitude figures are based on scientific study of continental drift along with analogous landforms, climate and botanical zones which shows how things "fitted together" over time as well as approximate past locations relative to the current locations of Pangea's bits.

View attachment 343575

Facts About Pangaea, Ancient Supercontinent

Pangaea is Earth's most recent supercontinent, which existed 320 million to 195 million years ago.

www.livescience.com

OB

My point is that to determine latitude and longitude, we need a FIXED point of reference on the Earth. Given that Earth's crust is constantly moving (tectonic drift), and that the magnetic pole changes regularly as well, I don't see how anyone can possibly point to a single fixed point on the Earth's surface that can be used as a point of reference.

 

[SelfSim]

My point is that to determine latitude and longitude, we need a FIXED point of reference on the Earth. Given that Earth's crust is constantly moving (tectonic drift), and that the magnetic pole changes regularly as well, I don't see how anyone can possibly point to a single fixed point on the Earth's surface that can be used as a point of reference.

A 'fixed point' might be the intersection of the shown bisecting, orthogonal axes in the rough diagrams of both eras.
We can note the symmetry of the shape of the diagram hasn't changed over time(?)

 

[Kylie]

A 'fixed point' might be the intersection of the shown bisecting, orthogonal axes in the rough diagrams of both eras.
We can note the symmetry of the shape of the diagram hasn't changed over time(?)

How can we note that?

 

[SelfSim]

How can we note that?

By looking at the respective diagrams(?)

 

[eclipsenow]

Thank you for confirming what I suspect:

1. It's not taught in academic circles.
2. Academia doesn't know where it started.

And that's because it didn't start out in the ocean and move anywhere.

Your opening question reads like:

"I want scientific proof that you have a nose. But I don't want you just to send me photos - as they could be photoshopped or faked. Therefore, your nose is not true."

I mean - why would anyone bother? Just wince a little at it all - and go to another thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

Your opening question reads like:

"I want scientific proof that you have a nose. But I don't want you just to send me photos - as they could be photoshopped or faked. Therefore, your nose is not true."

I mean - why would anyone bother? Just wince a little at it all - and go to another thread.

Putting a nose on Mr Potato Head in an instant of time is one thing.

Telling me you took five years to put a nose on Mr Potato Head, picking it up from a table five feet away, and moving it to its current destination at the rate of one foot per year is different.

 

[Kylie]

By looking at the respective diagrams(?)

But there's nothing there to show that one diagram isn't rotated completely different to the other.

 

[SelfSim]

But there's nothing there to show that one diagram isn't rotated completely different to the other.

Sure .. but that'd sort of defeat the whole point of the exercise, wouldn't it(?)

 

[Kylie]

Sure .. but that'd sort of defeat the whole point of the exercise, wouldn't it(?)

The exercise depends on being able to state that two points on the Earth's surface are the same after billions of years. I'm just asking how that is determined. Until then, the exercise is based on an assumption.

 

[SelfSim]

The exercise depends on being able to state that two points on the Earth's surface are the same after billions of years. I'm just asking how that is determined. Until then, the exercise is based on an assumption.

I think that whenever a set of axes are 'imposed', (and co-ordinates assigned), Inference plays the key role .. (So there's my overall take on an answer to your question there).
'Points on Earth's surface' also requires Inference. Those points can also be referenced to similar sets of axes .. with one set representing 'billions of years' into the future.

I think one can always find Inference at play there .. regardless of whether the model is 'a graph on paper' or (a model of) 'Earth's surface'.

The method used, signifies the intended purpose. Inference rules are a cornerstone of the scientific objective method, no(?)