yes Pangaea
2006-07-02 16:39:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
By soil analysis, it appears to be very true and scientifically factual. Soil for S. Carolina matches soil that is normally found only in Western Africa. This would not be unusual if it were tidal deposits, but this is soil that is too far from any water source of today.
In the mid 1800's, early Americans received first hand how things can shift when a mild earthquake moved the Mississippi River from its normal course. Today, the Mississippi River is several yards away from the original path than where it was prior to the mid 1800's.
In the last 200 years, there have been many shifts of the Earth that has been recorded that shows the continents are still in movement. The Golden Gate Bridge in SF had to have one of its anchors adjusted since its completion due to Continental drift.
Fossil Records also help prove this... Fossil of animals that should not be in regions if all land were as they are located today.
2006-07-02 16:50:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Corillan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is NOT a scientific FACT. A lot of people love to ASSume a lot of things these days, but a one major thing that this theory ASSumes to already be true is that there have never been any advanced civilizations before modern history.
After all the crazy sh*t I've been reading these past few years I can't really believe that we've just crawled out of the stone age like we learned in history or geography. Maybe the continents did break apart, but all the fossils and crap like that could have been getting spread around in a time before the Great Flood or thunderbolt from Zeus or whatever the hell smacked us stupid again.
2006-07-02 19:44:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tony, ya feel me? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you were to take all the continents on the globe and lay them flat, then slide them all together, you would find that they all come pretty close to mathing up and fitting in place like puzzle pieces. Also as someone mentioned already, fossils have been found of animals that existed on continets now seperated by oceans.
Now I don't know if this is actually a scientific fact or not, but I do know this was taught in school.
2006-07-03 04:35:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The idea of continental drift is just that, an idea. It is just a theory, they have clues that it could be possible, even likely, but scientist lack any definite proof that all continents were connected. So no it is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific theory.
2006-07-03 03:47:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Alfred Wegener (German meterorologist) discovered that South America, Africa, India and Austrail had almost identical rocks and fossils from the Paleozoic era. These continents formed Pangaea (Pangea today). This giant continent then split into Laurasia (northern "supercontinent" of North America and Eurasia) adn Gondwanaland (southern Supercontinent of southern continents plus India).
2006-07-04 04:57:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Yamagirl 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
there is no definitive way to tell for sure cause plate tectonics change so much. most scientists believe that the continents were connected in a super continent called Pangaea but no one can say without a shadow of a doubt or not
2006-07-02 16:52:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by dab_oft 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it is a scientific fact to the best of my knowledge.
The fact is backed by findings of remains and fossils found in one continent which in reality belong to another continent separated by big bodies of water.
2006-07-02 16:47:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Real Guy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Um I think there are things like identical animal fossils on two completely different continents that would never have been able to cross hundreds of miles of ocean. And also I think the land masses can kind of fit like puzzle pieces if you tried enough. Among other evidence...
2006-07-02 16:42:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Carolyn 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've heard that theory too. Continental shelf-lines matching, animal fossilization, plate tectonics ad nauseum. Good theory but based entirely upon empirical data. How does one prove beyond doubt something occurring millions of years ago? To state it as a fact - well, like I said I like the theory too but ....
U-never-know?
2006-07-02 16:47:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by brainfulloftrivia€notmuchelse 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pangaea
2006-07-02 18:48:13
·
answer #11
·
answered by blingy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋