Were All the Contenents conected ???

Gopher wrote:Which has nothing to do with the question....
All land is resting on water, OBVIOUSLY, otherwise we would be floating at rapid speed into each other.

I agree, we would be like boats.

BUT hawaii would be losing.

The ground is connected to the crust. The crust is broken into plates, which float ontop of a sea of magma (lava, for the dummies). Its like what you were saying about it floating in water, except much slower, because it is very viscous.

They are still moving apart, the atlantic is widening by about 1 inch a year. They were all connected, sediment confirms it.

Anyone who disagrees is buyring their head in the sand...which is moving

They were connected from late permian to late triassic.

The ground is connected to the crust. The crust is broken into plates, which float ontop of a sea of magma (lava, for the dummies). Its like what you were saying about it floating in water, except much slower, because it is very viscous

Couldn't have put it better myself. I also learned that that The somalian plate (Africa's horn) is breaking off from africa and moving towards India, and Greece is heading towards north africa. All from that slow moving "Lava"

hahahaha.


If we look back in time (on the topic) he wants to know when they where broken up drastically, or where the dinos around while the seven continents where here, i think- is what hes asking

Sorry to revive this slightly old topic, but this is just a message for all who do not believe the plates were connected:

plates on earth were, and always have been connected. End of story. However, many people believe that many years ago, all of the continents were connected together to form one mass-continent, Pangea. We have enough scientific proof to confirm this.

But if all plates are connected why does the world look like this and not the super contanint ('')

The sea floor is the anser. We are connected thru thru the seafloor. And welcome to JM

Your right in a way. But how did the super contanint break apart('') And thanks for welcoming me.

F22-RAPTOR wrote:Your right in a way. But how did the super contanint break apart('') And thanks for welcoming me.

Erosion, volcanic activity, changes in earth, earthquakes..

It's possible, but only a theory.

Aren't the continents still moving?

I read somewhere that America is getting an inch closer to Asia every year

Um..never heard of that, but I still don't believe it totaly, althought I do agree with it in my own ways.

Nova wrote:Aren't the continents still moving?

I read somewhere that America is getting an inch closer to Asia every year

Yes It is. Book Of science and Facts.

raptors rule wrote:It's possible, but only a theory.

Wow, I thought we cleared this up a while ago...

Yes. Pangea. They were. Untill the plates moved, and it all broke off. Just look at it. It makes a puzzle. Look at mada gasgar. It lookes like it was torn off of from africa. Japan. obiously asia. Hawaii was from volcanoes. And america, and asia are side by side, looks like its been torn. Green land. Apart of america. Austrailia. Part of asia. Iceland, mabye from england. Or just some island.

It's Proven that Earth's Continents Move. They moved by Earthquakes, Plates Shifting,Erosion,Change In Earth's Activity, And Natural Disasters.

(And I bet This Will appear on MG)

raptors rule wrote:It's possible, but only a theory.

Its not a theory, its proven

Allosaurus571 wrote:

raptors rule wrote:It's possible, but only a theory.

Its not a theory, its proven

Is that not what a theory is? A collection of facts into a proven model?

I agree with Nova. It is a theory, but, it is a proven theory.

Raging Raptor wrote:I agree with Nova. It is a theory, but, it is a proven theory.

Well I'm gona stay out of this,but in MY EYES it's a theory or proven theory.

i believe yes and i think its called pangea

raptors rule wrote:

Raging Raptor wrote:I agree with Nova. It is a theory, but, it is a proven theory.

Well I'm gona stay out of this,but in MY EYES it's a theory or proven theory.

Technically they are the same thing

It's only the colloquial definition of theory that conveys uncertainty. Scientific theories are everything laws are, just too complex to be summed up by math

Why would they put theories that they arent sure about in science books? Like, we are learning alittle about it at achool. It HAS been proven. It makes a puzzle if you were the hands of god from above, or in a map.

Andrew wrote:Why would they put theories that they arent sure about in science books? Like, we are learning alittle about it at achool. It HAS been proven. It makes a puzzle if you were the hands of god from above, or in a map.

They will put anything in the science and school textbooks. My one textbook still uses the Aryan invasion theory, which is completely false.