• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: New/old continent?

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "New/old continent?"

Collapse

  • MyUserName
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    Let's just hope they don't also discover a couple of hundred thousand IT grads looking for work..
    Yeah, we have enough unemployed already

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Let's just hope they don't also discover a couple of hundred thousand IT grads looking for work..

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    A supercontinent, the sole big landmass on the planet, has formed every several hundred million years or so, during continental drift, and several have now been inferred and named, including likely future ones.
    Yes, Im aware there have been other 'super continents.' My point was that scientists seem to contend that these super continents all contain the current continents and not, some unknown landmasses that have now been subducted.

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    Given the planet has tectonic plate activity, I find it odd that scientists insist pangea was the only landmass before it split apart.
    A supercontinent, the sole big landmass on the planet, has formed every several hundred million years or so, during continental drift, and several have now been inferred and named, including likely future ones.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Atlantis?
    In the Indian Ocean? That would be a quirk of fate.

    Leave a comment:


  • SimonMac
    replied
    Atlantis?

    Leave a comment:


  • NotAllThere
    replied
    The forming of supercontinents and their breaking up appears to have been cyclical through Earth's history. There may have been several others before Pangaea. The fourth-last supercontinent, called Columbia or Nuna, appears to have assembled in the period 2.0–1.8 Ga.[5][6] Columbia/Nuna broke up and the next supercontinent, Rodinia, formed from the accretion and assembly of its fragments. Rodinia lasted from about 1.1 billion years ago (Ga) until about 750 million years ago, but its exact configuration and geodynamic history are not nearly as well understood as those of the later supercontinents, Pannotia and Pangaea.

    Seems the wiki authors are happy with more than one supercontinent. I keep reading that as Rodney.

    Leave a comment:


  • BolshieBastard
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    BBC News - Fragments of ancient continent buried under Indian Ocean

    All interesting but I was struck by this phraseThat's a little open-ended... are they trying to keep the creationists happy?
    Given the planet has tectonic plate activity, I find it odd that scientists insist pangea was the only landmass before it split apart.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    started a topic New/old continent?

    New/old continent?

    BBC News - Fragments of ancient continent buried under Indian Ocean

    All interesting but I was struck by this phrase
    Researchers have found evidence for a landmass that would have existed between 2,000 and 85 million years ago.
    That's a little open-ended... are they trying to keep the creationists happy?

Working...
X