North Atlantic geoid high, volcanism, glaciations and Atlantis

[stereologist]

2 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

I really hope that you read this. It is also my wish that moderators are aware that i am not a liar.

The image you referred to (with lots and lots of arrows) was created in order to forward equidistant continental delineations (and other small details that seem to have been imprinted) in the two coastlines. I am not even going to show it for obvious reasons, if there is a lesson in this i guess i learned it.

Now, to the point.

If this event ever took place (as i suppose it did), where is the great conflagration? An island as Big as Plato portrayed cannot vanish without leaving traces, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Igneous_Province

Your image was and is a lie. It is nothing but a lie. You even posted image showing that it is is a lie.

Nothing you say about Plato matters when you rely on you telling a lie.

[Piney]

5 hours ago, stereologist said:

Your image was and is a lie. It is nothing but a lie. You even posted image showing that it is is a lie.

Nothing you say about Plato matters when you rely on you telling a lie.

He keeps twisting what I post soiz I givem uppie.  

[Mario Dantas]

I was hoping that before you react with pejorative slander, you would think first of the reason why i do it. How else on earth are you going to show a similarity if you do not show it.

 

[Trelane]

The thing is you keep trying to prove something that is not at all true.

[Mario Dantas]

 

[Piney]

On 10/28/2022 at 8:46 AM, Mario Dantas said:

I was hoping that before you react with pejorative slander, you would think first of the reason why i do it. How else on earth are you going to show a similarity if you do not show it.

 

No slander intended. I'm trying to wake you up.

Similarity? That's called "mass comparison" and it's really bad research.

If the geology doesn't match. It's not true. Greenland was above North America and connected to the UK and Norway according to something called.......and I'll simplify it for you. Matching rocks.

[Kenemet]

On 10/25/2022 at 8:16 AM, Mario Dantas said:

Thanks again for the valuable contribution. I have known for years that a specific type of sedimentary rock exists in southern Greenland (psammitic and pelitic rocks).

I looked up for Argillite and guess what? It is also named Pelite or pelitic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argillite

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiworz1ofv6AhVS-YUKHQ8SB7IQFnoECCsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fgeusjournals.org%2Findex.php%2Frapggu%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F7430%2F13300%2F42163&usg=AOvVaw2r-oUOakqhtZIcPtJGxFmv

Therefore the continental "wedge" we talked about does contain at least this sedimentary rock which means that it is geologically related and it might have been located further south.

 

Rock names are categories and not (except in unusual cases, like "llanite") something that's local.  You find granite all over the world.  Likewise you find pellic rocks and limestone and marble and sandstone (etc) all over the world.

However, each site has a different appearance (different layer thickness, different micro-quantity "inclusions" and "contaminations") and even a different hardness.  The oil-bearing limestone here in West Texas is not the same formation and the oil-bearing limestone in Pennsylvania.  It's not even the same fossils.

 

 

[Peter Cox]

On 10/28/2022 at 2:46 PM, Mario Dantas said:

I was hoping that before you react with pejorative slander, you would think first of the reason why i do it. How else on earth are you going to show a similarity if you do not show it.

 

Wait - Does this mean I can post pictures of a Dragon and say its real? Or even better of a time travelling machine and say its a real thing? 

 

A lie is a lie and no amount of manipulation will change that.

[Mario Dantas]

On 11/1/2022 at 7:19 AM, Piney said:

No slander intended. I'm trying to wake you up.

Similarity? That's called "mass comparison" and it's really bad research.

If the geology doesn't match. It's not true. Greenland was above North America and connected to the UK and Norway according to something called.......and I'll simplify it for you. Matching rocks.

The Geological Society of London call it "Jigsaw Fit".

Image: from OU S267 How The Earth Works: Block 2 How Plate Tectonics Works p7

Eastern South American and West African coastlines show the best jigsaw fit.

As you are aware there are different continental reconstructions models:

 

Reconstruction of Pangaea B showing anteosaurid dinocephalians and platyoposaurid temnospondyles during the Middle Permian. Probable dispersal routes are indicated by red arrows. 1, Russian Platform; 2, southern fore-Urals, Kazakhstan; 3, Ordos Basin, China; 4, Parnaíba Basin, Brazil; 5, Paraná Basin, Brazil; 6, Karoo Basin, South Africa. The map is considerably modi fi ed from ref. 48 after new geological data. 

 

If there can only be one true model, I ask what do you call the other existing different models, a lie? You are simply throwing my model in the garbage because it is more convenient, sorry to say that.

I have made several reconstructions that show a different jigsaw fit approach to the region in front of and around Gibraltar. Even the orogenic processes for the Iberian peninsula, Atlas and Watkins ranges are greatly coincident.

WARNING: These following models are the product of an experiment and are not recognized as being an accepted reconstruction.

That is perhaps why the Iberian peninsula topographic relief is very high relative to other European countries.

 

 

My Greenlandic Jigsaw Puzzle with Iberia and northwest Africa is not a lie, but rather an experiment.

 

 

[Piney]

13 minutes ago, Mario Dantas said:

The Geological Society of London call it "Jigsaw Fit".

Image: from OU S267 How The Earth Works: Block 2 How Plate Tectonics Works p7

Eastern South American and West African coastlines show the best jigsaw fit.

As you are aware there are different continental reconstructions models:

 

Reconstruction of Pangaea B showing anteosaurid dinocephalians and platyoposaurid temnospondyles during the Middle Permian. Probable dispersal routes are indicated by red arrows. 1, Russian Platform; 2, southern fore-Urals, Kazakhstan; 3, Ordos Basin, China; 4, Parnaíba Basin, Brazil; 5, Paraná Basin, Brazil; 6, Karoo Basin, South Africa. The map is considerably modi fi ed from ref. 48 after new geological data. 

 

If there can only be one true model, I ask what do you call the other existing different models, a lie? You are simply throwing my model in the garbage because it is more convenient, sorry to say that.

I have made several reconstructions that show a different jigsaw fit approach to the region in front of and around Gibraltar. Even the orogenic processes for the Iberian peninsula, Atlas and Watkins ranges are greatly coincident.

WARNING: These following models are the product of an experiment and are not recognized as being an accepted reconstruction.

That is perhaps why the Iberian peninsula topographic relief is very high relative to other European countries.

 

 

My Greenlandic Jigsaw Puzzle with Iberia and northwest Africa is not a lie, but rather an experiment.

 

 

It's a failed one and I'm not being facetious.

Edited November 3, 2022 by Piney

[Essan]

It's not just about matching the shapes - as with any jigsaw, the picture has to match too.   And in the case of continents, that picture is the underlying geology.     Greenland's picture only fits in one place.   Alongside Norway.

[stereologist]

On 10/28/2022 at 8:46 AM, Mario Dantas said:

I was hoping that before you react with pejorative slander, you would think first of the reason why i do it. How else on earth are you going to show a similarity if you do not show it.

 

So you are going to post things you know are false? How pathetic is that?

Instead of continuing on with this obvious laughable nonsense, why not learn how things are matched up in geology.

[stereologist]

49 minutes ago, Mario Dantas said:

The Geological Society of London call it "Jigsaw Fit".

 

Image: from OU S267 How The Earth Works: Block 2 How Plate Tectonics Works p7

Eastern South American and West African coastlines show the best jigsaw fit.

As you are aware there are different continental reconstructions models:

 

 

 

 

Reconstruction of Pangaea B showing anteosaurid dinocephalians and platyoposaurid temnospondyles during the Middle Permian. Probable dispersal routes are indicated by red arrows. 1, Russian Platform; 2, southern fore-Urals, Kazakhstan; 3, Ordos Basin, China; 4, Parnaíba Basin, Brazil; 5, Paraná Basin, Brazil; 6, Karoo Basin, South Africa. The map is considerably modi fi ed from ref. 48 after new geological data. 

 

 

If there can only be one true model, I ask what do you call the other existing different models, a lie? You are simply throwing my model in the garbage because it is more convenient, sorry to say that.

I have made several reconstructions that show a different jigsaw fit approach to the region in front of and around Gibraltar. Even the orogenic processes for the Iberian peninsula, Atlas and Watkins ranges are greatly coincident.

WARNING: These following models are the product of an experiment and are not recognized as being an accepted reconstruction.

 

That is perhaps why the Iberian peninsula topographic relief is very high relative to other European countries.

My Greenlandic Jigsaw Puzzle with Iberia and northwest Africa is not a lie, but rather an experiment.

 

 

This is false: "My Greenlandic Jigsaw Puzzle with Iberia and northwest Africa is not a lie, but rather an experiment."

You are not doing an experiment you are purposely posting a falsehood.

None of the models ever how Greenland where you so falsely posted it. Why? Because the rocks do not match up. The fossils do not match up. The major fault zones and tectonic zones do not match up. What about paleomagnetic evidence? What about volcanic evidence?

Here is another problem. You are playing jigsaw with shorelines. Why? Why are you using shorelines instead of continental margins?

You claim that there are multiple different models, but these models all differ in slight ways. They place the larger masses against each other in the same manner. They use all of the evidence and not some unimportant shoreline as you do.

So let me give you a simple geology lesson today. The word is formation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_formation

Quote

A geological formation, or simply formation, is a body of rock having a consistent set of physical characteristics (lithology) that distinguishes it from adjacent bodies of rock, and which occupies a particular position in the layers of rock exposed in a geographical region (the stratigraphic column). It is the fundamental unit of lithostratigraphy, the study of strata or rock layers.

Read about it in several places online.

As @Kenemetstated

Quote

The oil-bearing limestone here in West Texas is not the same formation and the oil-bearing limestone in Pennsylvania.  It's not even the same fossils.

There are many limestone formations. Each formation was created independently of the others. They represent different times,places, events in the history of the Earth.

[stereologist]

Maybe you can learn from this article.

https://njg.geologi.no/images/NJG_articles/NGT_82_4_281-298.pdf

Quote

Greenland- Norway separation: A geodynamic model
for the North Atlantic

 

[stereologist]

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253646333_Continental_breakup_and_microcontinent_formation_Geodynamic_models_and_comparison_between_the_Norwegian-Greenland_Sea_and_the_modern_Red_Sea-Afar_system

Quote

The Jan Mayen microcontinent in the Norwegian-Greenland Sea

The JMMC Sea represents a true microcontinent surrounded by oceanic domain. The early

history of the JMMC is traditionally characterized by a first phase of continental breakup

accompanied by significant volcanic activity, resulting in the formation of volcanic margins

 

 

during the splitting of Norway and the coupled Greenland/Jan Mayen system in Early Tertiary

(Skogseid et al., 2000). Many studies have also considered that the most important tectonic

event that influenced the Norwegian-Greenland Sea after the initial breakup occurred around

Oligocene time. During that time period, initial spreading along the Aegir Ridge decreased

until it became extinct and the spreading axis "jumped” westwards to initiate the Kolbeinsey

Ridge. The relocation of the spreading ridge from the aborted Aegir Ridge to the Kolbeinsey

Ridge resulted in the final separation of the JMMC from the Greenland Plate.

All of the models you presented show that Greenland was connected to Norway.

Here is another article clearly discussing the separation of Greenland from Norway including a number of geological events.

[Mario Dantas]

On 11/1/2022 at 2:31 PM, Kenemet said:

Rock names are categories and not (except in unusual cases, like "llanite") something that's local.  You find granite all over the world.  Likewise you find pellic rocks and limestone and marble and sandstone (etc) all over the world.

However, each site has a different appearance (different layer thickness, different micro-quantity "inclusions" and "contaminations") and even a different hardness.  The oil-bearing limestone here in West Texas is not the same formation and the oil-bearing limestone in Pennsylvania.  It's not even the same fossils.

 

 

Thank you for the information!

[Mario Dantas]

I wonder why nobody bothered to comment on the "parallelism" of the lines. You all can't miss that phenomena. It is a truthful statement, that the continental lines resemble (the jigsaw fit exists there).

Yes, certainly there are rules against a southerner Greenland. But, this coincidental shape extending for thousand of kilometers cannot simply be a coincidence. Because if it was a mere coincidence, i ask where else is the evidence on earth? Show me such a "coincidence" anywhere on earth.

You talk as if this is nothing related to Plato's demise, it's ok. But you also fail to comment on the lines. I can only thank you for even comment. But what about the lines?

With all due respect i will show another potentially strong candidate, related to the same jigsaw puzzle but a secondary result of the first apparent fit. Warning: this reconstruction is not considered by the scientific community. This is a superposition of images.

South east Greenland, Iceland, the Canary islands do have a jigsaw fit (i had no time to look further into it ever since), but as it is such a small piece, i never mention them.

It seems to me that the continental contact with the Anti Atlas region and Gibraltar left the Canary as a volcanic trace before it started to move northwards, passing nearby UK contacting Norway and finally moving towards Canada, as Iceland disengages from Greenland and stays within the MAR.

Just because this apparently is not true, does not invalidate the fact that lines do appear to naked eye, as being parallel sinuous lines.

You tell me what are the odds of this happening elsewhere on the globe? The driving force for the motions i propose were the impact and a slight expansion of the earth.

This impact explain all processes that would develop after, supposedly, the ancient configuration was altered, as Plato had stated. This statement alone by Plato, is probably another important clue to the kind of event that happened:

Quote

[...] in comparison of what then was, there are remaining only the bones of the wasted body, as they may be called, as in the case of small islands, all the richer and softer parts of the soil having fallen away, and the mere skeleton of the land being left.

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/critias.html

The experiment led to another coincidence related to other smaller jigsaw fit. The superposition yielded other similar coincidences on a smaller scale. This must be measurable right?

[stereologist]

1 hour ago, Mario Dantas said:

I wonder why nobody bothered to comment on the "parallelism" of the lines. You all can't miss that phenomena. It is a truthful statement, that the continental lines resemble (the jigsaw fit exists there).

Yes, certainly there are rules against a southerner Greenland. But, this coincidental shape extending for thousand of kilometers cannot simply be a coincidence. Because if it was a mere coincidence, i ask where else is the evidence on earth? Show me such a "coincidence" anywhere on earth.

You talk as if this is nothing related to Plato's demise, it's ok. But you also fail to comment on the lines. I can only thank you for even comment. But what about the lines?

With all due respect i will show another potentially strong candidate, related to the same jigsaw puzzle but a secondary result of the first apparent fit. Warning: this reconstruction is not considered by the scientific community. This is a superposition of images.

 

South east Greenland, Iceland, the Canary islands do have a jigsaw fit (i had no time to look further into it ever since), but as it is such a small piece, i never mention them.

It seems to me that the continental contact with the Anti Atlas region and Gibraltar left the Canary as a volcanic trace before it started to move northwards, passing nearby UK contacting Norway and finally moving towards Canada, as Iceland disengages from Greenland and stays within the MAR.

Just because this apparently is not true, does not invalidate the fact that lines do appear to naked eye, as being parallel sinuous lines.

You tell me what are the odds of this happening elsewhere on the globe? The driving force for the motions i propose were the impact and a slight expansion of the earth.

This impact explain all processes that would develop after, supposedly, the ancient configuration was altered, as Plato had stated. This statement alone by Plato, is probably another important clue to the kind of event that happened:

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/critias.html

The experiment led to another coincidence related to other smaller jigsaw fit. The superposition yielded other similar coincidences on a smaller scale. This must be measurable right?

So this is all delusional baloney?

Your wrote: "Yes, certainly there are rules against a southerner Greenland." That's because the totality of evidence says that your pretty pictures are completely irrelevant and nonsensical.

Then you write: "Warning: this reconstruction is not considered by the scientific community. This is a superposition of images."

Because you know tat what  you post is ridiculous laughable fiction unrelated to reality.

Let's be clear about this. We already know this to be the situation.

[Kenemet]

2 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

I wonder why nobody bothered to comment on the "parallelism" of the lines.

It's well known and an artifact of the Atlantic Ocean spreading (which is reeealllll slow: https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/seafloor-spreading)

In this case, the ridge is a subset of the Atlantic Ridge complex and it's called the "Reykjanes Ridge"

It's an interesting feature - a fairly young one at that: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AGUFM.T13G0261H/abstract

Basic information is here: http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/HIGP/Faculty/hey/rr2007/scienceoverview.html

 

 

[Kenemet]

Reference for folks... this is what the earth looked like 50 million years ago - about the time that the Reykjanes Ridge began forming (long before h. sapiens) http://paleoportal.org/index.php?globalnav=time_space&sectionnav=period&period_id=8

During this time we've got the ancestral primates... tarsirs.  Monkeys (and apes) won't actually evolve for another 10 million years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution

I doubt that Solon's Egyptian priest (from whom Plato got the tale third or fourth hand) could interpret "ack! eeek! Oook!  Oookaoooka!" as the teachings of an Egyptian priest.

By the time of the last Ice Age, everything was where it is now (give or take a few feet)

Edited November 4, 2022 by Kenemet

[stereologist]

3 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Reference for folks... this is what the earth looked like 50 million years ago (long before h. sapiens) http://paleoportal.org/index.php?globalnav=time_space&sectionnav=period&period_id=8

During this time we've got the ancestral primates... tarsirs.  Monkeys (and apes) won't actually evolve for another 10 million years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution

I doubt that Solon's Egyptian priest (from whom Plato got the tale third or fourth hand) could interpret "ack! eeek! Oook!  Oookaoooka!" as the teachings of an Egyptian priest.

By the time of the last Ice Age, everything was where it is now (give or take a few feet)

This is like telling the resident troll that Greenland against Gibraltar is a falsehood, untruth, lie, anti-truth, ridiculous prevarication, etc.

[Peter Cox]

18 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

The Geological Society of London call it "Jigsaw Fit".

Image: from OU S267 How The Earth Works: Block 2 How Plate Tectonics Works p7

Eastern South American and West African coastlines show the best jigsaw fit.

As you are aware there are different continental reconstructions models:

 

Reconstruction of Pangaea B showing anteosaurid dinocephalians and platyoposaurid temnospondyles during the Middle Permian. Probable dispersal routes are indicated by red arrows. 1, Russian Platform; 2, southern fore-Urals, Kazakhstan; 3, Ordos Basin, China; 4, Parnaíba Basin, Brazil; 5, Paraná Basin, Brazil; 6, Karoo Basin, South Africa. The map is considerably modi fi ed from ref. 48 after new geological data. 

 

If there can only be one true model, I ask what do you call the other existing different models, a lie? You are simply throwing my model in the garbage because it is more convenient, sorry to say that.

I have made several reconstructions that show a different jigsaw fit approach to the region in front of and around Gibraltar. Even the orogenic processes for the Iberian peninsula, Atlas and Watkins ranges are greatly coincident.

WARNING: These following models are the product of an experiment and are not recognized as being an accepted reconstruction.

That is perhaps why the Iberian peninsula topographic relief is very high relative to other European countries.

 

 

My Greenlandic Jigsaw Puzzle with Iberia and northwest Africa is not a lie, but rather an experiment.

 

 

People used to think the world was flat (some still do). Do we need to take them seriously too. 

 

A wrong model is still a wrong model. 

[Abramelin]

@Mario Dantas

At some point you'll have to accept that the idea you loved so much is wrong.

[Essan]

15 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

@Mario Dantas

At some point you'll have to accept that the idea you loved so much is wrong.

Even if the Magratheans come along and Slartibartfast explains, in intricate detail, over several years, how he built the Earth. Mario still won't accept that his fantasy is wrong.   Because, because, because, despite all the contrary evidence, in an infinite universe with infinite possibilities, there is a 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 chance that just maybe he is right.  

[Abramelin]

On 11/3/2022 at 1:48 PM, Mario Dantas said:

If there can only be one true model, I ask what do you call the other existing different models, a lie?

All the models you showed are very alike. And Greenland stays on the same spot in everyone of those models.