Biogeographical Falsification of Subduction

OilIsMastery said:
With respect to Zealandia, it was formed by oceanic seafloor spreading aka expansion/growth just as all continental crust formed and just as basalt pillow lava and oceans form now.


Zealandia is young (that pesky old core sample and zircon dating thing). It didn't exist in the Jurassic and was formed in the Cretaceous, when, according to plate tectonics dogma, there were no land bridges.

Score another loss for plate tectonics.

Expanding Earth 1-Plate Teconics 0

Wegener, A.L., The Origin of Continents and Oceans, 1915

Mortimer, N., Zealandia, ASEG Extended Abstracts, 2006
Click to expand...


And OIM Looses again.

I have a Jurassic fossilized fern sitting on my desktop that says you're wrong.

Not to mention the fact that I know for a fact that there are dinosaur fossils right here in New Zealand.

Not to mention all those pesky andesitic volcanoes - and the ruddy great hole in the middle of one of the islands (here's a clue, those sorts of holes don't tend to form with basaltic volcanoes, and basaltic volcanoes in the southern hemisphere don't tend to erupt with such violence they cover 10% of the southern hemisphere in half an inch of ash, and inject that much ash into the atmosphere that the effects of the eruptions are record by the chinese and romans.
 
AlphaNumeric said:
As usual, you don't bother realising that quote can be applied to your argument too. No matter how much you wish the Earth is expanding, simply wishing and misconstruing what people tell you doesn't make it so. Over whelming evidence says otherwise.
Except it isn't a point against plate tectonics and if we (or scientists) were keeping score it would be about 0-20 for Plate tectonics.
Click to expand...
As usual, an emotional religiously motivated response with no scientific content or reference.
 
Trippy said:
I have a Jurassic fossilized fern sitting on my desktop that says you're wrong.
Click to expand...
Any why is that?

Not to mention the fact that I know for a fact that there are dinosaur fossils right here in New Zealand.
Click to expand...
Granted. So? And?

Not to mention all those pesky andesitic volcanoes - and the ruddy great hole in the middle of one of the islands (here's a clue, those sorts of holes don't tend to form with basaltic volcanoes, and basaltic volcanoes in the southern hemisphere don't tend to erupt with such violence they cover 10% of the southern hemisphere in half an inch of ash, and inject that much ash into the atmosphere that the effects of the eruptions are record by the chinese and romans.
Click to expand...
So?
 
What's more, your own source contradicts you (Mortimer) by discussing:

Additional geological events that have affected Zealandia?s regional mineral prospectivity include more widespread 125-85 Ma magmatism and extensional exhumation, superposition of Neogene volcanic arcs in the North Island, and localised Neogene exhumation in the South Island.
Click to expand...
 
Trippy said:
What's more, your own source contradicts you (Mortimer) by discussing:
Click to expand...
The South Island of New Zealand is what is commonly refered to as "land" or continental and Zealandia is submerged. New Zealand is old; Zealandia is young.

Zealandia didn't exist in the Jurassic.
 
OilIsMastery said:
Any why is that?
Click to expand...

Two main reasons.

1) Because it occurs in Jurassic marine sequences, and is from the west coast of the North Island (Port Waikato to be precise). It demonstrates that during the Jurassic a sea existed between New Zealand and Australia. The Jurassic sediments that I found it in include (IIRC) Andesitic turbidites.


OilIsMastery said:
Granted. So? And?
Click to expand...
So Zelanandia existed during the Jurassic.


OilIsMastery said:
So?
Click to expand...
So Zelandia is not the result of basaltic pillow lavas.
 
Trippy said:
Two main reasons.

1) Because it occurs in Jurassic marine sequences, and is from the west coast of the North Island (Port Waikato to be precise). It demonstrates that during the Jurassic a sea existed between New Zealand and Australia. The Jurassic sediments that I found it in include (IIRC) Andesitic turbidites.
Click to expand...
The North Island is continental crust and is not part of the oceanic lithosphere.

So Zelanandia existed during the Jurassic.
Click to expand...
No. Reference? Citation? Link? Didn't think so.

So Zelandia is not the result of basaltic pillow lavas.
Click to expand...
Not according to the peer-reviewed science posted above. So far you have provided no scientific reference. Just emotional responses which is the typical reaction of someone whose sacred religious faith has been profaned.
 
OilIsMastery said:
The South Island of New Zealand is what is commonly refered to as "land" or continental and Zealandia is submerged. New Zealand is old; Zealandia is young.

Zealandia didn't exist in the Jurassic.
Click to expand...

Wong Again

http://www.teara.govt.nz/EarthSeaAndSky/Geology/Fossils/3/mi

Most of the greywacke rocks dominant in the New Zealand mountains, including the Southern Alps and those in the central North Island, originally accumulated as sediment on the ancient Pacific Ocean floor during this time.

These rocks were uplifted and incorporated into the eastern margin of continental Gondwana.
Click to expand...
 
OilIsMastery said:
The North Island is continental crust and is not part of the oceanic lithosphere.
Click to expand...
Bzzzzt.

OilIsMastery said:
No. Reference? Citation? Link? Didn't think so.
Click to expand...
You want a reference for a fossil I have sitting on my desk?


OilIsMastery said:
Not according to the peer-reviewed science posted above. So far you have provided no scientific reference. Just emotional responses which is the typical reaction of someone whose sacred religious faith has been profaned.
Click to expand...
Your butchered mis-representation that twists it completely out of context so that it says something that it doesn't actually say just so it fits into your paradigm?
 
OilIsMastery said:
Nowhere does that say Zealandia existed in the Jurassic.
Click to expand...

:ROTFLMGDAO:

Jurassic (200–145 million years ago)
During the Jurassic period, brachiopods (lamp shells) declined globally while molluscs such as ammonites and belemnites (relatives of squid) flourished. On land, dinosaurs and birds rose to prominence and flowering plants first appeared. Jurassic marine fossils include plankton, corals, many other marine invertebrates and rare sharks and bony fish.

Jurassic land fossils include well-preserved tree stumps (Curio Bay, Southland). Fossil wood, leaves, seeds, spores and pollen have been documented from numerous layers. The oldest New Zealand fossil insect (an ancestor of the wētā) is Jurassic. A single Jurassic dinosaur fossil has been found near the Waikato River mouth.
Click to expand...

Oh, and for the record:

basement.jpg


Therefore, Zelandia existed during the Jurassic.
 
New Zealand is what is known as "land" aka continental crust. It is old. Zealandia is what is known as submerged. It is young. This is specifically predicted by expanding earth theory and is only explained by it.
 
OilIsMastery said:
You said you found the fossil on land...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Actually, I said I found it at a port.

I've also provided material that states that at the time the fossil was a living fern, New Zealand was part of the Oceanic crust.

You're wrong. Admit it, and move on.
 
OilIsMastery said:
New Zealand is what is known as "land" aka continental crust. Zealandia is what is known as submerged. This is specifically predicted by expanding earth theory and is only explained by it.
Click to expand...

Now you're just being deliberately obtuse.

New Zealand may currently be land, but there are (substantial) portions of it that were oceanic crust.

You're wrong, get over it and move on.
 
Trippy said:
You're wrong.
Click to expand...
"About twenty years ago, when I expressed my reservations about the plate tectonics theory to one of its supporters, I got the answer, 'You either believe in it or not.' Unfortunately the religious mentality of the supporters of plate tectonics did not change in the years to come." -- Stavros T. Tassos, seismologist/geoscientist, National Observatory of Athens, 1997
 
OilIsMastery said:
Exactly. New Zealand is what is commonly referred to as "land" aka continental crust. Specifically predicted by expanding earth theory and only explained by it.
Click to expand...

Again, you're bong obnoxious, obtuse, and one might go as far as stupid.

What is now 'Continental' crust was oceanic crust (at that time).

Just to prove my point - portions of Zelandia aren't continental crust, they're elevated oceanic crust.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!

Wrong again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top