About 300 million years ago, the supercontinent of Pangaea started to break apart into the continents we live on today. An Italian designer who goes by the name Massimo put Pangaea back together, then added on modern political boundaries, creating the map you see here. Brazil and Nigeria were neighbors, once upon a time.
this fits too nicely - I thought the gulf of mexico was the impact crater that 'killed the dinos' thats what they taught me 20+ years ago in elementary school. but if not, according to wikipedia, if not a crater impact, the whole basin should have been dry land. so South America wouldn't be able to fit in there like that.
Also, what about the Western Interior Seaway? and other ancient spots of seas and dry land?
this image assumes, that water levels never changed over the millions of years. which we know is incorrect.
i wouldn't be putting this globe in any text book any time soon.
If you think Marvin`s story is cool,, a month-back my boyfriend also made $5696 workin a 10 hour week from there apartment and there friend's step-mother`s neighbour did this for 5 months and got more than $5696 part-time on-line. the guidelines on this address, .............zee44.com
I wonder where the most power would be if the world stayed like that.
This is just an example of an artist putting shapes together without any attention paid to the underlying geology. The big problem I see is that Central American countries are on the map. They only showed up later.
Interesting to look at, but no real value beyond art.
I would assume the power distribution would be fairly similar to today because much of a country's power comes from natural resources which, as far as I know, would be in the same countries.
Though, the middle of the supercontinent would likely be a massive desert, making it more or less inhabited.
I would love to see one based on Rodinia.
@TheRandomFactor: (1) "Fits too nicely"? Just look at fit between the eastern coast of South America and the western coast of Africa, then remember that the mid-Atlantic rift/ridge shows why those two continents are no longer together. (2) Check your timelines for why the Gulf of Mexico/meteor impact and the 'Western Interior Seaway' would not show up in a 'map' of Pangaea. (3) "Other ancient spots of seas and dry land" is to vague to form a serious question deserving a serious answer. (4) 'This globe' wasn't meant for a textbook; it's an artistic aid to help us envision where --roughly!-- the current landscape would correspond to Pangaea.
So, who are you most suspicious of: the world's community of geologists, or the vision of the Italian designer named Massimo?
The whole concept of Pangaea never really made sense to me.
Tectonic plates don't directly follow the coastlines for the most part, so why would the coastlines have ever lined up together like this?
And even if there was a way for them to combine precicely at the coastlines, what would have caused the earth to form in such a lopsided fashion?
You are not taking time periods into consideration. By the time the Yucatan peninsula was hit by the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, continental drift had reshaped the world considerably. The map at the time would have looked very familiar to you, not exactly like today, but noticeably similar. Furthermore, Pangea was not the first super continental arrangement. Look up Nuna and Rodinia for an interesting read.