Question
Asked 21st Nov, 2017
  • Expanding Earth Research

Can you provide any real, well supported and indisputable evidence for trilobite, dinosaur or other fossil (older than e.g. 1 Ma) recognized ages?

As been already pointed out, Zealandia can be put together with South America:
The best explanation for the observed relations is Earth's rapid expansion since the Pangea break up. So I am asking, because according to the expansion, the fossils should be younger than we think today, maybe not, but it would be more elegant to link the evolution directly with the expansion.

Most recent answer

10th Jan, 2018
Jan Mestan
Expanding Earth Research
Still waiting for it. Actual score (and counting): 316 reads, 8 followers, 0 answers. When googling any relevant answer (checked hundreds of papers), I found this picture. Hope we have better evidence for published data, please, provide one single image linking any fossil with radiometric data.

Popular Answers (1)

22nd Nov, 2017
Syed Abbas Jafar
National Centre for Polar and Ocean Research Goa India.
Jan:
Why make a simplistic model of evolution of Life on Planet Earth more complicated? Trilobite disappeared from Earth around 250 Ma. How the breakup of Pangaea could be related to the evolution of Trilobites? Seems absurd.
Best
Syed
6 Recommendations

All Answers (8)

22nd Nov, 2017
Syed Abbas Jafar
National Centre for Polar and Ocean Research Goa India.
Jan:
Why make a simplistic model of evolution of Life on Planet Earth more complicated? Trilobite disappeared from Earth around 250 Ma. How the breakup of Pangaea could be related to the evolution of Trilobites? Seems absurd.
Best
Syed
6 Recommendations
22nd Nov, 2017
Enrico Savazzi
Data is evidence.
2 Recommendations
24th Nov, 2017
Rubén Puertas
University of Alicante
The answer you are asking is complex. First of all, it is you who could demonstrate your hypothesis. The Tectonics and the Evolution were proved since they were published. But, if you want to read them, the Internet is full of papers about these topics. Data is evidence, BUT for explaining that data you may make an hypothesis, and demonstrate it. The data are real, scientists' job is to find an explanation for those data.
You did the affirmation "The best explanation for the observed relations is Earth's rapid expansion since the Pangea break up." That thing, written like this, is only an opinion, not even a hypothesis. Is true that it is an explanation, but, as I know, it is not the BEST explanation. Nowadays, the best explanation are the Tectonics and Evolution. There are millions of evidences through the World which are supporting that theories. But, if you think your hypothesis are more fit to the data than the previous theories, please demonstrate it. Science itself works like that, and all we will thank you for the job.
Secondly, you want the reader of this site give you a "real, well supported and indisputable evidence for trilobite, dinosaur or other fossil (older than e.g. 1 Ma) recognized ages?". There are data recorded by precise GPS that supports the Tectonics, millions of indirect evidences like overlying beds, rocks' structure, and palaeoecology relationships between ancient beings. Also are direct evidences, like radiometric, palaeomagnetic, biostratigraphical and micropalaeontological that support not only the general theory, but also the dating of a very large amount of fossils, from the Archaean to the Holocene. Most of them can be fitted to a precision of a million years or less.
Finally, Pangea is the last, but not the only one, supercontinent we have evidences of. What about all the previous supercontinents? Can your hypothesis explain them? If it do, how?
This web site are full of papers of palaeontology, whose authors are made measurements of the age of their samples. Also, if you visit http://stratigraphy.org/ they will be able to provide to you more information and evidences, better than me.
Thank you.
3 Recommendations
25th Nov, 2017
Rubén Puertas
University of Alicante
Dear Jan:
I think you are talking about continental drift, specially of the Atlantic borders of America, Africa and Europe. Tectonics and continental drift are related, but are not exactly the same. Tectonics tells us that not only the continents are moving, but the oceans too. Every single plate has a movement vector at all of their single points. They are the GPS data I was talking about the last comment.There are some plates that are expanding themselves, like for example the Africa plate, and another are getting smaller, like the Pacific plate.The total amount of size change is zero. At the Pacific Ocean borders there are subduction zones, where oceanic crust is disappearing under the continental crust. There are more examples in the Mediterranean, or other places in the World. In addition, there is the Alpine Orogeny, where the continental crust are loosing surface (but not volume except due to erosion).
The movements are much more complex than I am telling, but I am trying to conclude that every single movement, or loose and increase of surface, are balanced, and the total amount is zero. These data are a fact. Tectonics is the theory that tries to explain these data, and nowadays it is the best we have.
But, as I told in the last message, it is you who are trying to demonstrate a hypothesis. Please, give to us the vectorial data that supports your hypothesis. You should have more precise data, and widely distributed on Earth, than the GPS data I was talking about before, for demonstrate your hypothesis. Could we see them? Could we improve them? If we could, please let us. If not, I am sorry, but that thing you would be talking about is not Science, but another thing.
Finally, if you want an example, I can give to you this. It is a paper, which talks about Devonian (earlier than Pagaea) marine beings named Conodonts, found in China, which borders are touching the Pacific Ocean. There is another one, from Argentina. I give to you both links, but if you want to know more, feel free to search for more information.
Thank you.
PS: The animals that supports the breaking of Pagaea, as you tells, were species, not general groups. Are you talking about Mesosaurus tenuidens? This fact only demonstrate that the continents of America and Africa were merged together, but anything else. For demonstrate Tectonics, we need more data like GPS points, seismography and others. I think you are confused with the Tectonics, that are opposite to your hypothesis (and not only your, because of more people who believe in it in the past).
If you want an evidence that will improve your own hypothesis (I think it is what you want), I can't give it to you. It is not my job, and, the most important thing, every data in the past is opposite. And, finishing, if there were no evidences for Tectonics, it would not mean that your hypothesis is true. Your hypothesis will be true only when the data and the facts, will support it, not before.
2 Recommendations
25th Nov, 2017
Jan Mestan
Expanding Earth Research
The shape fit is perfectly visible till today :)
26th Nov, 2017
Rubén Puertas
University of Alicante
It is not the length of the subduction/ridges zone the important thing here, but the speed of the rock's horizontal movement. And the subduction zones are another fact. But I will not waste my time trying to give to you another paper supporting this theory, if you can't even read the previous ones before continuing the discussion. I will only add one thing. How explains your "theory", the ophiolites into the Hercynian Orogeny?
As I see, the only "evidence" you have of your "hypothesis" is a map made by other scientist, and you want to change all we know about geology only with the image of a map. Without any geological, palaeontological, structural or even physical evidence.The shape of the ocean let you just to speculate. The further steps, like formalize a hypothesis, search for data that improve it (and deny all the other theories), and publish them, are what you lack. In other words, you want to convince us to forget all we know about plate tectonics only with a bathimetry map, which you are not the author. Please, excuse me if I trust your affirmation the same as "Italy is a boot as we could see in the next picture".
When you find geological evidences, and write a paper with them, I will be very interested on read it. Until then, please do not waste your and my time doing affirmations without any data that support them.
2 Recommendations

Similar questions and discussions

Related Publications

Chapter
Full-text available
In this paper, I discuss several temporal aspects of paleontology from a philosophical perspective. I begin by presenting the general problem of “taming” deep time to make it comprehensible at a human scale, starting with the traditional geologic time scale: an event-based, relative time scale consisting of a hierarchy of chronological units. Not o...
Data
COPYRIGHT Palaeontology [online] (www.palaeontologyonline.com) publishes all work, unless otherwise stated, under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) license. This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the published work, even commercially, as long as they credit Palaeontology[online] for the original cr...
Article
Full-text available
The different types of falsification of fossils of several countries are commented but they are described all the forms known about falsifications relating to the trilobites of Morocco. Also we describe the methods known for their correct detection.
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.