Now I know that Alfred Wegener`s theory is wrong!

What about bouyancy? Not really. In a centrifuge, the heavier elements tend to move away from the center of rotation faster than the lighter and they would displace the ligher elements. I think we should send you to Iran to run their centrifuges. Actually, there is no centripetal force other than a reaction to the centrifugal force. The only other force is gravity, but that has less to do with rotation than centrifugal. Well, since your disposition of continents covers a huge amount of latitude, I don't see it in your model. Do you have some evidence for this?

To correct the confusion in this thread (singling nobody out), it is physicists who deny the existence of centrifugal force.And the reason that they do so is that, while the effect is real, there is no force causing it. In fact it is all down to inertia - the tendency of objects to move in a straight line, UNLESS acted on by a force. The object is not being accelerated away from the centre, so there is no force involved.Centripetal force is real, and that is because circular motion requires a force accelerating the object towards the centre of it's orbit.

Sorry about that, bit I haven`t been home before now. :-)This impact have a lot to say. If it was two seperated oceans at the world as I belive, and one dry land who seperate this two oceans, then it seems to me that all these spices lived in the ocean in north. I belive these animals end up in these line at the same way if you turn a bucket with water and fine sand upside down on a floor then you see that the sand float out to the end in a circle at the edge.These animals have one thing in common, they was burried alive in a lot of sand, most likely at the same time.
Long time the scienentists belive they couldn`find animals like this from this age, because they where soft bodies.When I locate the findings area and put them to my map, I was suprised that I could draw a half circel over nearly all these locations. That have to mean something.I draw them into my map because I would campare one continent to another, and I don`t expect to find nearly all into the line of this half circle at all.The first thing I thinked was it have to be some crater or somthing after a meteor, because something have to bring these animals into this line and burried them alive at the same time. So I put an X into the midle of this circle and started to read about the sea floor in this area. At that time I didn`t know anything about this seafloor in this area, other than the seafloor was very flat in this part of the world.So I got suprised when I find out what it was under the X i made. Here I have made a illustration just now to show you this area where this X was. This seafloor are replaced several times because of seafloor spread, but it is still obvious that something has happened in this area.So my conclusion was that a metor hit this area and threw sand and the sea creatures out of the continents, while it was this that divided up the continents and got them to run. This hit also threw up a lot of liquid mass from the mantle an made a new layer over a lot of landmass. No one in this world is able to collect data from a seabed that has been replaced several times.

quote:

---

Ediacaran age fossils can only be found where Ediacaran rocks of the proper type/depositional environment are EXPOSED on the surface. This has NOTHING to do with all the places in the world where these rocks exist but are buried under the surface and you cannot look at to see if they have fossils. No one is going to dig up Ediacaran age rocks that are 50, 100, 5000 or 30,000 ft below the surface to see if these fossils are there.

​

Your map means nothing.

---

Try to explain to me why nearly all these fossils was found in a perfect half circle then? It wasn`t me who find these fossils. I just discover this pattern.

quote:

---

That you did this shows me you do not have an understanding of basic geology.

---

How many time have the geologist told me that I don`t have a clue when I say I belive we only have two magnetic poles the most of the time. They say it exactly the same as you here.But, these people who think they have an answer to everything, they ignore everything who don`t fits into their own theory.They ignore new discoveries and measurements in which science has established that we only had two poles. That's because they a system that is wrong and therefore they tells us that we have several poles in the past to get an explanation why it can not find out of their own system. These geologists presents this as a complete concrete
facts. Just take a look at this link again:http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/10/091002132350.htmI quote Professor Roy Gabrielsen at the Geological Institute at Bergen University, who has expressed following:
There are many unanswered questions around the plate technology plate tectonic, and some of the things we work on today is to find the interplay between the driving forces behind the plate-movements. We have to date very little insight in this, and it might be that the answer to these questions will make it necessary to change the whole model.(UIB.MAGAZINE 1/98)

Here we have another problem. One part of sciense tells us the opposite of the other part of the same science. It's really sad actually.

quote:

---

Here we have another problem. One part of sciense tells us the opposite of the other part of the same science. It's really sad actually.

---

No. At worst some scientists use a common term that is not strictly correct. There is no disagreement within science over the matter.Physicists all agree that there is no centrifugal force. The effect is due to inertia.

Possible! If the lighter mass searched to the point longest away from the core, this would be at Equator who are 15 kilometer wider than the line than the radius to the poles. The land plates are much lighter than the heavier oceanic plates and the matrials are just heavier and heavier the longer you come into the earth.

But so would the heavier mass...

If you have a glass globe
completely filled with water and you shake small pieces of cork in the water, where this will add up eventually?

Have you seen this article from Science Daily (Oct. 3, 2009)?http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/10/091002132350.htm

Are you asserting that the west coast of Africa and the east coast of South America were never connected? There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence for such a connection during the Mesozoic. I belive that the continents was clustered at the same way like the picures under here. This is a illustration over Pangaea. The only thing I have done, was to move Pangaea after all the vulcanic islands who lay in a half circle over the Pacific Ocean.With this movement I got all the continets around the Earth near Equator. The red dots on the map is the locations of the 32 places when the find the Ediacara fossils. Nearly all these locations ended up far out at this bar on this circle that is plotted here as a bow for some strange and mysterious reason. I have more about them here:http://www.aspevik.net/lifestartedinnorth.htm
http://www.aspevik.net/extra.htmThey drift in one direction like that: And as you see they still drift in this direction as you see at this picture NASA have used GPS to find the directions today: The reason I think it's been a mistake here is that geologists have consistently assumed that all recent land mass has come up through the crust in different locations, but I think a lot of these new layers come from one or more meteorites that have broken up into the earth, and cast new layers on top of already existing rocks.I also belive that this movement created the edge I have marked with read on this pictures. This line fits into the edgde of this group of continents Wegener called "Pangaea" when they drifted as I tell here in my theory: Edited by Aspevik, : No reason given.Edited by Aspevik, : More pictures addedEdited by Aspevik, : No reason given.

Helge,Du lage nei fornemme. You talk about an Ediacaran event using Mesozoic reconstructions.You seem to think that graphite deposits were created by ancient lifeforms that wer splattered all over the earth by a meteorite.Then you discuss Cretaceous orogenies that started in the Precambrian.You have a random distribution of Edicaran fossils and draw an arbitrary line through them.Then you propose a meteorite forming a basin that didn't exist until the Mesozoic.Prior to that you had Precambrian events forming Tertiary gold deposits of various types, and lined them up by leaving out a large number of existing mines.Now you are 'just moving Gondwana', but the map shows a complete rotation and translation into the modern Pacific Ocean which shows well-documented plate motions contrary to anything you suggest.You completely ignore age dates and magnetic domain data.You do not understand the kinetics of subduction nor accretion.And yet your only evidence is a set of cutouts of the continents laid out on a table, arbitrarily joined to form a land mass at the equator which is not at the equator, and occurred at an unknown time in the past.And you completely ignore what we post, all the while complaining that no one listens to you.Denne er spr. Du slseri vre tid.

Yes, and I know the Ediacara fauna lived for 635 and 542 my ago, and the Mesozoic was from 250 to 75 my ago. But these fossils are making a perfect half circle over this "newer land", and this newer land fits perfectly inn to the edge where we find the continental shelfs from Aleuten and down the coast where Japan lays today and so one. These locations of this fossils make a accurate pattern over the continents in
Mesozoic too. Therefore I am sure that the landmass at the Mesozoic was a mutch more like the landmass at the at the Ediacran periode too.You always refers to the maps that I tell you have to be wrong. If a meterite hit the seafloor when it was a lot of life there in the sea,there is nothing strange that these life forms will be thrown out to the sides on the dry land with sand, etc. It would have been more strange if it did not do this.And if a big meteor get into the mantle, a lot of liquid mass have to get out of the hole the meteor made on the way in. It would have been more strange tooo, if it did not do this.
Some place this new mass from the meteorite have to land, and I belive that the geologist have concluded this new mass came from the bottom and up in the same place these new rocks are found. They not think at this new mass could come from the top and down on the existing land mass. Therefore, their maps as you refer to all the way could be wrong. ??? The first sea animals started in the Ediacaran periode. I know, but this only indicates that the structure under this basin has been changed and I have written that this sea floor has been replaced several times. Yes, and I didn`t know about all gold deposits in the world and I used they I find in these links that I referred to. It doesn`t matter anyway, because most of these locations after this hit and until today are clustered in the same area that was changed when the continents split up for some strange reason. These plates in the Pacific Ocean have been changed out nearly three times since the drift started and it isn`t true that this is well-documented plate motions at all. The truth is that the geologist don`t have any idea at all and they still working to find the way the drift have been taken as you can read in this article here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/10/091002132350.htm From this data the geologist have concluded there have been up to 4-8 poles at the time, becouse they dont`t find a system into their own data when they put these data into their own model. As the article over here shows, we have only two magnetic poles and it have been like that the last 1.1 billion years, and they have been very stable too. So therefore the geologist maps have to bee wrong since their own data don`t fit into their model. There is no other possible way to explain this. Ok, tell me what the right answer would be to that? I think I have answered the best way I could and with I have used all the time I have available. But I can tell you that someone have listen to me and I have a lot of exciting mails from people who work with this question. It takes time to read thise mails, but I know somthing would en up as a result of my theory in the future. Not everybody just see the holes in the cheese. :-)If the future show us that the continents WAS clustered around the Earth an close to Equator, I think I would like to treat you a cup of coffee! ;-)

This in incorrect. You have fossil evidence from that time do you not? Then you should have impact related evidence as well.An impact does not have to be very large to leave not only a scar at the impact site, but debris and geochemical signatures on land surfaces. Your alleged impact sounds like it would have been one of the largest over at least the last 550 million years, therefore you should find something. Very likely you'd find impact-related evidence somewhere in the vicinity of the death horizon of Edicaran fossils.Without that evidence and tying it to your impact site, you're going to have a hard time gaining support for just the impact, much less anything else.

This in incorrect. You have fossil evidence from that time do you not? Then you should have impact related evidence as well. Yes, these fossils are evidence that something happend in the center of this circle, but there is impossible to find evidence when a meteor hit the seafloor and this seafloor have been changed nearly three times since then. Maybe we can find a different structure on the seafloor like this area I have pointed out, and I think I have done that.
Researchers must know what they have to look after, and they haven`t had this before I point out this locaton of this impact.I think that if I got dragged with the whole meteorite, they would not have accepted this matter anyway, because this don`t fits into their model anyway! ;-)Sooner or later, any scientist who can think independently and who dare to look at this, would investigate any of this on his own. Then I am sure some of these things will be verified that it was correct. I'm not looking for any glory or or would make some money in some way, but I just want to help a little with what I've found.I have not made the names of the different continents on purpose. The credit will be given to these people who want to investigate further on this model.