Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

1.7-Billion-Year-Old Chunk of North America Found Sticking To Australia (livescience.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the broken-apart dept.

walterbyrd shares a report from Live Science: Geologists matching rocks from opposite sides of the globe have found that part of Australia was once attached to North America 1.7 billion years ago. Researchers from Curtin University in Australia examined rocks from the Georgetown region of northern Queensland. The rocks -- sandstone sedimentary rocks that formed in a shallow sea -- had signatures that were unknown in Australia but strongly resembled rocks that can be seen in present-day Canada. The researchers, who described their findings online Jan. 17 in the journal Geology, concluded that the Georgetown area broke away from North America 1.7 billion years ago. Then, 100 million years later, this landmass collided with what is now northern Australia, at the Mount Isa region.

"This was a critical part of global continental reorganization when almost all continents on Earth assembled to form the supercontinent called Nuna," Adam Nordsvan, Curtin University doctoral student and lead author of the study, said in a statement. Nordsvan added that Nuna then broke apart some 300 million years later, with the Georgetown area stuck to Australia as the North American landmass drifted away.

80 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. Theft and larceny by TimothyHollins · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't that why we sent the Australians over there in the first place?

    1. Re:Theft and larceny by Ian+A.+Shill · · Score: 1

      How do they sleep at night?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      For hire.
    2. Re:Theft and larceny by OzPeter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Isn't that why we sent the Australians over there in the first place?

      Actually the reason that convicts were transported to Australia is because the Brits could no longer dump them in North America due to that pesky revolution thingy.

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

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:Theft and larceny by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh come on now. That's just because they couldn't dump them in the colonies anymore, they were still doing that in Upper and Lower Canada and the colonial state of Newfoundland. Despite what the wikipedia article says, the crown was still shipping them to north america until the very late 1700's(round about 1795ish), but only into lands "just far enough" to not make it an issue for the newly founded US. See there was even a trick to it, they would declare the prisoners being sent to an "unknown location" and then basically dump them in the territory or colonial state. Who'd then be responsible for well...everything, from feeding to housing, and so on while it "was in dispute with the crown." And that could take years, and in the mean time the prisoners would/could be forced onto a plantation while arguing with the crown over it.

      Lot's of bits of history like that which really doesn't get fully covered. Here's an example from 1789, also covers some other stuff but worth the reading.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re: Theft and larceny by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Trump will get it back. There is already a petition started.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    5. Re:Theft and larceny by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You cant "steal" land by moving it. he property just moves with you.

      Now we have learned something new.... a portion of southern Australia is actually part of Canada.

      Better get ready to start paying your backtaxes, folks.

    6. Re: Theft and larceny by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1
      Well, since the article says that the chunk broke off what is now Canada, it should be entertaining* to watch Trump try come up with an even half way plausible basis for a US claim on that rock.

      *problem is, world leaders, elected officials and the like aren't supposed to be entertaining, they're supposed to be competent. Picking a leader on the basis of who might provide the most lulz strikes me as a Bad Thing.

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    7. Re:Theft and larceny by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Researchers from Curtin University in Australia examined rocks from the Georgetown region of northern Queensland.

      Now we have learned something new.... a portion of southern Australia is actually part of Canada.

      I see by your grasp of geography that you hail from the land of Canada's southern neighbors.

    8. Re: Theft and larceny by LesFerg · · Score: 1

      Actually he will make the Mexicans get it back. All that rock will make a damned big wall.

      --
      If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
    9. Re:Theft and larceny by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I see by your grasp of geography that you hail from the land of Canada's southern neighbors.

      Nooooo.... How dare you imply I have something to do with those filthy renegade colonists.

    10. Re:Theft and larceny by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      No he shouldn't. The only reason he "knows" so much about that particular time and imprisonment practices is because it's one of his "they enslaved white people too" memes. Mashiki is a vehement racist, particularly funny since he rocks that Japanese name.

      Or...or...it could be that you're an actual racist, since that's what you are focusing on. The reason that I happen to know is because one of my hobbies is the commonweath history of eastern canada.

      To the other AC: I have no interest in writing anything for wikipedia. Even if you can prove something factually correct, they have a much greater desire to present particular narratives. On top of that they've gone from "presenting verifiable fact" to "presenting 2nd and 3rd sources" of any kind as fact. A good example would be the spectre and meltdown articles on there currently.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  2. surprise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The entire earth is all connected to itself and the planet is not flat after all. This is earth shattering news!

  3. Bloody Americans. by mjwx · · Score: 1, Funny

    Dumping their crap on our own fair shores for billions of years... without even a thank you note.

    I hope you Chooks turn into Emus and kick your dunny down.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:Bloody Americans. by Holi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Piss off, why you blaming us for some stupid Canadian rock?

      Thing probably already apologized to you.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:Bloody Americans. by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      As an American who has visited Port Douglas and Cairns (and Heron Island), I can completely understand a piece of America falling in love with, and attaching itself to, God's Own Country.

    3. Re:Bloody Americans. by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Piss off, why you blaming us for some stupid Canadian rock? Thing probably already apologized to you.

      Because it's part of Queensland and you gave them extra room to propagate.

      WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!!!!

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    4. Re:Bloody Americans. by gx5000 · · Score: 1

      Did you not read the whole article?
      "Rocks that can be seen in present-day Canada"
      Looks like Hungcouver actually....

      --
      End of Line.
    5. Re: Bloody Americans. by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Yes, I saw that. I stand by my statement. :-)

  4. For those of us by TFlan91 · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of us that aren't geologists and saw "Nuna", but read/expected "Pangaea":

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

    1. Re:For those of us by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Colombia is part of Texas. And New Mexico, and probably Arizona...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:For those of us by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For most of us, even the highly educated, We have a High School or Middle School understanding of most topics. When we furthered our education, it for the most part had became specialized in particular areas, But for those who didn't specialize in that area, we have a limited understanding, in the topic. (Thank you for the link for additional information) Pangaea, was the latest Super Continent which we are shown during or basic education, as it is relatively recent enough that we could plainly see how the Continents fit together. "Nuna" had continental plates that do not look like what we know of, hence hard to teach to kids. And once we get older unless we study geology such topics isn't so relevant to other topics we choose to study.

      This brings up the disturbing trends of people not believing the experts in fields, and some of them are in leadership positions who's actions causes change.
      Now a leader may not follow the advice of the expert, because their may be factors beyond that particular field, that need to be weighed in, however these experts should be listened to as you gut instinct and general knowledge in most things are actually at a basic level.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:For those of us by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

    4. Re:For those of us by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      It's comforting that I'm not the only one.

      Thank you for the link.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    5. Re:For those of us by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      When I was in grade school, Continental Drift was a hot new theory - well, not really new, a revived theory recently given prominence thanks in part due to advances in computer graphics that made it much easier to visualize the moving puzzle-pieces and experiment with differing arrangements.

    6. Re:For those of us by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of this "Nuna" before.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    7. Re:For those of us by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      The speculation that continents might have 'drifted' was first put forward by Abraham Ortelius in 1596. The concept was independently and more fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912

      You should have a lower user ID if you're that old.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    8. Re:For those of us by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

      The concept was independently and more fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912

      See Krakatoa by Simon Winchester for an excellent description of Wegener's continental drift concept. Winchester can be long winded and a bit full of himself, but he's an excellent researcher and I'm thoroughly enjoying the book.

      --
      Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
    9. Re:For those of us by bugs2squash · · Score: 2

      scientists are fallible like anyone else, no reason to trust any one of them

      The system of science however has been reliably self-correcting for centuries now. Whether driven by self interest, curiosity or a sense of duty, scientist have a stake in exposing mistakes and correcting them. So yes, I trust that any big thing would be addressed and resolved and even small things get cleared up eventually

      --
      Nullius in verba
    10. Re:For those of us by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      You don't believe religious leaders, but you attach "science" and all of the sudden you believe them? Theology has been methodically studied for two millenia longer than geology.

      What predictions has that knowledge allowed humans to make? What in religion is falsifiable? Repeatable?

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    11. Re:For those of us by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      You don't believe religious leaders, but you attach "science" and all of the sudden you believe them? Theology has been methodically studied for two millenia longer than geology.

      I do believe geology was studied far earlier than theology, in that mining for gemstones and various ores predates almost all known religions and certainly all modern ones.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    12. Re:For those of us by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of this "Nuna" before.

      Thank you for your participation. Here's a trophy.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    13. Re:For those of us by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      I thank you for the link as I curse you for the link. Now I have added yet another tab to the hundred that I have open, to look at when I quit wasting time on /..

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    14. Re: For those of us by DutchUncle · · Score: 2

      :-) I think it was 1968 or 1970 when the idea was revived with more support from new ground penetrating radar and other new geophysical information gathering techniques. Computer graphics helped make illustrative animations that sold the idea.

    15. Re:For those of us by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Continents fit together. "Nuna" had continental plates that do not look like what we know of, hence hard to teach to kids

      Considering the long age of the earth; it's ridiculous for almost anyone to think they have information on a significant fraction of the geologic history,
      but just because someone heard of Pangea or Nuna or whatever doesn't mean there weren't other supercontinents at different times.

      This brings up the disturbing trends of people not believing the experts in fields, and some of them are in leadership positions who's actions causes change.

      In reality all the extra education in specializations is for added skill and efficiency --- that doesn't mean what experts say should be yielded as dogma or instantly accepted.

      On trivial matters where stakes are low - the expert in the field might deserve a benefit of the doubt, BUT there are plenty of times people should not believe experts in the fields ---- before they are to be believed, they have a burden of explanation and proof that they should be equipped to handle as an expert.... even the best experts make mistakes often, and you should ALWAYS question and confirm information before you spread it or make an important decision off of it --- for example: The Geoligical history person would not be an expert in leadership or decisionmaking or publication or education, and not necessarily the true impact of what they found (Their story or views may simply be wrong), and if you fail to find overwhelming confirming support or you find contrary information an expert wasn't able to explain, then, well, that could be a legit reason not to believe said expert.

    16. Re:For those of us by Kjella · · Score: 1

      This brings up the disturbing trends of people not believing the experts in fields, and some of them are in leadership positions who's actions causes change. Now a leader may not follow the advice of the expert, because their may be factors beyond that particular field, that need to be weighed in, however these experts should be listened to as you gut instinct and general knowledge in most things are actually at a basic level.

      The trouble is in deconstructing knowledge from perspective and agenda. For example take the war on drugs, there's plenty of experts and organizations on both sides of the fence. If you ask a rehab clinic drugs leads to addicts, because the drug users they see are those who became addicted. The police will see criminal drug users. The psychologist will see drug users with psychological problems. On the other hand a medical marijuana shop may stand to make a huge profit if it's legalized for recreational use, they're not exactly neutral either. It's hard to find people that are highly knowledgeable about a topic and not deeply invested or biased in some way. I mean it works for Donald Knuth and CS, but in more practical matters it's not that easy to know who to believe. And people like to believe that the "experts" that agree with them are those that are right.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    17. Re:For those of us by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I believe Religious leaders, in term of their view on religion. So if I have an issue in terms of faith, or making a moral choice, then a Religious Leader who has dedicated their lives to the religion.
      However their view on science, isn't that well respected, because of the lack of time they had individually studied it. There is also a lot of Bad Science reporting,
      Calling a new Hypothesis a Theory, Jumping the gun to a conclusion, people jumping on the band wagon of a popular idea without looking at the data. However Science works itself out over time. However if you want to disprove a scientific principal all you need to do is offer a new Hypothesis, Figure out what measurements would you'd see if you are right, take such measurements, compare them to your guess. If they are right, bring them to someone else to double check and verify.

      In my opinion if your Religion key points are about explaining the natural world, then it is sadly a very poor religion to follow.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    18. Re:For those of us by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Awesome! This is exactly what I was fishing for. Now I'm going to track every post you make and make sure I put my two cents in, so when I collect enough trophies I can melt them down and get money for the scrap. Who the fuck was talking to you again?
      I was underscoring, along with others here, how esoteric this supercontinent is. Almost everyone is familiar with Pangaea. Nuna? Not so much.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    19. Re:For those of us by youngone · · Score: 1

      Theology has probably been "studied" since the first priest caste formed maybe 10,000 years ago when the species began forming structured societies.
      That really does not make theology anything other than arguments about what to believe.

    20. Re:For those of us by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      The study of religion (theology) is actually something quite recent. After all, even today you run the risk of execution for questioning religion in certain religious societies. They practice their religion, not theology.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    21. Re:For those of us by mixed_signal · · Score: 1

      It's even easier to disprove a scientific principle: One well thought out counter example will do it. (Well thought out meaning it doesn't have some misunderstanding or poorly constructed part making it incorrect.)

    22. Re:For those of us by mixed_signal · · Score: 1

      Yes. Humans are fallible. Hence, Science.

    23. Re:For those of us by mixed_signal · · Score: 1

      I remember as a kid (in the 1970s) playing with a globe noticing that South America would fit rather nicely into Africa. Some things are just kind of obvious on inspection. Perhaps many geologists noticed things like that and started looking for similar strata, etc. in locations that would have been nearby.

    24. Re:For those of us by youngone · · Score: 1

      Well, if by quite recent you mean a thousand years or so, you might be right (in the Christian context). After all the University of Bologna has been handing out theology degrees since about 1088.
      However, if I was a priest telling the villagers that thy needed to give me some of their harvest and pray to this statue over here to ensure another one next year, then I had better have a pretty good justification for it.
      I imagine that's a possible basis for theology.

    25. Re:For those of us by FrankSchwab · · Score: 1

      You're the one that blurted out your ignorance like it was some point of pride.

      Suck it up, buttercup.

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    26. Re:For those of us by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      The University of Bologna has been handing out law degrees since that time. While its founding was for studying Roman law, it is debatable when the study of canon was introduced and if it met the definition of theology.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    27. Re:For those of us by careysub · · Score: 2

      The speculation that continents might have 'drifted' was first put forward by Abraham Ortelius in 1596. The concept was independently and more fully developed by Alfred Wegener in 1912

      You should have a lower user ID if you're that old.

      Kids daydreaming in school and looking at the world map hanging on the wall will on occasion notice that the margins of Eurasia-Africa fit into the Americas. Ortelius gets the credit for making this observation because it was incidental to the main reason history remembers him - he was the leading cartographer and atlas publisher of his age. He had in this hands the first good set of maps of the margins of the two continent systems anyone had ever prepared, so he was the first to be able to notice this readily apparent fact.

      Wegener's contribution was on another level entirely. He studied the geology and fossils along the margins of both continental systems and showed the same geology and fossil species are found along the margin of the divide from one end to the other. And plainly species distributions look nothing like that at any recent time (recent here means the last 150 million years). Wegener also identified the strata, and thus time were the similarities end and divergence begins.

      He did not have theory about how it moved, which was what kept the idea from being take seriously. But the evidence for the fact that they were joined 175 million years ago that Wegener compiled is overwhelming. Even without a plausible explanation for how they managed to move apart the fact that did had such an astonishing body of evidence supporting it geology should have accepted that fact as it stood, and start thinking about how to uncover a mechanism by which it occurred, and developing theories to test through field research. As it was sea floor spreading was discovered serendipitously, through anomalies in other more general oceanographic studies.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    28. Re:For those of us by careysub · · Score: 1

      Yep, that is exactly what happened. People were constantly noticing this plainly evident margin alignment. Wegener reasoned that if the two continent systems once were joined, then the geology and fossils on either side the split at the time it occurred must be the same everywhere, not just here and there. Wegener showed that this was the case. If he had been able to show the opposite he would have decisively disproved the idea.

      Once he had convincing evidence that this was true geologists should have believed it, and then gone to work on thinking about how it happened.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    29. Re:For those of us by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      How did that come across as a "point of pride", tough guy? Maybe the word you're looking for is honesty.. What a concept.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    30. Re:For those of us by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There's studying people's religious beliefs and their causes and consequences, and there's trying to figure out what one's own religion really means. The latter is usually called "theology", and it is not in general based on empirical observations. It's been around for a long, long time.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    31. Re:For those of us by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      It's hard to find convincing evidence for something that's considered impossible. Without some sort of idea as to how continents can drift, Wegener's work was interesting but not conclusive.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    32. Re:For those of us by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Well, like someone said, "'Tis best to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt".

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    33. Re:For those of us by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      OMG, stop the presses, I've never heard of supercontinent "Nuna" before, like 95% of the rest of the human population.. ..so that makes me a fool.
      It must be nice to be among the elite. If you admitted to something I knew that you didn't, I wouldn't be such a dickwad about it, but then I'm a decent human being.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  5. Re: Glboal Warming by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Which book? I couldn't find any reference of this in the Bible.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  6. I claim this in the name of Canada... by grub · · Score: 1

    ... and propose drilling for oil by summer!

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  7. Good deed by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

    So in a way Great Britain joined long lost siblings under the Commonwealth? Isn't that nice of them?

  8. Fake News Ticker reports by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 3, Funny

    President Trump demands immediate return of American property. Unnamed private investor will be building a golf resort on it.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    1. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      If it aint got no oil we dont want it.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    2. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by cyberchondriac · · Score: 2

      It said parts of Canada, not the US. Good reading comprehension.
      Justin Trudeau apologized for the inconvenience to the Ozzies and offered to immigrate half of Australia's deadly snakes and spiders to British Colombia as an appeasement

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    3. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      On behalf of all Australians we encourage your unnamed investor to build his course and spend as much time playing there as possible. The only things up there are skin cancer, firebombing birds, crocodiles, and the worlds deadliest jellyfish. Think you're safe? Not even Steve Irwin survived up there.

    4. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by Teun · · Score: 1

      Foreign oil when Trump just stopped import of cheap solar panels?
      No, Trump prefers to keep his USA First billionaire friends make money locally.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    5. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It said parts of Canada, not the US. Good reading comprehension.

      Human Nature Rule #73: good jokes override logic and accuracy. (So do some Presidents, but that's another rule.)

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    6. Re:Fake News Ticker reports by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      President Trump demands immediate return of American property.

      Australian leadership replied that Trump can have it if he can haul the chunk away using wind power. At least that's how I'll interpret "blow chunks".

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  9. It needs to be said by bradley13 · · Score: 1

    Bad blood. It's thieves and criminals what were sent to Australia. So now they stole a piece of someone else's continent?

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  10. Re: Glboal Warming by Maritz · · Score: 1

    It's just after the bit where stealing women and raping them is cleared as OK and just before the bit where the she-bears kill 40 kids for making fun of a bald guy.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  11. Learn' som'thin new.... by CyberRacer · · Score: 1

    Who knew the aborigines were canucks?

  12. Chunk of Canada stuck to your ass? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Go see a doctor.

  13. At long last proof! by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    I find myself deeply moved in my faith that God would go to all this trouble to mislead idiot atheists into believing the world is more than 6,000 years old.

    I must go at once to donate my children's college fund to Pat Robertson. You go, God!

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:At long last proof! by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      You misspelled "athiest".

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    2. Re:At long last proof! by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Sorry. My mistkae.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  14. Canada suing to get it back by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    They filled a international court motion to get their land back.

  15. The Proper Name by dcw3 · · Score: 2

    We call that the "sticky bit"

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  16. Re: Glboal Warming by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    It's just after the bit where stealing women and raping them is cleared as OK and just before the bit where the she-bears kill 40 kids for making fun of a bald guy.

    Well that was the *old testament* real wrath of god type stuff, so you should expect that. Then they got all cranky in Europe, had a reformation(s) and decided it wasn't so great anymore. But it hasn't got that far with Islam, just look at all those people who supported ISIS and whatnot, or tried arguing before the courts that raping women is allowed because their religion says so. Might only take another few hundred years before that's fixed, providing of course they don't change the "this is the true word of god, and questioning it is forbidden" and "changing it makes you an apostate and you need to be put to death" stuff first. Might be sooner, but probably not.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  17. Ob. Star Trek by pipingguy · · Score: 1

    Has anyone made a klingon joke yet?

  18. #MAWA by quintus_horatius · · Score: 1

    Make American Whole Again!

  19. Exotic Terranes by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

    These exotic terranes, which are rock that originally were part of other continents, are a pretty common occurrence. Most of the eastern seaboard of the US was once part of Africa or South America. Large parts of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachussets, New Hampshire, Maine Nova Scotia and Newfoundland contain African rocks. The contact between African and North American rocks runs through New York, Its called Cameron's Line. A large long piece of Africa called Avalonia broke off, drifted across the ocean and lodged on North America 400 million years ago. Florida and Louisiana was seperately added by the collisions that formed Pangea, it remained on the North American side when the split occured.

    1. Re:Exotic Terranes by Teun · · Score: 1

      Indeed, and most of Italy is still part of the African shelf.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  20. Reunite Gondwana! by kybred · · Score: 1

    We want our rocks back!

  21. Re: Glboal Warming by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    The christians in trumps government seem to be intent on rolling back as many health reforms for women and removing equality for all because their religion says so to show that some christians still haven't entered the 20th century yet.

    Repeating that meme doesn't make it true. Seems more like you're happier with the state/religion separation only working one way, where under those guaranteed rights businesses, charities, and so on also have protections. So do the people working for them, and in some cases people work for/volunteer for particular morals. Something that various left-wing progressive groups have been very happy to trample all over.

    Let me know when those gay couples go out of their way to target a christian bakery again, and ignore the muslim ones(who also wouldn't bake them a cake).

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  22. Re: Glboal Warming by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    "particular morals." - in the religious case its generally "peculiar morals" - picking and choosing according to their own form of bigotry. keep religion in your own head and out of every other place except a church then we'll have real equality.

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  23. Re: Glboal Warming by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    If its too hot in the kitchen then they should get out instead of foisting their dodgy morals on others.
    God also command the total extermination / genocide of the Canaanites, women and children included etc etc so the bible is not a paragon of good words/deeds

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)