Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion

From: Carsten Troelsgaard (carsten.troelsgaard_at_mail.dk)
Date: 03/16/05 

Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 23:17:41 +0100

"Carsten Troelsgaard" <carsten.troelsgaard@mail.dk> skrev i en meddelelse
news:42389e01$0$254
> "Matt" <matt.edwards@utoronto.ca> skrev i en meddelelse

>> Thanks for the interesting links. It didn't seem like anything there
>> touched on the issue of whether concordant strata on the African and
>> South American mainlands show the split at 180 Ma.

You were atleast supposed to know, that a contemporary ocean shore could not
have been present at the same time and place as a Permian inland sea
produces voluptious amounts of evaporites. I'll leave it to your own guess,
and the other available evidence, when, between Eocene and Perm, the ocean
started forming.

Why is it that I think that you've run short of arguments and found yourself
busy elsewhere?

> Would that be interesting if you assume recycling of the ocean?
> The rocks that split does not tell the date of the split. If you look at
> the informations you'll se Cretaceous strata dipping into the basin and
> overlying the salt, and the deep abyss covered with Eocene sediments.
> Keep doubting the dating if you have to.