Monday, November 24, 2008

Marsupials Vs. Plate Tectonics

According to plate tectonics, this is what the Earth looked like during the Cretaceous period, 125 million years ago.

Here it is more clearly from the same source (Northern Arizona University) as the crude maps above.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, the paleomaps based upon plate tectonics are utterly absurd and totally contradicted by observation and logic.


Because marsupials "evolved" in Northern China.

A mouse-sized fossil found in China may be the oldest ancestor of modern marsupials - the mammal family that includes kangaroos and koalas.

The creature, which was unearthed in Liaoning province, extends the ancestry of marsupials by 50 million years.

The stunning specimen preserves an imprint of the animal's coat of hair and analysis of its feet suggests it was adapted to climbing in trees.

Details of the find are reported in the latest edition of the journal Science.

Sinodelphys szalayi, as the new species has been named, lived alongside the dinosaurs in the early Cretaceous Period.

The 125-million-year-old creature has close affinities with the family of mammals known as metatherians, which includes the marsupials.
Question: if marsupials evolved in China 125 million years ago, how did they teleport to Australia and South America? I guess since banded iguanas have no problem rafting 7,000 miles to Fiji-Tonga, kangaroos have no problem hopping across the Pacific Ocean?


Anonymous said...


Hmm, excellent, but this raises the question of the age of the sediment these fossils were found in.....

All sorts of chronological paradoxes arise assuming a uniformist geological time scale.

Marsupials and dinosaurs, size wize, is another problem (Ted Holden ideas).

I think you have opened another can of worms.

Well done.

Quantum_Flux said...

Talking about the history of macroevolution is not my expertise, but I'll grant geologists the benefit of the doubt that they have a coherent theory. You can't just say "these guys are idiots" just because you don't care to understand anything about their field of research, or at least I can't do that.

:::::Off topic here:::::

The only marketable thig coming out of macrobiology will be in transplanting body parts and hormones from foriegn species.

I want the belly of a cow, the strength of a gorilla, the speed of a cheetah, the sight of an eagle, the penis of a horse, a dog's sense of smell, etc....that sort of thing is what the future of the medical community requires, specialized doctors can't just continue to charge high prices when people are sick or injured, that's communism and it's just plain wrong. If I were president, I'd make medical care as cheap as drive through resteraunts (the raw materials used are almost free for most doctor visits, the expense is all in keeping the paper handlers fat), and I'd lift the beaurocratic ethics policies so the medical industry (not community) can take off dammit.

OilIsMastery said...


In response to: "I'll grant geologists the benefit of the doubt that they have a coherent theory."

Why aren't you willing to give biogeographers the same benefit of the doubt? Why must all science which contradicts so-called "geology", make way for so-called "geology"?

Why aren't you willing to give "expanding earth" the benefit of the doubt that they have a coherent theory?

Quantum_Flux said...

The thing is that geology had to pass peer review which means that it shouldn't be contradictive of biogeography. Until I look at the evidence close enough I'll just assume they are correct, however, I probably never will unless I find it imposing on what I know to be true in my own field of interest. In that case, I'll run over geology like a super-tornado after an asteroid impact.

Quantum_Flux said...

....I threw religion under the concrete slab with a mega huge bus on top, perhaps geology, biology, and astronomy are next if I see necessary to do so.

Quantum_Flux said...

Ultimately, like Anaconda has been saying, if theories don't produce practical applications then there may not be great use for them. OIM, you need to prove abiotic oil by implementing economic proof of the concept, same with expanding earth theory and electric cosmos.

OilIsMastery said...


In response to: "OIM, you need to prove abiotic oil by implementing economic proof of the concept, same with expanding earth theory and electric cosmos."

See the sidebar for proof. There is no evidence commercial petroleum is biological, none. There is no evidence the mantle is subducting, hot, and, convecting. None. Electrodynamics of course has already been established. See Faraday, Maxwell, and Birkeland.

Quantum_Flux said...

Obviously you know what you are talking about, which is good. You need to popularize your idea via publication. I look forward to reading and promoting some of your books when you come out with them. You know the best way to get build your blog traffic is to publish a book, because even the negative publicity is still enough to get much neutral publicity and also good publicity. That's what Richard Dawkins did with religion, and his blog gets 200+ hits a day.

Quantum_Flux said...

....heck, that's how Galileo and Darwin got famous too. Of course, the heated publicity those guys faced in that time resulted in a lot of persecution.

Anaconda said...


Great job over at Clastic Detritus on the "subduction myth". I thought that was some of your best work -- combining the citation of scientific papers with your own analysis.

And you kept coming back with additional papers and data to demonstrate your points which added to the effectiveness.

The papers you cited providing solid observational data, using the latest up to date technology measuring expansion were hard to refute.

In regards to the other side, it seemed only Cam was willing to grapple with the evidence -- that was a pleasant surprise -- not because I necessary agreed with him, but because at least he was willing to engage in a genuine exchange which BrianR never seems willing to do.

That willingness to exchange ideas in a truly give-and-take fashion is the hallmark of the idea that reasonable men of goodfaith can draw different conclusions from the same observations and data, and through reasoned dialogue attempt to reconcile those differences.

Sadly, BrianR, while he has great rhetorical skills, a master in someways, seems incapable of acknowledging other's views in a way that suggests he respects opposing viewpoints.

There is a "brittleness" behind the slick facade.

Quantum_Flux, maybe I shouldn't say this, but the Oil Is Mastery website is inching up to 200 hits a day, right now, from all four corners of the world. You can check it out on the sitemeter at the bottom left-hand corner of the website.

Quantum_Flux said...

Yeah, that's pretty good, but check out Richard Dawkin's website...he gets about 400 hits every hour ;)