Wegener

no, but if 8 rocks all in the same place look like they fit together, and do, then it is safe to assume they were possibly one rock at some point.

Quote from: john_hand on May 10, 2011, 03:44:50 PM

no, but if 8 rocks all in the same place look like they fit together, and do, then it is safe to assume they were possibly one rock at some point.

Surely if you have two rocks that fit together it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they were possibly one rock at some point.

Quote from: klandri on April 12, 2011, 05:23:21 PM

1) The outlines of the continents fit fairly well together. So? So it's evidence for the theory of plate tectonics
2) Ancient fossils of similar land animals are found both in South America and Africa. It must be unheard of for organisms to cross oceans. The Galapagos do not exist! He never says that fossils conclusively prove that Wegener was right.
3) Equally old fossils of the same plants in South America, India and Australia. Really? They have the DNA of those plants to confirm they are the same, or do they just appear to look similar? Genuine question. Finally. I don't know.
4) Earth formations of both sides of the Atlantic seem to be the remains of a single unified mountain range. So? So, it's evidence.
5) 300 millions year old remains of the same glacier have been found in S-America, Africa, India and S-Australia. Palaeomagnetism is an extremely sketchy theory, and many scientists whole heartily disagree with it. Paleomagnetism? Glaciers != paleomagnetism. And paleomagnetism is actually the piece of evidence that led most scientists to accept continental drift. The directions of scratches on the continents caused by glaciers also indicates that maybe the continents were joined together.

For fun here are six more arguments to fight

6) How deep oceanic mountain ridges are. So? I agree.
7) The locations of most earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. What about them?
8] The locations of great mountain ranges. What about them? They tend to line up.
9) How volcanic spots seem to have moved. Evidence?
10) How the Hawaiian islands seem to have moved. Evidence? The shape of Hawaii and how (as far as I know) there is only one hotspot in that area that could create islands.
11) How magnetic substances in ground formations are turned.  What about them? Alternating bands polarity in rocks found at either side of a mid-ocean ridge indicate sea-floor spreading.

Let's not forget apparent polar wandering.

If you were to independently create a theoretical map of the Earth during the time of Pangaea (Can't remember when off the top of my head) based on each piece of evidence (Fossils, polar wandering maps, mountain ranges, shapes of continents, ages of rock, glacial sediments and "scratches") they would all look pretty similar.

we aren't talking about all the rocks in the universe, just the ones in the metaphor

So if two rocks continents appear to look like they could fit together, that means they must have actually fit together at one point! Brilliant!

Quote from: john_hand on May 10, 2011, 03:52:33 PM

we aren't talking about all the rocks in the universe, just the ones in the metaphor

The rocks in the metaphor were "rocks". Are you claiming that a rock in the universe is something else but a rock? Considering the amount of meaningful content in your previous posts, you probably do. Anyway, two rocks fitting together are not evidence of anything. As for eight rocks, let's see.

Two rocks fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Two rocks composed of two smaller rocks each (four rocks) fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Two rocks composed of the aforementioned rocks (eight rocks) fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Eight rocks fitting together are in no way more evidence than two of them. In fact, they're the exact same situation, and since the amount of variations of how we can try to fit the rocks together rises exponentially, the probability of you finding a matching combination is raised as well. Thus, it can be concluded that it's actually a lesser or equal (assuming it's quantifiable) form of evidence to that provided by two rocks.
Of course, the only numbers that will make logical sense in this case are 0 and 0.

EDIT: In case this explanation does not satisfy you, here's a simpler one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on May 10, 2011, 05:03:08 PM

Quote from: john_hand on May 10, 2011, 03:52:33 PM

we aren't talking about all the rocks in the universe, just the ones in the metaphor

The rocks in the metaphor were "rocks". Are you claiming that a rock in the universe is something else but a rock? Considering the amount of meaningful content in your previous posts, you probably do. Anyway, two rocks fitting together are not evidence of anything. As for eight rocks, let's see.

Two rocks fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Two rocks composed of two smaller rocks each (four rocks) fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Two rocks composed of the aforementioned rocks (eight rocks) fit together, therefore they once were one rock.
Eight rocks fitting together are in no way more evidence than two of them. In fact, they're the exact same situation, and since the amount of variations of how we can try to fit the rocks together rises exponentially, the probability of you finding a matching combination is raised as well. Thus, it can be concluded that it's actually a lesser or equal (assuming it's quantifiable) form of evidence to that provided by two rocks.
Of course, the only numbers that will make logical sense in this case are 0 and 0.

EDIT: In case this explanation does not satisfy you, here's a simpler one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

You epitomise stupid, or pedantic. I will explain it to you in simple to understand terms. When I say we aren't talking about all the rocks in the universe, just the ones in the metaphor, we’re referring to quantity, ie, the 8 rocks in the metaphor we are discussing. There was no comparison of these rocks to any other rocks nor was there a suggestion that they were not rocks. See, a metaphor is a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. In this case, the rocks represented the continents. Do you see?

I hope this clears things up and makes you look and feel suitably stupid as seems to be your prerogative

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on April 13, 2011, 01:37:10 PM

The if two rocks appear to look like they could fit together, that means they must have actually fit together at one point!

all the continents fit conveniently, South Americas east coast firs snuggly into Africa’s west, as does the East coast of Ireland into the west of England

when all the stones fit together, you got a single structure, and stones don't conveniently break into matching pieces that happen to be in the same place and happen to fit together.