Land Bridge

[texasmom]

Geology is tough to dispute.   Plate Tectonics are a reality and proven.    The "Land Bridge" is quite possibly the reason, when looking into the "Various Routes into the Americas".   

I've also talked to people who are adamant that the Earth is only 14,000 years old.   I show them a chunk of Banded Ironstone from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.    I tell them that "this Metamorphic Rock is 3.0 Billion Years old."    Some of the oldest rock formations on this Earth are Banded Ironstone Formations.   I'm a "rock hound" and hope to pass on my learnings to my son.    Imagining the Appalachians in their heydey is garganutan to fathom.    27,000ft tall mountains now worn down to 6,000 ft in height.   

For those in Oregon and Northern California, you can acquire the rarest of rocks.    I forget the exact location, but you can get Glaucophane Schist.   As most know, "Subduction of the sea floor creates the magma for the Cascade Region".   Well, Blueschist or (Glaucophane Schist) forms when the Basaltic Ocean floor subducts under the N.A. Plate and it finds itself flipped on top of the N.A. Plate, in an violent counteraction.

I was in Oregon twice and forgot to grab a piece.   

National Geographic says this:
Siberian (or Amur) tigers are the world's largest cats. They live primarily in eastern Russia's birch forests, though some exist in China and North Korea. There are an estimated 400 to 500 Siberian tigers living in the wild, and recent studies suggest that these numbers are stable. Though their northern climate is far harsher than those of other tigers, these animals have some advantages. Northern forests offer the lowest human density of any tiger habitat, and the most complete ecosystem. The vast woodlands also allow tigers far more room to roam, as Russia's timber industry is currently less extensive than that of many other countries.


Have any of y’all seen the woodlands of Alaska?  Compare Russia's vast birch forests to the ecosystems in Alaska. The Siberian Tiger would quickly dominate in this ecosystem. Why no Siberian Tigers in Alaska?  They would absolutely have PRIME food there in Alaska; it’s population would have flourished.

If there was ever a land bridge ~ the Siberian Tiger would certainly be there.  The absence of the Siberian Tiger is in direct opposition to the survival of the fittest crowd's standard line.  This one thing alone is enough to dispute a land bridge ever having been present almost without question.

About 100 years ago, my Grandpa's family traveled across the Bering Strait to settle in Alaska.  Is it only possible for migrants to have traveled to Alaska by land?  Don't think so. The rest of those migrants came over in the same manner ~ boat.

[croduh]

Indians came by boat.

[lasersailor184]

Perhaps at the time there was a land bridge, there weren't any tasty deer in Alaska.

[Xargos]

Grizzlies would have a problem with Siberian Tigers competing for their food.  In a fight between the two, I'd put my money on the Grizzly.  It wouldn't surprise me if some bones were found in the future, so much of Alaska is still unexplored.  No telling what's below the permafrost.


I think you may find this interesting TxMom.

http://www.mnh.si.edu/arctic/html/peopling_siberia.html

[AWMac]

Are you saying that coconuts migrate?

[FrodeMk3]

National Geographic says this:
Siberian (or Amur) tigers are the world's largest cats. They live primarily in eastern Russia's birch forests, though some exist in China and North Korea. There are an estimated 400 to 500 Siberian tigers living in the wild, and recent studies suggest that these numbers are stable. Though their northern climate is far harsher than those of other tigers, these animals have some advantages. Northern forests offer the lowest human density of any tiger habitat, and the most complete ecosystem. The vast woodlands also allow tigers far more room to roam, as Russia's timber industry is currently less extensive than that of many other countries.


Have any of y’all seen the woodlands of Alaska?  Compare Russia's vast birch forests to the ecosystems in Alaska. The Siberian Tiger would quickly dominate in this ecosystem. Why no Siberian Tigers in Alaska?  They would absolutely have PRIME food there in Alaska; it’s population would have flourished.

If there was ever a land bridge ~ the Siberian Tiger would certainly be there.  The absence of the Siberian Tiger is in direct opposition to the survival of the fittest crowd's standard line.  This one thing alone is enough to dispute a land bridge ever having been present almost without question.

About 100 years ago, my Grandpa's family traveled across the Bering Strait to settle in Alaska.  Is it only possible for migrants to have traveled to Alaska by land?  Don't think so. The rest of those migrants came over in the same manner ~ boat.

TxMom, at the time that the 'land bridge' most paleantologist's refer to, would have sometime during the Pleistocene era. This was well before the modern Siberian Tiger as we know it. Think Sabertooth Tiggers. The big cats' kinda evolved from there.

[Airhead]

no Mac, what she's saying is there's two different types of animals living in Alaska vs. Russia and if there had been a land bridge they would have comingled- as they didn't it's evidence if there ever was a land bridge it wasn't used by animals to migrate, and in all liklihood humans arrived in North America by boat- or, as many of us believe, by space ship.  

[bj229r]

I bet a Swallow could carry a coconut

[Gryphons]

I bet a Swallow could carry a coconut

NO, its a simple lift to wieght ratio.  Tho maybe an african swallow... 

[ROX]

Most people look to the simple creature; the lemming.  

Each year adult lemmings unwittingly commit suicide by charging head-long into the Bering Sea.  Scientists say it's because for millenia, lemmings migrated across the "land bridge".

Supposedly, because this annual migration was imbedded in their DNA, lemmings continue to die in the ocean....looking for their long lost "land bridge".

I'd also go with a scenerio that included glaciers.  If in a period back in history that glaciers prodiced a "land bridge" early man wouldn't need boats...although boats would work.  Humans are a curious lot, and it they can see land across some water...it's only a matter of time before someone goes there and comes back, even if it's just to say "I was there".

While Viking settlements in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have been noted, there are are stone structures with massive stone obelisks in New York State, Maine, and New Hampshire.  The structures are believed to have been made betwen 1,600 and 2,000 BC.  This timeframe is believed to be far older than North American Clovis Man or other "migratory" peoples that made use of the Bering Strait "land bridge".  Some scientists say that Celtic peoples had temporary settlements in these locations...other scientists say they were built by ancient Minoan explorers.  No one seems to know for sure.

So much for Columbus discovering North America.

There have also been discoveries of Chinese anchors in ports ranging from California to Peru...these anchors are dated as old as back to 1,000 BC.

BTW:  When Russia still owned Alaska there was a small trickle of Russian citizens who volunteered to settle the region prior to the American Civil War.  You will find their ancestors with russian names to this day.

I'd love to see more research done.  The evidence is out there.


ROX

[AWMac]

NO, its a simple lift to wieght ratio.  Tho maybe an african swallow... 

What, held under the dorsal guiding feathers?

[Xargos]

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Chinese sailors landed in the Americas before the Europeans.  Many people fail to realize how advanced the Chinese were back then, before opium.

[texasmom]

...Many people fail to realize how advanced the Chinese were back then, before opium.

 

[Masherbrum]

National Geographic says this:
Siberian (or Amur) tigers are the world's largest cats. They live primarily in eastern Russia's birch forests, though some exist in China and North Korea. There are an estimated 400 to 500 Siberian tigers living in the wild, and recent studies suggest that these numbers are stable. Though their northern climate is far harsher than those of other tigers, these animals have some advantages. Northern forests offer the lowest human density of any tiger habitat, and the most complete ecosystem. The vast woodlands also allow tigers far more room to roam, as Russia's timber industry is currently less extensive than that of many other countries.


Have any of y’all seen the woodlands of Alaska?  Compare Russia's vast birch forests to the ecosystems in Alaska. The Siberian Tiger would quickly dominate in this ecosystem. Why no Siberian Tigers in Alaska?  They would absolutely have PRIME food there in Alaska; it’s population would have flourished.

If there was ever a land bridge ~ the Siberian Tiger would certainly be there.  The absence of the Siberian Tiger is in direct opposition to the survival of the fittest crowd's standard line.  This one thing alone is enough to dispute a land bridge ever having been present almost without question.

About 100 years ago, my Grandpa's family traveled across the Bering Strait to settle in Alaska.  Is it only possible for migrants to have traveled to Alaska by land?  Don't think so. The rest of those migrants came over in the same manner ~ boat.

You aren't thinking properly for the time.    Also by when the term "Land Bridge" is used, it is often used in a vague manner.    Glaciers would provide a VERY LIKELY and treachorous method of travel for short distances if they existed back then.    But the most likely cause of "having a land bridge" would be the amount of "sea water sucked into the Ice Caps, exposing the Basaltic Sea Floor."   This is the most "plausible" reason to have a "land bridge".   Heck even New Guinea and Tasmania were linked to the Australian Continent as we know it today.   Plate Tectonics will ALWAYS be disputed, but it factually exists and has been proven. 

The perfect example of "Hotspot volcanology" is not only Hawaii.   But Central America and New Zealand.    Hawaii is in Stage One.   New Zealand will soon reach the Stage Three phase (last one) of an solid stretch of land resembling Central America.   

Siberian Tigers weren't around then.   Mastodons,  Smilodons (Sabretooth Tigers - as Frode mentioned) would have been the primary mammals in the Alaskan/East Russain habitat.   Not to mention that the last Glacial Period [not "Ice Age" as was most commonly taught] (in the Pleistocine) began about 110,000 years ago and ended between 10,000 and 15,000 from today.   Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan have the most common remnants of this time.    Minnesota is called "The Land of 10,000 Lakes".  But it has a lot of very "small lakes".  When the Glaciers last receded, they left behind large chunks of bedrock and the water melted around them (this also applies to most States that would have been covered by Glaciers).    Except Virginia, it is the only State in the Union that does not have a Natural Lake. 

Indians came by boat.

Wrong.  But believe what you want. 

I've bored you all enough.    Just trying to inform and educate with no malice.   <<S>>

[texasmom]

I'm assuming part of the reason any timeline I use will never match up is that I'm basing all off of a creationism timeline rather than the "billions and billions of years ago, when life started as germs" timeline, also.