General Question

rojo's avatar

Was there ever a land bridge between Europe and the Americas?

Asked by rojo (21960points) January 10th, 2017

I have read articles about Beringia, the land bridge that existed between Asia and the Americas during a period of lower sea levels, but have not heard of what the landscape was on the opposite side of the Americas during the same time frame. Anyone have any knowledge about this subject or links to articles?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

28 Answers

janbb's avatar

Have never heard of one.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

Yes, at one point they were literally on top of each other.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I need to add that this was a much earlier time frame.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

Yes. When Pangia was one large large island.

rojo's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me , @RedDeerGuy1

I am wondering about a much later time frame, Beringia existed during and through the last ice age so maybe 38,000 to 13,000 B.P.

Seems like I recall something a few years back about similarities between the Solutrean toolkit of Europe and the Clovis toolkit in the Americas.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I don’t think there was but it would not have been hard then to leapfrog between land masses.

cazzie's avatar

There was a land bridge between Europe and the British Islands.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It’s happened several times mainly due to the ice ages when the mass of water tied up in ice dropped sea levels to the point that bridges emerged connecting the land masses. One aspect of global warming that we’d better start thinking about is the fact that a great percentage of the human population is now concentrated in coastal regions. A lot of those places are going to disappear AND SOON.

cazzie's avatar

@stanleybmanly and the problem is being compounded by the big coastal cities sinking as well experiencing higher storm swells.

Zaku's avatar

I think the answer is thought to be “yes, but when? A very very long time ago.”

This model suggests not quite. Nova Scotia shows close to Scotland but with some water between, 200 million years ago. But perhaps earlier than that?

This model also suggests not.

This model suggests yes, but many millions of years ago. It has Pangea starting to break apart 200 million years ago, at which point Europe and NA are unrecognizable. At 165 million years ago, the Atlantic starts cracking between them. At 155 million, another rift forms. At 140 million, more rifts and there may be no land bridge, or perhaps only a very northern one, at least according to this very rough and conjectural (I assume) map. At 130 million, it looks cut off by water. Assuming light blue means covered by water though shallower than dark blue. If only dark blue counts, it looks like you may have until 70 million years ago, or so. By 50 million, certainly an ocean of nope, by this model.

Response moderated (Spam)
CWOTUS's avatar

Well, there’s Pangea, but I think that was pre-human history.

cazzie's avatar

this was interesting to read.

This is getting a ‘GQ’ from me!

imrainmaker's avatar

Here’s the wiki link that suggest it did exist between Asia and Americas.

David_Achilles's avatar

A picture is worth a million words. Check out this video of paleogeography and plate tectonics:

cazzie's avatar

This is weird and I don’t know why I read it this way, but I thought the OP was getting at the ability of humans to migrate. @David_Achilles your video is very good, but it goes well back before humans even left Africa or even existed. I guess it was @rojo ‘s follow up question that made me think he was more focused on human migration than actual tectonics.

Patty_Melt's avatar

Whaaaaaa? How can they track those changes with any accuracy, and predict at all future movement?

cazzie's avatar

@Patty_Melt It’s Geology. It’s science.

Patty_Melt's avatar

That tells me what, not how, and geology is not a depedable study. They have no realistic warning system for volcanic activity. We are still hearimg Yellowstone might blow, but nothing certain, and time guesses are all over.
So, again, how?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

You’re confusing seismology and volcanology with historical geology.

Patty_Melt's avatar

Still doesn’t explain to me how.
My confusion is not what, it is how.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

For that you need to probably take an entire sequence of historical geology classes. The short answer is stratigraphy.

Patty_Melt's avatar

My point is, the science cannot be reliable. We have had unexpected occurances in my lifetime which altered land mass positioning.
Indonesia was unexpectedly repositioned by Tsunami.
At least once an earthquake was so severe it changed the length of the day minutely.
Volcanoes do play a role.
Islands appear, disappear, and sometimes reappear.
There are a great many variables which have not and cannot be predicted.
Culderas of ancient volcanoes are still being discovered.
Super volcanoes are known to have exploded in the past, but how many and when is mostly speculation.
If anybody knew continental shift with any certainty, then tectonic related tsunamis would not be so unpredictable.
I still remain unconvinced that anyone has the data required to track continental drift past or future with any real accuracy.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I agree that the resolution may be granular but we got the overall picture and understand it fairly well.

Patty_Melt's avatar

Well stated, but I would still disagree to the level of confidence.
In regards to the question of similarity of some stone tools, I would think it possible different peoples simply hit upon similar ideas and design. (Yes, the pun was intended.)

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

On tools sure on plate tectonics not so much.

cazzie's avatar

@Patty_Melt Science isn’t about absolute facts. Quite the opposite. I know a professor who studies lightning and you’d be surprised what we don’t know about lightning. You’d also get a kick about some of the silly ideas scientists have had about lightning, like gamma radiation from space etc. Science doesn’t know everything for a fact. We can’t even get a decent weather report, but that’s now how science works. We know where fault lines are, especially the major ones, but they still find new ones. No, they can’t predict when a volcano will erupt. My friend who studies lightning sat on the side of a volcano in Japan waiting for it to erupt so he could get some measurements from the lightning that happens in the ash cloud. The damn thing had been pretty reliably going off for a long time, but the three weeks he and his team sat there, not a burp.
We absolutely shouldn’t believe everything we hear from ‘experts’. Plate tectonics, however, is pretty well established as what is happening on the surface of the Earth. My friends in New Zealand wish it wasn’t or at least if the movements were more predictable because their last earthquake had us all crying and scared. They do try to measure the pressure that builds up along the fault lines that might lead to an earthquake, but even that is difficult.

I like to stick to chemistry because I feel like I have more control over the outcome of my experiments. My friend who studies and teaches lightning is an experimental physicist. That would send me around the twist. He teaches quantum mechanics and that just bends my brain the wrong way.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther