lpetrich

Continental drift is a bit slow for significant position changes over the last 10,000 years; it's about a few cm (~1 inch) a year. So 10,000 years would produce a few hundred meters/yards of drift.

A good site that presents reconstructed continental drift is <a href="http://www.scotese.com" target="_blank">Chris Scotese's site</a>.

Australia split from Antarctica about 70-90 million years ago, and has been drifting northward ever since (Antarctica has approximately stayed put). So Australia would be in approximately the right place -- if one looked back to the early Cenozoic or late Cretaceous. And I don't think that our ancestors back then had been capable of making maps (they had looked <a href="http://shreddies.ai.mit.edu/scrapbook/animals/scans/bushbaby.jpg" target="_blank">something like this</a>).

ageofreason2000

Here's the map in question the Orontius Finaeus map

<a href="http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Finaeus_Map.html" target="_blank">http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Finaeus_Map.html</a>

(don't know what the site is exactly just did a search on the map)

I must say the conclusions against Hapgood are pretty damning (which explains why I picked the book up cheap and hadn't heard anything else about it).

However it does at least LOOK like antartica and its in the right place (OK too big and wrong orientation). Maps of the time drew a land mass on the S Pole, apparently they believed the land masses had to balance out.

It could just be a coincidence?
or
It could be portugese sailors partially mapped it?
or
It could point to some older undiscovered sea faring civilization?

Who knows

Age

ageofreason2000

They have hands they have eyes what more do you need to draw maps


Age