Dictionary.com

Where will Los Angeles be in 50 million years? Beijing?

pangaea, pangae, gondwana, laurasia, amasia, continentsWhere would you have lived 200 million years ago? And will your descendants in Los Angeles or Bangkok live in Amasia instead of Asia or North America?

Maybe you’ve heard of Pangaea – the theoretical supercontinent that existed 200–300 million years ago and consisted of all the landmasses pushed together. Coined by Alfred Wegener in 1927, “Pangaea means “entire earth” in Greek. Wegener’s theory of continental drift also suggested that Pangaea split into two sub-supercontinents, Gondwana and Laurasia. No, he wasn’t making these words up off the top of his head. Gondwana comes from Sanskrit meaning “forest of the Indians” and refers to the landmasses that became South America, Africa, Australia and Antarctica. Laurasia became North America, Asia and Europe. The word Laurasia came from the name of the core of North America (Laurentia) and Eurasia.

The earth, though, hasn’t stopped moving. Geologists at Yale University predict that Asia and North America will join near the North Pole. Don’t worry – this will not happen in the foreseeable future. Continental drift is slow and steady, and the scientists say this particular shift will occur in 50–200 million years. They are proposing to call this future supercontinent “Amasia”. Learn more at the BBC.

What are continents made of? Cratons are the core of continents. They are the oldest and sturdiest part of landmasses, and their roots (yes, rocks have roots) descend many miles into the Earth’s crust.

How are continents defined? In World Geography, we learned about the seven continents of the world: Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, Antarctica, North America and South America. Some geologists quibble with the notion that there are seven continents. Perhaps Europe and Asia should actually be one continent (called Eurasia), or others claim, North and South America technically make one continent. However, those are not the prevailing beliefs. The word continent comes from the land phrase, “terra continens,” which meant “continuous land.” Continēnt literally meant “holding together.”

The names of the continents are contentious. Etymologists still haven’t pinned down the particular root for the word “Europe.” It shows up in Greek mythology in the form of a woman, Europa, who seduced Zeus, but its exact origin is uncertain. It has referred to what we know of as Europe, though, for a very long time. The word Asia comes from the Akkadian word “asus” which meant “to go out, to rise” in reference to the sun. So, Asia technically meant “the land where the sunrises.” From the perspective of Europe, Asia is in the direction of where the sun rises. Africa comes from the Latin name, Afri, which referred to people who lived in North Africa. It is unclear what “afri” meant.” Learn how the Americas were named here.

Australia and Antarctica both refer to the geographic positions of the continents in relation to Europe. Australia is derived from the Latin word australis, which meant “southern.” Antarctica simply means “opposite of the Arctic.”

How did the Yellow, Black and Red Seas get their names? Find out here.

Do you have a better name for the future continent? What is it?

ENHANCED AIRLINE PILOT SECURITY SCREENING BEGINS AT BOSTON LOGAN AIRPORT PROGRAM STRENGTHENS AVIATION SECURITY, EXPEDITES PASSENGER SCREENING.

States News Service October 25, 2011 WASHINGTON, DC — The following information was released by the Airline Pilots Association:

The Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l (ALPA) and the Air Transport Association of America (ATA) today began operating the seventh test site for the Known Crewmember program at Boston Logan International Airport. Known Crewmember, an enhanced security-screening program for airline crew members, positively verifies a pilot’s identity and employment status, strengthening aviation security and shortening screening lines for passengers. this web site boston logan airport

“Since 2007, the Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l, has led a national effort, engaging with the Air Transport Association, the Transportation Security Administration, and the airlines, to make the Known Crewmember program a reality,” said Capt. Lee Moak, ALPA’s president. “This enhanced screening process recognizes the extensive background checks pilots receive as part of their employment and, importantly, airline pilots’ critical role and responsibility in securing their aircraft each and every time they fly.” “We are pleased to partner with ALPA and TSA to advance an enhanced security-screening system that can improve security and reduce passenger screening congestion, benefiting both passengers and crew members,” said ATA President and CEO Nicholas E. Calio. “We urge the TSA to include flight attendants in the Known Crewmember screening system so that the screening system will be further enhanced.” The Known Crewmember program enables Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers to verify the identity and employment status of airline flight crew members. As a result, airline pilots, who already undergo thorough criminal background and employment checks as a condition of their employment, will be subject to a more efficient security-screening process. Both ALPA and the ATA have asked the TSA to include flight attendants in the future.

It is the goal of ALPA and the ATA to make the program available to all U.S. airline pilots, and 28 airlines already have connected to the system. bostonloganairportnow.net boston logan airport

Boston Logan International Airport is the seventh and final trial site for the Known Crewmember program, with the other trial access points located at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, Miami International Airport, Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Seattle–Tacoma International Airport, and Washington Dulles International Airport.

With the Boston Logan International Airport test site now operational, the Known Crewmember Program begins a 90-day evaluation period at the seven selected airports. At the end of the 90 days, the TSA, working with ATA and ALPA, will evaluate the results and consider a potential next stage of the program.

68 Comments

  1. Ben Cook -  May 19, 2015 - 10:19 pm

    Los Angeles will be floating near China

    Reply
  2. hokie pokie -  July 24, 2012 - 10:28 am

    I LOVE Asia, so exotic! I don’t think America + Asia = A very good match because they are so different! Asia, exotic and unusual, America, beautiful, but not very unusual or exotic… Again, even with Amasia there will be the rest of America and Asia which are not touching, so… I guess it won’t be that different… Yep.

    Reply
  3. Angel -  July 2, 2012 - 2:03 pm

    Actually, I’d call it Continent Earth.

    Reply
  4. Stella -  May 30, 2012 - 1:45 am

    @Socrates: HAHAHAHAHA Amnesia! LOL

    Reply
  5. Mr. D [A.K.A] Elysian -  March 7, 2012 - 10:50 am

    Yeah in 50 million years L.A. will be sand in the bottom of the ocean lol..

    Reply
  6. thomas jefferson -  March 7, 2012 - 7:42 am

    indubitably

    Reply
  7. SnipahKitteh -  March 5, 2012 - 6:35 am

    @ lando lol

    Reply
  8. SnipahKitteh -  March 5, 2012 - 6:34 am

    @qwerty
    What does God have to do with this? They never said he ISN’T real!

    Reply
  9. SnipahKitteh -  March 5, 2012 - 6:33 am

    I don’t think that it will have a name. Think about it. Humans may be abundant now, but we’re destroying the world. We’re polluting ourselves to death. We might be extinct in 50-200 million years.

    Reply
  10. mary torres 4 ever -  March 3, 2012 - 8:02 pm

    @oniya no you go away ugly person

    Reply
  11. oniya -  March 2, 2012 - 4:42 pm

    you are so not good fight you are go away.

    Reply
  12. QWERTY -  February 29, 2012 - 3:41 pm

    God is real Pangaea ain’t

    >:-|

    Reply
  13. QWERTY -  February 29, 2012 - 3:39 pm

    Never gonna happen Cu’s there was no evolution, thus no PANGAEA! Just because someone has a degree in science doesn’t mean they can say whatever and expect us 2 believe it. God is real!

    Reply
  14. Trebles -  February 26, 2012 - 8:58 am

    Ryan, of “yes i know where am i going??????????in heaven!!!!!!!!!!!:

    Well done. But keep it to yourself, mate. You’ll frighten people on here.

    Reply
  15. Trebles -  February 26, 2012 - 8:55 am

    Here on what are known as the Granitic Islands of the Seychelles (check a map; about 1,000 kilometres off Kenya in the Indian Ocean) we are living on slivers of granite that would have been in the middle of Gondwanaland before India and Africa parted company. I love it that when you look at a world map, Africa and India so obviously were once one. As for a name for a new supercontinent, couldn’t be arsed.

    Reply
  16. Lando Calrissian -  February 23, 2012 - 6:10 pm

    Where will L.A. be? At the bottom of the Pacific.

    Reply
  17. Ryno -  February 23, 2012 - 1:05 am

    2 words that would be the perfect name for all this…………….Terra Nova. You heard me

    Reply
  18. ryan -  February 20, 2012 - 1:05 am

    yes i know where am i going??????????in heaven!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  19. mary torres -  February 19, 2012 - 6:21 pm

    I LOVE MA MR. WRONG :)

    Reply
  20. jeth -  February 14, 2012 - 10:55 am

    we wont exist at that time eart resources will be depleted and we are to tranfer to other planet or maybe hit by a comet I hope not but hte name amereusia hehe sound like russia isnt it hehe

    Reply
  21. F3 -  February 14, 2012 - 8:44 am

    IMHO, this discussion is moot. In 50 million years, the entire flora and fauna of the earth will be new and we won’t be here in our current form. From a biological standpoint, every child born has between 100 and 300 new errors in their genome that their parents did not have. Eventually, these accumulating errors won’t lead to a new race, but a dead one. From a Christian standpoint, Christ will return LONG before our descendants are no longer able to bear healthy offspring. The all the phyla on the earth (including underground, in the oceans, and in the air) will be reborn new and we will have bodies which never age, never get sick, and never die.
    A new super-continent… Maybe. Relevant? Uh, not.
    I say we leave this world, today, better than we found it (to the extent of our abilities).

    Reply
  22. Irma Beck -  February 13, 2012 - 8:49 am

    Manila and Dethanos, thanks for the elucidation. Good to know! Always good to hear from scientists in the public sphere.

    Reply
  23. mary torres -  February 11, 2012 - 7:31 pm

    :)

    Reply
  24. serumbia -  February 11, 2012 - 3:42 pm

    Amasia means amazon and asia add together, amazon is at the wast and asia is at the east, add together equal Pangea.

    Reply
  25. Noob -  February 11, 2012 - 3:22 pm

    @ gilgamesh sheesh nerd

    Reply
  26. DrakeCennedig -  February 11, 2012 - 3:22 pm

    What about “Neolaurasia” or “Novolaurasia”? I’ve always thought “Laurasia” and “Laurentia” are awesome names, and since Eurasia never really separated, wouldn’t it make sense to say that this the new iteration of the old continent?

    Personally, “Laurentia” seems to be a better name for North America anyways, since it refers specifically to the continental shield, and not to simply “Land Discovered by Amerigo Vespucci,” which isn’t completely true anyways. Yes, I know the term refers indirectly to St. Lawrence; but unlike the term “America,” which applies across geologic regions, “Laurentia” really doesn’t have any other land to confuse it with.

    Reply
  27. Bruce Lee -  February 11, 2012 - 12:39 pm

    let’s call it “Chuck Norris”!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  28. Dee -  February 11, 2012 - 9:21 am

    Hee hee! This is soo cool! I like Futerra as its name!
    ;)

    Reply
  29. maximonk -  February 11, 2012 - 8:59 am

    Funny, isn’t it? If I think a ‘Hot Word’ subject is interesting, someone will post “Boring”; if I think it dull, someone will post “Fascinating”. Good! Vive la difference!
    Of course, someone else will change the subject to another religious rant. (Oops, I’ve done just that! Many apologies.)

    Reply
  30. Random -  February 11, 2012 - 8:35 am

    ╔═══╗ ♪
    ║███║ ♫
    ║ (●) ♫
    ╚═══╝♪♪

    Reply
  31. manila -  February 11, 2012 - 8:00 am

    @Ptron: A scientific theory is much different than a lay theory (a guess). In order for an idea to become a theory, in science, it has to undergo the scientific method where it is proposed as a hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once it is verified, it is a theory. On the other hand, a scientific law, is a statement that explains something under all conditions (i.e. real gas law, law of thermodynamics, Newton’s law’s of motion). These laws are how we as scientists and people govern the properties of the world.
    Theories are unique in science because they have been proven to be true. It takes much effort, testing, and evaluation, to produce a theory. One can argue both sides of evolution ( and I do not want to incite further controversy because that is another topic) but it is a fact.
    I’m simply stating that a scientific theory holds more truth and validity than ‘theory’ implies, and to any nonscientific person, it is commonly misunderstood and degraded because of lack of understanding of the real practice and process.

    Reply
  32. Dethanos -  February 11, 2012 - 7:03 am

    @Ptron

    The term theory has a different meaning in science than in standard speech. A scientific theory is not just a speculative idea. A scientific theory begins as a hypothesis, and must undergo research and peer-review before being considered a theory. The scientific method requires scientists to make every effort to disprove a hypothesis before accepting it as theory.

    It is also inaccurate to say they are “just theories”. Evolution, for example, is an observed phenomenon. The “theory of evolution by means of natural selection” merely attempts to explain the process that drives evolution.

    As for scientists “going back and forth”, that is usually a case of bad journalism. Many of the people reporting on these subjects either don’t understand the subject matter or are simply twisting the facts to fit their own political agenda. If you look at actual scientific literature, you’ll find that scientist rarely make the bold and definitive claims that we so often see in the media.

    Reply
  33. Mary -  February 11, 2012 - 3:20 am

    Gilgamesh you make an excellent point. They should remember that there are other languages.Just a tiny thing. Amasia and concubine are not the same thing. Concubine is when two people, not married, are living together but there in no legal impediment for them to marry each other. The “amasiato” is when two people living together cannot get married because one or both of them are still legally married to someone else.

    Aside that, I still don’t like this name, it reminds me of another spanish word: “amasar”, like working with dough, I like Amerisia or Ameria better :P Though I’m happy I won’t be here when that happens, I like things to stay the way they are. Yes, even continents haha.. =D

    Reply
  34. AVINASH -  February 10, 2012 - 11:02 pm

    WHATE IS THISH HOW R U

    Reply
  35. mujjuman -  February 10, 2012 - 10:17 pm

    just call everything America

    Reply
  36. DeathHawk13 -  February 10, 2012 - 9:46 pm

    One thing I’m curious about is in my opinion, before all this happens, Alaska and Russia look like they will collide, maybe not. I’m wondering what will happen to the land itself. Will it crumble or become a mountain range of some kind? So before we name the new continent, we might need to name the new mountains. Of course, one tectonic plate could get pushed up over the other one, in that case, a ton of earthquakes are gonna happen.

    Reply
  37. Triceratop -  February 10, 2012 - 8:20 pm

    Post-Mundi.

    Reply
  38. DG -  February 10, 2012 - 7:01 pm

    I think they have the name of what they call Gondwana wrong. It is actually called Gondwana Land. The original place called Gondwana is in India.

    Reply
  39. huh -  February 10, 2012 - 5:27 pm

    In 50 million years, language will probably transcend letters and phonetics. We will be a species of mind readers with no written records of history. So the resulting continent will probably be called..(insert thought here)….:)

    Reply
  40. Vanessa -  February 10, 2012 - 5:18 pm

    ‘So, Asia technically meant “the land where the sunrises.”’
    Perhaps I’m wrong, but shouldn’t that be ‘where the sun rises’? That is, with a space between sun and rises?

    Reply
  41. Gilgamesh -  February 10, 2012 - 4:31 pm

    Amasia in Spanish means female concubine, lover, etc. Don’t forget English only speaking people, there are more languages than English.
    Pan in greek means “all”, gaia (gea) “earth”. Pangea, all the earth.
    Ptron, all of them are hypothesis. Science requires for a proven phenomenom under controlled conditions to be a theory.

    Reply
  42. mari -  February 10, 2012 - 4:03 pm

    “amasia” – sounds like “amaze ya!” whoohoo!!

    Reply
  43. J-Wu33 -  February 10, 2012 - 3:15 pm

    It’s really funny how there’s always someone who says something like, “First comment, yippee!” but then is really the third or fourth comment. It’s really funny how Earth’s continents are always moving… Like they can’t figure out where they want to be.

    Reply
  44. British Bulldog -  February 10, 2012 - 3:03 pm

    In addition, to the plates moving between North America and Far-East Asia, they’re moving apart in the Atlantic – eventually a new landmass will emerge. Also (Maybe unfortunately) the British peninsula is moving towards Europe (Literally, not metaphorically) and so might rejoin. It’s a bit of a downer that we’ll lose one of our greatest distinctions and defences – being an island.

    Reply
  45. Greg -  February 10, 2012 - 2:08 pm

    Valerio, the inflating Earth theory was popped almost a hundred years ago.

    Reply
  46. Derrick -  February 10, 2012 - 1:43 pm

    I agree with Ptron – fun topic but I hope no one accepts these “theories” as fact without questioning it. The very first axiom is that the map was 200-300 million yrs ago – of course the person who proposed it was not there at the time, it is an assumption out of which grows this “reality”.

    On that note I profer my reality: If there was going to be a new supercontinent it would be called “Tekken”!!

    Reply
  47. Vicaari -  February 10, 2012 - 12:59 pm

    Intersting article. Enjoyed it very much. Thank you.

    Feel extremely excited on reading today’s article and w/ reason I hope which is as follows:

    Now there is a suggestion that the term Asia means the land where sun rises. I thought that too. B4. Not now. Why not! Well b4 the beginning of time when, say hypothetically, our foreparents began to walk to move eastward they went after light (The source of LIGHT–sun is the source; they thought they would get that, LIGHT, as if for 24hours a day. So why not go for it–the light.

    However, later as I thought more… something made me think that possibly (not as romantic as above) Asia could mean NOT SEA. A=not (b/c this a/A comes b4 a consonat S, it is A &/+ SIA. Or… A=NOT +Sia=Sea. Altogether the term Asia becomes NOT SEA. Sea is where water and opposite of sea is land or landmass. Forgive me I am not that educated &/or such to arriculate properly. Also Eng is not my first lang. Haowver thought I let you know what I thought about Asia; this belief is still in my system

    Amasia is extremely nice, soft sounding name and it is well thought as it looks from its roots: America & Asia. No new name can beat it. Like it very much.

    @Vex: Very gd point. Anything, everything will be moot….@ onetime or another, yet still not yet, so why not let’s make it a worthwhile & spice it up & have fun.
    @Nikhil Thakur: Your comment, ” …first to comment on this”. Is it?! Now I doubt if mine will be here/there @ all or disappear like CAMPHOR!!!

    Reply
  48. sherryyu -  February 10, 2012 - 12:55 pm

    im meant amerasanafriers

    Reply
  49. sherryyu -  February 10, 2012 - 12:55 pm

    im going to say the name is amerasanafrier

    Reply
  50. PANGAEA | BLOGCHI@mayopia.com -  February 10, 2012 - 12:00 pm

    [...] ‘Pangaea’, Pandowdy, Pangloss — In Montana they raise Dental Floss — Theoretically some Hypothesis of Gaia, — Not in sync with some Calendar of Maya — We have Free Will — To change things Still — We am what we see AmEuthanasia? –>>L.T.Rhyme [...]

    Reply
  51. Socrates -  February 10, 2012 - 10:45 am

    How about Amnesia?

    Reply
  52. Ptron -  February 10, 2012 - 9:40 am

    I like Charles’ “Asierica.” Or how about: Aquilonamerasia (uh-kee-luh-nuh-mair-zhah) or Borasierica (bor-uh-zhair-ih-kuh)? (“Aquilonem” and “boreas” are Latin words referring to “north.”)

    Amit, you are on to something. This could be a whole new fantasy genre. It could be called “neopangaea fantasy.”

    Side note: I do not mean to be a downer because this is a really fun topic, but am I the only one who is skeptical about what scientists say? I am not that old, but already I have heard scientific experts go back and forth on so many things.

    And so much of what is talked about are theories; however, these theories are heard often enough that despite their status as theories (e.g., theory of evolution, big bang theory, the theoretical supercontinent of Pangaea), they seem to become so engrained in our minds through repetition that we forget that they are just theories: “a speculative or conjectural view or idea.”

    Perhaps I woke up on the wrong side of the bed today. Or maybe it was that article I read about global warming…er…I mean climate change (a more adaptable term should things not turn out exactly how they thought).

    Reply
  53. Valerio -  February 10, 2012 - 8:03 am

    Good article but I cannot agree at one point.
    Every articles about it make the same mistake. Wrong interpretation of the science studies. The Earth’s surface was been equal at the sum of the continents, nowadays split. This mean that the Earth was smaller than today, and in the future will be bigger adding more surface under the oceans. This is for from the big energy kept inside in the Earth’s core. It.s such as a balloon with inside steam.

    Reply
  54. Nikhil Thakur -  February 10, 2012 - 4:45 am

    Really interesting article… Cant believe I’m the first to comment on this :))

    Reply
  55. Vex -  February 10, 2012 - 2:23 am

    ACTUALLY, the question is moot…
    Los Angeles will be dust in 50 million years.

    Reply
  56. Renrut -  February 10, 2012 - 12:57 am

    Panderelectis nuclearis may not be a better name but it is a sure thing that human beings intend to turn the world into it.

    Reply
  57. Suman Chakraborty -  February 9, 2012 - 10:44 pm

    Awesome article.Have read these when I was a kid.Now almost after a decade I m reading this.Its realy exhilarating to know about such things which exists and is unnoticed in daily life.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  58. Sergio Macías -  February 9, 2012 - 9:40 pm

    There are other possible future supercontinents, as Neopangaea (a.k.a. Pangaea Ultima or Pangaea Proxima) and Novopangaea.

    Reply
  59. Amit -  February 9, 2012 - 8:43 pm

    Fascinating in terms of knowledge. Could be useful for writing a fairytale that transcends timeframe of history. Interesting!

    Reply
  60. Kathleen -  February 9, 2012 - 8:14 pm

    Well, not us. I mean our future generations.

    Reply
  61. Kathleen -  February 9, 2012 - 8:14 pm

    Imagine that. Amasia. We could actually dig a hole to China.

    Reply
  62. :D -  February 9, 2012 - 8:09 pm

    Amersia, its pretty :D

    Reply
  63. Charles -  February 9, 2012 - 7:34 pm

    Amasia is a cool name.
    What about Asierica (pronounced ə-zhĕr’-ĭ-kə)? <— I kinda like that more.

    Reply
  64. Connor W. Colombo -  February 9, 2012 - 7:20 pm

    I think a better name for the continent would be either Inauterra (pronounced: in+ow+tear+uh) or Inauger(pronounced: in+ow+g+air) (Inaugera maybe, the -a doesn’t mean anything, it is simply for sound purposes) or Futerra (pronounced: foo+tear+uh).

    Inauterra: inauditus (unheard (of ), new) + terra (I think we all know this one)
    Inauterra essentially would mean: a land unheard of OR a land unknown to us.

    Inauger(a): inauditus (unheard (of ), new) + ager (farm LAND).
    Inauger would essentially have the same meaning as Inauterra, but with a different sound to it… personally, I think Inauterra sounds better.

    Futerra: futura (things about to be, really just meaning future) + terra
    Futerra would basically mean: a land to be, OR a land about to be (born).

    Reply
  65. A!3x -  February 9, 2012 - 6:42 pm

    :)

    Reply
  66. A!3x -  February 9, 2012 - 6:41 pm

    asarica !!!!!!?????!!!!!?????

    Reply

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked (required):

Related articles

Back to Top