If we still lived on a giant supercontinent, transportation and communication between different regions would likely be more challenging and time-consuming. Cultures and societies may have developed more homogenously without the geographic barriers that lead to differentiation. Natural disasters such as earthquakes and volcanoes could have a more widespread impact on the entire population.
Well, I'm not an expert but it's a question that's still up in the air. You could argue that Gondwana or Laurasia were before Pangea but we still can't be 100%. My person opinion would be no, Pangea was not the first supercontinent, but you could argue that Pangea could be the first supercontinent because of the big lapse in time between all of the supercontinents, but again, my opinion would be no.
If Pangaea never broke up, Earth would still likely have a single supercontinent surrounded by a single vast ocean. The distribution of species would be very different, as continents played a critical role in shaping biodiversity. Additionally, geological processes like mountain building and volcanism would likely be concentrated along the edges of the supercontinent.
Plate tectonics. The tectonic plates (basically giant land masses) move about as much in a year as your fingernails grow in a year. The shifting of the plates led to the current placement of the continents. If there were no shifting, then we would likely still be one land mass.
Pangaea is believed to have been a supercontinent that included all of the continents we know today in one giant landmass. A web address where an approximate picture of what Pangaea may have looked like can be found at the related link below. The "map" located at this link includes the countries as they are now, in order to show the original makeup of the continents.
If the movement of the plates brought all the continents together again, a single continent would form. At the moment plate movements are not heading in that direction.
Well, I'm not an expert but it's a question that's still up in the air. You could argue that Gondwana or Laurasia were before Pangea but we still can't be 100%. My person opinion would be no, Pangea was not the first supercontinent, but you could argue that Pangea could be the first supercontinent because of the big lapse in time between all of the supercontinents, but again, my opinion would be no.
With pesticides
If you could slide all the continents towards each other - they would literally fit back together like a giant jigsaw.
if they were still alive they would probably be endangered and live in zoos and reserves.
there is still slavery
we would still be dope
If people lived on the moon they would probobly still be called humans or people.
Andre the Giant was born on May 19, 1946. If he were still alive today, he would be 75 years old as of 2021.
He resigned after two terms.
If Pangaea never broke up, Earth would still likely have a single supercontinent surrounded by a single vast ocean. The distribution of species would be very different, as continents played a critical role in shaping biodiversity. Additionally, geological processes like mountain building and volcanism would likely be concentrated along the edges of the supercontinent.
In 2011; 82 years old
No. Abel Tasman lived in the 1600s. It would not be possible for his daughter to still be alive.