Featured Image Credit: kampee patisena/ Roberto Moiola / Sysaworld/ Getty
It's often thought that we know more about space than we do about the bottom of Earth's deepest oceans, something that's been underlined by an exciting new discovery.
Scientists have unveiled a new theory about how our planet went from a ball of molten magma to one with landmasses and oceans.
The start of the question involves a chunk of land in South Africa that has baffled researchers for ages, called the Barberton Greenstone Belt. This area of land contains layers of rock beds that don't match up to what research surveyors think should be there.
Advert
Specifically, the rock bed contains elements from ancient seafloor areas that simply shouldn't be there, if our understanding of how landmasses formed is correct.
The basic theory is that the Earth was roiling and almost liquid in its infancy, which meant that tectonic plates didn't form until later, and earthquakes didn't happen as there was no mass to shake.
Instead, though, this team of researchers from the Victoria University of Wellington think that there were tectonic plates, or at least matter to be shaken, and that the Barberton Greenstone Belt helps prove this.
They made their thesis by comparing the Belt to areas deep on the seafloor near New Zealand which show the signs of significant underwater landslides which jumble up their rock beds. This is known as 'subduction', as one plate slides under the other.
As it turns out, when a major earthquake hits, it's not just the surface above sea level that is rocked by it - underwater the situation is just as bad, with massive rockslides and upheaval of the seabed.
By contrasting the two environments, the team ultimately concluded that the Belt was a "remnant of a gigantic landslide containing sediments deposited both on land or in very shallow water, jumbled with those that accumulated on the deep seafloor". It wrote about the discovery, and this new theory, in a piece for non-profit media site The Conversation.
This is a bit of a re-ordering of how we've looked at our planet's history, since it busts the assumption that earthquakes didn't play a part in this phase of geological history.
Similarly, the paper goes on to indicate more possibilities - looking at the likelihood that volcanic activity was also involved at an earlier stage than has often been assumed, thanks to the presence of rare forms of volcanic ash in the Barberton Greenstone Belt.
So, it looks like this one stretch of land has already been able to enlighten us on elements of our planetary history - who knows whether it has further tidbits and revelations to offer up?
