5 ms·
and they are ooooold. Older-than-trees old.
by hprotagonist 4y ago
and they are ooooold. Older-than-trees old.
- h2odragon 4y agoand separated for much of that time. at some point the unique life experience of each side of the range renders them individual; it might be more proper to say they're descendants of the single original range. On the other hand if we could convince them to get back together the shipping costs to Europe would plummet and that would be good for the economy.
- tjr225 4y agoAren’t most mountains older than trees? Maybe even all of them?
- zamadatix 4y agoCertainly not all, e.g. trees are ~8x older than the Himalayas. I think trees might actually even be slightly older than the Central Pangean Mountains.
- sulam 4y agoI suspect gp may have been referring to specific mountains and specific trees, not trees as a species.
- bandyaboot 4y agoNo, they were referring to trees in general. As in, this particular mountain range has existed since before the first tree evolved on earth. Edit: My mistake, thought you were referring to the original “older than trees” comment.
- tjr225 4y agoNo I wasnt.
- Brian_K_White 4y agohprotagonist was
- tjr225 4y agoCorrect.
- dredmorbius 4y agoMany mountain ranges are surprisingly young, geologically speaking. They rise quickly, but also erode rapidly. The tallest ranges (Himalaya, Andes) are relatively young, at roughly 20--50 mya based on a quick Wikipedia read. The higher and more rugged the range, the younger, in all likelihood.
- bumblebritches5 4y ago
- vidanay 4y agoYounger than the mountains, growin' like a breeze.
- hollerith 4y agoWikipedia says trees have been in existence for 370 million years. Are these mountains even older than that?
- hprotagonist 4y agoyep! by about 80-100 million years.
- dredmorbius 4y agoThey're probably older than dirt. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32373985
- shadowgovt 4y agoThere's a meme that criss-crosses Facebook from time to time that notes that in general, one doesn't find any skeletal remains in the rock formations in the Appalachians. You might find them washed into a cave, but you won't find any in the rock itself, as those mountain formations predate the evolution of skeletons. Older than bones, older than bones.
- DFHippie 4y agoBut a lot younger that a lot of other mountains (though not the Alps, Rockies, Himalayas, or Andes). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orogenies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orogenies
- dredmorbius 4y agoNot only older than trees, but older than dirt. Literally. Dirt, in the sense of organic topsoil, requires plant life, and often the action of burrowing insects, reptiles, and mammals to form. The Appalachian range formed about the same time that life was first colonising land, ~480 mya, and it's likely that soil formation post-dates this by a significant extent. This also means that the Appalachians have some of the oldest rivers in the world, including the ... inaccurately named ... New River, the Susquehanna, and French Broad River, all dating to ~260--340 mya. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_by_age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_by_age
- Maursault 4y ago> This also means that the Appalachians have some of the oldest rivers In the case of the New River (unsure about the others), it is the other way around: the river is not old because the mountains are old, but the mountains are old because the river is older. The New River predates the mountains that surround it.
- dredmorbius 4y agoFair point, and I'd known that once. That said, the river runs through the Appalachians, and is quite old.