5 ms·
The Scottish Highlands, the Appalachians, Atlas are the same mountain range
- nephihaha 10mo agoDidn't know about the Atlas, but I knew northern Scotland and Nova Scotia shared a lot of geology.
- Tagbert 10mo agoThe southern end of the Atlas, the Anti-Atlas range, is from the same formation as the Appalachans. The rest of the Atlas came from a different (later?) event.
- aitchnyu 10mo agoNova Scotia and Scotch-Irish settling in Appalachia (another comment). Interesting thought process how a people managed to find their ideal land in spite of continental drift.
- nephihaha 10mo agoThere has been an obvious tendency for Europeans to migrate to areas similar to where they came from. A lot of Finns migrated to Minnesota I believe because it is full of trees and lakes and has cold winters much like Finland!
- trgn 10mo agoatlas remain very high though. so what's different there that they're not eroded?
- wahern 10mo agoI've been nerd sniped. Per Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Mountains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Mountains > In the Paleogene and Neogene Periods (~66 million to ~1.8 million years ago), the mountain chains that today constitute the Atlas were uplifted, as the land masses of Europe and Africa collided at the southern end of the Iberian Peninsula. But it also notes, > The Anti-Atlas Mountains are believed to have originally been formed as part of the Alleghenian orogeny. These mountains were formed when Africa and America collided Anti-Atlas? If we jump over to the Anti-Atlas article we see, > In some contexts, the Anti-Atlas is considered separate from the Atlas Mountains system, as the prefix "anti" (i.e. opposite) implies. and > The summits of the Anti-Atlas reach average heights of 2,500–2,700 m (8,200–8,900 ft), So in addition to subsequent events, the portion of the Atlas originally formed with the Appalachian is geologically distinguishable from the other portions of the Atlas chain, and actually significantly lower than the parts of the chain formed later, though not as low as the Appalachians.
- brcmthrowaway 10mo agoWhere do the himalayas fit in all this?
- nkrisc 10mo agoThey don’t.
- turtlesdown11 10mo agoThey're also mountain ranges formed from the collision of plates? Otherwise, nothing, the timelines of the formation of the Himalayas and the Appalachians are hundreds of millions of years apart.
- voxleone 10mo agoThe Himalayas formed because the Indian craton moved exceptionally fast northward (all the way from Antarctica) and collided with Eurasia, one of the fastest sustained plate motions known in geological history. The collision with Asia began around 50–55 Ma and is still ongoing, which is why the Himalayas are still rising today.
- mr_toad 10mo agoThe Himalayan mountains are new kids on the block. The Appalachian ranges pre-date life on land, they pre-date the evolution of vertebrates.
- IAmBroom 10mo agoAppalachians:Himalayas::Childhood scar:Pimple.
- tengwar2 10mo agoI'm finding it difficult to believe that map relates to the title. It's not showing just the Scottish Highlands (roughly speaking the north-west half of Scotland), but the whole of Scotland, Ireland and Wales, plus about half of England, including the famously flat Lincolnshire fens.
- zimpenfish 10mo ago> including the famously flat Lincolnshire fens. I think they might have gotten flatter in the intervening 200M+ years.
- IAmBroom 10mo agoSo, you expected a map that omits all adjoining land to the mountains? Most people wouldn't object to an article about Kilimanjaro containing a map of where it is in Tanzania, but for reference, here is a map of just the mountain: O.
- tengwar2 10mo agoIf the map labelled the whole of Tanzania, Kenya, and Malawi as being Kilimanjaro, yes, I would have a problem with that.
- shagie 10mo agoAnd if you want to hike it, you've got the International Appalachian Trail... https://iat-sia.org/the-trail/ https://iat-sia.org/the-trail/
- almog 10mo agoIf you want to section hike it, its entire North American part is covered by the Eastern Continental Trail (ECT), which some people (very few, as in a tiny fraction of all A.T. thruhikers) thruhike it in a single calendar year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Continental_Trail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Continental_Trail
- AndrewKemendo 10mo agoI segment hike the eastern AT probably monthly and encounter a half dozen thru hikers a year. It’s a very busy trail with relatively good infrastructure .
- al_borland 10mo agoI visited Scotland last year. They bring this up a lot on tours. Some of the distilleries also bought land in the Appalachian region to grow trees to make future whiskey casks.
- mauvehaus 10mo agoIn Scotland, surely they're concerned with the future supply of whisky casks, not whiskey casks. Also, AIUI, because bourbon has to be aged in new white oak barrels, you find a lot of former bourbon barrels aging distilled spirits all throughout the world, Scotland included.
- al_borland 10mo ago> whisky casks, not whiskey casks. Interesting, I just looked up the details on this[0]. I’m surprised they didn’t hammer that home as well. I thought maybe you were just being pedantic at first, but that’s a good call out. I did make sure to say cask instead of barrel, as a barrel is just one size option for a cask. They did talk about the rules of scotch vs bourbon and how some of that supply chain works for reuse. [0] https://www.scotchwhiskyexperience.co.uk/about/about-whisky/whisky-or-whiskey/ https://www.scotchwhiskyexperience.co.uk/about/about-whisky/...
- wil421 10mo agoA lot of times they use whisky casks. Lots of distilleries use bourbon casks because you can only use a cask once for bourbon.
- IAmBroom 10mo agoWhich is restating what the GP said...
- eszed 10mo ago<Maximum pedantry mode engaged> Either could be correct, because whisky casks begin as whiskey casks. It's wise to be aware of all the links in your supply chain!
- adolph 10mo agoThe Scottish Highlands are also significant to contemporary understanding of geology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton%27s_Unconformity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton%27s_Unconformity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdwRRpiYGQ&t=68s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfdwRRpiYGQ&t=68s
- biomcgary 10mo agoThis explains the Scotch-Irish settling in Appalachia. It felt like home, but without the overbearing Brits nearby.
- librasteve 10mo agosurely you mean overbearing English, old man?
- clickety_clack 10mo agoYa, the Scotch-Irish were the Brits doing the overbearing in Ireland.
- physicsguy 10mo agoLet’s also not forget that the Irish lords that the Anglo-Irish supplanted were themselves the descendants of Normans.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- orwin 10mo agoNo, they weren't, not in a meaningful way.
- clickety_clack 10mo agoThis is incorrect. It was the Britons that were ruled by saxons and then normans, not the Irish (until the invasion we’re talking about obviously).
- oncallthrow 10mo agoNo, we just found Nicola sturgeon’s hacker news account
- esseph 10mo agoA lot also settled in the farmlands of Western Kentucky and brought sheep farming along with them, which is how it emerged as a very intense (mutton, pork, chicken, beef) bbq region.
- sakopov 10mo agoAccording to this study from 2005 [1] the Appalachians are eroding 6 meters per 1 million years while the rivers are incising 30-100 meters per same time period. So they're technically still becoming more rugged. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20250326213947/https://www.geotimes.org/mar07/article.html?id=geophen.html https://web.archive.org/web/20250326213947/https://www.geoti...
- IAmBroom 10mo agoCurrently.
- cranberryturkey 10mo agocheck out local hiking trails on ParkLookup
- IAmBroom 10mo ago"A Progressive Web App (PWA) for discovering and exploring U.S. National Parks." So, advertising your side project? Because it is useless for checking out Scottish Highlands trails.
- jjulius 10mo agoIf ya think that's neat, go check out the idea behind Baja BC - that huge chunks of British Columbia and Alaska, as well as portions of Washington, were once down by Baja Mexico. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.T13A2979G/abstract https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.T13A2979G/abstra...
- sbuttgereit 10mo agoNick Zentner, a geology lecturer at Central Washington University, takes a particular subject and does a relatively deep, discussion oriented, dive into it over the course of 26 sub-topics... his "A to Z" series. In these he does a couple streamed shows a week and includes links to relevant papers and resources. At the end of each session is a viewer Q&A for those watching live. Almost an online continuing education course.... He did "Baja-BC A to Z" 3 years ago: https://www.nickzentner.com/#/baja-bc-a-to-z/ https://www.nickzentner.com/#/baja-bc-a-to-z/ With the associated reading list: https://www.geology.cwu.edu/facstaff/nick/gBAJA/ https://www.geology.cwu.edu/facstaff/nick/gBAJA/ Currently he's about halfway through another "A to Z" called "Alaska A to Z" which covers some of that same territory https://www.nickzentner.com/#/livestream-series-26-episodes/ https://www.nickzentner.com/#/livestream-series-26-episodes/ And the so-far-posted reading list: https://www.geology.cwu.edu/facstaff/nick/gALASKA/ https://www.geology.cwu.edu/facstaff/nick/gALASKA/ Of central importance to the first half of the current Alaska series is recent paper by geologist Robert S. Hildebrand titled: "The enigmatic Tintina–Rocky Mountain Trench fault:a hidden solution to the BajaBC controversy?" What's great about these series is that he'll get a number of the geologists writing these papers involved in one way or another. Either contributing interviews or talks specifically for the video series, or like in the case of this Hildebrand centric work in the current series, Hildebrand himself is watching the stream and participating in the live chat with the other viewers, answer questions and the like.
- jjulius 10mo agoHell yeah!!! Huuuuge Nick Zentner fan here, he's the entire reason I even knew about it. I'm a PNW resident and love attending his lectures in April. If you can make it, please do! Zentner's a goddamned national treasure.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- fsckboy 10mo agoglancing at that map, an interesting (to an American mostly just cuz we think we know our own geography) trivia factoid came to mind: Q: Where in the US are you closest to Africa? I'll explain the answer key at the bottom so you don't see them sooo readily if you want to think about it... but whatevs an entirely different interesting factoid, the Catskill Mountains in NY State, which seem to be part of the Appalachian Range, are in fact not mountains at all. What appear to be mountains is actually erosion of a high plateau, leaving mountainous appearing hills https://static1.thetravelimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/catskills.jpg https://static1.thetravelimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/upl... (they are however connected to the Appalachians, they just aren't mountains) . Wrong Answer: adirolf A: eniam I wrote the words backward
- ErroneousBosh 10mo agoBy quite a comfortable margin, too. I guess it's kind of like how Edinburgh on the east coast of the UK is quite a bit further west than Bristol on the west coast of the UK.
- fsckboy 10mo agoi didn't know that, i need to find an aerial view and similar, traversing the Panama Canal from the Atlantic to the Pacific puts you farther east.
- ErroneousBosh 10mo agoI didn't know that, but there it is, about 30km or so.
- nonameiguess 10mo agoI'm pretty sure it's the US Virgin Islands, but I guess you don't want to include territories.
- prennert 10mo agoI would file this under blogspam, given the length of the article, the atrocious oversimplifying, highly compressed map and the number of ads. If you are interested in the geology of Scotland, there are excellent books available, including "Land of Mountain and Flood: The Geology and Landforms of Scotland". I am sure good books about the Appalachians and the Atlas are available, too.
- aklemm 10mo agoWhen I learned this, I also learned that in the Appalachian Mountains, the valleys were the peaks originally and the peaks are what were the valleys. This has to do with the type of rock and the erosion that has happened; the original peaks were a softer rock. That mountain range was extremely tall at one point.
- Ericson2314 10mo agoI'm a little suspicious that they drew the Atlas mountains in the wrong spot.