How did Monkeys get to South America?

Well, of course, but your math is wrong.Since when is 12 mm = .12 centimeters? 12 mm = 1.2cm. Or .012m..012m * 40,000,000 = 480,000m. Or 480km. Or 298.258 miles.Naturally, something doesn't make sense. Either the spread has changed through time (which we can determine by finding two matching magnetic strips, measure the distance between them, how old they are, and divide distance by time), your current rate is simply wrong, or both.The atlantic ocean did not exist 130mya. So if we use that as our start date, and the maximum width of 2850km (the narrowest part), we get a crude rate of 21.92mm/yr.The average rate of all spreading is roughly 2.5cm/year. The Atlantic ocean spreads at a rate of between 1cm to 10cm per year.

I'd be interested to know what values he entered into the model he linked to. It almost seems as if you can build hypothetical spread rates with it.Of course, claiming 12mm is .12cm is really, really silly.Africa, according to this (File:Global plate motion 2008-04-17.jpg - Wikipedia) seems to be moving in a northeasterly direction.

No, you still haven't provided your model.Yes, you gave a link. But there are all sorts of variables that you can enter. You claim that whatever you enter gives you 12mm per year. And you link has none of the values filled in, with all of the choices set to the default (GSRM 1.2 (2004), TPAM is auto, reference is NNR).However, I can get various rates using all the separate models with no net-rotation. Those rates vary from 9.61mm/yr with the APKIM2000.0 model with no-net-rotation with S.America as the reference plate, to 32.59mm/yr with the NUVEL 1 model with no-net-rotation with Africa as the reference plate. That data set was provided by using Brasilia and Brazzara as the reference points, with the simulation running all models, with no-net-rotation (NNR), with tectonic plate of attributed motion (TPAM) set to auto. The data I posted here is from the column "speed in mm/yr", not "N. v. mm/yr" or "E. v. mm/yr".Changing any of the TPAM or reference values gives you different data sets. For example, changing the reference from NNR to S.America gives a wildly different data set, where most of the movement in the models is zero (22 of 30), but of the 8 that have non-zero values, they are {12.03, 9.69, 32.02, 29.41, 32.47, 32.02, 33.05}. Funnily enough, those eight are also where the plate reference is SA(AF), not SA(SA).That is the information I am looking for from you. Which model did you pick? Which TPAM? Which reference?

Well, using current currents, that would be a touch of a problem. Your link shows that currents from 1992-2008 moved from 0 to .2m/s around Africa and South America (excepting some extremely fast currents close to the equatorial region that move to africa). If my math isn't screwy, than .2m/s = .72km/hr, or 17.2km/day. Assuming one could float as the crow flies, and that this is the speed of the current from africa to S.America the entire time, and assuming the current distance of 2850km, you have approximately 5.5 months to reach the other shore (165.7 days).Now then, this model has some problems. First, it is based on modern current speed. Second, it assumes the fastest speed of the south atlantic the whole time. Third, it assumes a straight line float. Fourth, it assumes that the continents are at their present locations. That said, it probably assumes a slower than average speed, as the equatorial region of the atlantic has speeds ranging from .1-.3m/s, excepting extremely fast currents off the coast of S.America, and it is also the equatorial region that has the continents closest to each other.As to your mention of the bathtub toys, it's worth noting that most of the surface current speed in the NE pacific, per your link, is 0-.1m/s. Roughly 10 months to travel 1450km works out to .2km/hr, or .056m/s.What you really need to find is an estimate of current speed for the oceans at the time that these animals and plants were suspected of having rafted across the oceans. You also need to know what the distance was at the time between the start and end points. The most accurate way would be to find magnetic strips on both sides of the atlantic that are the same age, and then measure the distance between the two.

You're kidding, right? This ranks up there with your claim that 12mm is .12cm. Notice what the wiki says:

quote:

---

When they occur naturally they are sometimes referred to as tussocks, floatons, or sudds. Natural floating islands are composed of vegetation growing on a buoyant mat consisting of plant roots or other organic detritus.

​

They typically occur when growths of cattails, bulrush, sedge, and reeds extend outward from the shoreline of a wetland area. As the water gets deeper the roots no longer reach the bottom, so they use the oxygen in their root mass for buoyancy, and the surrounding vegetation for support to retain their top-side-up orientation[citation needed]. The area beneath these floating mats is exceptionally rich in aquatic lifeforms. Eventually, storm events tear whole sections free from the shore, and the islands thus formed migrate around a lake with changing winds, eventually either reattaching to a new area of the shore, or breaking up in heavy weather.

​

Natural floating islands may have been the source of many "disappearing island" legends, such as those surrounding the Isle of Avalon.

​

Explosive volcanic eruptions may create pumice rafts, that can float on the ocean for months or even years before becoming fully saturated and sinking. The larger rafts often wind up having grasses and palm trees growing on them.

---

Really now, you can do better than this.