Is it true that years ago some Cristal skulls were found in the  Amazon jungle?
465455
Skulls are humanity's foremost symbol of death, and a powerful icon in the visual vocabularies of cultures all over the globe. Thirteen crystal skulls of apparently ancient origin have been found in parts of Mexico, Central America and South America, comprising one of the most fascinating subjects of 20th Century archaeology. \n\n\n© Joshua Shapiro photo by Vera Manaleo \n\nThese skulls, found near the ancient ruins of Mayan and Aztec civilizations (with some evidence linking the skulls with past civilization in Peru) are a mystery as profound as the Pyramids of Egypt, the Nazca Lines of Peru, or Stonehenge. Some of the skulls are believed to be between 5,000 and 36,000 years old.\n\nMany indigenous people speak of their remarkable magical and healing properties, but nobody really knows where they came from or what they were used for. \nWere they left behind after the destruction of a previous world, such as Atlantis? Are they simply ingenious modern fakes or can they really enable us to see deeply into the past and predict the future? \n\nMuch research is currently being done on the skulls. However, their origin is still a baffling mystery. They seem to defy logic. Everything that is known about lapidary work indicates that the skulls should have been shattered fractured, or fallen apart when carved.\n\nFamous Crystal Skulls\nThis report examines the known history of crystal skulls, various viewpoints on where they might have came from, and the secrets they may reveal.\n\nCopyright 1996 ParaScope, Inc.\n\nThe Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull \nThe most widely celebrated and mysterious crystal skull is the Mitchell-Hedges Skull, for at least two good reasons. First, it is very similar in form to an actual human skull, even featuring a fitted removable jawbone. Most known crystal skulls are of a more stylized structure, often with unrealistic features and teeth that are simply etched onto a single skull piece.\nSecond, it is impossible to say how the Mitchell-Hedges skull was constructed. From a technical standpoint, it appears to be an impossible object which today's most talented sculptors and engineers would be unable to duplicate.
521108
The latest studies place the oldest rock formation in the canyon at 1.84 billion years old.  Note that you have to be somewhat careful when discussing the age of the rocks at the bottom of the Grand Canyon as the dates have become more refined with improved dating techniques while books and literature often quote older, outdated numbers that have since been revised.\n\nOne of the most recent published studies about the age of rocks in the Grand Canyon's inner gorge is that by geologist K. E. Karlstrom and others.  They identify the Elves Chasm pluton (a granite intrusion in the western end of the canyon) as the oldest rock formation in the canyon (and in the southwest US for that matter) at a date of 1.84 Ga (1.84 billion years old).  They also date most of the other rocks of the inner gorge (a variety of schists, gneisses and other granite plutons) over a range of 1.65 to 1.75 Ga (1.65 - 1.75 billion years old).\n\nThese dates place the oldest rocks of the inner gorge near the end of the geologic time frame known as the Paleoproterozic Era (which is the period from 1.6 to 2.5 billion years ago) when the North American continent was still forming and life was limited mostly to simple algaes.  \n\nNote that for many years, the inner gorge rocks were believed to be somewhat older (2 billion years or more) and were once even assigned to the earlier Archean period.  These somewhat older dates and classifications are still sometimes given in books, web pages, etc.\n\nLastly... I have the seen the Vishnu Schist complex that makes up much of the inner gorge added to the phrase mentioned above as 'Know The Canyon History, See Rocks Made By Time, Very Slowly' (Very Slowly = Vishnu Schist).
13506
I would assume that you're speaking of an Amazonian frog in the rainforests of South America. Although, currently hermaphroditic frogs have been linked with pesticide usage. My suggestion would be to search some website like National Geographic or a university's zoology department. \n\nHave fun searching, and you could always borrow the dvd off someone.
464728
Well, the GABI (Great American Biotic Interchange) went both ways, and several families of mammals from North America came to South America, and viceversa. However, only few native South Americans remain today in North America (NA), whereas many originally Holarctic families are thriving in South America (SA) at present. \n\nThe above answerer has outlined the three major "strata" defined by GG Simpson for the mammals of SA. The "original" South American mammals before the GABI included marsupials (shared with Australia, but forming a distinct cohort with different families) but also the exclusively South American xenarthrans (although there is a possible fossil anteater from Europe), and the Caviomorph rodents (closely related to the hystricognathous African rodents). In addition, there were some carnivores that had made it from NA. \n\nAfter the Panama land bridge appeared, the GABI was intense. North and South American faunas mixed and they appear to have coexisted for a long time. \nThe subsequent Pleistocene extinctions involved groups of both origins, but the South American natives were more intensely affected. Among the hypotheses to explain this,  interspecific competition has been mentioned, but also climatic changes. \nFirst of all, direct competition is _very_ difficult to prove, and more so with respect to fossil remains from strata that may not be exactly coeval. A more recent and preferred explanation involves a little paleoclimatology. \n** During the glaciations (and other stressful periods), South American conditions were more benign, because the continent is closer to the Equator, whereas environments in NA were much harsher, facilitating the extinction of the South American immigrants, along with many native North American giant forms. \n**In addition, the Central American corridor, which had been at first a savanna-like environment that permitted passage, later in the Pleistocene became more like a tropical forest. Then many cursorial (running) animals that inhabited open areas were unable to "cross the bridge". The giant ground sloths and glyptodonts were trapped in NA, and when climate and vegetation kept changing toward colder and drier conditions, became extinct.\n\nAnimals left from this: \nAmong the original South American natives, only the xenarthrans (sloths, armadillos, and anteaters) and marsupials (opossums)[early inhabitants], and the caviomorph rodents (originally derived from their African relatives) [second stratum colonizers] are alive today. The immensely diverse native ungulates went extinct, along with the representatives of the megafauna (giant sloths, glyptodonts, etc). At least one species of armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) is expanding its range in NA today, and the opossums (I remember Didelphis virginiana, not sure if there are others) are well established there. Caviomorph rodents also occur in NA (porcupines, genus Erethizon), but are mostly confined to Central America. \nThese are the South American contributions to North American fauna. In contrast, about 50% of the South American mammal genera have North American origin.\n\nWith respect to birds, at least the Passeriformes Suboscines are South American in origin, but I have no idea _when_ they colonized NA. They include the Tyrannidae (tyrant flycatchers). Other birds with Neotropical origin are the hummingbirds (Trochiliformes or Apodiformes).\n\n---------------------\nUpdate:\nMmm... I’m not sure what you call “non-speed strategies”. Predators? Running forms such as ungulates? There were many native ungulates in South America and they went extinct; also many marsupial predators such as the marsupial sabertooth “cat”  that also disappeared. Many caviomorph rodents are cursorial (capybaras, agoutis, etc).\nI would relate it more to size. Size _is_ a constraint because large animals have different energetic balance and need large amounts of food and room. And those went extinct in both co
127171
According to Wikipedia, yes.\nAlthough the river had previously been given several names, from indigenous ones given by the tribesmen along its banks to those given it by early Spanish explorers, this is the one that stuck:\nThe name Amazon arises from a battle which Francisco de Orellana had with a tribe of Tapuyas where the women of the tribe fought alongside the men, as was the custom among the entire tribe. Orellana derived the name Amazonas from the ancient Amazons of Asia and Africa described by Herodotus and Diodorus.
1128758
"The oldest indications for the existence of real land plants have been found in cores from boreholes in Oman. They contained fours of mutually connected spores (tetrads) enveloped by remains of the spore sac in which they had been formed. Research on the spore walls point to a relationship with the liverworts. The fossils have been found in the Middle Ordovician and are about 475 million years old."\n\nSee the link below for 2 pages of info on the development of this.
1083205
The aztecs were building pyramids long before the egyptians in South America!
537798
Excellent question. I have often thought about this before. They say that Egyptians never came to the new world but I don't buy it. Pyramids, heiroglyphs, burials, tombs And they way they looked. Too much to be coincidence. National geographic has a special called the curse of the cocaine mummies. They found the coca plant in Egyptian mummies which proves that they had trade.
613043
Probably not.  Though I've lost the reference, I remember reading once that large animals (wolves, saber-toothed tigers, mammoths, etc.) would only have to get stuck and die together once a decade to produce the number of bones that have been found there.
774728
You can find an abstract of an article written on this subject at the url below. The title and volume listed below. \n\nIn a nutshell, the dates on this huge mafic-ultramafic complex in Brazil (old ocean floor possibly) point to two big events in the earth's early tectonic history: First, a Mesoproterozoic extension event (like a spreading ridge) that forms the mafic-ultramafic complex (ocean crust and seafloor)(1583±25 Ma , 1565±22 Ma-million years ago).  Then, a continental collision event: younger dates of 770–795 Ma (million years ago) for  metamorphism of the complex (" high-grade amphibolite to granulite facies prograde metamorphism"), may represent the timing of a continental collision event.   \n\nZircon and rutile U---Pb geochronology of the Niquelândia layered mafic and ultramafic intrusion, Brazil: constraints for the timing of magmatism and high grade metamorphism\n\nby Ferreira-Filho and several others.\nPrecambrian Research \nVolume 68, Issues 3-4 , August 1994, Pages 241-255
276563
Yes, there are. The biggest is the Amazon located in the south (share with Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia). The second biggest is known as the choco rain forest located in the northeast (Panamá border)and this rain forest is why the Panamerican road have not been finished yet.
363371
http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/dept/d10/asb/anthro2003/origins/selection/mickey3.html
1180379
isn't it obvious? the triceratops of course!\n\nhere's a site to prove it...
234093
Yes it did happen, if you look on a map by the Yucatan Penisula you'll be able to make out the shape of the crater in the area
1099542
Neanderthal and Monkey.
305328
yes i have heard the story and i'm british. but all these tales are myths that appear in all ages of man. currently this tales is repeated in mexico, south texas and arizona the aztecs had versions of it and hernandes cortes had heard of it. in spain there are versions of it and malaysia has similar tales.
211411
I dont know them by heart but I do know they are in the book called Popol Vuh (sacred book) and what I could remember is the previous answer, in 2012 we´re history.  You can look it up in the following site:\nwww.sacred-texts.com/nam/maya/pvgm