Hmmm, a very interesting start position - and one that looks like you really need more info on where to settle. The square the settler is on looks very good - near floodplains, on the coast, but with not too many coastal squares - so it can benefit from the great lighthouse and colossus but without losing too much production. Ideally suited to having rapid growth combined with high-ish production initially and then converting to a science-centre once you have some other good cities. Navy is going to be largely irrelevent on pangea, but the map is suggestive of being able to expand along the coast to a large extent, so a great-lighthouse/colossus strategy might be very useful for science. Especially because on pangea it's likely that several other civs will be inland so less likelihood of other civs building them quickly.
Two snags about settling in-place though: 1. You lose a forest, and 2. It does look like it might be near the end of a peninsula - just the wrong distance that settling there might lose you some land for a city to the SE (good land outside the city radius but still too close to be able to put another city there). Plus you end up with a capital at the end of your empire and so higher distance maintenance costs. You could move East and settle on the plains-hill for higher initial production, but with a greater risk of losing what might have been good land. Alternatively, moving West looks like it'll avoid wasting the land, and allow you to still found on the first turn, but I doubt I'll do that because the resultant location looks less good (and you lose the pigs). I'm a little nervous too because the presence of flood plains suggests there's likely to be desert nearby - moving west (or NW) just might give you a capital with lots of useless desert squares.
I think I'm most likely to start by moving the warrior SE, to try and get a better view of how much land there actually is down there, and then decide what to do with the settler. But I also suspect, based on the limited map so far, that I will settle in-place as being the best all-round compromise.
One other point. The flood-plains implies we're near the equator, so probably not at the southern tip of the land mass. To me that suggests we're at the eastern tip, so quite possibly the land dips down to the West. (I might be wrong, there might be more land dipping down to the East, but that looks a bit less likely from the map).
