http://creationwiki.org/Catastrophic_pla…
I KNOW that is a shady source, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. Unfortunately I'm not a scientist so I can't tell if what they're sayin is true or not. Does catastrophic continental drift really explain anything that the regular continental drift can't explain? I would love it if educated persons could answer this(geologists, physicists, etc), but course science aficionados are encouraged to answer too :)
I KNOW that is a shady source, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. Unfortunately I'm not a scientist so I can't tell if what they're sayin is true or not. Does catastrophic continental drift really explain anything that the regular continental drift can't explain? I would love it if educated persons could answer this(geologists, physicists, etc), but course science aficionados are encouraged to answer too :)
-
All I can say is.....wow....just wow. The sheer level of ridiculousness is almost too much to bear.
It's a classic case of deciding what they want to have happened and then bastardising the science to fit. For a start they're advocating the upper mantle suddenly sinking for no apparent reason whatsoever. The only way to accomplish that would be an utterly massive, instantaneous density change which, aside from being catastrophic enough to completely scour the earth, would require something to start it. They never explain what. They give a nod to the problems caused by such a huge release of energy, but then come up with utterly moronic explanations (Rapid expansion of space - where? Parallel universe - Cop out explanation for a start, and where was it before and after? Direct act of God - Cop out! Freezing cold water - at pressure under over 600 Km of hot rock (depending on where they claim it was) and heated constantly by radioactive decay, not going to happen.) On top of this there is no way, however much creationists might like to repeat it, that a global flood would create the fossil record. Floods produce chaotic jumbled up messes, not carefully stratified sediments with clear boundaries.
Then the outright lie "No other theory predicts nor readily explains these this evidence". All the features in the "supporting evidence" section are dealt with by either the plume or slab graveyard hypotheses and are perfectly consistent with plate tectonics.
So no, catastrophic continental drift explains nothing because there is no legitimate mechanism to cause it.
It's a classic case of deciding what they want to have happened and then bastardising the science to fit. For a start they're advocating the upper mantle suddenly sinking for no apparent reason whatsoever. The only way to accomplish that would be an utterly massive, instantaneous density change which, aside from being catastrophic enough to completely scour the earth, would require something to start it. They never explain what. They give a nod to the problems caused by such a huge release of energy, but then come up with utterly moronic explanations (Rapid expansion of space - where? Parallel universe - Cop out explanation for a start, and where was it before and after? Direct act of God - Cop out! Freezing cold water - at pressure under over 600 Km of hot rock (depending on where they claim it was) and heated constantly by radioactive decay, not going to happen.) On top of this there is no way, however much creationists might like to repeat it, that a global flood would create the fossil record. Floods produce chaotic jumbled up messes, not carefully stratified sediments with clear boundaries.
Then the outright lie "No other theory predicts nor readily explains these this evidence". All the features in the "supporting evidence" section are dealt with by either the plume or slab graveyard hypotheses and are perfectly consistent with plate tectonics.
So no, catastrophic continental drift explains nothing because there is no legitimate mechanism to cause it.
-
it is bullshit, they are both twisting facts and outright making crap up
there simply isn't enough water to flood the earth, and if there was enough water, where did it all go
also it totally leaves out the formation of Pangaea. there is plenty of research showing it was made of of several continents colliding to form it, and evidence f an even older supercontinent called Pangaea. These creationist crap mentions none of that
also, there is no way the plates can move that fast and suddenly low down without a severe violation of the laws of motion
there simply isn't enough water to flood the earth, and if there was enough water, where did it all go
also it totally leaves out the formation of Pangaea. there is plenty of research showing it was made of of several continents colliding to form it, and evidence f an even older supercontinent called Pangaea. These creationist crap mentions none of that
also, there is no way the plates can move that fast and suddenly low down without a severe violation of the laws of motion
-
Why do you even have to ask?
Stop and think for a bit.
A 'global' flood'???? And just where would all the water come from?
Congratulations! You've struck pure b*llsh*t.
Stop and think for a bit.
A 'global' flood'???? And just where would all the water come from?
Congratulations! You've struck pure b*llsh*t.