Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
The word “tectonics” has to do with earth movements; so the study of the movements and interactions among these plates is called “plate tectonics.” Plate tectonics is an interpretation or model of what geologists envisage happened to these plates through earth’s history
Plate tectonics is not directly mentioned in the Bible, but Genesis 1:9–10 suggests that all of the land was once connected, whereas the continents are now separated. The catastrophic plate tectonics model and continental sprint during the Flood can explain this.
We have a reasonable picture of what happened at the catastrophic initiation of the Flood. Huge plumes of molten rock blasted the underside of the earth’s crust like massive blow-torches. Eventually the crust was ripped apart, and steam and molten rock burst forth. The supercontinent collapsed.
In the middle of the Ethiopian desert, a 35-mile-long gash cuts through the earth, the product of tectonic activity in 2005. The speed with which the Ethiopian rift appeared is a suggestion of just how rapidly tectonic events may occur on earth now.
The biblical worldview changes how you see everything, even a “paradise” like Hawaii.
The world that we see today is not the one that existed in Noah’s day.
Did the continents drift apart in the days of Peleg as a result of God dividing and separating the continents?
How could a massive, global flood be triggered? Do plate tectonics provide a valid mechanism? Geologist Andrew Snelling answers.
Smithsonian’s account of tectonic history is significantly short-sighted.
Diamond data testifies to tectonic history—or does it?
Because of the enormous explanatory and predictive success of the plate tectonics model, we feel that at least some portion of plate tectonics theory should be incorporated into the creation model.
When you look at a globe, have you ever thought that the earth looks cracked? Or, maybe the continents have reminded you of a giant jigsaw puzzle.
More information is provided from the ocean floor on the uniformitarian assumptions that undergird his belief in plate tectonics.
Any serious model for the Genesis Flood must account for the massive tectonic changes evident in the geological record since the point in that record where metazoan fossils first appear.
Baumgardner’s model is elegant, but contains many problems. The most serious seems to be assuming plate tectonics has been proven and too much uniformitarianism.
Michael Oard’s first contribution in this forum lays out a valid criticism of uniformitarian plate tectonics—namely the quantity and character of the sediments in the deep ocean trenches.
Catastrophic plate tectonics seems to be sped-up plate tectonics, a paradigm assumed too quickly and with many uniformitarian assumptions, including ‘precise’ radiometric and fossil dates.
We publish here six articles that address catastrophic plate tectonics as a framework for Biblical Earth history.
When one examines Michael Oard’s own alternative explanations for the tectonic features of the Earth, it should be plain he is not concerned with serious alternatives to the paradigm he is attacking.
This bias against the plate tectonics paradigm has developed after examining the paradigm for 25 years. I find many serious problems with it that I have recently catalogued.