Timeline for Why was the initial theory of plate tectonics so controversial?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aug 15, 2023 at 18:55 | comment | added | John | @RBarryYoung I wound say that alone would justify a lot of skepticisms. If someone proposed cold fusion today they would suffer a lot of skepticism just due to the failures of similar ideas in the past. Scientists are still human they can and do develop prejudices to ideas if repeatedly proven wrong. | |
Mar 2, 2015 at 12:12 | comment | added | mtb-za | There was also a well-known South African geologist named Alex du Toit, who was able to link features in South Africa and South America in the 1920s and 1930s. He published a book named "Our Wandering Continents" in 1937, laying out his evidence. One of his big discoveries was that part of South Africa had evidence of glacial deposition. More people should know about him. | |
Feb 22, 2015 at 14:30 | comment | added | RBarryYoung | @michael I would say rather that as a theory, it was very incomplete. Really more of a supposition than a theory. | |
Feb 22, 2015 at 1:20 | comment | added | Gimelist | I'm with @RBarryYoung - continental drift was simply wrong. It was wrong then and it is still wrong now. | |
S Feb 22, 2015 at 0:04 | history | edited | Fred | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed typo (and changed link syntax to work around 6 character limit)
|
S Feb 22, 2015 at 0:04 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed typo (and changed link syntax to work around 6 character limit)
|
Feb 21, 2015 at 22:29 | review | Suggested edits | |||
S Feb 22, 2015 at 0:04 | |||||
Feb 21, 2015 at 2:11 | history | edited | user889 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
Feb 20, 2015 at 23:45 | comment | added | RBarryYoung | A nice article, but unfortunately it does not properly address the OP's question. This article answer's "Why was the Theory of Continental Drift controversial in the 1920's?" However, although the Theory of Plate Tectonics in the 1950's did incorporate the central thesis of Continental Drift, it was a separate theory proposed at a separate time (and most importantly, it answered the criticisms of Continental Drift). Controversies surrounding it would have had to come from after it was proposed, and so any answer to the question should reference criticisms from the 50's and 60's onwards. | |
Feb 20, 2015 at 16:41 | comment | added | Bob Eret | Were there any events or findings that would have made this theory specifically relevant at the time it was conceived? Thanks. | |
Feb 20, 2015 at 16:32 | vote | accept | Bob Eret | ||
Feb 20, 2015 at 13:52 | history | answered | Fred | CC BY-SA 3.0 |