Social Question

johnpowell's avatar

Does anyone dispute the prior existence of Pangea?

Asked by johnpowell (17881points) February 22nd, 2015

And more importantly can anyone recall a politician being asked about at and denying it was real?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

11 Answers

cheebdragon's avatar

I can’t think of anyone, but I’m sure they would unfortunately be a conservative and/or mormon.

johnpowell's avatar

Yeah.. I’m kinda wondering how you get by with the earth is 5000 years old thing. I’m wondering why Pangea isn’t getting as much love as evolution.

Brian1946's avatar

I think flat-earthers would dispute it because apparently they hold this view, or something like it; “I’ve never seen continents shift personally so I have no reason to believe that they do.”

dappled_leaves's avatar

@johnpowell “Were you there?”

It’s a good question – I can’t imagine any young earth creationist trying to argue against plate tectonics, but perhaps they do. Maybe they think the receding of the flood shaped the mountains and revealed the present-day continents.

@Brian1946 I can’t figure out if that site you linked is serious or satire!

stanleybmanly's avatar

The BIG stumbling point for those insisting on a 10,000 year old universe is that the preposterous notion flies in the face of EVERY BRANCH of science from Astronomy ( in which we see light from stars in our own galaxy that required 60,000 years to get here) to Zoology (with fossilized creatures PROVEN to be dated from millions of years ago). The very light from the sun itself requires hundreds of thousands of years to battle its way from the interior before the eight minute trip to our eyes.

1TubeGuru's avatar

Some Creationists dispute the plate tectonics theory and espouse what is known as the Hydroplate theory. http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html

dappled_leaves's avatar

Haha. I knew it. Good thing they have that flood to blame everything on.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

There are simply waaay too many lines of evidence that put the earth at billions of years old and not thousands. The only feasible explanation for a young earth was that the universe is “digital” and was “rendered” 5000 years ago.

cheebdragon's avatar

The bible is full of shit.

gondwanalon's avatar

The things that some folks believe just because they are written in the bible is fascinating to me. There are a lot of people who believe that every word of the Holy Bible is 100% right. I hope that no elected politicians believe that. Because such limited reasoning ability is an indication of their intellectual blindness. I think that if God exists, then He would want humans to use our brain to figure things out. Not blindly follow what some backward people wrote 2000 years ago.

Historical geology is backed up by modern science and indicates that Pangea split into 2 super continents (Laurasia and Gondwanaland) about 200 million years ago.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther