There are problems for ‘slow-and-gradual’ plate tectonics, while the zebra-stripe pattern has been confirmed, drilling through the basalt adjacent to the ridges has shown that the neat pattern recorded by dragging a magnetometer above the ridge is not present when the rock is actually sampled. The magnetic polarity changes in patches down the holes, with no consistent pattern with depth.1 This would be expected with rapid formation of the basalt, combined with rapid field reversals, not the slow-and-gradual formation with slow reversals assumed by uniformitarians.
Such evidence for rapid reversals was later found by the respected researchers, Coe and Prevot.2,3 Their later work confirmed these findings and showed the magnetic reversals were ‘astonishingly rapid’.4
Catastrophic plate tectonics.
The process starts with the cold and dense ocean floor beginning to sink into the softer, less dense mantle beneath. The friction from this movement generates heat, especially around the edges, which softens the adjacent mantle material, making it less resistant to the sinking of the ocean floor.5
The edges sink faster, dragging the rest of the ocean floor along, in conveyor-belt fashion. Faster movement creates more friction and the heat in the surrounding mantle, reducing its resistance further and so the ocean floor moves even faster, and so on. At its peak, this thermal runaway instability would have allowed for subduction at rates of metres-per-second. This key concept is called runaway subduction.
The sinking ocean floor would displace mantle material, starting large-scale movement throughout the entire mantle. However, as the ocean-floor sank and rapidly subducted adjacent to the pre-Flood super-continent’s margins, elsewhere the earth’s crust would be under such tensional stress that it would be torn apart (rifted), breaking up both pre-Flood super-continent and the ocean floor.
Thus, crustal spreading zones would rapidly extend along cracks in the ocean floor for some 10,000 km where the splitting was occurring. Hot mantle material displaced by the subducting slabs would well up, rising to the surface along these spreading zones. On the ocean floor, this hot mantle material would vaporise copious amounts of ocean water, producing a linear geyser of the superheated steam along the whole length of the spreading centres. This steam would disperse, condensing in the atmosphere to fall as intense global rain.
Baumgardener’s catastrophic plate tectonics global Flood model for Earth history6 is able to explain more geological data than the conventional plate tectonics model with its many millions of years. For example, rapid subduction of the pre-Flood ocean floor into the mantle results in new ocean floor that is dramatically hotter, especially in its upper 100km, not just at spreading ridges, but everywhere. Being hotter, the new ocean floor is of lower density and therefore rises 1,000 to 2,000 metres higher than before and implies a dramatic rise in global sea level.
This higher sea level floods the continental surfaces and makes possible the deposition of large areas of sedimentary deposits on top of the normally high-standing continents. The Grand Canyon provides a spectacular window into the amazing layer-cake character of these sediment deposits that in many cases continue uninterrupted for more than 1,000km.7 Uniformitarian (‘slow and gradual’) plate tectonics simply cannot account for such thick continental sediment sequences of such vast horizontal extent.
Conclusion – Early scepticism about plate tectonics has largely evaporated because the framework has such great explanatory power. The catastrophic plate tectonics model for the Flood not only includes these explanatory elements, but also accounts for widespread evidence of massive flooding and catastrophic geological processes on the continents. Many creationists believe the concept is helpful in explaining Earth’s history. Some are still cautious. The idea is quite new, and radical, and much work has yet to be done to flesh out the details. There may even be major modifications to the theory that increase its explanatory power, or future discoveries could cause the model to be abandoned. Such is the nature of scientific progress.
Batten D., Ham K., Sarfati J., Wieland C., The Answer Book Pg 149.
1. Hall, J.M. and Robinson, P.T., 1979. Deep crustal drilling in the North Atlantic Ocean. Science 204:573-586.
2. Coe, R.S. and Prevot, M., 1989. Evidence suggesting extremely rapid field variation during a geomagnetic reversal. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 92:292-298.
3.For details, see Snelling, A.A., 1991. ‘Fossil” magnetism reveals rapid reversals of the earth’s magnetic field. Creation 13(3):46-50.
4. Coe, R.S., Prevot, M. and Camps, P.,1995. New evidence for extraordinary rapid change of the geomagnetic field during a reversal. Nature 374:687-692
5. Baumgardner,J.R., 1994. Runaway subduction as the driving mechanism for the Genesis Flood. Third ICC, Pittsburgh, pp.63-75.
6. Austin, S.A., Baumgardner, J.R., Humphreys, D.R., Snelling, A.A., Vardiman, L. and Wise, K.P., 1994. Catastrophic plate tectonics; a global Flood model of earth history. Proc. Third ICC, Pittsburgh, pp. 609-621.
7. Austin, S.A. (ed.), 1994. Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe, Institute for Creation Research, Santee, California.