Heat release from tectonic friction

This does not seem correct to me. If slip efficiency increases, you still have the problem of reducing the speed of fast moving plates to the current slow rates in the same small amount of time. The same amount of kinetic energy is still being converted to heat. Reducing friction to nil just makes it harder to argue that plate movement was once much faster than today.

It wouldn't except that YEC is linked tightly to a literal, inerrant Bible. Having the continents in one place explains things like how the animals got home after the great flood and how humans scattered after the Tower of Babel was destroyed.

That's fine. But I'm really asking about the effect of slip efficiency on the generation of heat. Perhaps my question is irrelevant?

No it doesn't. This is news?

Actually, I wrote that stuff. I wasn't quoting Faith.I think Faith's point is that she should have most of 4500 years rather than merely 800 to get the continents to their current places. I think we cut into that time frame quite a bit using historical and geological evidence, but to use the Phoenicians we would need some evidence about how far they actually sailed when they traveled.

By formative years, you would have to mean prior to the nineteenth century back during the time when people believed that the sun and planets orbited the earth. The fact is that YEC belief was in serious decline before its revival in the twentieth century. You don't have to prove anything. But in a discussion forum it is not unreasonable to make attempts at persuasion, which generally requires evidence. I'm just not sure that such an attempt is really on topic here.As I understand it, the purpose of this thread is to discuss whether tectonic plate friction raises any issues that reject a YEC interpretation.

Geocentric astronomy was not just the view of the church. It was the scientific view as well. There is no reason why any Christian would have rejected geocentric cosmology prior to science establishing something else. I understand that. The problem is that what you had in mind is wrong. There was no universal view among Christians in the early twentieth century that the earth was only 6000 years old. I'm not even sure that it was the majority view among Christians. I don't subscribe to it now, although my wife does. I know that you define real Christians to include only those people who are YEC, but IMO, that's complete nonsense.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

It wouldn't be an effective cooling agent unless there was someplace to transfer the heat out of the water. Imagine your cars cooling system without a radiator.

You aren't describing the problem set up here. At least not as I understand it.Basically, the issue here is that if the world is only 6000 years old, then the plates must originally have been moving really fast to get into their current position. Currently the plates are observed to be moving far more slowly. That loss of kinetic energy is from friction. We can say something about the magnitude of the energy involved and about the time involved. We don't have to speculate about what happens when the plates slide smoothly over each other because that would not produce slowing.

I don't know what your sentence means? In order for big plates to stop moving, you cannot simply stop applying a moving force. You actually have to apply some kind of braking force. Or at least that's what Newton and I thought.