Hydroplates unchallenged young earth explains Tectonics shortcomings!

I'm on the ropes on this one, but why don't you just bring it down a few notches,(layman's terms) and tell me what it is that is puzzling you folks?

Coincidence?

Hope this leap isn't based on my not knowing much about either plate theory. Either way, I do think the continents parted in the recent past. You gotta admit Walt's fit at the ridge is a better one than pts! He may have it wrong. You certainly do.

ha. the radiometric thing I've already said before is less dependable by some estimates than Jeanne Dixon's successful predictions. (not that things don't decay, but lava has been way off) Island velocity--and erossion---Things certainly eroded with a world of water! I guess the question of which island is more 'recent' matters less in a young earth. Walt says theres many chains of submarine volcanoes scattered over a large area next to the Hawaaian chain, but not in line with it.--that you folks don't explain. One chain actually being perpendicular.

probably because the man who you are trying to look like in your picture has a book I looked at. In it there's pictures of what look like a much better fit.

I don't plan to be here long, so, keep it up, you may do well in the predictions thing. You seem to feel you are pretty expert in most of these things, but show me how much of of your knowledge is not built on the assumptions of great age, and there is probably not much left.

You asked I didn't know, I raised coincidence, after all if fossils happen to get sorted a certain way, and it coinsides with your theory, you seem to bite.

The scientific basis for the dating, in as much as seeing how something decays now is fine. My concern would be to extrapilate a present decay into the distant past, as if all things were the same as we now see. So to say it's presently decaying at a certain rate fine. Also on different places, I have heard about errors in the results. So I'm not going to base my thoughts, beliefs, or life on any dates thank you very much.

He has a chart where his theory scores about perfect, and the pt theory is frought with problems. I glanced over some of his predictions, you're probably more aware of them. Has any failed? You seem to have a concern in this area.

guess I should have kept up with the Jones, and put hyperlinks leading to cut and pasted stuff instead. I think it depends more on the pro evolution moderators

No. I don't feel we need to beg here.

Hydroplate people seem to think they did most of their riding in a few days around the flood somewhere, and they ate kinda just settling in now, I think they believe that's what causes earthquakes?

So Walt's sliding continents (I thought he said the water was 10 miles under) have no mechanism? I thought he said something about that 'theory' of gravity? Are we assuming the 100 km 'plate' from pt? Why would I believe you over Walt? Anyone can say they "should not be questioned cause 'everyone' knows I'm right, what are you ignorant (uneducated)because you don't also?

Thanks I'll try not to gloat.

Why does your dating methods and results, fit so wonderfully together'? There could be some forces at work that make it appear so. You don't know what. It is one of those things that you can put on a shelf, and, see if it stands the test of time. You know, for a long time mainstream science has assumed old age, and looked for it. No other explanation will do. Sometimes where their error lies, is in dates that are way too old. In this case, what caused the erosion? (water?) What else besides their "dating" makes it old? In strata layers they call things layed down in the same event millions of years old. Of course Prof Tweedly Dee agrees with Prof Tweedly Dum, and they use stata and fossils to agree with themselves. I wonder if you'll get any heavy hitters to straighten you out, when the moderators here are admittedly pro evolution, and seem to me (right or wrong) to be bullies. Reminds me of "Groundhog Day" Where this guy named Ned says "am I right or am I right or am I right"? Then goes on to try and sell his policy (evolution in this case).