The Flood = many coincidences

Game over. If that's not an argument by authority, I don't know what is. That would be a logical fallacy. Fallacies undermine arguments. So as said, game over.

Well, ignoring evidence will cause you to claim that nobody has a)answered the questions, or b)refuted them.There's also the slight problem that no, you have not, to date, actually provided real evidence, only conjecture, to support your 'theories'.

Well, let's see. Dense material sinks. Less dense material floats. Basalt is more dense than granite. Oceanic crust is mostly basaltic. Continental crust is mostly granitic. When they meet, basalt ends up subducting underneath granitic. Mind you, this is a very simplistic explanation, but since you seem to not understand the concept of density . . .Instead of just spouting things out, you could look up whether your questions have already been answered. Your question is answered in intro to geology courses in universities across the states.The rest of your post? Wow, just, wow. A complete and total lack of understanding of the basic processes behind plate tectonics. Seriously. Sign up for a comm. college course on geology. Do yourself some good.

Yeah, I'd say your answer came out of nowhere. And is still bunk. It hasn't put me in a real fix, because I can now see you're as crazed as that comic-book writer (name escapes me) who thinks that the earth is growing. No amount of evidence will convince you that you are wrong. Of course, you still display a lack of understanding how plate tectonics work (since you have yet to remedy your claim in my post you replied to), and until you actually learn what plate tectonics says, your criticism of it is rather insignificant and really quite funny. It's on the same order of those who disprove evolution by saying "if men came from apes, why are apes still here?". So yeah. Keep on coming out of left-field. I need something other than the daily show and the colbert report to keep me laughing in sweden.