Fossils+ & Pangaea
By now everyone has been taught about the one supercontinent called Pangaea or Pangea. it is supposed to be one land mass and over time, through tectonic plate activity, slowly separated over millions of years. The theory goes:
At one point in time, all continents were merged together as one supercontinent.
This supercontinent “Pangaea” (sometimes spelled Pangea) eventually tore apart from continental drift. But it took millions of years to do this.
So how do we know that Pangaea existed?
There were several clues that led to the discovery of the Pangea supercontinent.
For example, we can connect the pieces today and see how remarkably well they fit. Also, we can examine the fossils we find today on each continent and check for resemblances. ( source)
The scientific theory may have some biblical support to it as Genesis 1 says:
9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land “earth,” and the gathering of the waters He called “seas”; and God saw that it was good.
Thus, there may have been one supercontinent for the pre-flood world to live on before the flood. What is wrong about the Pangea theory and where it loses biblical support is the ‘millions of years’ timescale.
There is no way for scientists to provide credible, verifiable evidence to support their time scale or the movement of the continents. It is very possible that the continents were in their current positions originally and nothing moved over time.
We say this because of the Lost Continents we wrote about in an earlier article. The lost continents put a damper on any continental drift. But researchers always try to find a way to support their theories, even though they do not make sense.
One of those reasons scientists use is the shape of the continents. They determined that the shape is evidence of a supercontinent and continental drift:
Like a jigsaw puzzle, the Earth’s crust has 15 or 20 separate pieces of minor and major plate tectonics. These pieces are the plate tectonics that rides on the soft melted rock underneath. ( source)
But that idea is illogical because it assumes that as the continents moved, they did not lose any geographical shape or material. That is a very big assumption to make without any real evidence supporting it.
The idea that continents just moved perfectly without damage over millions of years is absurd. This assumption is made in spite of all the damage tectonic plates do to the land masses today and throughout known history.
Another so-called piece of evidence is the myriad of mountain chains, etc., buried under the sea:
But it wasn’t until we started exploring beneath the oceans that we realized the vast chains of mountains on the ocean seafloor. These ridges and trenches are scars from the opening up of plates at ridges. (Ibid)
The problem with using these mountain chains as evidence is that there is nothing linking them to continental movement. The undersea mountains are declared to be remnants of this drift not proven true.
Scientists see something and make vast and illogical leaps to conclusions about what they see. What we have really are submerged mountain chains and nothing connecting them to current-day continents.
Since scientists cannot see into the past, they have to make up evidence like this to support their illogical and irrational theories. even the formation of Pangea is badly assumed as scientists claim:
Pangea was formed around 335 million years ago from the earlier continental units like Gondwana, Euramerica (Laurussia), and Siberia during the Carboniferous period.
C-Shaped Supercontinent: Unlike the continents scattered around the globe today, Pangaea wasn’t symmetrical. It had a C-shape, with the bulk of its landmass concentrated in the southern hemisphere.
Pangaea formed through a gradual process spanning a few hundred million years. Beginning about 480 million years ago, a continent called Laurentia, which includes parts of North America, merged with several other micro-continents to form Euramerica. Euramerica eventually collided with Gondwana, another supercontinent that included Africa, Australia, South America and the Indian subcontinent. ( source)
However, none of this is scientific nor has this concept been observed by scientific principles. It is all assumed by what is observed in the present and those observations are extrapolated back into unseen and unknowable time.
Get D David Thiessen’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Nothing but declarations support this thinking. Then we come to fossils:
Evidence for the existence of Pangaea comes from a variety of sources, including the distribution of fossils, rocks, and mountain ranges. For example, scientists have found fossils of the same plant and animal species on continents that are now widely separated, such as North America and South America. This suggests that these continents were once connected together (Ibid)
But like the undersea mountain ranges, assumptions not facts rule the day. The presence of fossils in those widely separated regions is not limited to continental drift. There are hundreds of reasons why the fossils were and are found where they are.
Wegener, trained as an astronomer, used biology, botany, and geology describe Pangaea and continental drift. For example, fossils of the ancient reptile mesosaurus are only found in southern Africa and South America. Mesosaurus, a freshwater reptile only one meter (3.3 feet) long, could not have swum the Atlantic Ocean. The presence of mesosaurus suggests a single habitat with many lakes and rivers. ( source)
This is only one fossil out of how many? It is not enough of a sample to prove the continental drift theory or that Pangea existed and was the source of this dispersion.
It is just that scientists do not want to acknowledge those alternative reasons for they undermine and prove their theory wrong. For example, the animal fossils. They could easily have lived in the pre-flood world and once destroyed by the rising waters, had their bodies deposited in those unique but separate regions.
This makes more sense than drifting continents because we have evidence of bones in South American caves and fissures around the world or a wide assortment of extinct and human skeletons mixed together. (Noah’s Flood Did Take Place by Dr. Tee).
Since the flood was global, where these bodies ended up and fossilized could be anywhere in the world. What about plant fossils:
Wegener also studied plant fossils from the frigid Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, Norway. These plants were not the hardy specimens adapted to survive in the Arctic climate. These fossils were of tropical plants, which are adapted to a much warmer, more humid environment. The presence of these fossils suggests Svalbard once had a tropical climate. ( source)
Yes, this idea that the frozen north had the same climate as the tropical equatorial region but it is not evidence for continental drift. it is evidence for a similar climate which the pre-flood world had.
Fossilized plants are not connected in any way to continental drift except in the minds of those who do not want to know the truth. The flood changed the angle of the earth creating 4 seasons for some regions and two for others.
There is more evidence for this point than there is for continental drift or a connection between these fossils and drifting land masses. Fossils are not evidence of continental drift. There is no credible evidence proving there is.
Just because someone does a limited study on fossils does it mean they got the right answer. It just means they limited their study focus to get the answer they wanted to see.
Finally, Wegener studied the stratigraphy of different rocks and mountain ranges. The east coast of South America and the west coast of Africa seem to fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and Wegener discovered their rock layers “fit” just as clearly. South America and Africa were not the only continents with similar geology. Wegener discovered that the Appalachian Mountains of the eastern United States, for instance, were geologically related to the Caledonian Mountains of Scotland. (Ibid)
The same reasoning applies here as well. Just because similar rocks are found on different continents does not prove continental drift. It just proves those rocks formed in the same manner.
Wegener’s conclusions do not exclude any other possible answer. Nor do any secular scientists’ conclusions do the same thing because all they have are similar rocks and no evidence of being one a long time ago.
Their conclusions are just blind declarations that have no hope of being verified. Saying the two mountain ranges are related is like saying the blond-haired people of Africa are related to the blond-haired citizens of North America.
It is categorically false to make these assumptions, especially without real credible and verifiable evidence. The same type of rocks are not evidence for continental drift. That relationship is read into the fossils of animals and plants and the rocks.
Finally, there is the case of the submerged continents. How do they play a role in continental drift? Were they formed before or after the Pnagea split? How were they formed and how were they submerged?
Science has no credible answer for the existence of these submerged continents. especially since two of them, Doggerland & Mu, hold human and material remains.
Too many questions remain unanswered by scientific theories about continental drift. Pangea may have existed in some format but not as scientists claim. Most likely, it was the global flood that divided the continent into the ones we currently have today, not tectonic plates.
That is the only logical and rational explanation there is to answer the question of how we got our continents. Scientific answers are mere declarations without evidence or logical thought.
Originally published at http://theoarch.wordpress.com on March 3, 2025.
