CPT Q. 059: Is plate tectonics a data-driven necessity or a result of the need for a grand synthesis?

Q. 59. You have said: “The wealth of new data…that precipitated the acceptance of plate tectonics during the 1960’s simultaneously also opened the door for the first time in more than 200 years to a technically credible defense of the Genesis Flood” (Baumgardner, 2003, p. 113).¹ Is plate tectonic theory a data-driven necessity or the result of a perceived need for a grand synthesis by geologists? If the former, then why were the basic ideas in place in the early 1960s, well prior to the data that supposedly proves the theory?

Response: A ridge of mountains on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean was first discovered during the expedition of HMS Challenger in 1872 while investigating the future location for a transatlantic telegraph cable. Its presence was confirmed by sonar in 1925. During a 1925-1927 research cruise, the German research ship Meteor, equipped with early sonar equipment, produced the first detailed survey of the South Atlantic Ocean floor. This survey established that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge was continuous through the South Atlantic and continued into the Indian Ocean beyond Cape of Good Hope. The advances in sonar technology during World War II, driven by the need to hunt and track submarines, was applied beginning in the 1950’s to map the topography of the ocean bottom in great detail for the first time. These topographical maps of the world’s seafloor brought to the attention of the world’s earth science community the astonishing presence of a mountain chain some 65,000 km in length running like a baseball seam through the world’s ocean basins. The fact that the geological picture of earth history prevailing at that time had no explanation for such a prominent feature prompted many earth scientists to seek an explanation and to begin gathering new types of data from the ocean bottom to address this issue.

I believe it is fair to conclude that the state of affairs in 1960 was that there was a significant body of observational data for which there was no viable explanation, at least in the minds of the broader earth science community. I believe it is fair to say that it was this body of unexplained data that caused many researchers to be willing to consider new and bold hypotheses. It also created a desire throughout the community to acquire more data. I also believe it is fair to say that the scientific revolution that subsequently unfolded in the 1960’s was strongly data driven. It is also of interest to note that there were multiple hypotheses at the time, earth expansion as an example, in addition to the one which ultimately prevailed.