[msisk6]

The idea that the surface of the earth consists of a bunch of rock "rafts" floating around on a hidden mantle, occasionally running into each other -- with some falling and others rising -- seems rather crazy. It took a lot of data to convince folks it was real.

[griffzhowl]

Still, the 1960s feels very late for something that has become so foundational to our understanding of geology. One obvious analogy is the Copernican revolution where the crazy idea that the entire Earth is spinning on a daily basis was recognized centuries ago.

With plate tectonics there was the major clue with how the outline of South America fits so neatly into Africa, and I assume that it was known that the rocks were similar on each side of the ocean.

Nevertheless, if the idea remained speculative till the sea-floor spreading was observed then I suppose it had to wait till we had robust enough subs to get down there to see it.

[Pet_Ant]

> Still, the 1960s feels very late for something that has become so foundational to our understanding of geology. One obvious analogy is the Copernican revolution where the crazy idea that the entire Earth is spinning on a daily basis was recognized centuries ago.

The Gregorian calendar is really the problem because it amplifies relative numbers. The agricultural evolution that started modern humans as a culture was 10,000 years ago. If we think of the current year as 12,025 ME and Copperncian revolution as 11,514 ME I think it puts in a proper scope as all relatively recent and contemporary event.

Gregorian calendar is like standing too close to a Monet or pointillist painting, you lose the scope of the big picture.