That still does not explain why the fossils on the upper plates are billions of years old and most of the fossils at the bottom of the ocean are only about 70 million years old.

It does not explain why the shapes of the continents (upper tectonics) all fit together perfectly. If the ocean is growing and spreading and the earth is not growing, then are you claiming that the continents are shrinking? If so, why do they all still remain basically the same shape and why do they all fit together neatly when you shrink the earth?

It does not explain why the oceans keep "spreading" and if they are spreading where are they spreading to?...if the earth is not growing? Spreading to where?

Also, I have watched the movie you mention and it is not as well explained (or convincing) as this youtube video. So "science" has either got it wrong or they are really lousy at explaining things.

Here is what makes sense... the video makes sense. I have read up on all that other mumbo jumbo and it does not make sense... not to me.

If it is so simple and makes so much sense, then it should be easy to explain to someone like me who wants the easy sensible explanation. I don't need you to tell me to "read up on it" or "go to four years of college" or any of that nonsense. I don't have that kind of spare time.

If it is "so simple" then one of you geniuses should be able to explain it simply.

Otherwise prove to me that the earth is not 'alive' and growing.

Show me some simple to understand evidence that this is "impossible."

If you can't do that, then don't bother to try.

I don't want rude insults about how stupid or uneducated you think I am. I get enough of that crap from people who think they know it all but can't explain a damn thing.

you can get all pissy you want, but you don't want an explanation, you just want to argue. i gave you a website that shows how the fossils moved from ocean seabed to the tops of mountains, and you same the same thing no matter what we post on here... lots of people have tried to "talk" with about things, and the broken record comes out - "thats not proof", or I don't believe it" or how dumb we are for not believing your fantasy.

Continental Drift

The hypothesis of continental drift was largely developed by Alfred L. Wegener, a German lecturer in astronomy and meteorology, who suggested that the Earth's continents had at one time been joined. In 1912, Wegener proposed that all the continents were previously one large continent, but then broke apart, and had drifted through the ocean floor to where they are now located. Wegener studied the distribution of animals and fossil land plants to help him in his interpretations. He found that the plant Glossopteris had left behind leaf remains which were relatively common in the Southern Hemisphere continents. This supported his hypothesis, as Wegener reasoned that in order for Glossopteris leaves to be found in the widely spaced continents of the Southern Hemisphere, the continents must once have been joined. Using this idea, he reconstructed all the continents which contained evidence for commonality into a supercontinent which he named Pangea. Interestingly this was all the southern continents, along with India. Wegener also studied the distribution of major rocks and mineral deposits. He found that when he fitted Africa and South America together along their continental shelves, large blocks of ancient rock called cratons formed continuous patterns across the dividing line. The mountains that run from east to west across South Africa seemed to link with the range near Buenos Aires in Argentina.

Wegeners's findings were published in 1915 in his book Die Entstehung der Kontinente und Ozeane (The origin of the continents and oceans). His ideas were not widely accepted as critics thought that the evidence was not strong enough, that the underlying cause of the drift was not explained and that the drift was impossible. He was attacked by many critics and this eventually took its toll on his career. Despite his undisputed talents as a teacher and the continuing loyalty of his close associates, he was unable to obtain a professorship in a German university and eventually left Germany for the University of Graz in Austria.

Through the discovery of palaeomagnetism after the second world war and the development of oceanography it was possible to support Wegener's theories and convert the critics.

ummm.. remember who your talking to...

Maybe the earth is alive. Growing from sunlight.

I take it from that comment that you have disproved the idea of pair creation resulting from highly energetic particles at the Earths core?

Expanding Earth my 4ss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwg6Od49e8&feature=related

The main question of that condescending video is "Where does the extra mass come from?"

Now if you could live long enough to watch an acorn from a giant oak tree grow into a giant tree, you might ask the same question.

The tree grew because it is alive.

Look at someone weights 400 pounds and ask them where all that "extra mass" came from.

It grew because it is alive.

Watch a tiny plant grow to a tall stalk of corn .... where does that extra mass come from?

OMG I wonder where all this extra mass comes from?

JB are you really this stupid?

People just like plants get most of our matter from the atmosphere, and soil.

So what scientists are saying is that there one one big continent on the earth right? And the rest of the earth was ocean right?

Then this one big continent broke apart and spread all over the earth right?

So the ocean floor should be just as old at the rest of the mantle and yet its not? Right.

You say the ocean floor is "spreading" and the continents are "moving."

Why would the ocean floor be spreading? And where is it spreading to?

The way the guy in that video Bushi posted explained it, was very confusing not to mention condescending.