Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BarcaMSN t1_jc5tq32 wrote

Very nice, it's amazing how the Himalayas is just crumpled ground from the Indian plate smashing into the Asian plate.

83

Wermine t1_jc6l5h7 wrote

>By 1967 most scientists in geology accepted the theory of plate tectonics. The root of this was Alfred Wegener's 1912 publication of his theory of continental drift, which was a controversy in the field through the 1950s.

Surprisingly recent.

24

Volcic-tentacles t1_jc6lufa wrote

I was taught earth science by one the originators of tectonic plate theory, back in the 1980s.

15

scruffye t1_jc7pm47 wrote

Yeah, I think the final nail in the coffin for those resisting it was when we finally got good data on the details of the sea floor and we could actually map out the forces that were driving plate tectonics. Also, science in general can be held back by older generations resisting new ideas. IIRC the theory of part of the heat in the Earth's core being caused by radioactive isotopes was basically dead in the water because Lord Kelvin refused to accept it, and his death finally allowed people to really start arguing for it.

3

TonyzTone t1_jc7v0cp wrote

Isn't it crumpled ground from the Asian plate as a result of the Indian plate jamming underneath?

1

JoHeWe t1_jc7xo3g wrote

IIRC, the Himalays are both the Asian and Indian plates crumbling. There're three types of plates touching: convergent, divergent, and transform (towards each other, apart from each other and alongside each other). There's two types of plates: continental and oceanic, of which the latter is much lighter .

The Indian plate and Asian plate are convergent and both continental. That means they generally just smash into each other, i.o.w. both crumbling. If one of them was oceanic, say Asia and the Pacific, the oceanic one would sink under the continental one, creating a valley or (Mariana) trench.

2