Pangaea or Plate Tectonics?

Watch the videos, read the comments, and decide!

Here are some comments by bloggers:

1. Is the Earth Expanding, or drifting apart as held by the Pangaea Theory? Neal Adams proposes that there was a Pangaea “super-continent” in the past, but that the change to is due to the Earth expanding, not continental drift and tectonic plate movement.

2. “100 years of scientific theory, out the window” Science changes all the time, Einstein disprovedNewton’s theories, etc. Science is constantly growing. There is no conspiracy to maintain old theories that have been proven false.

3. This theory neglects one fundamental problem. IF you contract the continental plates, as he did, where does the water in the Oceans go?

4. If the earth was increasing in size, then there would have been no mountains as mountain develop only when the plates collide and they would not collide if earth increased in size !

5. If this was all true, one would expect to see the ocean floor along the American coast to be the same age as along the Asian coast. But its not. Because the oceanic plates are subducting underneath the American plates. Plate theory explains this, but you seem to skip over this detail.

6. Continents are made of felsic material (such as granite). Oceanic plates are maffic. Maffic rocks are much denser than felsic rocks. This causes oceanic plates to mechanically be subducted under oceanic plates. … More: ===>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iW5HUrEkc8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HDb9Ijynfo&feature=related

And here is my own question: Where did all the water come from if originally there were no oceans?