Alfred Lothar Wegener (1 November 1880 – November 1930) was a German polar

researcher, geophysicist and meteorologist.

During his lifetime he was primarily known for his achievements in meteorology and as a pioneer of
polar research, but today he is most remembered as the originator of the theory of continental
drift by hypothesizing in 1912 that the continents are slowly drifting around the Earth
(German: Kontinentalverschiebung). His hypothesis was controversial and not widely accepted until
the 1950s, when numerous discoveries such as palaeomagnetism provided strong support for
continental drift, and thereby a substantial basis for today's model of plate tectonics.[1][2] Wegener
was involved in several expeditions to Greenland to study polarair circulation before the existence of
the jet stream was accepted. Expedition participants made many meteorological observations and
achieved the first-ever overwintering on the inland Greenland ice sheet as well as the first-ever
boring of ice cores on a moving Arctic glacier.
According to the theory of continental drift, the world was made up of a single continent through
most of geologic time. That continent eventually separated and drifted apart, forming into the seven
continents we have today. The first comprehensive theory of continental drift was suggested by the
German meteorologist Alfred Wegener in 1912. The hypothesis asserts that the continents consist of
lighter rocks that rest on heavier crustal material—similar to the manner in which icebergs float on
water. Wegener contended that the relative positions of the continents are not rigidly fixed but are
slowly moving—at a rate of about one yard per century.
According to the generally accepted plate-tectonics theory, scientists believe that Earth's surface is
broken into a number of shifting slabs or plates, which average about 50 miles in thickness. These
plates move relative to one another above a hotter, deeper, more mobile zone at average rates as
great as a few inches per year. Most of the world's active volcanoes are located along or near the
boundaries between shifting plates and are called plate-boundary volcanoes.
The peripheral areas of the Pacific Ocean Basin, containing the boundaries of several plates, are
dotted with many active volcanoes that form the so-called Ring of Fire. The Ring provides excellent
examples of plate-boundary volcanoes, including Mount St. Helens.
However, some active volcanoes are not associated with plate boundaries, and many of these so-
called intra-plate volcanoes form roughly linear chains in the interior of some oceanic plates. The
Hawaiian Islands provide perhaps the best example of an intra-plate volcanic chain, developed by
the northwest-moving Pacific plate passing over an inferred “hot spot” that initiates the magma-
generation and volcano-formation process.
The Similarities and Differences Between the Theory of Continental Drifts and Plate Tectonics
The similarities would be the movement and they are both apart of one large theory.
The difference between continental drift and plate tectonics is that the theory of continental drift
states that the world was made up of a single continent. The theory of plate-tectonics, on the other
hand, states that earth's surface is broken into numbers of shifting plates or slabs.
It is known to move because of the shifting and sliding of plates, which is where the Earth's crust sits
upon. Because of this movement, it can cause magma, gas, and ash to shoot up and create a
volcano and/or an earthquake when the plates shift and slide. Earthquakes are caused when two
tectonic plates are colliding. They move because of the intense heat from the Earth's core. As the
lava cools it shrinks and as it heats up it expands causing the plates to move.
Plate Tectonics
Plate tectonics are the structure of the Earth’s crust and many associated phenomena as resulting
from the interaction of rigid lithospheric plates that move slowly over the underlying mantle
Continental Drift
The continental drift is the movement of the Earths continents relative to each other by appearing to
drift across the ocean bed.
Alfred Wegener believed this theory that continents were slowly drifting around the Earth. He
believed this because of fossils he found.
Continental drift is the name of the theory of the earth from around 1925 by Alfred Wegener who
suggested it based on the fit of the continental coasts of the Atlantic Ocean, later based on evidence
of fossil correlations between southern Africa and South America, but not adopted overall as a
theory of geology.

Plate tectonics is the modern term used from the 1960's on after geophysicists learned the
mechanism of sea-floor spreading at mid-ocean ridges and of earthquakes in the ocean trenches
and were able to learn the facts about the division of the globe into lithospheric plates created
and destroyed by the convecting asthenosphere, and were able to adapt this model as a framework
within which geologic
processes operate.

With only one land, there would be less technological disparity. You wouldn’t have had the United
Kingdom taking over the world with its blood empire, and therefore it wouldn’t have gained an upper
hand on the rest of the world. No country would.

And there’d be fewer diseases, as well. No more countries invading other countries and bringing
strange and foreign germs. Every country would have the same diseases and the same immunity.

Life would be less diverse and varied, too. Every country would have the same plants and animals –
everywhere would be nearly identical. Much of the interior of Pangaea would be arid, too, meaning
there would be fewer lakes and therefore, less water. A Pangaea that never broke up also suggests
that there are no plate tectonics, therefore, there would be no earthquakes, no volcanoes, to
tsunamis and no mountains. This means that, over time, water from the rain would cause mass soil
erosion and would flatten the land, to the point whereby Pangaea would become flooded.
Permanently under water.

However, this would take a billion years, meaning humanity still would have a chance to evolve and
prosper. Perhaps living in a more equal and less violent world, perhaps with manmade mountains to
help prevent our watery doom. And sure, one billion years is a long time, but we know for a fact that
the Earth will still be around come the year five billion, meaning a world that still has Pangaea has
four billion fewer years of survival for the human race. Unless, of course, we did something to stop
the flood.

I imagine, in any case, we’ll have developed space colonies come the end of the Earth. Humanity
wouldn’t give up quite so easily. I, for one, would love a condo on Mars. I hear the Martian girls are
just darling.

All this is pure speculation, of course. We can’t know exactly what the world would be like if Pangaea
still existed. There seems to be many benefits, but just as many disadvantages. But there is one
thing we do know, for sure.

If Pangaea still existed, the world would be a very different place…