Yes, I realize tidal forces were not mentioned. But that's exactly why it should be mentioned. The subduction theory does not explain the physical features of the tectonic boundaries. The tidal forces do explain the physical features of the tectonic boundaries.

This is a serious solution to plate tectonics and one that deserves a serious investigation by USGS, AGU scientists, NOAA, Scripps, etc.

Pangea is further back in time and would require further study. We need to firmly establish plate boundaries for that time period and be able to recreate the portions of earth that have since subducted and recycled into the mantle. Pangea could have been only half of the planet's surface and the other half could have been sunk into the earth due to a huge asteroid impact.

Whether we rely entirely on convection or tidal forces, neither theory could alone explain why the planet was apparently lopsided in the first place or why Pangea suddenly began to break up. There are definitely other factors involved in plate tectonics prior to the break up of Pangea.

But what do you say about the topography of the tectonic boundaries? Are you still convinced that a convection model would produce this type of land formation or that the convection model could explain the rotation of the Pacific subduction?

Dave