Hydroplate Theory

Hydroplate theory is a hypothesis that Earth once had huge chambers of water sandwiched between the Earth's crust and its mantle. It also was developed solely to explain the question "Where did the water for the great flood come from?" This was because Creation Scientists had rejected the water canopy hypothesis, and they thought there might be some problems with the plate tectonics hypothesis.


The hydroplate theory is an alternate explanation of the events of the Noahic flood, the present-day geological features of the world, and the actual mechanisms that operated then and continue to do so now. Hydroplate theory claims to explain the Flood purely by natural cause and effect. No miracles needed.


The hydroplate theory was first proposed by Dr. Walt Brown. Dr. Brown claims that centuries of "tidal pumping" from the pull of the Moon's gravity led to the eventual rupture of the hydroplates, implying that the start of the Flood was a natural and inevitable event. Those eruptions sent water up into the atmosphere above us, causing it to rain for 40 days and 40 nights, and the source of the water for the Great Flood was the “fountains of the great deep.”


In support of that it is pointed out that the “fountains of the great deep” are mentioned in the Bible before the “windows of heaven were opened.” This is a moot point if they started at the same time.

The water canopy theory, the theory of plate tectonics, and the hydroplate theory were all for the purpose of explaining where the water came from for the Great Flood.


First of all, Dr. Brown’s model starts with some very questionable conditions. He proposes that when the Earth was created about 6,000 years ago, it was covered by a 10-mile-thick granite crust (recently increased on his web site to 20-60 mi) suspended over highly pressurized subterranean water chambers. To help explain how the crust did not soon crack open, Brown proposes that on the second and third days of the creation week, the granite crust dipped and sagged down in places, all the way to the floor of the water chambers, forming supporting “pillars.”


As for the Scientific Viability of the Hydroplate Theory see:

(1) Analysis of Walt Brown’s Flood model - by Michael J. Oard

This article focuses on the second part of Dr. Brown’s book, titled Fountains of the Great Deep, which presents his model of the Flood. He also discusses continental drift theory. “I find much of Brown’s model and many of his explanations of phenomena lacking detailed evidence. Sometimes aspects of his model are unclear or incomplete, leading to difficulty understanding some of it.” “He often seems to make his model fit the data … Brown seems to rely on legends and myths too much.” Conclusion: “I do not consider his model a viable Flood model for the general and specific reasons summarized above.”

https://creation.com/hydroplate-theory


(2) Hydroplate Theory—problems for trench formation in the Pacific Basin

By Edward Isaacs

“First, the trenches are not located where predicted by HPT, and are far from their proposed origin. Second, the proposed central trench complex is missing.

Therefore, HPT is unable to explain the origin of the Pacific Ocean Basin and the Pacific trenches.”

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j32_3/j32_3_58-63.pdf


(3) Hydroplate theory: the strongest theory? By Shaun Doyle

https://creation.com/hydroplate-theory-difficulties


(4) An Analysis of Astronomical Aspects of the Hydroplate Theory

by Dr. Danny Faulkner - Creation Research Society Quarterly 49(3):197–210, 2013.