The hypothesis of an expanding Earth has never attracted notable support, and if it were not for the historical example of continental drift, such indifference might be a legitimate response to an apparently improbable concept. It should be remembered, however, that drift too was once regarded as illusory, but the idea was kept alive until evidence from physicists compelled geologists to reinterpret their data.
Of course, it would be as dangerous to overreact to history by concluding that the majority must now be wrong about expansion as it would be to reenact the response that greeted the suggestion that the continents had drifted. The cases are not precisely analogous. There were serious problems with the pre-drift world view that a drift theory could help to resolve, whereas Earth expansion appears to offer no comparable advantages. If, however, physicists could show that the Earth’s gravitational force has decreased with time, expansion would have to be reconsidered and accommodated.
24. The passage indicates that one reason why the expansion hypothesis has attracted little support is that it will not
(A) overcome deficiencies in current geologic hypotheses
(B) clarify theories concerning the Earth’s gravitational forces
(C) complement the theory of continental drift
(D) accommodate relevant theories from the field of physics
(E) withstand criticism from scientists outside the field of geology
_________________
time is not on my side
close
