I'll take the non sequitur as conceded then.
Nope, the comparison you make with floating structures is meaningless. They're not oceangoing ships that can hold cargo as James' theory demands.
For example, palaeontologists have found teeth marks from a dromaeosaur on the fossil (or near the remains of) a large dinosaur. They then speculate that dromaeosaurs may have been intelligent creatures that practised coordinated hunting in packs.
So they found teeth marks of a smaller dinosaur on a much larger dinosaur and thought it possible that they hunted in packs, as it seems unlikely a dinosaur that small could take something that big down. That doesn't seem like much of a leap to me.
On the other hand, you're taking the fact that fossils show up on two different continents as evidence that some dinosaurs may have built ships and brought other plants and animals along with them on the voyage. No evidence of these ships, either.
Do you honestly think that's an equivalent leap?
As a Zetetic, I could see fossils in the ground and examine them for myself. However, I cannot live to observe plates whizzing about over the course of several million years.
Yep, I've already established that you can't see the plates moving. You can't see this ancient dino civilization, either. All we have is potential evidence of these things having happened
There are places on earth where you can actually see the exposed layers of rock at faultlines, and see that one side has been sliding underneath the other. We can match the layers of rock up. Shouldn't this be evidence of some ability of the earth to move around?