1. Lack of a plausible mechanism: Wegener couldn't adequately explain how continents could move across the Earth's surface. He proposed a "pole-fleeing force" and tidal forces as drivers, but these were not scientifically sound or powerful enough to move continents.
2. Opposition from established geologists: Many prominent geologists at the time were firmly entrenched in the belief of a fixed Earth, and they strongly opposed Wegener's radical idea. They argued that the similarities in coastlines, fossils, and geological formations could be explained by other factors like land bridges or long-distance migration.
3. Lack of direct observational evidence: Wegener's evidence was largely based on indirect observations like the jigsaw-puzzle fit of continents, matching geological formations, and similar fossils found on different continents. Direct evidence of continents moving was lacking.
4. Misconceptions about the Earth's structure: The prevailing view of the Earth's crust at the time was that it was a rigid, solid shell. This made it difficult to imagine how continents could possibly move.
5. Limited understanding of plate tectonics: The theory of plate tectonics, which provides the basis for continental drift, was not developed until much later. This theory explains the movement of continents through the interaction of Earth's lithospheric plates.
6. Lack of data and technology: Wegener's ideas were ahead of his time. The necessary technology and data to support his hypothesis were simply not available in the early 20th century.
It wasn't until the 1950s and 1960s that advancements in geology, geophysics, and oceanography, including the discovery of seafloor spreading, provided the missing evidence and a mechanism to explain continental drift. These discoveries eventually led to the acceptance of Wegener's theory as a cornerstone of modern geology.
