Whilst I'm in critique mode, the one-liner summaries of the palaeogeography of an entire planet for billions of years are a bit simple. I accept that this is neccesary for brevity, but informed readers should be aware that plate tectonics is not a recent event on Planet Earth.
Whilst the style of tectonics and the volume of continents has clearly evolved with time, nonetheless there were probably always mountain ranges, continental lowlands, and ocean deeps, plus numerous volcanic arcs and isolated islands and island chains.
In the early days, there would have been less continent and more islands, but even in times when we think we have a clear mental picture (like the "dinosaur times" of coal swamps), these conditions did not prevail across the entire globe. Some areas of desert or tundra co-existed with "dinosaur swamps" (There's a nice exposure in the coastal cliffs near here of cryoturbated sediments (frost-heave) during the Cretaceous when other parts of the world had "dinosaur swamps"
Actually, the real swampy times were in the Carboniferous. These have become conflated in the public imagination with the dinosaur eras of the Jurassic and Cretaceous - which actually had a more "normal" climate.
Re-reading the original article, they are not as one-sided on climate as I might suggest above, but we should always be wary of one-line sobriquets about large periods of geologic time. "Jurassic Park" lasted for many tens of millions of years and contained numerous climate cycles and local climate zones.
Space/Science » in reply to Redox issus
And Palaeogeographies...
