Re: Shrinking Earth


Al Zenner wrote:

> Invalid conclusion because causality is not demonstrated. Try
> shuffling cards if you need a generalized example demonstrating
> the stupidity inherent in the paragraph above.

Are you calling him stupid, Al? Not the way to win friends and
influence people around here.


> >>> but they push against each other until something gives,
> >>> What gives is the what one might call mountain building.
>
> That's only one example of several possibilities.
>
> >>> Similar to cement testing in a hydraulic pressure jack that
> >>> exerts force on a column of concrete until it bursts.
>
> Not at all similar. Any 1st year engineering or technicial
> student studies stress and strength of materials and knows more
> on the subject than the author of the paragraph above
>
> >>> The plates fold (if they are elastic enough) or crack and
> >>> are pushed up, since this is the only way they can go.
> >>> hence, after a while, you have the Himalayas .
>
> Learn something about Young's modulus before propounding this
> sort of nonsense. You don't have any grasp of the concept
> "elastic" as used in technical discussions. I'd expect to read
> this level of misinformation from a grammar school student not
> yet exposed to the most primitive course in classical mechanics.

(What's going on here? Does Al know who he's talking to in this reply?
)


> Understand this clearly: folding is a failure mode just as
> surely as breaking.
>
> >>> And judging from the height and volume of rock they
> >>> comprise, it must have been a hell of a collision period.
> >>> I bet the earthquakes around that time would have been 15 or
> >>> 20 on the Richter scale.
>
> The statement above comes from a complete unabashed idiot.

Since this post is addressed to me I've got a suspicion Al's having a
Senior Moment of some weight. Waken up, Al.


> "The Richter scale is logarithmic, that is an increase of 1
> magnitude unit represents a factor of ten times in amplitude.
> The seismic waves of a magnitude 6 earthquake are 10 times
> greater in amplitude than those of a magnitude 5 earthquake.
> However, in terms of energy release, a magnitude 6 earthquake is
> about 31 times greater than a magnitude 5."
>
> http://www.pgc.nrcan.gc.ca/seismo/eqinfo/richter.htm
>
> >> That's right.
>
> And Donald Duck Findlay agrees.
>
> >> There's never been such crumpling and collison
> >> of crust as you get in the Himalayas - I mean in the
> >> classroom:-
> >> http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/mtbldgcollis.html
>
> A magnitude 12 earthquake releases energy equivalent to
> 160 trillion tons of TNT which is enough to fault the earth
> in half through the center. But Donald Duck Findlay quacks
> his agreement with a magintude 16 earthquake accompanying the
> building of the Himilayas!!!!!

The only thing I will agree wtih here, amongst your statements which
appear to be directed to me, going by your first line, is that
the'building' of the Himilayas was accompanied by a heck of a *lot* of
Earthquakes, which saw not only the Himilayas uplifted, but the Pacific
Ocean as well. But the only trouble is (which returns us to the point
of this thread) that the Pacific seems to be lagging behind in the
game. But if you really want an excellent exposition of the manner in
which the Himilayas are built then you have to refer to the recent
article in the special issue of Scientific American, where our paid
representative at Yale is expounding on the efficacy of erosion in this
matter, and the role of grass growing, in slowing it all down. He's
even hinting a role for global warming, in case anyone feels like
throwing some money his way to further research the point.

Why don't you write to him, Al, and tell *him* about Earthquakes? For
the last week the've been pulling the Himilayas apart, not crushing
them up.


> >> Mt Everest and all the other high Peaks of the Himalayas are
> >> exactly the same.
>
> Well obviously they're not so just what do you mean by this
> statement? Never mind, you'll just make up more nonsense.

(Some more "nonsense" about the high peaks of the Himalayas being flat,
...just for Al Zenner with the Big Qualifications:-
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/to/codswallop.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/to/hidden.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/to/k2.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/to/anna.html

Or what about in your own backyard:-
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/to/mtbuild.html

Flat mountains... I think, senior moments of weight notwithstanding,
we have to cut Big Al a bit of slack here, ....

Ciao, Al. See if George, or Stu, or Brian, or Carsten even, will
come to your rescue.

> snip <escalation of bull***>

.

Quantcast