Re: Does Kamchatka belong to North America?

I didn't get to read the paper yet, but even if it is far-fetched, so was
Weggener a hundred years or so. I graduated with a degree in geology in
1971 and was pretty much in the middle of the transition from the American
eugeosynclinal theory to plate tectonics. Although I have been out of the
field for many years, I go back and read some of the old classic texts now
and chuckle a little.

King's "Evolution of North America" was a classic in its time and the
release I have was published in 1977. While he did address plate tectonics,
he seemed to be holding on to many of the old ideas. Many of them remain
valid today, but advances in technology and more data collection helps
refine hypotheses and also tosses some out.

There is plenty of room for ideas and for dissent. Both give us and the
next generation additional opportunities.

(We can settle the Kamchatka argument in Washington, DC. If there is any
oil there, it belongs to the US. Besides, that is the only location in the
world that the CIA didn't get to look for WMD.)



"Petra" <petrasrcf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146121055.445764.125430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hey AB.... Um I'm wondering about this one....
"This is why nobody is answering any questions on Plate Tectonics,
isn't it, ..It's a dead
file, ..killed by prediction." You can't kill anything with
prediction...reverse...saved by? But you can kill the messenger or bury
him/her...... a long list of papers..... fines....no funding..... a
neat little noose......don't go there...it's scary. One can be wrong
about the time of day.....guessing how many grains of sand.....but not
the holy grail.... It's sacred...belongs with hidden truths....behind
the door....there's another floor... it goes to hell....where all good
predictors dwell....Chicklet



.

Quantcast