Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?


"J. Taylor" <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ipb4g25grhhnjf6fmh6ak8ojvgm8jt4cqa@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 19:39:47 -0700, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In an obscure thread in this ng that you Real Geologists wouldn't touch
with a ten-foot pole, this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics
theory is "based on the assumption of a panthalassa." I wrote that that
is wrong. Plate tectonics theory is based on the assumption that
physics, geochemistry, geophysics, thermodynamics, fluid flow,
seismography, astronomic theories on planetary formation, and so forth
are correct. (Observations and interpretations follow, with the
conclusion that the curst consists of plates that move around ... and
that the continents were stuck together in various supercontinent
configurations in the past.)

Of course, since you Real Geologists know better than to waste your time
arguing with that funny little man who won't talk to you at geodynamics
conferences down under, none of you read that, nobody answered me, and
now he's dancing with glee. Maybe he thinks I'm as lonely as he is. Not
that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay
thinks >
At a most basic level a discussion cannot exist where there is
dishonesty. Would you mind providing a link where Don said, "200
years of physics is wrong" since you placed it in quotes, to signify
it was his statement. The only person I remember making that
statement is you, claiming it is what Don is saying, not that he said
it.

It is not a small point, since you are the one making all sorts of
claims as to what is or is not EE, then claiming it is the position of
those giving evidence for it.

It is not only dishonest, but a sign of desperation. You have nothing
so you make things up.

JT

The dishonesty is in EEers making wild assed guesses at how all of the
continents around the Pacific are alleged to have been stuck together 200
million years ago with no coroborating physical evidence whatsoever to
support the wild assed guess. I'm still waiting for your coroborating rock
samples and stratigraphic reconstructions across the north and south
Pacific Ocean, Mr. T.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?
    ... this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics ... that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay ... The dishonesty is in EEers making wild assed guesses at how all of the ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?
    ... this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics ... that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay ... but a sign of desperation. ... The dishonesty is in EEers making wild assed guesses at how all of the ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?
    ... this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics ... that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay ... The dishonesty is in EEers making wild assed guesses at how all of the ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?
    ... this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics ... that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay ... statement is you, claiming it is what Don is saying, not that he said ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?
    ... this Don Findlay person wrote that plate tectonics ... that I actually care what Don "200 years of physics is wrong" Findlay ... Maybe you can explain how EE does not violate conservation laws ... misrepresentations of plate tectonics theory. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
Loading