Re: evidences against subduction theory

On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:23:30 -0700, Offbreed
<offbreed_106@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

J. Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 04:19:19 -0700, Stuart <bigdakine@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Nope. No evidence for expansion.

Boatloads for PT

At least you sincerely believe this, however deluded.


You make an extraordinary claim, you need to offer extraordinary proof
of your claim.

All the ages of ocean crust, in all the oceans of the world, have a
pattern when all the ages are removed in sequence allows all the
continental margins to come together with a precision of 99% or
better, and while this is done the Earth remains a sphere and no
points need to be adjust in any manner other than pulling the age out.

This is extremely extraordinary

Yet, Stuart persist in claiming no evidence

And you, like so many before, may say so what, PT can equally account
for all the ages and movement on the ocean , and I, as I have said
before, show me.

I have seen Scotese animation and others. And they all are nothing
more than the pattern of expansion draw on a constant radius Earth.

In Scotese's drawing he shows subduction zones placed to the western
edge of North America before the presumed break-up of the
supercontinent. This placement would require the subduction zone to
either move before the continent or a new one was constantly being
formed to pull first the old ocean floor into it and then the new from
the ridge in the Pacific, all the while North America is moving from
presumably the push from the ridge in the Atlantic. Even though it
has been shown there is not even energy in either spreading or
subduction to drive the movement of the so called plates, but only has
enough when the slab turns and is assisted by gravity. Making that
movement a really neat trick and just one of the many unique features
of PT as to how it can do anything it needs to do. This also gives it
the remarkable power of predicting anything, thus accounting for
everything we see.

JT

.