Re: evidences against subduction theory

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:03:33 -0700, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <1i15hfc.15gzgbeqgoe4N%first_name@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
first_name@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Florian) wrote:

Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


As a geologist ignorant of basic principles of particle physics,

Ad hominen => short of arguments.

I suppose you cold come up with some magical ideas that might work.

There is no magic. Magic is for the believers of PT who think that crust
can magically plunge in the mantle although it is less viscous nor
dense.

But he
about of *energy* required to create all the mass that appeared inside
the Earth is pretty huge;

Assuming the density is unchanged and the the growth averages 2.9
km2/year such that the radius growth averages 18mm/year, then the amount
of mass created is 4.65*10E16 kg/year or 1.5*10E9 kg/s and the energy
required is about 1.3 x 10E26 J/s.

maybe you could compare it to the rate at
which the sun converts mass to energy.

That's 4*10E9 kg/s

But if energy to matter conversion occurs inside the earth, one has to
assume that it also happens inside the sun.

Anyway, enough speculations, back to geosciences.

Yeah, let's drop this expanding earth bull***. It requires too many
maybes, what-ifs, unknown behaviors of dark matter, and other
speculation.

But what if how the world works could be known by examination!

To many what if's Aristotle, the gods are enough.

That is why,

That is how it works,

The process of discovery

If you are perfectly happy with what you think you know, there is no
reason to go on, millions, perhaps billions have lived their lives and
quite happy ones with out knowing what we know today.

Why do I continue, in spite of being called a kook?

I, in all honesty, cannot get the pattern on the ocean floor to even
come close to working for PT and it works extraordinarily well for EE
despite all the good arguments against it.

Is that enough? Guess that depends on how much you want to see how
things work.

(By the way, there was not to the best of my knowledge, any exchange
like the one above with Aristotle, it is kind of a synopsis of you he
was)

JT


.

Quantcast