Re: What is this convection cell nonsense

On 5 août, 23:52, oriel36 <geraldkelle...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 4, 4:46 pm, Jim Willemin <jim***willemin@hot***mail.com> wrote:

oriel36 <geraldkelle...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:1186250477.122133.159640
@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

<snip rant>

Well, stuff comes out of the interior at the ridge, and disappears into the
interior at the subduction zone. Since there is not a HUGE hole at the
ridge, nor HUGE mountains at the subduction zone, and in fact, since both
areas are in pretty good isostatic equilibrium, you gotta have convection
of material by some means. Stuff MUST flow from sink to source. That
means convection,kind of by definition. Since the stuff sinking is colder
than the stuff coming up, there pretty much has to be a heat transfer
involved too, any way you look at it. You also need to explain things like
the spreading between Antarctica and Australia, which is zonal rather than
meridonal.

I distinctly told you that unless you attempt to make a complete fool
of yourself and determine where these nonsensical 'convection cells'
emerge and descend geographically on the planet that I would have
little interest in discussing matters of geological interest.As
differential rotation is observationally observed where a celestial
body is rotating,at least one which is not in a solid state but rather
in a variety of molten/flexibvle condition,why would I care to even
waste a second with silly people who believe in 'convection cells.

No offense but I do not think that reasoning is your strongest point
and I suggest you continue believing in silly correlations where you
can do no harm.Thank you.

I always appreciate your input, my friend.
One question though :
That rotation of the Earth, what is its driving force for a start ?

Best regards

Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Discoverer of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre mines in the Great Sandy Desert
Founder of the True Geology

.

Loading