Re: The important question for the Expanding Earth believers.

Stuart <bigdakine@xxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]

Again, its best on several lines of evidence.

You misspelled "clue".


1. Seismic determination of density and elastic parameters,
discontinuities
2. Experimental pertology
3. Kimberlites. Big plus for understanding what the mantle is made of
4. Meteroites, stoney, iron, stoney irons..
5. Isotopic composition.
6. Solar abundances

etc.

Everytime you're confornted with data you don't like, you don't even
attempt
to discuss it; rather you claim "assumption" as if that relieves you
of having
to deal with it.

Stuart, one day you will realize that geosciences have to rely heavily
on assumptions and indirect clues, because obviously, you can't take
sample from the inner earth.
That day will be a big step for you.



Of course you assume the Earth is expanding despite lack of
a mechanism and lack of measurments showing an increase in the Earth's
diameter.

I don't assume nothing. A mechanism and measurement on a year by year
basis are not necessary at all for the demonstration.


So its a regular laugh riot that you claim "assumption".

I suggest you learn the difference between assumption and a conclusion
drawn
from multiple lines of evidence.

See above.



Obviously, those people forgot that such interpretation can't rule other
hypothesis.

BTW, why do you think about the paper by Dennis McCarthy. You did not
comment it. I wonder why...

IMHO, it wasn't terribly interesting.

Tell me what you thought was profound about it, if anything.

Nothing was profound about it because what he wrote was evident. The
point is that he managed to publish it in a quite good journal and that
people from the field were baffled by his analysis (according to Der
Spiegel). I think it truly tell us something about the current state of
geosciences.

I give
Dennis
credit for publishing what is perhaps the shortest paper in JGR in
many years. It was
an innocuous piece, the purpose of which seemed to be to get Dennis
some street creds
as he can now say he published in JGR. The article, at least as
written doesn't
discuss or support expanding Earth. I'm not sure the observation that
continents have
a northward drift cuz Antarctica is surrounded by ridges is that
profound.





But hey, at least he got off his ass, wrote something, submitted it
for peer review
and had it published. Dennis deserves kudos for that. Now if only you
and Findlay would do the
same. You can't claim the scientific community is out to get you.

Never said the above Stuart. Beside the scientific community could
hardly be out to get me as I'm part of it!

After all Dennis was published
in JGR. What's your excuse?

The lack of time. I have at least 5 papers to write before the end of
next year.
Besides I would like to publish with coauthors to get a better
credibility in the field. There is also one point I would like to solve:
the origin of asymetric spreading in the pacific.




Nothing Herndon's ideas change that. With respect to his idea
in general,
parts are pretty interesting, however, since his putative ball of
uranium is so small
it might not be detected sesimically hence for now, I don't see a way
to tese his hypothesis.

Worst there is no reason for heavy element to concentrate in a small
core

Well given the density of U is like 20gm/cm^3, I can concieve of a way
U might find itself in the center of the earth.

Hmm, considering that the gravity field is null at the center of the
Earth, It is not evident it would migrate to the very center.


Thats one reason why I find some of Herndon's proposals interesting.

Stuart


--
Florian

"Tout est au mieux dans le meilleur des mondes possibles"
Voltaire vs Maupertuis/Leibniz/Meister
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kook warning, Oriel36
    ... > community' see the importance of the Earth as an astronomical body ... > figures in the discussion of crustal evolution - or evolution of the ... > Isn't it, Stuart? ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Pangaea
    ... reflected in the major geological features of the Earth. ... What have you got against the net as a publishing medium anyway? ... It's only academics who cherish ... It's posterity puts the value on it, not 'some george'. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Seismic waves, density and temperature.
    ... Bingham plastic do not behave like fluids in absence ... What do you think Stuart? ... convection in a Bingham plastic like material? ... way to go instead of a round Earth. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: 90-Degree Obliquity?
    ... Earth becomes tidally locked to the Sun (as it ... >> towards the Sun and one always facing away. ... The Moon was moved to Earth's trailing ... great tragedies of publishing, it was not a limited enough edition ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: What happens here, anyway?
    ... We don't need pink unicorns to explains facts. ... That's the problem with theory, Stuart, that you seem oblivious to: ... impression that Earth Expansion is a theory - with no mechanism. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
Quantcast