Re: The important question for the Expanding Earth believers.

On Sep 18, 10:46 am, first_name@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Florian) wrote:
Stuart <bigdak...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]

Again, its best on several lines of evidence.

You misspelled "clue".


You have no 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,

One day FLo, you'll learn teh difference between assumptions and
conclusions
drawn from multiple lines of independent evidence. Further you'll
understand that
the use of indirect clues or "deduction" is one of the cornestines of
the scientific
method. When that day comes you can then call yourself a scientist
instead of
the bumptious imposter that you actually are.

because obviously, you can't take
sample from the inner earth.
That day will be a big step for you.

Uh huh. Spoken like a true creationist. Fortunately I have
seismology on my side. Basically Flo is arguing that if
you can't directly observe something something with your own
sense that you cannot draw any conclusions about it. This
is the cornerstone principal of creation science. Fortunately
actual science has moved past this which is why it has made
great progress.




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.


Indeed, as far as I can tell, since neither you or Taylor or Findlay
have given
any test that could falsify EE, no mechanisms or lack thereof or any
data
have any bearing at all on EE.



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.


See my answer 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.

Just because something is "evident" doesn't mean it can't be profound.
However
in this case Dennis's observation follows from the rules of rigid body
kinematics
and the current configuration of the earth's tectonic plates.

Hence, I'm curious as to how this supports EE. If you have no idea
then
just say so, and admit you were silly for bringing it up.


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.


Funny, I wasn't baffled. The only thing that was baffling was that
someone thought it
was worth publishing.


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!

I think you confused scientific community with the creationist/alchemy
community.

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.

Oh boy. I can hardly wait.

So what papers have you published already? Don't
keep this scholarly work from us FLo.

Besides I would like to publish with coauthors to get a better
credibility in the field.

Indeed. Well at least you recognize you have no credibility
whatsoever.


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.

At the exact center yes. However Gravity at the CMB turns out to
be very close to what it is on the surface. In fact its slightly
larger.
And within the core it decreases in an almost linear fashion.

Gosh your silly.

Stuart

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: International Conference on the Phaistos Disk
    ... example are judging the book by Derk Ohlenroth ... of the scientific community as a whole is being hold up. ... years ago: publishing a message immediately ... It was Deja and then Google that weren't able to keep up with what everyone with direct Usenet access had been seeing all along. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: International Conference on the Phaistos Disk
    ... Progress in our understanding doesn't come from ... of the scientific community as a whole is being hold up. ... years ago: publishing a message immediately ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: International Conference on the Phaistos Disk
    ... of the scientific community as a whole is being hold up. ... years ago: publishing a message immediately ... Usenet itself. ... Usenet access had been seeing all along.- ...
    (sci.lang)
Loading