The pseudo miracles of Plate tectonics Zealots

George <George@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

No response?

Miracle 1: Where does the new matter come from?

What miracle? Observations lead to the unambigous conclusion that there
is accumulation of matter in planets.


Miracle 2: How does it happen that the new matter has the right chemical
and isotopic compositions in the right quantities to be undetectable?
Changes over time in heavier elements might simply be buried deep inside
the earth, but the model also creates water and other volatiles on the
surface in the right quantities and isotopic balances to leave no trace
in the geological record.

If the matter forming the volatile compounds has the same origin, why
would its composition differ over time? By the way, since the growth
is inside out, it is not obvious that heavier elements get buried very
deep.


Miracle 3: How does it happen that the new matter has not affected
earth's orbit or rotation period? The added material has increased
earth's moment of inertia, so keeping it rotating at a constant speed
(after allowing for tidal drag) is inexplicable.

It has changed. Tidalites do not allow the determination of absolute
values as it is assumed that the solar system did not evolve at all.
Obviously it did evolved.
That false notion that the solar system barely evolved in the 4.5 Gy is
reminiscent to creationism that advocates an absence of evolution in
lifeforms. Both notions share that same deep religion root and must be
discarded.


Miracle 4: How does it happen that the earth's paleomagnetism is
everywhere consistent with a constant-sized earth? A smaller earth in
the past would make paleomagnetism directions very much different, if
the earth's magnetic field was roughly the same. By what incredible
conincidence did the magnetic field adjust to produce data just like one
would find on a constant-sized earth?

False. This has been debunked. See Chudinov chapII for a discussion:

<http://books.google.com/books?id=MI4FtNlgnaQC&printsec=frontcover&sig=A
CfU3U2TaXpPB2p8QrnRSspyic83nPp3Gw&source=gbs_similarbooks_r&cad=3_2#PPA3
,M1>


Miracle 5: Why is expansion not occurring on other planets? Bodies
without atmospheres, notably the Moon and Mercury, don't have erosion to
obscure stretch marks, and the Moon and Mercury show no signs of
deformation for well over a billion years. Nor is the sun, or the
earth's orbit would be affected.

Planetary growth is universal, but the rate of growth is factually
different and change with time (increasing or decreasing) for each
planets/moons.

The true question is: Why is there currently active growth of some
planets/moons (Encelade, Earth, Venus, Io...) and at the same time very
slow growth from other (Moon, Mercury, Mimas...)

Obviously, We won't get a clear answer until we figure out the
mechanism.



Miracle 6: Why is expansion not seen occurring on Earth? Modern
instruments are plenty accurate to detect changes in both size and mass,
yet they detect neither.

At our timescale, the growth is only perceptible through coseismic
displacement and deformation of the crust measurable using GPS.
The change in mass is at the limit of detection for satellites. Scalera
has a dicussion about it:

<http://www.earth-prints.org/handle/2122/1066>

But the geological data (age of the ocean floor ) allow to quantify the
growth over the last 200 My with good accuracy.


Miracle 7: Why could overthrusting (subduction) not operate in the past?
We can see that subduction is happening at a fairly constant rate today.
And the expanding earth model includes subduction (they call it
overthrusting), but says that it eats up only tens, or at most hundreds,
of miles of oceanic crust. The limit makes sense only if overthrusting
started less than about ten million years ago. Why not earlier?

Before the recent strong oceanization period, growth of the continental
lithosphere accounted for most of the surface growth by progressive
emplacement, through successive eduction/upduction/overthrusting
episods.
So there was eductions during all of Earth's life even if it was less
intense in agrrement with the slower growing rate.


Miracle 8: Why is an expanding earth not detectable by paleontologists,
neither as changes in morphology from an increasing gravity, nor as
patterns of biogeography? Even if expanding earth proponents are not
looking at this issue, other paleontologists are, and they should have
noticed and pointed out patterns which do not match expectations.


False. Paleontologists and biogeographs have data showing that India has
never been completely isolated from Asia, thus refuting the hypothesis
of a thousands km-wide ocean (Tethys) between India and Asia. The data
are compatibe with the existence of an epicontinental sea or a *narrow*
oceanic basin north of India, depending on the periods.

Regarding the Pacific, the same conclusion is true. McCarthy presented
biogeographical and geological evidences that the Pacific was a small
enclosed basin:

<http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17279686>

There are other geological evidence that there was a narrow oceanic
basin between Australia/North America/antarctica that existed at least
for 1.5 Gy:


<http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/321/5886/235>



Regarding morphologies, the paleoflora (Giant ferns and fungi and non
ligneous plants) and paleofauna (insect size, dinosaur's average size,
early flying vertebrates) provide clues that in addition to higher
oxygen levels, paleo surface gravity was likely lower.


Miracle 9: Why are competent geologists not expounding on the expanding
earth, especially since it was such a hot topic 35 years ago? [...]

For the very same reason that competent geologist were not expounding on
Wegener's continental drift in the 50s, despite it was a hot topic in
the 20s.


Miracle 10: What do a small handful of amatuers know that the competent
geologists don't?

Irrelevant. There are amateurs that advocate the theory, because they
were convinced by the work of scientists: Hildenberg, Carey, Ollier to
name a few.
Scientists worked, are working and will continue the work on that
theory, and it will continue to attract amateurs for the simple reason
that it is by far the best paradigm around in geosciences.

See, these so-called miracles only exist in the mind of a few zealots.

You should quit going to church Ron Yates. That perverts your mind.

--
Florian
"Toute vérité franchit trois étapes. D'abord elle est ridiculisée.
Ensuite, elle subit une forte opposition. Puis, elle est considérée
comme ayant toujours été une évidence." - Arthur Schopenhauer
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The pseudo miracles of Plate tectonics Zealots
    ... the earth, but the model also creates water and other volatiles on the ... Why do stars have to start with H and He; and planets can somehow ... Planetary growth is universal, but the rate of growth is factually ... geologists don't? ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: The pseudo miracles of Plate tectonics Zealots
    ... the earth, but the model also creates water and other volatiles on the ... Why do stars have to start with H and He; and planets can somehow ... Planetary growth is universal, but the rate of growth is factually ... geologists don't? ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Where Matter Comes from For Planetary Growth
    ... really the right word but nevertheless a group of geologists and other ... scientists who have long endorsed the notion that the Earth has undergone ... gross expansion or growth. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Where Matter Comes from For Planetary Growth
    ... really the right word but nevertheless a group of geologists and other ... scientists who have long endorsed the notion that the Earth has undergone ... gross expansion or growth. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Floppy
    ... The Expanding Earth model raises some issues which, if not impossible, ... Miracle 1: Where does the new matter come from? ... Why are competent geologists not expounding on the expanding ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
Loading