Re: gravity theory


"Florian" <auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1imwue1.fs2n9r4c3qevN%auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George <George@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Florian" <auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1imk4r9.esqcehdyr6tzN%auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George <George@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Florian" <auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:1imi0lj.1rnu6k91h3xfvsN%auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The refutation was based on assumptions that are wrong. For example,
it
was assumed that there are no intraplate deformations.

Umm, are you arguing that there are? Because earlier you said that
there
were no plates at all? Make up your mind, floppy.

You don't have to act like an idiot. You are one.
No rigid plates moving in a block. Only lithosphere thta dforms in
response to various stresses.

Umm, I quote from above:

Floppy: "For example, it was assumed that there are no intraplate
deformations", the implication being that you believe that there are
plates.

Idiot. Can't you understand that this assumption is not mine?

Then why do you bring it up? In case you weren't aware, geologists have
known for many decades that intraplate deformations occur. So it would
appear that if the assumption isn't yours, the lie certainly is.


And floppy, the assumption that there were no intraplate deformations
went
out of fashion about the same time as Earth Expansion. Next.

Bull***, the current model (Nuvel1A) assumes rigid plates without
intraplate deformations.

Bull*** back at you. The Nuvel 1A model allows one to calculate motion
referenced either to a fixed plate or the NNR (no-net-rotation) frame of the
selected model (the default is NNR, not a fixed plate). It doesn't assume
that all plates are fixed, and says nothing about there being no intraplate
deformations. It allows you to assume that one plate was fixed relative to
all the others, or else allows you to assume no net rotation. And Floppy,
this isn't the latest model. The lastest is actually two models:

http://augsvn.ethz.ch/Proceedings/AGU2006/html/G41A-05.html

Models are used to test aspects of a theory. It does not encompass the
entire theory. Long before plate tectonics, intracratonic and
intrasbasinal deformations (later known as intraplate deformations) were
widely observed and mapped. And plate tectonics has NEVER discarded or
ignored them. Why you came up with this silly scam you are trying to push
is a mystery, unless you are truly insane and thought no geologist would
notice.

George


.

Quantcast