Re: Ancient Magma 'Superpiles' May Have Shaped The Continents



Stuart wrote:

On Jan 8, 2:41�am, "J. Taylor" <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 8, 1:35�am, "George" <Geo...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



"J. Taylor" <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:c57b822e-b7b4-437e-9a8a-9dc782051796@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, "George" <Geo...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"J. Taylor" <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:cc27842f-4f24-4b85-b6c1-e2452d38093d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 7, 2:14 am, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 22 2008, 7:47 pm,
auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(Florian) wrote:
brad <lbjohnson1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 19, 5:54 pm, auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Florian) wrote:
Your constant failure to identify evidences incompatible with
plate
tectonics and supporting planetary growth theory is quite amazing.

Let's all rewrite Physics .And Chemistry , too , just for good
measure . And
all Mathematics is suspect....

Only idiot would think that one must rewrite Physics or whatever your
fantasm tells you. George is one of them. Are you?

<snip>

I'd agree with George. It does require a rewriting of physics. If not,
then
tell me where the matter comes from, and how atomic xeroxing works,
all using known physics. If you claim known physical theory is
_wrong_,
then you have contradicted yourself, as you are saying above that we
do
_not_ need to rewrite physics.

You need a subscription to read
ithttp://www.nature.com/news/2008/081120/full/news.2008.1246.html
You need a subscription to read it

Here is someone blogging on
ithttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/11/21/confirmed-scient...

"Particle physics explains that the bulk of atoms is made up of
protons and neutrons, which are themselves composed of smaller
particles known as quarks, which in turn are bound by gluons. The odd
thing is this: the mass of gluons is zero and the mass of quarks
[accounts for] only five percent. Where, therefore, is the missing 95
percent? "

So let's see, 96% of the Universe is made up of Dark matter/energy

And the 4% we can see is made up of 95% "....from the way they
interact"

Which, if my math is correct, is only .2% we know much about

I don't think we will be closing the book any time soon because we
know it all.

JT
=========
This explains where the extra mass comes from, how? How does this extra
mass magically appearing inside the Earth prevent the moon's orbit from
going haywire? Basically, answer all the questions I've already asked,
Taylor, instead of avoiding them. You're clutching at straws again.

95% of mass is nothing more than energy
=============
Like I said, clutching at straws. E=mc^2. �Energy and mass are directly
proportional. �If there is more mass, there is also going to be more
gravity. �How does the moon stay in it's orbit if you add enough mass to the
Earth to make it up to 50% larger?

If they were directly proportinal the equation would be E=m

Like I said you don't know anything

Well folks, that in a nutshell presents the challenges inherent in
conversing with
EE screwballs.

Hang on (screwball). We're still waiting for you to explain how, in
Plate Tectonics, transform faults offset spreading ridges when the
offsets happen before transform faulting begins, and stop happening
once it starts.
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/transoffsets.html
.... A challenge that seems beyond your sophomoric capability. At
least Bruce there can rise to the challenge of fizzy and non-fizzy
carbonates (though not much else apparently). ... And
Krumbo, ..heavily into complaining ... well, ... can't seem to rise
to much at all beyond spelling his name.

You guys (seeing yourselves as 'experts') don't offer much do you,
when it comes to anything more onerous than telling people to see if
it fizzes, or look out when they hit stones with a hammer in case they
get a piece in the eye.

So much for the NSF's concern for "interested hobbyists asking
questions of experts". Seems that's about the limit of the expert
level you can rise to. And, ..to be fair, the limit of the level you
are generally expected to.

Looks like Bruce (Ph.D retired), and Krumbo (Hell's Angel), will
dovetail neatly with expectations of the "Look out whilst I hit this
stone with a hammer then we'll see if it fizzes" group.

(Experts at taking everybody for a ride, ..and that's about it if you
ask me. What a con. Can you so-called 'experts' really offer nothing
more than this?



Stuart

Stuart Who? Are you still camping on your surfboard while
fossicking for your moniker?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New design for spacecraft with Orion propulsion
    ... Pusher Plate Form: I looked at concave, flat, convex, and really ... be counteracted by adding mass near the rim. ... Vehicle Rotation: I should make clear that I proposed to rotate the ... Uneven use of pulse units will ...
    (rec.arts.sf.science)
  • Re: Kook warning, Oriel36
    ... >> study of the Earth evolution with the conditions of stars and galaxies ... > say in the next sentence below about subduction. ... >> subduction as a simple push of one plate down another, ... I don't know whether it's mass creation - ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Evidence *for* an Expanding Earth
    ... That the earth's mass is increasing? ... Go directly to jail. ... Pacific plate, while the rest of Marin county is on the North American ... Plate Tectonics is off to a bad start in this regard, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: HEAT RETENTIVE PLATES
    ... is like having a light bulb of 37.5 Watts inside your plate. ... A plate is a big mass, relative to the food you put on it. ... His invention is all about heating it quickly in the microwave, ...
    (rec.crafts.pottery)
  • Re: Ancient Magma Superpiles May Have Shaped The Continents
    ... tectonics and supporting planetary growth theory is quite amazing. ... _not_ need to rewrite physics. ... the mass of gluons is zero and the mass of quarks ... means that the g-field will get stronger, pulling the moon inward. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)