Planet Earth: A Question Of Expansion

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
New "go fetch" word of the day is Intermontane.

Now for some geology humour.

What do the subjects in these photos have in common?






 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
New "go fetch" word of the day is Intermontane.

Now for some geology humour.

What do the subjects in these photos have in common?






Your lover and his diseased dick?
Trolls don't get to dictate anything to me, now go do what you do be best, 'suck it all up Buttercup.'
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Perhaps you should give the different rates if you are going to focus on specifics rather than 'averages'. (include the yearly rates for the last 200m years also, thanx in advance)
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
New game, lets play 'balls', . . . You can start running but that only means you will be tired when you lose, . . . . both times.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Louis Hissink says: February 20, 2019 at 7:53 am
Thanks for the heads up.
I wasn’t aware perovskite was an excellent proton conductor, but Michael Cszudi in hie Electric Earth model, alluded to protons passing through matter. It;s electric charge that is observed moving through the mineral lattice, which is then interpreted to be protons and electrons as the case may be.
No one knows what’s in the mantle. In fact no one knows what the MoHo is and its at a very shallow depth. As the Kola Peninsula Deep Hole project found, around 12,000 meters down the lower crust acts like a viscous substance like cold honey. It flows and fills the bored hole in. And the temperature was too high as well, so the Russians gave up drilling because the hole closed up before they could get the drilling tool back down to resume drilling. Years later the Germans drilled deep holes to verify plate tectonics, in Germany, and that project also failed to verify the model.
The belief that the mantle has abundant perovskite, is based on the standard astrophysical model that involves gravitational accretion, and the belief that meteorites are primary early stage universal components. But gravitational accretion doesn’t occur, so if the starting assumptions are flawed, so too any derivative theory.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Poles and Drifts

Posted on February 19, 2019 by Louis Hissink
One of the unintended consequences of assuming the geomagnetic field is formed by external plasma currents, specifically the plasma z-pinch structure of which the Earth is the focus, is the problem of polar wander over geological time. It’s the documented geological fact that the magnetic poles have indeed moved over time, but did the poles move, or did the continents move?
The present day observation of polar movement is evidence enough that the documented remnant magnetism in rocks is not caused by plate movement or earth expansion. Nor can this movement be explained by upper core turbulent fluid behaviour, or the present dynamo model, since there is no physical mechanism to explain core turbulence; it’s all mathematics and modelling, and hence technically sophisticated gibberish.
Plate tectonics, and for that matter most global tectonic models, all rely on the spatial permanence of geomagnetic field being the benchmark or reference point from which continental drift etc. is deduced. It is assumed the Earth has always been oriented at its present state, though the geomagnetic record can only be traced back to Jurassic times.
Given the present day observation of geomagnetic polar movement, it is obvious the geomagnetic field’s orientation has nothing to do with the Earth’s rotation or tectonic plate movement. Which means the plates are not moving as proposed by plate tectonic theory. Nor can the Earth be expanding either since earth expansion theory also relies on the geomagnetic field being constant in orientation over time.
The logical conclusion is that neither plate tectonics or earth expansion theories are supported by the geophysical evidence. This leads to the question of how the various ocean basins or surface depressions were formed. Subsidence by degassing? Or plasma erosion during past catastrophes? Or both? (In addition any tectonic model that relies on geomagnetic polar motion should be rejected).
By the way if the Earth is located at the focus of a plasma Z-Pinch structure, then gravity is easily explained as a radially aligned Lorentz force
 
Last edited: