Expanding Earth?

[EStein]

Hi , Neal here

Gosh , I think that I proposed a single suite of observations and they prove my hypothsis .

...... Neal Adams

 

Neal, In your defense, just because one's ideas are preposterous, simplistic, without basis and mathematically unsound, it does not make him wrong. They laughed at perpetual motion, too.

[NAdams]

Just play video clip #7 on his site, where he alternates scathing and patronising remarks about conventional plate tectonics.

The point I was making is that we know from measurements of plate motion that some plates are colliding and this motion can only be accomodated by plate tectonic theory, not by his expanding Earth conjecture. The observations of plate motion run wholly counter to his theory. Only if he rejects these well validated measurements can his theory remain intact.

I found his matching quite unconvincing. I need more than a neat animation to convince me of its reality.

I guess the question is , Exactly what is it that you need , in order to simply have you listen to a reasoned argument?

I have presented , in my animations a more detailed and correct view of tectonic movement and the results of this movement than you have ever seen in your life . Much more detailed than any Pangea map ,that you have seen of the pangea view.

In fact ,in a lifetime of observation you have seen still drawings and animations and diagrams of all sorts of configurations of the island of pangea , each one of them , if from a different source , so profoundly different from each other as to belie credulity.

You likely don't remember the variety of configurations , because you saw them at different times. I on the other hand have seen them . I

have taken maps of the ancient world and created animations of them going back in time ,...in order to see what the theory from the USGS is all about .

These continental plates shift and squirm and twist like silly putty , certainly not granitic rock and basalts. You would and will be aghast at what your tax dollars are paying for , speculative researchwise when this video is seen.

But allow me be, what seems so hard to be .

Take a globe ,(Not a map. please.) set it away from you a bit and look at South America and Africa . Here are the rules you must live by .

!. Twisting and pulling may be applied on projected-out peninsula areas only but no massive turning of continents.

We KNOW , that is, Geologists and me ,know ,... for a fact, that the bottom of South America wrapped around the bottom of Africa and up to ,...at "Least

NEAR" to Madagascar. Now , hold that thought.

If you can do it by sight , fine, but trace the whole Eastern coast of South America , you can take /slide that tracing paper over to Africa .

You will see to your surprise that it does NOT fit, In fact to make the lower coasts to fit in a distorted way , you will have to rotate South America

counter-clockwise about 30 degrees(Breaking rule number one.) If you turn South America back to straighten out , You will see the top of South America fits under the armpit of Africa quite snugly.

Trouble is the lower areas have split apart about 30 degrees,

and that South America tail will never wrap around the bottom of Africa.

Step three Trace both South America and Africa onto tracing paper .

No need to be perfect. Now you had to wrinkle the tracing paper to get it to sort of wrap around the globe,right ? good . Now , cut the two continents out

Now get a soccer ball or some smaller kid's ball and just compress

the paper around it . Now slide the two continents together . Now , and only now, they fit! Actually , if the new ball is the right size , they fit perfectly

with this new geometry.

Have it actually happen under your hands and try to figure another way to close that 30 degrees. Geometry doesn't lie. It's like math , it's perfect. The whole Earth works like this.

Secondly , if plates collided before the ages of the dinosaurs there would be as many mountains as today. But there weren't! In fact 80 percent or more of the mountains on Earth rose up in the last 40 million years,

AFTER the dinosaurs died. Since the ages of dinosaurs no continents have collided , anywhere on Earth , ever .

Even in the pangea theory ...everything has moved away from each

other , and some have slid by . none have collided!

You will say India , of course. Above India , the most massive mountains and ranges on Earth .

According to physics , if India sits on and within an oceanic plate (and it does.)India MUST suffer the exact same fate that Asia does. "Every action has an equal and opposite re-action!" Must ! No

exceptions ! Think of a Volkswagen crashing into a Humvee.

Worse , exactly at the" impact zone", India has flattened plains ,for miles and miles. This is litterally beyond the law of physics. Any practical Physicist

would stand there sputtering and turning red at the thought of it . Our

VolksWagen not only crumpled the humvee , but it got a new coat of paint in the process.

There is no physical law or group of laws that would allow this .

So how were the mountains made and why weren't there substantial mountains 200 million years ago?

There weren't , because the crust wasn't thick enough . Only about

4 miles thick. Now... the continental crust is 70 miles thick . of Granitic Rock and Basalts.

Now ,.....imagine a thick crust on a smaller planet with a thin crust .

As the planet grows the crust gets thicker and is Not tugged at ,...because its now broken up into continents , It's recurving to a flatter surface and the upper crust ,.....buckles into ...mountains.

Got the picture?

Now on the biggest continent with shreding edges the whole continent recurves flatter and mountains and the mountaining pushes, compresses inward toward the middle ,......which is .....?

Neal Adams

[NAdams]

Neal, In your defense, just because one's ideas are preposterous, simplistic, without basis and mathematically unsound, it does not make him wrong. They laughed at perpetual motion, too.

 

Actually , when you have the biggest "gang" on Earth behind you it's not necessary to justify anything you say.

Even so, I personally would expect a reasonable and inteligent man , to justify what he has said.

In one of my various fields i told a group of scientists working with lasers that if they use their lasers to "Photographically shoot an already Hologramed hologram , they could use the transparent hologram to look at light and color , and the spectrum they see would move foreward and backward along the spectrum ...They didn't believe me.. But of course science is science , and it worked. I know you don't know what I'm talking about , When you go to the Planetarium next and they give you these clear 3-D glasses , Take your pair home and check them out.

Neal Adams

[Turtle]

Now there's some roundiloquence. :eek_big: Let's combine the peer review thing with a restatement of my earlier question "Do you have some reference link to support the boldened claim?", where the the claim I refer to is your statement "Then in 2002 a group reported that the Equator was getting larger each year for several years, ..."

 

What group? Using what measurements? Made how? Where? When? How often?

 

 

:) :phones:

[InfiniteNow]

I love watching unseasoned posters proclaim absolute knowledge, their strongest argument being akin to "are you daft?" :phones:

 

 

Is this expanding earth idea rooted in McCutcheon's theory, or is it somehow seperate and distinct?

[NAdams]

:eek_big: :phones: :)

Please google" the equator is growing"

Neal Adams

[NAdams]

I love watching unseasoned posters proclaim absolute knowledge, their strongest argument being akin to "are you daft?" :phones:

 

 

Is this expanding earth idea rooted in McCutcheon's theory, or is it somehow seperate and distinct?

 

Don't know McCutcheon. Is he Daft?

Neal

[InfiniteNow]

The first warning was nice. Please recognize it as such and find more robust support of your arguments. I would like to learn from your experience, as certainly would others, but cannot do so with the presentations you are currently offering.

 

Per McCutcheon, see the following:

http://hypography.com/forums/books-movies-games/797-final-theory.html

[Turtle]

Please google" the equator is growing"

Neal Adams

 

I surely will Neal; however, I fail to understand your reluctance to provide a specific reference yourself. Do you want to have us understand you or not? :eek_big: If you have a specific reference in mind, why not post the link? :phones:

[NAdams]

The first warning was nice. Please recognize it as such and find more robust support of your arguments. I would like to learn from your experience, as certainly would others, but cannot do so with the presentations you are currently offering.

 

Per McCutcheon, see the following:

http://hypography.com/forums/books-movies-games/797-final-theory.html

 

You're gonna have to catch up sooner or later , and that takes a heap 'a thinking.

It's important for me to be circumspect and Scholarly and, well, everything folks want me to be .

It ain't me , I have an oblogation to the truth , mine or" yours " which

ever is right, I don't really care , and I'm a gentle man , but that's my limit.

I talk to folks on the internet as if i'm gonna have coffee with them tomorrow . I don't believe in this internet brashness and insulting meanness.

I know what I have to say will rub people the wrong way, but look

At what I'm trying to do .

In the end I'm gonna throw out an awful lot of 150 years of science

And pretty brutally .

How can that be looked upon as anything more than ego and arrogance.

I simply got to take these hits along the way. I've been writing on 3 forums in the last week ,or so . Why?

So people can take shots at me?

I don't think so , I'll tell you . Some few folk here will be printing my notes out and reading them over again and again ,...and unfortunately I can't know who those people are now,

they'll be reluctant to step up but they will help , in some ways to make a difference when it's important. At least , that's what I believe.

Appearances on coast to coast , magazine articles , maybe a special on discovery , Nova or Natl Geo . Groups like EE . New sites , new people ,

more people tell others about the videos , 1500 viewings a day , It's a start

This is this theory's time to be tested, and I'm gonna see it happens.

I start something , I finish it.

Neal Adams

[InfiniteNow]

What notes? That's what I'm asking... I'm am neither attacking you nor blinding myself to your points, I am simply asking you to present yourself in a way that makes sense to someone who is not you.

 

Please, propose your hypothesis, support it with citations and/or works of others that parellel your own, and describe how the currently accepted theories are not only incomplete, but how your ideas do what they do and more.

 

Welcome to the scientific method. It would be nice to read a post from you that is 1) not accusatory, 2) not framed in the absolute, 3) avoids references in the first person, 4) does not use credentials to support a claim.

 

Open minded and highly cynical are not mutually exclusive.

[NAdams]

I surely will Neal; however, I fail to understand your reluctance to provide a specific reference yourself. Do you want to have us understand you or not? :eek_big: If you have a specific reference in mind, why not post the link? :phones:

 

I don't get it . That's the refrence . I've been trying to track this report and find out what's happening ,. Can't find them. Makes me nuts .

Theres this chinese schollar that's compiled the gps stuff and found the southern pacific is growing . I'm trying to verify his opinion myself .

Truth is I'd rather do it myself , then I'd know it's true.

Guys on the EE group found a Navy report that said their information was showing apparent growth ,..and they were given permission to zero the devices out at the end of the year. This kind of stuff is why I'm gonna do it myself.

Listen to this ,'

Science's view ,...in the beginning ,meteorites pummeled and pounded the Earth's body until the Earth was molten and differentiating.

Remember that ? So Earth is molten and cooling Two to three miles deep of Granitic rock, Then basalts,

So ,......what happened to 3/4 s of the outer crust of the earth about 3 miles deep since then ? It's gone. Magic? Oh and if there is subbuction , of any sort Granitic rock CAN'T subduct.

Neal Adams

[InfiniteNow]

Good grief, you wonder why people aren't respecting your views. Shall we call you messiah as well? What other profundities do you wish to share? After all, you're already in strange claims.

[Turtle]

Good grief, you wonder why people aren't respecting your views. Shall we call you messiah as well? What other profundities do you wish to share? After all, you're already in strange claims.

 

:hyper: Well, it's not Neals fault he's in Strange Claims as I started the thread here in the first place. :eek2: A bit off topic, but Neal mentioned presenting his study as if sitting around with folks chatting it up, and as Racoon can attest I can get considerably more...uhh...'animated' shall we say in such circumstances. ;) Go figure.

 

Ok, I have some search results so let's get down to brass tacks on the 'growing equator' business.

 

First: Web Search Results1 - 10 of about 46,600 for the equator is growing

 

Next, from the 3'rd link in the list:

Satellite data collected since 1998 from the U.S./French ocean-observing satellite Topex/Poseidon, managed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., indicate the bulge in Earth's gravity field at the equator is growing, and scientists think that the ocean may hold the answer to the mystery of how the changes in the trend of Earth's gravity are occurring.

.

.

.

Consequently, mass must have been redistributed within the oceans. That's where the ocean circulation theory comes in. Ocean currents can redistribute mass quickly, such as the 5-year time frame that these changes were first observed. The Topex/Poseidon observations of sea level height do show an increase in the equatorial bulge of the oceans corresponding to the observed gravity changes, but the data are not yet conclusive. One critical factor is the temperature of the world's oceans, and its salinity, for which detailed data are not yet available.

 

ScienceDaily: Satellites Reveal Mystery Of Large Change In Earth's Gravity Field

 

So, it is an increase in gravity, not circumference that is the noted change. Moreover, this change is explainable without recourse to an expanding Earth as the article notes.

 

Let's just float that for now, as 46,000 + references may take a bit of time to consume.

[InfiniteNow]

Thank you for some tangible information, Turtle. I feel much more prepared now to inform my opinion. Only 45,999 more to go and I might find "truth."

 

If it's been covered already, then I've missed it, but what about redistribution of landmass via volcanism and it's contribution?

[NAdams]

What notes? That's what I'm asking... I'm am neither attacking you nor blinding myself to your points, I am simply asking you to present yourself in a way that makes sense to someone who is not you.

 

Please, propose your hypothesis, support it with citations and/or works of others that parellel your own, and describe how the currently accepted theories are not only incomplete, but how your ideas do what they do and more.

 

Welcome to the scientific method. It would be nice to read a post from you that is 1) not accusatory, 2) not framed in the absolute, 3) avoids references in the first person, 4) does not use credentials to support a claim.

 

Open minded and highly cynical are not mutually exclusive.

The theory is a book length long. It begins with tectonics and a growing Earth ands ends with a Positron inside a proton. Geologically it begins with a seminal book on Earth Expansion By Sammuel Warren Carey in 1976 after a world debate , The book,..THE EXPANDING EARTH, several other books and many papers followed , dropped off and recently started up again including

James Maxlow's second book "Terra Non Firma Earth " recently and some others like Stavros Tassos' work. He get's around on speaking tour,and on and on. Truthfully theres getting to be too much to mention briefly

I just made myself tired.

If you have a question please ask it. My hypothesis is that ...

1, Science has gone wrong starting 150 years ago and it's gotten systemic ,and it needs to change, now.

2. Science's terminology is exclusionary in the extreme even between diciplines, and it must change now.

3. Sciences must be reintegrated into the field of SCIENCE with respect for all specialities equally in the investigration of the universe.

Citations???

Neal Adams

[NAdams]

:hyper: Well, it's not Neals fault he's in Strange Claims as I started the thread here in the first place. :eek2: A bit off topic, but Neal mentioned presenting his study as if sitting around with folks chatting it up, and as Racoon can attest I can get considerably more...uhh...'animated' shall we say in such circumstances. ;) Go figure.

 

Ok, I have some search results so let's get down to brass tacks on the 'growing equator' business.

 

First: Web Search Results1 - 10 of about 46,600 for the equator is growing

 

Next, from the 3'rd link in the list:

 

 

ScienceDaily: Satellites Reveal Mystery Of Large Change In Earth's Gravity Field

 

So, it is an increase in gravity, not circumference that is the noted change. Moreover, this change is explainable without recourse to an expanding Earth as the article notes.

 

Let's just float that for now, as 46,000 + references may take a bit of time to consume.

 

No , It's Both . Circumference was reported first! Read carefully

More ...Read The title here ,"Satellites REVEAL MYSTERY of LARGE CHANGES in Earth's Gravity.". EARTHS GRAVITY...CAN ONLY INCREASE IF THE EARTH INCREASES!.....".oh yeah Jane

you know that Earth growth thing we've been talking about for years and years....""

I told you about it here ,...and it's about to blow up in the science community's face,, ........You have just become part of history.

Think I'm kidding???

Neal Adams