Ping Don Findlay's strike game players

Timberwoof wrote:
In article . com,
"don findlay" wrote:
-
It's official. Buoyancy pushes the mantle
down. Go gander your nearest subduction zone amd see.

And now you're just being stupid.

If there's one thing we agree on, it's the stupidity of such a thing.
So long as it remains unspoken it's ok, eh? But sounds stupid when
it's spelt out, yes?
http://tinyurl.com/hrtpn
I couldn't agree more. Everything about plate tectonics is screwey
like that. "Plates that move (but don't move - but cycle).." ... "and
crumple the crust.." "and throw up mountains.."

It's idiotic, the whole thing, from go to wo.

Where would you like to begin? At the beginning? I'll bet you don't
even know what the beginning is. Well I'll tell you what it is, since
you're bending over backwards to know .. It has nothing to do with
heat, or the creation of the ocean floors, or the striping on it or
any of that stuff, all of which document growth of the planet in fine
detail, ... it begins with *BUOYANCY* and the crust pushing the mantle
down subduction zones, because subduction is by far the dominant force
driving plate tectonics. And *THAT'S* where plate tectonics begins -
with the supposed destruction of all of that growth. And *that's* what
Mr Forsyth got his prize for last year, .. And if you think it
doesn't then you tell us why you're in a position to contradict him,
and what you know that he doesn't?



Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com

In article .com,
"don findlay" wrote:

Timberwoof wrote:
In article . com,
"don findlay" wrote:
-
It's official. Buoyancy pushes the mantle
down. Go gander your nearest subduction zone amd see.

And now you're just being stupid.

If there's one thing we agree on, it's the stupidity of such a thing.
So long as it remains unspoken it's ok, eh? But sounds stupid when
it's spelt out, yes?
http://tinyurl.com/hrtpn
I couldn't agree more. Everything about plate tectonics is screwey
like that. "Plates that move (but don't move - but cycle).." ... "and
crumple the crust.." "and throw up mountains.."

It's idiotic, the whole thing, from go to wo.

Where would you like to begin? At the beginning? I'll bet you don't
even know what the beginning is. Well I'll tell you what it is, since
you're bending over backwards to know .. It has nothing to do with
heat, or the creation of the ocean floors, or the striping on it or
any of that stuff, all of which document growth of the planet in fine
detail, ... it begins with *BUOYANCY* and the crust pushing the mantle
down subduction zones, because subduction is by far the dominant force
driving plate tectonics. And *THAT'S* where plate tectonics begins -
with the supposed destruction of all of that growth. And *that's* what
Mr Forsyth got his prize for last year, .. And if you think it
doesn't then you tell us why you're in a position to contradict him,
and what you know that he doesn't?

What you present is all bull****. You could have gone to that
geodynamics conference and learned what plate tectonics really is, but
no, that would have forced you to change your mind.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com

Timberwoof wrote:
In article .com,
"don findlay" wrote:


What you present is all bull****.

My point precisely. I couldn't agree more, or have put it better
myself.. And that's just about the buoyant lithosphere pushing the
mantle down. What shall we look at next? The moving plates?
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonse...fconvects.html
....or the colliding plates?

You could have gone to that
geodynamics conference and learned what plate tectonics really is, but
no, that would have forced you to change your mind.

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com