Negating Plate Tectonics - Strike 9

"Friar Broccoli" wrote in message
oups.com...

George wrote:
"John Wilkins" wrote in message
.. .
Bill Hudson wrote:

Timberwoof wrote:

(Did I tell you that when I was a kid, my father had a button
that
read "End Subduction Now!"? And did I tell you that he was proud
that
I
understood it and thought it was funny?)

No, but it explains a lot about why you are the sick and twisted
individual you are today... oops, I think I was thinking about
Wilkins.

I don't hold with this newfangled subduction. What's wrong with land
bridges, I ask you? If it was good enough for Darwin, it's good enough
for me.

Darwin didn't have access to current seismic data. If subduction
doesn't
occur, please explain the pattern of earthquakes seen on this seismic
map:

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_pwaf_h.html

George

Darwins works are inerrant !!
These STATISTICAL correlations exist to test our faith.

Oh brother, Friar. You need to find a new congregation.

George

"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote in
message ...

I don't understand Carey's chronology, either. Why would he propose
anything like subduction in the 1930s? It was nearly 30 years before
sea-floor spreading was discovered, with its implication that the Earth
was expanding unless some process recycled the new crust. Or was he
(correctly) explaining Wadati-Benioff zones? That would be even more
ironic :-)

Arthur Holmes had the bulk of plate tectonics, including the downgoing
arms of convection cells, worked out in 1929. Carey knew Holmes. Don't
forget, too, that many southern hemisphere geologists, not just Carey,
enthusiastically embraced continental drift in the 1930s. Du Toit
published "Our Wandering Continents" in 1937, by which time Holmes had
already incorporated mantle convection into his courses.

Gerard Fryer wrote:
"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote in
message ...

-
-
I don't understand Carey's chronology, either. Why would he propose
anything like subduction in the 1930s? It was nearly 30 years before
sea-floor spreading was discovered, with its implication that the Earth
was expanding unless some process recycled the new crust. Or was he
(correctly) explaining Wadati-Benioff zones? That would be even more
ironic :-)
--
Arthur Holmes had the bulk of plate tectonics, including the downgoing
arms of convection cells, worked out in 1929. Carey knew Holmes. Don't
forget, too, that many southern hemisphere geologists, not just Carey,
enthusiastically embraced continental drift in the 1930s. Du Toit
published "Our Wandering Continents" in 1937, by which time Holmes had
already incorporated mantle convection into his courses.

All worked out in 1929, eh? ..on grounds of which G-man berates
Stuart:-
http://groups.google.com.au/group/sc...97cf578?hl=en&
....now isn't that just a laugh? In seventy years nothing's gone
forward, except Stuart upholding the rubbish that the crust pushing the
mantle down subduction zones drives plate tectonics. And Stuart
actually congratulates me for getting this right.

Hey Stuart, ..read my lips:- Subduction does not exist. It's crap.
Your crap. Deal with it. Suck it up, iron man. (Good bodybuilding
breakfast for a swim in the mantle.)

George wrote:
"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote in message

BTW, I said the Wikipedia article on Le Sage gravitation had a link to
"expanding Earth" which hadn't been written. I've now found that the
article on plate tectonics has a link to a short article in "expanded
Earth theory" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanded_earth_theory

One link reads "Warren Carey, Last of the Giants". That should read "last
of the dinosaurs".

(Cheap shot, ....buggerlugs.) Come on, now, ..rustle up people to
prop you up, if you want to be a broad after dark.


George

In article . com,
"Marc" wrote:

Timberwoof wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

don findlay wrote:
Lee Jay wrote:
don findlay wrote:
Yeah, ...well it only takes common sense to knock convection in the
mantle on the head,...

-
Are you challenging the idea that convection occurs in fluids when
there are temperature differences,

No

that the mantle behaves as a fluid,

Yes, in the thermal-way Plate tectonics says;
in the stress-way that rotation says, ..then no.

Explain how rotation places stress on the non-fluid mantle.

I bet he's going to say something like "It's obvious, and anyone who
can't see it is stupid."


Perhaps Don's idea of a "computer model" is something built out
of the bits and pieces of a smashed up old 286. Oh... that's his
"old" computer model. The new one is made from bits of a 386.

Is that the one with the 80386.99996 math coprocessor?

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.