Hydroplate Theory

[Southtown]

This thread is a repository for all things geographic as relates to Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory. This is where I will link to when bringing up this theory in other threads, so your questions and criticisms are most welcome. I will be adding evidences and explanations gradually as I have time. Below is a quick overview to get things started.

 

The hydroplate theory says that an unbroken, 10-mile-thick layer of granite crust completely covered the sphere of earth. Approximately half the earth's water was trapped beneath this crust and contained around twice the minerals that current sea water does. Beneath this underground water was a basaltic layer. The thicker portions of the granite came to rest on this basalt, forming a stable but flexible architecture. The pressure in the subterranean chamber could not escape because rock deforms like putty at 5 miles depth or so, and therefore cannot crack.

 

But as pressure continued to build, perhaps from lunar tides, the chamber expanded and caused a top-down rupture that encircled the globe in about 2 hours along what now forms our mid-oceanic ridges. The underground water then escaped at supersonic velocities. The eruption eroded an average 400 miles of granite crust from each side of the rupture as well as much of the thickness from beneath as the water rushed laterally. The uplifted water, minerals, and crust froze fast in the near-absolute-zero temperature of space. Some sediments and ice rained back down and the rest formed what we know as comets (mostly water) and asteroids (mostly rock). Solar radiation is responsible for regulating the orbit of asteroids.

 

The lower basaltic crust was then disproportionately burdened by the now fractured granite crust. The absence of a top layer of granite caused the basalt to rise at the eroded chasm, and the weight of the remaining granite fragments caused the basalt to sink under the new continents. The basalt was now stressed beyond its tensile strength at the chasm in two dimensions. The upward arching of the basalt formed major axial rifting parallel to the rupture, now known as the mid-oceanic ridges. Minor, perpendicular rifting was subsequently caused along these ridges by the curvature of the earth.

 

The fractured granite crust was no longer stretched taught over the whole globe. Each fragment began to shrivel at the edges, forming mountain ranges, much like a balloon being popped in slow motion. As granite continents retracted, their weight became more concentrated on the underlying basaltic crust, hence the continents pushed further down into the basalt, which pushed up the mid-oceanic ridges even more and retracted the continents even further, etc.

 

This runaway cycle continued, at least partially lubricated by the fast-depleting subterranean water, and the continents were thickened by their own weight and buckled, causing oceanic trenches in the Pacific. As the remaining water underneath the granite was purged, parts of the drifting continental crust came into contact with the underlying basalt. The friction was enough to melt large portions of both crusts, creating magma containing basalt, granite, and concentrated seawater, creating today's volcanoes and magma chambers, most of which are also in or near the Pacific.

 

As the erupting waters slowed, a flood rose above the relatively smooth surface of the planet, also covering the remaining jets of subterranean water. The water was very muddy, and these sediments were transported and deposited over the surface of the globe by the unimpeded tsunamis that would have encircled the sphere multiple times. The sediment was deposited in layers, forming our geological record of strata. Liquefaction, the process by which heavy objects sink into suddenly unsolidified sediments, is responsible for the sorting of the sediments by size and granularity. The gigantic waves compressed and decompressed the muddy water beneath them, which forced the water to move up and down repeatedly through the sediment.

 

The same thing happens when you shake a bag of chips. The small chips travel to the bottom while the large ones float to the top. And the same thing happens when earthquakes cause the ground to swallow buildings. In both of these examples, air is the medium that flows between these shaken objects and gradually sorts them. In the case of the flood, liquefaction more resembled quicksand than earthquakes. Water pressure suspended the sediments so that particles could move past each other, and the up-and-down tidal compression gradually sorted them by their shape and size.

 

Next, we have water lenses. Water lensing is the term Brown uses for the bottle-necking that occurs when water flows from one type of sediment to another. If one sediment is made up of rounded particles, water will move easily through it. But if there exists a layer of less-rounded particles above the rounded particles, water will take longer to squeeze between them. This will create an expanse of water between layers, where hapless humans and animals who managed to get caught in the flood would no doubt end up. If we looked at these (virtually pure) layers of sediment as deposited over eons of time, these organic remains sandwiched between changes in sedimentation would appear as occasional catastrophic extinctions.

 

As the continents contracted, buckled, and thickened, about 10 percent of their total mass rose above the new sea level. As the flood waters drained off the continents, there were large lakes left behind, such as the Great Lakes, the Caspian Sea, the Kashmir Basin, and countless others. Two particular large lakes were left in North America in the southeast corner of Utah, and northeast corner of Arizona that eventually breached the boundary between them and together spilled westward, carving the Grand Canyon a few thousand years ago, and leaving behind Monument Valley and the Petrified Forest National Park.

 

The millennia following the flood have seen a gradual return of the surface of the earth into a more spherical shape through earthquakes which are shifts in mass either by faulting or settling. Also, today's geothermal heat both oceanic and atmospheric are largely a result of the escaping subterranean water and its effect on the crusts. The preflood atmosphere did not retain so much heat because it was decidedly thinner, allowing for hotter days and cooler nights. The melting ice caps and the rising sea level are also fading remnants of these fountains of the great deep.

 

This is surely enough to start a good discussion. Plus it's already a lengthy post, so I'll stop here and allow for input. There's more evidence to put forth, of course. This is just a primer for the discussion, which I eagerly look forward to. Thanks for your time. :)

 

 

Explanations for above photos

Magnetic Reversals

Glenn Morton's rebuttal

Sediment diversity

Sediment deposition

[Bystander]

This is going to "strange claims" --- what's the point to posting here?

[Southtown]

Greetings Bystander. The purpose of the opening post is to provide a backdrop for the subsequent evidence to follow. In considering the hydroplate, one soon realizes the magnitude of conflict with popular scientific theories of every discipline. It will take extraordinary scrutiny to dissect these theories and seperate the facts from the inherent assumptions and interpretations which fill in the holes of our observations if we are to accurately assess if and/or how each theory departs from reality.

 

One obvious competing theory is plate tectonics, which consists of seafloor-spreading and consequential plate subduction. Some accredited support for this theory includes magnetic variations on either side of the mid-oceanic ridge where most crustal spreading is said to occur. The evidence that the magnetic field reverses at all consists entirely of these variations on the ocean floor. There is observation that the field meanders in direction and varies in flux intensity, both globally and locally, but nothing to support sudden reversals interspersed with periods of relative stability... nothing besides the ocean floor, that is.

 

Upon closer inspection, there are apparent conflicts between the tectonic explanation of the magnetic variations and actual observation. Less than three quarters of seismically-active, mid-oceanic ridge have accompanying magnetic variations. And less than half of the present variations are actually symmetrical to the ridge. These observations alone would suggest that new crust is created unevenly and should spread along the seafloor in a very nonuniform manor, creating large deformities such as ranges, crevasses, and faulting at odd angles to the ridge.

 

Furthermore, each magnetized band is inconsisent at different depths, and geothermal heat is not consistent with a laterally expanding ocean floor. The heat actually varies sporatically with distance from the ridge. Also, thrust vaults flank the Mid-Atlantic Ridge for 1000km around 13°N, suggesting compression rather than tension. Plate tectonics predicts tension to be the situation because convection currents in the mantle supposedly drive the South American and African plates away from each other.

 

The hydroplate theory provides a better fitting explanation. The upward buckling of the mid-oceanic ridges in the basaltic crust was caused by the weight of the continental granite crust. This description is one of compression and therefore better fits the observation of the thrust vaults. Also the sporatic presence of heat as one moves away from the ridge is better characterized by a heated basaltic crust which suffered fissures as the result of upward buckling. As with the rest of the globe, sediments settled into the cracks created by the expanding upper plane of basaltic crust.

 

Magnetic variations, according to the hydroplate theory, are not a consequence of time, but of heat. As you can imagine, much heat was present along the ridges before and during the rupture of the subterranean water but has been cooling ever since being exposed to water. Basalt has a Curie point of 578°C, which is the temperature above which all magnetic memory is lost. Tensional stress created fissures in the hot basalt into which the eroded sediments later gradually settled. Water circulating through the sediment-filled fissures cooled the basalt from the sides of the cracks inward. Black smokers are a visible testament to this process.

 

The further one gets from the edge of a fissure, the warmer is the surface of the ocean floor, hence the less magnetism is observed. Whereas the closer one gets to the edge of a fissure, the further down is the Curie point by process of cooling, and the more magnetized mass is contained beneath the surface. Thus the presence of magnetic variations along the fracture zones perpendicular to the ridge are more adequately explained.

 

Speculation (not from Brown's theory): the escaping subterranean waters were ionized by pre-rupture pressure fluctuations. Charged particles were then infused into the eroded crust fragments and sedimentary particles during the eruption. Charged sediments, as they settled, would have aligned themselves exactly opposite of the basaltic crust by attempting to bond with the magnetic medium. No magnetic "memory" was available to retain the direction of the magnetic field while the basalt was hotter than 578°C. But since these events occured in the span of weeks, magnetic memory isn't required to sort the ionized fissure sedimentations.

 

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - References and Notes (see #31, 44, 45)

Problems with plate tectonics

Plate tectonics: a paradigm under threat

Magnetic Reversals

[Bystander]

(snip)In considering the hydroplate, one soon realizes the magnitude of conflict with popular scientific theories of every discipline.(snip)

 

Not "popular," but well established.

 

One obvious competing theory is plate tectonics, ....

 

Very good

 

Upon closer inspection, there are apparent conflicts between the tectonic explanation of the magnetic variations and actual observation. Less than three quarters of seismically-active, mid-oceanic ridge have accompanying magnetic variations. And less than half of the present variations are actually symmetrical to the ridge. These observations alone would suggest that new crust is created unevenly and should spread along the seafloor in a very nonuniform manor, creating large deformities such as ranges, crevasses, and faulting at odd angles to the ridge.

 

No conflicts: tectonic theory does not include a symmetry constraint; it does not include a specification that all molten rock retain remnant magnetism at values exceeding detectable thresholds.

 

(snip)Also, thrust vaults flank the Mid-Atlantic Ridge for 1000km around 13°N, suggesting compression rather than tension. Plate tectonics predicts tension to be the situation because convection currents in the mantle supposedly drive the South American and African plates away from each other.

 

Plate tectonics depends on "push," not "pull."

 

(snip)Magnetic variations, according to the hydroplate theory, are not a consequence of time, but of heat.(snip)

 

You haven't changed the direction of the remnant magnetism with this mechanism, just erased stripes from a unipolar remnant.

 

The further one gets from the edge of a fissure, the warmer is the surface of the ocean floor, hence the less magnetism is observed.

 

This is just plain wrong.

 

(snip gibberish)

 

"Hydroplate" begins with a physically impossible situation, the unsupported granite dome, and proceeds via gibberish to no place in particular. Again, I ask, "What's the point of posting in 'Earth science' rather than in 'Strange claims'?"

[PedroH]

I agree with you Bystander, regarding to the plate tectonics theory,but I don't think this thread should be moved to "Strange claims".All theories about the formation and history of our continents should be considered,since they are only theories,Southtown's just have a different way of thinking.Maybe if you gather enough information (articles,links...) to convince him of your point of view should be a better way to support your claims.

[Southtown]

Not "popular [theories]," but well established [ones].

Correct, they are established because under scrutiny, they appear consistent with evidence. But that does not mean that current theories are not subject to further scrutiny, does it?

 

No conflicts: tectonic theory does not include a symmetry constraint; it does not include a specification that all molten rock retain remnant magnetism at values exceeding detectable thresholds.

Absence of magnetism is not the problem. There are magnetic variations at odd angles to predicted plate motion. Fracture zones contain these variations which are characteristically almost perpendicular to mid-oceanic ridges. How can the earth's magnetic field produce varying polarization at different longtitudes simultaneously? Tensional fissures of hot basalt containing ionized sediment is a simpler explanation and is more consistent with the evidence.

 

Plate tectonics depends on "push," not "pull."

You are at least half right. The alleged mechanism for plate motions is not the creation of new crust at divergent boundaries. Plates are said to be pulled (with respect to the divergent boundaries) from beneath by convection currents in the outer mantle. They are, however, also supposedly being pushed into convergent boundaries by this same mechanism.

 

Understanding plate motions [This Dynamic Earth, USGS]

 

You haven't changed the direction of the remnant magnetism with this mechanism, just erased stripes from a unipolar remnant.

Sorry, I don't follow what you're saying here.

 

This is just plain wrong.

Temperature increases with pressure [correction: depth], does it not? A gradual increase in temperature is the expectation beneath the ocean floor. At fissures, however, surface area of the basalt is exposed to allow heat to escape. This heat source causes natural convection currents in the colder ocean water. We can see evidence of this process in the existence of black smokers. Do you have a specific reason for disagreeing with this?

 

AMNH - Black Smokers

(from Brown's site)

 

"Hydroplate" begins with a physically impossible situation, the unsupported granite dome, and proceeds via gibberish to no place in particular. Again, I ask, "What's the point of posting in 'Earth science' rather than in 'Strange claims'?"

To solicit discussion of geography, of course. =) Are you game?

 

I agree with you Bystander, regarding to the plate tectonics theory,but I don't think this thread should be moved to "Strange claims".All theories about the formation and history of our continents should be considered,since they are only theories,Southtown's just have a different way of thinking.Maybe if you gather enough information (articles,links...) to convince him of your point of view should be a better way to support your claims.

Thank you, PedroH. And yes, all I'm asking for is scientific rebuttal.

[PedroH]

I wanted to join the discussion,but unhappyly I can't post links(I have less than 10 post). So I will skip this conversation till I can post some links I found about the subject.Sry

But,I'll be back :)

[Turtle]

Simple nonsense :note: ; Strange Claims, same as the expanding Earth mumbo-jumbo from Neal Adams. Gimme a break.:beer:

[TheBigDog]

This is going to "strange claims" --- what's the point to posting here?

Simple nonsense :note: ; Strange Claims, same as the expanding Earth mumbo-jumbo from Neal Adams. Gimme a break.:beer:

I think that we should keep this here for the time being for two reason's...

1. It is being postured as theory requesting the scrutiny of debate and discussion
   
2. I would give Southtown the benefit of the doubt that he is not trying to push some kooky nonsense.
   

Southtown, can you give some description to the pictures that you posted? I am curious what they are supposed to represent.

 

Bill

[Turtle]

I think that we should keep this here for the time being for two reason's...

1. It is being postured as theory requesting the scrutiny of debate and discussion
   
2. I would give Southtown the benefit of the doubt that he is not trying to push some kooky nonsense.
   

Southtown, can you give some description to the pictures that you posted? I am curious what they are supposed to represent.

 

Bill

 

Pictures smictures. Did you visit the first link? In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Hydroplate Theory: Key Assumption

Creationist mumbo jumbo. If you don't like Strange Claims, then maybe Theology. :note:

[Buffy]

Creationist mumbo jumbo.

Sure, but that being said, its kinda fun to do a point-by-point refutation of the "theory." Consider it an exercise in critical thinking!

 

You've said it Turtle, but let them play. As long as everyone plays nicely and does not resort to non-scientific data for support, this should be an interesting activity!

 

Have fun!

 

Even claptrap needs an occasional public flogging,

Buffy

[Southtown]

I wanted to join the discussion,but unhappyly I can't post links(I have less than 10 post). So I will skip this conversation till I can post some links I found about the subject.Sry

But,I'll be back :beer:

I look forward to it.

 

Southtown, can you give some description to the pictures that you posted? I am curious what they are supposed to represent.

 

Bill

Yessir, left to right. 1) The starting layout of the earth's surface as posited by Brown, 2&3) layering and deposition of sediments by liquifaction (strata) that do not appear likely to have been laid seperately over eons of time, but all at once while they were still wet, 4) a quartzite block (suspiciously rectangular) sanwiched between layered strata in the Grand Canyon said by scientists to have been deposited over millions of years, and 5) the Kashmir Basin, known to have been a lake at one time, being situated in the middle of the tallest mountain range on earth, is not likely to have existed through the duration of the supposed tectonic pushing up of the Himalayas.

 

Pictures smictures. Did you visit the first link? In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Hydroplate Theory: Key Assumption

Creationist mumbo jumbo. If you don't like Strange Claims, then maybe Theology. :note:

Then it should not be hard to refute. We are at 10 replies and counting...

[Turtle]

Then it should not be hard to refute. We are at 10 replies and counting...

 

I have no intention of giving a basic course in geology, which is the refutation. :note:

[Bystander]

If the point of the OP is to examine malarkey for fallacies, gibberish, mystic hand-waving, and other logical flaws that people should watch for when "buying" hypotheses from suspect sources, there's no harm in leaving it in "Earth science." If the point is to peddle malarkey, it really needs to go to "Strange claims."

 

'Nough's been presented

 

Tensional fissures of hot basalt containing ionized sediment is a simpler explanation and is more consistent with the evidence.

 

Temperature increases with pressure, does it not?

 

to satisfy me that the second alternative is the case. Spending time pointing out the flaws to potential "buyers" of malarkey is one thing --- but I'm not wasting time debating with the malarkey peddler.

[Eclogite]

I really don't know where to begin Southtown. I indicated on another thread that I would be happy to debate the concept with you, so I feel morally obligated to attemtp to do so. However, as Turtle eloquently pointed out, the ideal refutation is any degree level geology course.

 

Perhaps you can explain to me how the hydroplate theory explains the complexity of sedimentary strata, with their clearly definable relationships in space and time, proven environment of deposition, demonstrable evolutionary pathways revealed by the fossil content, etc. This complexity is not explicable by hydroplate theory. It is explicable by the billions of years of erosion, deposition, daigenesis, and orogenesis, powered by plate tectonics. Your comments please.

[Southtown]

The basic mechanisms behind stratafication are laid out in the first post, paragraphs 7-9. Perhaps you can give me an example situation that contradicts hydroplate and supports tectonics. It wouldn't be feasible for me to explain everything, and as you can see from my exchange with Bystander, I'm no good at guessing what your objections may be.

 

There is a whole lot more coming regarding the hydroplate, easily around a dozen more essays. I have to build the foundation first though, before I start trying to explain odd geographic phenomena. Feel free everyone however to object to any of my points, and I will relate it to the theory if possible.

[InfiniteNow]

Be cautious of foundations laid in sand. I commend your attempts Southtown, but would be annoyed if layers were added when the first was proven inaccurate. I personally lack the training to do this, so look forward to the refutations given by others.

 

 

Cheers.