Hydroplate Theory

[Turtle]

"Sorry, you're no longer allowed to ask questions about this topic, because the fact that it's silly is *obvious*, and to learn, no one need ask any questions."

 

If I'd written all the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people - including me - would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism, :phones:

Buffy

 

:rolleyes: what is obvious is that the thread contains all the geological rebuttal that is necessary. for all the good that did ecoglite. if someone has a real geology question, we have a forum for that. put all the lipstick on the pig you want, it's a pig. you say "most" of the problems with hydroplate were covered so you must see something you think needs more explication. i know you're well versed in geology so by all means let's hear from you on it if you want this to keep going. . . . . . .

 

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. :phones:

[Buffy]

what is obvious...

"there you go again!" :phones:

 

Remember, I'm defending you here too! Two words: "George Noory"

...you say "most" of the problems with hydroplate were covered so you must see something you think needs more explication.

On the contrary, I have a 14-year-old who's quite smart and never fails to amaze me with a unique twist on an old theme...claiming that "all questions have been asked" is, I think, somewhat, uh, closed minded.... :)

 

Honest, it's easier--and more fun!--to give the insistent folks enough rope to hang themselves quickly, and give the curious the immediate answers they crave on their way to knowledge.

 

Although you're right. We could just tell everyone on every topic, "it's in a book somewhere, go look it up. No need for questions." That would be easier and we wouldn't have to works so hard around here! :phones:

 

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd, :rolleyes:

Buffy

[Turtle]

"there you go again!" :)

 

Remember, I'm defending you here too! Two words: "George Noory" :evil:

 

Buffy! that is so obscure, even i can't divine it. did i support noory somewhere here at hypog? all i do at postmagnet is castigate him. :phones: speaking of which, there is no end of room over there at postmagnet for this kind of thread topic. ;)

 

On the contrary, I have a 14-year-old who's quite smart and never fails to amaze me with a unique twist on an old theme...claiming that "all questions have been asked" is, I think, somewhat, uh, closed minded.... :)

 

Honest, it's easier--and more fun!--to give the insistent folks enough rope to hang themselves quickly, and give the curious the immediate answers they crave on their way to knowledge.

 

kinda like cats playing with live mice before they kill them then? :cat: :shudder: :phones: but i was genuinely curious if you had such an immediate answer because in post #165 you said:

A good proportion of the issues raised by the theory have been discussed within the thread to date, ...

the implication is you have read an issue brought up in hydroplate theory that hasn't netted an immediate debunking and so while the mouse is still alive go ahead and bat it around a little is all i'm sayin'. :eek:

 

i like to watch. :rolleyes:

[Southtown]

deleted

[REASON]

At some point before the Cambrian period, about 1 billion years ago, the earth is thought to have almost completely been covered by ice, the oceans were frozen all the way to the equator. Rocks dropped by these glaciers near what was then the equator, give us evidence of this.

 

What you are referring to here is known as a Glacial Erratic.

[Turtle]

all righty thens. the court has ruled and the thread remains open. i gave my input and that's good enough for me.

 

as for those i oppose, no whining from y'all either and those hearts on your sleeves look like targets to me so you might wanna keep 'em outa sight. :confused:

 

moontan has some questions awaiting replies here so better get with it while the getting's good. :D :eek2:

[Southtown]

Southtown, I took a few minutes to read this thread and I came across this little jewel from you. I must ask do you really think an asteroid would carve a valley, bounce and come down to form a mountain? Really? I mean REALLY? Do you really expect to find dinosaur fossils on Mars? Really? I mean REALLY? I was ready to take you seriously but I really can't get past this one at all. An asteroid impact would not carve valleys, bounce, or fall down in a pile and form a mountain. An impact of such magnitude would leave a crater of epic proportions, not a valley and bounce into a mountain. And yes some asteroids are thought to be rubble piles and even porous but they still would not roll, bounce, carve or fall down into a pile..... And yes it is very possible that Mars life might be indistinguishable from Earth life, one planet having possibly seeded the other through rocks knocked out into space by huge impacts but dinosaur fossils?

About the fossils, I now think that if any organisms were ejected into space via supercritical fluid release, they would be vaporized. So there is probably only molecular traces of life out there. Not as exciting, I know, but reasonable considering the theory. Remember, the whole Valles Marineris thing is my baby and has nothing to do with the official theory.

 

About the asteroid, at an extreme angle, a large object would grind into the surface because it's momentum will be absorbed over a distance. The asteroid would be vaporized at contact point first and opposite point last. As the heat spreads through the impactor, pieces on the backside would be launched. And remember, the reason that satellites spiral inwards is because they revolve a little to slowly.

[Moontanman]

About the fossils, I now think that if any organisms were ejected into space via supercritical fluid release, they would be vaporized. So there is probably only molecular traces of life out there. Not as exciting, I know, but reasonable considering the theory. Remember, the whole Valles Marin eris thing is my baby and has nothing to do with the official theory.

 

Well since the dinosaur fossils was your idea..... It is indeed possible for microorganisms to be spread from one planet to another via rocks thrown by an impact.

 

About the asteroid, at an extreme angle, a large object would grind into the surface because it's momentum will be absorbed over a distance. The asteroid would be vaporized at contact point first and opposite point last. As the heat spreads through the impactor, pieces on the backside would be launched. And remember, the reason that satellites spiral inwards is because they revolve a little to slowly.

 

No Southtown that is not how it works, an asteroid would not spiral down and even if for some "ungodly" reason it did it would leave a crater, at the most extreme it might leave an oval crater but no gouges no valleys, no chunks making mountains.

[stereologist]

Evolution is the god of science though - so even if you dated this material and it came back with a young date - it would be discounted - because THE T-REX WENT EXTINCT 65 MYA. That is LAW.

 

This statement invalidates creationism, doesn't it?

 

Onto the next --- wooly mammoths for what they are - are hairy elephants.

 

Not really. Mammoths are an extinct genus related to elephants.

 

They want us to believe them on faith that this continent has been drifting for billions of years - but only eroding for 87,000?

If so then you are incapable of math or any critical thinking and can only regurgitate the consensus science of evolution. If you cannot see the problems between billions of years of missing coastal erosion - I suggest we drop the subject because we cannot even agree on the data let alone the derivitives OF THAT DATA.

 

No one but you has made the 87,000 year claim. That claim is in fact nonsensical. You appear to know math well enough to understand that is a completely incorrect use of rate formulas.

Well the word dinosaur was coined in 1840. Before then they were called dragons.

Quite wrong. Dinosaurs was coined to name the creatures who's fossils were uncovered. Dragons are mythical creatures without remains.

 

Why do have stories of them? Why do we have footprints with us and them?

We do not have stories of dinosaurs. We do have stories of hydra, centaurs, sea serpents, cyclops, ogres, elfs, sprites, fairies, griffins, minotaurs, grendel, incubus, hobgoblins, imps, vampires, and valkyrie.

Never have human and dinosaur footprints been found together. The footprints you showed were photographed by scientific teams when discovered. The vandalism in the form of perfectly clear toes was the work of despicable people that destroyed some of the prints. The vandalism occurred long after the footprints were discovered.

 

There is no mechanism in place to reverse an Ice Age - not one known.

Greenhouses due to outgassing of volcanoes has been demonstrated to work. Again you make a very wrong statement.

 

That is, of course, double the usual - that is 22.5 feet per year. That is just Alaska mind you.

Calmer seas will have lower erosion rates -

This is why it is averaged at about 3 feet per year of coast erosion.

Erosion has nothing to do with the movements of the continents. If you do not understand why this is a nonsense comparison then you need to take an introductory course in geology.

 

Notice that the arrows point in different directions, although most are toward the Pacific. This shows that material deep in the earth shifts in various directions, but generally toward the Pacific. If the entire mantle were circulating, greater uniformity would be seen in speed and direction. The plate tectonic theory considers the plates, outlined in blue, as rigid, but the variations in the measured movements show that the plates are not rigid.57 For the plates to be moving, pressure differences must exist. Either the pressure around the Pacific is greater than normal or the pressure under the Pacific is less than normal—or both. The hydroplate theory explains why both are true.

 

This is untrue. Your concept of the mechanics of plate tectonics is wrong. The fact that plates are not completely rigid is well known.

 

You claim to have a theory. You do not. Hydroplate is not a scientific theory. Do you understand why?

 

I have answered your queries.

Not even close.

 

The Bible is all to quickly dismissed. It has not been proven wrong and is not in error.

Let me repeat a biblical error. Civilizations existed through the time of "The Great Flood of Noah is placed at 2348BC". Therefore, the bible is wrong. This is one of many biblical mistakes. They exist in both the old and new testaments.

 

Evolutionary teachings are the basis for every major atrocity committed in the 19th and 20th century.

This is a lie made up by creationists who want to protect the bible which has been the source of destruction and death for millions and millions of people in the name of their god.

 

Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.

- Abraham Lincoln talking abut a war that cost 600,000 dead

 

The Crusades, a 200 year war in which Pope Urban II decreed:

Let this be your war-cry in combats, because this word is given to you by God. When an armed attack is made upon the enemy, let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God: It is the will of God! It is the will of God!

 

..Whoever shall determine upon this holy pilgrimage and shall make his vow to God to that effect and shall offer himself to Him as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, shall wear the sign of the cross of the Lord on his forehead or on his breast.

[Moontanman]

Great post Stereo but I do want to point out another problem I didn't catch until just now.

 

Quote:

They want us to believe them on faith that this continent has been drifting for billions of years - but only eroding for 87,000?

If so then you are incapable of math or any critical thinking and can only regurgitate the consensus science of evolution. If you cannot see the problems between billions of years of missing coastal erosion - I suggest we drop the subject because we cannot even agree on the data let alone the derivitives OF THAT DATA.

 

No one is saying the continents have been drifting for billions of years, the continents as we see them are only few hundred million years old at most. Continents change through mountain building and erosion they are all in flux all the time. What we think of as solid unchanging rock is totally ethereal on geological time scales. The erosion you talk about is countered by the mountains being eroded down to the sea. I live on the coast i see the cost wax and wan every year.

 

About 470 million years ago, the motion of the crustal plates changed, and the continents began to move toward each other. Eventually, about 270 million years ago, the continents ancestral to North America and Africa collided. Huge masses of rock were pushed west-ward along the margin of North America and piled up to form the mountains that we know as the Appalachians.

 

These mountains, which were once as grand as the Rocky Mountians are now, provide much if not all the sand that is being eroded away on the east coast. Your ideas are as I said before tedrick rooted in your ideas of a young earth and the idea that land is not being built up to counter erosion. The continents as we see them are just parts of crustal plates that are moving with the continents hitching ride.

[Michaelangelica]

Greetings Bystander. The purpose of the opening post is to provide a backdrop for the subsequent evidence to follow. In considering the hydroplate, o

 

One obviou

.

 

Furthermtes away from each other.

 

The hydroplate theory.

 

 

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

When was this supposed to have happened?

[Moontanman]

Michael, the time of Noah was about 4500 years ago according to the creationists.

[Boerseun]

"Floating for billions of years, yet eroding for only 87,000"?

 

What uninformed utterance is this?

 

Any amateur geologist (or those trying to debunk the findings of the discipline) would know that the eroded matter that is transported down to the sea as suspended particles in river water is taken down into the mantle hitching a ride on the closest plate heading to the nearest subduction zone. This, in turn, moves under the continent under discussion, where the formerly eroded particles (being mostly silica and aluminium) rise (being less dense than the material forming the upper mantle) and this, in turn, supports the continent above it. It's analogous to slag floating in an iron furnace. The slag (being less dense impurities floating on the molten iron) might boil, bubble and churn; revolve around on itself, break down and be rebuilt as the convection currents from the molten material below it drives the slag together, but it will never sink. If you can understand why slag in an iron furnace doesn't sink, then you'll understand continental building/erosion/rebuilding.

 

Thanks to the above process, which any amateur geologist is familiar with, "continent-building" (from rising eroded matter that was deposited on a subduction zone) keeps up perfectly with continental erosion, which has, in fact, been going on since the very first raindrop fell on planet earth. And that was billions of years ago.

 

If you are not at least familiar with the above, then... oh, let me shut up.

[stereologist]

No one is saying the continents have been drifting for billions of years, the continents as we see them are only few hundred million years old at most.

Moontanman, what about the Canadian shield? The rocks are in the order of billions of years old, likely over 3.5 billion. There are examples of rocks with ages in the billions of years old in many parts of the world including Greenland and Australia.

 

I understand that the existence of rocks does not mean the existence of continents. On the other hand here is a write up on early crustal formation:

The Oldest Rock on Earth: Ancient Continental Crust Still Exists Today | Suite101.com

 

or here from CalTech http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu8BW3aVKpVgBJ.ZXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByZmU2MmgwBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOARjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkAw--/SIG=12h9eda82/EXP=1252470486/**http%3a//www.gps.caltech.edu/~enadin/Writing/ES_OldestCrust.pdf

[Moontanman]

One question that really needs to be answered is if indeed this hydroplate theory is true then how did the creatures living in the sea and in freshwater survive such a catastrophic out flow of SC super hot water mineral laden water?

 

Aquatic creatures depend on a balance of not only dissolved salts in the correct amounts not to mention the right salts to survive. Such an out flow of water would have killed every sea creature in the earths oceans just by the salt content being wrong or the wrong dissolved minerals being in the water.

 

Freshwater animals would have been wiped out immediately. Things like star fish and most other sea animals are really sensitive top the salt content of the water it doesn't take much change to kill them outright.

 

Then you have the water temps. A great many sea animals also depend on temps being with in certain parameters. Such a tremendous release of super hot water would have killed all animal life in the ocean simply by cooking them.

 

Then I ask, where did all the water go after the flood was over? Back under the continents? This whole idea is fatally flawed just from the stand point of the survival of sea creatures. Where did all the extra water go? to cover the entire earth mountains and all would take a volume of water bigger than all the water currently in the earths oceans by a factor of at least three or four. Where did it go? If hydroplate theory cannot answer these questions it is debunked completely no matter what else it says....

[stereologist]

One of tedri--'s (whatever the name) rants was a typical rant I've seen at creationist lectures:

 

Seen any planets form?

Seen any stars form? ( do not show me some nebula nebula)

Seen any life come from non life?

Seen any water bearing comets hit the earth?

Have you seen any of the things evolution needs?

 

This is a rant that usually said like this,

"Who saw the Grand Canyon form? Did you? Who saw a dinosaur walk on the earth? DId you? We don't know if those are true, but we do have the word of almighty to give us assurances about what is true."

 

People that fall for this illogical rant really need to start taking some classes and getting away from the creationist deceivers.

 

Scientists are observing planets and stars form. Look up the Tarantula nebula for an example of an active area of research. In addition to observations are computer models of stellar and planetary processes. And yes science has observed predominantly water objects striking the upper atmosphere where the impacts have been recorded by UV instruments.

 

And for me, yes I have seen evolutionary forces at work. We all observe them every day. I see changing rainfalls, drought, insect infestations, human destruction of the landscape and other events at work that put pressures on plants and animals that may or may not one day give rise to new species. When we turn to the microscopic world we see how fast things can change. With multiple generations an hour the speed of change is seen as antibiotics fail on germs. Bacteria adapt to live in man made environment such as jet fuel.

Cadets research fuel line bacteria

 

Thanks for the quote from Michael Ruse. He was the creationist star witness in a case that the pseudoscience of creationism lost big time.

[stereologist]

I missed a bunch of posts - been out of town. Did we ever get the math that shows that the volume of the comets is greater than 10 times the volume of the earth?