Skip to comments.The Case Against Pangea
Posted on 04/22/2012 3:53:17 PM PDT by Windflier
First its important to understand that this is the most profound disagreement in all of science in a century and a half and, even so, it is the tip of the iceberg, the ramifications of this disagreement will change everything we know in science, top to bottom.
To begin with basic stuff.
All science knows
The earth has two crusts. One the mostly basalt lower crust or the oceanic crust which is 2 4 miles deeper down than the higher upper continental crust. This lower crust, essentially covers the Earth. It this crust is being made daily at rift cracks that snake around the earths mid- oceans. But how could all these rifts continually spread apart without the Earth growing? Ah .that is the question .isnt it?
Sitting on or in and as part of the oceanic crust is the second higher upper crust or the Continental Crust rising for the most part out of the water. It is made mostly of granitic rock, which is 2.5 times the weight of water.
Some edge area of the Continental Crust or Plate dips into and under the sea level of the ocean. This area is what we call the Continental Shelf. So as you go out into the ocean and the water gets gradually deeper that is the Continental Shelf. At a given distance out into the ocean the ocean floor suddenly drops off and goes down like a plummet 2 ½ to 4 miles to the deep ocean floor, where we find the second lower crust, the Oceanic Crust made mostly of basalts which are 3.0 3.3 times the weight of water. So to make it visually clear, if you took the water away what you would see as you go out into the ocean a distance is, the Continental Shelf would suddenly drop away and down like a ridge in Arizona., except it would go straight down for two to three miles, as if it was suddenly broken off. The other side of that broken off ridge is across the ocean thousands of miles in Europe, or Africa and west to Australia and Asia.
How did the two sides of this higher crust spread apart?
Rifts or eruptive cracks in the ocean floor provide new material in the form of molten magmic rock that rises up at a rift area and the oceanic plate spreads apart and the two sides move away from each other smoothly and regularly, and so the continents welded within the oceanic plates also move apart as the ocean bottom spreads . Now if this happens and it does, all over the world, logically speaking, this Earth must grow.
We I argue that, that this outer crust originally covered the whole of a smaller Earth and the Earth sphere grew. The outer crust, therefore, had to crack and spread to accommodate a growing Earth which it apparently did.
We further argue that if you were to shrink the sphere of Earth
by letting the oceanic plate re-enter the rifts they erupted from, over time
the continental crust would easily and completely fit back together, and this solution satisfies all questions of tectonics, science, geology, paleontology, theoretical and practical physics, cosmology, and subatomic physics. Pretty simple actually.
Amazing stuff. Start with video #0.
And it’s not just Earth. Neal shows how the same theory works on planets and moons throughout our solar system.
Neat stuff, and very profound.
He needs to pick up a Geology 101 textbook before he makes a bigger fool of himself.
Nah. The continents used to cover the whole earth when they were flat. After The Flood, they got all wrinkly and shrunk...
well I gotta say this guy draws one heck of a Batman though
The world is getting dumber. Its why men like Giorgio Tsoukalos can get rich by ignoring the obvious and feeding people stupid crap about ancient aliens building everything.
The fact that you replied so quickly tells me that you didn't bother to watch the videos, or read through his site. I'm afraid the case he makes is indisputable.
You'll have to digest the whole thing to see why.
If he plays this as a new age religion, he might get some followers. Other than that, he needs to take a basic geology course as you say. Funny stuff.
And hot spots also show clear evidence of plate movement. Plates clearly move across the surface of the Earth. This theory is rank idiocy that ignores solid evidence.
This is deliberate ignorance, which is the hardest kind to counter.
So, does this bring us any closer to anti gravity boots? NO... what I want, and I want it now, is anti gravity boots... don’t care nuth’n-bout no dumb EARTH CRUSTIES! /sheesh
I didn't watch his videos because his overview was so utterly stupid. Life is too short to double down on stupidity.
Seriously, do yourself a favor, spend ten minutes reading a Wiki on subduction zones. This is one of the clearest aspects of plate tectonics and anyone who pretends otherwise is seeking a path of deliberate ignorance.
I've seen this expanding earth garbage before and I and anyone else with the slightest comprehension of geology doesn't need to waste their time watching this idiot's videos.
That subduction zones aren't even mentioned in the original screed (which we can easily see through seismic records, and we can actually measure plate movement with GPS) immediately renders his argument a waste of time.
I cannot fathom why some people actively go out of their way to avoid actual scientific knowledge on a quest to believe kooks.
"The g****** Germans got nothing to do with it!"
He Delft-ly ignored it...
BTW, “How the earth was made” on the history channel tonight. Its a rerun but its a good one about the great lakes.
"Leon's getting larger !"
Well, well. Another one who spent less than 60 seconds at the site. The author goes into great detail about the theory of subduction zones, but you'd have to cast off your pre-conceived notions and read a bit to discover it.
Say what you will, but what's at that site is irrefutable logic. I can't, and won't dismiss it.
continental drift it bunk?
But how could all these rifts continually spread apart without the Earth growing? Ah, that is the question, isnt it?
I stopped reading there.
During the recent quake in Japan, in some places there was as much as 150 feet of the Pacific plate that was shoved - and shoved hard - under the Asiatic plate.
From the author:
"Against this is the current Pangea theory which insists that the continents float willy, nilly about the Earth, spinning, sliding, bumping, and crashing like bumper cars in a carnival. (Thats a common description which some geologists are currently backing away from in small numbers.)"
and: An aside .you may fairly ask how this matter can be created. Its created at the plasma core of all planets, moons, and suns by a process that is so common that science has a name for it, pair production! Its how all matter is made from energy.
The mass of Earth is 5.9742 × 1021 metric tons. The mass of Mars is 6.4191 × 1020 metric tons. If the earth has grown by 5.33 x 1021 metric tons created by pair production that means there are 2.67 sextillion tons of antimatter which is somehow kept separate from 3.31 sextillion metric tons of matter. No wonder Obama hates drilling and fracking gas and oil wells. He is just trying to keep the matter and antimatter separate.
I can see how that could happen, given the force of the earthquake, though I don't see that it's incompatible with the author's base theory.
Only a mental midget would buy this. And no, I didn’t waste my time with the videos either.
So I guess the earth must be puffing up like a ballon then.
They'd better be careful when they drill new oil wells. They might pop the bubble and the earth would collapse back down to a sphere the size of the Moon.
I see you’re at least processing the guy’s theory with some degree of analysis, Karl. Appreciate you trying to keep it light-hearted.
In other words, "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up!"
I had a feeling when I posted this, that I’d be opening myself up to a lot of wisecracks, and that’s ok. I’ve got the hide for it ;-)
I just want to know, though...has anyone taken the time to watch the videos at the site? You can go through all fifteen of them in about half an hour, and trust me, they are compelling.
I understand, Chode. I had the same question, but I also understand that in a system as large as an entire planetary crust, there are going to be forces of all types exerted in various locales.
I don’t think it debunks the guy’s entire theory.
Good observation, though.
But I found this guy long ago and he raises some pretty good questions (whether he is right or not). It seems self evident that the granitic continental pieces fit together perfectly as he suggests... And if that is not enough, or is discounted, the next question to ask is, "Then where is the rest of the granitic layer?"
No doubt his graphic representation works perfectly... And on it's face is more acceptable than the Pangea demonstrations I have seen. I don't know that he is correct however - and I largely disagree with his reason the earth is growing.
Thanks - food for thought.
Sorry, but your guy is creating a solution for a problem that does not exist. Plate techtonics does a fine job explaining how oceanic crust is both created and destroyed without expanding the overall average size of the Earth.
I don't waste time on such charlatans. And I recognize the breathless writing style typical of Internet snake oil salesmen.
“I speak jive.”
Airplane! Great stuff!
I can prove that internal combustion engines actually run on nuclear fusion if you would just open your mind and ignore all that sciencey stuff.
They are a collection of supposed supporting evidence, are they not? They show all the reasons why this guy is right.
The problem is you can present compelling evidence for almost anything, if you just pick out things that support you. It's called Confirmation Bias, and it's not science. What you have to look at is where it might be proven wrong, not where it's claims are supposedly upheld. A good theory is one that's not falsified.
How does a planet grow that much? Where is the mass coming from? Where is all the extra water coming from to fill in the gaps between the land masses?
Also, there are problems with his videos. In some places he is showing stretching without stretchmarks. And...when you put a skin of a small sphere on a larger sphere, there are going to be places where the skin puckers or bunches up. He doesnt show any bunching occurring in his animations. That is not very scientific.
I saw an ad for the next episode of Ancient aliens.
Georgio says “The ancient Mayan calendar looks remarkably like the large HADRON collider. (They’re both round) Coincidence? I think not.” LOL
The whole time I was reading it I was asking myself why nobody ever thought of this before?
This is literally an earth-shattering insight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.