Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ObieX
Yep I'm saying that pretty much the entire globe would be covered over with water that then receded as the planet grew. Is it really that hard to imagine? I mean most of the planet is already covered by water.. with less space for the water it has to go onto land, and honestly it would not take a lot of lost space to flood over the continents. And back then there was a lot less ICE at the poles. As we all know currently the big thing with global warming is that the poles will melt and that water would flood over huge sections of land. And thats just a small part melting. With it all melted and the earth smaller.. yea the planet would be 95-100% covered by water.
|
But thats the point, we would be able to see a universal ocean layer, all dated the same, for when this global ocean was, only we don't. There isn't a universal ocean layer.
Quote:
|
And as for the tectonics.. this is what tectonics is. Earth broke up into continents as the planet expanded. These continents are still free floating on magma after breaking apart from a much larger chunk (the gaps being fill in by magma to create "new" earth. Just because the continents broke up from a different mass in this theory than from the other theory doesn't make it not tectonics.
|
Ummm sure you could make a imaginary world which magically got bigger, and bigger and had plate tectonics. That doesn't really answer any questions about our world though. It also doesn't explain HOW the earth is getting bigger, if it was.
Quote:
|
Examples of expansion and contraction? k.. well the video gave the example of mars. That giant rift across the center doesn't come out of nowhere. The planet saturn is "squashed" into an oval shape and stretched out due to the speed of its spin. As that speed changes over the span of time the planets shape will change. Some of the moons like Europa are changing shape all the time as they are tugged by their parent planet's gravity, slightly stretching them and causing the planets to expand slightly toward the planet.
|
So you are comparing tidal forces and such as equivalent to getting PHYSICALLY bigger out of no where? As you said the earth does have the same rules apply to it as the rest of the planets, it is stretched by the moon, it is altered by the suns gravity, and is in fact an ellipsoid, but that doesn't make it get bigger, only change shape slightly in the grand scheme of things. I thought you had extreme examples. As for the Mars rift valley...
Quote:
The Great Rift Valley of Mars
Near the four giant shield volcanoes is an immense crack in the crust of Mars. This 3,100-mile-long (5,000-kilometer-long) rift valley is a series of canyons, each several hundred miles long and up to 62 miles (100 kilometers) wide.
Such a mammoth gorge in the United States would stretch from San Diego to Boston.
Rift valleys are well known on Earth, of course. For instance, in Africa they represent the breakup of that continent into two separate plates. There also is a remarkable rift valley on the planet Venus.
Rifting is the first step in plate tectonics, the beginning of plate formation. The process seems to have started on Mars, but the planet cooled too much to have the active plate movements we know as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.
There may be occasional small "marsquakes" and volcanic eruptions, but Mars is a dying world geologically.
|
Quote:
|
I'd give more but.. honestly.. do i have to? Things contract and expand all the time. Just because something is the size of a planet doesn't mean that it isn't subject to the same laws.
|
This is a FAR cry from saying the earth is GROWING and growing enough to make the continents drift apart which is the original theory.
Quote:
Earth is an extremely dynamic planet. There's the liquid magma that is churning and spinning under an extremely thin layer of crust. There's the moon tugging and spinning around the planet. All of that magma wants to bust its way through to the surface. Oceans flowing over the planet giant continents floating around.. etc etc.
If the first real theories coming out to explain our planet are incomplete or slightly off its understandable. We're getting new knowledge every day about or planet that will lead to these theories changing. 60 years ago there weren't satellites mapping the world mile by mile over land and under sea and ice to show what was what. The new knowledge may be pointing to our planet expanding. If they are they are, you can only take the sum of knowledge and form your own theories.
|
No the new knowledge isn't, in fact this was a very old theory before the theory of plate tectonics. There is nothing new about it, there is nothing to prove it, there is nothing to demonstrate it, there is nothing to support it that can't be better explained by the standard tectonic theory. Its a regression.
But lets get even more specific there are two expanding earth theories a 'slow' and a 'fast' one. The fast one is the one presented here, and part of it is denying the existence of subduction zones, which is just wrong.
The 'slow' expansion theory, from the 60's which is .05mm a year, is more plausible, mostly because its untestable. It also explains nothing, and is just a 'what if'.