Is the earth expanding?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by bgjyd834, Apr 26, 2011.

  1. Gneiss2011 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    58
    Are you talking about your own EE model? Doesn't your own EE model exclude non-negligible seafloor subduction and non-negligible convergence?

    Is this your last bullet? Will you claim that everybody who disagree with you lack of "understanding abilities"?

    Better questions would be:
    • Who understand Florian's answer to my request for "observation and measurement of Earth expansion which don't use EE model"?
    • Who understand Florian's answer to my request for "observation and measurement of Earth expansion which don't use EE model" as a correct answer, which fit the request?

    My dear Florian. Since your "overwhelming evidences supporting planetary growth" are "understandable by anybody", I see no flaw in people seeing me as a layman. On the contrary, being arrogant, insulting, a Poe, or a Dunning–Kruger, like you often seem to be, can be a flaw.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    And Florian doesn't understand that if the assumptions and parameters in the model were wrong, the ratios predicted by the modeling would be different from the ratios found in the tidalite data.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gneiss2011 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    58
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    The model curve does not follow the measurement. We discussed this already.
     
  8. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    You've been asked once before what proof it would take to convince you, and you (as I recall) failed to give a straight answer).

    So I'm going to ask you again, and directly, what proof would be required to demonstrate subduction to you?
     
  9. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Yes it does, it fits well within the error bars, I even provided you with a paper assessing the Tidalite data compared to the computer modelling, which you refused to consider on the (absurd) grounds that it was published before the more recent revised work.
     
  10. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    From the link:
    If the Earth was both becoming both more massive and increased in volume I have feeling you would struggle to get the Moon out to where it is. Has the moon been doing the same? Why would this expansion affecting just be Earth only?
     
  11. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    This is empirical data. Doesn't the empirical data show no net surface consumption despite convergence?

    Only to guys repeating ad nauseam questions that got already answered.
     
  12. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    Are you able to predict how much total momentum the Moon-Earth system gain or loose during the growth process? I guess not.
     
  13. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    1. I considered the paper
    2. The paper was based on an outdate model including a close encounter of Earth and the Moon.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2012
  14. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    This is silly, there is subduction, but mantle driven not plate driven.
    You too are repeating ad nauseam the same questions. Cheap rhetoric technic.
     
  15. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    page 1
     
  16. Gneiss2011 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    58
    As far as I understand, florian now acknowledge that subduction exist. But he also claim that subduction is negligible or something like.

    Are you talking about your own EE model? Doesn't your own EE model exclude non-negligible seafloor subduction and non-negligible convergence? Are my questions so hard that you can't answer, even by "yes" or "no"?

    Is this your last bullet? Will you claim that everybody who disagree with you lack of "understanding abilities"? Are my questions so hard that you can't answer, even by "yes" or "no"?

    Yes, of course! I totaly agree that "The empirical data show no net surface consumption despite convergence". So the Earth surface remain the same, and the Earth is not expandinig. But I was thinking you were supporting the expanding Earth theory. Are you actually a Poe, faking its support to a theory, only in order to dismiss it?
     
  17. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    The process of mass and volume expansion does it affect both the Moon and the Earth?
    If it is the Earth only; the dynamics of the Moon reflect the mass of the Earth. The Moon - Earth distance is increasing by about 38 mm per year.
    Basically the Moon would be getting closer to the Earth not further away. The fact that the moon is going away from the Earth clearly supports any theory which does not involve increasing the mass of the Earth.
     
  18. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    At active margins, the empirical data show no net surface consumption despite convergence.

    You said?
     
  19. Gneiss2011 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    58
    I do not see "measurements" in page 1. However, there is "an expanding Earth model". Are James Maxlow's measurements, actually,
    • make a model with which he agree
    • measure this model
    ?
     
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Thankyou for making my point for me.

    The fact that the paper included a close encounter of the earth and moon is irrelevant.
    The fact that there is newer work is also irrelevant.

    Do you know why?

    Because:
    1. The new model and the old model are based on the same dynamics.
    2. The new model and the old model give answers that are in good agreement.

    So, anything that agrees with the old paper also agrees with the new paper. The main part where they disagree, as I recall, is the newer model pushes the close encounter further back in time.
     
  21. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305

    No. Earth can transfer momentum to the moon thru the tidal effect. So if the process involves a gain in mass that is accelerating the rotation of Earth, then the Earth will send the Moon away despite growing in mass.
     
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Will it?

    Have you done the maths to prove this?
     
  23. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    305
    Pardon me, but two different models based on very different assumptions that lead to the same result (which is actually not true in this case) show the poor pertinence of these models (unfalsifiable).
     

Share This Page