Anyone interested in my hypothesis?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by iaee, Dec 16, 2008.

  1. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    ...and just so you guys'n'gals are aware of it, the subjects we have discussed to date on this thread are only a very small part of a much bigger series of events that took place here and elsewhere in the Solar System. These also form an important part of my hypothesis...
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sciencelovah Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,349

    But previously I asked:

    to which you confirm:

    And previously you wrote (to spidergoat):

    For that to happen, the initial object that hit the earth and came out on the other side should have higher density than the earth. However, the one that is known to came out of it (the moon) has lower density than the earth.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    I don't understand how any object with enough velocity to pierce through the entire earth and remain intact enough to burst through the crust on the other side. With that much energy involved one or both would shatter.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sciencelovah Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,349
    Exactly.

    Also, lets imagine two objects: one is a size of billiard ball, and the other is a size of bowling ball.

    For the billiard ball to be able to hit the bowling ball - enter it - and come out from the other side of it, the billiard ball should have very high speed, AND have much higher density than the bowling ball, like if the billiard ball is made from steel and the bowling ball is made from chocolate

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    If it has the same density, I think the billiard ball will be expelled. If it has lower density, it will be broken.

    In this case, the moon (the billiard ball) has lower density than the earth (the bowling ball).. :shrug:
     
  8. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    hmmm chocolate bowling ball...(drools)
     
  9. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    MacGyver's called it right. The incoming mass disintegrated as it passed through, and then out of Earth. It is no more.... This is evidenced by the additional, smaller 'exit wounds' which surround the main exit site (especially to the north and east of the Takla Makan Desert, and in and around the region of the Gobi Desert). The shattered remnants were all that was left of the original impactor as it exited Earth, along with fallout impact cratering to the west.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2008
  10. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    But how did it eject 1/3 of the mass of the earth at orbital velocities..and not shatter the earth? That a shitload (yes, it is a scientific unit of measure) of energy.
     
  11. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    A combination of 1) a shitload of upward momentum caused by the largest of the exiting remnants (at last, I've learnt some scientific terminology!), 2. the instant release of highly pressurised magma from within Earths interior and 3. the fluidic (is that a word?) characteristic of molten magma all combined to enable a large globule of magma to separate from its parent magma column before the column fell back to Earth to create what has been described (by scientists unaware to the possibility of an exit event) as 'one of the largest volcanic provinces in the world'. This is the region of Deccan Traps in India.

    The separated molten (but rapidly cooling) magma globule floated off into near-space...

    The impact and exit event did almost shatter Earth. In my book (there I go again..) I describe how the oceans of the time saved our planet from total disintegration by rapidly cooling magma that was emerging from several huge fissures that had been opened up as a consequence of the entire impact and exit event.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2008
  12. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Well...I'm just a computer tech...not an geologist or any type of "ologist". I'd like to hear Ophliate's opinion on this one...this is his field.
     
  13. Cyperium I'm always me Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    I for one like this hypothesis, earth was shot with a bullet! Why not, there's probably many denser things than the earth speeding around.

    (but be careful with the smaller earth hypothesis, it has a bad reputation around here)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV4X_O_Rrrs (now we can include the earth to that sequence!)
     
  14. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    Cyperium: Thanks for the link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV4X_O_Rrrs).

    I know, I know ...I KNOW that this is a poor example. Given its internal structure, the fact that the impactor remained a solid throughout the impact and exit and the fact that it is an EGG

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ), take another look at the sixth example in the video (we'll call it planet Egg

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ).

    The sequence starts 0:42 into the video. Pause it at 0:45 and observe the effects of the impactor on the shell. If you look closely, fractures have already appeared before the exit event occurred, even at such high-speed.

    Once the exit event occurred, if it could be 'frozen' at the end of the same frame (0:45) what would remain is planet Egg, battered (probably bewildered:bawl

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ...and somewhat larger than before.

    Of course because it is a bit bigger than planet Egg, Earth suffering an impact and exit event, at a shallow angle, at high speed with the impactor breaking up as it passed through is prrrrobably not the appropriate comparison to make *lol*.

    I wonder if the inhabitants of planet Egg had time to develop enough technology to enable them to relocate to another egg before impact?
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2008
  15. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Unfortunately I am not an expert on coprolites, which would appear to be the appropriate field of study for this notion.

    I have become fond of the observation "this is so far off the mark it's not even wrong". It applies here in spades. Just to pick a single point. South America is supposed to be the ejecta of the impact!! We seem to be ignoring the complex sedimentilogical and volcanic history of the continent revealed in detail. The impactor just happened to redeposit thousands of metres of sediments in the correct chronological order, complete with subtle depositional features and avoid any evidence of impact within the fabric of the rock!!!!! Give me a *****ing break. This isn't even childish. It's not even infantile. Not even foetal. It's pre-conception in its barbaric stupidity.

    It disturbs me that humanity is capable of producing people so simple of mind that they can be capable of generating such assinine flights of fancy and actually believe they be factual. Promoting such ideas on the internet is a crime against humanity and sanity. I have no doubt the author will respond with some waffle about closed minded individuals, about how once rejected ideas have been later shown to be true, etc. Like I give **** about the ramblings of a fool.

    Sorry, MacGyver. You did ask me what I thought.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    Thanks for your opinion, Ophiolite.

    Of course you are entitled to offer it as much as I am entitled to offer mine.

    As with anyone who offers a similar opinion to yours all I will say is ok, you have stated your case, in this case quite aggressively, but thats alright with me. Because of the nature of what I am proposing I have long-since anticipated this type of feedback.

    I have already acknowledged that this does appear wayyy far-fetched and that it will take some time persuading people of its validity.

    However, this discussion has begun with the impact element and there is a lot more supporting evidence to come - especially from todays established scientific research.

    Your position is very, very clear. I would like to ask, though that you do keep an eye on what I will be adding to support the hypothesis behind The Impact And Exit Event (and bite your lip when you feel the urge to wade in :runaway

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    because as strongly as you are convinced that I am MAD

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    , I am just as convinced that I will, in time change your mind.
     
  17. matthyaouw Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    162
    Ophiolite's objection is a very valid one. If the Andes are formed from ejected material from the crater, why do they have none of the characteristics of such material?
    Likewise if the gulf of maxico is a crater, why does it show none of the characteristics of a crater?

    If your idea is going to have any validity you will have to show us why our currentr understanding of the formation of these features is wrong and why we should accept yours.
     
  18. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    You have no idea

    A theory is not a hypothesis put taped together with some very weird evidence.

    It is a hypothesis with evidence gathered by many competant observers observing the evidence (in this case not the collision but the after effects things like the k-t boundry), it has been tested thousands of times and has always proved correct.

    A hypothesis has never even been checked

    There is no such thing as a scientific fact, the closest thing is theory.

    The asteroid hitting and stopping is a theory yours is a hypothesis, the theory beats the living snot out of the hypothesis every single time. You will need tons and tons of evidence, and tons and tons of witness's, and tons of tests to make yours a theory and tons and tons more to also disapprove the previous theory. Posting on this forum does not help your case in the scientific community.


    ALSO, Here is why you are wrong. If hypothetically you were right, it would be so incredibly obvious, only a moron would think otherwise. Something about a massive hole going around 13 miles down, molten magma, and another thirteen mile hole on the exact other side of the planet. Each hole being approximately 1 mile or more in diameter. And then massive covitation when it hits the magma which would've actually screwed up the tectonic plates heavily and would be easy to spot. The fact that it is not this obvious means it never happened. Unless your asteroid became magically invisible, you have no other reason to claim this to be a theory.

    Also where is the exit hole?
    And even if those 13 mile deep 1 mile in diameter holes were eventually buried by the magma or something else. It would be quite obvious how there are two opposite spots in our world where there is not K-t boundry, or banding of the sediment. Almost like a massive eraser erased everything away. And also it would be kinda obvious the fact that the two holes were made of totally volcanic rock, or other random kinds of rock.

    It would be impossible to miss. Here is how impossible. IF me and my family were going over the golden gate bridge and watching the waves go under the right side of the bridge, and not even glancing at the left side to see if there were waves, saying that the waves went into a massive underwater hole and disappeared. A simple glance to the left would prove otherwise. It would be so impossible to miss.
     
  19. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Unfortunately I think you may be completely sane. On the other hand you are massively ignorant. You can remedy this condition, but I doubt that you will.

    Now please explain how the South American continent can reveal hundreds of millions of years of geological history exposed in the form of complex, interlaced sedimentary, igneous and metamorphic rocks and revealed through thousands of detailed studies of the mineralogy, sedimentology, stratigraphy, palaeontology, geochemistry and geomagnetism of such rocks. In all of this there is not so much as a hint of the deposition of massively heated ejecta, except in local, periodic, expulsion of magma from well defined, readily identified, thoroughly mapped volcanic centres, which deposits are intermingled with sedimentary materials, containing a well-ordered sequence of fossils covering millions of years of time.

    If you cannot explain how this continent wide inter-lacing of rocks with documented provenance and well established relative and absolute ages came to be, then your speculation is dead in the water.

    That's before we take up the point made by matthyaouw about the impact site. Or a simple calculation of the energy levels involved and the consequent effect upon the planet. Or the chocolate/billiard ball analogy. Or some basic principles of orbital dynamics. Or just about anything, from any science, that impinges upon your hairbrained neurological fart.

    But for the moment I'm quite satisfied to hear you explain away the geological literature on South America. If you cannot do so - which you cannot - then please abandon this nonsense and get an education.
     
  20. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    fedr808 - Apart from the first line where you state 'You have no idea', I agree with everything else you wrote. Read what you wrote again and please, calm down.

    ..And wait until more 'stuff' comes out. As I have already said, this is only the beginning.
     
  21. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    Opholite: I can see that you are gonna be a hard nut to crack

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It appears that what I am proposing has hit your thought processes as though I have thrown my conceptual spear through your skull. Just like fedr808 I would ask that you refrain and at least WAIT to learn what lies ahead.

    Once again I state that there is much more evidence to emerge in support of what I am proposing and it might just, just be possible that you both stop, wait and THEN evaluate the sum of the evidence instead of ranting in the way you do when hardly any evidence has been presented.

    This thread is only a couple of days old, for goodness sake. C'mon, be a sport

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    I have zero intention of stopping ranting. You have spewed out a piece of nonsense. I have clearly stated what vast mountain of evidence you must contradict in order to demonstrate your idea has any merit.
    Instead of asking me to be patient because evidence is coming, cut to the chase and address the objections I have raised. If you fail to do so, but instead gradually reveal aspects of your wild idea and drop pieces of alleged evidence then I shall be forced to conclude
    a) You are merely trying to entice people of low mental ability to buy your book.
    b) You want to indulge yourself by remaining firmly within your delusion without addressing any of the substantial problems your idea creates.

    So, now, please, without further ado, how do you account for the observed geology of South America. The prevarication should cease now. The thread may only be a couple of days old, but that is no reason to avoid answering directly.
     
  23. iaee Registered Member

    Messages:
    34
    That's better, clearer and much more direct.

    I'll get back to you tomorrow (it's 3:20 am and I have been busy with christmas things...) :thumbsup:
     

Share This Page