Are pyrenees currently growing?

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by elchapero, Jun 10, 2011.

  1. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Because compression causes shortening, but sometimes rapid subduction cause vigorous circulation in the mantle (for rather obvious reasons) and that can result in back arc spreading and volcanism - which is what we observe in the Mediterranean.

    Ad hominem, and plan and simply rude.

    Ad hominem, poisoning the well, and an outright lie.

    Carey was actually talking about Diapirs - structures that rise up to 100km above their base, and pierce through the crustal lithosphere. You are talking about Mantle structures that reach the crustal lithosphere and spread out beneath it - not the same thing by a long shot.

    I'm familiar with the etimology of the word, one of the reasons for my assertion that you are using it wrongly.

    For one thing, it was your assertions about expansion that I was referring to as wrong. The entire Mediterranean basin is closing, east, central, and west, all of your sources that you have cited (so far) support this assertion, along with the assertion that any extension that is occuring in the basin is being driven by mantle convection, which in turn is being driven by the subduction occuring as the African plate collides with the European plate.

    It seems baseless to you because you do not understand it. I'm not going to explain it to you any more than I already have, because I choose not to get involved in that particular discussion with you at this time, because you have already dragged this thread far off topic with your toy model.

    There are extensional tectonics at work, as a result of the ongoing subduction of the African plate under the European one, yes.

    I believe that Rocco's work supports my assertions, yes, however you have to first understand what my assertions are, and have been in full to understand why, and I do not believe that you have fully understood my assertions.

    For example - do you recall me stating that the area where that diagram pertains to has in the past experience a mixture of compressive and extensional tectonics, but for the last 5 million years had been in a predominantly compressive regime?

    I disagree with that authors assessment, I think that based on the work of the likes of Facenna and Becker that the author of that diagram is very much mistaken.

    I am unconvinced that you're using the term 'straw man' correctly.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

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

    You continue to invert cause and consequence. Mantle circulation is the cause of subduction.

    So according to you, it is rude to describe the situation as it is?

    So now, you insult me, call me a liar, and continue to deny me the use of the term diapir for some irrational reason. Here again:

    And this is an outright lie, because the mantle diapir does often reach the surface in the back-arc and this leads to the formation of new seafloor.

    Ludicrous, I use it in the exact same way than Carey. Carey was the first to propose that asymmetric diapirs are at the origin of Wadati-Benioff seismofocal zone.

    You continue to deny a present expansion in the Mediterranean basins.

    Cause and consequence inversion, again.

    After calling me a liar, you write that I'm too dumb to understand tectonics. Great!

    How convenient.

    Inverting cause and consequence.

    Write again that I'm too dumb to understand tectonics.

    Compression around the extension zone as expected for any spreading diapir.

    You prefer illogical explanations to logical one.

    And continue to oppose systematically to whatever I will write. Let's see: I state that Earth is not a flat disk.

    And what's your name again?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

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

    I do no such thing, I simply state that I believe it to be the case in this instance.

    You're not describing the facts, your trolling, and using personal insults rather than arguing your case.

    Your assertion that I oppose whatever you say on principal is an outright lie, yes. My assertion that it is an outright lie is born out by the facts of the discussion, and the written record.

    If it doesn't pierce through the crust, it isn't a Diapir.

    Carey proposed Diapirism as an alternative form of Orogenesis in what appears to be (to me at any rate) almost a post hoc attempt to justify Orogenesis in his expanding earth view which was unable to accomodate orogenesis driven by compressional tectonics.

    Strawman Hypothesis.
    I do not confuse back arc extensional tectonics in a predominantly compressive regime with the opening of a new mid ocean rift.

    Only by your toy model, according to the mainstream I'm right, and several sources you've cited in this discussion actually agree with me.

    Strawman hypothesis - I did not state that you are too dumb to understand tectonics.

    Whether or not I choose to engage you in a side discussion, that strictly speaking is off topic, is my choice, and I will not be goaded into doing so.

    Only by your toy model, according to the mainstream I'm right, and several sources you've cited in this discussion actually agree with me.

    Only by your toy model, according to the mainstream I'm right, and several sources you've cited in this discussion actually agree with me.

    However you have failed to provide a mechanism by which an East-west spreading Diapir can give rise to compressive tension in a North-South direction.

    More personal insults - I'm going to give you a... Let's call it a piece of friendly advice. On this forum, or on any other forum, resorting to personal insults is not a good way to convince people of your case - generally speaking, when people see someone making comments such as these they see someone on the loosing end of an argument.

    Slartibartfast the Magrathean, if you must know.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

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

    Mainstream projection of what the world will look like 50MA from now.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Note the complete closure of the Mediterranean Basin, now labled Mediterranean Mountains.
  8. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Skipping the useless trolling comments and refocusing the discussion on the science:
    Fresh oceanic lithosphere is formed in the back-arc by decompression melting of peridotites approaching the surface. It proves that the mantle does upwell up to the surface in the well-developed back-arcs.

    Carey explained clearly that compressional tectonics is a side-effect of diapirism.

    You do not accept that the compressive regime is limited to the margins of the diapir. Anyway, this is the only way to explain why the heart of an orogen is generally in an extensive regime in one direction, transpressional regime in the orthogonal direction, whereas the borders of the orogen are in a compressive regime (tibetan plateau for example).
    Think to a glacier if it can help, it is quite similar.

    Not Lavecchia nor Le Pichon. The later insists that the roll-back subduction around the Agean Sea is mantle-driven.

    I remind you that under its own weigth, a diapir is spreading outward, away from its uplift center. So the form of the WB zones tell us in which preferred direction the diapir is spreading.
    So look again at the shape of the WBZs on this map:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Does it look like the diapirs at the origin of the WBZs are spreading strictly East-West? No it doesn't. So why do you claim it does?
    Your claim is even more "surprising" after I posted a figure (fig. 10.5b) showing specifically in which directions the diapirs are spreading:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    It simply tell us that we can't trust you.

    What are you afraid of?

    I also note the closure of the Red Sea and the absence of a new ocean separating the horn of Africa from the main continent... :bugeye:
  9. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    There was no trolling in my post. It is only your toy model that predicts a net opening of the western mediterranean basin.

    Right, but this contradicts nothing that I have said.

    Right, but according to Carey the current compressive regime being created by the diapirism should be east-west, not north south as is observed.

    No, I do not accept the existence of a diapir in the first place, because beyond circular logic, you have not presented one shred of evidence in favour of the existence of a diapir.

    Not true. I can think of at least one real world example where the direction of extension caused in the back arc basin is paralell to the convergent plate margin - the Lau-Havre-Taupo back-arc basin is paralell to the Kermadec-Tonga Subduction Zone.

    The difference between the two is that the Geography of the Kermadec-Tonga Subduction Zone is a lot simpler than the geography of the interface between the European Plate and the Afrcian one.

    I'm familiar with Carey's glacier analogy, thankyou.

    Well, the first point is that I said several sources, not all sources.
    Secondly, the Aegean Sea is in the Eastern Mediterranean basin, which we've both agreed will close, not the Western Mediterranean, which we've been discussing (so what Lavecchia or Le Pichon have to say about the Aegean Sea is irrelevant to my assertion that several of the sources you have cited agree with me that the Western Mediterranean basin will close).

    I'm aware of that, along with carey's prediction of a 100km Diapiric rise.

    Yes, that map completely supports the assertion that the spreading is mainly east-west. The claim that I have suggested that it is strictly East-West, is your strawman. The only thing I have said, and I am still saying, is that any extension that has occured has been in a primarily (or predominantly) east west direction, and the compressive regime is in a North-South direction, which is incompatable with your toy model, but explicable in terms of the geography of the African plate - if we assume that the plate is moving northwards, as the available evidence suggests, and the mainstream literature supports eg: The dynamics of back-arc extension: an experimental approach to the opening of the Tyrrhenian Sea; Faccena et al, 1996

    First off, you're presenting an ad-hominem argument.
    Secondly, the diagram caption says nothing about Diapirism.
    Thirdly, we were talking about what is currently happening.

    May I politely suggest that rather than plagiarising someone elses work, and presenting it out of context (indeed, misrepresenting it) you compile your own work and show on it the outline of the Diapirs you think exist, and what directions you think the Diapirs are spreading in.


    It is, quite simply, none of your buisiness, and it is irrelevant to this discussion.

    And? It's only your toy model that would require anything else to occur.
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2011
  10. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    The figure is from Scalera (2006) "The Mediterranean as a slowly nascent ocean" Annals of Geophysics Suppl Vol49 N°1, p451, freely available here: cap.pdf

    This figure is not out of context. It illustrates that the Mediterranean Sea is of diapiric origin and is a slowly opening new ocean (the title of the article).
  11. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    The term "toy model" is denigrating. This model was/is developed and argued by well respectable geologist and geophysicist like Carey, Scalera or Lavecchia. All along this discussion you have been deliberately using this denigrating rhetoric and at the same time accused me of "poisoning the well".

    You said that a diapir must pierce through the lihosphere or it is not a diapir. So you conclude that my use of the term dipair was wrong.
    This is contradicted by mantle diapirs piercing through the lithosphere in well developped back-arc.

    The compressive regime is in every direction as demonstrated by the directions of the WBZ (see below). It is in agreement with a mantle diapir spreading outward, and compressing and overlapping the lithosphere surrounding it and/or on its path.

    Not true. I cited the work of Lavecchia and Creati, arguing at length for the existence of a plume at the origin of the opening of the western basin: Lavecchia and Creati (2006) "A mantle plume head trapped in the transition zone beneath the Mediterranean: a new idea." annals of Geophysics, Supp Vol49, N. 1, p373. e Creati, 2006.pdf

    The whole region is actually quite complicated with back-arc opening overprinting older opening, but well explained by the mantle-driven back-arc opening model:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Not exactly. The fact that a running mantle flow is heading south-west does not necessarily mean that the basin will completely close. It all depends on the level of extension in the back-arc. As a matter of fact, the Aegean Sea is in extension and will probably continue to expand as the flow is progressing toward Africa. The arc can migrate without closing the basin.

    Le Pichon is relevant to show that mantle itself is the driving force, not subduction. By extrapolation, it can be hypothesized that the back-arc opening in the western basin is also mantle-driven and not subduction-driven, which implies an ongoing expansion of the basin. This is precisely what Lavecchia and Creati or Scalera show in their papers.

    Overthrusting results from compression, so that the direction of compression is roughly perpendicular to the line of active overthrusting front. Since the active overthrusting fronts are surrounding the western basin, compression is directed outward of the basin, so in every directions, not only East-West or North-South. From the figure it appears that the fronts of overthrusting progressed outward as the basin expanded. This is expected if a large mantle diapir spreads outward leading to an extensive regime at its heart, but lateral horizontal push and overthrusting of the surrounding lithosphere, and thus a surrounding compressive regime.

    You know my identity, it would be fair to tell me yours (in private).
  12. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    The fact (and not any toy model) show that the Red Sea is an actively expanding young ocean. They also show that there is intense rifting in Eastern Africa that will also lead to the formation of new ocean. So you embrace a prediction that is not supported by the facts.
  13. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Here is a figure showing the GPS-measured motion of the lithosphere in the Eastern mediterranean basin, with Europe as the reference frame:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    From this figure, it appears that Africa, the mediterranean Seafloor and Europe constitute a relatively stable substratum (no Africa/Europe Convergence). In the middle of this substratum, a mantle flow is running, carrying lithosphere on its back, and overthrusting the lithosphere on its path.
  14. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Who it has been argued by is irrelevant. Being well respected doesn't make you automatically right, even in your own field. For example, there are a number of well respected physicists that have some very wrong ideas about relativity.

    Oh, and incidentaly, seeing as how you don't seem to understand Toy Model. It is simply the politest term I can find that I consider accurately describes expanding earth tectonics.


    That's one of the reasons, yes.

    No, it isn't.

    See what below - you've provided nothing.

    They suggest a plume, not a diapir, and secondly, the same things can be explained by the work of Faccena and Becker suggesting the existence of subduction driven mantle circulation.

    I should have known better - and your map is wrong.

    And... I just don't know where to start on this one...

    So now you're saying that it may be the case that no part of the mediterranean basin will close?

    No, it doesn't, and the evidence is against it.

    It's what they hypothesize at any rate.


    More or less.

    So you're hypothesizing the existence of a single Diapir causing the whole basin to expand, in contrast to the work of say... Scalera? (at least I think it was Scalera).

    You chose to divulge your identity. I choose not to divulge mine - because it's none of your business, and irrelevnt to the discussion.

    No. The interpretation required by your toy model shows this. The source of that particular reconstruction suggests that the vectors reflecting continental motion do not support this interpretation. Rift zones sometimes fail to cause a new ocean.

    Can your toy model explain that even?

    Again, these are the facts required to support your toy model, nothing more. As I mentioned above, the source of that particular reconstruction does not believe that the plate motion vectors support your interpretation, and further more, sometimes rift zones fail, and do not result in the opening of an ocean.

    First off, the figure completely supports the interpretation that shortening/closure of the Mediterranean at a rate of 5mm/year.
    Secondly, what is the source of that image? Where did you adapt it from? Remember my comments about plagiarism?
  15. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Basaltic crust is formed in the back arc by decompression melting of the top of the mantle diapir which means that the diapir pierced the lithosphere.

    The formation of the basaltic crust prove that the plume reached the surface.

    No it can't. See arguments developed by Scalera or Lavecchia.

    What is wrong with this map?

    I argued why.

    So far you have provided zero evidence but vague remarks whereas I provided references from the literature with compelling evidence.

    No, there are different phase of expansion.

    The figure supports the existence of a well delimited mantle/crustal flow running in a middle of a static substratum formed by Africa, the mediterranean Seafloor and Europe. No other motions are significant in this region.

    It is adapted from the
  16. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    No it doesn't.

    No it doesn't, and they don't model it that way.

    Yes it can, see the work done by Faccena and Becker - including their experiments done with crust/mantle analogs.

    You plate margins are wrong for a start.

    I asked you a yes or no question, this response makes little or no sense in the context of the question.

    I have provided more than vague remarks.

    May I suggest you make up your mind, decide what you want to argue, and then present your argument in a coherent fashion.

    No, it also supports the closure of the Mediterranean basin at a rate of 5mm/year.
  17. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Explain to us how basaltic form at a ridge if not by decompression melting of the top of a mantle upwelling.

    It can't. The directions of subduction are mutually exclusive. But they are compatible with spreading mantle diapirs (See Scalera fig 10.5).

    Which one? I only indicate overthrusting lines.

    The answer can't be a yes or no and I argued why.

    More insults from Trippy. You repeated ad nauseam that there is a 5 mm convergence whereas the figure shows no significant Africa/Europe convergence. I will repeat ad nauseam that the figure supports the existence of a well delimited mantle/crustal flow running in a middle of a static substratum formed by Africa, the mediterranean Seafloor and Europe. I also provided references supporting an expansion of the mediterranean sea.

    Lavecchia and Scalera argue for a single plume with multiple heads.
  18. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    I already (more or less) agreed to that part, remember?
    It was your interpretation of this as a Diapir that I was disagreeing with.

    Yes it can, Faccena and Becker demonstrated this with their laboratory experiments. They at the same time demonstrated that the unusual configuration was due to the geography of the African plate, combined with the fact that there are multiple microsplates involved in this dynamic.

    You've got the Alpine fault (a 500km right lateral strike-slip fault that runs along the West Coast of the South Island of New Zealand) in the wrong place, the Subduction zone off the South Island does not project beyond the South West corner of the SOuth Island - it is marked by the Puysegur Trench, which transitions to the Alpine fault through the Macquarie Fault Zone, and it certainly does not follow the Campbell Plateu the way you've shown it.

    Likewise, the Hikurangi Trench does not project into the Tasman Sea the way you have shown it. The strain is picked up and transfered through a series of Faults throughout New Zealand.

    The alpine fault results in a rather conspicuous escarpment, which is very visible in this image following a Blizzard in 2003.
    See how the Western most boundary of the snow follows a nice, straight line? That nice straight line is the worlds longest naturally occuring straight line, and it's the Alpine fault.

    Here's the mainstream interpretation:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    But then, your toy model can't account for the reversal in polarity of the subduction zone along the length of the South Island of New Zealand, can it? Just like your toy model can not accomodate the reversal of Polarity of a subduction zone over time.

  19. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    If a mantle upwelling, reaching the surface (and thus melting by decompression) is not a mantle diapir, then what is a mantle diapir?

    The claim of Faccena and Baker that slab pull is a significant contribution to anatolia motion is refuted by Le Pichon and Kreemer. Actually, they recognize that their model "fails to reproduce the fast southward motion of Aegea with respect to Anatolia". And they even suggest that gravitational potential is the source of motion (the argument of Le Pichon and Kreemer). Anyway, smale scale convection = mantle flow and microplate = piece of lithosphere gliding the gravity gradient.

    Figure corrected according to your remarks.

    Why not? And eastward mantle current in the North and Westward current in the south can explain the inversion of polarity.

    It does. A reversal corresponds to the collision of two mantle current (for example Appenine and Hellenic).

    No, it is not, because it depends on the extension and uplift rates in the back-arc. If there is strong extension without uplift in the back-arc of the hellenic arc, then the Aegean Sea will expand and form a new basin while the arc if progressing toward africa. If there is strong uplift, then the back-arc will emerge (like anatolia) which means that the Mediterranean basin will be filled (closed).

    "Liar" is an insult. It is not the first time that you're rude and insult people in fora.

    You do really believe that these vectors are significant compared to what's happening in the aegean Sea?
    Follow this link for upscaled vectors.

    Even better, here is the link to make your own figure:

    I really don't understand how you can reach that conclusion after reading the papers by Lavecchia and Creati or Scalera.

    I assert that such a large plume has lobes or fingers. How is it different than a plume with different heads?
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    If you need me to tell you that, then your toy model does not appear to be on a very stable footing does it?

    A Mantle upwelling may cause Diapirism, but that does not make the upwelling itself a Diapir.

    Why are you bringing up the Anatolian flow when I was discusing western basin?

    I disagree with your interpretation.

    And it's still wrong, even though I provided you with a map illustrating the correct layout of the plate boundaries - although it is less wrong than it was before.

    These two sentences don't make any sense, seperately or together.

    Is what your saying that the reversal of the polarity of the Puysegur trench was caused by a collision of an eastward bound mantle current with a westward bound one?

    So now your flipflopping and agreeing that the Mediterranean basin, in its entirety may close in the future - as I initially asserted it would?

    It's also a correct statement when someone presents a false assertion as a factual statement.

    Relative significance is your assertion, not mine. The ONLY assertion I have made is that the mediterranean basin is closing at a rate of 5mm/year - an assertion which is supported by your figure.

    I will try to remember when I get home - that site does not work on my work computer.

    I really can't understand how you can make a statement such as this after reading the papers by Levacchia and Creati or Scalera.

    As I have said before, I find their papers unconvincing.

    Simple - I said that it wasn't the same thing that you appeared to be asserting. This: "I assert that such a large plume has lobes or fingers" was not what you appeared to be asserting.

    I just noticed - you also have the motion of the Alpine fault wrong. You have it reversed from what is observed.
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2011
  21. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    I ask this question to help you make up your mind.

    Then when a mantle upwelling is also a mantle diapir? (again, to help you make up your mind).

    You bring up the anatolian flow by citing the model of Facenna and Becker which main feature is the anatolian flow.

    A disagreement without argument is just an opinion of no scientific value.

    Is that correct now?:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If you don't understand, ask questions instead of making statements.

    I said that a reversal of subduction is explained by the collision of two mantle currents (e.g. Appenines-Hellenic). The Puysegur trench illustrates a strike-slip-subduction transition, not a reversal of subduction.

    You will never understand that filling of the eastern basin depends on the rate of extension and uplift in the back-arc, won't you?

    Your blunt statements are equivalent to argumented reply. They are just blunt statements.

    The figure shows that there is a 25 mm/y North/South component of divergence between the Agean sea and the Balkans. So the Aegan sea is opening at a rate five faster than your closing rate. Si in absence of uplift, It looks like there will still be a Sea at this place in the future…
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    I don't need the help, thankyou.

    Of some of their work, maybe.

    You have presented little of scientific value for me to present anything more substantial against.

    No. The region south (west) of Stewart Island that you have marked as a strike-slip boundary is actually a subduction zone.

    Really, if your toy model can't even get these kinds of basic predictions right...

    There is a difference between my not understanding what you said, and what you said not being understanable (and implicit in my statement is a request to restate it coherently).

    No it doesn't - see the map from the New Zealand Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences that I provided in on of my previous posts. If you're going to discuss New Zealand Geology, then New Zealand Government sources and Tertiary instutitions are going to have the most accurate and up to date information. American sources are going to be relying primarily on work in New Zealand, done by New Zealanders, and American sources can't even get New Zealand geography right.

    I understand what your toy model says, I also understand what the measurements and models say - and perhaps most importantly, I also remember what you said - you explicitly stated that the Western Mediterranean basin would open, and now you're saying that it will close.

    Huh? This does not parse as a sentence in English, and it contradicts itself.

    Again, you seem to contradict yourself, are you now suggesting that the Eastern mediterranean will open, and the western will close?

    I do wish you would make up your mind. So I should cancel my ski season tickets for Libya?

    The first thing I have to ask is, are you sure you have your margins in the right place.

    The only thing that diagram really shows is the Anatolian microplate effectively being pushed out of the by the collision between the African and european plates - it's being pushed in the direction of the mediterranean basin, and will probably end up acreeting onto the northen edge of the African plate.

    Nothing you have to say will change the fact that your own image clearly shows that the African plate is moving generally North, at a rate of 5mm/year with respect to Europe, which clearly shows that the mediterranean basin is closing at that rate.
  23. florian Debunking machine Registered Senior Member

    Oh yes you do need some help. You said that there is no mantle diapir in the back-arc because a diapir should pierce through the lithosphere. When a mantle upwelling reaches the surface in a backarc it differentiates into basaltic crust. Obviously, a mantle upwelling that reaches the surface had to pierce through the lithopshere and thus is a mantle diapir by definition.

    Their latest work: Facenna and Becker (2010) Nature, 465 p602.

    Yet another opinion.

    No. The focal mechanisms indicate strike-slip faulting not a thrust fault at the level of the Macquarie Ridge complex (Massell etal. (2000) Journal of Geophysical Research, 105, p13457)

    Irrelevant. A strike-slip fault is defined by the seismicity of the fault, not by a global tectonic model.

    What is the meaning of Understanable? This does not parse as English.

    No it is not.

    When a scientific point is discussed, only the peer-reviewed scientific literature has some values, whatever the nationality of the researchers involved. The map of some governement agencies is irrelevant. As a matter of fact the scientific literature shows that the Puysegur trench is a strike-slip-subduction transition (Lebrun et al (2010) Tectonics 19, p688). You're definitively wrong.

    Make up your mind. We were talking about the Eastern Mediterranea basin (as it actually appears in your own quote of my question).

    And yes, the western mediterranean basin has been opening for 30+ millions years and continue to do so by expansion of the Tyrrhenian sea.

    Typo: Your blunt statements are not equivalent to argumented reply.

    This contradiction comes from your adulated kinematic model. It shows you the absurdity of your inference from the 5 mm/year vector found in Libya and Egypt. If you choose to believe that these 5 mm/y vectors indicate convergence and thus closure of the Med Sea, then you must also accept that the 25 mm/y divergence between the Balkans and the aegean sea. Thus you must admit that the aegean sea is opening at 5 times the rate you infer that the Med sea is closing. In fine, according to your kinematic model, the aegean sea is opening at a fast rate at the expense of the older easter mediterranean basin, and there will still be a sea there in the future. Either you accept this conclusion, or you deny your venerate kinematic theory. You can't have both. Your choice?

    That will probably come as a huge shock to you, but unfortunatly I must inform you that you'll be dead at that time. Obviously, you've been naive and I'm afraid you won't get any refund. That's life.

    You deliberately ignore Le Pichon & Kreemer (2010) Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2010. 38:323–51. They showed that neither a push nor a slab pull are working mechanism in this region, and that the region could not be interpreted as a microplate and must be interpreted as a flow down the gravity potential. Le Pichon also argue that this flow must be connected to the afar plume: the mantle plume is flowing north under arabia and get channeled under anatolia to finally pour into the eastern mediterranean basin.

    This is absurd because your adulated kinematic theory completely fails in this region.

Share This Page