Can Gravitational Bodies Grow?

Not that it's in anyway relevant to the age of oceanic crust/ophiolite sequences incorporated in continental sequences.

I accept that, based on what I understand of the methods used, and based on the raw data that I have seen for myself, yes, it is accurate.

Belief in the sense you often try to misconstrue it, is irrelevant to the discussion, as it is subjective, and at least one of us is attempting to have an objective discussion.

 

And in that simple statement you demonstrate that you are in fact completely ignorant of Zircon dating methods.

 

AGAIN, you're being dishonest and misrepresenting my statement.

Jesus H Christ.

I didn't say that they don't grow, only that you don't understand how Zircon dating works.

 

And AGAIN with the out of context quoting, and deliberate deception.

Which you've already been warned about.

Wassamatta?

Run out of arguments?

Are they that weak that you have to resort to lies and deceit?

You spent?

Suffering from peek argument perhaps?

 

All irrelevant to the argument for reasons previously stated.

The earth stopped growing significantly approximately 4.5 Ga, at the end of the accretionary phase. Nobody disputes that.

What is disputed here how significant the growth (including the late heavy bombardment) since that time.

 

This has already been addressed.
These questions represent a strawman argument.
Nobody is claiming the growth has stopped - only that it's insignificant compared to the mass of the earth.
Nobody has cliamed gravity has stopped.
Nobody has claimed Shooting stars, meteorites, and impacts have stopped.

In short, the only thing you have demonstrated is that your ignorant of basic numeracy skills such as orders of magnitude.

Whatever, this makes no sense in the context of the conversation, or the argument. ONe can only assume it's a cheap distraction, yet another dishonest tactic from you.

My understanding is that it's caused by an overheating Asthenosphere.

Continental crust is thick, and it is low density, and therefore acts as a far more efficient insulator then oceanic crust.

Thus, when you have a supercontinent (Pangea being the most recent, but not the only one in the history of the earth) the Asthenosphere under the supercontinent tends to over heat, causing the crust to bow, and fracture, forming continents again.

It should also be pointed out that this process causes a cycle to occur.
Start with many continents.
Plate motions cause them to aggregrate into larger continents and super continets.
Those super ocntinents cause the astneosphere to overheat, causing the super continents to rift into many smaller continents which begin drifting apart, but there's only so far they can drift before they start bumping into other continents, and aggregating again, starting the cycle all over again.

 

I found one estimate of the Chicxulub comet/asteroid mass as 10^15 kg.

That's about 1 billionth of the mass of the Earth.

Insignificant.

 

Once again Context please.

I didn't say that extinction event meteorites had insignificant mass.
I said they had insignificant mass when compared to the earth.

What part of 'Big, bigger, biggest' is it, precisely, that you have the conceptual difficulties.

I would also say that the earth has insignificant mass when compared to the sun.

I've already explained this to youin long form numbers, and you completely sidestepped it.

No miracles, no magic.

Or have you not heard of Mid ocean spreading ridges?