The Expansion Tectonics of Europa

That's not what your source says.
That's not what your source says EMST says.

Are you now saying that EMST and Stavros are wrong?
Are you now contradicting your source, which you have abused other people in defense of?
Are you going to apologize to those you have abused in defense of EMST?

 

Oh, and of course you can prove that Iron is among the daughter nuclei produced by Nuclear Fission.

 

You're the one that brought up EMST.
You're the one that claimed EMST was responsible for this magical mythical growth of EUropa.

 

BZZZZT.

Cold fusion has even less hard science behind it then you claim subduction theory does.

I thought you were looking for a simpler theory with verifiable results?

 

Right...

So when I ask you about Neutrinos, you claim they're irrelevant, and then go and cite an article that says exactly the same thing I did - that if there was a nuclear process operating in the earth, there would be a detectable neutrino signal.

How exactly does that contradict me again?

All it says is that these particular researchers are going looking for what I said would be there if they're ideas are correct.

Once again, OIM fails at basic reading comprehension.

 

:ROTFLMGDAO:

This is just too fricking funny!!!!

From your OWN DAMN SOURCE!!!


"Sea water, which contains small amounts of deuterium, is sucked down where tectonic plates in the Earth's crust converge. It may reach the top of the mantle - the so-called Moho - before being drawn up into the ocean again at another point in the Earth's crust. According to Jones, a mass of water equal to the mass of the entire ocean passes through the mantle in about a billion years." - Steven Jones, 1983.

1. His idea requires subduction tectonics to be true to provide a source for the Deuterium. It's explicitly stated in the article, and it's implicit in his calculations.

2. That article was published in 1983. It's 20th century science.

What's your latest Mantra? Oh yeah, I remember: "Don't you think we've made a few advances since the 20th century".

My god, you're a total **** wit.

 

Good god man.

Do you know anything of Cold Fusion?

It's even further from Mainstream than Plasma Cosmology, or the electric universe theories.

And you're making some Awfully big assumptions on my opinion of the validity of cold fusion.

But then, there's nothing new there.

None of which does naything to address the point, however, that your own souces contradict you.

 

Cold fusion is far from science fact.

Your opinion otherwise doesn't change that.

And the simple fact of the matter is that you're still contradicting yourself.

1. Cold fusion is not the mechanism that Stavros posited.
2. The theory that says cold fusion, also says that Subduction is a scientific fact, and subducted sea-water provides the source of deuterium to the mantle.

 

You loose.