The Expansion Tectonics of Europa

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by OilIsMastery, Oct 2, 2008.

  1. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    They look like they're far from a perfect match to me, however, I imagine that it has something to do with a series of terranes that accreted on the west coast of the US, that at one time lay between North America and whatever was west of it.

    Do I have link? Not currently, I did come across one, but I didn't book mark it (apparently).

    It also probably has something to do with the fact that at various times (although, not neccessarily at the same time) various parts of Asia have been in contact with North America, so yeah, Plate tectnoics predicts it.

    It's a nothing. All it actually means, according to plate tectonic theory, is that at some point parts of asia were in contact with parts of north america.

    http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/jmeert/550.jpg

    I thought the answer to this would have been obvious - For example, Mars has already cooled to the point where it can no longer support tectonics as we recognize it. In fact, the crust has thickened to the point where it can support a Volcano 27km high.

    As far as Mars goes, it's (arguably) somewhat artificial - there was an article in the June 2008 issue of Nature suggestign the Martian dichotomy may be as a result of an impact.

    Plate tectonics has been put forward as another possible explanation with Olympus mons, and the rather straight line of volcanoes associated with it being compared to the Japanese arc.

    Here's a paper that outlines evidence for martian subduction:
    http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=4100262

    I did have another one, but I seem to have accidentally deleted it (or my daughter did).

    There's a range of explanations for this, for example, if you look at the moon, the highlands represent the older, lower density crust, and the lowlands represent younger, denser flood basalts.

    What's so hard abotu this to understand, that lower density solids float higher in a liquid, then higher density ones.

    Now you're just being ridiculous.

    Nobody is claiming this. And if you actually think about what i've said, that Earth is simply the only planet we have observed active tectonics on - this is a vastly different statement from some of what's being put forward on this board.

    You may be, but i'm not.

    Which is why it's OIM that has been the first person to start handing out abuse each, and every time.

    The point you're missing is that, at this time, there is significant amounts of evidence to support the idea of subduction.

    I have yet to see any convincing evidence of an expanding earth, and the analysis that I have seen appears to contradict this.

    I have elsewhere, for example, provided evidence supporting the existence of Wadati Bennioff zones, and oceanic crust substantialy older then OIM's rantings allow.

    Meanwhile, OIM invokes theories that contradict each other, and him, that require specific circumstances, and claims to have sufficient knowledge of the surface of Venus, Mars, Europa, Ganymede, and every other extra solar planet, to completely rule out any form of crustal recycling ever.

    And you're calling me judgemental for calling him out on his nonsense?

    The difference between us is that he's already made up his mind that i'm closed minded (as have, apparently you) because I have thus far failed to be convinced by any of the evidence presented so far.

    (Why should I accept a video on faith that contains factual inaccuracies, or papers and articles that reference the 'lost continent of Mu' and claim that the Eocene ended 24,000 years ago?)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    A blatant lie. If anyone gets abused here it's me. I've been called almost more stupid names than are in your vocabulary. Frequently/mostly by you I might add.

    There is no evidence for subduction. None whatsoever. Subduction is physically impossible.

    http://expanding-earth.org/page_2.htm

    http://www.es.mq.edu.au/GEMOC/Abstracts/Abs2006/GriffinIAVCEI6.pdf

    There is no subduction. See for yourself.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2008
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Probably for the same reason you "accept" there is no such thing as cold fusion, claim that in the history of science only one scientific paper has been written on cold fusion, claim that if a comic book artist says 2+2=4 it cannot be true because comic book artists have no credibility, or that hydrocarbons were only formed twice in the history of the Earth by fossils.

    You believe in plate tectonics so you believe in an encyclopedia of fake made up continents, not just Mu.

    The reason why you are obssessed with fake continents like Mu is because you are afraid to discuss the article here: http://thomasbrown.org/EndofFossilFuels/End_Fossil_Fuels.html

    That article briefly mentions that James Churchward (a Mu believer) mentioned subterranean gas explosions.

    You are afraid to address the rest of the article such as the rapid formation of coal: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120080223/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

    Therefore you obssess over the red herring and straw man Mu, even though you believe in every other fake continent ever imagined by man.

    For the record, I don't believe in Mu or any other fake make believe continent that Trippy believes in.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2008
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. EndLightEnd This too shall pass. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,301
    A question for the plate tectonics people...

    According to that sea floor map, how is it exactly that India moved independently from the east coast of Africa all the way up to south Asia, across an oceanic trench, to crash into asia to form the mountains which cannot be explained ANY other way (according to plate tectonics)?
     
  8. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    They believe that India magically and miraculously uprooted itself from the sea floor and then used a magic carpet to fly across the Indian Ocean.
     
  9. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    This is funny, given that for a long time you insulted me, and I did not respond what so ever, then I began questioning your literacy and numeracy skills based on your interpretations of posts and articles - an action I justified at the time, until finally I snapped and suggested you crawl out of your trailer park.

    I've called you an idiot, and a liar, and have been able to at least prove/justify some of those comments.

    Meanwhile, you have repeatedly stated or implied that I am an illiterate religous fundamentalist living in a cave, who's actions are comparable to those of Al Qaeda, all the while lying about your articles and the posts of others.

    Not only does this sentence not make any sense, it contradicts itself as well.

    Simply denying it's existence doesn't make it false. You still haven't explained the trends in earth quake depths observed under oceanic trenches.

    The first link contains many misconceptions, and false assumptions, the second I will look at when I have more time.


    [/quote]

    We've had this discussion before.

    Tell me, what would you expect to see on this map if there were subduction?
     
  10. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Blatant lie - I have not stated any such thing about cold fusion, only that it isn't currently an accepted part of mainstream science.

    Blatant lie - I have not stated any such thing, only that YOU have only managed to produce one paper which suggests how more reliable experiments confirming cold fusion might be carried out.

    This contains two blatant lies.

    1. Blatant lie: I did not claim that Comic book artists have no credibility, merely pointed out that Neal Adams had no formal qualificiations in Geology.
    2. Blatant lie: I claimed that Neal Adams work had no credibility because it contains substantial inaccuracies.

    Blatant lie: I did not claim that Hydrocarbons were formed only twice in the history of the earth. At no point have I stated how often or when I think that hydrocarbons were formed. At no point have I stated by what mechanism I think they are formed.

    I am of the opinion that the evidence we currently have supports active tectonics on earth, yes. But as for believing in an encyclopedia of fake made up continents? That's a blatant mis representation, I accept the evidence of there having been multiple super continents in the past - at least some of which you have accepted in accepting the map that you keep posting.

    Blatant lie - that's not the only problem that I've raised with that article.

    Another blatant lie, i'm not afraid of addressing anything. This is pure supposition on your part - and the link you've provided 404's.

    Blatant lie. If your arguments weren't based on red herrings and straw men, I wouldn't be able to point them out.

    Wow, you don't believe in Eurafrasia (Eurasia and Africa)?

    Better contact those map makers then, and explain to them how/why they've got it wrong.
     
  11. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    As has already been explained to you, there is no oceanic trench between Africa and India.

    The african (and Indian) margins are passive, and there lies a spreading rdige between them.

    No magic flying carpets involved.
     
  12. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    Some evidence...:crazy:
     
  13. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    :roflmao:
     
  14. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    :roflmao:

    According to plate tectonics mythology you believe in all sorts of fake made up continents such as Rodinia, Pannotia, Gondwana, Laurasia, and every geological myth known to man. Quite frankly I'm shocked you don't believe in Mu. There is far more evidence for Mu than there is for any of the other made up continents you make believe in.

    www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1502-3931.1970.tb01260.x
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2008
  15. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Apparently you failed to understand the question the first time round, so let me restate it.

    "So what [evidence] would you expect to see on that map if subduction were occuring?"

    See, again, you fail to grasp the simple implication of the sentence, or yolu're deliberately ignoring context.

    Should I stop assuming that English is your first language?
     
  16. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Once again, provide proof, or concede your error.
     
  17. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    So what you're saying then is that Zircon dating is only accurate when it supports your case?
     
  18. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    There once was a dipshit called Oil
    Whose trolling would make your blood boil
    His geological knowledge
    Showed he'd not been to college
    So good science he tried to despoil
     
  19. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    No. The zircon data IS my case.
     
  20. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288
    There once was a fundamentalist named Ophiolite
    who believed in fairy tales like subduction and mantle recycling.
    He had no logical argument
    so he resorted to ad hominem
    and poetic garbage,
    if that even qualifies as poetry.
     
  21. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    The 'imaginary continents' you keep referring to are based on the exact same evidence as sea floor spreading - paleomagnetism and zircon dating.

    So if you accept paleomagnetism and zircon data as being valid, then you must also accept that at some point in the past, the 'Old Red' continent must have existed (for example).
     
  22. Pandaemoni Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,631
    To some extent that may be true. Most of your posts rehash the same (I'd say "junk") science, and posters often do carry their exasperation with your silliness from one thread to the next. (Come on, iron production at the Earth's "nuclear" core? Stars have to generate temperatures of 3 Billion Kelvin for that, but the Earth is doing it on the cheap? Cold fusion, perhaps, even though cold fusion has never been demonstrated in any context and even with hydrogen, the nuclei of which are much easier to fuse?)
     
  23. OilIsMastery Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,288

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    No. Zircon data does not provide any evidence of fake made up continents 200 million years ago because the oceans that exist today didn't exist in the Triassic. The only continent at that time was the supercontinent (not Pangea because there was no Panthalassa, Tethys Sea, or any other fake b.s.).

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    No.
     

Share This Page