Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

FrozenGate by Avery

Expanding Earth Theory

Jmillerdoc

Jmillerdoc

0
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
899
Points
0
When I'm bored I love to explore around on YouTube and just follow where curiosity leads. Recently I was looking for videos on this tetrad of blood moons we are having over the next year and came across this video below. Basically, when I click on an interesting video the side bar brings up related videos. I eventually stumbled onto this one and couldn't resist the title.

My first thought when I saw the title was "yeah right, that's just nuts. Wonder what type of idiot put this hare brained idea together."

And then I watched it.

Yes! The Earth is Expanding. Part 1 of 14. - YouTube

I was stunned. The guy is not some YouTube nut job putting together some idiotic theory, he is a respected geologist who has worked in the oil and gas and mining industry for over 30 years. His theory and the results of his models are so intriguing it has me totally rethinking everything I've ever believed about plate tectonics and how the world works.

Not to toot my own horn here, but I've got a pretty extensive education in the natural sciences and am able to feel confident in my ability to understand and dissect theories in much of this field. Geology and oceanography were two areas of interest I had in undergrad school at Texas A&M University, and I was able to take a few advanced courses while figuring out what to do with my life. I've watched this presentation several times now and done some preliminary research of the data and references he has shown. So far I cannot find anything that's totally contrived, and of the references he has given and I've had time to check, they are real.

Other than the mechanism for the expansion, this theory seems to answer so many more of the things that seem unexplainable with the current theory of plate tectonics. His models are much more consistent with what is observed in the world as seen than the ones Plate tectonics puts forth IMHO. In fact the consistency and fit are so much more precise that it's almost impossible to dismiss this theory. Also, he's not the first to consider this. Many before him had looked at this and he is standing on the shoulders of those before him.

He does give a general theory of the mechanism of expansion but it is crude and bordering simple imagination. If someone could pose a theory with some roots in what's observable then I might have to replace this theory as my new paradigm to view the world. It's that convincing.

It would be cool if a bonafide Geologist here on the forum would weigh in on this.

This really seems so crazy I thought Geek's Corner was the best place to post this. Not to say geeky equal crazy, I'm a bit of a geek myself.

Interested to see what my forum-mates have to say about this, lots of people here much smarter than me.

JM
 





When the comments are disabled, I sense no credibility and wont risk wasting my time on this theory.
 
disabled comments is never a good sign on youtube.

remember, kent hovind always opened by saying " I taught high school science for 15 years", but he clearly is at odds with science.

it's an appeal to authority fallacy.

why are dinosaur bones found on antarctica if it's always been at the bottom (cold) tip of the southern hemisphere?

 
Last edited:
I tried watching one and a half of the videos and no proof at all was presented. I do not have time to watch all 14 videos. Can you summarize the evidence?
 
Shakenawake said:
Click to expand...


awesome video another thing supporting plate tectonics is that minerals and gold veins found on the west cost of Africa are also found on the east cost of south America exactly where plate tectonics show they would have split apart.

I saw a documentary on tv where these people who mined diamonds in Africa realized the diamond belt ended at the ocean so they went over to south America and after searching found the same type of diamonds in the same type of deposits. If I can find the documentary ill post it.
 
I did not watch the video yet but I remember last year in my geology class we talked about Earth's expansion. Anyway, the crust itself is not growing but shrinking. In the Pacific ocean there are 2 forms of plate movement(don't remember all too well so please excuse me).

#1) Which is located near the America's creates new crust
#2) Near the Mariana Trench(Close to the Phillipines) is responsible for destroying crust by a process called subduction

Well, #2 is destroying crust at a faster rate then #1 can produce it. Slowly but surely the Pacific ocean is losing it's massive size and one day Sydney and San Francisco could be neighboring cities. This is also why North America is also slowly getting farther apart from Europe.

-Alex
 
Hmmm, the earth is full of gas like a lot of scientists I know. As the gas inside the planet is heated under pressure, it becomes like a self inflating balloon or tire! Therefore , the earth is expanding! Please send nobel prize to ru124t !
 
lazerman121 said:
awesome video another thing supporting plate tectonics is that minerals and gold veins found on the west cost of Africa are also found on the east cost of south America exactly where plate tectonics show they would have split apart.

I saw a documentary on tv where these people who mined diamonds in Africa realized the diamond belt ended at the ocean so they went over to south America and after searching found the same type of diamonds in the same type of deposits. If I can find the documentary ill post it.
Click to expand...

This theory would still support exactly what you propose. It's not that the continents don't drift, it's that there is no major subduction zones.

As far as the comments goes, I'm not certain the author is the same as the posting person. It appears this documentary exists in it's full form on YouTube as well, possibly even more than once. I suspect you can find a posting with comments turned on.

One and a half videos probably doesn't get to the meat of the models.

I will make a very brief summary here but you might want to forward to maybe video 5 or 6 and start there, I think that's were some of the better evidence starts to surface. Of course, all the evidence is the same evidence used to explain plate tectonics theory, it's just modeled differently. And, when modeled this way the pieces of the puzzle appear to fit together much better.

Also, this guy is not taking a young earth position. So, wether you believe in an old earth or a young earth, and are trying to find evidence here supporting either view, you would do better to go elsewhere. His supposition is the earliest rocks formed are somewhere between 3.5ga and 4.5ga.

In summary, when you look at the mid-oceanic ridge and go outward there are differing ages of rocks that group together in "bands". When you remove each "band" of rocks from the youngest to oldest, and collapse the pieces back together with what's remaining you get a shrinking sphere. This does not require the need to have a major subduction zone opposed to each mid oceanic ridge to account for the expansion known to have occurred at the ridge. When you go backwards like this the "pieces of the puzzle" fit so much more accurately than can be explained by PT theory. It also can better model much of the sedimentary formations we see, including certain mountain ranges, etc.

Again, the precision of the modeling and the way the pieces of the puzzle all fall together are extremely compelling with one exception, the mechanism of the expansion.

Some of my early questions while watching were "ok then, if there were no major bodies of water as seen today then where did it come from?" There appears to be some very plausible theories for this as well. In fact, just recently there was a discovery recently of an "ocean" of water deep below our crust some 400 miles trapped in a crystal substance. Deep Underground, Oceans Of Water May Be Trapped In A Crystal 'Sponge' : The Two-Way : NPR

I'm not necessarily a believer in this theory yet but one thing is for certain, and history bears this out. Once the "scientific" community becomes locked into a single world view, advancement halts and human tragedy can occur. Look at geocentricity, flat earth, etc. men literally lost their lives going against the establishment, and advancement was not fostered. A true scientist will look at all theories and attempt to disprove them, and when one piece of evidence goes against the established theory he/she is not confined to "fit" the evidence into it, but rather is compelled to look for a better alternative theory where any and all evidence available does not contradict the theory. Sadly we see quite the opposite today and some fields of science have become more of a religion than actual science.

I realize it's a long video but I'm not willing to try to argue any points of this with someone who's not willing to look at all the information presented. I too do not have the time to re-present in summary all that is presented there. In it's essence the presentation on the video is already a summary. A summary of the evidence and how it fits into a new and competing model.

Again, I'm not suggesting this theory is absolutely correct, nobody could because it is a theory. What I am saying is what I've been able to review and research so far is very compelling, and arguments have been made that are not easily dismissed. In fact, what I am honestly looking for is someone who could effectively dismiss some of the points made and help me see why they can or may be dismissed.

I will try to go back tonight and find the best start point for someone not wanting to start from the beginning. Like I said, I think around 5-6 may be a place to start if you want to jump forward.

JM
 
I live in the Cascadia subduction zone where the Pacific plate slides under the North American plate, that's why we have mountains, volcanoes, and earthquakes here. Such a nice place to live. :yh:

Alan
 
Pi R Squared said:
I live in the Cascadia subduction zone where the Pacific plate slides under the North American plate, that's why we have mountains, volcanoes, and earthquakes here. Such a nice place to live. :yh:

Alan
Click to expand...

I don't mean to be sarcastic but I have to ask, how is it you are certain of this? Not where you live, but that the reason mountains are made are because of subduction? I would submit that you believe this because it is what's taught today, not because the best evidence supports this.

One very interesting piece of evidence Maxlow brings up is the absence of subduction zones where their should be. That's to say that the current measured drift direction and the rate of drift of certain parts of the wold should be opposed by an equally evident subduction zone, and it appears there are missing subduction zones. I believe this is discussed some at the first half of video #4.

Additionally, the theory doesn't require that there is no subduction at all, just that the movement of the continents and plates are not completely explained by expansion and subduction, and active subduction equivalent to the expansion seen at the mid oceanic ridges does not occur.

Here is a link to the author's website I just found:
Expansion Tectonics - James Maxlow may be a little easier to review quickly and hone in on things that are of interest or curiosity.

I realize the idea of an expanding earth is pretty zany at first thought, believe me I was resistant to digging deeper at first. I think the biggest objection most, including myself, will find with this theory is the mechanism causing the expansion. However, as I thought about it a little longer I remembered something almost equally disturbing from my days of study in undergraduate school, the mechanism of continental drift. Considering the thickness of the thickest parts of the crust are somewhere around 70-80km, and the underlying mantle is not exactly to be considered "slippery", what force or mechanism can account for the enormous amount of energy required to move the plates around and shove one under the other? If you didn't already believe this took place it would take a bit of convincing to overcome objections to it I believe.

Anyways, gotta get back to work. I'm still playing with this theory and plan to spend more time researching it tonight and the days to come.

Cheers,
JM

P.S. I just realized where you live. I have a very close friend who lives in Snohomish. Wonder if you know him....
 
Last edited:
How would we possibly expand we are already at gravitational equalibrium more pressure means more heat before it means more expansion. Bottom line.
 
Well I guess I am open to the idea, I haven't had time to examine this yet. There is no shortage of things we don't know or that science can't explain yet.

I don't know anyone who lives in Snohomish anymore but I used to. I used to live in Everett and Snohomish is a few minutes drive east of there. I am still not far away in Tulalip.

Alan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.





Back
Top