Earthquakes are Proof of a Expanding Earth.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

(Double facepalm)

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

(Double facepalm)

If your going to face-palm, you can at least put a little effort into it.



So, it appears as though, Electricity plays a very large role in the universe, and back here at home.

NASA recently discovered a "rope" between the Sun and Earth. Oh, boy I hear them now lol lol No, its true. A rope of inter wound magnetic portals. And I'm guessing, its what keeps the Earth on its Solar Orbit. At any rate..

Oct. 30, 2008: During the time it takes you to read this article, something will happen high overhead that until recently many scientists didn't believe in. A magnetic portal will open, linking Earth to the sun 93 million miles away. Tons of high-energy particles may flow through the opening before it closes again, around the time you reach the end of the page.

"It's called a flux transfer event or 'FTE,'" says space physicist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible."

Magnetic Portals Connect Earth to the Sun

And this about the northern lights:

Dec. 11, 2007: NASA's fleet of THEMIS spacecraft, launched less than 8 months ago, has made three important discoveries about spectacular eruptions of Northern Lights called "substorms" and the source of their power. The discoveries include giant magnetic ropes that connect Earth's upper atmosphere to the Sun and explosions in the outskirts of Earth's magnetic field.

NASA Spacecraft Make New Discoveries about Northern Lights

So it appears as though Electricity may play a very large role in how the earth is made up internally. Magnetic levitation anyone?

Issac Newtons gravity? Looks like it made of the same stuff subduction is.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Can you just admit that you don't know how geology works so we can draw a line under this thread and then go on to far more production things?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Can you just admit that you don't know how geology works so we can draw a line under this thread and then go on to far more production things?

Can you admit just because something is on a map does not make it a reality?

Here is a very interesting video making some very earth shattering claims. Einstein stole his ideas while working at the patent office???



Did you mean "Productive"? Because the "production" is falling apart.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Can you just admit that you don't know how geology works so we can draw a line under this thread and then go on to far more production things?

Can you admit just because something is on a map does not make it a reality?

Here is a very interesting video making some very earth shattering claims. Einstein stole his ideas while working at the patent office???

Did you mean "Productive"? Because the "production" is falling apart.

Your attempts at distracting us are not working. You do not understand geology or even basic chemistry. The fact that ocean trenches have a corresponding line of volcanoes not too far away from them is a case in point (hence why I said to look at a map).

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Your attempts at distracting us are not working. You do not understand geology or even basic chemistry

If you mean the "Royal Societies" version of Geology, ect., then yes, I understand it. What part of the word "Rejection" do you not understand?

If you mean distracting as in presenting the Nikola Tesla version of a electric Universe, or an alternative interpretation of Geology, then obviously, facts can be a distraction.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Can you just admit that you don't know how geology works so we can draw a line under this thread and then go on to far more production things?

Can you admit just because something is on a map does not make it a reality?

Here is a very interesting video making some very earth shattering claims. Einstein stole his ideas while working at the patent office???

Did you mean "Productive"? Because the "production" is falling apart.

Your attempts at distracting us are not working.

Us? As in organized group with a cover mission???

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Can you just admit that you don't know how geology works so we can draw a line under this thread and then go on to far more production things?

Can you admit just because something is on a map does not make it a reality?

Here is a very interesting video making some very earth shattering claims. Einstein stole his ideas while working at the patent office???

Did you mean "Productive"? Because the "production" is falling apart.

Your attempts at distracting us[/b are not working.

Us? As in organized group with a cover mission??? Or Us, as the Royal Institutes "Gate Keepers" that attempt to hide the Royal secret, that gravity is nothing more than a unified static electric field.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Your attempts at distracting us are not working. You do not understand geology or even basic chemistry

If you mean the "Royal Societies" version of Geology, ect., then yes, I understand it. What part of the word "Rejection" do you not understand?

If you mean distracting as in presenting the Nikola Tesla version of a electric Universe, or an alternative interpretation of Geology, then obviously, facts can be a distraction.

I hate to break the news to you, but the science of geology is not controlled by a secret society of men in silly hats, but is open to all. And the theory of plate tectonics is extremely popular. Why? The facts fit. The geology fits. Your constant protestations that you really, really, know what's going on are... amusing. Oh, and wrong.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I hate to break the news to you, but since 1660, they have. So that would make them the oldest, and most prevalent today.

The Society’s fundamental purpose, reflected in its founding Charters of the 1660s, is to recognise, promote, and support excellence in science and to encourage the development and use of science for the benefit of humanity.

Mission and priorities
Alphabetical List of Fellows of the Royal Society w ho were Freemasons

The story of the Royal Society is the story of modern science.

Our origins lie in a 1660 ‘invisible college’ of natural philosophers and physicians. Today we are the UK’s national science academy and a Fellowship of some 1,600 of the world’s most eminent scientists.
Nullius in verba

The very first ‘learned society’ meeting on 28 November 1660 followed a lecture at Gresham College by Christopher Wren. Joined by other leading polymaths including Robert Boyle and John Wilkins, the group soon received royal approval, and from 1663 it would be known as 'The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge'.

The Royal Society's motto 'Nullius in verba' is taken to mean 'take nobody's word for it'. It is an expression of the determination of Fellows to withstand the domination of authority and to verify all statements by an appeal to facts determined by experiment.

History

So, I will follow the Royal societies motto, show me the experiments, for I will take no ones word that subduction is real.

Going back to page 7 and the information that is shared, The Royal Society, or Institute, was and is, a Masonic organization. And I might point out, beholding to the Royal British Crown. And such, would make public, or keep private any discovery the Crown would decide. Whether it be utilized in economic or military would be decided by the Crown.
The “masonic” Royal Society of Sciences and the Arts

And the theory of plate tectonics is extremely popular.

This is true, but does it make it a reality, just because its popular? It is a creation of the Royal Society, a Free masonic Organization.
And again...

A symposium on continental drift was held at the Royal Society of London in 1965 which must be regarded as the official start of the acceptance of plate tectonics by the scientific community, and which abstracts are issued as Blacket, Bullard & Runcorn (1965).

Plate tectonics

It is popular with Free masonic Scientists, who support each others fantasy.......

And I might point out that Nicola Tesla was not a "Traveler", or a seeker of the "Light", or, a Brother Mason. He found the "Light".

a reply to: All Seeing Eye Oooookay. As this thread has now jumped the shark into zer madness place, I am going to exit, stage, left, convulsed with laughter.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye Oooookay. As this thread has now jumped the shark into zer madness place, I am going to exit, stage, left, convulsed with laughter.

Do anything but don't address the issue. Its a real hot potato..... No silly hats you say???

Silly Hats

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There is no issue, there is just a daft theory leavened by the occasional bout of additional silliness in this thread. The fact we are now talking about the Royal Society is the cherry on the cake of silliness.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Starting to sound like a youtube video from Gorilla199

Soooo all science is some kind of masonic conspiracy...

Im a PhD... and I am quite certain that the Queen of England isn't monitoring my work, nor the Free Masons. Im quite certain no one related to those two groups will be underground with me tomorrow

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There is no issue, there is just a daft theory leavened by the occasional bout of additional silliness in this thread. The fact we are now talking about the Royal Society is the cherry on the cake of silliness.

Yep, really kind of silly. Lets take Stephan Hawking for instance.

Hawking is one of the youngest members ever to be inducted into the Royal Society, the U.K.’s academy of sciences. One source states, “In 1974 Hawking was inducted into the Royal Society.

What is on Stephens mind?

According to Alfred Lambremont Webre, Stephen Hawking’s April 25, 2010 public statement that "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational," Prof. Hawking stated on April 25, 2010. "The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like."

He further added : "We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach," Hawking says.

Stephen Hawking May Be Part Of A U.K. Military Intelligence Psyops

Im not the creator of silliness. I just have to sort through all of it, to get to the truth... Your ridicule is duly noted.

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Starting to sound like a youtube video from Gorilla199

Soooo all science is some kind of masonic conspiracy...

Im a PhD... and I am quite certain that the Queen of England isn't monitoring my work, nor the Free Masons. Im quite certain no one related to those two groups will be underground with me tomorrow

I made it very clear in the OP what I though of the "Institutional" mindset. And you have made it clear that, that, is where you prefer my mindset to return to. Now, sharing your status as a "Institutionalized" individual, you have in essence betrayed your own bias to it.

It is your right to hold any belief you wish, for whatever reason, as long as your belief is based in your personal knowledge. I have my own scientific observations and have drawn my own theories as to what I have seen. You were not present(as far as I know), therefore, you do not know. Or in more down to earth terminology, "You don't know Jack". That's not to say anything you witness is invalid, far from it. But sitting in a classroom listening to a lecture is not quite the same as being there, seeing first hand, what ever the subject is. Institutions, are not the only game in town!

Soooo all science is some kind of masonic conspiracy...

I wouldn't go that far in saying that. There is one area in particular they seem to "GRAVITATE" to. And anything that might upset the "APPLE CART" in this one area seem to draw them like mosquitoes to the flame. And that would be anything that might disclose the ancient history of this planet! Whether it be geology, or the bones of the giants, or deciphering ancient text, you will find those who do not wish to disclose, but hide discoveries.

I am quite certain that the Queen of England isn't monitoring my work, nor the Free Masons

Good luck to your venture. I wish you well.

I wouldn't go that far in saying that. There is one area in particular they seem to "GRAVITATE" to. And anything that might upset the "APPLE CART" in this one area seem to draw them like mosquitoes to the flame. And that would be anything that might disclose the ancient history of this planet! Whether it be geology, or the bones of the giants, or deciphering ancient text, you will find those who do not wish to disclose, but hide discoveries.

"The Ancient Ones" is the term the secret societies use to address the previous, and it appears high tech, intelligent society that inhabited this planet, and most likely others. Those who have been following discoveries on Mars will note this.

The most recent discovery is that of a skeleton, on Mars.



Raw Images

And here on Earth..

British anthropologist Russell Dement and his team have unearthed six skeletons belonging to unusually tall people, between seven and eight foot tall, in Ecuador and Peru. Dement, who has been studying the local communities for over two decades, told Ecuadorian website Cuenca High Life that the locals have legends about very tall, pale-faced people, and it is possible that the skeletons belong to these legendary giants.

The bodies, which came to light because of a flood, were found in two ancient settlements in the Ecuadorian part of the Amazon. The researchers discovered that they had been elaborately buried, covered in leaves and then laid in thick clay, which helped preserve them.

Interesting. A flood may have buried them, and a flood, unearthed them.

However, he did tell the newspaper that in his 25 years studying the Ecuadorian communities of the Shuar and the Achuar he had heard numerous accounts from the elders about their tall, pale neighbours who were peaceful and welcome guests to the Amazonian villages. What was fascinating was that these legends referred to these people as belonging to “the spirit world”, which is why the discovery of actual skeletons was so exciting. Dement added that he suspected the legends were based on actual events because of the frequency with which they were being told in different parts of a large area of the Amazon.

At least one Scientist, did take into account, history, as told by the local elders.

Legendary Giants Found in Ecuador

So, instead of attacking the facts and evidence, you attack the person, you ridicule, and attempt to shame people back into the "Institutional Box". And why? Because you can not and or will not allow for the possibility that Ancient history will expose the true nature of not only our planet, but our "Electric Universe", and who created it. Or even worse, you took an oath against mankind itself.

An Expanding Earth has been proven beyond any doubt. Now prove Subduction with the same weight!

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Legendary Giants Found in Ecuador

They were tall, but Robert Wadlow was a foot taller. Moreover, I don't see what some tall people have to do with an expanding Earth. Maybe it was the Ecuadorian equivalent of the NBA? Those guys are pretty tall also.

So, instead of attacking the facts and evidence, you attack the person, you ridicule, and attempt to shame people back into the "Institutional Box". And why? Because you can not and or will not allow for the possibility that Ancient history will expose the true nature of not only our planet, but our "Electric Universe", and who created it. Or even worse, you took an oath against mankind itself.

Eros had me believing he was looking for new particles in his lab, not conspiring with the queen against electric universe and taking an oath against mankind. The electric universe needs no conspiracy. The mainstream models make quantitative, falsifiable predictions, while I have yet to see such for the electric universe model, so even if someone wanted to falsify data to conspire against electric universe, they wouldn't know what quantitative prediction their data was supposed to match. Electric universe proponents tend not to make quantitative predictions, not that you'd know what those are. I'm not sure what electric universe has to do with expanding earth either.

An Expanding Earth has been proven beyond any doubt. Now prove Subduction with the same weight!

Why bother posting anything? You'll just decry it's mainstream science, and a conspiracy against mankind or some such nonsense, as you've already dismissed volumes of other evidence posted.

Also plate tectonics is going to continue to be studied and it's the evidence that will shape it, not rantings by people who don't even understand the science. Anyway, here's more you can add to the pile of science you're ignoring:

Limits to the expansion of Earth, Moon, Mars, and Mercury and to changes in the gravitational constant

New estimates of the palaeoradius of the Earth for the past 400 Myr from palaeomagnetic data limit possible expansion to less than 0.8%, sufficient to exclude any current theory of Earth expansion.

I am conspiring to put ultra pure liquid argon into a detector... which... we are over 50% of the way there... we take more data in one day, than the current largest liquid argon dark matter experiment did in its entire run (We don't have enough data to cover all the dark matter experiments that have published to date... but we should do once we are full and have been taking data for a month)

All seeing eye, your raw image is not a raw image, it is a JPG, thus processed image... secondly the instrument it was taken with is taking images fairly close up... soooo any humanoid remains would appear fairly large in that image but infact be very very small. thirdly... there is no objects that look like bones, human or otherwise. Please, anyone correct me if i am wrong but the blurb under the image would suggest the above.

If expanding earth has been proven beyond a doubt... why is it an unknown science, that provides ZERO evidence that backs up the claims. Before you say BUT IT DOES... no sorry the evidence you have provided is about 1000 times less convincing than the subduction model. Sorry but that is from me, a physicist, not a geologist... which you would be right in saying i am no expert. BUT as a none expert, who is still a scientist, you should be able to provide me with evidence and convince me.

You have not.


Also the Irony here is that you accuse mainstream science of attacking peoples character... well, you just did that with the end of your post, you are no better. You accused all the mainstream scientists as being conspirators with the Queen of England (Like England is a superpower anymore *facepalm*) and signing a deal against humanity... those are pretty insulting personal attacks. not sure i have read a single thread in this whole saga that quite comes to the same level.

As i said... this is Science and Tech... we require evidence to back up claims, and not just evidence because you believe it is, actual evidence that you can build a logical train of thought with

a reply to: ErosA433

As i said... this is Science and Tech... we require evidence to back up claims, and not just evidence because you believe it is, actual evidence that you can build a logical train of thought with

And that is EXACTLY what this is all about!

Subduction has no "Actual Evidence", to build any train of thought on. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR SUBDUCTION.

Earthquake research came up with subduction to account for tectonic activity in some regions of the planet. However, it very quickly became a boon for the developing Plate Tectonics Theory (in the mid 20th century). It appeared to make sense, allied to the idea of sea floor spreading (an adaptation of continental drift). In spite of the beauty of the match there has always been problems - from the first hatchings of Plate Tectonics. Mainstream tended to ignore the mismatches, and the anomalies, thinking it was just a lack of data. In other words, a new theory that could be subsumed into uniformitarian thinking was preferred - before it had been properly investigated. So eager were mainstream to keep uniformitarianism on song they simply pretended all was well - and no anomalies in Plate Tectonics theory existed (especially when it came to subduction), The act of subduction was and is necessary if sea floor spreading takes place in a planet of a fixed size. If new basalt is being formed on the bottom of the oceans old sea floor has to be disappearing elsewhere - otherwise the earth would have to be expanding (or something like that).

Subduction elsewhere (at continental margins for example) is also suspect. Smot et al (2001) in his book, 'Active Margin Geomorphology' found no evidence of seismic activity where subduction is supposed to occur (around the perimeters of the Pacific). Choi (2005) could find no evidence for subduction in Indonesia or at the Juan de Fuca Plate. In other places geological sequences are known to occur across what are thought to be regions of subduction (in the literature) hence being obvious evidence the landscape is not subducting. The author, Vadim Gordienko goes on to say that in spite of all this lack of actual physical evidence for subduction there is an ongoing enthusiasm in settled science for the isomorphic approach to global tectonics (which indicates there is something seriously wrong with the settled science of geology).

Not only that, many of the trenches in the Pacific contain horizontally bedded sediments on the basement (at the bottom of the trenches) dating back many millions of years ago - which by itself is very odd. Old sea floor is supposed to be subducting at ocean trenches, down into the Mantle. Clearly, this cannot be the case if trenches have sediments that should have disappeared many moons ago.

is subduction real

The more the scientists look for evidence, the less they find. How on Earth can you support a "Theory" with no evidence???

To substantiate the theory because its "Popular" is akin to following the sheep over the proverbial cliff. The only thing subduction, as a theory, does, is keep the planet the same size.

Also the Irony here is that you accuse mainstream science of attacking peoples character...

No, I haven't. Only a select few who have taken an oath to something other than the truth. Are you inferring that all Main Stream scientists have taken the oath?

no sorry the evidence you have provided is about 1000 times less convincing than the subduction model.

Take for instance the real science, the not so publicized science that is forced to work in seclusion due to pressure from the "Settled Science" mindset.

Where is the subduction?

Conclusion

The transfer faults of the Gulf Coast, Mexico and GOM seem to be active and probably have been episodically active since the Mesozoic rifting. If so, we need to change the plate tectonic paradigm that fails to adequately explain the current seismicity and active tectonics of the North American interior, Mexico and the GOM (Figs. 8, 9 and 10; Hand, 2015). How can intra-plate and continent-wide deformation result from abstractions such as “low angle subduction, ridge push, slab pull, mantle convection, or deep seated candle like plumes?”

Remember, the so-called “intra-plate” movements are not just confined to North America, but are also common in South America, Africa, Asia, and Europe and even within the great oceanic regimes. The conventional plate tectonic theory seems to be at a loss to explain a lot of active deformation around the planet and simply relies on model-driven thinking devoid of convincing factual data.

PDF format.
NCGT Journal Issues V4, N2

The references are 3 pages long. And you, ErosA433, being a physicist, should appreciate that.

In layman's terms the above article questions the "accepted", Settled Science" version of plate tectonics. It is pointing out the failure of the science (Subduction) in explaining why the continent's are still under active stress's, that should have been "Subducted" many moons ago.

As you have pointed out, your not a Geologist, but do have a scientific mind. And that is all anyone needs to consider the subject. My personal opinion is that Subduction is only a theory, with no evidence to support it. And it should not be taught in school, as a fact! It should be taught only as a "Theory", and allow the students to decide for themselves.