It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Science, MUST, be initiated by observation. Otherwise it's just not Science. Now, I observe circular indentations approx 300 miles in diameter, in a odd pattern on the ocean bed. Plate tectonics just dosn't seem to answer the question as to how they were formed. I also observe circular patterns that match those on the ocean bed (300 mile diameter) somewhere else. My first logical thought is, can they be related in some way.
If, and there really is no way for me to confirm this, if, Google Earth is based on Scientific research, then, it would be a logical assumption it is a fair reflection of reality, given we know certain areas are smudged out.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
Science, MUST, be initiated by observation. Otherwise it's just not Science. Now, I observe circular indentations approx 300 miles in diameter, in a odd pattern on the ocean bed. Plate tectonics just dosn't seem to answer the question as to how they were formed. I also observe circular patterns that match those on the ocean bed (300 mile diameter) somewhere else. My first logical thought is, can they be related in some way.
No, you have OBSERVED nothing of the sort. You have just looked at Google Earth. By your own standards, that's a "Fail", I'm afraid.
How about "Ocean currents", by the way, as a possible explanation for these as yet unobserved patterns. Hypothetically speaking.
originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Okay, let me simplify it for you.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: oldcarpy
No idea. I am no expert. Are you? Plate tectonics? Earthquakes?
I've shown you where the plates are in that area, once you eventually told me where it was, now you tell me your "alternative to known science" theory of yours, and how it might be of any relevance to this thread topic.
Shame that One4all seems to have bottled this thread.
About 12,000 years ago there was a terrible traumatic event here on Earth. It's called the "Great Flood". Since this has not happened since, then, there is no way to examine what happened back then, or the mechanics of the event. Reviewing recorded statements of those who wrote down what they observed, is all we have. Cultures around the world have their own versions, which is understandable, but all generally say the same thing.. What on Earth could have caused such a event? Science is generally silent, except to say evidence is starting to pile up that the event did in fact happen.
Science, MUST, be initiated by observation. Otherwise it's just not Science. Now, I observe circular indentations approx 300 miles in diameter, in a odd pattern on the ocean bed. Plate tectonics just dosn't seem to answer the question as to how they were formed. I also observe circular patterns that match those on the ocean bed (300 mile diameter) somewhere else. My first logical thought is, can they be related in some way.
Did anyone Observe the plates move to produce that "Feature"? Or, is it just theory.......? Convince me
Please try to keep emotions in check, they play no role in Science.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: All Seeing Eye
Why so cryptic?
originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
If, and there really is no way for me to confirm this, if, Google Earth is based on Scientific research, then, it would be a logical assumption it is a fair reflection of reality, given we know certain areas are smudged out.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
Science, MUST, be initiated by observation. Otherwise it's just not Science. Now, I observe circular indentations approx 300 miles in diameter, in a odd pattern on the ocean bed. Plate tectonics just dosn't seem to answer the question as to how they were formed. I also observe circular patterns that match those on the ocean bed (300 mile diameter) somewhere else. My first logical thought is, can they be related in some way.
No, you have OBSERVED nothing of the sort. You have just looked at Google Earth. By your own standards, that's a "Fail", I'm afraid.
How about "Ocean currents", by the way, as a possible explanation for these as yet unobserved patterns. Hypothetically speaking.
This thread is making progress....now we are entertaining the possibility that there is a Cyclical Event on Earth with a high side that causes a Global Flood AND also causes our Planet to expand.....now this makes sense...every time the Earths skin is ripped scar tissue is formed and it EXPANDS BY PROXY.The hydraulicly catalysed reformation and the crustal expansion happen at the same time.
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: one4all
Funny how you cannot actually respond with anything other than personal attacks and childish rants that make no sense at all.
Still waiting for you to disprove the sciences of Geology and Geophysics.
originally posted by: one4all
Lets say 12,980 years ago.....we had Noahs flood.....lets say in fact we don't care about the date......because this is all Carpy has to hang onto...we will hamstring Carpy here at the beginning just to watch Carpy twist in the wind....LMAO.
We had NOAHS FLOOD.....and we can PROVE IT.....you listening Carpy.
originally posted by: one4all
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: one4all
Funny how you cannot actually respond with anything other than personal attacks and childish rants that make no sense at all.
Still waiting for you to disprove the sciences of Geology and Geophysics.
Stop looking for Mod interventions ok Carpy….stick to the thread topic like everyone else is.
It is easier to sit back and give you extra rope than it is to corral you....you ultimately slip that rope around your own proverbial neck every time.
Geology and Geophysics are not on your side Carpy…..the ways the peer approved and bastardised data are used and have been used in the past according to the Status Quo are what you stand upon....and you refuse to accept that PEER APPROVAL has to be real now and not contrived as it was in the past.....lol....the internet provides the PEER GROUP.....lol...and together we review and re-apply very hard earned and accurate data that has been intentionally misused.....we find the points of departure from truth ….then we reinstate the data by returning to those departure points and re-joining the correct research paths.FIRST we all agree to disenfranchise the olde peer approved data sets....we agree they have ALL been bastardised....lol...get it Carpy….one fell swoop and we disenfranchise it all...Centuries of deceptions all washed away at once.
But we keep the data...we DO NOT throw the baby out with the bathwater....and because we have the Net we can easily acess cutting edge research AND historical research to do comparative analysis...
Oh yes Carpy….we begin with the Sattelite Imagery....because really its all you need....yes a lot of data has already been bastardised and this is a going concern....but we DO NOT throw the Baby out with the bathwater....lol....so we BEGIN with the public domain images.
You do realise that if you print a 3-d platform of the Continent to scale and then simulate a VGDDW that you will have a repeatable Model right?.....seriously....that's so simple.......you do understand that this "Model" will superimpose EXACTLY OVER an image of todays geological Template?....right?.....I mean you can do this with ANY CONTINENT....you can with a repeatable Model simulate track map and measure the Earths expansion this way as well.
Stop looking for Mod interventions ok Carpy….stick to the thread topic like everyone else is.
....the internet provides the PEER GROUP....
You do realise that if you print a 3-d platform of the Continent to scale and then simulate a VGDDW that you will have a repeatable Model right?.....seriously....that's so simple.......you do understand that this "Model" will superimpose EXACTLY OVER an image of todays geological Template?....right?.....I mean you can do this with ANY CONTINENT....you can with a repeatable Model simulate track map and measure the Earths expansion this way as well.
originally posted by: Flavian
originally posted by: one4all
Lets say 12,980 years ago.....we had Noahs flood.....lets say in fact we don't care about the date......because this is all Carpy has to hang onto...we will hamstring Carpy here at the beginning just to watch Carpy twist in the wind....LMAO.
We had NOAHS FLOOD.....and we can PROVE IT.....you listening Carpy.
I'm sorry but there is absolutely no evidence to support a global flood event. There is evidence of various stages of Pulsewater melt events over roughly 7 to 11'000 years all over the Northern Hemisphere, obviously affecting differing shorelines over different phases within that (in human terms) large time frame. This is evidenced in submerged pollen records, submerged shorelines (with various stages of retreat over thousands of years) and many other areas of evidence.
And, importantly, none of this is suppressed. As fresh evidence emerges, the story evolves and is all available to research - the way science is supposed to work.
You may have some interesting theories but that is all they are. You have absolutely no evidence to back up any of your claims.
originally posted by: Flavian
originally posted by: one4all
originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: one4all
Funny how you cannot actually respond with anything other than personal attacks and childish rants that make no sense at all.
Still waiting for you to disprove the sciences of Geology and Geophysics.
Stop looking for Mod interventions ok Carpy….stick to the thread topic like everyone else is.
It is easier to sit back and give you extra rope than it is to corral you....you ultimately slip that rope around your own proverbial neck every time.
Geology and Geophysics are not on your side Carpy…..the ways the peer approved and bastardised data are used and have been used in the past according to the Status Quo are what you stand upon....and you refuse to accept that PEER APPROVAL has to be real now and not contrived as it was in the past.....lol....the internet provides the PEER GROUP.....lol...and together we review and re-apply very hard earned and accurate data that has been intentionally misused.....we find the points of departure from truth ….then we reinstate the data by returning to those departure points and re-joining the correct research paths.FIRST we all agree to disenfranchise the olde peer approved data sets....we agree they have ALL been bastardised....lol...get it Carpy….one fell swoop and we disenfranchise it all...Centuries of deceptions all washed away at once.
But we keep the data...we DO NOT throw the baby out with the bathwater....and because we have the Net we can easily acess cutting edge research AND historical research to do comparative analysis...
Oh yes Carpy….we begin with the Sattelite Imagery....because really its all you need....yes a lot of data has already been bastardised and this is a going concern....but we DO NOT throw the Baby out with the bathwater....lol....so we BEGIN with the public domain images.
You do realise that if you print a 3-d platform of the Continent to scale and then simulate a VGDDW that you will have a repeatable Model right?.....seriously....that's so simple.......you do understand that this "Model" will superimpose EXACTLY OVER an image of todays geological Template?....right?.....I mean you can do this with ANY CONTINENT....you can with a repeatable Model simulate track map and measure the Earths expansion this way as well.
Sorry mate but that is coming across like the rantings of a madman. "One fell swoop and we disenfranchise it all"? Really? Faceless people with no scientific knowledge have somehow disenfranchised scientific methodology and previous evidenced results? With absolutely nothing to base their "new interpretations" on? Apart from a self confessed admission that humans in blue overalls in a huge flying craft gave you some info and set the ball rolling for you?
I know this is a conspiracy site (and a very good one) but even the folks at GLP would be laughing at that one.
Yes..in "one fell swoop" we disenfranchise the methods in which proven data has been bastardised and in doing so we throw out the bathwater....but we keep the evidenced results that represent the Baby. So no you are off-base...we ACCEPT the results the ground floor researchers discover....in fact that is how we disenfranchise the olde school suppressions....we re-apply this honestly earned but purposefully mis-used data...yes people SOLVE problems online every day.
originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: one4all
What continental size debris trail? Please show evidence of this as i genuinely have no idea what you are talking about there.
And, if there IS continental size debris trails, then surely these all have the same dates given your theory would affect the entire planet in the same time frame? If you can provide evidence and it has different dates, it automatically discounts your model - you do understand that don't you?
Geology and history are my areas of interest so i have a genuine interest in all theories (new and old) but understand that without evidence they are simply theories. Interesting talking points, but nothing more.
originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: one4all
What continental size debris trail? Please show evidence of this as i genuinely have no idea what you are talking about there.
And, if there IS continental size debris trails, then surely these all have the same dates given your theory would affect the entire planet in the same time frame? If you can provide evidence and it has different dates, it automatically discounts your model - you do understand that don't you?
Geology and history are my areas of interest so i have a genuine interest in all theories (new and old) but understand that without evidence they are simply theories. Interesting talking points, but nothing more.
originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: one4all
I am aware of Carpy's true intentions. Along with all the other detractors.
But, in reality, Science does have its Pope's, Bishops, knights, and pawns, all preaching the same religious belief. The Great Religion of (Their Version) of Science.