Geophysics - Discussion & Research

reply to post by zenius


By 'eck that's a crass class bit of research by them ole scimentists don't you think. It is more likely that there will be a volcanic eruption where the tension is increasing! Now just who would have thought of that! Clever stuff eh - NOT! I just cannot imagine anyone coming up with this all on their own completely unaided by grants.

I have to say at this juncture that Science Daily ranks along with GLP as far as I am concerned. However, this vehemently warmist rag along with it's sister rag News Daily may be having a change of heart.

See this article Sun and Volcanic Eruptions Pace North Atlantic Climate Swings

When the scientists include actual changes in the solar forcing and the climate effect of volcanic eruptions in their model, they find a strong causal link between these external factors

Or re-written

When the scientists include actual changes in the solar forcing and the climate effect of volcanic eruptions in their model, they find a strong causal link between these external factors, something that most intelligent people have been aware for a very long time.

Pah!! Scientists!!

reply to post by PuterMan


Very well said!

Second line because I am out of Time.

Just so that you know, there is now a link to this thread (last page of it) in my loads of links pages in my signature.

This links takes you direct to ATS forums but just going to the main page and clicking ATS Forums works as well.

qvsdata.wordpress.com...

reply to post by zenius


I cannot contribute much but I will for sure be reading everything

S&F for you zenius

reply to post by berkeleygal


Thanks Berkleygal, but don't sell yourself short. I've seen your posts in other threads and I think you contribute a lot.

Awesome thread idea! I'll be here, learning and adding where I can.

I am in school now to get my BS in Geology, with a further plan to get an MS in Hydrology.

reply to post by blamethegreys


Welcome Blamethegrays. Some of us here disagree with standard textbook theories as you can probably tell from the discussions. It would be great if you put some of these ideas to your professors and get some input. I'd love to hear their feedback! I hope you share some of your learnings with us. It doesn't matter if any of us have studied it already. Revision is always good for the old brain! Or we might learn something too.

Gladly! I enjoy the geo discussions here on ATS, even if I don't always agree with em. I believe in keeping an open mind on all issues and not just digesting the current mainstream belief without question. In heading down this road I have learned that Geoscience is a new and unique field, where theories are derived not from observation of events, but solely from the evidence of events. To me, if the evidence can point to different events, it stands to reason that both theories have the same weight.

Two more things: First, I have to admit I am closeminded on one Geo topic: Hollow Earth. The preponderance of most of our known sciences (math, physics, geology, biology, magnetism, gravity, energy) would be fundamentally flawed were the Earth to be hollow. Humans don't know much, but I can't believe that the foundations of what we know could be so deeply erroneous, especially across all the different disciplines.

Second: In the expanding Earth model, the hurdle in my mind is matter. For the massive growth claimed, where does the theory obtain matter with which to expand the planet(s)?

Here is the link for the article on the rift geology of Yemen: www.obs-vlfr.fr...

Here is the link for the Wikipedia page about the Afar Depression: en.wikipedia.org...

It's a very interesting area tectonics wise. If any one else has some links about it please add. I'm pretty busy this week and don't have much time to look.

reply to post by blamethegreys


Hollow Earth I agree, really just not logically possible.

Expanding Earth different matter. There are explanations but don't just look at Neil Adams. I don't go for his 'geode' theory. Certainly his work on for example the marks on Europa look pretty darned convincing. If you have not watched that on please do so.

In the end I really do believe what we will end up with is a mix of plate tectonics, expanding earth, surge tectonics and the electric universe. The only loser I see is Hollow Earth.

Edit: Just maybe if we can get our act together and thrash out a new consolidated theory you could publish it? We need to get there first and prove that mainstream is not always right.

So you don't think the earth could be contracting? I will need to find time to look at whether that is a possibility. I still also think that there is a missing link that is yet to be discovered due to lack of knowledge about what is below us.

reply to post by zenius

During the early 1990s, when enough ground stations were established to form a global network, it was found that the global excess in radius was 18 mm/year – i.e. they found that the Earth was expanding by 18 mm/year. This value was considered to be “extremely high” when compared to expected deglaciation rates during melting of the polar ice-caps, estimated at less than 10 mm/year. The researchers in fact "expected that most … stations will have up-down motions of only a few mm/yr" and went on to recommend that the vertical motion be "restricted to zero, because this is closer to the true situation than an average motion of 18 mm/yr". This recommendation is now
reflected in current mathematical solutions to the global radius, where global solutions are effectively constrained to zero.

Source On page 5.

This is only a brief description but the description in the comment on this article knocking Expanding Earth is better.

Search for Robaudo and Harrison

That should take you straight to it.

Has anyone noticed the sun setting today? Through my research for the past few years, I've read that these seismic events Volcano in Indonesia, earthquake in Chile and the recent deep quakes around the world are very possibly linked to a poleshift. After reading some of the previous thread and some of this one, I believe we are experiencing a poleshift. My wife and I were having coffee and looked at the sun set and noticed that the sun is not in its usual place, but more south of where we usually see it, a lot more south of where we usually see the sun go down. I realize that sun set changes some because of the season change, but this seems more drastic. Please correct me if I am wrong.

reply to post by Komodo3


There was a thread a little while back where people were commenting on the sun's placement in the sky seemed different to what they were used to for a particular time of year. I can't remember what it was called......anyone?
It's not an area that I've looked into so I don't have an opinion on it.

reply to post by zenius


That sent a shiver down my back. It is yet another report of this and we even commented ourselves that this year the sun did not go as far round as it has in previous years, in other words on July 21 the setting sun was closer to the West than it normally is. In previous years it has been almost North West. We dismissed it until we found these comments on pole shift.

One was someone who said the sun never shone into their room in the evening and mow it does.

It is a fascinating and scary subject but I have to put my logic cap on and say if this was the case surely every ship and airline pilot in the world, not to mention thousands of satellites, would be aware of it?

reply to post by PuterMan


And then there is this:

A compromise between earth-expansion and earth-contraction is the "theory of thermal cycles" by Irish physicist John Joly. He assumed that heat flow from radioactive decay inside the Earth surpasses the cooling of the Earth's exterior. Together with British geologist Arthur Holmes, Joly proposed a hypothesis in which the Earth loses its heat by cyclic periods of expansion. In their hypothesis, expansion led to cracks and joints in the Earth's interior, that could fill with magma. This was followed by a cooling phase, where the magma would freeze and become solid rock again, causing the Earth to shrink. [5]

Scientific consensus There is no evidence supporting expansion of the Earth: measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size, and there is no source of energy to power expansion. This is in contrast to plate tectonics, which is supported by a large range of geological and geophysical measurements, including direct measurements of plate motions by geodesy and of subduction at plate boundaries.[13][14][15] Mass accretion on a scale required to change the Earth's radius is contradicted by the current accretion rate of the Earth, and by the Earth's average internal temperature: any accretion releases a lot of energy, which would warm the planet's interior. Expanding Earth models based on thermal expansion contradict most modern principles from rheology, and fail to provide an acceptable explanation for the proposed melting and phase transitions. Paleomagnetic data has been used to calculate that the radius of the Earth 400 million years ago was 102 ± 2.8% of today's radius.[16] Furthermore, examinations of earth's moment of inertia suggest that there has been no significant change of earth's radius in the last 620 million years.[17]

en.wikipedia.org...

That article by Maxlow, has no basis. He has lots of claims but based on what?

reply to post by PuterMan


I think the animations of Niel Adams are just so convincing that they have to be true! - only flaw is where does all the extra matter come from, and why can we not measure a steady increase in earth radius.

I find the idea of the lower astral periodicaly condensing straight into the physical quite convincing - ie as the higher levels descend the lowest gets shunted off the end and all the lowest most evilentities are destroyed. This then starts a new cylce of the ages (gold, silver etc) and explains why they are accompanied by earth changes, as new land rises and falls due to the recurvature of the earth.


Probably unlikely to happen all at once but in waves - and we should expect to see some really strange stuff as astral forms begin to condense into our world!

reply to post by zenius


Wow, yet another theory! New brain please! Well Oi have to say that if dat was by an Oirish fella den it be roight, to be sure.

Could you guys just put new theories on hold for a while?

I think one of the major problems that we have is the geological microsecond of our existence on this ball od mud. It just is not enough time to see what is going on. Couple that with the disgraceful closed minds of many mainstream geologists (not directed at you blamethegreys) and you a recipe for not finding out anything at all.

If you submitted a paper on any of this it would be rejected because they don't want to rock their cosy little world and anyway it seems de-rigour with so many of these papers to basically just quote/rehash other works.

You know the sort of thing:

When examining the clay deposits (Fred et al 2005) in the Nbanga rift valley we found evidence of ammonites (Jones et al 2003) which were unlike others in the area (William Herd 1994). It was determined that is was caused by rifting (Fred, Jones and Wiley et al 2007) which resulted in Pangea (Balderdash et al 1956) splitting up and isolating the seas (Uncle Tom Cobbley et al 1979).

One day I intend to trace one of these types of sentances back and just see where the original work was done.

It will probably be. In the claye (Publius 1436) in the land of dragons (St George 1104) we did fynde divers creatures (God 4000 BC) etc.............

reply to post by JohhnyBGood


Yeh ok, America fits into Africa quite well, but the mid atlantic ridge almost follows a direct central path. So does that mean it has been fairly consistent even spreading? Is that even plausible? Well if it is then perhaps a celestial body scaped across the earth and that is the resultant scar and the ridge is an unhealable weak spot.

Sorry Puterman, that's another (far out) theory.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
reply to post by PuterMan

 

I think the animations of Niel Adams are just so convincing that they have to be true! - only flaw is where does all the extra matter come from, and why can we not measure a steady increase in earth radius.

This is why we are examining the Electric (Plasma) Universe theories since it may provide that answer. Yes I agree that the animatins are very convincing. Much more so than Pangaea, Rodinia. Laurectia, Cloud cuckoo land etc.

See earlier points about the possible removal of an 18mm increase each year from the figures.

I find the idea of the lower astral periodicaly condensing straight into the physical quite convincing - ie as the higher levels descend the lowest gets shunted off the end and all the lowest most evilentities are destroyed. This then starts a new cylce of the ages (gold, silver etc) and explains why they are accompanied by earth changes, as new land rises and falls due to the recurvature of the earth.

Now I have to say you have got me there since I have no knowledge of any of astral whatsits etc. I am a very practical person and long since abandoned the idea of any God or supreme being and chose to ignore the concept of eternity. I don't have the energy to get my head round what was there before eternity!