Geophysics - Discussion & Research

LOL! DL'd, and I'll read it today and let you know how it rocked my geophysical world!

Oh yeah, second line...hmmm...The best response to a geologic question, when you want to be a smartass:

"Cause that's the way God made it 6000 years ago."

Alrighty then, I'm back having read through that Smoot paper, (Earth Geodynamic Hypotheses Updated).

If you asked for a one word response to the paper I would say: Excited. It's a shame that the (as you put it) Church of Geology is already bogged down in dogmas that are undermining scientists' education and work. But I guess it isn't surprising. People are involved.

I said 'excited' though because if the mag. isochron data for the seafloor is that misrepresented, that means there's SO much work to be reconsidered and challenged. I hadn't read anything about the flaws in that data before. That's huge, it's a game-changer. Soooo much research relies on those magnetic alignments.

As for his hypothesis on surge tectonics, I don't know yet. It just seems...incomplete somehow. The idea didn't win me over, but I am planning on re-reading it and doing a little bit of research to understand the connections he is pointing to (ie the idea of oceanic fracture zones extending onto and through the continental plate). The illustrations didn't really do much to enhance my understanding of the hypothesis.

Double Post.

Like a Double Rainbow. But better.

reply to post by PuterMan


Puterman, why do a BSc? You already know as much if not more than most of them. You know you will get totally frustrated by the mindset of uni/college. It's not until PhD level you can basically research what you want and then you still need those peer reviews to even get your ideas looked at, let alone recognised.
I don't know how Smoot did it. I'd love to have more time to read the papers and do some research on the man himself.
I think you'd be better as a professor at college. Get a job there, and they will encourage you to get your PhD whle you're employed there (well they expect you to here in most cases).

How many generations thought ....no....believed...the earth was flat?

btw the Leybourne paper link was an abstract only. Here is full pdf.

reply to post by zenius


So it was! I hate those publishing sites.

Many thanks for that.

reply to post by blamethegreys


I am not saying that surge tectonics is completely right or that plate tectonics is completely wrong. Somewhere lies the answer and it may be a mixture of more than one theory. Maybe there will even be a little bit of expanding earth in there as well. It is extremely difficult to deny Adams's Europa patterns for example.

Yes the illustrations were shall we say 'bad'. The point really is that it is a starting point to take a look at another possibility. Add the electric universe into this and electric earthquakes, it is massive and it is a long job to put it all together. As far as the magnetic alignments are concerned then if he is right, and my feeling is that this is the case, then as you say it is a game-changer - provided people will look.

In many respects it takes the younger generations to do this, to challenge hard and fast dogma. Things can change but there are not so many of the older people who disbelieve the tectonics theory unless like me they came from before tectonics took hold.

David France is one of these. He is older than me but you might be interested in these pages which are tucked away on Wikipedia and not generally accessible. I stumbled across them by following a long chain.

OK, I was unable to get the links to work properly here because of the colon in the link so I have made a PDF file of the three links

dl.dropbox.com...

If you get to the talk page for him you will find that he has more or less been told that if he publishes this it will be marked for deletion. You know why? Because it is original research and that is not allowed on Wikipedia. I have PDFed all three pages just in case.

Good site with gazillions of links about Electric Universe/Plasma Cosmology.

www.plasmaresources.com...

reply to post by PuterMan


More on the electric part. All about p-holes (no crude comments please!)

Lightning.pdf

Basically this is to do with electrical pre-cursors to earthquakes but I think it belongs here in the more esoteric realms rather than amongst the day to day mundane reporting of seismic activity.

Additionally this article contains yet further evidence of the suppression of data by the acolytes of the Church of Geology and sundry other so called 'scientists'. (See page 11 of the article)

I think 'scientist' should be made a term of derision.

Edit: This article discusses the PDF above.

hope this is on topic for here thank you sir for the stearage lol
Ok so here is the nut shell idea
Ive noticed if you take the new earthquakes over lets say 4.5 or so
earthquake.usgs.gov...

then go to this program '
www.smeter.net...

Bearing in mind where the quake was in referance to the moon view of the earth
Ok so ive noticed for some time now that three is more then a random amount of them, that are at the verry edge of where the moon is on the view. hope this makes sense to you Thanks

reply to post by Fritzthecat


So are you saying that the incidence of quakes is always at the edge of the area. And is this the on the right or left edge or on both?

Have you kept any records of this at all by any chance?

just mental notes lol. not always to the side just seems like more then not. and it could be either side. but also as a sorta side noe that is in the same area as the tidal influnce. so on the left side at that edge is high tide and on the right is low tide.

if you notice it just happend again in argentina
4 for 4
toady

reply to post by Fritzthecat


OK see if you can keep a record. I would but I have too much to do just at the moment.

I will come back to this.

I thought of this years ago. I was out on the ocean and heard of a earthquake. I was lookinig at a tide table at the time it came over the radio. So i thought to myself i wonder if the moon can pick up and set down the ocean what does it do to the land at the same time. We wouldnt notice it a lot would we. It wasnt til a few months ago that I came acros the luner view sight. Then is wehn i remembered that idea I had and sorta started watching both sites.
Im to anilitical at times lol. ok well all the time. I always figured theres rime to reason eh. Hope some of the other theorys arent valid because i live in valcano alley lol

earthquake.usgs.gov...
earthquake.usgs.gov...
earthquake.usgs.gov...
earthquake.usgs.gov...



all 4 of these fell on the are im talking about,
also like to note that Guy AR. will soon fall into this area on the right side of the view so i wonder if there will be a ramp up in activity?

reply to post by Fritzthecat


Someone has started the perfect thread for this.

I have transferred everything

www.abovetopsecret.com...

See you there.

Subductions fatal flaw further supports our doubts about mainstream tectonics. Thanks to Muzzy for the article link.

I reaed a article years ago. It proposed the idea that the earth is actually growing larger, that is what continental drift is. I said that the earth was verry small billlions of years ago, That is why everything looks like a jigsaw puzzle, they had a diagram and map that if you took the earth and shrunk it down it all fit in one land mass. I also went further on to say that the reason the earth grows is because of the atomic dust and the absorbed radiation from the sun. I sorta buy into it So the more solar energy absorbed the more magma heats, the more it heats it swells the crust and then theres quakes and volcanos till it equelizes the pressure. somthing along those lines

Article on research about What Drives Plate Tectonics

Aussie scientist states that width of plate subduction affects rate of subduction.

reply to post by Fritzthecat


Hi Fritz, yes that is the expanding earth theory. I think there is some stuff about that at the start of this thread.

I can find you more links if you are interested.