Expando Planet Theory more likely than Nirubu/Planet X...and happening NOW?!!!!

I had posted this picture earlier in the thread that I made just to test the expanding earth model.( You see I dont believe it yet, I'm still testing) I had cropped south america and followed the 'scrapes' and south america attaches to the new Zealand trench. As you can see it is a perfect fit, Antarctica slips nicely into Australia then Australia tucks into west coast south america


On a smaller globe..... Refute this with peer reviewed papers and sources otherwise anything else is an uneducated opinion with bias.

reply to post by sezsue

It says there are some problems with the theory, that can't be explained.

That can be said for all theories.

It does say the earth is expanding, not in those exact words, though.

Actually it doesn't.

You are acting like plate tectonics is so well understood that there is nothing else to be figured out about the process, and like no other theory makes any sense.

Never said it, never will.

At least you are now using the word "ridiculous" instead of "stupid" and other derogatory language that you were using before.

I try to use words correctly. Some issues are ridiculous. Other times stupid is the more appropriate word.

I just had to laugh at this one above.

Well take a deep breath and try to understand that the failure of one explanation, ie theory, does not lend any support whatsoever to other ideas. It's a common fallacy that people use to support ideas like expanding earth and flat earth and 2012.

Oh, and by the way, even though I'm a woman, I do have one, and that's why I won't be responding to any more of your posts.

I read man in the gender neutral sense of the word. It's okay if you don't.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


In other words you are demonstrating that the expanding Earth claims are false.

Well done.

Thanks, guys.

The last three posts (plus1, poet1b, and shadow herder's posts, right after my last post) have been amazing, along with many other amazing, thoughtful posts along the way; this is what I wanted when I put the thread up.

I have learned a lot about some processes that I knew very little about when this whole thread got started, so thanks again (even you, Stereo ), and lets just keep on speculating about our wonderful, mysterious earth and universe.

No matter what process might be happening, the awake and aware surely know something out of the ordinary is going on......and WE are the witnesses to it.

I like this one I made. North America fits in nice to Eurasia.

This next image shows you were the west coast of N.America was. Hawaii was part of Baja Mexico.
T

One of the basic problems in this thread is that people do not understand the difference between theory and fact. Please take the time to get this under your belt before making further comments that are incorrect.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Actually this and all of the other fake images you have made are meaningless and just illustrate how bad the expanding Earth theory is.

The so-called theory is not based on geology, but rather on ludicrous machinations.

There is the odd supposition that the continents millions of years ago would look like they do today.

In this latest image we see Japan as it looked like than in the past. That's a failure.

Learn some geology before wasting time making fraudulent images.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Let me ask you again since you did not bother to answer before, what is represented by the red zones in these images you cobbled together?

This next image is the continent together at the Atlantic.
This image is excepted by Pangaea theory believers. I except it too. This also happened in the Pacific.

This next picture I moved north america to the Hawaii chain islands and if I didn't tell you that you probably couldn't tell that Hawaii is beside Mexico.

reply to post by stereologist


What makes your theory any more of a fact than our theory (which no one has said they believe in as a *fact* yet, anyway, except you stating that YOUR THEORY is a fact.)

Have you done any reading about plate tectonics, because it doesn't seem like you have, based on your responses.

Everything I have read on the subject (published papers etc., you know, from scientific journals) makes it seems like NOTHING about the (should I use *ridiculous*, or *moronic* here, which would be more *scientifical*?) ******* plate tectonic/subduction zone/seismic can be agreed upon.

I guess quite soon they will find enough information is wrong to be able to call the old PT theory an "old, ridiculous, failed* theory, huh?

Seems like there are as many different subsets of the theory that, well, I'm suprised that they can even agree upon what to CALL the theory.

The EPT could definitely be a subset of the PT/SZ theory; it fits right in, actually.

But, prove me wrong...................

If Earth had a belly the Pacific would be it . You can see where it expanded the most. If you can visualize the pacific shrinking you can easily see that north america is/was attached to Asia ( more so than already)

reply to post by sezsue


Sezsue, In Cincinnati? Hope things are well there, moved away from the Queen City a few years back, spent thirty years there and no matter what anyone thinks, it is a great city I will never forget. I'm now in beautiful Berea, Ky.

I read Clif's article a few days after it was first posted and believed it covered a topic that is really ripe for debate. I was so glad to see that you started a thread where we can do just that, the reason I chimed in. It boils down to the old debate between an iron core vs plasma core. But whichever is true, the implications for earth and it's inhabitants is enormous and the answers will help us to understand our world and learn how to be more accurately predictive.

In an answer to another recent post, we do know the difference between theory and fact and this is clearly a discussion of theory that begets a need to find corroborating facts one way or the other. Every fact we have learned began with theory and I am comfortable with the scientific methods we have developed to discern the truth and I'm not afraid to be wrong, it's a fascinating and worthwhile debate and a pleasure to be part of it.

[snip]

Great work guys. You see I am not a firm believer in anything, I have tested Pangaea and it is partially correct but it never sat right with me ever since I heard about it as a child. Now that I have seen the expanding earth theory it begins to explain alot more. Theories for ya. Good debate. Saying something isnt so without proof is just plain stupid.


Made this gif. Shows you how the continent broke apart as the pacific expanded.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


That is not a realistic image since the Hawaiian chain was never a part of Pangaea.

If you are going to fake images at least make these dubious images follow scientific data.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

This image is excepted by Pangaea theory believers. I except it too. This also happened in the Pacific.

Not at all. You've made a mockery of this subject by cobbling together whatever you think should be done instead of following the evidence.

This is the same tomfoolery that makes the expanding Earth such a laughable subject.

reply to post by sezsue

What makes your theory any more of a fact than our theory (which no one has said they believe in as a *fact* yet, anyway, except you stating that YOUR THEORY is a fact.)

Take the time to learn what is meant in science by a theory and a fact. It's rather clear that you think that the use of these words in common parlance, ie the vernacular,is the same as the meaning in science.

Have you done any reading about plate tectonics, because it doesn't seem like you have, based on your responses. /quote]
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Not surprised.

Everything I have read on the subject (published papers etc., you know, from scientific journals) makes it seems like NOTHING about the (should I use *ridiculous*, or *moronic* here, which would be more *scientifical*?) ******* plate tectonic/subduction zone/seismic can be agreed upon.

Name me any theory in science in which everyone is in lockstep. There are always questions and that is good.

I guess quite soon they will find enough information is wrong to be able to call the old PT theory an "old, ridiculous, failed* theory, huh?

It would never reach the lower levels of such asinine concepts as the expanding earth.

Seems like there are as many different subsets of the theory that, well, I'm suprised that they can even agree upon what to CALL the theory.

There are a very few people with other ideas and other names. These are not mainstream and many of their ideas have long since been demonstrated to be incorrect.

The EPT could definitely be a subset of the PT/SZ theory; it fits right in, actually.

How cute. You bring up episodic plate tectonics. Or are you referring to the European Poker Tournament?

reply to post by Shadow Herder


More unreliable and whimsical constructions of no value other than to show images of something that never was. Where does anyone get the odd idea that the coastlines of the continents are constant?

reply to post by Plus1

In an answer to another recent post, we do know the difference between theory and fact and this is clearly a discussion of theory that begets a need to find corroborating facts one way or the other. Every fact we have learned began with theory and I am comfortable with the scientific methods we have developed to discern the truth and I'm not afraid to be wrong, it's a fascinating and worthwhile debate and a pleasure to be part of it. /quote]
You can't understand what you are talking about since you have the process backwards.

You get facts.
You propose a theory to explain the facts.
Then you test the theory to see if it fits the facts and any new information that comes along.

In the case of the laughable expanding Earth how does the Earth gain the mass needed to expand? So far 3 bad guesses that are all failures.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

Great work guys. You see I am not a firm believer in anything, I have tested Pangaea and it is partially correct but it never sat right with me ever since I heard about it as a child. Now that I have seen the expanding earth theory it begins to explain alot more. Theories for ya. Good debate. Saying something isnt so without proof is just plain stupid.

Making horrendous mistakes such as connecting the Hawaiian chain to the western coast of North America shows how ludicrous this exercise in making fake images is.

Saying something is using fake images is just plain a lie.