Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 28-09-2011, 08:57 PM   #1
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default Expanding Earth Theory debunked and rehabilitated

In response to this video debunking the expanding Earth theory...


I wrote the following response

I looked at geological/mineral world distributions and they appear to match as per expanding Earth theory. However there is subduction going on at present as the mid Pacific ridge disappears under the North American continent.

As to what drove the expansion in the first place, I was intrigued to find hydrogen is immensely soluble in iron at high temperature and pressure. If hydrogen electrons are delocalised within the iron core then what is left are protons. Protons are pure nuclear material and very dense of course. It is also possible that under core conditions the nuclear reaction whereby a neutron decays into proton + electron becomes reversible. In short I think that the Earth's core could have accommodated a large amount of hydrogen in the form of semi-collapsed matter. As earth cooled via black body radiation the solubility would drop, thereby releasing hydrogen into the mantle. This to me is the most plausible explanation for expansion, a nonlinear one-off process taking perhaps a billion years.

I also looked at tidal rhythmites and it appears the Earth days were nearly double about 300 million years ago unless I am mis-reading the evidence. This suggests to me the Earth expanded beyond its present size before shrinking back. to its present possibly equilibrium size. if so, then perhaps we have an explanation for giantism, (dinosaurs, giant ferns etc) since gravity and weather patterns would be very different on a larger slower-moving Earth.

I have found Neil Adams to be very dogmatic about his idea of matter creation. I look for a more prosaic reason, one that does not require new physics. Note that hydrogen release would also produce the hydrides required for life on Earth. (H2O, hydrocarbons, ammonia etc) and would support the abiogenic oil theory, which also seems to me to fit better what we see.

Last edited by rodin; 28-09-2011 at 08:59 PM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 02:13 PM   #2
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=NP7s0A4-alM#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=NP7s0A4-alM

Wow just goes to show someone always beats ya to it

Last edited by rodin; 09-10-2011 at 02:14 PM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 03:18 PM   #3
dolores1
Senior Member
 
dolores1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Over the hill and round the bend
Posts: 14,891
Likes: 15 (13 Posts)
Default

I wrote a post on the expanding earth a week or so ago, I like it!

My post was half in fun and ended with the proposition that after the next expansion humans would be hobbit sized and live in hobbit houses just because I liked the idea, only for fun.



I still like the expansion theory.
__________________
The ‘you’ that exists beyond these stubborn entanglements is a silent, serene, being-ness; a free, wise and child-like ‘you’ that has always known the way to the secret garden, and that has always recognised the nature beings with whom we share this gracious planet.

Never have a battle of wits with an unarmed oponent!
dolores1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 04:50 PM   #4
the apprentice
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,637
Likes: 2,987 (2,092 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
In response to this video debunking the expanding Earth theory...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwg6...yer_detailpage

I wrote the following response

I looked at geological/mineral world distributions and they appear to match as per expanding Earth theory. However there is subduction going on at present as the mid Pacific ridge disappears under the North American continent.

As to what drove the expansion in the first place, I was intrigued to find hydrogen is immensely soluble in iron at high temperature and pressure. If hydrogen electrons are delocalised within the iron core then what is left are protons. Protons are pure nuclear material and very dense of course. It is also possible that under core conditions the nuclear reaction whereby a neutron decays into proton + electron becomes reversible. In short I think that the Earth's core could have accommodated a large amount of hydrogen in the form of semi-collapsed matter. As earth cooled via black body radiation the solubility would drop, thereby releasing hydrogen into the mantle. This to me is the most plausible explanation for expansion, a nonlinear one-off process taking perhaps a billion years.

I also looked at tidal rhythmites and it appears the Earth days were nearly double about 300 million years ago unless I am mis-reading the evidence. This suggests to me the Earth expanded beyond its present size before shrinking back. to its present possibly equilibrium size. if so, then perhaps we have an explanation for giantism, (dinosaurs, giant ferns etc) since gravity and weather patterns would be very different on a larger slower-moving Earth.

I have found Neil Adams to be very dogmatic about his idea of matter creation. I look for a more prosaic reason, one that does not require new physics. Note that hydrogen release would also produce the hydrides required for life on Earth. (H2O, hydrocarbons, ammonia etc) and would support the abiogenic oil theory, which also seems to me to fit better what we see.
A stupid question maybe but isn't that how a hydrogen bomb works and after all earth was supposed to be born from a big bang?

I also added a laymans term of events when I explained how things turn out in expansion when the argon gas runs out on a MIG welder, as this happens the sheiding properties fail and the hydrogen from within the steel wire core at the hot spot rapidly expands leaving a weaker welded area visibly full of bubbles, it's a chain reaction right in front of your eyes.
the apprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 05:29 PM   #5
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the apprentice View Post
A stupid question maybe but isn't that how a hydrogen bomb works and after all earth was supposed to be born from a big bang?

I also added a laymans term of events when I explained how things turn out in expansion when the argon gas runs out on a MIG welder, as this happens the sheiding properties fail and the hydrogen from within the steel wire core at the hot spot rapidly expands leaving a weaker welded area visibly full of bubbles, it's a chain reaction right in front of your eyes.
What allegedly happens inside the Sun is what happens in alleged H bombs - hot fusion. I am agnostic on this.

What happens when Argon fails is possibly oxidation? That would be logical. The Hydrogen absorption we are talking about takes place at phenomenal pressure. One can barely attain core pressures in a lab, we certainly cannot obtain pressure + temperature. However what we have learned is hydrogen starts to dissolve in transition metals faster than expected as pressure increases.

One idea I have is that H donates electrons to all available sites (11 for Fe) and we have a highly negatively charged Fe matrix with a sea of protons balancing the charge. Sort of the opposite of what happens when electrons form the 'sea' in electricity currents.

FeH11 would be the highest stoichiometry before we get into nuclear physics (Fe then adopts noble gas stable electron config)
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 06:43 PM   #6
the apprentice
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,637
Likes: 2,987 (2,092 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
What allegedly happens inside the Sun is what happens in alleged H bombs - hot fusion. I am agnostic on this.

What happens when Argon fails is possibly oxidation? That would be logical. The Hydrogen absorption we are talking about takes place at phenomenal pressure. One can barely attain core pressures in a lab, we certainly cannot obtain pressure + temperature. However what we have learned is hydrogen starts to dissolve in transition metals faster than expected as pressure increases.

One idea I have is that H donates electrons to all available sites (11 for Fe) and we have a highly negatively charged Fe matrix with a sea of protons balancing the charge. Sort of the opposite of what happens when electrons form the 'sea' in electricity currents.

FeH11 would be the highest stoichiometry before we get into nuclear physics (Fe then adopts noble gas stable electron config)
I'm going to have to do an awfull lot of study before I will if ever get my head around that one.

Another question not related maybe, if diamonds are supposed to be made under tremendous pressure then how are we able to make them in a lab.

Last edited by the apprentice; 09-10-2011 at 06:47 PM.
the apprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 09:38 PM   #7
dolores1
Senior Member
 
dolores1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Over the hill and round the bend
Posts: 14,891
Likes: 15 (13 Posts)
Default

Don't lots of minerals hold hydrogen etc?
__________________
The ‘you’ that exists beyond these stubborn entanglements is a silent, serene, being-ness; a free, wise and child-like ‘you’ that has always known the way to the secret garden, and that has always recognised the nature beings with whom we share this gracious planet.

Never have a battle of wits with an unarmed oponent!
dolores1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 10:04 PM   #8
tnt1
Senior Member
 
tnt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,445
Likes: 661 (395 Posts)
Default

Both theories have adherents. The days were longer in the distant past. My theories answers this better than anything else I've read. The earth was expanded and shrunk on purpose. This while the one that started the garden, call him the creator of the garden earth experiment, experimented with various crops in his garden to perfect things.

All life on the garden earth started as an experiment by beings vastly advanced in consciousness and these creators of the garden earth currently have a set up that is working quite well. Took them some trial and error but that's what you are seeing. Hopi and other myths as they call them all tell of various ages. Generations of gardens existed. The dinosaur experiment was the second or perhaps third generation I'm not sure which. Perhaps some of both. The current age for humans being the number one producer on the planet is the fourth age which ends here in the future.

Anyway, interesting theories but both are fantasy. I don't doubt that some see my views as the fantasy also and that's fine but if I have to pick between the fantasy stories of so called scientists pretending they know when in fact they only suspect and have adopted their own set of truths based on belief, no different than other fantasies like organized religions teach? Well, I think I'll stick with my own framework of how things work that answers the questions I want answers to and just believe that! That is until I see something that answers those questions better than my framework does.
__________________
Rabbit Hole
tnt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 10:19 PM   #9
neutrino
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,147
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

The expanding Earth theory is one theory I can get behind, a long while ago I actually wrote a post with my own theories on how it could be possible but I'll have to try and find it out again.
The expanding Earth theory explains a lot.
neutrino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 10:55 PM   #10
dolores1
Senior Member
 
dolores1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Over the hill and round the bend
Posts: 14,891
Likes: 15 (13 Posts)
Default

True, it does explain a lot.
__________________
The ‘you’ that exists beyond these stubborn entanglements is a silent, serene, being-ness; a free, wise and child-like ‘you’ that has always known the way to the secret garden, and that has always recognised the nature beings with whom we share this gracious planet.

Never have a battle of wits with an unarmed oponent!
dolores1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 11:39 AM   #11
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the apprentice View Post
I'm going to have to do an awfull lot of study before I will if ever get my head around that one.

Another question not related maybe, if diamonds are supposed to be made under tremendous pressure then how are we able to make them in a lab.
Order of magnitude different pressures being used here. Under pressure carbon shifts to its closest possible packing arrangement which is tetrahedral. The pressure provides the energy and impetus for this to happen. In principle what I suggested re FeH is same. Another viable solution might be that Earth has a SOLID HYDROGEN CORE. I can't find a value for the predicted density of metallic hydrogen


I have read that the 'atomic' radius is expected to be smaller than the Bohr radius, and lie in the order of the De Broglie wavelength for the electron. Trouble is I looked up the 2 and it seems the wavelength is about 2x the Bohr radius. In other words - does not compute. I did read the phrase 'dense metallic hydrogen' in the scientific literature once - I'd love to know what this means... quanititatively....

Right now I am doing a study of a hypothetical Earth with a predominantly hydrogen core (inner and possibly outer). What would the mean atmosphere be like?

We know life started in the seas. Maybe that was because the air was Nitrogen and outgassing Hydrogen...

Last edited by rodin; 10-10-2011 at 11:40 AM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 11:42 AM   #12
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnt1 View Post
Both theories have adherents. The days were longer in the distant past. My theories answers this better than......
OK I will call you. Where do you get the idea days were longer once? The standard model says they were shorter in the young Earth. I have a reason for asking....
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 04:09 PM   #13
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

This is interesting

Quote:
Recent experiments on the compression of liquid hydrogen in reverberating shock waves, which indicate the transition into a metallic state at about nine times the liquid H2 density [S. T. Weir, A. C. Mitchell, and W. J. Nellis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1860 (1996)],
http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-p...w&size=largest

Also this...

Summary

Quote:
The proposed dual geospheres theory of the Earth is a dichotomy, an interior geosphere or underworld, of energy-rich hydrides and an outer geosphere or carapace of energy-poor oxides. Hydrides are fluidic, mobile, and capable of being squeezed and forced to migrate. Fluidity allows metal hydrides to fractionate. Plumes of less dense fractions ascend upward into the oxide zone, where lesser pressures and water cause hydride dissociation and oxidation with heat emission. Magmas, lavas, pyroclastics, and granites, rocks of lesser density and greater volume than those of the underlying mantle, are created. Less-dense terranes are raised as continents above surrounding landscapes and seascapes while at the same time adjacent terranes are densified by hydrogen permeation and subside as rifts, grabens, and oceanic trenches.

The effects of hydride behavior include all processes of global tectonics, volcanism, earthquakes, quiescent metasomatism, isostatic adjustment, polar wander, and generation of crustal heat; all being forms of tectonism that originates in the transition zone between the hydrogen-pervaded inner Earth, where hydrogen nucleii reside at high pressure within the electron shells of metals and the oxygen-dominated outer Earth, where the hydrogen has separated from atomic shells. The fundamental dualism in Earth structure is established by the contrasting density and energy of the Earth’s hydridic inner and oxidic outer geospheres.
http://eearthk.com/Articles03.html

Last edited by rodin; 10-10-2011 at 04:29 PM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 05:47 PM   #14
the apprentice
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,637
Likes: 2,987 (2,092 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
Order of magnitude different pressures being used here. Under pressure carbon shifts to its closest possible packing arrangement which is tetrahedral. The pressure provides the energy and impetus for this to happen. In principle what I suggested re FeH is same. Another viable solution might be that Earth has a SOLID HYDROGEN CORE. I can't find a value for the predicted density of metallic hydrogen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen

I have read that the 'atomic' radius is expected to be smaller than the Bohr radius, and lie in the order of the De Broglie wavelength for the electron. Trouble is I looked up the 2 and it seems the wavelength is about 2x the Bohr radius. In other words - does not compute. I did read the phrase 'dense metallic hydrogen' in the scientific literature once - I'd love to know what this means... quanititatively....

Right now I am doing a study of a hypothetical Earth with a predominantly hydrogen core (inner and possibly outer). What would the mean atmosphere be like?

We know life started in the seas. Maybe that was because the air was Nitrogen and outgassing Hydrogen...
Thanks again.

What is your take on my idea the the suns infuence is acually exciting our core and making the protective shield from that sun and the interelationship is being interupted by bodies like Cern and HAARP that is ultimately creating delayed actions like earthquakes etc.

Can the changing magnetic fluxes from the sun change the pressures within our core as we move closer to the sun thus creating the earthquakes naturally.

Last edited by the apprentice; 10-10-2011 at 05:53 PM.
the apprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 06:29 PM   #15
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the apprentice View Post
Thanks again.

What is your take on my idea the the suns infuence is acually exciting our core and making the protective shield from that sun and the interelationship is being interupted by bodies like Cern and HAARP that is ultimately creating delayed actions like earthquakes etc.

Can the changing magnetic fluxes from the sun change the pressures within our core as we move closer to the sun thus creating the earthquakes naturally.
CERN and HAARP are ineffectual mostly. CERN is chasing shadows (Big Bang Science). HAARP can perhaps change weather patterns but forget triggering earthquakes etc.

I see deceptions being wrought in both mainstream and alternative everything, I can I think recognise the 'accent' of deceit... No doubt the deceptions will get cleverer and more subtle as the game advances, but ultimately the defence of lies will yield to the assault of truth....
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 07:26 PM   #16
the apprentice
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,637
Likes: 2,987 (2,092 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
CERN and HAARP are ineffectual mostly. CERN is chasing shadows (Big Bang Science). HAARP can perhaps change weather patterns but forget triggering earthquakes etc.

I see deceptions being wrought in both mainstream and alternative everything, I can I think recognise the 'accent' of deceit... No doubt the deceptions will get cleverer and more subtle as the game advances, but ultimately the defence of lies will yield to the assault of truth....
Yes thanks.
the apprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 08:51 PM   #17
tnt1
Senior Member
 
tnt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,445
Likes: 661 (395 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodin View Post
OK I will call you. Where do you get the idea days were longer once? The standard model says they were shorter in the young Earth. I have a reason for asking....
My understanding is that in the ancient past as in millions of years back the earth diameter and orbit were both different than today. While the expando planet theory may have some merit and be provable my information indicates that at one point in the far distant past the earth was larger (as Tiamat) and was 'cleaved' by an incoming body reducing it's size by approx. 1/3rd or more.

Those same sources seem to indicate that the theory of Niburu coming back is in error as it had escape velocity when it came through and if you really want to stretch the story I got even more it appears if I understood correctly that the entire thing including the smashing of this garden was all done on purpose to wipe the slate clean to try another experiment with a new set of trial and error crops on the newly resized planet with a new orbit, new climate and smaller diameter with greater gravity.

If I understand the things passed on to me then how it works is that as a bigger diameter planet the gravity was less so therefore the organic life on the planet could be gigantic and the planet could support beasts of that size. Since gravity was less of an issue during at least two of the four generations of life here megalithic stone was moved easier by far than we can today and that is how the stones were manipulated if what I was told is true. Apparently the intelligent life that built these things which are older than we have been told, were also bigger than the life on the planet now so moving those stones was not the issue for creatures that big I guess. For all I know these were built at a time when the creator of this garden was still trying to find a working crop that produced what he wanted the way he wanted.

I understand its hard to follow. I barely follow it myself which is why its not mentioned in my writings. If the orbit was different and the planet was bumped or cleaved as some other writers have corroborated that would change days and length of them but again. Its one of those things we'll probably never really know the answer to. And even when we do I doubt main stream will change their view of things much like they still want to teach our children that Columbus discovered a new world when at least 20 million people lived on this continent when he supposedly discovered it and even though Erickson discovered it as much as 500 years earlier. Some seem to think that the ancient Phoenicians and perhaps seafaring Chinese discovered even before that. Whichever you choose it is apparent it was not Columbus yet here we are celebrating this fabricated myth as if it was fact.
__________________
Rabbit Hole
tnt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 07:47 AM   #18
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

OK

If a collision created the Moon then that would be 4 billion years ago or more. The Moon is a controversial issue on which I have no great insights to offer, save that it too seems to have expanded by a similar mechanism to Earth. In fact I think ALL planets and larger moons have gone through exactly the same evolutionary process.

I am open to the idea that in the more recent past - say around the time of the dinosaurs (assuming THESE are not a hoax, which seems unlikely) the Earth was about 1.4 - 1.7 times its present diameter, blown up by hydrogen, with 50% of today's gravity and perhaps 30-50% slower rotation. I don't think any orbits have changed much in the past billion years.

I also think that life perhaps started in the oceans because the atmosphere could not support advanced life forms but then I have to account for dissolved oxygen in the oceans

Last edited by rodin; 11-10-2011 at 07:49 AM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 09:30 AM   #19
the apprentice
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,637
Likes: 2,987 (2,092 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnt1 View Post
My understanding is that in the ancient past as in millions of years back the earth diameter and orbit were both different than today. While the expando planet theory may have some merit and be provable my information indicates that at one point in the far distant past the earth was larger (as Tiamat) and was 'cleaved' by an incoming body reducing it's size by approx. 1/3rd or more.

Those same sources seem to indicate that the theory of Niburu coming back is in error as it had escape velocity when it came through and if you really want to stretch the story I got even more it appears if I understood correctly that the entire thing including the smashing of this garden was all done on purpose to wipe the slate clean to try another experiment with a new set of trial and error crops on the newly resized planet with a new orbit, new climate and smaller diameter with greater gravity.

If I understand the things passed on to me then how it works is that as a bigger diameter planet the gravity was less so therefore the organic life on the planet could be gigantic and the planet could support beasts of that size. Since gravity was less of an issue during at least two of the four generations of life here megalithic stone was moved easier by far than we can today and that is how the stones were manipulated if what I was told is true. Apparently the intelligent life that built these things which are older than we have been told, were also bigger than the life on the planet now so moving those stones was not the issue for creatures that big I guess. For all I know these were built at a time when the creator of this garden was still trying to find a working crop that produced what he wanted the way he wanted.

I understand its hard to follow. I barely follow it myself which is why its not mentioned in my writings. If the orbit was different and the planet was bumped or cleaved as some other writers have corroborated that would change days and length of them but again. Its one of those things we'll probably never really know the answer to. And even when we do I doubt main stream will change their view of things much like they still want to teach our children that Columbus discovered a new world when at least 20 million people lived on this continent when he supposedly discovered it and even though Erickson discovered it as much as 500 years earlier. Some seem to think that the ancient Phoenicians and perhaps seafaring Chinese discovered even before that. Whichever you choose it is apparent it was not Columbus yet here we are celebrating this fabricated myth as if it was fact.
This is really interesting, so IF we were larger and slower and now we are smaller and faster, so what is the next stage to be then I wonder.

If the gravity is stronger today and we are smaller, then why is the gravity of the larger planets thought to be greater.

If our gravity is more densce today due to compressions then what about a big bang theory actually starting life after all supernova, and that life here could be the very centre and as we are today after our supernova.

If we were cut down to size and the rest was cast away this could mean the other parts of us are somewhere else living similar to how we are today.

Or the body doing the resizing this may well have left behind samples which are the rare ellements on earth we see today.

It is my idea that most of the physical evidence of collisions here on earth happened in a very short time period as the loose bodies were attracted back into the surrounding planets like a shotgun spread, the strongest gravities pulling the most debris into them.

Of all the neighbouring planets with a moulten core being the ones most effected.

Last edited by the apprentice; 11-10-2011 at 09:53 AM.
the apprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 09:52 AM   #20
rodin
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: location location
Posts: 16,981
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the apprentice View Post
... so IF we were larger and slower and now we are smaller and faster, so what is the next stage to be then I wonder.

If the gravity is stronger today and we are smaller why is the gravity of the larger planets thought to be greater.....
It is all of these questions I seek to answer with the hydrogen cores theory

I think Earth expanded (blew up with hydrogen) then contracted as hydrogen boiled off into space (as it does even now). This explains the smaller continental sphere that matches in geology as well as shape, plus the dinosaurs which need lower gravity.

I smell I am on to something here, the hypothesis is simple, elegant and matches the gross known facts. All that remains is to add detail from examination of previous land and magnetic orientations, tidal rhythmites etc

Plus, there is MOTIVE for a scientific deception - the control of minerals and hydrocarbons

Last edited by rodin; 11-10-2011 at 09:53 AM.
rodin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:41 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.