http://www.expanding-earth.org/
honestly, is this really more far fetched than Pangaea theory?
0
everything we know is wrong vs. batshit insane pseudoscience
Started by
Guest_Ş∂ШÐ۸M_*
, Nov 19 2006 06:51 PM
4 replies to this topic
#2
TheZoe
-
- Members
- 216 posts
the mule want it.....sunday.....
Posted 20 November 2006 - 01:05 AM
What exactly is Pangaea theory? Because if it's what I think it is, it's not that far-fetched at all.
Now the stuff in that link you posted, that's a bit...well, wrong. They haven't followed their hypothesis out to it's obvious disproval and/or ignored all evidence (which is considerable) that points to it being incorrect.
Now the stuff in that link you posted, that's a bit...well, wrong. They haven't followed their hypothesis out to it's obvious disproval and/or ignored all evidence (which is considerable) that points to it being incorrect.
#3
JonnyStone27
-
- Members
- 5,110 posts
stoned
Posted 20 November 2006 - 01:12 AM
i didn't read it all, couldn#t be arsed, but i get the gist...how would subduction fit into that theory anyway, or did it mention it...
#4
TheZoe
-
- Members
- 216 posts
the mule want it.....sunday.....
Posted 20 November 2006 - 01:22 AM
QUOTE(JonnyStone27 @ Nov 19 2006, 08:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
i didn't read it all, couldn#t be arsed, but i get the gist...how would subduction fit into that theory anyway, or did it mention it...
That's exactly what I was thinking. I pretty much just skimmed over it, but didn't see that mentioned anywhere, either.
#5
JonnyStone27
-
- Members
- 5,110 posts
stoned
Posted 20 November 2006 - 01:53 AM
QUOTE(TheZoe @ Nov 20 2006, 01:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That's exactly what I was thinking. I pretty much just skimmed over it, but didn't see that mentioned anywhere, either.
it does down the bottom actually
QUOTE
Subduction is not only illogical, it is not supported by geological or physical evidence, and violates fundamental laws of physics. Had the scientific community been less hasty in adopting subduction they might have realized subduction’s fatal flaw that shows WHY subduction is totally false. [See P. 2 – Subduction Sophistry]+ This evidence also eliminates subduction from current plate tectonics dogma because it was adopted on the basis of a constant-diameter Earth and EARTH’S DIAMETER HAS NEVER BEEN CONSTANT.
+ The supreme irony of subduction and the conclusive argument that subduction is false can be summarized quite simply by the following illustration.
+ The supreme irony of subduction and the conclusive argument that subduction is false can be summarized quite simply by the following illustration.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
