PDA

View Full Version : Plate Tectonics debunked



Stripe
January 14th, 2015, 11:07 AM
kwfNGatxUJI
The convection idea presented in this video is bunk.

At atmospheric pressure, rock melts producing magma that is less dense than its parent material. However, at pressures found quite near the surface (about 400km, depending on type), rock that melts produces magma that is more dense than its parent material.

This means that there is a crossover depth above which melted rock will rise and below which melted rock will only ever sink. Thus convection of the mantle cannot happen.

Also, GPS measurements do not measure crustal movement of the type described. The data comes from movement due to earthquakes, not the steady, slow drift predicted by plate tectonic theory. The mid ocean ridge is accessible on land in some places, but laser measurements between the two edges do not show the drift.

The explanation for the surface features is understandable with a rejection of the assumptions presented in this video and a simple model of gravity producing friction, producing melting, producing a denser and shrinking core.

This means that the volume of the Earth is shrinking.

Jose Fly
January 14th, 2015, 11:34 AM
So should we tally up what True Christians at ToL must believe?

The universe is less than 10,000 years old.

The earth is less than 10,000 years old.

The entire universe orbits the earth.

The earth does not move at all.

Plate tectonics is false.

The entire earth was flooded ~4,000 years ago.

All life was reduced to 2-7 individuals of each "kind" ~4,000 years ago.

Humanity was reduced to 8 people ~4,000 years ago.

All life was created according to "kinds", which no one can define.


Sheesh....no wonder Christianity is dropping like a rock and young people are leaving in droves.

Nazaroo
January 14th, 2015, 11:38 AM
kwfNGatxUJI
The convection idea presented in this video is bunk.

At atmospheric pressure, rock melts producing magma that is less dense than its parent material. However, at pressures found quite near the surface (about 400km, depending on type), rock that melts produces magma that is more dense than its parent material.

This means that there is a crossover depth above which melted rock will rise and below which melted rock will only ever sink. Thus convection of the mantle cannot happen.

Also, GPS measurements do not measure crustal movement of the type described. The data comes from movement due to earthquakes, not the steady, slow drift predicted by plate tectonic theory. The mid ocean ridge is accessible on land in some places, but laser measurements between the two edges do not show the drift.

The explanation for the surface features is understandable with a rejection of the assumptions presented in this video and a simple model of gravity producing friction, producing melting, producing a denser and shrinking core meaning the surface is subsiding.

Thanks for the thoughtful discussion and additional scientific data.

Keep up the good work

Eeset
January 14th, 2015, 12:34 PM
The mid ocean ridge is accessible on land in some places, but laser measurements between the two edges do not show the drift.
Where?

Stripe
January 14th, 2015, 12:41 PM
Iceland.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Iceland_-_Thingvellir_36_-_plate_boundary_fault_line_(6571229459).jpg
If you put a laser measuring instrument across that divide, the only time you'll register any change is when there is an earthquake.

Eeset
January 14th, 2015, 12:58 PM
Iceland.

If you put a laser measuring instrument across that divide, the only time you'll register any change is when there is an earthquake.
Thanks. But when I go to google earth I can see the mid oceanic ridge and it doesn't seem to extend to Iceland. I'm not disputing your basic premise. But I am interested in learning more.

Preceptive
January 14th, 2015, 01:15 PM
Are there articles or videos from geologists explaining that principle and showing where this "crossover depth" is?

Stripe
January 14th, 2015, 01:18 PM
When I go to google earth I can see the mid oceanic ridge and it doesn't seem to extend to Iceland.

I use Google Maps. You can see where the ridge comes ashore here (http://goo.gl/maps/uQ3kq). Being on land, it is readily eroded so not as obvious as it is on the seafloor.

Stripe
January 14th, 2015, 01:19 PM
Are there articles or videos from geologists explaining that principle and showing where this "crossover depth" is?

The opening post. :up:

Eeset
January 14th, 2015, 01:44 PM
I use Google Maps. You can see where the ridge comes ashore here (http://goo.gl/maps/uQ3kq). Being on land, it is readily eroded so not as obvious as it is on the seafloor.
Thank you. I brought those coordinates up on Google earth as opposed to google maps and there you can see quite clearly that your location is north of the mid oceanic ridge.

I did find a good article for you. It took me a little time to read since it is 145 pages long. It includes measurements of various sections of the ridges and rates of expansion. http://www.dynamicearth.de/Lectures/Geodynamik.WiSe09/Vorlesung/extra8.pdf

Stripe
January 14th, 2015, 11:47 PM
It includes measurements of various sections of the ridges and rates of expansion.

And how were those speeds measured?

NathanM
May 17th, 2015, 10:12 AM
Wow - you have totally overturned a major principle in geology. When do you plan to present this earth-shattering (no pun intended) research to the geological community? I'm sure that they will want to start employing Garmins in their research.

Stripe
May 17th, 2015, 10:16 AM
Wow - you have totally overturned a major principle in geology. When do you plan to present this earth-shattering (no pun intended) research to the geological community?
I just did, you moron. :loser:

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 12:42 PM
GPS measurements do not measure crustal movement of the type described. The data comes from movement due to earthquakes, not the steady, slow drift predicted by plate tectonic theory.


NMNNr2CyekA
GPS stations along the coast of Japan had been moving to the west before the March 11, 2011 earthquake, and rebounded back to the east following the earthquake. This animation compares that subduction zone with a mirror-image subduction zone in the Pacific northwest by illustrating how the shallow portion of the Cascadia plate boundary is locked by friction thus compressing the overlying North American Plate in a NE direction during subduction of the Juan de Fuca Plate. Using a spring to emphasize the strain within the overlying plate, we will see the displacements of GPS receivers along the entire leading edge of the North America continental margin. Ultimately, the continental margin will rebound suddenly to the southwest as the stored elastic energy is released for the first time since the last great Cascadia earthquake on January 26, 1700.

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 12:43 PM
Current plate movement can be tracked directly by means
of space-based geodetic measurements; geodesy is the
science of the size and shape of the Earth. Because plate
motions are global in scale, they are best measured by
satellite-based methods. The late 1970s witnessed the rapid
growth of space geodesy, a term applied to space-based
techniques for taking precise, repeated measurements of
carefully chosen points on the Earth’s surface separated
by hundreds to thousands of kilometers. The Global
Positioning System (GPS) has been the most useful for
studying the Earth’s crustal movements.
By repeatedly measuring distances between specific
points, geologists can determine the movement along
faults or between plates. The separations between GPS
sites are already being measured regularly around the
Pacific basin. By monitoring the interaction between the
Pacific Plate and the surrounding mostly continental plates,
scientists are learning more about events that build up
to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in the circum-
Pacific “Ring of Fire”. Space-geodetic data have
already confirmed that the rates and directions of plate
movements, averaged over several years, compare well
with rates and directions of plate movements averaged
over millions of years.

Source: http://www.iris.edu/hq/files/programs/education_and_outreach/aotm/14/1.GPS_Background.pdf

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 12:45 PM
when I go to google earth I can see the mid oceanic ridge and it doesn't seem to extend to Iceland.

According to the National Geographic website (http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/photos/plate-tectonics-gallery/#/thingvellir-iceland_1247_600x450.jpg):

The divergent Mid-Atlantic Ridge rises above sea level at Thingvellir, with the North American plate to the west and the Eurasian plate to the east:

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/012/cache/thingvellir-iceland_1247_990x742.jpg

Stripe
June 7th, 2015, 01:00 PM
Current plate movement can be tracked directly by means
of space-based geodetic measurements; geodesy is the
science of the size and shape of the Earth. Because plate
motions are global in scale, they are best measured by
satellite-based methods. The late 1970s witnessed the rapid
growth of space geodesy, a term applied to space-based
techniques for taking precise, repeated measurements of
carefully chosen points on the Earth’s surface separated
by hundreds to thousands of kilometers. The Global
Positioning System (GPS) has been the most useful for
studying the Earth’s crustal movements.
By repeatedly measuring distances between specific
points, geologists can determine the movement along
faults or between plates. The separations between GPS
sites are already being measured regularly around the
Pacific basin. By monitoring the interaction between the
Pacific Plate and the surrounding mostly continental plates,
scientists are learning more about events that build up
to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in the circum-
Pacific “Ring of Fire”. Space-geodetic data have
already confirmed that the rates and directions of plate
movements, averaged over several years, compare well
with rates and directions of plate movements averaged
over millions of years.

Source: http://www.iris.edu/hq/files/programs/education_and_outreach/aotm/14/1.GPS_Background.pdf

And yet if you were to string a wire tight between rocks on either side of a plate boundary, the link would not be stretched and break over time.

The space-based recordings measure movement due to seismicity and average them out.

During the Tohuku quake in Japan, the seafloor moved a couple of meters.

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 01:30 PM
And yet if you were to string a wire tight between rocks on either side of a plate boundary, the link would not be stretched and break over time.

Interesting. How do you know this? Has this experiment been performed?


The space-based recordings measure movement due to seismicity and average them out.

During the Tohuku quake in Japan, the seafloor moved a couple of meters.

"GPS stations along the coast of Japan had been moving to the west before the March 11, 2011 earthquake, and rebounded back to the east following the earthquake" (source (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMNNr2CyekA)).

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 02:04 PM
I can see the mid oceanic ridge and it doesn't seem to extend to Iceland...I am interested in learning more.

"Iceland was created from volcanic lava bubbling up at the junction between the North American and Eurasian Plates. It's one of the few places on earth that one can actually see continents being pushed apart" (source (https://youtu.be/KCSJNBMOjJs?t=17m45s)).

Stripe
June 7th, 2015, 11:29 PM
Interesting. How do you know this? Has this experiment been performed?Call it a prediction.


"GPS stations along the coast of Japan had been moving to the west before the March 11, 2011 earthquake, and rebounded back to the east following the earthquake"

I think your video makes the mistake of taking relative measurements and calling them absolute. GPS stations that record westward movement in Japan are being read against other stations in the area, not against the global situation.

As you said before, satellite readings show an average movement eastward in Japan.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Global_plate_motion_2008-04-17.jpg

However, this movement is all attributable to seismic events; averaging out the movement over time to present a slow, gradual scenario is to misrepresent the data.

User Name
June 8th, 2015, 07:39 AM
I think your video makes the mistake of taking relative measurements and calling them absolute.


"Global map of current absolute plate motion as calculated using GPS technology and the Jules Verne Voyager: Earth software. The direction of arrows indicated the direction of plate movement. The length of the arrow indicates the speed of movement (note relative arrow length of the key in the upper left corner)."


https://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/sage/geology/lesson2/images/concepts_fig14.gif


Source: https://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/sage/geology/lesson2/concepts.html


As you said before, satellite readings show an average movement eastward in Japan.

However, this movement is all attributable to seismic events; averaging out the movement over time to present a slow, gradual scenario is to misrepresent the data.


"This animation shows that GPS can record the movement of the leading edge of the overlying continental plate in a subduction zone. The plates are locked and the overlying plate is forced back. When friction is overcome and strain is released, the GPS receiver will snap back toward its original position. This animation is exaggerated to depict the relative motion of plates and GPS as seen in the 2010 Magnitude 8.8 earthquake in Chile where the land in places rebounded 10 meters":


XqXxJzVsQq4

User Name
June 8th, 2015, 07:44 AM
At atmospheric pressure, rock melts producing magma that is less dense than its parent material. However, at pressures found quite near the surface (about 400km, depending on type), rock that melts produces magma that is more dense than its parent material.

This means that there is a crossover depth above which melted rock will rise and below which melted rock will only ever sink. Thus convection of the mantle cannot happen.


mB2pzhWUaiU

6EdsBabSZ4g

f8GK2oEN-uI

Stripe
June 8th, 2015, 08:30 AM
[INDENT]"Global map of current absolute plate motion as calculated using GPS technology and the Jules Verne Voyager: Earth software.

Yes.

Can you tell how they might distinguish between the relative movement on either side of a convergent plate boundary?

TracerBullet
June 8th, 2015, 08:59 AM
Iceland.

If you put a laser measuring instrument across that divide, the only time you'll register any change is when there is an earthquake.

Ongoing precision measurements along the Icelandic plate boundless started in 1994 show that the Eurasia and North America Plates, are separating at a constant rate of 18.2mm/year.
Páll Einarsson (http://earthice.hi.is/sites/jardvis.hi.is/files/Pdf_skjol/Jokull58_pdf/jokull58-einarsson.pdf). Plate boundaries, rifts and transforms in Iceland.

Nazaroo
June 8th, 2015, 09:17 AM
User Name


"Global map of current absolute plate motion as calculated using GPS technology and the Jules Verne Voyager: Earth software. The direction of arrows indicated the direction of plate movement. The length of the arrow indicates the speed of movement (note relative arrow length of the key in the upper left corner)." https://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/sage/geology/lesson2/images/concepts_fig14.gif

Source: https://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/sage/geology/lesson2/concepts.html

Your data proves too much, or rather something entirely different.

The direction for instance of the two Atlantic plates are not at all moving
in the same DIRECTION as they did to form the Ocean floor and the
Atlantic Ridge.

Not only speed of crustal movement, but direction has drastically changed.

Current processes do not in any way account for the major
current geophysical features of the Earth, such as:

(1) Canadian Shield

(2) Tibetian Plateau

(3) Atlantic Ridge

(4) Motion of volcanic sources, i.e., Hawai and Iceland

(5) Nevada desert, Appalachians, Britain

(6) Mediterranean Sea and Baltic Sea

(7) Gulf of Hormuz



QED.

Nazaroo
June 8th, 2015, 09:18 AM
Ongoing precision measurements along the Icelandic plate boundless started in 1994 show that the Eurasia and North America Plates, are separating at a constant rate of 18.2mm/year.
Páll Einarsson (http://earthice.hi.is/sites/jardvis.hi.is/files/Pdf_skjol/Jokull58_pdf/jokull58-einarsson.pdf). Plate boundaries, rifts and transforms in Iceland.

Meaningless drivel, since current processes don't account for
the geophysical features of the whole area.

Jose Fly
June 8th, 2015, 09:55 AM
So when is the community of geologists supposed to notice that an anonymous poster at a Christian message board has overturned plate tectonics?

User Name
June 8th, 2015, 10:27 AM
The direction for instance of the two Atlantic plates are not at all moving
in the same DIRECTION as they did to form the Ocean floor and the
Atlantic Ridge.

Not only speed of crustal movement, but direction has drastically changed.

Current processes do not in any way account for the major
current geophysical features of the Earth, such as:

(1) Canadian Shield

(2) Tibetian Plateau

(3) Atlantic Ridge

(4) Motion of volcanic sources, i.e., Hawai and Iceland

(5) Nevada desert, Appalachians, Britain

(6) Mediterranean Sea and Baltic Sea

(7) Gulf of Hormuz

Are "current processes" meant to explain geophysical features that were obviously produced by past processes?

Nazaroo
June 8th, 2015, 10:33 AM
Are "current processes" meant to explain geophysical features that were obviously produced by past processes?

Apparently yes, according to subduction theorists.

User Name
June 8th, 2015, 10:38 AM
Apparently yes, according to subduction theorists.


KCSJNBMOjJs

User Name
July 19th, 2015, 03:39 PM
_belQwGNolY

User Name
July 19th, 2015, 03:54 PM
UD7GHzIRI-s

musterion
July 19th, 2015, 04:04 PM
I can understand clocking the speed of surface movement, but how is it determined how fast the mantle beneath the plate is moving (re: Nazca plate)?

aikido7
July 19th, 2015, 04:38 PM
kwfNGatxUJI
The convection idea presented in this video is bunk.

At atmospheric pressure, rock melts producing magma that is less dense than its parent material. However, at pressures found quite near the surface (about 400km, depending on type), rock that melts produces magma that is more dense than its parent material.

This means that there is a crossover depth above which melted rock will rise and below which melted rock will only ever sink. Thus convection of the mantle cannot happen.

Also, GPS measurements do not measure crustal movement of the type described. The data comes from movement due to earthquakes, not the steady, slow drift predicted by plate tectonic theory. The mid ocean ridge is accessible on land in some places, but laser measurements between the two edges do not show the drift.

The explanation for the surface features is understandable with a rejection of the assumptions presented in this video and a simple model of gravity producing friction, producing melting, producing a denser and shrinking core meaning the surface is subsiding.

Stipe:

I realize many on this board shy away from long articles and essays, so you may probably just want to pass on this.

But mark my words, it is grounded in honest research:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/08/23/the-big-one-2

These facts, this evidence and the data here are not things that are part of anyone's hidden agenda. Like it or believe it or not, most scientists just aim to follow the truth as they see it wherever it may lead them. Facts are neither liberal or conservative.

For those who want to spend the time to study this, it is truly a horrific scenario that is long overdue. And we can thank the movements of the land masses above and below us for this....

aikido7
July 19th, 2015, 06:00 PM
A thoughtful poster let me know in a private message that I posted the wrong link. It should have been

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

Another regret from my lack of attention.

User Name
July 19th, 2015, 08:03 PM
yZYy1BbjtOA

Stripe
July 20th, 2015, 12:52 AM
A thoughtful poster let me know in a private message that I posted the wrong link. It should have been

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

Another regret from my lack of attention.



yZYy1BbjtOA

You two seem to have a fascination with trying to teach me stuff that I spent thousands of dollars studying for three years. :idunno:

Let us know when you're willing to engage on the fundamentals. :up:

chair
July 20th, 2015, 02:38 AM
You two seem to have a fascination with trying to teach me stuff that I spent thousands of dollars studying for three years. :idunno:



This is quite interesting. Have you written up the results on this work? I mean, as a thesis, class project, or even for publication? I think some here would be interested in seeing the results of your study.

Stripe
July 20th, 2015, 03:36 AM
This is quite interesting. Have you written up the results on this work? I mean, as a thesis, class project, or even for publication? I think some here would be interested in seeing the results of your study.

You could try reading the thread for a start. :up:

Or just stick with being a troll. :troll:

User Name
August 7th, 2015, 08:30 PM
In this video, the horizontal motion of GPS station NAST, located in Kathmandu, Nepal is displayed for the 25 April 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake. The inset is a youtube video from a stationary camera of the ground motion experienced by a crowd of people in an open square in Kathmandu, Nepal. The back and forth motion seen in the crowd and the GPS station shows the basin resonance:


VS6WVz4V0ps

User Name
August 7th, 2015, 08:50 PM
I can understand clocking the speed of surface movement, but how is it determined how fast the mantle beneath the plate is moving (re: Nazca plate)?

This is a good question and I'm not sure of the answer. Can anyone else help out here?

Stuu
August 7th, 2015, 09:34 PM
You could try reading the thread for a start.
Have you read it, Stripe?

How about you tell us about the hydroplates now? That's hilarious.

The Himalayas are held up how? By magic?

Stuart

Stripe
August 7th, 2015, 11:31 PM
In this video, the horizontal motion of GPS station NAST, located in Kathmandu, Nepal is displayed for the 25 April 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake. The inset is a youtube video from a stationary camera of the ground motion experienced by a crowd of people in an open square in Kathmandu, Nepal. The back and forth motion seen in the crowd and the GPS station shows the basin resonance:


VS6WVz4V0ps
Therefore, something. :idunno:

Stuu
August 8th, 2015, 01:32 AM
Therefore, something. :idunno:
Good grief.

Therefore that the earthquake resulted in a permanent change of some metres in the location of Kathmandu relative to the rest of the planet surface, as is measurable by GPS.

But by all means post the data that shows a change in the radius of the earth during that earthquake, which would support your shrinking earth 'hypothesis'.

Stuart