PDA

View Full Version : Challenge to plate tectonics: Spreading-center intersection?



Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 10:29 AM
In the Indian Ocean (https://goo.gl/maps/0Gy29), there is a point where plate tectonics theory would indicate that two or three spreading centers intersect, with one or three terminating.

How does plate tectonics theory explain this feature?

The Hydroplate theory says there are no spreading centers. Instead, it says the mid-ocean rises are gravity-induced features; the response to mass being removed caused the new ocean floor to spring upward all around the planet.

However, it seems impossible for the seafloor to be spreading away from this point to be able to create the feature while maintaining plate theories.

User Name
June 6th, 2015, 10:36 AM
"The Indian Plate is currently moving north-east at 5 centimetres (2.0 in) per year, while the Eurasian Plate is moving north at only 2 centimetres (0.79 in) per year. This is causing the Eurasian Plate to deform, and the Indian Plate to compress at a rate of 4 millimetres (0.16 in) per year." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Plate

See also: Unusual Indian Ocean earthquakes hint at tectonic breakup (http://www.nature.com/news/unusual-indian-ocean-earthquakes-hint-at-tectonic-breakup-1.11487)

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 10:39 AM
"The Indian Plate is currently moving north-east at 5 centimetres (2.0 in) per year, while the Eurasian Plate is moving north at only 2 centimetres (0.79 in) per year. This is causing the Eurasian Plate to deform, and the Indian Plate to compress at a rate of 4 millimetres (0.16 in) per year." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Plate

See also: Unusual Indian Ocean earthquakes hint at tectonic breakup (http://www.nature.com/news/unusual-indian-ocean-earthquakes-hint-at-tectonic-breakup-1.11487)

Neither of those sources are to do with the spot I indicated. :)

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 10:51 AM
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/webpictures/hydroplateoverview-tharp_world_ocean_floor_map.jpgFigure 43: World Ocean Floor. Notice the characteristic margins of each continent. Seaward from each ocean beach is a shallow, gradually sloping continental shelf, then a relatively steep drop, called the continental slope. This strange pattern is worldwide. Why? For a better look at the typical shape of this margin, see Figure 46 on page 115. Also notice the different characteristics of (1) continents and ocean basins, and (2) the Atlantic and Pacific Basins. Ninety East Ridge is so named because it lies almost exactly along 90°E longitude. Its straight, 3,000-mile length, and curious north-south orientation aimed at the Himalayas are important clues to past events on earth. (Note: As one moves toward polar regions on this type of map projection, east-west distances are stretched and do not reflect true distances.)

Why does the Mid-Oceanic Ridge intersects itself in the Indian Ocean (shown by the black circle)? Ask yourself how seafloor spreading could work there—moving away from that intersection point in four perpendicular directions. Answer: It can’t. As will be explained with many more examples in this and the next chapter, seafloor spreading is a myth. That alone falsifies plate tectonics. The hydroplate theory will provide a simple explanation for that intersection point and the Mid-Oceanic Ridge.

-source (http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html).

User Name
June 6th, 2015, 11:10 AM
Neither of those sources are to do with the spot I indicated. :)

"The Rodrigues Triple Point (also, Rodrigues Triple Junction) is a geologic triple junction in the southern Indian Ocean where three tectonic plates meet: the African Plate, the Indo-Australian Plate, and the Antarctic Plate. The triple point is named for the island of Rodrigues which lies nearby." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodrigues_Triple_Point

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 11:25 AM
"The Rodrigues Triple Point (also, Rodrigues Triple Junction) is a geologic triple junction in the southern Indian Ocean where three tectonic plates meet: the African Plate, the Indo-Australian Plate, and the Antarctic Plate. The triple point is named for the island of Rodrigues which lies nearby." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodrigues_Triple_Point

OK. It's got a name. :)

Jonahdog
June 6th, 2015, 12:59 PM
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/webpictures/hydroplateoverview-tharp_world_ocean_floor_map.jpgFigure 43: World Ocean Floor. Notice the characteristic margins of each continent. Seaward from each ocean beach is a shallow, gradually sloping continental shelf, then a relatively steep drop, called the continental slope. This strange pattern is worldwide. Why? For a better look at the typical shape of this margin, see Figure 46 on page 115. Also notice the different characteristics of (1) continents and ocean basins, and (2) the Atlantic and Pacific Basins. Ninety East Ridge is so named because it lies almost exactly along 90°E longitude. Its straight, 3,000-mile length, and curious north-south orientation aimed at the Himalayas are important clues to past events on earth. (Note: As one moves toward polar regions on this type of map projection, east-west distances are stretched and do not reflect true distances.)

Why does the Mid-Oceanic Ridge intersects itself in the Indian Ocean (shown by the black circle)? Ask yourself how seafloor spreading could work there—moving away from that intersection point in four perpendicular directions. Answer: It can’t. As will be explained with many more examples in this and the next chapter, seafloor spreading is a myth. That alone falsifies plate tectonics. The hydroplate theory will provide a simple explanation for that intersection point and the Mid-Oceanic Ridge.

-source (http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html).
What scientific journal is that from?

User Name
June 6th, 2015, 05:58 PM
What scientific journal is that from?


-source (http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html).

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 06:52 PM
What scientific journal is that from?

What rock did you climb from beneath?

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 06:55 PM
The challenge is straightforward: Plate tectonics theory rides on the idea that hot, rising rock pushes plates away from each other at spreading centers. That means there must be rock rising at the Rodrigues Triple Point that is reaching near the surface and then pushing plates away from it in three directions.

This seems highly improbable.

User Name
June 6th, 2015, 07:38 PM
The challenge is straightforward: Plate tectonics theory rides on the idea that hot, rising rock pushes plates away from each other at spreading centers. That means there must be rock rising at the Rodrigues Triple Point that is reaching near the surface and then pushing plates away from it in three directions.

This seems highly improbable.

"The triple junction consists of two medium spreading ridges and one slow spreading ridge (the Southwest Indian Ridge). GLORIA sidescan sonar and French Sea Beam bathymetry data suggest that the two medium spreading ridges almost form one continuous ridge. Seafloor created by them is slowly rifted by the slow extension of the Southwest Indian Ridge, producing a progressively broadening and deepening rift." -- http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/neil.mitchell/mor/mor.html

User Name
June 6th, 2015, 08:05 PM
The challenge is straightforward: Plate tectonics theory rides on the idea that hot, rising rock pushes plates away from each other at spreading centers. That means there must be rock rising at the Rodrigues Triple Point that is reaching near the surface and then pushing plates away from it in three directions.

This seems highly improbable.

"The Indian Ocean triple junction is a ridge-ridge-ridge type joining two medium-spreading ridges with one slow-spreading ridge. GLORIA long-range side scan sonar images show that, while the axial valleys of the two medium-spreading ridges are almost colinear, apart from a small ~5 km offset, the valley of the slow-spreading third axis does not meet the other two in a simple fashion. The axis of this slow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge (SWIR), beyond the rift valley walls of the other two ridges, steadily deepens by over 1000 m away from the triple junction to reach 5000 m at 35 km. The GLORIA images show large normal faults around the deep SWIR rift valley, which increase in heave away from the triple junction and crosscut the abyssal hills formed at the faster-spreading Central Indian Ridge, indicating that extension across the SWIR is distributed over a zone 10 km or more wide. This zone also shows no evidence for the formation of new oceanic crust, suggesting that the extension may be amagmatic near the triple junction. The high relief of the SWIR rift flanks, containing tilted seafloor of the other two ridges, may be an isostatic response of the lithosphere to the deep valley produced by this rifting. These observations, which suggest the progressive development of a propagating SWIR rift by the extension of preexisting seafloor, may have general implications for the dynamics of oceanic spreading centers. In particular, the deepening and widening of the valley away from the triple junction is attributed to the competing effects of tectonic thinning and lithospheric cooling."

-- http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/neil.mitchell/cv/iotj-dd.html

patrick jane
June 6th, 2015, 08:11 PM
Stripe, what is your official stance on plate tectonics (in general) and the age of the earth ? -

Stripe
June 6th, 2015, 09:39 PM
"The Indian Ocean triple junction is a ridge-ridge-ridge type joining two medium-spreading ridges with one slow-spreading ridge. GLORIA long-range side scan sonar images show that, while the axial valleys of the two medium-spreading ridges are almost colinear, apart from a small ~5 km offset, the valley of the slow-spreading third axis does not meet the other two in a simple fashion. The axis of this slow-spreading Southwest Indian Ridge (SWIR), beyond the rift valley walls of the other two ridges, steadily deepens by over 1000 m away from the triple junction to reach 5000 m at 35 km. The GLORIA images show large normal faults around the deep SWIR rift valley, which increase in heave away from the triple junction and crosscut the abyssal hills formed at the faster-spreading Central Indian Ridge, indicating that extension across the SWIR is distributed over a zone 10 km or more wide. This zone also shows no evidence for the formation of new oceanic crust, suggesting that the extension may be amagmatic near the triple junction. The high relief of the SWIR rift flanks, containing tilted seafloor of the other two ridges, may be an isostatic response of the lithosphere to the deep valley produced by this rifting. These observations, which suggest the progressive development of a propagating SWIR rift by the extension of preexisting seafloor, may have general implications for the dynamics of oceanic spreading centers. In particular, the deepening and widening of the valley away from the triple junction is attributed to the competing effects of tectonic thinning and lithospheric cooling."

-- http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/neil.mitchell/cv/iotj-dd.html

Can you explain any of this from the perspective of the proposed mechanism driving plate tectonic theory?

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 07:55 AM
Can you explain any of this from the perspective of the proposed mechanism driving plate tectonic theory?

Convection of magma:

http://www.whoi.edu/cms/images/dfino/2006/9/doei_project_laurent_en1_30976.jpg"Mantle (green) and melt (red and brown) trajectories predicted at the corner of two ridges, one spreading four times slower than the other. The blue surface is a particular level of the ridge pressure field, showing the relative strength of each spreading center. The slower ridge is able to tap into the stronger ridges' melting field although the melt trajectories are dispersed near the surface."

Source: http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=97063&tid=3622&cid=16131

Jonahdog
June 7th, 2015, 08:32 AM
Stripe, what is your official stance on plate tectonics (in general) and the age of the earth ? -

His official stance on plate tectonics is to suggest you read Walt Brown's "hydro-plate theory". his official stance on the age of the earth is Bishop Ussher.

Both are just irrational but his thought process allows him to resort to emoticons and making fun of people with the knowledge that he is one of the favored ones and will never be banned. He consistently cherry picks bits of information and data and translates that to goddidit.

He is a hoot.

Stripe
June 7th, 2015, 09:24 AM
Convection of magma:

"Mantle (green) and melt (red and brown) trajectories predicted at the corner of two ridges, one spreading four times slower than the other. The blue surface is a particular level of the ridge pressure field, showing the relative strength of each spreading center. The slower ridge is able to tap into the stronger ridges' melting field although the melt trajectories are dispersed near the surface."

Source: http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=97063&tid=3622&cid=16131
Some questions:
What data or observations is this explanation based on?
The surface features are extremely detailed, with the triple point well defined even on Google Maps. How does mantle movement provide such detail? How can the available surface area of mantle on crust provide enough traction to form the surface features we see?
The surface feature we see at the triple point is unique. Why would that be?

User Name
June 7th, 2015, 11:54 AM
Along the western coast of Chile, three of Earth’s tectonic plates intersect in a way that does not occur anywhere else on the planet. Chile, and the other countries of South America, lie on top of the South American tectonic plate. To the west of Chile, the Nazca Plate extends beneath the Pacific Ocean and meets the Pacific Plate along a divergent plate boundary called the East Pacific Rise. The southern edge of the Nazca Plate adjoins the Antarctic Plate along another divergent plate boundary called the Chile Rise. The eastern edge of the Chile Rise is being subducted beneath the South American plate at the Chile Triple Junction (CTJ), which is unique because it consists of a mid-oceanic ridge being subducted under a continental tectonic plate:


http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/12chile/background/edu/media/eem_fig1-1_600.jpg

The eastern portion of the Nazca Plate is also being subducted along the Peru-Chile Trench, and the Andes mountains are one consequence of this process. Not surprisingly, complex movements of three tectonic plates at the CTJ result in numerous earthquakes. In fact, the largest earthquake ever recorded (magnitude 9.5) occurred along the Peru-Chile Trench in 1960.

Source: http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/10chile/background/edu/media/whenplates.pdf

Stripe
June 7th, 2015, 12:41 PM
Along the western coast of Chile, three of Earth’s tectonic plates intersect in a way that does not occur anywhere else on the planet. Chile, and the other countries of South America, lie on top of the South American tectonic plate. To the west of Chile, the Nazca Plate extends beneath the Pacific Ocean and meets the Pacific Plate along a divergent plate boundary called the East Pacific Rise. The southern edge of the Nazca Plate adjoins the Antarctic Plate along another divergent plate boundary called the Chile Rise. The eastern edge of the Chile Rise is being subducted beneath the South American plate at the Chile Triple Junction (CTJ), which is unique because it consists of a mid-oceanic ridge being subducted under a continental tectonic plate:


The eastern portion of the Nazca Plate is also being subducted along the Peru-Chile Trench, and the Andes mountains are one consequence of this process. Not surprisingly, complex movements of three tectonic plates at the CTJ result in numerous earthquakes. In fact, the largest earthquake ever recorded (magnitude 9.5) occurred along the Peru-Chile Trench in 1960.

Source: http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/10chile/background/edu/media/whenplates.pdf
What I meant was: The surface feature we see at the triple point is unique.

It should have been obvious that I wasn't saying plate tectonics theory does not have other points where three plates meet.

For example, there are nine in your image, but none of them show a surface feature like what we see in the Indian Ocean. Why is that?

User Name
September 6th, 2015, 01:01 PM
Earth’s tectonic plates do not fracture along straight lines over a great distance because the Earth is not flat. With a flat surface, one force is pulling the paper 180° relative to the other force. Over a spherical surface, however, this tension extends radially in all directions...Under radial stress, the weak point extends along three branches, each pair forming an angle of ~120°. These branches converge at a central point known as a triple junction. So long as there is tension pulling away from the triple junction, each branch will rift in a more or less linear fashion. Therefore, the layout of Earth’s tectonic plates is characterized not so much by linear fractures at right angles, but rather by pseudo-hexagonal polygons...As tectonic plates pull away from one another, they typically create depressions in the Earth’s surface, due to a thinning of the crust. If this process occurs within a continent, the depression often forms a linear rift valley, where the anomalously thin crust results in low elevations and active volcanism...The East African Rift, which has been forming for at least 11 million years, provides one of the best examples of the continental branch of a triple junction. Given enough time, the depression may eventually subside below sea level, giving birth to a new ocean basin.

Once you understand how triple junctions form and how to recognize them, they appear everywhere on physiographic maps of the world. To this end, GoogleEarth is a great tool for exploring how Earth’s modern surface came to be. Look closely at mid-ocean ridges and continental edges: how many of them are characterized by ~120° angles that separate one plate from another or define valleys and ridges? Triple junctions thus explain the shape of familiar continents, like the west coast of Africa and its Brazilian counterpart, the west coast of South America, the Arabian peninsula and Red Sea, and even the Kara Sea and Yenisei river basin in western Siberia.

Read more at the source: http://ageofrocks.org/2015/07/06/monday-minute-triple-junctions-and-the-age-of-the-earth/

Stripe
September 6th, 2015, 01:15 PM
Except you forgot to answer the question.

Try again. :up:

User Name
September 6th, 2015, 02:32 PM
3D fly-thru of bathymetry from the Rodriguez Triple Junction in the Indian Ocean, with the flight going from east to west and diving down the Southwest indian Ridge:


GS4fyH6vZ-4

Jonahdog
September 6th, 2015, 02:57 PM
What I meant was: The surface feature we see at the triple point is unique.

It should have been obvious that I wasn't saying plate tectonics theory does not have other points where three plates meet.

For example, there are nine in your image, but none of them show a surface feature like what we see in the Indian Ocean. Why is that?

What is the particular surface feature and why is it there? Please explain.

Stripe
September 6th, 2015, 07:42 PM
What is the particular surface feature and why is it there? Please explain.
Evolutionists hate reading.

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 04:23 AM
Evolutionists hate reading.
Stripe, you made a reference to a particular feature and "why it is there?'.
I asked you to explain further.
And I get one of your standard nonsequitors. If all you wish to do is be a troll you succeed. If what you wish to do is expand Christian belief you fail.
On the admittedly slim chance that you would bring be back to Christ you do a terrible, terrible job. There maybe one chance in a million that you could save my soul, yet you bypass that in order to get in meaningless cheap shots that apparently make you feel more important.
Even 6days, who falls back on his same boring routine, appears to do it with some desire to win souls for Christ. You just continue to show aggressive ignorance. If he exists, you are a tool of the devil.

ok doser
September 7th, 2015, 05:49 AM
so you're pitching a hissy because you don't like stripe's presentation of his Christianity?


explain to us again how you are in any position to judge





kinda like a child whining that the adults are mean to him and stamping his foot and yelling that if they're not nicer, he's not going to grow up

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 07:41 AM
so you're pitching a hissy because you don't like stripe's presentation of his Christianity?


explain to us again how you are in any position to judge





kinda like a child whining that the adults are mean to him and stamping his foot and yelling that if they're not nicer, he's not going to grow up

Actually, I dont give a rat's behind about his "presentation of Christianity" What does bother me is that he is dishonest and unwilling to explain, he falls back on his standard nonsense. Yet he is one of the favored ones here.

Very unChristian, although perhaps not given what I perceive the new standard fundamentalist position "I'm going to heaven and you are going to hell, HA, HA, HA" as represented by some of the favored here.

If Christianity were so wonderful and The Truth, one should never, never miss an opportunity to explain and expound despite the fact that one might be ridiculed. Stripe lacks that Christian courage and dependence on his god.

chair
September 7th, 2015, 07:59 AM
Mr. Stripe is a_word_that_would_get_me_quickly_banned .
He is likely one of the nastiest people in Taiwan, a country with many pleasant people, and few Christians.

ok doser
September 7th, 2015, 08:17 AM
Very unChristian...


what basis do you have to make this judgement?

Stripe
September 7th, 2015, 08:21 AM
Stripe, you made a reference to a particular feature and "why it is there?'.
I asked you to explain further.

You didn't read what I already said.

Learn to read; then you might be able to join the conversation. :up:

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 09:43 AM
You didn't read what I already said.

Learn to read; then you might be able to join the conversation. :up:

I asked a specific question and you cannot take the time or make the effort to answer it. Instead you whine.

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 09:45 AM
what basis do you have to make this judgement?

Stripe's history on TOL and my years of both Catholic school education and Bible study with evangelicals.

ok doser
September 7th, 2015, 09:48 AM
Stripe's history on TOL and my years of both Catholic school education and Bible study with evangelicals.

all those years of education and study and you're still just a hell-bound fool

:sigh:

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 09:48 AM
I asked a specific question and you cannot take the time or make the effort to answer it. Instead you whine.

Matthew 28:20 suggests that Christians should teach. You make no effort to do that.

Jonahdog
September 7th, 2015, 09:50 AM
all those years of education and study and you're still just a hell-bound fool

:sigh:

Nope, since there is no hell, not likely.

But its nice that you seem to have some concern for me, or do you? Does it make you feel more important suggesting I am going to hell and you, maybe, are not?

Stripe
September 7th, 2015, 07:22 PM
Yeah. This thread was about something.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 09:11 PM
Can you explain any of this from the perspective of the proposed mechanism driving plate tectonic theory?

Mantle plumes: https://youtu.be/5tF5zRqO9ec?t=2m35s

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 09:39 PM
Earth's tectonic plates skitter about: http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/03/earths-tectonic-plates-skitter-about

badp
December 17th, 2015, 09:47 PM
Ah, plate tectonics. A theory arguably dumber than CD because it has no observed mechanism to explain how huge plates just move all by themselves.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 09:49 PM
Ah, plate tectonics. A theory arguably dumber than CD because it has no observed mechanism to explain how huge plates just move all by themselves.

Plate tectonics on the Earth triggered by plume-induced subduction initiation: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15752.html

badp
December 17th, 2015, 09:53 PM
Plate tectonics on the Earth triggered by plume-induced subduction initiation: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15752.html

I said observed mechanism. Not some convenient magic trick.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 09:54 PM
I said observed mechanism. Not some convenient magic trick.

It has been observed: https://youtu.be/5tF5zRqO9ec?t=2m35s

badp
December 17th, 2015, 09:58 PM
It has been observed: https://youtu.be/5tF5zRqO9ec?t=2m35s

See also: http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/09/mantle-plumes-seen-rising-earths-core

Nice try, buddy, but that video is about plumes, not plume-induced subduction. Plumes aren't the mechanism. Subduction is the mechanism.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:00 PM
Nice try, buddy, but that video is about plumes, not plume-induced subduction. Plumes aren't the mechanism. Subduction is the mechanism.

How the shell of ancient Earth cracked, giving rise to moving continents: http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/11/how-shell-ancient-earth-cracked-giving-rise-moving-continents


"...mantle plumes can give birth to subduction zones, where one piece of Earth’s rigid outer layer—or lithosphere—rides over another, pushing it into the mantle. Today, the pull of sinking slabs at subduction zones provides much of the driving force behind plate tectonics."

See also: Plate tectonics on the Earth triggered by plume-induced subduction initiation (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15752.html)

badp
December 17th, 2015, 10:05 PM
How the shell of ancient Earth cracked, giving rise to moving continents: http://news.sciencemag.org/earth/2015/11/how-shell-ancient-earth-cracked-giving-rise-moving-continents


"...mantle plumes can give birth to subduction zones, where one piece of Earth’s rigid outer layer—or lithosphere—rides over another, pushing it into the mantle. Today, the pull of sinking slabs at subduction zones provides much of the driving force behind plate tectonics."

See also: Plate tectonics on the Earth triggered by plume-induced subduction initiation (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15752.html)

You obviously missed the keyword: observed.

Nothing in any of those links says plume-induced subduction has been observed.

It's speculation to bolster a failed theory, like CD.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:10 PM
Ah, plate tectonics. A theory arguably dumber than CD because it has no observed mechanism to explain how huge plates just move all by themselves.


You obviously missed the keyword: observed.

Nothing in any of those links says plume-induced subduction has been observed.

You just moved the goal posts. In your first post, you limited your comment to the movement of tectonic plates. In the next post, you changed your focus to "plume-induced subduction." Did you think the rest of us wouldn't notice?

The plates obviously move. There is no question about that. The question is why.

badp
December 17th, 2015, 10:16 PM
You just moved the goal posts. In your first post, you limited your comment to the movement of tectonic plates. In the next post, you changed your focus to "plume-induced subduction." Did you think the rest of us wouldn't notice?

The plates obviously move. There is no question about that. The question is why.

The question is why, and plumes don't explain how the plates move. Let me break it down for you.

Plume - indirectly observed
Plume-induced subduction - not observed

Therefore, you can't claim the plume as the mechanism when plume-induced subduction has not been observed.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:19 PM
The question is why, and plumes don't explain how the plates move.

Okay, so the plates move, but you reject the mainstream scientific explanation for why they move because you somehow know better. What, then, is your explanation?

badp
December 17th, 2015, 10:24 PM
Okay, so the plates move, but you reject the mainstream scientific explanation for why. What, then, is your explanation?

Nice! Instead of admitting you were wrong, you play the, "Well it's the best theory we have!" card.

I don't really care why the plates move. I do care that speculation based on indirect observations gets passed off as "science" while so-called lovers of "science" and "reason" blindly accept it.

Plate tectonics isn't based on empirical evidence. It's a failed theory. Let it go.

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:34 PM
Nice! Instead of admitting you were wrong, you play the, "Well it's the best theory we have!" card.

I don't really care why the plates move. I do care that speculation based on indirect observations gets passed off as "science" while so-called lovers of "science" and "reason" blindly accept it.

So you don't know why the plates move, but yet you do somehow claim to know that the mainstream scientific explanation for why they move is wrong.

If you don't know how or why the plates move, how do you know that the mainstream scientific explanation for why they move is wrong?

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:39 PM
Plate tectonics isn't based on empirical evidence.


The significance of polar reversal for the theory of plate tectonics alongside ocean floor spreading provides scientists with almost undisputable empirical evidence that plates are in constant movement and that this movement is created by convection cells that exert huge pressures on the lithosphere and at ocean ridges lay down fresh ocean crust which drives the movement of our plates.

-- http://thebritishgeographer.weebly.com/plate-tectonic-theory.html

badp
December 17th, 2015, 10:45 PM
Let me explain to you how science works and then I'm out.

A theory needs to be supported by evidence.
Plate tectonics lacks evidence.
After many years of searching, no one has found an observable mechanism for plate movement.
Conclusion: plate tectonics is a failed theory.

The blog post you linked to doesn't provide a mechanism and so is irrelevant. It's just more speculation.

In the meantime, I hope you'll educate yourself on the history and practice of science. It's not a popularity content or something people get to vote on.

Greg Jennings
December 17th, 2015, 10:49 PM
The question is why, and plumes don't explain how the plates move. Let me break it down for you.

Plume - indirectly observed
Plume-induced subduction - not observed

Therefore, you can't claim the plume as the mechanism when plume-induced subduction has not been observed.

What, pray, do you believe to be responsible for movement of tectonic plates?

Greg Jennings
December 17th, 2015, 10:51 PM
Nice! Instead of admitting you were wrong, you play the, "Well it's the best theory we have!" card.

I don't really care why the plates move. I do care that speculation based on indirect observations gets passed off as "science" while so-called lovers of "science" and "reason" blindly accept it.

Plate tectonics isn't based on empirical evidence. It's a failed theory. Let it go.

Never mind. You're silly

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 10:53 PM
What, pray, do you believe to be responsible for movement of tectonic plates?

He doesn't know. He just knows that no one else knows. And how does he know that no one else knows? He doesn't know.

Greg Jennings
December 17th, 2015, 11:06 PM
He doesn't know. He just knows that no one else knows. And how does he know that no one else knows? He doesn't know.

So on a scale of 1 to Stripe, what am I dealing with here?

User Name
December 17th, 2015, 11:11 PM
So on a scale of 1 to Stripe, what am I dealing with here?

:chuckle:

My opinion of Stripe is that he knows enough science to know that he is misrepresenting the data in favor of his beliefs.

This is actually my first exchange with "badp," but from what I can tell so far it appears that he doesn't know enough science to know that he is misrepresenting the data in favor of his beliefs.