Skip to comments.
Geologic History of North America Gets Overturned
Yahoo News ^
| 4-3-2013
| Becky Oskin
Posted on 04/17/2013 7:05:48 AM PDT by Renfield
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
1
posted on
04/17/2013 7:05:49 AM PDT
by
Renfield
To: SunkenCiv
2
posted on
04/17/2013 7:06:07 AM PDT
by
Renfield
(Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
To: Renfield
There's one thing missing that I don't see....
Bush's Fault
3
posted on
04/17/2013 7:12:15 AM PDT
by
mountn man
(ATTITUDE- The Pleasure You Get From Life, Is Equal To The Attitude You Put Into It.)
To: geologist
4
posted on
04/17/2013 7:16:22 AM PDT
by
TEXOKIE
(We must surrender only to our Holy God and never to the evil that has befallen us.)
To: Renfield
According to this revelation, when a plate sinks well into the abyss of the earth’s core, down 1,200 miles; it retains some of the original structure it had when it was close to the surface. I would have assumed it would have been disolved by then.
The climate and typography assumptions of the Jurassic and earlier remain.
5
posted on
04/17/2013 7:25:24 AM PDT
by
cicero2k
To: Renfield
6
posted on
04/17/2013 7:31:38 AM PDT
by
mj81
To: cicero2k
I think what they're looking at is the accretionary wedge at the upper limit of the subduction zone. What they are saying is that rather than than a single subduction zone along the margin of the NA plate, there was also westward movement (from the Juan de Fuca/Farallon spreading center) that accounted for another “left-handed” subduction zone further west that is now being overridden by the NA plate.
7
posted on
04/17/2013 7:39:36 AM PDT
by
stormer
To: cicero2k
According to this revelation, when a plate sinks well into the abyss of the earths core, down 1,200 miles; it retains some of the original structure it had when it was close to the surface. I would have assumed it would have been disolved by then.
This has been a result of new discoveries, understanding, and modeling over the past decade or so.
I think it's pretty widely believed that subducted slabs are actually hitting the core-mantle boundary, astonishingly.
To: cicero2k
“I would have assumed it would have been disolved by then.”
Yeah! Cuz it’s, like, millions of degrees down there right? Somebody said that.
8^)
To: Renfield
Personally, I think the expanding planet theory is too compelling to ignore.
Expanding Earth and Pangaea Theory
The center of the earth is a nuclear reactor, which is why it has never cooled down. Fission products are created by this nuclear reaction, resulting in an increase in volume as a single atom of one element decays and becomes multiple atoms of other elements.
10
posted on
04/17/2013 7:50:28 AM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
("Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth." --Alan Greenspan)
To: mj81
Bunk. Heres what happened
The author of the linked study is an imbecile.
What exactly motivates the belief and fascination with random kooks instead of actual scientists?
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Personally, I think the expanding planet theory is too compelling to ignore.
Personally, I think the expanding planet theory is too hilariously stupid not to laugh at it or anyone that gives it any creedence.
There's no evidence the Earth is expanding based on GPS. There are thousands of pieces of evidence that subduction occurs, based on GPS and seismic profiling. Expanding Earth is garbage. Case closed.
To: mountn man
Well see that’s because the Bush’s Fault is constantly moving and can’t be pinned down to just one place!
13
posted on
04/17/2013 8:04:28 AM PDT
by
Mastador1
(I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
ManBearPig on Leno I think.
14
posted on
04/17/2013 8:08:37 AM PDT
by
EEGator
To: E. Pluribus Unum
I have said for quite a while that the earth is getting fatter....reason being when archaeologist go looking for something, sometimes the digs go deep, also under the cities are other cities...might not be reasonable but how else to explain digs....
To: Renfield
I read a book once, so I’m pretty smart. I think the Earth is like a big tick, except that it doesn’t have to eat anything to get bigger. If you look at pictures of it from space it is round, just like a really big tick that is about to pop.
To: Strategerist
How ‘bout the hydroplate theory?
17
posted on
04/17/2013 9:15:02 AM PDT
by
jagusafr
(the American Trinity (Liberty, In G0D We Trust, E Pluribus Unum))
To: mj81
I have enough geology background to find that link fascinating and at the same time wonder if it’s complete bullsh_t.
18
posted on
04/17/2013 9:43:27 AM PDT
by
Rebelbase
(1929-1950's, 20+years for full recovery. How long this time?)
To: Rebelbase
What is absolute BS is the notion that convective currents beneath the lithosphere move the continents. Ever wonder: what about Newton’s Third Law?
19
posted on
04/17/2013 9:53:23 AM PDT
by
mj81
To: Strategerist
‘Case closed.’
Indeed, the science is settled.
20
posted on
04/17/2013 9:55:40 AM PDT
by
mj81
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson