| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"don findlay" |
| Date: |
24 Sep 2006 11:57:48 PM |
| Object: |
Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
Look, ..it's simple:- If destruction of the ocean floors were
commensurate with growth (to keep the planet the same size) then ocean
floors would never develop in the first place.
(I've said this before, but deserves repeating because Pteros are nuts,
....and because Mr Bercovici, (appointed Chair of Geology and Geophysics
at Yale, a key institution towards which the institutionalised look for
guidance), is at last casting doubts on the whole process of
subduction.
http://groups.google.com.au/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/ba2e41293e54308c?hl=en&
Surely it doesn't take much thinking about? Production >=>
Destruction means the mantle would never be exposed. I mean, ..you're
sitting in the bath, right? And you've got your rubber duck, ... (This
is a repeatable experiment a three-year-old is quite capable of). And
you plonk it on the bottom then let go,...all the water cascades off
its 'back', doesn't it?
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/balloon.html
....it doesn't force convection in the whole bath, now does it? So the
returning cycle is right there, above the 'plume' So if you think
about it then it would be obvious that the Spreading Ridge and the
so-called 'Subduction' Zone would be one and the same thing.
Which they are, ..if you look properly at the geology. That's why the
Pacific Ridge is different in shape from the Atlantic one. Sticks out
like a sore thumb. It's the break in the lithosphere, right to the
lower mantle. The Atlantic isn't. It just breaks to the upper mantle.
So why are they (sz and sr) separated? Because the ocean floors are
*growing*. Simple. Look at them, ..stripes and all. Separation
DEFINES growth.
I mean it's *obvious*, ..surely. ! It's not rocket science. Ask
any child. Give them it for homework before the bell. I'm sure they
could write a better surmise of logic than most of the 'gurus' that
flit in and out of here can.
So why is it so difficult for 'professionals'? Because they don't have
balls enough to say (when asked why it's getting bigger), "We don't
know". Because that would mean that they would have to say that they
have based all their learning on a figment of their imagination, and
for the last half century have been pissing support money up against
the wall since they have made absolutely no effort directed towards
finding out what it is they don't know. They have been "Gift-milkers"
- only interested in mudying the waters to keep themselves in a job.
(You can read all about it on my site. How it's easily worked out
http://users.indigo.net.au/don
....though it hardly needs worked out; it speaks for itself.)
(And don't give us that crap about plumes either. That's just a cop
out, to keep the argument within publishable (convectional bounds.)
.
|
|
| User: "Gerry Seaton" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 12:13:17 PM |
|
|
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
Translation:
WARNING- This is a Mission Post.
I'm not getting enough attention, so I am going to stomp my feet and make
some more noise.
There MUST be someone, somewhere who is actually interested in this.
.
|
|
|
| User: "don findlay" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 06:49:33 PM |
|
|
Gerry Seaton wrote:
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
There MUST be someone, somewhere who is actually interested in this.
Yes, ..and we can see it's not you, ..so do something simply super, and
***** off.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gerry Seaton" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
26 Sep 2006 12:50:34 PM |
|
|
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159228173.260667.174090@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Gerry Seaton wrote:
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
There MUST be someone, somewhere who is actually interested in this.
Yes, ..and we can see it's not you, ..so do something simply super, and
***** off.
Nor is it many others. Or should that read any others?
Your temper tantrums are so-o-o-o scientific. But, then again, you are
mission posting, with very little effect. No, change that to NO effect.
.
|
|
|
| User: "don findlay" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
26 Sep 2006 05:36:29 PM |
|
|
Gerry Seaton wrote:
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159228173.260667.174090@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Gerry Seaton wrote:
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
There MUST be someone, somewhere who is actually interested in this.
Yes, ..and we can see it's not you, ..so do something simply super, and
***** off.
Nor is it many others. Or should that read any others?
No, ...Udders, ..it's 'udders', ..the ones on the milk cow of
consensus.
Your temper tantrums are so-o-o-o scientific. But, then again, you are
mission posting, with very little effect. No, change that to NO effect.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Timberwoof" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 01:09:53 AM |
|
|
In article <1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
Look, ..it's simple:- If destruction of the ocean floors were
commensurate with growth (to keep the planet the same size) then ocean
floors would never develop in the first place.
I don't know how you can keep making up this crap.
(I've said this before, but deserves repeating
Oh, you don't make this crap up, you just recycle it.
Since you're just repeating yourself, how come you count this as strike
17?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "George" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 04:33:03 AM |
|
|
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@infernosoft.com> wrote in message
news:timberwoof.spam-39D578.23095224092006@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
We don't know why you are here either, Don. I guess your comedy routine
got rejected in Vegas as well, eh?
Look, ..it's simple:- If destruction of the ocean floors were
commensurate with growth (to keep the planet the same size) then ocean
floors would never develop in the first place.
I don't know how you can keep making up this crap.
(I've said this before, but deserves repeating
Oh, you don't make this crap up, you just recycle it.
Since you're just repeating yourself, how come you count this as strike
17?
He makes it up, then regurgitates it, over and over, and over, like the
energizer bunny on syrup of ipecac.
George
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stuart" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 09:26:33 AM |
|
|
George wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@infernosoft.com> wrote in message
news:timberwoof.spam-39D578.23095224092006@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
We don't know why you are here either, Don. I guess your comedy routine
got rejected in Vegas as well, eh?
That would have been funnier if you said "Venus" instead of "Vegas"
Stuart
.
|
|
|
| User: "George" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 10:26:34 AM |
|
|
"Stuart" <bigdakine@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1159194393.045482.45830@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
George wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@infernosoft.com> wrote in message
news:timberwoof.spam-39D578.23095224092006@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much
of
this crap.)
We don't know why you are here either, Don. I guess your comedy routine
got rejected in Vegas as well, eh?
That would have been funnier if you said "Venus" instead of "Vegas"
Stuart
Well, I was thinking of Vegas as the place where the has-been comedians and
singers end up playing for the rest of their lives. Of course, in Donnie's
case, he never was! So, now that I think about it, you may have a point.
George
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "don findlay" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 06:44:27 PM |
|
|
Stuart wrote:
George wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@infernosoft.com> wrote in message
news:timberwoof.spam-39D578.23095224092006@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <1159160268.529638.226410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
We don't know why you are here either, Don. I guess your comedy routine
got rejected in Vegas as well, eh?
That would have been funnier if you said "Venus" instead of "Vegas"
Stuart
Now, you just behave yourself Stuart, unless you want Fanny to dot you
with the other one:-
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/ng/midnight.html
....you're amongst very dubious people there. Surely you wouldn't want
to be tarred with the same brush, ..a man with your track record....
(Pyrates of the Caribbean...) (The last we saw of that great big
Blubber that goes Bwahhh all the time, he was.... well, .. I thought
we'd left him to whales to bugger, but I see he's turned up again.
He's a bad element.)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "don findlay" |
|
| Title: Re: Negating Plate Tectonics - strike 17 |
25 Sep 2006 12:17:14 AM |
|
|
don findlay wrote:
( I don't know why I'm here.) (You can only put up with just so much of
this crap.)
Look, ..it's simple:- If destruction of the ocean floors were
commensurate with growth (to keep the planet the same size) then ocean
floors would never develop in the first place.
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/tck/index.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
