|
|
sci.geo.geology |
>bigdak...@aol.comGetaGrip (Bigdakine) wrote in message >> >> 1. Why does plate tectonics ignore the aggregate continuity and >> > What is your profession? You are a geologist? If its true, then you know >> >> 1. Why does plate tectonics ignore the aggregate continuity and >> >As you can read, my english is not the best. Please explain "aggregate >> Heck, even those of us for who English is out native language don't >...'for *whom', Stuart, ..for *whom. ..... >> He doesn't make much sense to us either.. >(Better take a seat at the front of the class - and pay more Its Ok if you make up your own excpressions.. but when you do that you must there are no pre-Mesozoic I'm so sorry you are not interested in learning, but that is your fault. What conductivity does Do you claim that because there is no oceanic floor older than 220 million You can find older crust, its called ophiolite. I think its about time you've read something written in the last 20 years on For until you do, watching you argue against plate tectonics is like watching a <snip> Stuart >Subject: Re: Earth Cooling. LOL touche'
>From: d...@tower.net.au (don findlay)
>Date: 2/20/03 4:29 PM Hawaiian Standard Time
>Message-id: <5f164087.0302201829.10fd7...@posting.google.com>
><news:20030220054946.27504.00000001@mb-cg.aol.com>...
>> >Subject: Re: Earth Cooling.
>> >From: "Jörg Reichert" jo.reich...@web.de
>> >Date: 2/20/03 12:13 AM Hawaiian Standard Time
>> >Message-id: <b329oc$1gska...@ID-45174.news.dfncis.de>
>> >> spirality of transforms?
>> >> 2. When did the assumption of subduction stop being an assumption and
>> >> become a fact?
>> >> 3. Why subduction anyhow, and not over-riding?
>> >that all the (standard) answers for your questions.
>> >> spirality of transforms?
>> >continuity ". Yes, I can translate it, but I think that I don't know what
>> >you mean.
>understand
>> him.
OK..
>attention!)
explain what they mean, instead of leaving us guessing..
>Question for you: if the decay rate of these 'bad elements' of HizNibz Convection has been with us since the get go. THe Earth has large stores of
>Heat is fastest when there's mostest, why have we had to wait so long
>for this 'convection' to get under way? -
radiogenic power and thermal energy.
>ocean foors like we see today (except for maybe a bit in the Archaean,
>yet plate tectonics is all about Laurasia, Laurentica and Baltica/ THe argument from personal disbeleif is not a scientific argument.
>Rodinia - and God (and Pteros)only know how many in Absentia. Plates
>(and microplates) all over the place. Indeed. Come on now, what delay
>factor do you have to add on to your Taylor Number to explain this one
>(plates going on at the surface, without the convection underneath)
>when the mantle is like "industrial steel"?
>the mantle need to have, to explain this delay? WHat delay?
years, that convection didn't start until then? Funny nobody else thinks that,
and certainly nobody who accepts PT thinks that either.
geophysics.
one legged man in an butt kicking contest.
Dr. Stuart A. Weinstein
Ewa Beach Institute of Tectonics
"To err is human, but to really foul things up
requires a creationist"