Plate Tectonics

[Strathos]

Why not?

If you're at all familiar with his ideas, you should know.

 

[fargonic]

I can find some data on that. But it would be meaningless until someone use them for something.

If you can actually find some data then please present it.

Clearly it must have some meaning at least for you because you feel it is a big question to be answered.

Don't worry about sounding unprofessional, we are all likely amateur arm-chair geologists on here. We can learn from each other until a trained geologist comes on!

 

[fargonic]

If you're at all familiar with his ideas, you should know.

If someone does NOT believe in plate tectonics I should hope it would be because of a FAILURE of plate tectonics. But I suspect that many who do not believe in plate tectonics do so because plate tectonics messes up their preferred model of how the earth came to be as it is.

If I don't like what Bob says and Bob says the sky is blue then if I refuse to believe Bob I am not proceeding from logic but rather from bias.

I will assume Dad has a solid reason for not believing in plate tectonics.

 

[juvenissun]

If someone does NOT believe in plate tectonics I should hope it would be because of a FAILURE of plate tectonics. But I suspect that many who do not believe in plate tectonics do so because plate tectonics messes up their preferred model of how the earth came to be as it is.

If I don't like what Bob says and Bob says the sky is blue then if I refuse to believe Bob I am not proceeding from logic but rather from bias.

I will assume Dad has a solid reason for not believing in plate tectonics.

You know it is a BAD description and un-scientific statement.
So, the OP is meaningless.

 

[juvenissun]

If you can actually find some data then please present it.

Clearly it must have some meaning at least for you because you feel it is a big question to be answered.

Don't worry about sounding unprofessional, we are all likely amateur arm-chair geologists on here. We can learn from each other until a trained geologist comes on!

How about 1 x 10E21 Pa S.
So what? Only data is meaningless. YOU need to ask a question.
If you have question, then in science, you do not really believe that thing.

 

[fargonic]

How about 1 x 10E21 Pa S.
So what? Only data is meaningless.

Well that's absurd to post just a number. Data has something associated with it. For all I know you could have randomly typed that viscosity number. Why don't you say where you found it, what it was associated with, etc.

YOU need to ask a question.

You claimed there are things about plate tectonics you disagree with. I simply asked you to tell us what those things were. So now we see that 1e21 Pa S is something you disagree with.

Why? Do you think the number is wrong? Why? Do you think the method of measurement is wrong? Why?

If you have question, then in science, you do not really believe that thing.

Well, in this case, the question is still what specifically about plate tectonics do you question. If you question this particular number you need to explain WHY you question it.

I sense right now you are playing a bit of a game with us. As I said no one here is going to judge because we know that we are all just amateurs. Who among us is actually a geologist?

Don't be afraid to present your real questions.

 

[Strathos]

If someone does NOT believe in plate tectonics I should hope it would be because of a FAILURE of plate tectonics. But I suspect that many who do not believe in plate tectonics do so because plate tectonics messes up their preferred model of how the earth came to be as it is.

If I don't like what Bob says and Bob says the sky is blue then if I refuse to believe Bob I am not proceeding from logic but rather from bias.

I will assume Dad has a solid reason for not believing in plate tectonics.

Everything that happened before ~2300 B.C. was in a different state and can't be measured or gives false measurements. The fact that all of these measurements coincide with each other to tell a cohesive story is apparently irrelevant.

 

[poolerboy0077]

that is a trick question..
I believe that there is plates that now move. but they have the caboose pushing that train..
I don't believe their time clock and I don't believe in Pangea. they are wrong.

the atlantic as we know it now was formed in one day.
north america 3200( Joshua's long day ) years ago met north Africa at the Atlantic ridge .
forming an giant island AKA heart of the seas.
probably name Caftor or Atlas or some variations on these spellings such as Azatlan etc . .


it ( the moon ) pushed pulled and broke the crust into what we now call the continents and all the continents drained their water in the void left we now call the Atlantic.

the water level was once in the neighborhood of 1000 to 1200 ft higher than now..
and lands which are barren and grow nothing but grass were salted sea floor just 3200 or maybe 2800 ( Hezekiahs 10 steps) years ago. this is the reason native americans did not want to (M)ove( or love it either ) to Oklahoma. and only tribes that got here later did it . or some they moved only to northern Arkansas/ the Ozarks they would not go to the plains.
ONLY land with trees/ cedars on top were once islands... but even then some of the tree'd islands were completely buried in the event.

then started the wars because everyone lost their livelihood and how they even ate was by sea the seas and sea trading.

after millions of miles of salted dirt had to be crossed to find even little bits of land which would grow anything at all for ages then only grass.. then that little patch of good land / treed lands , that did grow any food had to be defended . so wars on wars on wars.. endless wars. human history is very sad.


NO scientism is Nuts and doesn't have a clue.

if the world is so old why isn't it cover with trees .. only some hill tops have trees.. what birds and deer just evolved ?
No scientism has only been concerned with trying to prove there is no God by making fake time clocks.

Do you work for The Onion?

 

[juvenissun]

Well that's absurd to post just a number. Data has something associated with it. For all I know you could have randomly typed that viscosity number. Why don't you say where you found it, what it was associated with, etc.



You claimed there are things about plate tectonics you disagree with. I simply asked you to tell us what those things were. So now we see that 1e21 Pa S is something you disagree with.

Why? Do you think the number is wrong? Why? Do you think the method of measurement is wrong? Why?



Well, in this case, the question is still what specifically about plate tectonics do you question. If you question this particular number you need to explain WHY you question it.

I sense right now you are playing a bit of a game with us. As I said no one here is going to judge because we know that we are all just amateurs. Who among us is actually a geologist?

Don't be afraid to present your real questions.

You are right. I do that because you started to play game with me.
I will discuss issue with you. But I will not spend time to teach you.

 

[fargonic]

You are right. I do that because you started to play game with me.

What game was I playing?

I will discuss issue with you. But I will not spend time to teach you.

I would rather get my geology lessons from an actual geologist, but on here we can all discuss it!

I was hoping you actually had specific topics about Plate Tectonics you disagreed with but apparently the only thing you disagree with was the one viscosity number and we have no idea where that was from.

If you could perhaps dial back your haughty attitude a bit I'm sure we could all discuss this nicely.

 

[dad]

Everything that happened before ~2300 B.C. was in a different state and can't be measured or gives false measurements. The fact that all of these measurements coincide with each other to tell a cohesive story is apparently irrelevant.

Not bad!!! Tweedledee and Tweedledum are bound to agree with other, both being less than free thinkers.

 

[dad]

Why not?

Because we do not know what lies beneath to any great degree...it is speculation all based on what we see on the surface basically. Yes, plates move...and yes they have some bits right...most wrong! There may be different physics way down under.

 

[fargonic]

Because we do not know what lies beneath to any great degree...it is speculation all based on what we see on the surface basically. Yes, plates move...and yes they have some bits right...most wrong! There may be different physics way down under.

Actually you are incorrect. We use seismic waves to see inside the earth. Much as we use x-rays to see inside your body. Or when we use sonar to see under the sea.

 

[juvenissun]

What game was I playing?

I would rather get my geology lessons from an actual geologist, but on here we can all discuss it!

I was hoping you actually had specific topics about Plate Tectonics you disagreed with but apparently the only thing you disagree with was the one viscosity number and we have no idea where that was from.

If you could perhaps dial back your haughty attitude a bit I'm sure we could all discuss this nicely.

That is the game you are playing. I never said I disagree with that data.

If you try to learn some tectonic issues, then you humble yourself and ask politely. Then I will try to answer your question based on the level of the question. Otherwise, you can be a proud geologist on your own.

 

[dad]

Actually you are incorrect. We use seismic waves to see inside the earth. Much as we use x-rays to see inside your body. Or when we use sonar to see under the sea.

No you are incorrect, be4caue the way we interpret the waves in wholly based on surface laws that we know. For example a wave can't pass through liquid here...with our physics. However, if there is spiritual stuff in the interior of the earth, could a wave pass through that? You have no idea! You merely assume it is a liquid that the wave can't pass through!

 

[Strathos]

Not bad!!! Tweedledee and Tweedledum are bound to agree with other, both being less than free thinkers.

It's not a matter of "agreeing", it's a matter of analyzing the evidence and making predictions from it, which are fulfilled by new evidence. How can they predict where to find oil and natural gas reservoirs using geological processes and be correct before they find them, if all of the data they were working with was incoherent noise?

 

[dad]

It's not a matter of "agreeing", it's a matter of analyzing the evidence and making predictions from it, which are fulfilled by new evidence. How can they predict where to find oil and natural gas reservoirs using geological processes and be correct before they find them, if all of the data they were working with was incoherent noise?

Easy. We look at the patterns of how layers and etc were laid down. Why and when that happened is totally another issue! Yes there was a lot of life that died and maybe helped make fossil fuel...yes a lot is in certain layers...nothing to do with the reasons you think though...yet of course we will find certain things there.

 

[fargonic]

No you are incorrect, be4caue the way we interpret the waves in wholly based on surface laws that we know

Do you assume that we can't interpret x-rays because the state inside the body may different from the outside?

 

[fargonic]

That is the game you are playing. I never said I disagree with that data.

My apologies...you said you don't believe the data that you have a question about. I suppose that is a little different.

If you try to learn some tectonic issues, then you humble yourself and ask politely.

No, I will take my real questions about tectonics to a geologist or a geology teacher. Not you. And why do I need to humble myself before you? Are you better than I?

 

[juvenissun]

My apologies...you said you don't believe the data that you have a question about. I suppose that is a little different.

No, I will take my real questions about tectonics to a geologist or a geology teacher. Not you. And why do I need to humble myself before you? Are you better than I?

I am more humble than you are. And I can sense pretty well on who knows how much on what.