@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
No, youre jut whining. I believe I started quite respwectfully about where you could gain further information nd you immeditely lunched into a ditribe about the vluelessness of training nd experience. Then you were intimating that were the only one with an open mind.
You telling me to go somewhere else to 'gain further information' does nothing to further this discussion on this forum. If you don't want to discuss the topics I raise, you can just say that.
Quote:If I may make a final comment about your "beliefs " on Global Tectonics by another analogy, that is NOT related to geophysics and structural geology.
Years ago, the discussion was that there was life on the Moon . AFter many flyovers nd lndings, we iscovered that its a lifeless rock.
Our understandings about Global Tectonics are like that.,We beleieved one set of "scientific facts" that were wrong but were , without any alternative at the time, ccepted and worked with . This theory called the geosynclinal theory was the source of lots of error and understanding.
During WWII, when our Navy was trolling the Ocean floors searching for subs and other electronic gear, they discovered magnetic "Stripes" that later were found to be the rsult of remnant magnetism emplaced on underwater magma and lava fields acquiring an inclination , declnation and field strength. These "Stripes" ere apparently acquired as the magma reached its Curie Temp and all the Iron and Nickel acquired the magnetic field of the earth t that time. This was studied and mapped the world over and only on the Magma PLATES in the Ocean. All these plates were almost prfectly aligned perpendicularly to continental margins that were those which were spreading from each other.The dates of sea floor spreading were also mappable because most all the ATlantic margins are bound landward by sediments (deep ocean sediments li atop the magma plates and are part of the plate networks.). These seiments are of Jurassic age pretty much all over before hitting beach and continental margin sediments which were flowing atop the plates as the plates marched landward.
I don't want to let the fact they we are bickering over nonsense interfere with my telling you that I appreciate what you are saying here and wishing that you weren't so hostile so we could have more in-depth critical discussion regarding the information/facts you post.
Just FYI, there is a good PBS video that explains what you are talking about, albeit with slightly different details, geared toward a popular audience on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0tnqPmwWvk
You should realize that lay people can watch mainstream documentaries and think about the information presented. It may be that when we do, we come up with thoughts that fail to take into account other information that we haven't received yet because the documentaries, books, and articles we've read didn't contain them, but that's when it's your job as someone with more information to present it to us in a way that helps us see how we are misguided, so that we can 'revise and resubmit' our thoughts after taking the new information into account. In this sense, public discussion among lay people and/or between lay people and more academically-trained scholars fulfills the same function as public education.
In short, science should go beyond the walls of the ivory tower, not fight against public dissemination/development of knowledge among lay people.
This issue is as fundamental as Martin Luther's struggle to publish the Bible in the vernacular of common people instead of keeping them out of discourse by restricting it to Latin. I hope that as a science-supporter, you would also support the right of the public to have access to scientific discourse and to think for themselves when studying it at whatever level.
Quote:ALL DATA AND EVIDENCE does NOT SUPPORT anything youve been aying. (When in doubt always look at the data-do NOT run to soe bogus hollow earth Bullshit and then claim that science is being denied)
That may be your conclusion, but how would I be able to assess whether it is reasonable or just your own personal bias unless you submitted a full explanation of your reasoning?
You are just expecting me to blindly accept your assessment because of status claims you've made about yourself. Doing so would make me a fool and you a fool for expecting me to.
Quote:I think , once again, Ive wasted enough time with you because you are apparently uninterested in finding out what and how but are only interested in sounding like an internet genius.
Don't waste your time if that's what you feel you are doing when communicating about science, which is what you seem to want to advance over religion/etc.; but no, I am not just interested in how I sound or otherwise come across for the sake of status. I am genuinely interested in how energy transmutes through the different spheres of the Earth and I am applying basic thermodynamics to asking general questions about the connection between sun, exosphere, atmosphere, biosphere, lithosphere, etc. Your knowledge would be helpful to me if you were capable of discussing it in an egoless way without kneejerking into arguments about how great your expertise and others' are verses how unworthy I am and others like me.
Quote:I can highly recommend an excellent text on the subject, Its by Rogers and Santosh and is called Continents and Supercontinents Oxford Press. Its in its 2nd edition. The mechanisms hve been clearly worked out and anyone is able to understand the mechanics of Continental Drift and Global Tectonics, (You just have to really be open minded and toss away your agendas, religious beliefs, and legends about what you have been thinking about). Chapters 1 through 6 are a really well written xplanation and the attending data and evidence about everything from the geochemistry , melt history, sediment "piles" , to assemblies of continental cratons through time.
Im still waiting for your take on where your plates are "born" aand how they assemble and migrate at similar rates of spreading.
I don't actually have to 'toss away' anything, because I am perfectly capable of reviewing different POVs without automatically judging them based on my own biases, which I am aware of.
I recall you recommended this book before, and I looked it up; but it is an expensive academic textbook, so until I come across it at a library or used I won't be reading it; i.e. because textbooks are a big investment, as is higher education generally, which doesn't payoff even if you get a higher-paying job as a result; i.e. because the point of life isn't to make more money but to live ethically, which becomes more difficult as you make more money.
Quote:One area of your "idea" about solar powered drifting mechanisms bothers me. You do realize that these plates , beginning at centers of sea floor spreading are often a mile or more UNDER THE SEAS.
Biological sediments sink to the bottom. They pile up in sediments, the same as on land. By the time the Jurassic sediments make it to the subduction zone, how much chemical energy has built up on and under the sea floor? Think about it.
Quote:Or , how about "hot spots" like YEllowstones portion of the Snake River Plain. These hot spots are all fairly local a few hundred square miles at most. Howcome the Solar Powering only effects a small area and not several states or the entire west.
Thank you for thinking critically about my thoughts. Generally, sunlight is doing numerous things when it reaches the surface. It penetrates below the ocean surface, so it must have some warming effect there besides just reflecting, which it also does if you look at videos from orbit. Green light reflects and scatters off tree canopies, and blue and red light get absorbed and converted into chemical energy. There is also heating of un-treed land, such as prairies and deserts that creates more hot air, which circulates and causes various effects such as evaporation and other warming effects.
Now, why are there certain 'hot spots,' you ask? I can't answer that, obviously, but I can assume that they are due to convection patterns that move energy around below and/or through the tectonic plates. I would be happy to have a more critical/deep discussion of the data and various possible theoretical explanations, but I think it would be good to post a specific thread about it, e.g. "Why are hotspots like Yellowstone hot?" and then tag the thread with 'geology,' 'plate-tectonics,' etc.
We might not come to agreement in our POVs and beliefs, but I'm sure that discussing the subject matter would stimulate us both to think further about what we currently know/think, which would benefit us in furthering our own understandings. E.g. even the questions of a fool can stimulate a master to think beyond his or her current limits.