| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oriel36
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 7:16 pm Post subject: Wiki article |
 |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_motion
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
don findlay
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:07 pm Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
oriel36 wrote:
[quote]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_motion
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
[/quote]
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. (Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
Plate Tectonics, .. it used to have the confidence of the Hallelujah
Chorus sung by jackhammers, .. whilst the bishops cardinals and Popes
took turns screwing a willing congregation (Ooo- Aahh) to the alto
tones of choirboys and a media cheer-squad. Candles everywhere (for
the shy) (or the super-enthusiastic), .. and the place awash with holy
water.
But these days it hardly gets a whisper in the vestry, and nothing
handed down from the altar any more.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here..." - more like.
...Wonder why... Plate Tectonics ... once a happy party. "Roll up
folks. All day every week and twice on Sundays", - now a ghost of
its former self, ...and the congregation either disconcertingly quiet,
or complaining about party poopers.
Hey, ..you>re really opening up a Pandora>s Box here, aren>t you. Can
you imagine? ... the mayhem that breaks loose once people realise
that the shape of the Earth, and all the surface deformation that goes
towards keeping it that way, has nothing to do with its internal
indigestion, but is due to it being round and spinning? Like every
other blinking planet in the solar system, and who knows where else.
I>m sure this is why he>s changed The Purple Robe of Babylon with the
Hawaiian badge for that funny motheaten yellow oufit. He>s
beginning to get a clue that for all the rubber he>s been collecting
and sticking to his front like medals, not all is well in the Church
of Plate Tectonics.
Hey, ..you don>t reckon the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre - the Ewa
Beach Institute of Geology and Geophysics - might have taken it off
him, do you? ..after that remark he made about Florian being a
disgrace to his institution? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
oriel36
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
On Nov 1, 2:07 pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
[quote]oriel36 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_...
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. (Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
[/quote]
I am an astronomer in a world full of observational astrologers (who
think a 'magnification exercise' represents astronomy),that is not a
putdown but rather an unfortunate fact borne of many years of calling
attention to topics based on daily rotational and orbital dynamics and
finding nobody who can adapt to more productive premises,working
principles and the rare but important conclusion.The Wiki article was
written by such a person and especially in his point of view of
comparing the geocentric view with that of Copernicus and from there
to the geological shift to plate tectonics -
'Geological paradigm shift'
"The acceptance of the theories of continental drift and sea floor
spreading (the two key elements of plate tectonics) may be compared to
the Copernican revolution in astronomy (see Nicolaus Copernicus).
Within a matter of only several years geophysics and geology in
particular were revolutionized. The parallel is striking: just as pre-
Copernican astronomy was highly descriptive but still unable to
provide explanations for the motions of celestial objects, pre-
tectonic plate geological theories described what was observed but
struggled to provide any fundamental mechanisms. The problem lay in
the question "How?". Before acceptance of plate tectonics, geology in
particular was trapped in a "pre-Copernican" box."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_motion
In actuality,the stationary Earth 'convection cell' mechanism is
highly descriptive but is a monster that diminishes plate tectonics
and from my seat,I can take the same view as Copernicus when people
jump the tracks and start speculating on interior
composition,viscosity and other properties based on a thermal
pseudodynamic' rather than a geodynamic -
" . . . although they have extracted from them the apparent motions,
with numerical agreement, nevertheless . . . . They are just like
someone including in a picture hands, feet, head, and other limbs from
different places, well painted indeed, but not modeled from the same
body, and not in the least matching each other, so that a monster
would be produced from them rather than a man. Thus in the process of
their demonstrations, which they call their system, they are found
either to have missed out something essential, or to have brought in
something inappropriate and wholly irrelevant, which would not have
happened to them if they had followed proper principles. For if the
hypotheses which they assumed had not been fallacies, everything which
follows from them could be independently verified." De revolutionibus,
1543
Copernicus
I have no dilemma insofar as I work with rotational geodynamics and
apply the geological consequences as a matter of course and even
though huge puzzles remain that cannot be easily resolved,there is
enough physical considerations to continue pursuing crustal
geodynamics effects of planetary rotational dynamics.The
"inappropriate and wholly irrelevant" thermal 'convection cells'
creates a dilemma for people who wish to consider rotational dynamics
insofar as the highly elaborate design of the planetary interior is
built to support a 'convection' mechanism,again,it is like having a
Rolls-Royce (plate tectonics) with a pedal driven mechanism.
[quote]Plate Tectonics, .. it used to have the confidence of the Hallelujah
Chorus sung by jackhammers, .. whilst the bishops cardinals and Popes
took turns screwing a willing congregation (Ooo- Aahh) to the alto
tones of choirboys and a media cheer-squad. Candles everywhere (for
the shy) (or the super-enthusiastic), .. and the place awash with holy
water.
But these days it hardly gets a whisper in the vestry, and nothing
handed down from the altar any more.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here..." - more like.
..Wonder why... Plate Tectonics ... once a happy party. "Roll up
folks. All day every week and twice on Sundays", - now a ghost of
its former self, ...and the congregation either disconcertingly quiet,
or complaining about party poopers.
Hey, ..you>re really opening up a Pandora>s Box here, aren>t you. Can
you imagine? ... the mayhem that breaks loose once people realise
that the shape of the Earth, and all the surface deformation that goes
towards keeping it that way, has nothing to do with its internal
indigestion, but is due to it being round and spinning? Like every
other blinking planet in the solar system, and who knows where else.
I>m sure this is why he>s changed The Purple Robe of Babylon with the
Hawaiian badge for that funny motheaten yellow oufit. He>s
beginning to get a clue that for all the rubber he>s been collecting
and sticking to his front like medals, not all is well in the Church
of Plate Tectonics.
Hey, ..you don>t reckon the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre - the Ewa
Beach Institute of Geology and Geophysics - might have taken it off
him, do you? ..after that remark he made about Florian being a
disgrace to his institution?
[/quote]
Florian is a typical empiricist with no interest in geology other than
as a platform for grandstanding but he has managed along with you,to
expose the weakness of the 'convection' mechanism underlying plate
tectonics and perhaps exposed those who adhere to 'convection cells'
as being on par with your premise and conclusion.
There is no need to constantly publish the man>s place of employment
as if that is going to help you,in any case,the shift to rotational
dynamics effects on crustal geodynamics should be well under way were
it not for the particular dilemma created between the attempt to
organize the interior around 'convection' instead of organizing the
composition,viscosity and other factors around rotational dynamics and
that rather large 40 Km spherical deviation clue.
Perhaps it is sad to see the inheritors of plate tectonics prefer to
make themselves feel better at your expense rather than look at the
corner they have painted themselves into.If the guy who wrote the Wiki
article is so gung-ho about the dramatic shift to plate tectonics
after a short rejection then it should be a stroll in the park
jettisoning the ad hoc thermal 'convection' and turning to rotational
dynamics. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
don findlay
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:17 pm Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
oriel36 wrote:
[quote]On Nov 1, 2:07�pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_....
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous �interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. �Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. �Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. �(Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
I am an astronomer in a world full of observational astrologers (who
think a 'magnification exercise' represents astronomy),that is not a
putdown but rather an unfortunate fact borne of many years of calling
attention to topics based on daily rotational and orbital dynamics and
finding nobody who can adapt to more productive premises,working
principles and the rare but important conclusion.
[/quote]
Observation first. Establish the facts. Very important. Birds and
bees are not the same as whales, although they all swim about in
'mediums'.
[quote]The Wiki article was
written by such a person and especially in his point of view of
comparing the geocentric view with that of Copernicus and from there
to the geological shift to plate tectonics -
'Geological paradigm shift'
"The acceptance of the theories of continental drift and sea floor
spreading (the two key elements of plate tectonics) may be compared to
the Copernican revolution in astronomy (see Nicolaus Copernicus).
Within a matter of only several years geophysics and geology in
particular were revolutionized.
[/quote]
Yes, but the reason for that was practical, not scientific. There was
an significant emergent academia, and an imperative to publish. With
everybody squabbling there was little chance of anything published
carrying more weight than the next. Which affects careers. So there
is Money. And who gives and who receives. And the powerful American
Economy after the war. And a need for the Advancement of Science in
the face of those damm Ruskies. American money got poured into
American Universities. Get a place in a prestigious American
University and your career was virtually assured, and Harry Hess
("Harry") with his Hollywood Looks at a time when America was reliving
its recent Pacific past was just the goer.
http://tinyurl.com/5hwh2k
(Carey turned down his offer by the way.) Everybody sided with
Harry. And why wouldn>t they when to go with the flow meant you got
published no questions asked? ("The gift that keeps on giving"). But
those guys stated very clearly that what they were saying was very
tentative, far removed from fact, and grounded heavily in
assumptions.
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subass.html
which has been forgotten in the need for all the hangers-off- the-back-
of-the bandwagon to put their careers ahead of the science and the
common logic which makes us rational human beings. (You don>t really
think they believe the crap the put around, do you? It>s a game of
chess, or Chinese Chequers. You only have to read the way that Stuart
answers questions to see that.
The American Economy dominated science for reasons of money, not the
science.
There is logic in going with the flow, and it>s nothing to do with
science. Going with the flow is the sterile child that science
begets, and it was illustrated EXACTLY by that example of the shift
from Continental drift (and the resistance to it) to Plate Tectonics
and its overwhelming acceptance. Why otherwise would it have been
overwhelming in a natural milieu of questions and uncertainty? Wilson
of the Wilson Cycles cops flack for his vacillation between an
Expanding Earth and Plate Tectonics, ..but why wouldn>t he (in
America), when Carey (who influenced him) was in Tasmania?
[quote]The parallel is striking: just as pre-
Copernican astronomy was highly descriptive but still unable to
provide explanations for the motions of celestial objects, pre-
tectonic plate geological theories described what was observed but
struggled to provide any fundamental mechanisms. The problem lay in
the question "How?". Before acceptance of plate tectonics, geology in
particular was trapped in a "pre-Copernican" box."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_motion
[/quote]
And so it should be still! The last decades have provided us with
unprecendented capability of dealing with the taxonomic tools to
establish the geological facts. But nobody>s interested in them.
Everybody prefers dancing to the construction that winks in and out of
sanity, and that has more arms and legs than an Indian Swami, every
one of them a detachable and disposable illusion:-
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subcrux.html
And why? Because it>s manipulable (where the facts aren>t.) ("There
is nothing so damnable as facts etc etc.")
[quote]
In actuality,the stationary Earth 'convection cell' mechanism is
highly descriptive but is a monster that diminishes plate tectonics
and from my seat,I can take the same view as Copernicus when people
jump the tracks and start speculating on interior
composition,viscosity and other properties based on a thermal
pseudodynamic' rather than a geodynamic -
[/quote]
By every logical consideration the "convection cell mechanism" is an
illusion. Why else do you think Stuart (or any one else for that
matter) can>t answer the simple questions I raise in that other
thread? http://tinyurl.com/6y5xop
[quote]
" . . . although they have extracted from them the apparent motions,
with numerical agreement, nevertheless . . . . They are just like
someone including in a picture hands, feet, head, and other limbs from
different places, well painted indeed, but not modeled from the same
body, and not in the least matching each other, so that a monster
would be produced from them rather than a man. Thus in the process of
their demonstrations, which they call their system, they are found
either to have missed out something essential, or to have brought in
something inappropriate and wholly irrelevant, which would not have
happened to them if they had followed proper principles. For if the
hypotheses which they assumed had not been fallacies, everything which
follows from them could be independently verified." De revolutionibus,
1543
Copernicus
[/quote]
Copernicus must have been impressed with Bollywood as well.
[quote]
I have no dilemma insofar as I work with rotational geodynamics and
apply the geological consequences as a matter of course and even
though huge puzzles remain that cannot be easily resolved,there is
enough physical considerations to continue pursuing crustal
geodynamics effects of planetary rotational dynamics.The
"inappropriate and wholly irrelevant" thermal 'convection cells'
creates a dilemma for people who wish to consider rotational dynamics
insofar as the highly elaborate design of the planetary interior is
built to support a 'convection' mechanism,again,it is like having a
Rolls-Royce (plate tectonics) with a pedal driven mechanism.
[/quote]
A real hoot, isn>t it. But that>s the pay-off for going along with
Harry. Or at least, what the career artists at the time made of what
he said.
[quote]
Plate Tectonics, .. �it used to have the confidence of the Hallelujah
Chorus sung by jackhammers, .. whilst the bishops cardinals and Popes
took turns screwing a willing congregation (Ooo- Aahh) �to the alto
tones of choirboys and a media cheer-squad. �Candles everywhere (for
the shy) (or the super-enthusiastic), .. and the place awash with holy
water.
But these days it hardly gets a whisper in the vestry, and nothing
handed down from the altar any more.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here..." - more like.
..Wonder why... � Plate Tectonics ... once a happy party. � "Roll up
folks. �All day every week and twice on Sundays", - now �a ghost of
its former self, ...and the congregation either disconcertingly quiet,
or complaining about party poopers.
Hey, ..you>re really opening up a Pandora>s Box here, aren>t you. �Can
you imagine? �... the mayhem that breaks loose once people realise
that the shape of the Earth, and all the surface deformation that goes
towards keeping it that way, has nothing to do with its internal
indigestion, but is due to it being round and spinning? �Like every
other blinking planet in the solar system, and who knows where else.
I>m sure this is why he>s changed The Purple Robe of Babylon with the
Hawaiian badge for that funny motheaten yellow oufit. � �He>s
beginning to get a clue that for all the rubber he>s been collecting
and sticking to his front like medals, not all is well in the Church
of Plate Tectonics.
Hey, ..you don>t reckon the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre - the Ewa
Beach Institute of Geology and Geophysics - might have taken it off
him, do you? ..after that remark he made about Florian being a
disgrace to his institution?
Florian is a typical empiricist with no interest in geology other than
as a platform for grandstanding but he has managed along with you,to
expose the weakness of the 'convection' mechanism underlying plate
tectonics and perhaps exposed those who adhere to 'convection cells'
as being on par with your premise and conclusion.
[/quote]
No problem either. Easy as Pie. Surely you don>t mean to say that
the world had to wait for Florian and me to do it? If it>s that easy
the point you *should* be making is how come nobody else is, or at
least picking it up and asking likewise questions of those Popes and
Bishops. I put it to you that the congregation really enjoys being
shafted to the swelling strains of the Hallelujah Chorus, provided the
iconography is colourful - which point Jo has picked up on in her
complaint of "pablum"
http://tinyurl.com/6cj9mh
[quote]
There is no need to constantly publish the man>s place of employment
as if that is going to help you,
[/quote]
He>s been publishing his moniker here for years thinking it helps him
and works as an apagos satanos to keep difficult questions at bay.
I>m just helping him since he seems to have lost it recently.
(Dropped his cross.) (Chicken man, ...Bo Peep. How many guises does
this guy go under?)
[quote]in any case,the shift to rotational
dynamics effects on crustal geodynamics should be well under way were
it not for the particular dilemma created between the attempt to
organize the interior around 'convection' instead of organizing the
composition,viscosity and other factors around rotational dynamics and
that rather large 40 Km spherical deviation clue.
[/quote]
You keep making this mistake of thinking this is about the science.
It has *nothing* to do with the science. Absolutely nothing. And
I>ve shown that ad nauseum by the plethora of responses here to every
page I>ve put up showing how nonsensical Plate Tectonics is.
Everybody knows it>s nonsense, in every aspect. "Mindnumbingly
boring", says Jo. " I prefer Sulphur in Paradise instead" says
Barbara. You>re just about the only sane guy here pointing out about
rotation. Why do you think nobody>s got anything to say? Because
it>s obvious. It>s the underlying meme that Plate Tectonics is
hanging its hat on hoping it will get it out of this mess. But Memes
are unspoken, they are the urban myths of science, .. Nobody knows
wher it comes from but everybody knows the punchline, ..intuitively.
Like "convection drives plate tectonics", when by all logic there are
no plates and there is no convection; like "Plate collision crumples
the crust and pushes up mountains", (when there are no plates) when
there is no collisional movement, and the highest mountains of the
world are uncrumpled.
Stuart has gained his legitimacy here (with henchman george) as a
headkicker of anyone contradicting Plate Tectonics. He thinks it
important that its sanctity be maintained - almost at all cost. Not
*once* has he *ever* put forward *any* conundrum or point of
controversy for rational appraisal, yet everyone knows the more youo
get to know about something, the more (and deeper) questions are
raised. He only ever fronts up when he sees an opportunity to put
the boot in. Just check out any google archive if you think
otherwise. His role here is inscribed in googlestone . If he can>t
answer, he hopes by shutting up that people will see him on high
ground. It>s an appeal to the congregation and the iconography. He
understands both very well.
[quote]
Perhaps it is sad to see the inheritors of plate tectonics prefer to
make themselves feel better at your expense rather than look at the
corner they have painted themselves into.
[/quote]
Frankly, I think they really don>t know yet the corner they>ve painted
themselves into, or if they do they need to put up with it till the
paint dries. It>s an example of convergence and predictability that
Jonathan>s on about. It>s just a matter of time till there>s a rush.
Which there will be, just like with Wegener, after the crucifixion.
[quote]If the guy who wrote the Wiki
article is so gung-ho about the dramatic shift to plate tectonics
after a short rejection then it should be a stroll in the park
jettisoning the ad hoc thermal 'convection' and turning to rotational
dynamics.
[/quote]
Scientifically sure, .. and that>s the way it will be presented in the
future. They>ll just close the book on all the promulgated rubbish
and people will wonder how things could ever have been otherwise.
Everybody will forget in a week. But for the meantime, again, it>s
not about the science.
It>s far from the 'science'. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
oriel36
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 8:49 am Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
On Nov 2, 12:17 am, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
[quote]oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 1, 2:07 pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_...
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. (Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
I am an astronomer in a world full of observational astrologers (who
think a 'magnification exercise' represents astronomy),that is not a
putdown but rather an unfortunate fact borne of many years of calling
attention to topics based on daily rotational and orbital dynamics and
finding nobody who can adapt to more productive premises,working
principles and the rare but important conclusion.
Observation first. Establish the facts.
[/quote]
No,here is the way to go about things -
"Scientists still do not appear to understand sufficiently that all
earth sciences must contribute evidence toward unveiling the state of
our planet in earlier times, and that the truth of the matter can only
be reached by combing all this evidence. . . It is only by combing the
information furnished by all the earth sciences that we can hope to
determine 'truth' here, that is to say, to find the picture that sets
out all the known facts in the best arrangement and that therefore has
the highest degree of probability. Further, we have to be prepared
always for the possibility that each new discovery, no matter what
science furnishes it, may modify the conclusions we draw." Wegener
I look at how geology is discussed here and the ebb and flow between
premises and conclusions based on surface correlations and it looks
like a planetary autopsy is being performed and insofar as people
have yet to appreciate that the planet has incredible dynamics to it,
and echoing Wegener>s approach ,it is the ability to move comfortably
between astronomy and geology or indeed any other relevant discipline
is what makes the pursuit worthwhile.
Very important. Birds and
[quote]bees are not the same as whales, although they all swim about in
'mediums'.
[/quote]
[quote]The Wiki article was
written by such a person and especially in his point of view of
comparing the geocentric view with that of Copernicus and from there
to the geological shift to plate tectonics -
'Geological paradigm shift'
"The acceptance of the theories of continental drift and sea floor
spreading (the two key elements of plate tectonics) may be compared to
the Copernican revolution in astronomy (see Nicolaus Copernicus).
Within a matter of only several years geophysics and geology in
particular were revolutionized.
Yes, but the reason for that was practical, not scientific. There was
an significant emergent academia, and an imperative to publish. With
everybody squabbling there was little chance of anything published
carrying more weight than the next. Which affects careers. So there
is Money. And who gives and who receives. And the powerful American
Economy after the war. And a need for the Advancement of Science in
the face of those damm Ruskies. American money got poured into
American Universities. Get a place in a prestigious American
University and your career was virtually assured, and Harry Hess
("Harry") with his Hollywood Looks at a time when America was reliving
its recent Pacific past was just the goer.http://tinyurl.com/5hwh2k
(Carey turned down his offer by the way.) Everybody sided with
Harry. And why wouldn>t they when to go with the flow meant you got
published no questions asked? ("The gift that keeps on giving").
[/quote]
Stringing together buzzwords , snappy sentences and soundbites is
just as irritating as couching poor geological and astronomical
reasoning in abstruse technical language and I have known nobody in
astronomy and few in geology who can actually discuss different
aspects of enjoyable topics as though the ideas themselves were
important.It must seem great to post a response designed to impress
the hell out of yourselves and others but that leaves little room for
adding details to geological evolution or the possible dynamics behind
events such as Earthquakes arising from crustal motion.
[quote]those guys stated very clearly that what they were saying was very
tentative, far removed from fact, and grounded heavily in
assumptions.http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subass.html
which has been forgotten in the need for all the hangers-off- the-back-
of-the bandwagon to put their careers ahead of the science and the
common logic which makes us rational human beings. (You don>t really
think they believe the crap the put around, do you? It>s a game of
chess, or Chinese Chequers. You only have to read the way that Stuart
answers questions to see that.
[/quote]
There are more than a few people who wish to consider rotational
dynamics and its geological effects but do not know how to proceed or
find their way out of the particular dilemma created by organizing the
interior composition and viscosity around a thermal 'convection'
mechanism.There is no real problem ,it is just revisiting the approach
Wegener took by taking a wider view and in this case by looking at
daily rotation and the planet>s shape thereby resolving the difficulty
of removing the narrow view based on thermal convection.A
complimentary addition to Wegener>s multi-disciplined endeavor is also
found in the same approach of Pascal with the benefit of easing the
concerns of those who remain stuck with limited views such as the ad
hoc 'convection cell' mechanism -
"When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he
errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that
side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to
him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he
sees that he was not mistaken and that he only failed to see all
sides. Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does
not like to be mistaken, and that perhaps arises from the fact that
man naturally cannot see everything, and that naturally he cannot err
in the side he looks at, since the perceptions of our senses are
always true. People are generally better persuaded by the reasons
which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come
into the mind of others." Pascal
I am a Christian and moving from local to global or higher levels is
just a tenet of my faith and I believe Pascal is drawing on the same
mode of expression in whatever endeavor is pursued.It may be felt as a
shift in responsibilities rather than the idea of superiority which is
why I always remind readers that if all they can manage is ee or
thermal convection then that is fine but the physical considerations
of both drag down plate tectonics.
[quote]The American Economy dominated science for reasons of money, not the
science.
There is logic in going with the flow, and it>s nothing to do with
science. Going with the flow is the sterile child that science
begets, and it was illustrated EXACTLY by that example of the shift
from Continental drift (and the resistance to it) to Plate Tectonics
and its overwhelming acceptance. Why otherwise would it have been
overwhelming in a natural milieu of questions and uncertainty? Wilson
of the Wilson Cycles cops flack for his vacillation between an
Expanding Earth and Plate Tectonics, ..but why wouldn>t he (in
America), when Carey (who influenced him) was in Tasmania?
[/quote]
[quote]The parallel is striking: just as pre-
Copernican astronomy was highly descriptive but still unable to
provide explanations for the motions of celestial objects, pre-
tectonic plate geological theories described what was observed but
struggled to provide any fundamental mechanisms. The problem lay in
the question "How?". Before acceptance of plate tectonics, geology in
particular was trapped in a "pre-Copernican" box."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_...
And so it should be still! The last decades have provided us with
unprecendented capability of dealing with the taxonomic tools to
establish the geological facts. But nobody>s interested in them.
Everybody prefers dancing to the construction that winks in and out of
sanity, and that has more arms and legs than an Indian Swami, every
one of them a detachable and disposable illusion:-http://users.indigo.net..au/don/nonsense/subcrux.html
And why? Because it>s manipulable (where the facts aren>t.) ("There
is nothing so damnable as facts etc etc.")
In actuality,the stationary Earth 'convection cell' mechanism is
highly descriptive but is a monster that diminishes plate tectonics
and from my seat,I can take the same view as Copernicus when people
jump the tracks and start speculating on interior
composition,viscosity and other properties based on a thermal
pseudodynamic' rather than a geodynamic -
By every logical consideration the "convection cell mechanism" is an
illusion. Why else do you think Stuart (or any one else for that
matter) can>t answer the simple questions I raise in that other
thread? http://tinyurl.com/6y5xop
" . . . although they have extracted from them the apparent motions,
with numerical agreement, nevertheless . . . . They are just like
someone including in a picture hands, feet, head, and other limbs from
different places, well painted indeed, but not modeled from the same
body, and not in the least matching each other, so that a monster
would be produced from them rather than a man. Thus in the process of
their demonstrations, which they call their system, they are found
either to have missed out something essential, or to have brought in
something inappropriate and wholly irrelevant, which would not have
happened to them if they had followed proper principles. For if the
hypotheses which they assumed had not been fallacies, everything which
follows from them could be independently verified." De revolutionibus,
1543
Copernicus
Copernicus must have been impressed with Bollywood as well.
I have no dilemma insofar as I work with rotational geodynamics and
apply the geological consequences as a matter of course and even
though huge puzzles remain that cannot be easily resolved,there is
enough physical considerations to continue pursuing crustal
geodynamics effects of planetary rotational dynamics.The
"inappropriate and wholly irrelevant" thermal 'convection cells'
creates a dilemma for people who wish to consider rotational dynamics
insofar as the highly elaborate design of the planetary interior is
built to support a 'convection' mechanism,again,it is like having a
Rolls-Royce (plate tectonics) with a pedal driven mechanism.
A real hoot, isn>t it. But that>s the pay-off for going along with
Harry. Or at least, what the career artists at the time made of what
he said.
Plate Tectonics, .. it used to have the confidence of the Hallelujah
Chorus sung by jackhammers, .. whilst the bishops cardinals and Popes
took turns screwing a willing congregation (Ooo- Aahh) to the alto
tones of choirboys and a media cheer-squad. Candles everywhere (for
the shy) (or the super-enthusiastic), .. and the place awash with holy
water.
But these days it hardly gets a whisper in the vestry, and nothing
handed down from the altar any more.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here..." - more like.
..Wonder why... Plate Tectonics ... once a
...
read more »[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
don findlay
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
oriel36 wrote:
[quote]On Nov 2, 12:17�am, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 1, 2:07 pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_...
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. (Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
I am an astronomer in a world full of observational astrologers (who
think a 'magnification exercise' �represents astronomy),that is not a
putdown but rather an unfortunate fact borne of many years of calling
attention to topics based on daily rotational and orbital dynamics and
finding nobody who can adapt to more productive premises,working
principles and the rare but important conclusion.
Observation first. �Establish the facts.
No,here is the way to go about things -
"Scientists still do not appear to understand sufficiently that all
earth sciences must contribute evidence toward unveiling the state of
our planet in earlier times, and that the truth of the matter can only
be reached by combing all this evidence. . . It is only by combing the
information furnished by all the earth sciences that we can hope to
determine 'truth' here, that is to say, to find the picture that sets
out all the known facts in the best arrangement and that therefore has
the highest degree of probability. Further, we have to be prepared
always for the possibility that each new discovery, no matter what
science furnishes it, may modify the conclusions we draw." Wegener
I look at how geology is discussed here and the ebb and flow between
premises and conclusions based on surface correlations and it looks
like a planetary autopsy is being performed and insofar as people
have yet to appreciate that the planet has incredible dynamics to it,
and echoing Wegener>s approach ,it is the ability to move comfortably
between astronomy and geology or indeed any other relevant discipline
is what makes the pursuit worthwhile.
Very important. �Birds and
bees are not the same as whales, although they all swim about in
'mediums'.
The Wiki article was
written by such a person and especially in his point of view of
comparing the geocentric view with that of Copernicus �and from there
to the geological shift to plate tectonics -
'Geological paradigm shift'
"The acceptance of the theories of continental drift and sea floor
spreading (the two key elements of plate tectonics) may be compared to
the Copernican revolution in astronomy (see Nicolaus Copernicus).
Within a matter of only several years geophysics and geology in
particular were revolutionized.
Yes, but the reason for that was practical, not scientific. �There was
an significant emergent academia, and an imperative to publish. �With
everybody squabbling there was little chance of anything published
carrying more weight than the next. �Which affects careers. �So there
is Money. �And who gives and who receives. �And the powerful American
Economy after the war. �And a need for the Advancement of Science in
the face of those damm Ruskies. � American money got poured into
American Universities. �Get a place in a prestigious American
University and your career was virtually assured, and Harry Hess
("Harry") with his Hollywood Looks at a time when America was reliving
its recent Pacific past was just the goer.http://tinyurl.com/5hwh2k
(Carey turned down his offer by the way.) �Everybody sided with
Harry. �And why wouldn>t they when to go with the flow meant you got
published no questions asked? ("The gift that keeps on giving"). �
Stringing together buzzwords , snappy sentences and soundbites is
just as irritating as couching poor geological and astronomical
reasoning in abstruse technical language and I have known nobody in
astronomy and few in geology who can actually discuss different
aspects of enjoyable topics as though the ideas themselves were
important.It must seem great to post a response designed to impress
the hell out of yourselves and others but that leaves little room for
adding details to geological evolution or the possible dynamics behind
events such as Earthquakes arising from crustal motion.
those guys stated very clearly that what they were saying was very
tentative, far removed from fact, �and grounded heavily in
assumptions.http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subass.html
which has been forgotten in the need for all the hangers-off- the-back-
of-the bandwagon to put their careers ahead of the science and the
common logic which makes us rational human beings. (You don>t really
think they believe the crap the put around, do you? �It>s a game of
chess, or Chinese Chequers. �You only have to read the way that Stuart
answers questions to see that.
There are more than a few people who wish to consider rotational
dynamics and its geological effects but do not know how to proceed or
find their way out of the particular dilemma created by organizing the
interior composition and viscosity around a thermal 'convection'
mechanism.There is no real problem ,it is just revisiting the approach
Wegener took by taking a wider view and in this case by looking at
daily rotation and the planet>s shape thereby resolving the difficulty
of removing the narrow view based on thermal convection.A
complimentary addition to Wegener>s multi-disciplined endeavor is also
found in the same approach of Pascal with the benefit of easing the
concerns of those who remain stuck with limited views such as the ad
hoc 'convection cell' mechanism -
"When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he
errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that
side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to
him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he
sees that he was not mistaken and that he only failed to see all
sides. Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does
not like to be mistaken, and that perhaps arises from the fact that
man naturally cannot see everything, and that naturally he cannot err
in the side he looks at, since the perceptions of our senses are
always true. People are generally better persuaded by the reasons
which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come
into the mind of others." Pascal
I am a Christian and moving from local to global or higher levels is
just a tenet of my faith and I believe Pascal is drawing on the same
mode of expression in whatever endeavor is pursued.It may be felt as a
shift in responsibilities rather than the idea of superiority which is
why I always remind readers that if all they can manage is ee or
thermal convection then that is fine but the physical considerations
of both drag down plate tectonics.
The American Economy dominated science for reasons of money, not the
science.
There is logic in going with the flow, and it>s nothing to do with
science. �Going with the flow is the sterile child that science
begets, and it was illustrated EXACTLY by that example of the shift
from Continental drift (and the resistance to it) to Plate Tectonics
and its overwhelming acceptance. �Why otherwise would it have been
overwhelming in a natural milieu of questions and uncertainty? �Wilson
of the Wilson Cycles cops flack for his vacillation between an
Expanding Earth and Plate Tectonics, ..but why wouldn>t he (in
America), when Carey (who influenced him) was in Tasmania?
The parallel is striking: just as pre-
Copernican astronomy was highly descriptive but still unable to
provide explanations for the motions of celestial objects, pre-
tectonic plate geological theories described what was observed but
struggled to provide any fundamental mechanisms. The problem lay in
the question "How?". Before acceptance of plate tectonics, geology in
particular was trapped in a "pre-Copernican" box."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_....
And so it should be still! �The last decades have provided us with
unprecendented capability of dealing with the taxonomic tools to
establish the geological facts. But nobody>s interested in them.
Everybody prefers dancing to the construction that winks in and out of
sanity, and that has more arms and legs than an Indian Swami, every
one of them a detachable and disposable illusion:-http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subcrux.html
And why? �Because it>s manipulable (where the facts aren>t.) �("There
is nothing so damnable as facts etc etc.")
In actuality,the stationary Earth 'convection cell' mechanism is
highly descriptive but is a monster that diminishes plate tectonics
and from my seat,I can take the same view as Copernicus when people
jump the tracks and start speculating on interior
composition,viscosity and other properties based on a thermal
pseudodynamic' rather than a geodynamic -
�By every logical consideration the "convection cell mechanism" is an
illusion. �Why else do you think Stuart (or any one else for that
matter) can>t answer the simple questions I raise in that other
thread? �http://tinyurl.com/6y5xop
" . . . although they have extracted from them the apparent motions,
with numerical agreement, nevertheless . . . . They are just like
someone including in a picture hands, feet, head, and other limbs from
different places, well painted indeed, but not modeled from the same
body, and not in the least matching each other, so that a monster
would be produced from them rather than a man. Thus in the process of
their demonstrations, which they call their system, they are found
either to have missed out something essential, or to have brought in
something inappropriate and wholly irrelevant, which would not have
happened to them if they had followed proper principles. For if the
hypotheses which they assumed had not been fallacies, everything which
follows from them could be independently verified." De revolutionibus,
1543
Copernicus
Copernicus must have been impressed with Bollywood as well.
I have no dilemma insofar as I work with rotational geodynamics and
apply the geological �consequences as a matter of course and even
though huge puzzles remain that cannot be easily resolved,there is
enough physical considerations to continue pursuing crustal
geodynamics effects of planetary rotational dynamics.The
"inappropriate and wholly irrelevant" �thermal �'convection cells'
creates a dilemma for people who wish to consider rotational dynamics
insofar as the highly elaborate design of the planetary �interior is
built to support �a 'convection' mechanism,again,it is like having a
Rolls-Royce (plate tectonics) �with a pedal driven mechanism.
A real hoot, isn>t it. �But that>s the pay-off for going along with
Harry. �Or at least, what the career artists at the time made of what
he said.
Plate Tectonics, .. it used to have the confidence of the Hallelujah
Chorus sung by jackhammers, .. whilst the bishops cardinals and Popes
took turns screwing a willing congregation (Ooo- Aahh) to the alto
tones of choirboys and a media cheer-squad. Candles everywhere (for
the shy) (or the super-enthusiastic), .. and the place awash with holy
water.
But these days it hardly gets a whisper in the vestry, and nothing
handed down from the altar any more.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here..." - more like.
..Wonder why... Plate Tectonics ... once a
...
read more �
[/quote]
willreply later |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
oriel36
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: Re: Wiki article |
|
|
No,leave it be.
It is not a private discussion and I have no interest in complainers.
The matter will rest until I feel it time to bring up again.
On Nov 2, 7:37 pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
[quote]oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 2, 12:17 am, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 1, 2:07 pm, don findlay <d...@tower.net.au> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#Driving_forces_of_plate_...
It is a little bewildering to see people actually try and discuss
geodynamics as it applies to the evolution of surface crust and
subsequently the motion of the fractured plates as though these things
must be spoken in a whisper in order not to offend those who believe
in thermal convection cells which require no reference to daily
rotation of to the Earth>s shape.
I is not a matter of convincing people that the mid Atlantic ridge
which almost spans the entire length of the globe and the orientation
of the ridge almost dictates a rotational component but rather,the
details of why the planet has a spherical deviation due to the
rotation of the viscous composition remain out of bounds as long as
the thermal 'convection cells' remain.
To exempt the Earth>s viscous interior from differential rotation is
almost shocking and this is not because I have found a means to link
planetary shape with crustal dynamics but more that it jettisons the
troublesome 'convection cell' mechanism which is plaguing productive
discussions as to the role rotational dynamics plays in evolutionary
geology.
http://www.oso.tamucc.edu/labs/lab4/satlantic.jpg
Freed from bothering with thermal convection as a mechanism,the
remarkable symmetry of crustal development off the entire length of
the ridge with the expected tapering off at the polar regions,at least
in terms of the underlying differential rotation mechanism,I can>t see
why geologists are not more open about the role of rotation.This is
not a plea to people who are convinced of thermal convection but
rather a lovely addition to the outlines of plate tectonics and those
who subscribe to it by linking astronomy with geology.
You need to shout louder here, Gerald. Stuart at least surely has an
answer as to why those ridges in that link you cite are not offset by
the spreading ridges, and why all the convection since the ocean
floors opened is not offsetting them, and why when the plates change
direction the ridges don>t, .. and why when the ridges move away from
the continents the continents don>t shrink - but he>s not telling
anybody. Either he>s being a dog-in-a-manger, or he>s treating it
like a secret. (Hell, .. you>d think he>d at least recommend a
*book*.)
I am an astronomer in a world full of observational astrologers (who
think a 'magnification exercise' represents astronomy),that is not a
putdown but rather an unfortunate fact borne of many years of calling
attention to topics based on daily rotational and orbital dynamics and
finding nobody who can adapt to more productive premises,working
principles and the rare but important conclusion.
Observation first. Establish the facts.
No,here is the way to go about things -
"Scientists still do not appear to understand sufficiently that all
earth sciences must contribute evidence toward unveiling the state of
our planet in earlier times, and that the truth of the matter can only
be reached by combing all this evidence. . . It is only by combing the
information furnished by all the earth sciences that we can hope to
determine 'truth' here, that is to say, to find the picture that sets
out all the known facts in the best arrangement and that therefore has
the highest degree of probability. Further, we have to be prepared
always for the possibility that each new discovery, no matter what
science furnishes it, may modify the conclusions we draw." Wegener
I look at how geology is discussed here and the ebb and flow between
premises and conclusions based on surface correlations and it looks
like a planetary autopsy is being performed and insofar as people
have yet to appreciate that the planet has incredible dynamics to it,
and echoing Wegener>s approach ,it is the ability to move comfortably
between astronomy and geology or indeed any other relevant discipline
is what makes the pursuit worthwhile.
Very important. Birds and
bees are not the same as whales, although they all swim about in
'mediums'.
The Wiki article was
written by such a person and especially in his point of view of
comparing the geocentric view with that of Copernicus and from there
to the geological shift to plate tectonics -
'Geological paradigm shift'
"The acceptance of the theories of continental drift and sea floor
spreading (the two key elements of plate tectonics) may be compared to
the Copernican revolution in astronomy (see Nicolaus Copernicus).
Within a matter of only several years geophysics and geology in
particular were revolutionized.
Yes, but the reason for that was practical, not scientific. There was
an significant emergent academia, and an imperative to publish. With
everybody squabbling there was little chance of anything published
carrying more weight than the next. Which affects careers. So there
is Money. And who gives and who receives. And the powerful American
Economy after the war. And a need for the Advancement of Science in
the face of those damm Ruskies. American money got poured into
American Universities. Get a place in a prestigious American
University and your career was virtually assured, and Harry Hess
("Harry") with his Hollywood Looks at a time when America was reliving
its recent Pacific past was just the goer.http://tinyurl.com/5hwh2k
(Carey turned down his offer by the way.) Everybody sided with
Harry. And why wouldn>t they when to go with the flow meant you got
published no questions asked? ("The gift that keeps on giving").
Stringing together buzzwords , snappy sentences and soundbites is
just as irritating as couching poor geological and astronomical
reasoning in abstruse technical language and I have known nobody in
astronomy and few in geology who can actually discuss different
aspects of enjoyable topics as though the ideas themselves were
important.It must seem great to post a response designed to impress
the hell out of yourselves and others but that leaves little room for
adding details to geological evolution or the possible dynamics behind
events such as Earthquakes arising from crustal motion.
> those guys stated very clearly that what they were saying was very
tentative, far removed from fact, and grounded heavily in
assumptions.http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/subass.html
which has been forgotten in the need for all the hangers-off- the-back-
of-the bandwagon to put their careers ahead of the science and the
common logic which makes us rational human beings. (You don>t really
think they believe the crap the put around, do you? It>s a game of
chess, or Chinese Chequers. You only have to read the way that Stuart
answers questions to see that.
There are more than a few people who wish to consider rotational
dynamics and its geological effects but do not know how to proceed or
find their way out of the particular dilemma created by organizing the
interior composition and viscosity around a thermal 'convection'
mechanism.There is no real problem ,it is just revisiting the approach
Wegener took by taking a wider view and in this case by looking at
daily rotation and the planet>s shape thereby resolving the difficulty
of removing the narrow view based on thermal convection.A
complimentary addition to Wegener>s multi-disciplined endeavor is also
found in the same approach of Pascal with the benefit of easing the
concerns of those who remain stuck with limited views such as the ad
hoc 'convection cell' mechanism -
"When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he
errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that
side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to
him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he
sees that he was not mistaken and that he only failed to see all
sides. Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does
not like to be mistaken, and that perhaps arises from the fact that
man naturally cannot see everything, and that naturally he cannot err
in the side he looks at, since the perceptions of our senses are
always true. People are generally better persuaded by the reasons
which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come
into the mind of others." Pascal
I am a Christian and moving from local to global or higher levels is
just a tenet of my faith and I believe Pascal is drawing on the same
mode of expression in whatever endeavor is pursued.It may be felt as a
shift in responsibilities rather than the idea of superiority which is
why I always remind readers that if all they can manage is ee or
thermal convection then that is fine but the physical considerations
of both drag down plate tectonics.
The American Economy dominated science for reasons of money, not the
science.
There is logic in going with the flow, and it>s nothing to do with
science. Going with the flow is the sterile child that science
begets, and it was illustrated EXACTLY by that example of the shift
from Continental drift (and the
...
read more »[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
