Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman73
Hello All,
I just happend to do a Geology elective subject when I was at uni some 15yrs ago. Plate Tectonics and the Expanding Earth theory were both discussed. The lecturer that I had stated that if we were to go to any of the other Geology staff and spoke to them about it, we would be promptly told that the theory was garbage but that happens in science. When the majority of academics are pro one idea it is very difficult to introduce a new idea until a number of them can be convinced. This lecturer seemed to have an open mind.
We were taught that one piece of compelling evidence for Expanding earth comes when you look at the amount of areas of sea floor spreading as opposed to areas of subduction. Looking at maps it appears that there are more areas of sea floor spreading then there are of subduction. The question arrises that if more crust is being made then is being destroyed, where does it go?
If you look at the shape of the continents as the broke up and drifted apart, it is easier to put them back together using a smaller sized Earth then to move them and fit them together using the current sized Earth.
Unfortunately, this is all I can remember of the Expanding Earth theory. Geology was after all only an elective, and the subject was entitled something like Environmental Studies. When I saw that I thought it was something to do with looking into the environment on Earth, Greenhouse effect, salination, deforestation and errosion, that kind of thing, not looking at rocks. I did hear the lecturer say that the subject was named as such to pull more people in (the environment was really big back in the mid 90"s too and it worked on me).
I am sure that with out current technology, I am sure we would be able to measure if the Earth was expnading. I know that they are constantly measuring the distance from the Earth to the Moon, I am sure something would show up there for instance.
Anyway, I have put in my 2c worth.
Regards
Paul
|
I am a geologist (and an astronomer as well). That idea you posited there is as inane as it is ridiculous...whoever told you that was either having a lend of you or didn't really know their own subject. Seafloor spreading and subduction occur at different rates in different places all over the globe and whether more seafloor is being produced than subducted is far more easily explainable via plate tectonics than by any hocus pocus that EE could pull out of its top hat. Anyone who said there are more spreading centres than subduction zones needs to have a good look at a tectonic map and then go learn basic geology before they go make statements like that to students.
It's alright to be open minded, but not to the point that your mind becomes an open sewer. If people are going to be making outlandish statements or have alternative theories, they better have good convincing evidence which can be backed up via observation and testing....otherwise it's not science, it's just wild speculation at best.
Want to read something which sums it all up very nicely, go read Rick Nolthenius's page on science and clear thinking....
here.