Mainstream Science

[Avajs]

Uh, no. The Hydro-Plate Theory is funnier than plate tectonics--about the only thing it has going for it. How many H-bombs worth of energy does it take in what period of time to make it work?

Your opinion does not impress me.

The fact of the matter is that HPT explains all of the features that we see on earth far better than any other theory.

Things like:

• The mid-Atlantic ridge
• The 90 east ridge
• The location of the major mountain ranges and the associated plateaus
• The Grand Canyon
• The earth's radioactivity
• The Pacific ring of fire
• The sunken crust under the Pacific ocean
• etc. etc. etc.

Feel free to discuss your complaints about the HPT here: https://theologyonline.com/forums/the-global-flood-and-the-hydroplate-theory.254/

And your opinion makes me question your thought processes

 

[Right Divider]

And your opinion makes me question your thought processes

Yes, I understand that discussing the facts is beyond your ability and therefore you must stoop to childish insults.

 

[Avajs]

Yes, I understand that discussing the facts is beyond your ability and therefore you must stoop to childish insults.

Oh sorry, was not meant as an insult at all. I think you need some mental help and I hope you get it

 

[Right Divider]

Oh sorry, was not meant as an insult at all. I think you need some mental help and I hope you get it

Continued childishness.... how cute.

Come back when you graduate from kindergarten and are ready to discuss scientific facts like an adult.

 

[Avajs]

Continued childishness.... how cute.

Come back when you graduate from kindergarten and are ready to discuss scientific facts like an adult.

Well, pick a particular fact ans we can discuss. Your choice.

 

[Right Divider]

Well, pick a particular fact ans we can discuss. Your choice.

How about the fact that there is no "sea floor spreading" or "plate subduction"?

 

[Avajs]

How about the fact that there is no "sea floor spreading" or "plate subduction"?

How do you know that? What evidence do you have?

 

[Right Divider]

How do you know that? What evidence do you have?

Go ahead and try to support it.

 

[Avajs]

Go ahead and try to support it.

You brought it up . Ball is in your court.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You brought it up . Ball is in your court.

You're the one who brought up plate tectonics and continental drift initially.

The thread is still there for everyone to read, Avajs.

Crichton said that in a speech at Cal Tech in 2003. He was a climate change skeptic and was bemoaning the consensus then developing around climate change. I think this was not long after Mann's hockey stick graph became well known.
But Crichton overstated his complaint re science consensus. He gave several examples in his talk about consensus in science. But his examples each ended in the particular consensus changing. His examples dealt with change in consensus based on better information. One was my favorite about Alfred Wegener in the early 1900's. Wegener described continental drift based on geology, biology, paleontology etc. However, Wegener had no mechanism to support his theory. It wasn't until the middle of the last century when Heezen and Tharp, mapping the sea floor, were able to suggest a mechanism for plate tectonics that Wegener made more sense. There is now a consensus in science, a general agreement, that plate tectonics is actually the likely explanation for certain geological processes over time.
Crichton died almost 16 years ago so we cannot know if his position on climate change would have remained the same. I'll note too that Crichton was a fiction writer with an MD who never practiced. He was not a scientist. One of his complaints, maybe justified, about climate change was that emphasis and government and other money spent there took away from funds available to cure disease, feed people and ameliorate poverty. Since climate change has the potential to cause a great deal of damage to, and interference with, human culture I think understanding it is likely to effect our understanding of the impact of disease on certain areas, crop and food production and poverty. Crichton's criticism may have been well-meaning but perhaps misplaced.

 

[Avajs]

You're the one who brought up plate tectonics and continental drift initially.

The thread is still there for everyone to read, Avajs.

How do you explain the magnetic striping on either side of the mid Atlantic ridge?

 

[JudgeRightly]

How do you explain the magnetic striping on either side of the mid Atlantic ridge?

Changing the subject now?

Are you unable to support your belief in plate tectonics and continental drift?

 

[Avajs]

Changing the subject now?

Are you unable to support your belief in plate tectonics and continental drift?

Ah, are you unaware of the magnetic striping? It impacts sea floor spreading which
you claimed did not exist. See post # 26

 

[Right Divider]

Ah, are you unaware of the magnetic striping? It impacts sea floor spreading which
you claimed did not exist. See post # 26

Sea floor spreading is a silly myth. Why can't you give us your support for the idea?

P.S. The HPT explains the tension cracks quite well.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Ah, are you unaware of the magnetic striping? It impacts sea floor spreading which you claimed did not exist.

Please pay attention to who is posting what. Right Divider and I are two different people. We don't even have the same color palette for our avatars...

Please show your evidence for magnetic striping.
Please show your evidence for sea floor spreading.

See post # 26

See post #30. Ball is in your court to support your claims.

 

[Right Divider]

Ah, are you unaware of the magnetic striping? It impacts sea floor spreading which
you claimed did not exist. See post # 26

Another news flash for you. Magnetic striping is not caused by sea floor spreading, because SFS doesn't happen.

Again, the HPT thoroughly explains the magnetic variations.

 

[Yorzhik]

Ah, are you unaware of the magnetic striping? It impacts sea floor spreading which
you claimed did not exist. See post # 26

Magnetic striping is not nearly as distinct as science journalists and science grifters want it to be. It is much more pronounced nearer the surface, and it has alternate explanations that fall outside the seafloor spreading narrative. With these facts and logical doubts, you'll have to do more to support your theory.

 

[Avajs]

Magnetic striping is not nearly as distinct as science journalists and science grifters want it to be. It is much more pronounced nearer the surface, and it has alternate explanations that fall outside the seafloor spreading narrative. With these facts and logical doubts, you'll have to do more to support your theory.

Science grifters. Love it. But you did not supply any "facts or logical doubts" so a bit hard to evaluate

 

[JudgeRightly]

Science grifters. Love it. But you did not supply any "facts or logical doubts" so a bit hard to evaluate

The ball is still in your court for providing facts. See post #35.

 

[Yorzhik]

Science grifters. Love it. But you did not supply any "facts or logical doubts" so a bit hard to evaluate

That magnetic striping is more pronounced at the surface is a fact that if you didn't know it, you haven't looked into the topic. And you aren't the one that determines how much doubt about a narrative someone can have based on the facts. Thus, it's up to you to bring evidence that makes your point.

Show us your evidence for magnetic striping and sea floor spreading.