It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Planets Grow!

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by JackRuby

Originally posted by Byrd
Discussed a number of times here.

Basically, Adams is a wonderful cartoonist but doesn't even know basic high school science.


Wait a minute, your calling the guy incompetent because he doesn't buy into the bunk that is taught in high school science class?


No, I think you'll find Byrd simply said that he doesn't know basic high school science
Stop trying to twist words to your own agenda.

Adams is highly selective with his evidence - for example he believes in Pangea. Yet not in Rodinia (or the previous suspected supercontinent)? Why is that? Because Rodinia doesn't fit his ideaology.

www.palaeos.com...

If he rejects Rodina he must reject Pangea. You can't just pick and chose your evidence and expect people to take you seriously.

Now if he came up with an idea that better fitted all the evidence, fine. But coming up with a theory that requires discarding most of the evidence is - well, incompetent ......


First of all I'm not twisting words to fit any agenda, and I take offense to that comment. Byrd's comment was a hit and run that in no way contributed to the thread other than attempting to discredit Neal Adams- and frankly I'm surprised that a moderator would post in such a brief and derogatory fashion.

Secondly, where on earth do you get the idea that Neal Adams believes in Pangiea? continuitystudios.net... You should get your facts straight before you you go spouting nonsense that he is picking and choosing evidence. You obviously didn't even take the time to review any of the links that I posted for discussion. If you did, you might realize that the guy actually makes sense and provides a heck of a lot more evidence for his views than you and Byrd do combined.




posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction

Originally posted by Astyanax


There's a big valve at the South Pole. Angels are blowing into it.



But then, how do the hollow earth aliens get out? Is there an exit valve at the North Pole?


Seriously, though, does it matter if the earth is expanding? IF it is, it's doing it so slowly that it won't have any effect on us at all. And if it isn't, who cares?


I'll explain why it's important- because it affects our understanding of the entire universe. If the expanding earth theory is true (and I'm not saying that it is) it would influence other branches of science- important stuff like physics. I for one don't want my kids being taught half-baked theories and outright lies- some of the ideas that our schools try to pass off as FACT are just theories- and bad ones at that.

Posting comments like those above doesn't do anybody any good. I thought this website was for discussing ideas that go against the grain? At least that's what is implied on the ABOUT page: AboveTopSecret.com is the Internet's largest and most popular discussion board community dedicated to the intelligent exchange of ideas and debate on a wide range of "alternative topics".

I don't understand why people here find it necessary to laugh it up and make fun of others who see things differently. Such a grand idea to deny ignorance. So many people on ATS don't understand the concept.



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by JackRuby

First of all I'm not twisting words to fit any agenda, and I take offense to that comment. Byrd's comment was a hit and run that in no way contributed to the thread other than attempting to discredit Neal Adams- and frankly I'm surprised that a moderator would post in such a brief and derogatory fashion.


All Byrd said was that she doesn't think he understands basic high school science. nor do I. Nor would anyone else with the slightest knowledge of geology or other earth sciences .....

However, lack of understanding of subject is not the same as being incompetent. After all, I don't understand how to carry out a heart transplant, but that doesn't make me incompetent (does it
)



Secondly, where on earth do you get the idea that Neal Adams believes in Pangiea? continuitystudios.net... You should get your facts straight before you you go spouting nonsense that he is picking and choosing evidence. You obviously didn't even take the time to review any of the links that I posted for discussion. If you did, you might realize that the guy actually makes sense and provides a heck of a lot more evidence for his views than you and Byrd do combined.


Adams believes all the continents were once joined together in a single land mass. But why on earth would he think that unless he accepts the geological evidence for such a single landmass? But whilst he has heard of Pangea he hasn't heard of Rodinia - else he'd have used that for the basis of his ideas ...

I assume you've read a bit of Geology and are aware of the evidence for Rodinia - and indeed for other different configuration of continents? If not, I recommend Richard Fortey's book 'Earth- an Intimate History' for an easy to understand over-view of how we know about such things. Afterwards you may find Adams' ideas less compelling.



posted on Jun, 30 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I think Cameron, and Adams are correct about the expanding/growing earth theory. I also feel that the story of Creation as recited in Genesis
is also true. How? God created all matter (mass) that is currently in the Universe, He created this "system" as dynamic and alive. Not dead.
By that I mean everything in the Universe is in communication with everything else by exchanging information in the form of energy.

Yes, earth is expanding, by both the heating up of the core, and complex matter bombarding the planet, but also by direct energy exchange in the
form of communication between the obvious source (the sun) and the earth. I also believe the earth contracts. The proof of this concept would lay in our solar system in the form of `equal and opposite' reactions. If we are expanding, then something must be losing energy to us, and contracting or diminishing in energy output.

Has anybody looked at the sun to see if it too is changing its size??



new topics

top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join