It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The study focuses on an area near the southwestern coast of Greenland where there is a rare outcrop of ancient rock, called the Isua Supra-crustal Belt, which have been dated at 3.8 billion years old. The Isua rocks are ophiolites, which have a green hue from the chlorite minerals within them and are found in all major mountain belts, usually located in areas associated with volcanism and plate tectonics. The Isua deposits were first described in the 1960s. They also have been found to contain fossilized evidence of the earliest bacterial life on Earth, also about 3.8 billion years old, in studies conducted in 1999 by Minik Rosing.
I second that motion IvanZana. I don't trust the Pangea theory.
The Deluge event is confusing the scientists.
I have no idea where the extra mass is coming from but I like a new theory to ponder over.
Originally posted by Hanslune
One must ask, where did the trillions and trillions of tons of mass come from? The video also dismiss the existence of subduction. Unfortunatley subuction is a well proven and observed.
The Solar system took a while to form, whose to say one of the functions of that process was for the earth to expand to produce continents and seas for the propigation of the species.
I still believe Earth used to look like Venus millions of years ago. I bet you Venus is smaller under that thick atmosphere and the mantle is just waiting to expand when the atmosphere thins out.
Remember the atmospheric pressure of Venus is much greater than earth and that may be keeping Venus compressed.
Who says there is trillions of mass added?
Subduction is not supported by observed data to the extent needed to explain geology. Subduction is used as an excuse because no other acceptable explanation is available.(Or else accept expansion)