|
|
Topic started on 11-1-2009 @ 10:14 AM by MsSmartypants
|
                       +3 more
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Fragile Earth topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 11:02 AM by robwerden
|
 
It has been talked about, but I think it does merit new talk from time to time.
It is a very convincing theory. I personally subscribe that it is more likely than the current theory, it just makes more sense.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 01:17 PM by MsSmartypants
|
reply to post by robwerden
It also seems to tie into the electric universe theory...but I am still listening to the Coast to
Coast interview so I haven't had time to assimilate everything yet.
And perhaps the hollow earth theory...but that's a little out there for me.
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 01:41 PM by defendant
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 01:44 PM by defendant
|
If I remember right, I thought, about twenty five years ago, they said the Earth was SHRINKING!
Now the Earth is GROWING! So are my socks!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 01:56 PM by and14263
|
This is the first time I have heard this theory. From what you post I find it very interesting.
I wonder if other planets may do the same?
I also wonder if this change in size is reflected in a change of mass. I'm sure the information is in what you have posted but I am yet to look
deeply. If there is a change in mass then there could be a change in the Earth's orbit, if this is the case then this could have many implications on
various ancient buildings/sites which are supposedly related to the position of stars.
It seems that mass would not increase but instead density decreases.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 02:03 PM by MsSmartypants
|
reply to post by and14263
If you listen to the video (coast to coast) You will see that mass increases as well and, yes this holds true for the other heavenly bodies as well.
They are growing also.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 02:05 PM by MsSmartypants
|
reply to post by defendant
the increase is not due to meteor strikes but is actually a result of new matter being created. The interaction of cosmic rays(energy) interacting
with "pre-matter"(dark matter, perhaps?)
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 02:25 PM by Waldy
|
If there were no oceans and just shallow waters there must have been less water. Also this theory does not explain where all the GIANT sea monsters
of the Jurassic period were living. To become giant in the oceans you need ALOT of space and ALOT of food. So if there were just shallow
waters...
...where did this monster live?
Article
And this monster that ruled the oceans about 150 million years ago.
A creature, which measured 20 meters (65 ft) from nose to tail, and weighted up to 150 tons.
BBC article
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 02:43 PM by MsSmartypants
|
reply to post by Waldy
If you listen to the coast to coast interview you will see water is constantly being created by the same mechanism that creates the additional mass
needed to explain the "growing earth". There were inland seas(lakes) that I'm sure were deep and large enough for your pleisiosaurs and such.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 02:54 PM by and14263
|
reply to post by MsSmartypants
Just got it then... this seems pretty natural. I wonder why it is not more widely discussed?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 03:17 PM by MsSmartypants
|
reply to post by and14263
as Neal Adams freely admits he is not a degreed scientist...but even if he were I doubt mainstream science would readily adopt such a radical change
in thinking unless they were absolutely forced to. As far as ancient sites matching up with astronomical features...Mr Adams asserts that all of the
universe is growing so maybe this means the sites will still match up.
And yeah, this is tacky but...could someone flag me so this thread can get on the main page? thanks if you do
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 03:49 PM by robwerden
|
 
The part about a growing earth that I think holds true to evolution is the reduced gravity due to smaller earth size would allow creatures to grow
larger. A chicken hatched on the moon would probably be taller than on hatched on earth.
As the earth got larger gravity forced animals to be smaller in size to adjust for higher gravity.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 04:40 PM by MsSmartypants
|
In another video(which I cannot find now) mr adams explains why pangea wouldn't work. Having all the land on one side of the earth and all the water
on the other, with the land weighing more than the water,would have caused the land to sink somewhat allowing the water to flood it and exposing land
where the water had been and this exposed land is no where to be found.
I will try to find the video.
I found it!
video.google.com...
tle#
[edit on 1/11/2009 by MsSmartypants]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 06:28 PM by Anonymous ATS
|
It seems possible and especially more so that the center of our earth is a molten ball of a medly of metals. Some scientist theorize that some of our
gravity is attributed to the intereactions and mass of these metals. If earth's core is cooling, like it did for mars, then our gravity would be less
and therefore the earth would be less compact. The only problem though is with the gravity theory itself. Does it really come from magnetism our is it
still not understood enough.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 07:05 PM by SumnerKagan
|
  
Sorry man. That is all bunk.
Almost every sensational statement and argument was incorrect. And, I'm not really sure where he got his "facts", but there is plenty of evidence
and information out there, that supports Pangea, and a lot of the other facts that he disputed.
Very clumsy work.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 07:13 PM by Wormwood Squirm
|
Originally posted by and14263
This is the first time I have heard this theory. From what you post I find it very interesting.
I wonder if other planets may do the same?
Yes, check out the Neal Adams videos. He has plenty. One of them is about Mars and how the huge Valles Marineris trench on Mars shrinks back
together.
For me this is convincing. He demonstrated indisputably that the Earth has grown. The evidence is that all continents shrink back together and the
Ocean Floor in the Atlantic is proven to be "NEW" earth.
Enjoy.
grammar edit
[edit on 11-1-2009 by Wormwood Squirm]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 07:23 PM by YourForever
|
 
Matter does not come from nowhere.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 07:48 PM by MsSmartypants
|
 
reply to post by YourForever
You must remember that matter is essentially "congealed" energy. He is not saying it comes from nowhere but that it is a result of interaction
between cosmic energy and "pre-matter"(darkmatter possibly). If you listen to the Coast to Coast interview he explains it in great detail.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 11-1-2009 @ 07:49 PM by TheRealDonPedros
|
It explains the mystery of how the Pterodactyls would've been able to fly. Less earth would've meant less gravity. This also explains the gargantuan
size of everything during that time period.
To the post asking about the massive marine dinosaurs, if the earth of yesteryear was 1/4 of today's size it is still a massive breeding ground for
diverse ocean life.
Peace
|
copyright & usage
|
 |