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.

 

The Earth Is Growing!? Watch These Videos!

page: 3
31
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I first seen this a little over a year ago. And the most convincing part about it is the way the age of the ocean floors line up. And also, the way the ocean floors themselves look like stretch marks.

The only thing I didn't think was right was his deal about water. I think it makes more sense that at one time the world was covered in water, and that as the earth grows, the land rises up from the water. Oddly enough, this would fit genesis, and as we know, life originated in the ocean. It also explains why they find ancient aquatic fossils so far inland.

Interesting theory.




posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Just a thought, if the earth is indeed growing that is its diameter is increasing, does that mean that the crust which we stand upon is moving faster and faster relative to the core? If this theory is true then centrifugal force will increase and we move further away from the center and we will all fly off. Unless the growing increases mass and therefore gravity.
Could this be why the human race is getting taller as well?

Maybe everything I said is nonsense but its worth a thought.

Cheers.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MsSmartypants
 


Hate to be the bear of bad news, but if the earth was so small at one time, and there were only shallow seas and no ice covered poles, where di all the water come from the fills the deep oceans. The water mass alone on the planet today would have made the earth a water world. Sorry to pull the plug on this... water didnt just show up out of nowhere..



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Could someone explain this away please.
The Himalayas mountain range consist mostly of uplifted sedimentary and metamorphic rock. 70 million years ago, the Indo-Australian Plate collided with the Eurasian Plate. The Indo-Australian plate is still moving at 67 mm per year, and over the next 10 million years it will travel about 1,500 km into Asia. The Himalayas are currently rising by about 5 mm per year.

If I want to start a therory that the oceans are growing, I could make a computer model showing the above and everything else Morphing into a small lump of land. I would title it: Buy a Rowboat now!

I sited only one plate tectonics example. If anyone can disprove this Himalayas mountain range formation, then I will sell my beach front property.

Thank you.

Peace.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   
I would suspect that if the expanding earth theory has elements that are true to it, then the plate tectonics are necessarily disproved.

Expansion creating more of the heated inner earth would still need escape paths. Expansion wouldn't need to be exactly perfect. Therefore plate tectonics would still be powered by the movement of the crust floating and grinding over the mantle.

One doesn't necessarily disprove the other.

This sort of uneven expansion of a spherical structure can be seen in the universe. Coronal bursts in the sun. Suns that go nova, and the energy and mass doesn't expand out in a sphere.

[edit on 2009/1/11 by Aeons]



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
I first seen this a little over a year ago. And the most convincing part about it is the way the age of the ocean floors line up. And also, the way the ocean floors themselves look like stretch marks.


Funny you mention that.... just a few days ago I was looking at tis at another forum.

National Geo did a book with a map of the ocean floor and something REALLY weird shows up...




I came across a very large book published in 1980 by National Geographic; they had undertaken to map the ocean floor.

There is not a lot of information about the ocean floors and even less in the public domain. There are some very unusual markings and shapes to investigate.

Here are two images from that book.









Now since that was posted I found the Website that has a live interactive map of this...

Go on... go ahead push the red button

You know you want to




Here is a close up screen capture of one area...




Anyone care to explain why the ocean floor has these regular pattern markings along all the major rifts?





posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
And for all you religious types that believe in Noah's ark and the flood that covered the entire Earth...

Care to tell me where all that water went?



Now our Earth is porous like a sponge... acid in the water is leaching out limestone caves and causing sinkholes every where Southern Florida is swiss cheese with houses sinking all the time...

Now if all that water goes below ground as the earth expands and make more air pockets... maybe we will finally have the answer to what happened to the water on Mars?




Enjoy



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted 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.







I don't think it's a question of where that monster lived, it's more a question of where is that monster? Do they have a fossil record of that animal or is it just a theory?

edit: Never mind, I will try reading the article first next time instead of after. I see that they found a fossil in Antarctica.

Peace

[edit on 12-1-2009 by letthereaderunderstand]



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
And for all you religious types that believe in Noah's ark and the flood that covered the entire Earth...

Care to tell me where all that water went?



Now our Earth is porous like a sponge... acid in the water is leaching out limestone caves and causing sinkholes every where Southern Florida is swiss cheese with houses sinking all the time...

Now if all that water goes below ground as the earth expands and make more air pockets... maybe we will finally have the answer to what happened to the water on Mars?




Enjoy


Actually Zorgon, this theory better explains the ark then does the current one. It says that, before Noah went into the ark it had never rained only a mist (subterranean water boiling?) came up from the ground and watered the face of the earth until the foundations of the deep were "rent", so that the water was coming up from the crust as well as from the sky, but perhaps it wasn't actually coming from the sky, perhaps because there was such a rapid release in the subterranean boiling water that it collected very fast in the upper atmosphere like steam on a glass window. That being said, the water of the oceans now is the water in question after running off of the land.

It could actually be that when the water was "abated" the earth was growing, although this would be some pretty rapid growth, but then again Noahs ark wasn't a boat, it was a coffin and tombstone made so that God (the living) would remember it, but that is another story.

Just a thought.

Peace



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by defendant
I think God times things just right. With population growth, the Earth needs to grow! With the scientific (OHhhhh they call this evolutionism!) discoveries of asteroids and meteors and craters on the Earth as well as on the moon, with each striking meteor, the Earth does get a bit bigger. God's project aint finished yet and humans still commit sin. When the times get bad enough, God can both kick some badass and also cause the Earth to "grow" at the same time, giving added space for who may who hopefully end up as the good guys! Yep, good timing of asteroids, comets and meteors crashing into the Earth it may be the end of the world and the beggining of another, just as some christian funky rock and roll singer said, "time fo God to turn the soil". I could make a song of a big ball game in space! KABLAAAM!! Have a ball!


I worship Satan because he gives me everything I want and life has never been better.......

But seriously....really?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
I first seen this a little over a year ago. And the most convincing part about it is the way the age of the ocean floors line up. And also, the way the ocean floors themselves look like stretch marks.

The only thing I didn't think was right was his deal about water. I think it makes more sense that at one time the world was covered in water, and that as the earth grows, the land rises up from the water. Oddly enough, this would fit genesis, and as we know, life originated in the ocean. It also explains why they find ancient aquatic fossils so far inland.

Interesting theory.


Perhaps think about it like this, because it is the exact same model. A baby. Babies don't start out completely immersed in embryonic fluid, but the volume of fluid grows as the baby grows. If that's the case, then maybe the moon was still born.

Peace



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by MsSmartypants
 


I came across this theory a couple months ago, at first glance it seems compelling. I suppose the Earth could be growing, but it would have to be at super-slow speed because otherwise structures like the Pyramids wouldn't retain their alignment to North, South, etc... The main problem I have with the idea is the oceans, as the Earth grows the water seems to miraculously appear, but what could cause water to just come into existence? Dinosaurs could easily exist without a reduction in gravity. I suppose it could be true, but I have my doubts...



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by YourForever
Matter does not come from nowhere.



Perhaps the matter is just being redistributed. There are two options here one of which has already been covered (additional mass due to cosmic collisions), the other is the obvious fact of volcanic eruption displacing matter from inside the earth to the surface. This would make the earth bigger, but the mass would stay the same. I am no scientist so it's just a thought.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   
I found this very interesting, and very plausible. Although there should be more research done in this particular field.

The one thing that has me thinking the most is the size of the Dinosaurs in relation to the smaller Earths gravitational pull. That would explain why they could grow so large. Yes,, Dinosaurs could survive in todays gravity, BUT if the species started their evolution in a world as the current size, i think they would have gone a totally different direction

This has really sparked my interest, and i will be looking into it more myself.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRealDonPedros
 


Actually large size was due to the higher Oxygen content present on the earth during the time of the dinosaurs.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 04:10 AM
link   
The moon has been with the Earth for around 4.5 Billion years, so long before the dinosaurs.

The moon is held in it's position by the gravitational pull of the Earth.

If the Earth was at one time much smaller, as someone suggested maybe a 1/4 size in the time of the dinosaurs for example, then the Earth at that time would have had less gravitational pull, and the moon would have needed to be closer to be held in it's orbit.

If the Earth then grew in size & the moon presumably grew in size also, then the increased gravitational pull should have pulled the moon into the Earth. It wouldn't still be held in orbit exactly as it always had been, so it sounds unlikely to me.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ThreadTrekker
 





As for where the new the matter comes from, Carey speculates that it is due to quantum fluctuations at the center of the earth where gravity acceleration approaches zero (a Newton-Hubble null).


This is absolute nonsense. First, please define what the "Newton-Hubble null" for us. I did a quick google search of the term, and I only got one page of links. Only one of the links on that page lead to anything resembling a description of this phenomena. Surprise surprise, it was a Google Books exert from the very same Samuel Carey book you're mentioning.

Tsk. Tsk. Sounds to me like he's just making @#$! up as he goes along in order to substantiate a claim which has no evidence.

Further, gravitational acceleration is not zero at the center of the Earth. To US it would seem that way, but that's only because we're traveling at the same orbital velocity. The Earth, and everything on it, is still very much acted upon by the Sun's gravity well. This gravity is what keeps us in orbit around the Sun, rather than flinging off out into space. Further, we're also experiencing gravitational tugs from the Moon, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, ... all of the planets, and all of the stars in the sky. Remember, we're still in an orbit around a GALACTIC central point. The gravitational effects we feel from these sources may range from minor to so extremely minute as to the point of being practically non-existent... but it is certainly not "zero" or even close to approaching zero.

His theory would depend upon on Earth being a closed system. It's not. Never was. Never will be.

Whatever his geological credibility may be, he is certainly no physicist.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Is there any way our sattelites in orbit can measure the growth of the earth or is it just growing so slowly that our race will be extinct by the time we notice it growing?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarrylGalasso
Perhaps the matter is just being redistributed. There are two options here one of which has already been covered (additional mass due to cosmic collisions), the other is the obvious fact of volcanic eruption displacing matter from inside the earth to the surface. This would make the earth bigger, but the mass would stay the same. I am no scientist so it's just a thought.


Yes, it would mean the Earth is higher in that location. Everywhere else it will stay the same. Erosion will then reduce the height again anyway, and the weight of the new land will probably cause itself to be lower anyway(not sure about this, but it makes sense).

This theory has a lot of problems with it. Ignoring the mass problems (unless we are seriously suggesting some sort of vacuum energy/mass system naturally occurring within every planet, star, moon, etc) there is still the problem that since gravity is related to mass, the gravity of the early earth would be 1/8th of what it is now. Though the smaller size would mean a smaller distance, so 1/2th of now, but I think that would have a large effect on the atmosphere.

Additionally, there is the problem of explaining away the evidence for plate tectonics. Firstly, subduction volcanoes like the Cascades, the Andes, The rest of the Ring of Fire etc would not exist without this. As well as that, without continental drift the Hawaiian chain would be a single island - if in fact Mantle plumes were able to exist in such an expanding world. In fact, in this case Yellowstone would also be a stationary object, rather than an apparent chain there instead.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Crustal age map:
www.ngdc.noaa.gov...

You can download it free in various formats. It clearly shows the age of the seafloor around the globe and its quite easy to see that the earth is growing and the growth rate seems to be increasing. Theres also few places where I atleast had problems figuring out these subduction zones I was told about in school, around the southpole for example.




top topics



 
31
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join