Scientist Baffled by Land Uplifted in Alaska - Nothing to Explain it

page: 12
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 12:25 PM

Originally posted by Syrus Magistus

Originally posted by Amagnon
I totally subscribe to the growing earth theory - it is entirely likey that this is the explanation.

The mountain range along the west coast of south America is also caused by this expansion of the crust.

The problem with dinosaurs size caused to me to do a great deal of research - and so far I am totally sold on the growing earth as the solution.

There is a strong possibility that the earth is entirely hollow and that a black hole resides inside the earth producing the magnetic field that surrounds us - also that the sun has basically the same design, but runs much hotter. Sun spots are simply whirlpool vortex's caused by the flux carrying plasma deep inside the sun to feed its black hole.

There's no such thing as black holes. Watch Thunderbolts of the Gods

Black holes are a myth, created by astrophysicists who think gravity is the only driving force in the universe. What scientists are witnessing is a massive confluence of electromagnetic energy. Since there's no such thing as electromagnetism in mainstream astrophysics, they say it has to be an infinite source of gravity, because gravity is an infinitely weak force and quasars, which are the massive bursts of energy they see, are too powerful to be explained as a gravitational phenomenon. Please note that there is no one shred of proof that there is any such thing as a black hole or a neutron star, because neither can exist, nor do they. Watch this documentary. If you want the big picture, you have to look at it from every angle.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by Syrus Magistus]

This is what happens when mathematics and physics get out of hand and people based ideas off data which people base more ideas off of and more and more but if the original data is wrong, it's all wrong.

We really do not know much for sure, do we?

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:08 PM

Hudson's Bay, that large bay in Canada, is slowly rising upwards. It is not Nibiru or the NWO, it is isostatic adjustment. You see, during the Ice Age, there was a large amount of glacial ice over that region, the increased weight caused the plate to flex downwards to accommodate the new ice above it. This in turn created Hudson's Bay. Now that the ice is gone, in order to restore isostatic equilibrium, the plate is flexing upwards to restore it to the position it was in before the Ice Age.

Further examples of this can be seen as mountain ranges. When a convergence zone causes mountains to form, the above surface mass will be reflected by the increased thickness below the plate to establish isostatic equilibrium. The plate is thicker where there is more mass concentrated.

Anyone want to challenge it? I sure would like to hear illogical explanations for a common geological event.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by BaronVonGodzilla

Straight up isostasy. That's the only logical theory that can come to mind. The growing earth theory simply does not work because if it did then the Pacific Ocean would be growing, not shrinking. Currently the Mid-Atlantic Ridge is growing and pushing the Americas away from Africa and Europe. It is already theorized that within the next millenium we may arrive at a point where Asia will be as close to us as Europe is close to North America currently.

People, you're here to deny ignorance, not common sense.

By the way, BaronVonGodzilla lovely username.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by Essan

That was actually my second theory as to why this would occur in coastal Alaska. ATS readers are by large ones who deny common sense, they actually create ignorance that way. Another theory besides slope failure and isostasy could be regional metamorphism causing recrystallization of a large plutonic form. Just a theory but it may actually work.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by warrenb

My apologies my good sir, but we are not an elliptical geoid, we are actually an oblate spheroid. We're spherical but we bulge around the middle. Yes the surface features of the earth are uneven but that does not stop the earth from being spherical.

Deny ignorance, not common sense.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:45 PM
Has anyone checked for an equal landmass sinking elsewhere? Many years ago (1960's or 1970's) I read a theory stating that if a sizable landmass recessed, an equal landmass would rise elsewhere - due to non-compressable Earth interior. The concept might be related to the isostasy concept.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 02:59 PM
I think the answer might be in the first part of this vid.. He states that they have pumped one billion tonnes of natural gas into the ground in Alaska. Maybe they didn't pump it deep enough and the earth couldn't handle the preasure?

Google Video Link

[edit on 21-7-2009 by deadoralive]

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by deadoralive

I find that strange that they'd claim to pump natural gas (a fossil fuel of value) INTO the ground instead of out. Maybe they were experimenting with carbon storing technology.

Still think its slope failure, isostasy, or even metamorphism.

We'll have to wait for more details.

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 09:05 PM
reply to post by Larryman

Sorry man, the concept of land sinking in one place and rising in another is not isostatic equilibrium. Isostasy is when a certain region has had mass added on top so the plate is flexed downwards in a way to become equal in deviation to the newly added topping. Its like a mirror. You lift your hand in front of a mirror and the reflection is showing your lifted hand. Now imagine your hand is a glacier, that reflection is the thickening of the crust.

If your concept is correct, then the raising of Hudson's Bay will cause a hell of a lot of problems for an equally large region anywhere else.

new topics
top topics
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in