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.

 

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

page: 7
60
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by andrewh7
The earth did not grow and is not growing. The tectonic plates are subsiding at a number of fault lines. Elsewhere, such as in the middle of the Atlantic, new ocean floor is being created. The continents are located on these plates and move as these plates do. That video is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. If you took a single university-level geology class you would see how simple plate tectonics is.



[edit on 9-7-2009 by andrewh7]



edited and removed post due to lack of personal research

[edit on 9-7-2009 by juzchilln]




posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


If these things happen all the time then there is a rate of change included in that formula as well. Even when you look at geological layers in canyons, the sharper the contrast between layers, the faster the event happened that created the quick transition. The gradual the transition is, the more time it took to create it.

Science might be right about these things happening all the time, but it's my belief that we're witnessing the beginning of a very highly contrasted layer...if you get my meaning....



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by andrewh7
The earth did not grow and is not growing. The tectonic plates are subsiding at a number of fault lines. Elsewhere, such as in the middle of the Atlantic, new ocean floor is being created. The continents are located on these plates and move as these plates do. That video is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. If you took a single university-level geology class you would see how simple plate tectonics is.

[edit on 9-7-2009 by andrewh7]


For more info on Expanding Earth go to this site:

"Seventh, scientists failed to take into account the E-W seafloor growth of ~30-44 mm/yr (~1-1/4 to 1-3/4 in/yr) occurring along Carlsberg Ridge in the Indian Ocean, plus extensive N-S seafloor growth surrounding Antarctica that must be vectored northward into the Pacific Ocean basin. Antarctica, therefore, is not only moving away from Earth’s center of gravity, but the new seafloor growth is increasing the size and total surface area of that southernmost continent. Antarctica’s growth is, in itself, clear evidence the EARTH IS EXPANDING! "

Expanding

juzchillin, I don't think a tree grows from inside. You can kill it by peeling away the bark and the layer under it.
"Very little of a tree's volume is actually "living" tissue. Just 1% of a tree is actually alive and composed of living cells. The major living portion of a growing tree is a thin film of cells just under the bark (called the cambium) and can be only one to several cells thick. Other living cells are in root tips, the apical meristem, leaves and buds."

How a tree grows

[edit on 9-7-2009 by OhZone]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Darkice19,asked a most sensible question about the growing Earth theory,"Where was all the water" and only Warrenb answered, and that included plants and moisture and Meteorites.You have to ask why the video does not accomodate that very question.
When I was at school,like everyone else we were taught about Continental drift,which did show large land masses and then the "breakaways" and it is easy to see where islands and continents would have been together at a time. But that was only an earlier time,and the same processes had been going on before that in an ever changing process..we used to do exercises in what the earth might have looked like looked like going back and back,ad infinitum,although it was just a visual thing and no account taken of collisions from large Asteroids or other heavenly bodies,it was still interesting.I don't think the the Growing Earth Theory goes back far enough.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by dgtempe
 


Well, Hello everyone. This is my very first reply/post on ATS and I'm very honored to be a part of this community.

I have to agree.
The way the moon affects the ocean's tides actually causes buldging if one were looking at earth from a distance. We all know this.
It could be that if there is a planetary body entering our solar system, it's effects are just what we've been seeing - possibly starting with the land shift which caused the asian tsunami that devestated Indonesia.
Now this?
I'll pay close attention to see if there are anymore "uplifts".
If there are and they become more frequent, then quite possibly - Something wicked this way comes.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by juzchilln
 




If the Earth is not growing, than how can you explain the thousands of feet of layers in the Grand Canyon or any large mountain range? You could say that the collision between plates causes one plate to protrude upwards. But I disagree if that is the case, since many many millions of years of layers can be seen in all geographical areas, not just where plates converge or interact with one another. More over, collision of plates does not create thousands of layers.


Two things erosion and the in moutiains collision doesnt create the layers it just pushes up existing layers.



But here's a question I put to anyone in the know. But when you look at an old tree trunk. The outer layers are the oldest part and the inner core is the newest. Howevever, when we look at the Earth. The outer is supposed to be the newer, and the inner is supposed to ancient times.

This is only because wind, soil, leaves, water, etc tend to bury the older stuff on the crust of the earth.



This doesn't make sense to me on two fronts. One, how can there be a molten core of OLD material. Two, if the molten rock is new material, how can the bottom layers of the crust contain things of the past, and then the top be the newest again?


It is molten because the pressure of gravity as you get nearer to the center of the Earth causes high temperatures.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
OI you lot - stop flailing around like nuggets and do a little learning.

I'm a geologist, with a specific interest in volcanology. So please, no stupid comebacks.

We are missing something from the picture here. Geological instruments around the earth are extremely sensitive. The military had an early interest in sharpening their skills in detecting seismic movements in order to detect weapons tests. So they can pick up extremely small events.

Uplift of material in this manner would have created a significant seismic 'blip'. P, S and even a few W waves all over the shop. Where are they? Why have we had NO indications of any crust based movement at all from all of these advanced detectors? I won't speculate there, but I'm sure you lot can.

There are three factors that (in normal channels) could've caused this -
1) Crustal Movement - earthquakes, geode capitulations, tectonic forces, fault slip, etc etc.
2) Volcanic acitivity - Forceful magmatic intrusion, at some point either directly or indirectly.
3) Evironmental Factors - This is off the reservation. Hydraulic geothermal activity.

The only other thing I can think of is as follows -
*Tactical nuke test underground in the vicinity.

A note on the crustal movement issue - often, earthquakes produce effects that don't happen for many years afterwards. In this case, (the Anchorage earthquake for example) a large event could've created a large synform structure that failed to bend into shape correctly. Or at least was fluid enough not to shape immediately. Over time, as the material in question suffers under the stress of being under-formed, it weakens and succumbs to the Synform shape. An event like this could potentially produce the effect seen here, with very little seismic shock - it would be like a mining operation explosion going off rather than an earthquake event.

Therein lies the crux of the problem - no seismic signature. Who's hidden it, and why? What else was going on there besides this?

The Para.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Its another underground war like Dulce this time theres no survivors, because THEY can and did do better. just kidding.

There was an interesting show on coast to coast am about a supposed upcoming pole shift. Something about the Milky way going through a dark rift in the universe which will cause an extreme gravitational pull on earths crust. It could be a possibility.

Its called Coming Polar Shift on youtube. It starts at part 5. part 1-4 is just the usual hick callers on open lines.

The segment ties in Revelations and 2012 and impending apocalyptic doom all in an hour and a half. There should be a pathetic money grabbing movie about this. Oh wait...



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Some here have suggested some doubt as to the evidence supporting continental drift. Its well established that Pangaea existed in the geological record as a single land mass and that continents were proscribed from it. These theories are proven without a doubt and are considered fact.

To deny it, equates to denial of plate tectonics. If you don't believe this fact, then for you, denial is not a river in Egypt.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by lazimodo
 


Oh now you dont think some of these folks are going to let a few facts get in their now do you?



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return

Originally posted by TheWatcher11
The Webb bot, right on the money once again, thanks for the information. And to you all, "Prepare for the future"



What did the webbot predict and when?


don't know if someone had already replied to you, I am just trying to catch up with the thread.

But the webbot said that "land would rise this summer" But it said there was going to be quite a bit of land doing that. So, this may just be the start.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
As a matter of interest, would the OP have gotten so many stars had this been discussed as a serious geological curiosity? I'm guessing no. A sad reflection IMO on the people who visit ATS



I am lost - because almost every single post IS discussing this in an intellectual manner - and what possibilities could be out there. Yes, some may have ideas outside the realm of "normal" science. But I see everyone discussing it in curiosity. I guess you have not been reading the post, and if you are only looking at postings and feel all of us other members are "a sad reflection" then why are you even in the thread?

I feel this is a very interesting event and would love to have been around where land was being formed overnight. It had to have been an amazing sight.

Thank you to all the members who are giving your opinions and discussing this in such a WONDERFUL manner!!!



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by warrenb
reply to post by questioningall
 


IMO it also helps explain many things, although not stated in the theory; it could possibly explain why some animals and plants mysteriously appear on different continents. Elephants, tigers and monkeys to name a few are found all over the world and the Alaskan land bridge is not a plausible explanation for their appearance in so many distant places.



what? the accepted scientific understanding is that due to the earth being divided into tectonic plates and their movements, caused by convection currents in the mantle, the once singular land mass has and continues to drift in lots of different directions due to the movements of the plates.

i don't rule anything out, maybe this suggested theory is right or wrong. but some people are talking of this as though there isn't an already pretty logical and accepted theory on this which is already well explored and accepted. creatures which were on the west coast of africa were once essentially on the east coast of the americas because before the land split those two places were essentially the same area. with the plates moving slowly apart those which were just west of the split line were american and those to the east were african. in england we learn this in geography lessons about plate tectonics very early as kids and whilst it's possible that it's not entirely right, it's accepted.

the same tectonic forces causing the split will lead to parts of east africa (the horn i believe) drifting north east and merging with southern asia (india i guess) and once more there will be those animals which will be separated by the split, some of which will end up in asia and the cycle will continue of the same species existing in two different places. also if i remember right the uk is drifting a few cm closer to america each year, so we will end up part of the americas some time.

don't they teach this at school in america? as i understand it it's just accepted across the athiestic scientific world.

on the thread topic: can't they do some sort of scan of the ground there to see what's under the surface, if anything? what about that system they use for searching for gas and oil by firing frequencies into the crust and checking if it resonates at certain frequencies to get an idea of what's down there (apologies for any crudeness in my understanding of that method!).

it's entirely fanciful and surely not true, but the first thing in my mind when i saw this thread was that some BIG creature had moved under the surface somehow. like literally inside the ground or something. and no i'm not suggesting this could be real, just what i wish was the case


the truth is normally very boring. it is most probably just some increased pressure caused by gas or magma or whatever. as much as i wish it was, it's probably nothing jaw dropping or anything.

[edit on 9-7-2009 by Renegade Bison]

[edit on 9-7-2009 by Renegade Bison]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Tried to stay out of this. Really did, I promise. But how about this:

Maybe the earth is increasing in size. I love that theory because it makes sense to me. But, what if it increases rapidly as opposed to slowly over thousands of years? This would cause cataclysms in a relatively short period of time?

I enjoy many of your theories that try to narrow this incident into it's own little "box" without considering a bigger picture. Now, some may wonder at this bigger picture that I write about, so... let us consider this incident along with:

Africa is Splitting Apart

Strange Tides in Puerto Rico

Have You Experienced Strange Weather Lately?

Please, let us also consider some of the "newer" things that we have been introduced to such as, bollides, supercell storms, blue sky lightning, EF5 tornadoes (as a reality), and many more.

I think that an outside gravitational force makes more sense than underground nukes, happenstance magma flows, and / or a breaking ice shelf (which would mostly support an outside force in light of information regarding the breakdown of polar ice caps on Mars and general planet heating throughout the solar system). Every day that goes by the simpler explanation seems to be more fanciful.

Then again, it may be those alien goats that we all know are pushing up from underground...

But never mind this thread, I live on a flat planet governed entirely by Newton's laws.

Thanks!



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Parallex

Therein lies the crux of the problem - no seismic signature. Who's hidden it, and why? What else was going on there besides this?

The Para.


Thank you Parallex for your experienced input.

I do have to say that what you have stated has been completely overlooked. There are those who are saying that the explanation is simple: the result of a landslide that happened 12,000 years ago. Personally, I fail to make the correlation or how anyone can logically explain this to happen. Secondly, if this explanation (or any other explanation such as an earthquake, melting underground glaciers, a release of gas (space goat farts anyone?
and the like) is the only one they can come up with WHERE IN THE HECK IS THE EVIDENCE of this seismic activity. Just as you said and I've been thinking.

No matter what caused it (which the cause could have actually have been the symptom of something else), I would imagine that a 1,000 ft piece of land suddenly lifting up 20 ft (which is about 2 stories or so?) unnoticed within hours would definitely have registered on a seismic graph SOMEWHERE.

I think you have brought up a VERY valid point that needs to be looked into with all seriousness REGARDLESS of any of our own theories.

You may well have given us the first bread crumb.

P.S. some people have been suggesting that some have "ridiculous" theories that are laughable and suggest that they have the most logical explanations. You fail to realize that even the geologists are at a loss for an explanation and the best they could come up with is a landslide that happened 12,000 years ago? Keep your minds open, because NONE OF US know the answer right now. So you assuming you have the most logical explanation is just as bad as us assuming we have a great "alternative" explanation.

It's ALL speculation at this point because not even the experts have a clue.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I know, I know!
www.acamoth.net...



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
It says a new fissure opened up on the second paragraph, that is an explanation right there but OK... I haven't heard anything about this though.

[edit on 7/9/09 by MoothyKnight]



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
earth changes


Report: China quake destroys 10,000 homes

(CNN) -- More than 10,000 homes have been destroyed from an earthquake that struck southwest China, state media reported.

The quake hit Yunnan province in southwest China Thursday evening, leaving more than 300 people injured, the Xinhua news service reported. Xinhua reported the quake as having a 6.0-magnitude, while the U.S. Geological Survey gave a figure of 5.7.

The quake happened at 7:19 p.m. (11:19 a.m. GMT) Thursday, at a depth of about 10 kilometers (6.2 miles), Xinhua reported.

Thirty people suffered severe injuries, and another 305 were slightly injured as of 1 a.m., relief officials in Yao'an County said.

www.cnn.com...

Tents, medicine and food were seen being distributed by relief authorities, Xinhua said. Approximately 4,500 tents, 3,000 quilts and other relief material was being distributed, officials said, according to the Xinhua report.

Thursday's earthquake comes more than a year after a massive quake struck Sichuan province in China. The 8.0-magnitude quake on May 12, 2008 killed more than 68,000 people, left nearly 18,000 more missing and displaced 15 million others.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by warrenb
 


viola! Thanks, I dont know why my brain didnt tell me that earlier



posted on Jul, 10 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


Good find. Very interesting read.



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join