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 expanding earth theory has compelling explanatory power on any no of fronts, too much to be ignored in my opinion.
The one serious drawback is where the extra matter comes from - and it certainly isn't coming from emissions from the sun - most likely explanation I can think of is the periodic condensing of the lower astral straight into the physical.
This is all tied in with the cycles of the ages that the ancient cultures all report - gold, silver, bronze etc.
But this is obviously so far beyond the purview of current science that they will never pick upon it.
Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
reply to post by stereologist
sure expanding earth theory has a few problems.......but it has waaay more explanatory power than anything else!
You are probably unaware of the truly enormous and fatal flaws in the techtonic plate models - subduction seems to be a myth, with all the evidence for it being indirectly inferred - since they know plates are expanding - then they simply have to accept that they must be being consumed somwhere else - even though they have no plausible mechanism for that ever to happen, having given up on ridge push and magma convection they are now clinging to slab pull.
see 'triple geo sphere theory' to fill in the missing gaps.
If all the planets land mass was on one side of the planet, it must have created enormous problems with the planets rotation.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by poet1b
Baloney!!!
If all the planets land mass was on one side of the planet, it must have created enormous problems with the planets rotation.
IF you mean the ancient mega-continent we now call "Pangaea"....you just have a distorted view of what it means....the amount of land ABOVE the ocean's mean sea level. Not enough to cause a global "imbalance"!!!
No wonder this Neal Adams BS fools so many people....they just don't realize the fallacy of their initial set of "beliefs" and assumptions......
This is something I have always wondered about myself. If all the planets land mass was on one side of the planet, it must have created enormous problems with the planets rotation. This is simple mechanics. It just doesn't seem possible.
Ever balance a tire? I guess not.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by topherman420
It is hard to tell, you seem to lack critical thinking skills, but are you saying that science should be static, and that it shouldn't change when new evidence comes to light?
Are you saying that the new evidence that has been gathered by mapping the floor of our oceans should not be considered in changing theories that this new evidence contradicts?
Sounds like you prefer your science to be more like religion than science.