ForumGarden

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1335193 wrote: Is it that no-one *can* answer the questions or that no-one fancies the idea of being called an idiot for pointing out the obvious?Why don't you point out the obvious then. Since no one else has,... I'm very interested in hearing your reply. Oh yeah,...

preearth

<t>I decided to comment on Don Findlay's site, earthexpansion.blogspot.com, even though he appears to be false opposition. Someone always deletes the posts. Do you think it is Don Findlay, or the blogspot.com people, who are deleting the comments? Seems most likely t...

preearth

Seems no one (here or elsewhere) can answer the above questions (which shows the paucity of current geological theories).

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1334009 wrote: When yaaarrrgg's question was specifically about the difference between objects that did or did not orbit the sun then to give that answer is misleading at best. Actually, I couldn't figure what he was trying to say with regard to this. So. I answered and if he corre...

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1333983 wrote: Question - if a body passes through the solar system on a hyperbolic path is it in orbit? Nope. But can you name even one natural body that has passed through the solar system on a hyperbolic path (I was trying to make the point that there is almost nothing in deep s...

preearth

Anyone read any of the books yet?

preearth

<r>Today, the continental crust covers only 35% of the globe. Continental crust cannot be subducted as it is the lightest (there is essentially NO subduction of continental crust). Here are some questions that show the current theories concerning geology are plain wrong; <...

preearth

yaaarrrgg;1331697 wrote: Then what can we explain by assuming the impactor orbited the Sun once (or ten times, or a billion times) versus not at all?
If the impactor is in the vicinity of the Sun then it orbits the Sun.

preearth

<r>fivedoughnut;1332588 wrote: Warning! Ignore this insane idiot - he's running his braindead theory rife over the internet. It's been debunked so many times, only a complete slavering imbecile would continue spamming this utterly fruitcake nonsense. <E>:)</E> fivedoughnut is an insa...

preearth

Don't forget my little forum at: http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/

preearth

katesisco;1329391 wrote: As much as I agree with Carey, he could not explain how the Earth could expand. He dealt in facts from the rock record.
Actually, the expantion is easy to explain.

One giant impact.

preearth

<r>yaaarrrgg;1331126 wrote: For your theory that is probably true, since the relative difference in speed (between the two Earths) may be less than the escape velocity. Heaven orbits PreEarth, hence has to have less than the escape velocity (of PreEarth), by definition. yaaarrrgg;133...

preearth

<r>Kevin Mansfield has a forum at: preearth.net/phpBB3/ Here's a list of topics: <URL url="http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/search.php?search_id=newposts"><LINK_TEXT text="http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/search.p ... d=newposts">http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/search.php?search_id=newposts</L...

preearth

yaaarrrgg;1331172 wrote: By assuming the object orbited the sun, we can explain *less* than if we don't make this assumption in the first place. By adding these definitive (and untestable) properties to the object, it goes against Occam's razor.
No it doesn't.

preearth

<t>Britneys;1330210 wrote: If one took the crust from the PreEarth-Pangaea region and imposed Earth's curvature upon it, by say, placing it above the Earth and physically forcing it down until it lay on the Earth's surface, then the crust would necessarily split in one or two places and at least one...

preearth

<r>yaaarrrgg;1330205 wrote: I have a harder time imagining two cold Earths hitting together. Momentum is preserved regardless of temp, but if the objects are rigid I think they would want to recoil or break up, not stick together as much. Actually, it is really hard not to get them to stick tog...

preearth

<t>katesisco;1329391 wrote: but since then I have read Milton/DeGrazie & please see A Creation Geology alternative to Plate Tectonics - Shock Dynamics as Mike has some good animations also. Yeah. Mike has some real nice animations. Problem is he hasn't fitted Pangea together the ...

preearth

yaaarrrgg;1326402 wrote: As a thought experiment, roll two marbles in a bowl and watch what they do when they smack into each other.
This is a nice thought experiment.

preearth

Clodhopper;1328314 wrote: Well, that's a fair bit to wade through and it is 2:30 am here. OMG! 2:30???? Goodnight!
Well. I guess you have read it by now. What do you think?

preearth

yaaarrrgg;1326402 wrote: preearth, it's an interesting paper. I still don't see how two equally sized spheres could smack into each other without throwing each other off orbit.
Well, yes the orbit would have changed, but not that much.

preearth

<r>Don't forget to read this thread as well; <URL url="http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/general-chit-chat/51943-did-earth-coalesce-2-medium-sized-planets.html"><LINK_TEXT text="http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... anets.html">http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/general-chit-chat/519...

preearth

What happens is the planet adjusts its orbit for the new speed and direction. It ends up a bit further, or closer, to the sun, depending on whether it loses, or gains, energy from the change.

That and the eccentricity of the orbit changes.

preearth

No comment from the pundits?

preearth

<t>yaaarrrgg;1326402 wrote: The speed and direction of an orbiting body are critical in maintaining orbit. Any slight deviation will send it spiraling either away from, or towards the Sun. yaaarrrgg; that's not true. Even very large deviations will not send it spiraling either away from, or tow...

preearth

<r>Evidence supporting Kevin Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis. The Hypothesis: Earth, as we now know it, formed from the collision of two similarly sized planets, called Heaven and PreEarth. Heaven had a radius about ninety percent that of PreEarth. These two, ...

preearth

<r>yaaarrrgg;1326402 wrote: Also, I don't see a huge difference between this theory and the "mainstream" theory which you are attacking, which also asserts that the moon was formed by an impact. Actually the differences are huge. For one, the impact was assumed to occur 4...

preearth

Has anyone read the whole book and have some comment on it?

preearth

Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: The Evidence.

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1324702 wrote: Then come back and show me where, in your paper, you enumerate this as the mechanism for loosing half of the kinetic energy. Do you know what; â€œfully half the kinetic energy that Heaven would have otherwise accrued, will be dissip...

preearth

Bevdee;1323906 wrote: I haven't read this book, but I have read online about the sixteen saviours. The similarities are very interesting.
Yes, they are amazing.

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1324273 wrote: Whether the energy goes into the core of the body or into the ocean is totally irrelevant to what was said. No it is not irrelevant. The energy that goes into the ocean as heat is easily lost to space,... you know, just like a hot day becomes cold at night...

preearth

<r>Here are two other books from Kersey Graves that sound interesting. I haven't read either of them (I just found them on archive.org). You can get them from archive.org; 1) The bible of bibles; Twenty-seven "Divine revelations"... <URL url="http://www.ar...

preearth

preearth;1323322 wrote: And what I say about many (perhaps most) forums being driven by a small group with a common agenda,... that is absolutely true.

This forum seems OK though.

preearth

<t>Bryn may be a very smart guy, but he is clearly no expert on the subject at hand. If he insists on claiming errors, which are only errors because of his misunderstanding of the subject, then I feel quite free to say he doesn't know what he is talking about. It may not be obv...

preearth

<r> THE WORLD'S SIXTEEN CRUCIFIED SAVIORS or CHRISTIANITY BEFORE CHRIST Containing new, startling, and extraordinary revelations in religious history, which disclose the oriental origin of all the doctrines, principles, precepts, and miracles of the Christ...

preearth

<r>Bryn Mawr wrote: What you actually say is "fully half the kinetic energy that Heaven would have otherwise accrued, will be dissipated by tidal friction." which is a nonsense as the energy of tidal friction will go into the bodies involved." Lets split the idea up into bits so we can see wher...

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr wrote: What you actually say is "fully half the kinetic energy that Heaven would have otherwise accrued, will be dissipated by tidal friction." which is a nonsense as the energy of tidal friction will go into the bodies involved." Lets split the idea up into bits so we can see wher...

preearth

<r>Bryn Mawr wrote: What questions have you asked? Insults yes, denials yes, but I see no questions from you. How about the following; preearth wrote: How did the Earth aquire a 6-7,000 degree temperature at its core? You even quoted this question to ask ...

preearth

<r>Bryn Mawr wrote: Two problems here, firstly you are treating both bodies as solid which would not have been the case and secondly, where the two bodies are of comparable sizes they should be treated as a binary pair rather than as a primary and a satellite. Also, the figures you are using do not ...

preearth

<r>Bryn Mawr wrote: The first thing that would happen is theat the kinetic energy lost due to tidal friction would be transformed into heat within the two bodies - black body radiation from those two bodies would only take place after this had happened. The first thing that would happen is the ...

preearth

<r>Bryn Mawr;1321792 wrote: Question :- Where would the energy dissipated through tidal friction have gone? The heat would be lost to space over time. You know, just like a hot day becomes cold at night. Bryn Mawr;1321792 wrote: Question :- <br...

preearth

preearth;1321185 wrote: There are many more such problems with "official" theory, if you are interested.

Another example;

How did the Earth aquire a 6-7,000 degree temperature at its core.

preearth

preearth;1320633 wrote: However, most "scientists" quietly ignore this HUGE problem.

There are many more such problems with "official" theory, if you are interested.

preearth

<t>Clodhopper;1319890 wrote: Oh, and regarding the Himalayas: I saw a documentary about how the mountain root of the Himalayas will eventually drop off (or maybe it already has) and the whole vast Tibetan plateau will end up like Death Valley! (In a few million years) I don't believ...

preearth

Clodhopper;1318362 wrote: Chuckle. Anyway, science is constantly learning new things and changing its mind about old things. Who knows what we will know in another decade? This is a very exciting time to be alive.

Thats true.

preearth

<r>Clodhopper;1318362 wrote: But it is equally logical to say that the identical nature of the Earth and Moon's isotopes show that the Moon is formed of roughly equal amounts of both colliding bodies? Even if the Moon was made of equal amounts of impator and pre-earth, their initial...

preearth

<r>Clodhopper;1318362 wrote: Thanks for the explanation <E>:)</E>. But isn't there a flaw in your argument? You say that the Moon ought to be 80% impactor. That it is exactly the same as Earth is taken by you to show that the impactor was identical to Earth. But it is equally logical to say that the...

preearth

<r>Clodhopper;1317310 wrote: What do you mean by "80% impactor"? I mean it is 80% impactor, i.e., the Moon is 80% comprised of material from the impactor. So the oxygen-17/oxygen-18 ratio of the Moon would be very close to that of the impactor. I have started u...

preearth

<t>Clodhopper;1315947 wrote: Since the debris was from both colliding objects, it would make sense that Earth and Moon would share characteristics such as oxygen isotopes. They did not mix much at all. Computer studies show that the Moon would be 80% impactor. So the oxygen isotope...

preearth

<t>Bryn Mawr;1315954 wrote: Firstly, the "fully half the kinetic energy that Heaven would have otherwise accrued, will be dissipated by tidal friction.". The energy dissipated by tidal friction would have ended up as heat within the two bodies being slowed. Far from being lost from the equation, the...

Search found 77 matches