mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ For complete access to all the files of this collection see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php ========================================================== [1]nav [2]undefined [3]nav [4]undefined [5]More... [6]nav undefined [7][Close] The Stretched Out Earth This web page attempts to get you to think about something very simple that is also very difficult. It is very simple because it is the elementary idea that lies unnoticed at the foundation of Western thinking. It is difficult because Western people's minds are closed off in this direction. Please consider the fundamental assumption. I call the fundamental assumption Aristotle's Conjecture because he invented it. It is the dogma or the authoritative teaching of science. The scientific mind only knows how to think in accordance with Aristotle's Conjecture. Scientists invent unverifiable things like dark matter, dark energy, black holes, a big bang and cosmological expansion. The reason they imagine these things is because they only know how to think about physical things according to Aristotle's Conjecture. They force the evidence from the whole universe to fit their assumption about the nature of physical reality. If you throw out the fundamental assumption, you can throw out all these "ether like" inventions. The evidence seems to fit so much simpler without Aristotle's Conjecture. The question I want to ask is, "Does the earth expand?" Isn't that incredible that the earth may be expanding? Westerners remain skeptical of any phenomena for which there is no "how and why" explanation. Our philosophic system of thinking demands a causative mechanism before an idea can be accepted. We do not realize that if Aristotle's Conjecture is false, a causative mechanism is unnecessary. If Aristotle's Conjecture is false, the earth changes size because of the basic nature of all matter. Aristotle's Conjecture is an assumption that is not testable by experiments. It is the basis, the a priori, upon which experiments depend. Consider the strange geology of our planet. The continents rest on a much thicker crust than the sea floor. The continents are also covered with deep sedimentary rock formations often laced with the fossils of sea creatures. These sea fossils are found on the tops of the highest mountains. Unlike the continents, the deep oceans are not layered with thick beds of sedimentary rock. The sea floor beyond the continental shelves is basalt with a thin layer of marine sediments. Radiometric dating indicates that the deep ocean rocks are younger than the continents. Why should a rotating planet have such a radically differentiated crust? Plate tectonics is the currently accepted theory of geophysics. This theory does not, however, provide a causative mechanism for continental drift. The tectonic theory claims that continents have migrated across the oceans. The continents move, it tells us, because the sea floor is increasing in area. The largest geological structure on earth is not visible. Except in the Pacific, it lies at the midpoint of all the earth's oceans. It is a 60,000 kilometer range of mountains that surrounds a deep crack in the crust of the earth. This undersea mountain range is higher, wider and longer than mountain ranges on the surface. The great crack in the ocean crust is surrounded by thousands of transform cracks. The whole structure is geologically active and oozes molten material into the sea to continuously build new sea floor. Cores drilled close to the rift are younger than the cores close to the continental shelves. Sedimentary deposits are also thinner at the central rift. Tectonics claims that there is just as much subduction as expansion. If the earth is to remain constant in size, subduction must consume the same amount of sea floor as the rifts produce. The Nazca plate parallel to the west coast of South America is expanding at four times the rate of sea floor expansion in the South Atlantic. The ocean floor off the west coast of South America is also young basalt. If the Pacific were being reduced in size, old sea floor should be diving under the South American continent. If tectonics is valid, the entire width of the Atlantic should have been consumed by subduction in the Pacific. The Pacific, however, seems to have increased in size around the periphery of the original sea. o Subduction does not seem to occur around most ocean basins. Earthquake maps show many earthquakes on the rift system. The Atlantic coasts of Europe, Africa and the Americas are not active earthquake zones. If the ocean crust were moving the continents, the coastal areas should be active earthquake zones. The lack of earthquake activity indicates the sea floor is firmly attached to the continents in the Atlantic. Australia, Africa, the far north and Antarctica. The rift system runs for 60,000 kilometers through all the worlds' oceans. One would expect at the minimum, 60,000 kilometers of subduction zones. There is a great imbalance with much more rifting than possible subduction zones. o Another problem with tectonics is that it provides no source for the energy needed to force continents to move against the resistence of multi kilometer thick solid crust. This is not a minor problem. All the various mechanisms proposed by tectonics are orders of magnitude less than the energy needed for continental motion. o Tectonics also does not provide a causative mechanism for new sea floor build up. Tectonics assumes that convection currents of molten rock rise at the rift system. This magma supposedly splits in half at the rift. Each half of this heat driven flow is supposed to push equally in opposite directions on each plate. Why these convection currents just happen to rise in a narrow belt winding through the center of most oceans is not explained. Laboratory experiments show that rock under extreme pressure and temperature does not readily liquify. When the pressure is relieved, however, the hot rock liquefies. This is not unlike a boiler under pressure. As long as the boiler is pressurized, heat added to the boiler produces a predictable amount of steam. If the pressure is suddenly relieved, the water in the boiler quickly flashes into steam. o The ocean basins are under a stretching tension that opens up the crust at the rift. When a crack opens, hot rock liquefies, rises and solidifies to form new sea floor. The build up of basaltic rock does not favor either side of the rift. If the cause was an up welling pressure, it would be extremely unlikely that the Atlantic rift would lie half way between the continents. Earthquake plots indicate that the rift system is a place of ongoing geologic activity. Submarine instruments also show that the building of new ocean floor is a continuous ongoing process. The evidence strongly suggests that the ocean rifts are cracks in the earth, not convection zones pushing up from below. The simplest geophysical explanation for our planet is that it is expanding. If the earth expands, the continents could remain fixed in position. At the same time the distance between continents would increase. The rift system would be the expansion joint that allows the earth to increase in size. S. Warren Carey, a geologist from Australia, published his book "The Expanding Earth" in 1976. In Carey's thinking, earth expansion is the reason for continental drift. Carey claims that subduction is a myth that the adherents of tectonics have invented in order to make their theory "work." In California, one of the ocean rifts has apparently migrated under the continent. Carey says this of the underground rift: "The notion of a spreading ridge crabbing obliquely down its own subduction sink under California, while continuing to excrete towards the Pacific but swallow from the Atlantic, is as hallucinatory as a maw vanishing into its own anus . . ." Carey says that, "the case for subduction reduces to the faith that it is so." Carey spent years trying to figure out how to get the continents to fit together into the original super continent without large gaps. The gaps defied the evidence, since the local geology and fossils at the mating points indicated they were once joined without a gap. Carey claims that the problem of assembling the continents without gaps disappears when you mold put them onto a smaller globe. The continents fit best if the earth was about 2/3 its present size when the continents split from each other. On such a globe, the earth was mostly land with a much smaller Pacific as the principal sea. Carey claimed that the perimeter of the Pacific has increased in size by about 50%. Carey questioned how the perimeter increases while the area of the Pacific was supposed to be decreasing according to tectonics. Even if subduction is going on around the perimeter, the perimeter cannot increase and have the area decrease. Another problem with tectonics is the arctic areas. How can North America, Europe and Asia both be drifting away from the Arctic ocean and towards it at the same time? How could Antarctica be drifting away from all the land masses in the south without the earth increasing in size? The earth is apparently expanding faster in the southern hemisphere. There are more oceans and rifts in the southern hemisphere. Since the rift system is the expansion joint, the earth should expands faster in the southern hemisphere. The earth is indeed oblate with the large end of its pear shape in the southern hemisphere. An expanding earth would explain the oblate shape. All ancient peoples were catastrophists. They believed that the planets fought great battles in the sky. They believed that the planets used to sometimes pass us at very close range. They believed that the very fundamentals themselves changed. Time was speeding up even while people matured faster. In their thinking, everything changes. The material world contained nothing that does not change. They also believed that a great flood destroyed the earth. Flood stories are found in almost every ancient culture. In the biblical account, the water rains down from above the atmosphere. The biblical account also says that the early earth had no rain before the flood. The Bible also tells us that the earth was divided at the end of the flood for the waters to run into newly formed seas. The Bible several times mentions the stretching out of the earth. It even says that God stretched out the earth upon the waters. How did they know that the expansion of the earth occurs in the seas? The arguments against Carey's theory include the rotation of the earth. If a spinning ice skater extends her arms out from her sides, she will slow down her rate of spin. Another argument is that the magnetic bands around the rift system do not suggest an expanding earth. Why are there no GPS and satellite laser ranging data that shows that the earth expands? Why do VLBI antennas focused on distant quasars not indicate an expanding earth? All these ideas cannot exclude the possibility of earth expansion. Cesium clocks, orbits, gravity and dimension would all change together in a universe that defies Aristotle's Conjecture. The mathematics of all these systems assumes a constant sized planet. They use their mathematical models based on the assumption and find that it is indeed unchanging in size. If the basic nature of all matter was that it changes in an inter related way, instruments could not measure the change in size of the earth. Aristotle's Conjecture is the most basic assumption of all Western thinking. What is the opposite of Aristotle's Conjecture? It is that change is going on continually in all matter. In a universe which does not follow Aristotle's Conjecture, everything changes TOGETHER. Inside atoms the clock speeds up even while the quantum dimensions increase. Why do scientists not measure such things? You cannot measure fundamental things without assuming that some part of atoms does not change. They always interpret their measurements according to the dogma of science. For example, the simplest explanation for redshift of distant galaxies is that matter has changed in an inter related manner. If ancient atoms were indeed smaller, time ran slower and mass and gravity were also lower, the evidence would indeed fit. Science is founded on Aristotle's Conjecture and does not prove it. Even measurement of the earth require the assumption in order to "work." Why does it work then? Why is science able to precisely measure the earth? It assumes the assumption and therefore all the evidence is made to fit. Even higher mathematics is based on Aristotle's Conjecture. What if there are no independent variables in the real universe? What if the energy, mass, gravity, size and clocks of all atoms change together. If everything changes, every unit one in the universe would be changing internally. Even though 1 + 1 = 2, if every one (1) changes internally, logic fails over a long time base. Such a universe would defeat science through the very thing they think is most certain. The evidence for an expanding earth should make you think. Doesn't it make more sense if you just throw out the fundamental assumption and take the evidence in simplicity. If the assumption is false, the earth would expand without a logical and mathematical cause. It would do it because of the nature of all matter. Think about it. Copyright 2002 by Victor McAllister Last revision September 9,2002 [INLINE] setstats 1