http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
Thunderbolts Forum

StefanR

Location: Amsterdam

For those who wish to read further on:

Organized Opposition to Plate Tectonics:

The New Concepts in Global Tectonics Group

Quote:

NCGT Group: Origins and Activities

The New Concepts in Global Tectonics Group is an informal association of
earth scientists who are critical of plate tectonics and want to explore
alternative theories. It arose after a symposium on "Alternative theories
to plate tectonics" held at the 30th International Geological Congress
(IGC) in Beijing in August 1996. The name "New Concepts in Global
Tectonics" was taken from an earlier symposium held in association with
the 28th IGC in Washington, DC, in 1989 (see Chatterjee & Hotton, 1992).

The first issue of the New Concepts in Global Tectonics Newsletter
appeared in December 1996. In their editorial, J. M. Dickins and D. R.
Choi wrote:

Although enormous strides have been made in our knowledge of the earth and
much has been added to Geology by Physics and Chemistry, we need to
acknowledge that we are only at the beginning of tabulating and
understanding what is at the surface of the earth, let alone what is
underneath....

In this context, in the 1950s and 60s the new theory of Plate Tectonics
was propounded by "Geophysicists" (Physicists) and mainly young Geologists
with little experience, depth of understanding or respect for existing
geology. The theory, although admittedly simplistic and with little
factual basis but claiming to be all embracing, was pursued by its
proponents in an aggressive, intolerant, dogmatic and sometimes
unfortunately an unscrupulous fashion. Most geologists with knowledge
based locally or regionally were not confident in dealing with a new
global theory which swept the world and was attractive in giving Geology a
prestige not equalled since the nineteenth century.

The ideological influence and strength of the Plate Tectonic Theory has
swept aside much well-based data as though it never existed, inhibited
many fields of investigation and resulted in the suppression or
manipulation of data which does not fit the theory. In the course of time
the method has become narrow, monotonous and dull: a catechism repeated
too often. As new data has arisen there is a growing scepticism about the
theory.

Quote:

Conclusion

Since its formation in 1996, the New Concepts in Global Tectonics Group
and its newsletter have become the main focus of organized opposition to
the reigning paradigm of plate tectonics. The NCGT Newsletter provides a
vital forum where critics and opponents of plate tectonics can present and
discuss anomalous data and alternative interpretations and theories. The
group is now firmly established, and its activities will remain necessary
until it once again becomes possible for a variety of competing hypotheses
and theories, and the data underpinning them, to be openly aired and
debated in mainstream publications.

Quote:

Comments by editor-in-chief Henry Bauer, JSE 20:1, 2006, p. 2 I learned of
the existence of the New Concepts in Global Tectonics (NCGT) group some
years ago, when we received a manuscript questioning aspects of the theory
of plate tectonics. Until then, I had thought that plate tectonics
(formerly described as continental drift) had become as well established
as the theory of biological evolution: that while there might remain
important questions about "How?", no one doubted that it had happened and
was continuing to happen. Now I recognize this as just another instance of
what is routine in the mainstream of science: The very existence of
unorthodox views is a "hidden event" (Westrum, 1982), irrespective,
whether or not those views have intellectual merit. So it is with anti-Big
Bang cosmology, anti-HIV/AIDS claims, and more. The popular media are in
the thrall of Big Science and there is a lack of investigative science
reporting. Knowledge monopolies and research cartels (Bauer, 2004)
describe the circumstances of 21st-century science.

When David Pratt recently offered a lengthy "Article of Interest" extract
from the newsletter of the NCGT group, I asked for a piece about that
group, and I'm very pleased that in this issue we have a highly
informative essay that details the formation of the group and also makes
clear what the chief points of substantive geological contention are. The
most appalling point is that mainstream organizations not only suppress
unorthodox interpretations, they censor factual material. A general
feature that characterizes dissents from established scientific dogmas is
also illustrated: While the received view is monolithic, the critiques are
anything but. That makes very challenging the task of creating
non-mainstream organizations and publications, for those with unorthodox
views may disagree among themselves as much as they disagree with the
governing paradigm.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/ncgt-jse.htm