Birth of Earth

Apologies for the confusion in my statement. I meant that the only way that Hawaii (on the Pacific plate) and Peru (South American plate) can move closer is if the Pacific plate is directly subducting under South America and there was no spreading ridge between them. There is a spreading ridge between these two plate (East Pacific Rise, which is between the Nazca and Pacific plates). As has already been pointed out, it's the Nazca plate that is being subducted (rather rapidly too!) under South America.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

dear all
do not waste the time go to saw mill see the log cutting. you will see the results earth formation.
1. you will see the subduction zones in log
2. see the black plates
see lot of similarties of earth formation.so do not waste the time hurry to saw mill.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I sure hope so because I haven't seen it anywhere else.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not needed. If any are needed, they would be due from me.
I was ignorant of the existence of the separate Nazca plate which is driving under the Andes Mountains. It is the "Nazca plate that is being subducted (rather rapidly too!) under South America." to quote your words.

I have not followed this thread much but OIM appears to be denying the existence of subduction. How does he explain the existence of tall (and in some cases even growing taller) mountains if not by subduction. Surely he does not deny the obvious mountain destroying process called erosion - one need only look at the large river deltas to see it is real. Logical thought does not seem to be OIM's strong point so perhaps inconvenient facts are just ignored?

 

The "standard" explanation in EE theory is that mountains are caused by lighter material rising up, in turn caused by phase transitions, thermal expansion and gravitation (this info comes from Wikipedia). Whilst this explains how the mountain gets there and forms, but doesn't explain the compressional tectonics that are observed (thrust faulting, etc), the Pressure-Temperature profiles (PT) paths and the presence of ecolgite facies (high pressure high temp), or indeed blueschist facies, which require low temperatures and high pressure. Moreover, it also doesn't explain "suture zones", such as is observed in the Lake District of UK where Scotland and England collided in the Silurian/Ordovician (the Iapetus suture) - the rocks are derived from different continents, shown by fossils and lithofacies and are now joined together.

Hope that helps.

 

Thanks. But your more informed objections are not needed. Simply entropy increases would do. Let’s assume that initially there was more "lighter material" at the location of a mountain. Erosion would dispersed it very rapidly compared to the age of the solid surface Earth.

Mountains could not exist now. By now that original lower entropy state with a mountain would have the maximal entropy state with uniform distribution of the lighter material all over the globe.

 

pls try you will see the results. so go to saw mill and see the log cutting copare it with earth formation.i am sure you will find the postive results.

 

Unfortunately that argument does not work as there would be continual generation of new material due to changes in the mantle. In the plate tectonics model diapers, batholiths, etc are generated via partial melting of the subducting slab and/or heating of the lower continental crust (hence why we get andesitic magmas even at ocean-ocean collisions). Under the EE model the diapers etc would form due to changes in the mantle, I would guess, so mountains would still form continuously. I could envisage a mechanism similar to the hotspots where it would heat the lower mantle, causing partial melting and raising the land surface, for example. However, this mechanism fails to address several observable features, such as the compressional tectonics and the P-T paths as I very briefly mentioned above.

 

But if, as OIM does claim, there is no subduction, then the mantle is also subject to entropy increase - getting more uniform all the time. (Except for possible uniform radial density induced variations - no way a particular Lat. & Longitude to concentrate lighter material.) How can the lighter stuff concentrate?

I of course am firmly convenced that subduction is real, but OIM rejects that. Hence he is logically inconsistent if claiming mountain building is by some mechanism that causes the mantle to concentrate the lighter rocks under where the mountain forms, I believe.

 

only fact is earth has biological growth . this is hard fact

 

23 pages and not cesspooled yet?
WTF?

 

In EE theory, the mountains are a result of the "folding" of the land. As the Earth grows larger, different parts of a continent are going to move different directions at different speeds and anywhere the upper tectonic crust gets "bent" it folds upwards creating mountains.

This is why the peninsulas of Italy and India look so similar in the following video. They both have an area of flatlands where the area is being stretched (the red arrows) right before the mountaining that is taking place by the folding of the land right above it.

http://www.continuitystudios.net/clip07.html

 

pls try to understand that earth has biological growth only.no other possibility.i have lot of reasons and evidences that earth has biological growth only.

 

No, old son, you have a nutty idea that has very little supporting evidence (actually it's so little it's equivalent to zero).
Standing in a sawmill and concocting a theory about geology and geochemistry, is a helluva lot like looking at a tree and thinking the planet is a cosmic banana.
(I know, I tried it)

 

How do you know that?

Very easily.

Correct.

Peridotite (mantle) and basalt (oceanic crust) are heavier than granite (continental crust) and we find the iron-rich rocks below the others. What's inconsistent about that?

 

That's not always true. There are some ophiolite sequences in the Himalayas, for example:
Photang thrust sheet: an accretionary complex structurally below the Spontang ophiolite constraining timing and tectonic environment of ophiolite obduction, Ladakh Himalaya, NW India.
RICHARD I. CORFIELD, MIKE P. SEARLE and OWEN R. GREEN
Journal of the Geological Society; October 1999; v. 156; no. 5; p. 1031-1044; DOI: 10.1144/gsjgs.156.5.1031

Abstract:

The pre-collisional tectonic evolution of the north Indian continental margin is best recorded in the few ophiolite complexes preserved, the largest of which occurs in the Spontang area of the Himalayas. Structural, sedimentological, palaeontological and geochemical work on the ophiolite and associated allochthonous thrust sheets has been carried out to constrain the timing and tectonic environment of ophiolite obduction. A distinct thrust sheet of accretionary complex rocks has been identified immediately underlying the ophiolite. Accreted units include thrust slices of tectonic melanges and alkaline basaltic lavas capped by limestones ranging from late Permian to late Cretaceous in age, interpreted as remnants of former seamounts. The accretionary complex formed above a north dipping intra-oceanic subduction zone during the Cretaceous, the Spontang ophiolite located in the hanging wall. Beneath the Photang thrust sheet, two further distinct, allochthonous thrust sheets of sedimentary melanges and continental slope deposits have been recognized. The structural relations of the allochthonous thrust sheets with the sediments of the north Indian margin have been mapped in detail and show clear evidence that obduction occurred in the late Cretaceous. At this time the Dras-Kohistan intra-oceanic arc had already collided with the southern Asian margin, over 1500 km to the north. Obduction of the Spontang ophiolite therefore records a separate tectonic episode in the Ladakh Himalaya.

 

So? All that does is prove Earth expansion.

McCarthy, D.D., Ophiolites

Obduction is a myth.

 

earth has biological growth it is serious theory only.

 

if earth is expanding throw acceretion system than how subduction zone formed no possibilty. how different different minerals pockets formed. no possibility.

 

Exactly.

"Subduction exists only in the minds of its creators." -- Samuel W. Carey, geologist, 1976

"Subduction is a myth." -- Samuel W. Carey, geologist, 1988

Wrong.

Tassos, S.T., Element, Mineral and Rock Formation in the Context of Excess Mass Stress Tectonics - EMST, International Geological Congress Oslo, Aug 2008

Tassos, S.T., Excess Mass Stress (E.M.S.): The Driving Force Behind Geodynamic Phenomena, Proceedings of the International Symposium On New Concepts In Global Tectonics, Pages 26-34, Nov 1998