Plate Tectonics?

  • 82 Replies
  • 23969 Views
Plate Tectonics?
« on: December 16, 2009, 04:28:42 PM »
how does FE explain plate tectonics?

?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2009, 05:05:49 PM »
how does FE explain plate tectonics?

It doesn't have a proper explanation. Some sectors of the flat community try to get round it by saying plate tectonics is a myth and evidence for it is due to things like dinosaurs building boats and migrating to different countries with livestock. I'm not kidding.
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2009, 05:07:31 PM »
woah! seriously? thats so sad. i guess thats why nobody is responding to this thread. cowards, plain and simple.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2009, 07:10:47 PM »
Plate Tectonics do not exist.

?

Mookie89

  • 1327
  • Artilles is a goddess
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2009, 07:15:33 PM »
Plate Tectonics do not exist.


Then how do you explain earthquakes?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Ugh ugh! Ugh nug nug ugh!

It's fourteen French social dances past the hour.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2009, 07:23:12 PM »
Plate Tectonics do not exist.


Then how do you explain earthquakes?
Internal explosions in the earth.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2009, 07:40:59 PM »
An acceptable albeit unlikely theory. What are the explosions of? Why do they take place at fault lines? etc. If you can answer these questions than you have a feasible theory.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #7 on: December 16, 2009, 08:10:24 PM »
not only earthquakes but mountain ranges. you know what? theres a whole SERIES on this on history channel. its called "HOW THE EARTH WAS MADE!" tons of episodes with HUNDREDS of scientists giving hard facts. prove all them wrong, then come back.

?

Mookie89

  • 1327
  • Artilles is a goddess
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #8 on: December 16, 2009, 09:00:20 PM »
Plate Tectonics do not exist.


Then how do you explain earthquakes?
Internal explosions in the earth.

What causes these explosions? Why do they only occur along the fault lines? Why are there fault lines if there are no tectonic plates? I'm sure a physics expert as yourself could answer these easily.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Ugh ugh! Ugh nug nug ugh!

It's fourteen French social dances past the hour.

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2009, 09:05:45 PM »
I fail to see why plate tectonics would even be an issue for the Flat Earth. Why couldn't they exist on a plane just as easily as a sphere? Is there some reason the FET must deny their existence due to a previous denial or something? It would be a simple mechanism for the plane, which everyone agrees has SOME depth whether finite or infinite, to have more than one layer, or even a few partial layers to it.

I don't see the problem. Other than the fact that yohan says no way, and I assume many others.

Take care,
- Optimus
Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2009, 09:15:14 PM »
because you need circulation with convection currents to drive the crust. if it were flat, this couldnt happen because there wouldnt be anything making the core spin, therefore no circulation. unless theres some magic making it spin. or DE, or whatever excuse you have.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2009, 09:23:17 PM »
Plate tectonics and mountain ranges exist and they're due to pressure, which would not exist if the world wasn't round.
Quote
Where two continental plates collide the plates either buckle and compress or one plate delves under or (in some cases) overrides the other. Either action will create extensive mountain ranges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics

Another theory is that the world was actually once solid, with no large bodies of water that see today. Since then, it has been expanding.

Very interesting video. Hard to dispute.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2009, 09:55:11 PM »
because you need circulation with convection currents to drive the crust. if it were flat, this couldnt happen because there wouldnt be anything making the core spin, therefore no circulation. unless theres some magic making it spin. or DE, or whatever excuse you have.

That is exactly my point though - why would you need a sphere for this process? What I am saying is this:
you have a surface (crust) broken up into fragments of various size and shape. They are all slowly grinding, etc. due to your afore mentioned currents... why would this at all require specifically a spinning core? I would think that just basic physics, with any kind of hot core or layers would create massive amounts of varying pressures, and with the obvious variations in the Earth's makeup would cause all sorts of different 'pushes' and 'shoves' small and large, causing slow movements over time, venting, quaking, etc.

So, basically my point was that if we are assuming that the Earth is indeed flat, then I think the mechanics would also work out slightly different, and I don't see why it wouldn't work out just fine with some hot layers of liquid and gas.

Hopefully that made some sense anyway.

Take care,
- Optimus
Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2009, 10:01:33 PM »
because in a flat earth the molten magma would just be sitting there. all that would do would build pressures and make big bubbles in the crust like an over baked pie

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2009, 10:06:44 PM »
I believe that there are continental plates.

However, I do not believe that they move in the motions predicted by the Round Earth model.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2009, 10:08:58 PM »
I'd like to add that, in our understanding of plate tectonics, the spherical shape of the earth is pretty much a requirement. We have the movements of the plates mapped out in a way that only makes sense if the earth is round- if it were flat, the plates would behave accordingly. You either have to discount the entire theory, or maintain that everything we know about HOW the plates are moving is wrong.

Of course, that's nothing new. Everything about FET involves assuming thousands of years of proven science is wrong.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2009, 10:16:17 PM »
Quote
I'd like to add that, in our understanding of plate tectonics, the spherical shape of the earth is pretty much a requirement. We have the movements of the plates mapped out in a way that only makes sense if the earth is round- if it were flat, the plates would behave accordingly. You either have to discount the entire theory, or maintain that everything we know about HOW the plates are moving is wrong.

The Continental Drift Theory was originated in the 1900's to explain fossil records, not any visual or detected movement of the plates. To this date no one has been able to detected the specific movement of the continents.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/1752/Continental-Drift.html

However, I think that the plates are moving. Just not in the specific motion held in classic drift theory.

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2009, 10:16:22 PM »
because in a flat earth the molten magma would just be sitting there. all that would do would build pressures and make big bubbles in the crust like an over baked pie

That is a perfect metaphore. Now think about that bubble attempting to be formed through thousands.. no billions of tons of rock and strata - not exactly going to just get pop marks and small bursts are you. Sure the occasional volcano eruption, sinkhole, etc. but I would imagine that immens pressure building up would start causing continents to drift away from eachother as that pressure built up or "bubbled" like your pie example over an extremely long period of time.

In areas where it was not prominent, that edge of the plates would be getting crushed together from the force of others being pushed apart. A ripple effect all the war around the 'disk' as it were.

So yeah, we may have it all mapped out and figured out just how it works on a globe, but I think it could be worked out just fine for another model if the time were put into it. I don't see how it could not be replicated.
Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2009, 10:18:28 PM »
The way the continents move requires on everything being interconnected- not having an edge where pieces can just be shoved off. If Antarctica was really a giant ring around the world, I guarantee the movement of the plates would be accordingly different.

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2009, 10:37:22 PM »
The way the continents move requires on everything being interconnected- not having an edge where pieces can just be shoved off. If Antarctica was really a giant ring around the world, I guarantee the movement of the plates would be accordingly different.

Nothing can be 'shoved off' the Flat Earth the way I understand it... there is the wall, which for our purposes here we can assume because of the freezing temperatures of space would stop all thermal processes of any kind at the Earth's perimiter, therefore you would have a constant 'back-pressure' or churning motion that would allow the same sort of constant motion.

Also, you are arguing the same semantics as the structures of the two models. If we cannot agree to argue specifically about the likelihood of whether or not tectonics are PLAUSIBLE on FE then we have nothing to argue about, as nobody agrees on what FE looks like, or that the layout is the same as RE. In that respect, we must simply assume that since FE is obviously laid out differently - continents arranged slightly different, etc. - that this would account for those same variations that would also bring the tectonic movements into alignment ... see what I'm saying?

Therefore I am only arguing whether or not tectonics are possible, I can't debate everything else at the same time! :)

Take care,
- Optimus

Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2009, 10:39:32 PM »
You're right. Silly me bringing OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE into the discussion.

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2009, 11:04:11 PM »
You're right. Silly me bringing OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE into the discussion.

So am I, however you are bringing Assumed evidence into the discussion. You are assuming that in the FE model tectonics would not possibly act in any manner that could possibly replicate those of a RE. I am simply stating that if you take a step back and consider the possibilities of just standard properties of heat, expansion, pressures, frictions, restrictions, etc. That it could very well be possible. I don't see the problem here?
Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2009, 11:17:52 PM »
No, I'm stating facts. I'd love to see the plate movements mapped out for a flat earth if someone has them, but I already know it isn't possible. The movements wouldn't make sense in the far south. Kind of like how there's no way for Australia to be mapped on a flat earth map, come to think of it. FE in general doesn't work in the far south.

*

Optimus Prime

  • 1148
  • Autobot Leader: Keeper of the Matrix of Leadership
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2009, 11:28:27 PM »
No, I'm stating facts. I'd love to see the plate movements mapped out for a flat earth if someone has them, but I already know it isn't possible. The movements wouldn't make sense in the far south. Kind of like how there's no way for Australia to be mapped on a flat earth map, come to think of it. FE in general doesn't work in the far south.

That's what I'm talking about - if you are going to dismiss FE as a whole, then there is no reason to argue tectonics anymore. It would work the same way as the 'far south' works in the FE model. If you already know it isn't possible then you don't want to have a debate you want to have an 'end of discussion' - so have a good night!! :)

I need some sleep anyways...

Take care,
- Optimus
Dyslexics are teople poo!

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #24 on: December 17, 2009, 12:40:54 AM »
I don't want an end of discussion unless you want to admit I'm right. I'd like you to show me how the hell this could work on a map. Right now you've given me a vague "well it COULD work" without any evidence. I've told you why you're wrong. Is this not how debates usually go?

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2009, 03:54:39 AM »
I am giving you free reign to make up theories, and the best you come up with is that everything we have observed is wrong? Please try again.

*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #26 on: December 17, 2009, 07:19:46 AM »
He said what's observed is right and can be explained on a FE.

Can you read?
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"

?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #27 on: December 17, 2009, 01:41:04 PM »
Plate Tectonics do not exist.


You'd do well to take a leaf out of the Optimus book, Kathleen. Also, try switching your brain on at any time.
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #28 on: December 17, 2009, 01:44:29 PM »
He said what's observed is right and can be explained on a FE.

Can you read?

Let's see it then! I've got my RE explanation all set up, it's called Googling for "plate tectonics map." Where's the FE counterpoint?

*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: Plate Tectonics?
« Reply #29 on: December 18, 2009, 08:07:20 AM »
Obama Llama, what makes you think they WOULDN'T work on a FE?
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"