The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: lambie on November 22, 2007, 03:10:05 AM
-
Hi, I'm new here
I haven't had time to look at every thread on the forum, so please forgive me if I'm dragging up an old discussion...
What is the average FEers view on the REers theory of plate tectonics? For example, does an FEer believe in ancient supercontinent of Pangea?
-
Yes. The plate tectonics are all the same as on a RE model.
-
I brought up FE Pangea and it's problems before here http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17403.0
-
The ice wall was not originally part of 'pangea', it is a composite formation of glaciers and underwater mountains (which are now above the water)
-
The ice wall was not originally part of 'pangea', it is a composite formation of glaciers and underwater mountains (which are now above the water)
So, the ice wall is not connected to any of the RE plates?
-
The ice wall was not originally part of 'pangea', it is a composite formation of glaciers and underwater mountains (which are now above the water)
in FE history the Earth would have had to have begun as frozen water which then melted as the little sun rotated above it. my question to the right honourable gentleman is this: how?
-
this has been explained countless times.
the ice wall comes under little exposure because of the sun that is exposed to it.
Read the FAQ about how the sun works
and yes the ice wall is part of the tectonics but just not visibly (ie under water) as for the glaciers they are just temporary, over billions of years the shape of the wall will go through changes
-
if the ice wall is part of the plate, then it wouldn't have always been where it is now. That's assuming FEers believe in continental drift, which I believe they do. So, why didn't the water fall off the edge before the ice wall moved into position?
-
the water was frozen, got melted by son, the ice wall didnt melt under the sun because the sun is never concentrated on the ice wall.
-
but the ice wall would have been further north for a few hundred million years and would have been melted, my son.
-
this has been explained countless times.
the ice wall comes under little exposure because of the sun that is exposed to it.
Read the FAQ about how the sun works
and yes the ice wall is part of the tectonics but just not visibly (ie under water) as for the glaciers they are just temporary, over billions of years the shape of the wall will go through changes
Please, don't patronise me with the 'read the FAQ'
my point is not how it formed the puddle that is the Earth where we live, but how a solid coin of ice and rock initially forms with a Univeral accelerator pushing it up and a wee sun falling into a circular patern above the Earth
-
lol im sorry but seriously read the FAQ
all your questions will be answered.
-
no these questions are not answered. Have YOU read them?
-
yes. Please also read Earth Not A Globe by St. Rowbotham. And re-read some of tom bishops work. tis good
-
Earth Not A Globe by St. Rowbotham does not mention the movement of plates in any detail. Which is the area around which my query is based.
-
Seriously, I've been directing newbies to the FAQ for long enough to know the basics of what it contains, just to make doubly sure it hasn't been updated recently, i checked again though and it confirms my original thoughts, there is nothing concerning the formation of the Disc.
-
If it is not contained in the FAQ then it does not exist.
You must be talking about pseudo forces.
-
Rowbotham believed that the contients float on an infinite ocean. Okay, so FEers don't agree with RE plate tectonics. So, somebody please enlighten me and explain what the ice wall is connected to.
-
Hmm, im a RE believer and i just tried to fight from an FE point of view.
its easy, you just answer (bullshit) some parts of a question and just totally ignore the other parts. No wonder no-one can ever prove them wrong. Sorry i had to do it in your post but it was just a little experiment i wanted to try.
-
Exactly, FEers also seem to read from different hymn sheets on every topic, including this one. No FEer will come on this thread and provide an answer ::)
-
Hmm, im a RE believer and i just tried to fight from an FE point of view.
its easy, you just answer (bullshit) some parts of a question and just totally ignore the other parts. No wonder no-one can ever prove them wrong. Sorry i had to do it in your post but it was just a little experiment i wanted to try.
I had my suspicions, but yes it's true, I created a whole account to test it. (I still use it if i need a chuckle)
-
haha they really have a formula.
Find the easiest part of the original question. Answer it.
The RE'er comes back and questions your answer.
After a while you have bamboozled them they don't know what they were asking they quietly leave.
obviously it was my first time i couldnt sustain it but others who have had more practice really could!
-
come on, where are the FEers ::)
-
laughing behind the scenes
-
no, no. I think it's normal RE believers that are laughing. Not FE freaks.
-
Tom Bishop thinks the ice wall is INFINITE; that it goes on forever!
it is to laugh!
-
Tom Bishop thinks the ice wall is INFINITE; that it goes on forever!
it is to laugh!
I simply cannot believe that he actually thinks that. I feel very, very sorry for him if he does. Poor bloke :(
-
Yes. The plate tectonics are all the same as on a RE model.
Plate tectonics cannot exist on FE due to the requirement of a luquid core.
-
no, no. I think it's normal RE believers that are laughing. Not FE freaks.
That's exactly why we laugh
-
Yes. The plate tectonics are all the same as on a RE model.
Plate tectonics cannot exist on FE due to the requirement of a luquid core.
LOL, you talk about FE like it's some other place. Yet we're on it right now.
-
Yes. The plate tectonics are all the same as on a RE model.
Plate tectonics cannot exist on FE due to the requirement of a luquid core.
LOL, you talk about FE like it's some other place. Yet we're on it right now.
as usual you've avoided my point, tectonics can't work without a liquid core. which only occurs naturally in spherical form.
-
errr, no. On the RE model the core is solid.
-
On a flat earth accelerating upwards the natural shape would be flat due to the pseudoforce acting downward on it against the "hard" bottom.
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
-
Wrong. There are several subduction zones. if only around the circle then explain to me why the indonesian plate is slipping down over
-
So, the ice wall is not connected to any of the RE plates?
Didn't my theory already explained how the Ice Wall forms? The Earth begun with an icy surface/frozen water. The Sun at the center melts the ice, all the way until the edge where the heat concentration is extremely low. Thus, Ice Wall. This wall is not really a wall; it is a mountain range covered in ice.
-
Did I say the only subduction zone is at the outer edge? 'Cause I'm pretty sure I did not.
-
Did I say the only subduction zone is at the outer edge? 'Cause I'm pretty sure I did not.
The only large magma output site is the sub atlantic ridge. Which is pushing europe from america, not feeding lots of plates which are pushing themselves under the ring.
Tectonics cannot function without the kind of core RE has.
-
A solid one?
-
Tectonics cannot function without the kind of core RE has.
What kind of core?
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
-
Explain how it could not. There is nothing there that is specific to a round earth.
-
Explain how it could not. There is nothing there that is specific to a round earth.
A core can't exist on FE or all of it's energy would be concentrated directly underneeth the north pole.
-
Explain how it could not. There is nothing there that is specific to a round earth.
A core can't exist on FE or all of it's energy would be concentrated directly underneeth the north pole.
There is no reason it couldn't occur on a flat surface rather than a round core.
-
Explain how it could not. There is nothing there that is specific to a round earth.
A core can't exist on FE or all of it's energy would be concentrated directly underneeth the north pole.
There is no reason it couldn't occur on a flat surface rather than a round core.
Flat core couldn't remain in one place. nothing would stop it from breaking up.
-
first you say molten core, now you say solid core (after I correct you), are you just making stuff up as you see fit?
-
the solid core of earth is significantly smaller than the molten iron core which surrounds it, so it is often excluded from core diagrams.
-
Strangely, I think you have a point.
Not sure. I'm a bit fuzzy with Plate tectonics. Haven't studied them for about 3 years.
Just a sudden thought: does FE have a magnetic field like RE then? I mean, if there is the core, mantle and crust as with RE, then sure there is a magnetic field, caused by the inner core?
And I thought the inner core was growing.
-
Strangely, I think you have a point.
Not sure. I'm a bit fuzzy with Plate tectonics. Haven't studied them for about 3 years.
Just a sudden thought: does FE have a magnetic field like RE then? I mean, if there is the core, mantle and crust as with RE, then sure there is a magnetic field, caused by the inner core?
And I thought the inner core was growing.
There is a magnetic field.
-
first you say molten core, now you say solid core (after I correct you), are you just making stuff up as you see fit?
there both right , it as a solid inner core and a liquid outer core
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
Then you agree? I mean, those are only 2 possibilities of the movement, anyway.
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
Then you agree? I mean, those are only 2 possibilities of the movement, anyway.
With the entire chunky molten body of earth pushing the plates, its hardly a "minor" contribution
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
Then you agree? I mean, those are only 2 possibilities of the movement, anyway.
With the entire chunky molten body of earth pushing the plates, its hardly a "minor" contribution
With the massive weight of the plates pulling themselves down, it's much less of a contribution.
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
Then you agree? I mean, those are only 2 possibilities of the movement, anyway.
With the entire chunky molten body of earth pushing the plates, its hardly a "minor" contribution
With the massive weight of the plates pulling themselves down, it's much less of a contribution.
They're floating silly
-
Flat core couldn't remain in one place. nothing would stop it from breaking up.
Explain.
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
Then you agree? I mean, those are only 2 possibilities of the movement, anyway.
With the entire chunky molten body of earth pushing the plates, its hardly a "minor" contribution
With the massive weight of the plates pulling themselves down, it's much less of a contribution.
They're floating silly
Oh, God. Pull out a high school Earth sciences text, please. You need to refresh on what happens to plates.
-
Flat core couldn't remain in one place. nothing would stop it from breaking up.
Explain.
it'd be like a sheet of ply board. So much force on it with so many weak points would tear it appart. a sphere has no week points, this is how the core is a solid sphere of iron and nuclear material
-
it'd be like a sheet of ply board. So much force on it with so many weak points would tear it appart. a sphere has no week points, this is how the core is a solid sphere of iron and nuclear material
Who says the core has to be flat?
-
it'd be like a sheet of ply board. So much force on it with so many weak points would tear it appart. a sphere has no week points, this is how the core is a solid sphere of iron and nuclear material
Who says the core has to be flat?
A sperical core would leave too much heat concentrated directly above it, leaving a lovely hole in the arctic.
-
Good to know the forces that move the plates are covered.
-
it'd be like a sheet of ply board. So much force on it with so many weak points would tear it appart. a sphere has no week points, this is how the core is a solid sphere of iron and nuclear material
Who says the core has to be flat?
A sperical core would leave too much heat concentrated directly above it, leaving a lovely hole in the arctic.
You flip-flop worse than a politician.
-
check out this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seismograph
according to something i read (i forget where), large earthquakes can be sensed by seismographs all over the world. but when the differing times are measured, and compared to the known speed the vibrations travel, the result can ONLY be explained by a round earth!
(and that's not counting the waves that are said to "bounce" off the core!)
-
A solid core which is maintained solid due to the immense pressure it is under, consisting of iron and nuclear material which is decaying to produce the heat necessary to maintain a liquid core. as the liquid core heats, it rises to the surface, where it cools. Then dropping back towards the earth's core, where it is re heated and rised again, making a convetion current. this constant current moves the plates.This is happening in all directions by the way.
Explain how this can happen on a flat earth
Convection is minor in the movement of the plates in comparison to things like slab pull.
Don't question me i studied geography and tectonics were my favourite subject funnily enough
LOL, I don't believe you, or you wouldn't keep calling the Earth a sphere when it's not.
-
A sperical core would leave too much heat concentrated directly above it, leaving a lovely hole in the arctic.
I would assume you meant like this:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/FLATEARTH1.jpg)
You're saying that the smaller distance between the lithosphere and the core would cause melting? If so, explain.
-
I love your diagrams, Jack. Do you keep a catalog of them all? Maybe you should put them all into a thread in "Everything Else." Trekky could put all of his refraction ones in it. It could be called "Self Drawn Explanatory Diagrams" thread.
-
There is no reason the core could not be a flat layer.
-
So, the ice wall is not connected to any of the RE plates?
Didn't my theory already explained how the Ice Wall forms? The Earth begun with an icy surface/frozen water. The Sun at the center melts the ice, all the way until the edge where the heat concentration is extremely low. Thus, Ice Wall. This wall is not really a wall; it is a mountain range covered in ice.
Exactly, so the land mass has always been at the boundary of the FE world. But, we know that Antarctica before around 100m years ago wasn't where it was now. There was no land mass in the south.
-
I love your diagrams, Jack. Do you keep a catalog of them all? Maybe you should put them all into a thread in "Everything Else." Trekky could put all of his refraction ones in it. It could be called "Self Drawn Explanatory Diagrams" thread.
Heh, thanks.
-
Exactly, so the land mass has always been at the boundary of the FE world.
Uh, what?
-
the mountains at the edge (lol) of the earth, they've always been there ie. the plates on which the mountains sit have always been in the same place?
-
the mountains at the edge (lol) of the earth,
What about it?
they've always been there
Yes.
ie. the plates on which the mountains sit have always been in the same place?
Lithospheric activity causes the changes.
-
the mountains at the edge (lol) of the earth,
What about it?
they've always been there
Yes.
ie. the plates on which the mountains sit have always been in the same place?
Lithospheric activity causes the changes.
What do you mean by the last statement?
-
Plate tectonics.
-
so you think the Antarctic plate exists, but is a big ring round the edge?
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world. There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
-
so you think the Antarctic plate exists, but is a big ring round the edge?
Yes.
-
see my last post then
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world. There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
answer that JACK?
-
Instead of me explaining how a flat core wouldn't work. explain to me how one WOULD work.
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world. There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
answer that JACK?
-
well played.
-
Another win for the REers then. Too easy.
-
Another win for the REers then. Too easy.
You didn't win anything. All of these posts have been done just today. People have things to do, you know.
-
yay (http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/1632/4channe6.gif)
-
flat core would work the same as a spherical core.
-
flat core would work the same as a spherical core.
Answer the question. Don't just post random statements. A thread's like a conversation.
-
flat core would work the same as a spherical core.
No it wouldnt. What would keep it from becoming liquid without equal forces from every direction.
-
I believe that Jacks diagram is wrong. In actuality, there would be a 'flat' core. Basically a layer of crust, a layer of mantle, a layer of solid inner core.
-
I believe that Jacks diagram is wrong. In actuality, there would be a 'flat' core. Basically a layer of crust, a layer of mantle, a layer of solid inner core.
Fascinating stuff, but I've already proven in this thread that a FE wouldn't work.
-
when? I see no such proof.
-
I believe that Jacks diagram is wrong. In actuality, there would be a 'flat' core. Basically a layer of crust, a layer of mantle, a layer of solid inner core.
you write like you are arguing for FE for the sake of it, but don't really believe it (that's how it comes across in your phrasing). Is that the case?
Answer my question about the convergent/divergent boundary length disparity in the FE model.
-
It would have a spherical core as only a sphere can contain these forces. Being why the earth is a sphere. FE'ers is an ancient believe. Much like when they thought if you have sex with the woman on top, she won't get pregnant. a time when they burned "witches". When earth was the centre of the universe. looking at that. does your FE theory make any sense?
-
It would have a spherical core as only a sphere can contain these forces. Being why the earth is a sphere. FE'ers is an ancient believe. Much like when they thought if you have sex with the woman on top, she won't get pregnant. a time when they burned "witches". When earth was the centre of the universe. looking at that. does your FE theory make any sense?
That's a straw man, and has no relevance.
I believe that Jacks diagram is wrong. In actuality, there would be a 'flat' core. Basically a layer of crust, a layer of mantle, a layer of solid inner core.
you write like you are arguing for FE for the sake of it, but don't really believe it (that's how it comes across in your phrasing). Is that the case?
Answer my question about the convergent/divergent boundary length disparity in the FE model.
What's the question?
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world. There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
answer that JACK?
That was my point.
-
well, i don't know enough about plate tectonics to answer your question. I guess you'll have to wait for Jack.
-
well, i don't know enough about plate tectonics to answer your question. I guess you'll have to wait for Jack.
It is clear to me Jack doesn't know much about plate tectonics either. Of course, you could use a similar argument that you used in another thread, "anomalies in measuring equipment"
-
Should I?
-
go on, probably good as it's going to get.
-
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
Obviously.
There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
Just more than you've been told about.
-
It would have a spherical core as only a sphere can contain these forces.
You also believe light travels faster than radio waves. Can we all just assume you know very little about physics?
-
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
Obviously.
Then a FE model doesn't work.
There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
Just more than you've been told about.
Oh I see, yet another group of scientists are in on the conspiracy ::) This is a shit argument
-
Then a FE model doesn't work.
Wow. That is an amazing argument.
-
Then a FE model doesn't work.
Wow. That is an amazing argument.
No. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
That was my argument. You argument is that we just haven't found these mysterious convergent zones yet. Brilliant.
-
No. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
The FE is the real world, so the Antarctic plate is just the right size.
-
No. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map, the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
The FE is the real world, so the Antarctic plate is just the right size.
you've changed your argument :o You said about 5 posts ago that there would obviously be a surplus of subduction. That there are undiscovered divergent boundaries. Now you're saying because of the shape of the real world, everything makes sense.
-
Right. A surplus from what the RE would like you to believe, but the right amount in reality.
-
Right. A surplus from what the RE would like you to believe, but the right amount in reality.
No, because we know how far the plates are moving apart per year. Fact. In the FE model these rates would have to be different, and wrong. Do you use different methods of measuring in your weird FE world?
PS You're mad
-
in the FE model, antarctica is a giant ring surrounding the world, not a plate!
-
in the FE model, antarctica is a giant ring surrounding the world, not a plate!
the ring of mountains sits on plate. It doesn't really matter anyway. It doesn't work whatever you assume about the FE world plate tectonics.
-
The outer ring is solid due to the coldness of space around it.
-
The outer ring is solid due to the coldness of space around it.
I don't care if it's solid. This has no bearing on you theory.
-
No, tis the right thread. In FE theory Antarctica does not move for my previously stated reason.
-
No, tis the right thread. In FE theory Antarctica does not move for my previously stated reason.
All plates move.
-
No, tis the right thread. In FE theory Antarctica does not move for my previously stated reason.
All plates move.
Not the outer ring. It kind of has nowhere to go...
-
No, tis the right thread. In FE theory Antarctica does not move for my previously stated reason.
All plates move.
Not the outer ring. It kind of has nowhere to go...
It can't just stay where it is, not physically possible for a plate to stay where it is. The convection currents in your FE model don't exist then. You're saying there is no heat transfer in the mantle. You're implying that continental drift doesn't occur.
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
-
Sorry to crash but could the Engineer answer my questions in the slow clock thread also as it seems to be being ignored for some reason.......cant imagine why.
-
It would have a spherical core as only a sphere can contain these forces.
You also believe light travels faster than radio waves. Can we all just assume you know very little about physics?
I already corrected myself on that mr air cadet.
-
You back peddled, yes.
-
by admitting that i was under the impression radio waves are slower than light waves?
oh while im on the topic i did some research. Radio waves are only the same speed as light when traveling through a vacume. When introduced to atmosphere, they're slowed.
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
still no answer...
-
by admitting that i was under the impression radio waves are slower than light waves?
oh while im on the topic i did some research. Radio waves are only the same speed as light when traveling through a vacume. When introduced to atmosphere, they're slowed.
so is light...
-
oh while im on the topic i did some research. Radio waves are only the same speed as light when traveling through a vacume. When introduced to atmosphere, they're slowed.
And what speed is light when it's in the atmosphere?
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
The ring is made of rock. It does not sit on anything. It's in space.
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
The ring is made of rock. It does not sit on anything. It's in space.
Do the mountains and ice wall sit on this rock in space then??
-
oh while im on the topic i did some research. Radio waves are only the same speed as light when traveling through a vacume. When introduced to atmosphere, they're slowed.
And what speed is light when it's in the atmosphere?
It isn't slowed. The amount of light energy output the sun gives out is far too intense for the atmosphere to have any real effect.
-
oh while im on the topic i did some research. Radio waves are only the same speed as light when traveling through a vacume. When introduced to atmosphere, they're slowed.
And what speed is light when it's in the atmosphere?
It isn't slowed. The amount of light energy output the sun gives out is far too intense for the atmosphere to have any real effect.
LOL
-
It isn't slowed. The amount of light energy output the sun gives out is far too intense for the atmosphere to have any real effect.
You may want to do some more of that 'research'.
-
Spartex is hilarious. I can't decide wether he believes what he's writing or not. It's great.
-
Spartex is hilarious. I can't decide wether he believes what he's writing or not. It's great.
No i believe the words of a man with a degree in physics.
Basicaly they CAN travel at the speed of light. Radio waves are an example of electromagnetic waves (other examples include, microwaves and x-rays) can all travel at the speed of light.
However, their actual speed (called the propagation velocity) depends on two variables. One is called permeability and the other is called permittivity. Each variable's value depends on the material that the waves are traveling through. Basically, you can think of the variables as how "easy" it is for electic fields and magnetic fields to travel through the medium. If the waves are traveling in free space, they will always travel at the speed of light. Otherwise, the waves will travel slower.
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
The ring is made of rock. It does not sit on anything. It's in space.
Do the mountains and ice wall sit on this rock in space then??
Hey, FEers, care to answer my question. Can't wait for the answer :P
-
No, I'm saying the outer ring doesn't move. The plates and such do, relative to the outer ring.
What is the ring made of? What does it sit on? Four elephants?
The ring is made of rock. It does not sit on anything. It's in space.
Do the mountains and ice wall sit on this rock in space then??
Hey, FEers, care to answer my question. Can't wait for the answer :P
yes
-
the ice wall is in space then, not connected to the earth?
-
Yes. It's magical icewall.
-
If the waves are traveling in free space, they will always travel at the speed of light. Otherwise, the waves will travel slower.
The waves will travel at the speed of light through that medium.
-
Do the mountains and ice wall sit on this rock in space then??
Obviously.
-
Yes. It's magical icewall.
Am I going to get a sensible answer.
-
Yes. It's magical icewall.
Am I going to get a sensible answer.
Is that a question?
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map,
When the outgoing plates subduct into the antarctic plate, they end up back into the inner layer of the flat Earth.
the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
Yes, because it circles around the edge of the flat Earth.
There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
The divergent boundaries move plates apart from each other, causing the plates to subduct into the Antarctic plate. Thus, the divergent boundaries (near the ice wall) circle around the flat Earth oceans. The plates subducted into the Antarctic plate ends up back into the Asthenospheric (upper mantle) layer of the flat Earth, which are recycled through melting.
Looks like I'm gonna have to make another diagram for this...
-
I believe that Jacks diagram is wrong. In actuality, there would be a 'flat' core. Basically a layer of crust, a layer of mantle, a layer of solid inner core.
It was just my assumption of how SparteX thinks, not how I think about it.
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map,
When the outgoing plates subduct into the antarctic plate, they end up back into the inner layer of the flat Earth.
the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
Yes, because it circles around the edge of the flat Earth.
There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
The divergent boundaries move plates apart from each other, causing the plates to subduct into the Antarctic plate. Thus, the divergent boundaries (near the ice wall) circle around the flat Earth oceans. The plates subducted into the Antarctic plate ends up back into the Asthenospheric (upper mantle) layer of the flat Earth, which are recycled through melting.
Looks like I'm gonna have to make another diagram for this...
You're back. Have you just been reading up on plate tectonics on wikipedia or something ::)
-
Yes. It's magical icewall.
Am I going to get a sensible answer.
Is that a question?
Yes, you can't rely on magic
-
The edge of the FE is one giant ring plate. As the outgoing plates contact this ring, they subduct at this location. As the plate subducts, it is heated, melted and recycled. Due to this subduction, the ice wall formed.
Wouldn't work. There would be a "surplus" of subduction, as on the FE map,
When the outgoing plates subduct into the antarctic plate, they end up back into the inner layer of the flat Earth.
the Antarctic plate would have a longer boundary than in the real world.
Yes, because it circles around the edge of the flat Earth.
There would have to be more divergent boundaries than actually exist.
The divergent boundaries move plates apart from each other, causing the plates to subduct into the Antarctic plate. Thus, the divergent boundaries (near the ice wall) circle around the flat Earth oceans. The plates subducted into the Antarctic plate ends up back into the Asthenospheric (upper mantle) layer of the flat Earth, which are recycled through melting.
Looks like I'm gonna have to make another diagram for this...
You're back. Have you just been reading up on plate tectonics on wikipedia or something ::)
Or maybe he was working ::)
-
Yes. It's magical icewall.
Am I going to get a sensible answer.
Is that a question?
Yes, you can't rely on magic
Why not? RE does with these magical gravitons and stuff
-
come on Jack boy, where's you diagram. I need a good laugh.
You'll probably need to use a RE diagram as a base. A) because no FEer has ever studied plate tectonics before and B)because you know nothing about plate tectonics anyway. Only what you read up on between my posts
-
come on Jack boy, where's you diagram. I need a good laugh.
You'll probably need to use a RE diagram as a base. A) because no FEer has ever studied plate tectonics before and B)because you know nothing about plate tectonics anyway. Only what you read up on between my posts
Way to make assumptions...and idiotic assumptions at that, anyone who's ever done science in school have studied plate tectonics.
-
If the waves are traveling in free space, they will always travel at the speed of light. Otherwise, the waves will travel slower.
The waves will travel at the speed of light through that medium.
The atmosphere slows them. mkay?
-
come on Jack boy, where's you diagram. I need a good laugh.
You'll probably need to use a RE diagram as a base. A) because no FEer has ever studied plate tectonics before and B)because you know nothing about plate tectonics anyway. Only what you read up on between my posts
Way to make assumptions...and idiotic assumptions at that, anyone who's ever done science in school have studied plate tectonics.
Well let's just wait till we see the diagram hey.
-
The atmosphere slows them. mkay?
But they are still traveling at the speed of light through that medium.
-
Totally off topic but SparteX has been giving me a good laugh with radio waves and how they relate to the speed of light.
-
In a vacuum radiowaves travel at c. in atmosphere, they are slowed. what's to understand?
-
How fast does light travel in the atmosphere?
-
In a vacuum radiowaves travel at c. in atmosphere, they are slowed. what's to understand?
radio waves are light, thus they always travel at the speed of light.
-
You're back. Have you just been reading up on plate tectonics on wikipedia or something ::)
Uh, I have school and work, unlike you.
Here's the Antarctic Plate [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth3.jpg)
Here's how the plates work [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/LITHOSPHERE.jpg)
-
omg, that's hilarious :P
Bye bye, I give up with you freaks
-
omg, that's hilarious :P
Bye bye, I give up with you freaks
noooooooooo don't leave, I was just starting to like youuuuuuuuuuu
-
Totally off topic but SparteX has been giving me a good laugh with radio waves and how they relate to the speed of light.
Me too. See my sig...
-
come on Jack boy, where's you diagram. I need a good laugh.
You'll probably need to use a RE diagram as a base. A) because no FEer has ever studied plate tectonics before and B)because you know nothing about plate tectonics anyway. Only what you read up on between my posts
Way to make assumptions...and idiotic assumptions at that, anyone who's ever done science in school have studied plate tectonics.
or even keystage 3 geography. :p
-
Sorry to be harsh guys. I don't know where to start with the diagram. Perhaps you could provide some evidence of your magical continuos divergent boundary that cirles the earth. The ice wall seems to be connected to the earth too. A while ago (in the same thread) it was floating in space.
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
-
The ice wall seems to be connected to the earth too. A while ago (in the same thread) it was floating in space.
It's the Earth that is floating in space. ???
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
Uh, yes it has...
-
For the subduction zones to be all the way around the ice wall. every other plate boundry would have to be kicking out magma.
-
The ice wall seems to be connected to the earth too. A while ago (in the same thread) it was floating in space.
It's the Earth that is floating in space. ???
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
Uh, yes it has...
In the real world, the continent of Antarctic hasn't always been where it is now. You can't deny that, it's a fact. The plates in the FE world don't seem to move.
-
Perhaps you could provide some evidence of your magical continuos divergent boundary that cirles the earth.
Raise some money, bring me to an underwater team, and I will show you the evidence.
The ice wall seems to be connected to the earth too. A while ago (in the same thread) it was floating in space.
The Ice Wall always connected to the Earth...
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
Antarctica IS on the edge.
-
The ice wall seems to be connected to the earth too. A while ago (in the same thread) it was floating in space.
It's the Earth that is floating in space. ???
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
Uh, yes it has...
No it hasn't, the southern tip of pangea became Antarctica, it hasn't always existed (in FE terms) as a circle surrounding the Earth
-
Come on Chris, read.
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
-
Come on Chris, read.
How does this diagram fit in with the fact that Antarctica (somewhere near the ice wall?) hasn't always been on the edge of your map?
Chris is right. Actually my name is Chris, so I'm right too :D
-
I'm glad you didnt leave :D FES needs more Chris's
-
Where's Jack, I need a good laugh
-
I dunno I'm not his minder
-
Wasn't asking you Gayer
-
But I felt like answering
-
You're back. Have you just been reading up on plate tectonics on wikipedia or something ::)
Uh, I have school and work, unlike you.
Here's the Antarctic Plate [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth3.jpg)
Here's how the plates work [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/LITHOSPHERE.jpg)
From you diagram, it looks like your ice wall is getting a bit too warm
-
Too warm for what?
-
it's just a little unclear what the ice wall is connected to on the diagram. Looks like ice next to hot stuff = melty ice wall = no stupid FE
-
I don't see the ice wall next to any hot stuff...
-
I don't see the ice wall next to any hot stuff...
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is. Plate tectonics and FE don't mix. You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
-
:D
-
I don't see the ice wall next to any hot stuff...
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is. Plate tectonics and FE don't mix. You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
The flat earth has no boundries.
-
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is.
Right.
Plate tectonics and FE don't mix.
They seem to mix just fine to me...
-
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is.
Right.
Has always been there? How did it form on the edge again rather than side out of the side of the disk? Things push up (mountains etc.) because of opposing forces. This is what forces plates under and over each other. The wall just kinda pushed against space in FE's case. Tom Bishop is doing a better job than you guys in this aspect. :'(
-
It's cold in space.
-
So earth-like material was more comfy and warm huddled up in a mound on the edge?
-
Uh, what?
-
Uh, what?
even i didn't get that one..
-
You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
Why?
:D
Good, we finally reach an agreement.
-
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is.
Right.
Has always been there? How did it form on the edge again rather than side out of the side of the disk? Things push up (mountains etc.) because of opposing forces. This is what forces plates under and over each other. The wall just kinda pushed against space in FE's case.
Land mass (in addition to ice) composes the icewall. If your saying 'space is cold' I assume this is to imply that the water from oceans freeze thus far out to form the wall or at least start it. The land mass is my concern though. The earthy material still would need to push against something.
-
Molten rock + cold = solid rock
-
Molten rock + cold = solid rock
So is it presumed that the FE is in a state of constant growth 'outward'?
Or is it assumed that this DID happen in the beginnings of Earth and then stopped, leaving the Ice Wall as it is?
Just clarification, not debating.
Thanks
-
You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
Why?
:D
Good, we finally reach an agreement.
What have we agreed?
-
Molten rock + cold = solid rock
And the sedimentary layers? And varying rock minerals that indicate multible origins?
-
Scratch number two, I have no evidence of my own for that. ::)
I saw the layers being counted on discovery channel.
-
So is it presumed that the FE is in a state of constant growth 'outward'?
No.
-
And the sedimentary layers?
What about them?
-
please could someone debating on the FE side of things draw a map of the earth 100m years ago, just to roughly show where the plates were.
-
I don't see the ice wall next to any hot stuff...
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is. Plate tectonics and FE don't mix. You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
The flat earth has no boundries.
It does in the sense of plate tectonics, that's what this thread is about. What is the edge of the flat earth made of? The Ice Wall? A continental plate? Something else?
-
In answering my question... I have to agree here.
Even with a large oceanic expanse to move upon, the plates still need a 'barrier' of sorts to push against. Therefore, either the ice wall is still growing, or the plates are not moving anymore.
If molten rock + cold = solid rock (which it obviously does) then if the lava flows are active at even 10% of the ice wall, the Earth must still be growing outward, even if it is oblong.
OR it could be the plates are pushing all landmasses apart and expanding the earth in that fashion. Could this be the case?
Main thing is that new land is being formed everywhere, whether it be the sea floor or visibly above the water line. It must go somewhere...
-
You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
Why?
:D
Good, we finally reach an agreement.
What have we agreed?
Well, what don't you agree?
-
I don't see the ice wall next to any hot stuff...
OH, I see. The ice wall is part of a plate. The one which doesn't seem to move, has always been where it is. Plate tectonics and FE don't mix. You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
The flat earth has no boundries.
It does in the sense of plate tectonics, that's what this thread is about. What is the edge of the flat earth made of? The Ice Wall? A continental plate? Something else?
No, it has no edge.
-
I find that interesting. So if the earth has no edge, I want to clarify before I continue... do you mean to say the earth has infinite landmass? (Ice or no)
-
The Earth is not infinite.
-
Ok then, if it is not infinite, how can it have no edge? Is it some sort of dimensional shift that allows for thickness where there physically is none?
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but this one is slipping past me - I'm a bit tired and unless the earth tapers to a sharpened point, it has to have an edge somewhere if it's not infinite. And even then it still technically has an edge eh?
Have a good one all.
-
it has no edge. Please can someone debating on the FE side explain the shape of the earth. Or haven't you all agreed on that yet? ::)
-
Or haven't you all agreed on that yet? ::)
Is that required? Ugh, I can't stand this shit.
Anyways, Tom has tried to say that it's infinite (and there were discussions about the possibilities this entails), but the general consensus is that it is finite.
-
Or haven't you all agreed on that yet? ::)
Is that required? Ugh, I can't stand this shit.
Anyways, Tom has tried to say that it's infinite (and there were discussions about the possibilities this entails), but the general consensus is that it is finite.
finite without an edge then?
-
Well, there obviously has to be an edge if it's finite. I can't remember if Username subscribes to the infinite Earth idea.
-
Well, there obviously has to be an edge if it's finite. I can't remember if Username subscribes to the infinite Earth idea.
Well instead of worrying about that, answer me this. Is the continent of Antarctica connected to the same plate that the ice wall sits on?
-
Is the continent of Antarctica connected to the same plate that the ice wall sits on?
Depends on where the Ice Wall is actually located. Given that the Ice Wall hasn't been seen etc... I would guess that no, it isn't on the same plate.
-
Or that plate is stretched into a ring on FE... ???
-
You can't have moving plates on a flat surface with boundaries.
Why?
:D
Good, we finally reach an agreement.
What have we agreed?
Well, what don't you agree?
Virtually everything that you say
-
Is the continent of Antarctica connected to the same plate that the ice wall sits on?
Depends on where the Ice Wall is actually located. Given that the Ice Wall hasn't been seen etc... I would guess that no, it isn't on the same plate.
but the ice wall sits on a plate right?
-
I'm just struggling to see how this plate that's on the edge of the Earth works. Which was is it moving? Maybe it's time for Jack to draw one of his good pictures to show me the edge of the Earth and how the plate here operates. I bet he doesn't post it, because it won't be possible to draw.
-
Well, there obviously has to be an edge if it's finite. I can't remember if Username subscribes to the infinite Earth idea.
Yeah, I do.
-
Virtually everything that you say
Point them out.
I'm just struggling to see how this plate that's on the edge of the Earth works.
The plate is not moving. Can't even comprehend pictures, eh?
Which was is it moving?
Which moving what?
Maybe it's time for Jack to draw one of his good pictures to show me the edge of the Earth and how the plate here operates.
Already shown in the picture. It's your responsibility to fully comprehend its meaning, which I guess you couldn't...
I bet he doesn't post it, because it won't be possible to draw.
Won't be possible to draw what?
-
I find that interesting. So if the earth has no edge, I want to clarify before I continue... do you mean to say the earth has infinite landmass? (Ice or no)
The earth has infinite surface area or at least, sufficiently large surface area.
-
I find that interesting. So if the earth has no edge, I want to clarify before I continue... do you mean to say the earth has infinite landmass? (Ice or not)
The earth has infinite surface area or at least, sufficiently large surface area.
Sufficiently large enough to not have an edge? ???
-
The Earth has an edge and it's finite.
-
So I have come to understand by the general population. I'm merely trying to understand Username's state of mind.
-
I find that interesting. So if the earth has no edge, I want to clarify before I continue... do you mean to say the earth has infinite landmass? (Ice or not)
The earth has infinite surface area or at least, sufficiently large surface area.
Sufficiently large enough to not have an edge? ???
Large enough that the edge is not a defined point but an eventual tappering off of density that approaches 0.
I think its more likely thats its infinite.
-
Virtually everything that you say
Point them out.
I'm just struggling to see how this plate that's on the edge of the Earth works.
The plate is not moving. Can't even comprehend pictures, eh?
Which was is it moving?
Which moving what?
Maybe it's time for Jack to draw one of his good pictures to show me the edge of the Earth and how the plate here operates.
Already shown in the picture. It's your responsibility to fully comprehend its meaning, which I guess you couldn't...
I bet he doesn't post it, because it won't be possible to draw.
Won't be possible to draw what?
I can't comprehend your picture because it's utter dross. End of. Go back to school.
-
Lambie, no matter what you say or do, you are still wrong. That is how this forum works
-
You're back. Have you just been reading up on plate tectonics on wikipedia or something ::)
Uh, I have school and work, unlike you.
Here's the Antarctic Plate [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth3.jpg)
Here's how the plates work [ILLUSTRATION AND APPROXIMATION ONLY]:
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/LITHOSPHERE.jpg)
From you diagram, it looks like your ice wall is getting a bit too warm
So, your "plate" that the ice wall sits on covers the whole of the underside of the earth too?
-
Lambie, no matter what you say or do, you are still wrong. That is how this forum works
haha damn why didn't anyone ever tell me that when i was young and impressionable?
now i've fallen into the eric bloedow category of trying to prove all FE'rs wrong once and for all.
DAMN YOU ALL!
-
Lambie, no matter what you say or do, you are still wrong. That is how this forum works
So there is no point in the discussion area of the website then. :o
-
unless you want to be proven (i use that word lightly) wrong by the FE'rs, then no.
-
now i've fallen into the eric bloedow category of trying to prove all FE'rs wrong once and for all.
Jesus, don't sell yourself that short.
-
So, your "plate" that the ice wall sits on covers the whole of the underside of the earth too?
Do you not understand the legends? That is the crust, and the "plate" is part of the crust, just like the plates on a round Earth.
I can't comprehend your picture because it's utter dross. End of. Go back to school.
Then it's your problem that you can't comprehend pictures. Now, go back and revise plate tectonics. Actually, based on your reasoning, literacy, and comprehensive skills, I can only assume you're still a high school student. Get that high school geography textbook and read.
-
Lambie, no matter what you say or do, you are still wrong. That is how this forum works
haha damn why didn't anyone ever tell me that when i was young and impressionable?
now i've fallen into the eric bloedow category of trying to prove all FE'rs wrong once and for all.
DAMN YOU ALL!
Just as long as YOU don't start CAPITALISING FAR TOO many words for EXTRA EMPHASIS. Otherwise NO-ONE will take you SERIOUSLY!!!!
-
it IS an effective debating technique though.
-
I don't think so, since I now find myself casually scrolling past all of Eric Bloedow's posts because the letters offend my eyes.
-
it IS an effective debating technique though.
Italics and Bold > Capitals
-
So, your "plate" that the ice wall sits on covers the whole of the underside of the earth too?
Do you not understand the legends? That is the crust, and the "plate" is part of the crust, just like the plates on a round Earth.
I can't comprehend your picture because it's utter dross. End of. Go back to school.
Then it's your problem that you can't comprehend pictures. Now, go back and revise plate tectonics. Actually, based on your reasoning, literacy, and comprehensive skills, I can only assume you're still a high school student. Get that high school geography textbook and read.
Jack, you really are a sad little frustrated boy. Get a life.
-
Nice, what a strong argument you got there.
-
Nice, what a strong argument you got there.
it's true though ;)