6
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 33:
Line 33: + − + −
no edit summary
:::::::::Also, 1) if the continents were once one landmass and 2) if the Earth is really young (6000 years) then the plates would have had to move at ''incredible'' rates that could not be observed or repeated. The catastrophic plate tectonics models that currently exist (hydroplate and runaway subduction) are lacking, and the latter cannot even work without a miracle. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 18:42, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Also, 1) if the continents were once one landmass and 2) if the Earth is really young (6000 years) then the plates would have had to move at ''incredible'' rates that could not be observed or repeated. The catastrophic plate tectonics models that currently exist (hydroplate and runaway subduction) are lacking, and the latter cannot even work without a miracle. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 18:42, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Perpetual motion is not impossible, Superfluid fountains are perpetual in nature for several different gravities, including earth normal gravity. This[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI Video Clip]illustrates a perpetual motion fountain. Furthermore, Lexfundamen is correct in his statement in the fact that no change in radioactive decay of any element has ever been shown to change, only the amount of the material is in flux and decays at a predicted rate. Since the claim that it DOES change goes against what I learned in my education in nuclear engineering, I am curious where Mr. Schlafly gets this idea from. If requested I can point you to several nuclear engineering books in both academic and industrial applications that hold the decay rate to be constant.
::::::::: Addison has a point if you assume a young earth, plate tectonics would have been impossible as the forces needed to accomplish the movement would have damaged the lithosphere to such a degree where volcanic activity would occur at a rate that would extinguish life. The plates would have had to move so fast as to open up many cracks in the crust. However, if you want to argue that the rate of tectonic movement is dynamic; your theory would have to explain the effects of magnetic striping. Which is as yet to be explained by any other theory.--[[User:RichB|RichB]] 20:18, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::