Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
997 bytes added ,  04:20, June 26, 2009
replies
Line 36: Line 36:     
::::::::: 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)
 
::::::::: 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)
 +
 +
:::::::::: In response to Addison, I would never expect the rate of movement of the continents today to be as fast as they moved near the beginning of the continental drift.  Today the San Francisco peninsula is moving at a slow rate, presumably much slower than in the past.  The moon is receding from the earth now, but I would not expect that rate to have always been constant.
 +
 +
:::::::::: In response to Lexfundamen, entropy is what makes a [[perpetual motion machine]] impossible, and it is what slows down rates of virtually everything over time.
 +
 +
:::::::::: In response to RichB, you say a [[perpetual motion machine]] is possible and I have nothing to add to that except to disagree.
 +
 +
:::::::::: In response to all, there is no reason to expect the rate of decay of uranium to have been forever constant, even into the early seconds of the [[Big Bang]].  Indeed, it is preposterous to pretend it was always constant, even then.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:20, 26 June 2009 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,231

edits

Navigation menu