Is Plate Tectonic Theory Wrong?

Tao_Equus

Interfaith Forums
Messages
5,826
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Location
Edinburgh, scotland
I came across some clips on Youtube in which this guy, Neal Adams, says that our current geological model of subducting continental plates is wrong. He contends that Pangea never existed as a huge island on one side of the Earth, with a huge ocean on the other. Instead he states that all the continental land masses were joined together on an Earth about half its current size. And that the oceans we now see were formed when the Earth expanded like an inflating balloon, separating the continents.

His argument is compelling as told in the video clips he presents on his website and he shows 'evidence' that the same process has taken place on Mars and Ganymede, a moon of Jupiter. I have not looked at every bit of his site yet so perhaps I am missing it but the one big obvious flaw in his ideas are where did the huge volumes of water that make up the worlds oceans come from? The only possible source would be Earths interior... which intuitively seems unlikely.

Anyhow this is an interesting idea and I wonder if any of you have read about it in any detail and can offer your thoughts?

This is the link to his website:
Neal Adams Science Project New Model of the Universe Two Guys in a Bar



Tao
 
Here's a WIRED article about the guy:

Wired 9.03: Master of the Universe

edit: Just finished reading the article. Seems like a very charismatic and kooky guy. Probably a lot of fun to be around, but with some danger of communicable verbal diarrhea. Also sounds like he has a particular liking for being the lone champion of justice, fighting off a seemingly omnipotent evil behemoth. Will Adams avoid almost certain doom at the clutches of the cantankerous curmudgeons of science? Will the Earth grow greater in girth than Jupiter? Tune in next time, Adam-friends. Same Adams time. Same Adams channel.
 
Last edited:
Thx Dauer,

Well I am relieved to see that he's not pushing anyone's ideas but his own, and they are interesting. I never read anything before your link that suggested he was applying expansion as a universal principle... this is even more fascinating and one that my mind leaps toward as explaining a number of unanswered questions in current models.

Last thing I needed at the moment was yet another avenue I want to go down... so much to do... so little time!! Jury not in on him yet I think.

Tao

Edit: response to your edit.

Have you had a look at his website and the clips he's put together to back his ideas? They are compelling. And it seems he believes "everything" is expanding, not just Earth. This would explain some things science really struggles with.
 
Read a bit more. He seems to have a poor grasp of scientific orthodoxy, makes sweeping statements that contain huge errors of reason. Seems he is just a...... erm ....crackpot.
 
His almost blind enthusiasm throughout the interview gave me that sense at the start (and I was a little wary of the way he was being portrayed because of the clear anti-crackpot bias to the tone of the article), but the fourth page is really the kicker, especially scouring the web all night for ways to possibly account for a fact he wasn't aware of before within his theory and then quickly lighting up when a hypothetical energy to support his hypothetical matter is suggested.
 
Back
Top