Well, I'm getting tired of waiting for you to explain yourself, and I did not ignore your opening post. So here's my interpretation.I read it, and the references I could access (which was not all of them). The way those seemed to break down were:

(1) Articles/webpages that appear to be mainstream and discuss limited long past expansion that does not require exotic explanation.

(2) Articles/webpages that have not been shown to be relevant to Ganymede's expansion. For instance, having some "stretching crust" does not require an entire surface to expand. These articles are irrelevant unless clear, relevant text can be shown that indicates the "expansion."

(3) Expanding Earth/Ganymede Articles/webpages/videos that are wildly ATM, and almost certainly why this was shunted to ATM. For these wild and wacky arguments to be acceptable, you would need to find some very good support.

My guess is that you're attemting to support (3) using (1) and (2) and aren't happy when people ask you about the problems and limitations of (1) and (2).

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser