Quote:
Originally Posted by Margiani
it is only one topic from modern theory about evolution of the universe. if you want to understand everything necessary to read all theory. its name is the COSMOGEOLOGICAL THEORY. www.cosmogeology.ge
If you'll begin right analyze maps of continental drifts, our oceans beds maps, continental and ocean lithosphere tiles geological structures, Earth's geospheres. Necessary good knowledge in Physics, Chemistry, Geology, and Astronomy.
Q.-Conntinental drift could ever created mountine ranges?
A.-No, because drift can create only rift zones with thin ocean lithospere
tiles. drift is only reason of submerging and melting thin ocean lithosphere tiles into asthenosphere. To create Andes, Himalayas, Alpes, etc is necessary continental tiles rapid movement, destroyed thin ocean lithisphere tiles created thik continental lithosphere tiles and huge mountine ranges too.
Only huge geological forces could created continental folding structures.
We know that our all mountines geological layers were ocean bed for millions and millions years ago... |
I want to rephrase this to make sure I have it right. It's going to sound like I am being smart-alec, but I assure you I am not. I just want to make sure I completely understand your hypothesis and that language is not a barrier.
As I understand your post:
You are starting with one topic, from modern theory of the evolution of the universe. (That is good, to start with one topic, but it is misleading in what your post proposes. Plate techtonics doesn't have much to do with the creation and evolution of the universe.) You state people must read your website to be informed of your ideas. (I disagree. You should be able to state your idea here, however much you may need to elaborate.)
To begin with, you want to introduce as evidence our understanding of continental drift, maps of ocean beds etc... (You need to either provide links to the relevant reference material, or attach them if apropriate. It is bad form to reference them in general and expect your audience to wade through google pages to find which ones you may be referencing.)
You state that it is necessary to have a good understanding of Physics, Chemistry, Geology, and Astronomy. Ok.
You proceed with a question: Can continental drift account for, or have created, mountain ranges?
Your answer: No, because drift can create only rift zones with thin ocean lithosperes. (I assume instead of "rift zones" with thin ocean lithospheres you mean mid-ocean ridges? These are different from rift in creation of new crust and lithosphere. But I digress)
You go on to say that converging plates cannot account for the various mountain ranges on Earth, and that deposits from drift combined with Horst and Graben valleys are the only geologic forces that can create mountains. And that these must have occured during high-energy catastrophies. You finish by stating that the only geologic layers observable in mountain rock are ocean bed sediment and drift accumulation?
Is this a fair translation of you hypothesis? Again, I am only trying to make sure I understand the exact particulars of your presentation.
If I may, apropriate material in support of your hyposthesis is in order, as well as links to any cites that you feel may support your hypothesis. I also think a much greater level of detail is due, in particular why you feel established plate techtonics is not only a simpler explanation but that why, in your view, it cannot account for the creation of mountain ranges. And to finish, you need to provide clarification and detail on your theory of how drift, rift, etc... and/or mid-ocean ridges accounts for ALL mountainous regions on Earth.
Please feel free to correct my interpretation of your post. It is hard for me to understand your post, and my interpretation is certain to be wrong in spots. Also, please be attentive to the call for detail and support. Once I am sure of exactly what we are talking about, and you have provided clarification and support, I will be happy to discuss your hypothesis.
One more, but very important question. In the ATM forum, the burden of proof is completely upon
you. It is not incumbent upon any forum member to "brush up" on yours or any other website, or to necessarily prove mainstream science. It is
your responsibility to provide any knowledge needed in support, and to prove your hypothesis correct. With that knowledge, I again look forward to hearing more detail of this first hypothesis.
Thanks,
Serenitude