We are fortunate indeed that Neal Adams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Adams the DC Comics book illustrator has taken a deep interest in the subject and created stunning animations showing the growth not just of Earth but pretty much every planet and moon with a hard surface (so we can see geological history)

http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html

There can be very little doubt that Earth once existed as a smaller planet with a shell made up of the present continental land masses. I have checked and gross mineral and geological features connect across the Pacific as well as the Atlantic. I am sure some matching fingerprint deposits can be identified to put the matter beyond reasonable doubt into certainty.

Neal Adams has a theory that matter is being created continuously inside bodies in space ie everything i
s expanding and gaining more mass. However there is a huge flaw in this - it is clear earth underwent a SUDDEN expansion. A gradual accretion of mass from whatever source cannot explain this. I have another theory.

Any successful theory must explain how earth underwent a phase transition.

I propose the expansion was driven by the release of huge amounts of Hydrogen from the Earth's core.

If during the accretion process the dust cloud was a charged plasma it is possible protons and electrons became separated. Under intense heat a6nd pressure a state of semi-collapsed matter may have been created which would gravitate to the core. In other worlds the core of Earth was supercondensed hydrogen - either alone or possibly as iron Hydride.

Earth over time cooled. It is possible that at some point the Earth becomes less able to hold hydrogen in this plasma state. We get the start of a hydrogen driven expansion.

This expansion may well have exceeded today's Earth size. In FACT many evolutionary features support this, notably the giantism of the dinosaur age.

IMO the thing that has been holding back acceptance of Expanding Earth is the lack of a suitable mechanism. Here I provide a possible if not likely mechanism.

Also -consider how Earth surface and atmosphere chemistry would be changed by release of Hydrogen. Abiogenic hydrocarbons, water, methane, ammonia, the stuff of life. Excess hydrogen would be released into space especially with a lower G larger diameter Earth.

From what I have read some mass extinction events suggest depleted oxygen.

So my theory in a nutshell

> Hydrogen formation drives planetary expansion
> Loss into space and reaction with other elements subsequently causes planetary contraction
> Evolution was kick-started by the release of Hydrogen and creation of life molecules
> Life conforms to the current size of the Planet

Over to you

So my theory in a nutshell

> Hydrogen formation drives planetary expansion
> Loss into space and reaction with other elements subsequently causes planetary contraction
> Evolution was kick-started by the release of Hydrogen and creation of life molecules
> Life conforms to the current size of the Planet

Over to you[/QUOTE]
The great British scientist Sir Frederick Hoyle has said that the probability of the sequence of molecules in the simplest cell coming into existence by chance is equivalent to a tornado going through a junk yard of airplane parts and assembling a 747 Jumbo Jet!
Just couldn’t understand why you are so naive and allowed to be brain-wash by unproven never ending scientific theories. To make something on the Earth humans need knowledge such as; to builds a computer man has to have knowledge? Man’s curiosity come –up with new idea how to build a first computer in 1946 ENIAC 28 tons in size 80’wX8’h with 17,840 vacuum tubes only could solve 5,000 problem/sec. Man constantly adds new idea’ makes a better and better computer as we see it today. The same rules apply to the universe and to the nature to create all these things has to have knowledge it is much complicated that man’s idea on the Earth, also “BEINGS” exist with knowledge beyond human’ understanding . Please stop writing nonsense and believing in an “evolution of a computer” and that the computer evolved by itself from ENIAC to today’s modern computer.

PS just remained the Earth is ET's a laboratory to see how inhabitants will live in harmony with the nature and each other. Not need to write what good and harm science in destruction of the Earth only human’s home in the universe where they can live.

The title of the thread is extremely misleading. However a word of advice, instead of starting so many threads on different topics maybe you should start one and focus on it before you start another. Fact is you are going to get asked for evidence on all three and as per the rules in ATM you are required to answer in a timely manner or the thread will be locked. Starting threads all over in ATM is a sure way to get threads locked for the above mentioned reason.

Fisherman - I presume you subscribe to intelligent design. Who is to say the designer did not design the Universe I am describing?

What would you have called it? I say the earth and its life grew (and contracted) in unison and that all planets grow in similar manner. I think the title pretty much sums it up.

I would have called it Rodin's idea on planetary growth. The term evolution is quite misleading because it does have a common understanding as referring to life.

That would be misleading as I think Earth has also shrunk. Surely more accurate to say evolved?

Provided you change the accepted usage of evolution...sure. Now I gave you my opinion on the title. Why are you arguing it?

Well you were arguing mine. Now about the actual theory itself. I see the subject of EE has come up before here and been debunked. Q. Is my idea sufficiently different to be accepted for debate?

Have you ever heard of the concept of "infinite regression"? Presumably the argument against evolution also applies to the origin of your designers, and hence they must have been designed as well. I hope that you can see the problem here? If the designers can just "happen" then that negates the original argument in favour of designin the first place. How do you solve this?

Rodin, you seem to have constructed a theory to solve a problem with a hypothesis that is already surplace to requirements. In other words, there is no need to invoke an expanding earth theory in order to explain geological observations, so why do we need to fix any problems with it?

I start with the observation that all continental land masses connect to form a sphere, and that the opposing pieces of the jigsaw match for age, shape, and far as I have been able to ascertain geology also. This seems very powerful evidence the Earth was once smaller. Furthermore the intervening oceans are much younger. So far I agree with the expanding Earthers.

Can you or anyone explain how, if the continents were once one Pangea, why is there a match across the Pacific coastlines and near-coastal land?



Like I say I would like to find fingerprint deposits matching both sides of the Pacific with more precision. Perhaps a geology forum would be a good place to enquire for help.

Amusingly...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodinia

Now is this more likely than a smaller planet?

Trivial: Break a styrofoam sheet into several parts and put them into your pool (without turning any parts upside down!). After a while you will see them separated by water channels (some southerly wind might be helpful).

Unless your pool has expanded ...

__________________
If everyone had even a basic grasp of scientific principles, this planet would be a better place (Phil Plait)

Die Lücke, die wir hinterlassen, ersetzt uns vollkommen [The gap we will leave behind will take our place entirely] (Carl Heinz Schroth)

1 + e^i*pi = 0

You don't know much about plate tectonics do you? The ocean floor spreads about 2.5 centimeter per year and the only way EE could be made to seem correct is if there were no such thing as subduction zones. Your job is now to prove to me and everybody reading that there is no such thing as subduction zones.

Sorry I don't see what you are getting at. How does this explain the land match across the Pacific???

Well assuming the model of subduction is correct (there seems to be some debate about this) the obvious answer is as a result of the subsequent reduction in Earth diameter. And perhaps in addition to expansion then contraction there are eddy currents. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.

Telling me there is a debate does not provide any evidence that there is no such thing as subduction. Please give the evidence in your own words (not links as per the rules) otherwise I will report your inability to comply with the rules and this thread will be closed.

Let's not assume.

Shall we go over all the evidence, point by point, and determine what seems to be the most accurate description?

(There seems to be some debate that the Earth is flat too.)

Subduction zones and divergent boundaries are well understood and explain well how the tectonic plates move causing the separation of the continents. I don't see why your idea should explain it any better?

__________________
ooops..... wrong forum!!!

What I meant was that no expansion of your pool is necessary. The pieces (continents, etc) just float on a given surface area

__________________
If everyone had even a basic grasp of scientific principles, this planet would be a better place (Phil Plait)

Die Lücke, die wir hinterlassen, ersetzt uns vollkommen [The gap we will leave behind will take our place entirely] (Carl Heinz Schroth)

1 + e^i*pi = 0

Better yet (and more accurate since there is heat and cooling), take a pan full of wax and heat it until the wax melts. Remove it from the heat and "continents" will form and start to separate from one another.

I do not believe in religious fantasy but I am one craze man that has came-up with new idea such was Albert Einstein, Leonardo da Vinci, Nikola Tesla and may others individuals also they came-up new ideas. You never able to convince me with of these kind theories because I was in time when was nothing in existence I saw how the universe and galaxies was created. Also I saw what caused the galaxies to drift in every direction forever in present chaotic the universe. I was present when this solar system was created and the earth was chosen for experiment of Free Will. I was present when all life forms on the planet earth were created. It is your choice to believe or not, but remember no one able to change human’s destiny.

It is amazing to see how people on this forum explain the universe, life and everything in existence in the same way. It is impossible to recognize as individual amongst this group of people. When we talk about life on the earth no-one on the earth able to connect dots of archeological finding of human’s ancestor. From primitive primate and primitive man how constantly and slowly was improving in their appearance and knowledge and the last 10,000 years modern man was created. Isn’t similar to human’s invention such as a car, a computer etc, how men slowly and constantly enhance their ideas by making better and better parts. It is not important what you believe I look at your heart if is a peacemaker or trouble-maker and only peacemaker I do respect, because we are on the same side.

_____                                       ____
     |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/
     |                            ________/
     |            _______________/
     |   X       /
     |__________/

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

I will try to answer several posts here

Subduction

I am not a 'subduction denier'. And I do not suggest my theory explains subduction any better than plate tectonics.

Rodinia

Your analogies showing coalescence and separation of layers are moot.

However the idea of continental drift does not address the observation that the older continents form a sphere absent the oceans, and that coastal features match across the Pacific as well as the Atlantic. In order to successfully attack the idea that Earth has expanded from this smaller sphere it is necessary to show that the observed correlation between opposing Pacific coastlines is coincidental, or provide a mechanism within the continental drift paradigm to explain for this.

Today´s Earth:
volume = V(now)=1.1*10²¹m³
Total surface area= 5.1*10¹⁴m²
Land surface area= 30% = 1.5*10¹⁴m²
From this follows Earth´s volume “before expansion”:
V(before)= 1.8*10²⁰m³
Therefore V(before)/V(now)=16.4 %
i.e., Earth has expanded by a factor of 6 !!

Where did all this material come from?

__________________
If everyone had even a basic grasp of scientific principles, this planet would be a better place (Phil Plait)

Die Lücke, die wir hinterlassen, ersetzt uns vollkommen [The gap we will leave behind will take our place entirely] (Carl Heinz Schroth)

1 + e^i*pi = 0

Tree Rings.

Just wanted to point out, since no one has mentioned it yet, that this idea has not only been presented here in the past, but Neal Adams was active in the thread.

NEAL ADAMS expanding Earth model

__________________
I'm not evil.
An evil person would do the things I think up.

Apology to Fortis.

Looks like I was way off.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

Yeah, and his idea was pretty much ripped to pieces. He couldn't present any kind of qualitative support for his ideas.

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

i can't be the only person here who wants to see how all the continents used to fit together as a perfect sphere.
one has to assume that this theory takes things like erosion into consideration, and is able to explain things like the Himalaya and Rocky Mountain systems, as well as all the uplifted and sideways layers of sedimentary layers of rock that are thousands of feet above sea level and yet chock full of the fossilized remains of sea creatures without invoking the great flood.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...