the expanding earth and plate tectonics-jnperson

8/14/2019 The Expanding Earth and Plate Tectonics-JNPerson

1/17

The Expanding Earth and Plate TectonicsJohn N Person

Nov - 2007

Ever since the human species developed the ability to retain a memory and

consider a thought, it has been interested about its origins. There have been

more than one mind that has gazed at the pinpricks in the night sky wondering

about their part of the cosmos. Some have looked back down at their feet and

marveled at the round ball they stood on, all basically thinking the same thing,

where did their home come from and how long had it been here.

Current theory holds forth that our planet has been around for some 4.5

billion years, in other words, a long time. Scientists today have calculated that

each and everyone of us, standing still or laying down are moving through the

Universe at 264,120 miles per hour and if you believe the current age, our

planet has moved something like 9,277,457,990,400,000,000 (9.28E + 18)

miles from its original position, as a layman in the art of geology I hold to the

quote, there is only one constant in our Universe and that is change! Even if

you subtracted the rotation of earth around its axis the number is 9.25E +18.

In any account a large distance no matter how you measure it.

As the scientific world increased the thinkers around the globe began to try

and answer some of their most basic questions not only about their existence

but the existence of the universe around them and the world they stood on as

in most sciences their findings only increased their questions, whereas one

simply answer would by itself create hundreds of unopened question, such is

science.

The idea of an expanding Earth pushed its way into mainstream science

back in 1938, when the physicist Paul Dirac suggested that the Earths

gravitational constant had decreased in the billions of years of its existence,

leading Pascual Jordon (a German physicist) with a modification of General

Relativity to propose in 1964 that all planets slowly expand, recent

measurement have all but killed his proposal.

OSI Publications Page 1


2/17

The theory of an internal expansion of the earth has a small following, this

in comparison to the well accepted theory (again a theory) of plate tectonics,

being discredited by some pretty heavy hitters in the geological mainstream.

Although they basically depend on the same bare facts, whereas they base

their strength on the appearance of new crustal material bubbling forth from

mid-ocean ridges, with one of their big differences being the absence of

subduction (reentry of the earth into the mantle between the plates a theory

not subscribed to an Expanding Earth analysis. There is a large school of

thought, along with some evidence, that supports a fixed-size Earth due to

subduction model, thus in their minds eliminated the Expanded Earth model.

There are a number of models that have floated around in the Scientific

Community over the past few years:

A: The Earth is shrinking as it cools causing lithosphere mountain building,

and compressional changes. This was popular for a time in the 19th century

and faded after the discovery of radioactive nuclides which cause thermal

heating, but as of late it also has been discovered that these nuclides are not

evenly distributed throughout the entire body of earth, and they are only

concentrated in the uppermost crust whereas they cannot be the cause of

the estimated 6000 degrees K (10,800 F) deep interior Earth temperature.

B: Earth has a constant radius with fixed and unmoving continents. This

theory was the general scientific truth for most of the 20th century, prior to

the widely accepted plate tectonic, continental-drift theory which came about

in the late 60s and early 70s.

C: A pulsating Earth. This where Earth expands to form the mid-ocean rift

zone crust and contracts to form the mountain belts, in a sense surge tectonics,

this doesnt have really the mid-ocean rifting, it has surge channels like lava-

tube conduits.

D: Earth has a constant radius and has continents which are mobile and

drift around, periodically colliding and merging with each other to form

super continents and then begin the process all over again drifting in new

directions, all controlled by the mantles thermal convection. This the currently



3/17

accepted theory known as Plate Tectonic (used to have a handle of continental

drift, which I imagine sounded too much like a popular dance in the late 60s).

The theory is based on the creation of new material at the mid-ocean-ridges

and its eventual removal in the deep ocean trenches, with a major hole in it, as

there are only a few places on the globe that have these deep ocean

trenches, and in contrast there are far more locations of new oceanic crust

generation and the chain of events demonstrate that the required energy to

maintain the mantle convection mechanism is far too inadequate.

E: Earth is Expanding: In this the continents originally formed unbroken

single plate over the surface of a smaller Earth and as the expansion of the

Earth came about, the single plate tore apart, creating deep ocean basins, and

a collection of individual plates, This expansion began to dominate the Earth, it

is believed this movement tool place over the last 200 million years, which is

only 4.44% of the Earths estimated age.

In defense of the others, especially against the widely accepted Plate

Tectonic theory, the continental drift model has yet to clearly identify or has

general opinion agreed upon a mechanism or the horizontal plate

movements. As objective geologists and many geophysicists state their claims

that global expansion does not have any identified mechanism, they also

acknowledge that the accepted Plate Tectonic and Subduction Plate Drift model

is also missing anything remotely linked to a workable driving mechanism, and

are now coming to the conclusion (the objective ones) that they cannot use this

argument or reasoning to deny the existence of the Earth Expansion theory.

In other words, Plate Tectonic is no more scientifically founded than the

Earth Expansion explanation of the geotectonism that is said to be happening

to our home in the Universe. This is the question now facing the scientific mind

today, which is true, Plate Tectonics or the Expanding Earth model?

The scientific arguments are numerous against each, Plate Tectonic and the

Expanding Earth theorieseven as person who has spend years in this field, I

only understand some of them, leaving many far beyond my comprehension

as such the reader of this paper will have to bear with me as I attempt to put to

the pen what I was able to understan



4/17

Some known facts:

During the mid-60s, deep-ocean drilling was conducted at the meeting

point of the East/West North Atlantic basin where if was found that the basaltic

ocean crust adjacent to the North American continent and to Europe was

only about 140 million years old and as the drilling vessel moved along a line

toward the mid-ocean-ridge the scientists observed that the rocks retrieved

in the drilling cores progressively grew younger as they neared the mid-ocean

mountain range and that the marine sediment deposits grew less and less.

Volcanic rocks from the center of the mountain range turned out to be only

a few million years old, at most! As they made their way past the mountain

range the reverse was true, the age of the material increased in age, this

including the rocks and the increasing sediments.

Their conclusion was that the chain of undersea volcanoes represented

areas of continuous extended crustal rifting and the formation of new basaltic

ocean crust. Recent drilling has confirmed these finding. Another basis of fact



5/17

was determined, it showed that North America, Europe and the Asian Far East

had all once been part of a single land mass, whereas North American and

Western Europe began their separation around 180 million years ago, and it

also linked the lower halves of the two, West Africa and Eastern South America.

Four separate plates had once been joined together.

Not unlike todays rush to the Global Warming bandwagon, the scientific

community, especially in the USA, fell over each other to embrace the Plate

Tectonic Theory, massive funding was made available for further research. The

recently converted constant Earth state scientific community took this money

and wrote trainloads of documents on their Plate Tectonic interpretations on

every phenomenon they could think about, no matter the lack of physical

information to support their ramblings this in turn creating more non-sensical

Plate Tectonic interpretation. As today with respect to global warming, the

general opinion why should anyone go against the now popular Plate Tectonic

(global warming) theory and risk cutting off their funding?

The result was a mass of unsupported interpretative documents that rolled

forward like a ten-ton boulder down a steep hill, moving on its own accord

without any substantial evidence or scientific true reasoning. Like other parts

of our existence, the politics of research funding had in this case circumvented

the set rules of the scientific processes, throwing out the door critical

approaches to data as well as the use of any fail safe procedures such as the

time honored self-correcting, peer review, all of this clouding the issue of an

accurate or sparse database to account for Earths history.

The Western adoption of the Continental Drift Theory represented the

largest singular popular change in Earth science thinking in our history and

in adopting this way of thinking we have produced many, many significant

advances in our understanding of Earth, along with generating mountains of

raw data. Some feel that now it is now time the basis of this theory with a

more satisfactory interpretative geotectonic and a geodynamic working model.

The drilling activities in the Atlantic open the door to many questions, where

some feel that they can only be answered by adopting the Expanding Earth

Theory for a solid explanation of the Earths mountains, but then again this



6/17

proposal to other was even more absurd and heretical than the previously

scandalous continental-drift theory. US geoscientists in lieu of this adopted the

lesser heresy, and the theory of Plate Tectonics became the generally

accepted framework. But was it valid?

Western mainstream scientists as a body seemed to never bother to ask

questions or check missing data or what data they had with an equal efforts or

scientific thoroughness. On the International scene there were a few

geologists who did bother to check, with most of them persuaded by the

available evidence to lean toward the Expanding Earth scenario.

These few individuals realized that Plate Tectonic was not very close to the

truth, with some claiming it was false and that a great error had been pushed

off on the scientific community unfortunately their information were met with

deaf ears on the geosciences mainstream, and that it wasnt even interested in

listening to the few and their arguments, what for, they had garnered the bulk

of the research dollars, building their careers, making maps, writing papers and

giving lectures on the theory of Plate Tectonic all based on the idea that Plate

Tectonics was the way to go, and now along came a few said they had made a

big mistake, give me a break, it would never happen. They, like most

politicians today left it to later generations to clean up their mess.

If youre a graduate of High School and in some parts of this nation where

you have studied geography you have more than likely exposed to Plate

Tectonics and if you for the first time are hearing about an expanding Earth you

are probably surprised there was such an idea floating around out there. I

know I was about six-months ago. I revisited the concept as I was writing a

preamble for a business plan I was dibbling and dabbling with a project in the

Arctic Ocean concerning oil.

It is well understood that the exterior of the Earth is basically make up of its

outermost rocky crust, which extends downward for around 40 kms (24.9

miles), iron and magnesium silicates are in the upper and lower mantles; and

then the liquid outer core and the solid inner core. The inner core boundary is

some 2,900 kms [1,800 miles] below the surface, which up some recent tests

scientists have long assumed the inner core was rather featureless. Although



7/17

the results of their exploration has not be detailed as such, they have found in

their detailed views more complexity than expected.

No one has ever seen the turbulently swirling liquid iron of the outer core

meeting the silicate rock of the mantel, which is 10 times further below ground

than the International Space Station is above, with their new study researches

have been able to estimate that the temperature of this region is 3,700 C

[6,692F), that is white hot.

A little closer to the surface and in dealing with Plate Tectonic theory we

find the New Madrid Seismic Zone (Reelfoot Rift)/(New Madrid Fault Line) which

is classified as a major seismic zone in the Southern United States and the

Midwestern U.S. this rift zone is responsible for the 1812 New Madrid

Earthquake, and some note it has the potential to produce damaging

earthquakes on an average of 300 to 500 years.

It is said that this zone (rift) was formed when North America began to pull

(rift) apart during the breakup of the supercontinent Rodinia [Pangaea] in the

Neoproterozoic Era (about 750,000,000 years ago), with the rift failing to

separate but remaining a scar of zone of weakness. The region than was

flooded by an ancient ocean depositing layers of sediment on the rift.

About 200,000,000 years ago (Mesozoic Era) when the Atlantic Ocean was

opening in the east, rifting was once again re-activated and intrusive igneous

rocks were put in place but once again the rifting failed and the continent

remained in one piece. The natural valley formed by the collapsed portion is

part of the Mississippi embayment.



8/17

Alfred Wegener is credited as the main (but not the only one) driver behind

this theory. This theory like most that from time-to-time enter into mainstream

science met with some fierce opposition since the 1960s it has become

dogma at every level of education.

Wegener [1880-1930] educated in meteorology and astronomy observed

many striking similarities in the land forms and their position on the planet,

such as coastal dents and the continuation of mountain ranges on various

continents. Some believe he was constructing his hypotheses based on the

observations of Alexander von Humboldt [1769-1859] the famous German

naturalist.

From 1910 onward, he promoted a thesis that the continents at one time

were all one landmass, a supercontinent which he named Pangaea. With no

reference to calculate its shape, its perimeters were undefinedhis assumption

moved forward with it first dividing into two smaller continents, the northern

Laurasia and the southern Gondwana.

His later calculations claimed that over a period of 225 million years the

continents moved into their current locations. Since his time, research

suggests that his Pangaea may not have been the first supercontinent, in

other words it was a result of smaller continents colliding as they traveled over

the surface of the planet. Recently a new revision to the hypothesis suggests

that our continents today drifted from a more relaxed cluster than Wegeners

solid Pangaea, with their shapes relatively intact and it is in this new hypothesis

that scientists are attempting to define the perimeters not previously known.

The drift concept fueled the development of two other currently accepted

theories.



9/17

A. Plate tectonics, where it is said that the Earths crust is comprised ofsegments (plates) which shift very slowly (inches per year) by heat-generated propulsion.

B. Subduction, new sea floor is continuously generated at a mid-ocean crestand then spreads from the center out and sucked by some force into a

deeper hot magma, the overflow of sea floor dips under the continents,thus forming the deep ocean trenches.

None of these theories addresses or provides a fully admissible explanation

for the development of Earths features.



10/17

Wegener met with scorn and ridicule with his theory, with many arguments

that were presented backed by their hypotheses which declared his unfounded.



11/17

Since that time much criticism has been launched, not only by geologists but

by others who worked with science examining our life and the teachings in our

schools, universities and how their science was affected by his theory.

Unfortunately, like the CO2 effect with Global Warming, most have been

silenced. There are three very well known men of geology who have not been

silenced, Dr. Paul S Wesson and Dr. Hugh Owen and an Australian geologist

Professor S Warren Carey.

The First Objection:

Understanding heat distribution it is difficult to comprehend why a turning,

cooling planet or for that matter, one that has been

turning of its axis for more than 4 billion years would

develop a crust where 33% of it would be thicker 10

times thicker (Pangaea) than the remaining 66%, the

ocean floors.

In other words, it would not develop a lopsided crust.

To most this is the basic error in Wegeners theory, no

valid reason to this day has been proposed on why it

did. The recent hypothesis of a loose-fitting continental

structure has also met with the same criticism. In that

with its greater sprawl of land masses, it attempts to cover or overcome the

weakest part of the Pangaea concept.

It is also known that in a normal cooling process the heat-absorbing co-

efficiency of water is greater than that of air, so things cool faster in water

than in air. This would have produced a much thicker oceanic crust than the

continents, not thinner. It appears that Pangaea goes against known natural

laws.

In addition its difficult to understand why such a formation would rupture

at its thickest part rather than at its thinnest and weakest, the ocean floor. And

as his theory states for some reason, unknown Pangaea cracked and spit the

landmass.



12/17

The Second Objection:

Wegeners theory only accounts for some of the perimeters whereas any

rupture of the supercontinent would have produced a correlation only in the

perimeters created along the break. His theory provides for no explanation for

the shape of the remaining continental shorelines. On todays globe the

continental perimeters are clearly correlated. With their relationships such that

the continents themselves could not logically have originated from a Pangaea

whose perimeters are undetermined.

The Third Objection:

One assumption of the continental drift theory is the mechanism that drives

it, where magma currents are claimed to be this mechanism. Magma is

spreading the plates by convection similar to that of thick, simmering soup.

In all or any direction. To cover this random movement the theory rests its

case upon a process that is labeled intricate causality, or one without a

guiding mechanism.

That these intricate causality forces could produce the precision in the

pattern of the continents today is beyond the thinking of most of its serious

critics.

The Fourth Objection:

Our planet has, beneath the waves, a mid-ocean crest system that is made

up of a series of mountains (ridges) running through the center of our oceans,

with the exception of largest ocean the Pacific.

The continental drift theory assumes two main features, one is that the

tectonic plates are generated at, and spread out from these crests. Two, is

that the crests must be acted upon by a compound movement in order to

remain centered.

In this explanation these crests are not logically explained with Plate

Tectonics, and in addition random drift could not have placed these crests



13/17

precisely between the continents. To assume this, in some scientists eyes is a

grave error.

.

The concept of expansion will not only challenge you knowledge, it has to

overturn the basics of Plate Tectonic, to a point. You where taught in high

school that the Earth developed within 4.6 billion years, turning at its current

size, with one super continent and continental drift. Now you have an

opportunity to re-evaluate your traditional thought.

When a spherical object (Earth) expands radially, the objects on its surface

will maintain their position. Any particular object

will not move laterally across it surface. It

maintains its position on the surface and will move

with the surface as it expands, and easy

demonstration of this is to blow up a balloon, tape

an object to it and continue to blow up the balloon.

In this manner, Expansion only extends the radial

line and the object remains locked in place simply

being transported on the expanding surface, moving along the radial line.

If the Earth went through a similar process then its magma, being extremely

fluid, pushed up with equal pressure from the interior of the planet. Thus, in

theory, like a balloon the Earth expanded.

There have been such experiments done with balloons with the continents

connected to the balloon at the tangent points of the continent secured to the

balloon with Velcro.



14/17

A brief description of their findings: Starting with the deflation cycle

making it smaller so all the continents fit together. They used a standard 12

model in the process, and cut from a 12 globe the landmasses on Earth.

Deflation:

As they decreased the size of their balloon from 12, as it deflated the

oceans shrank, and the continents firmly affixed to the balloon came closer. At

a size of 7 the continents came together and formed a spherical jig-saw puzzle

with all the perimeters of the continents matching on all sides, forming a

equally solidified crust enveloping the globe.

At the 7 size there was two holes in the pattern, where the continents

circumventing the Pacific Basis did not touch, only forming a continuous circle

around it the Pacific Basis was thus a land-less void and the second land-less

void was a smaller hole below India.

At the 7 size the large mountain ranges and parts of the Ring of Fire were

unified, appearing as a continuous mountain range encircling the Pacific Basin.

As a matter of reference our globe now has a radius of 6,367 kms [3.956.6

miles] if you were to extrapolate from the 12 to 7 its radius would be 3,714

kms [2,308 miles].

Inflation:

Naturally the original 12 gave us the position of our continents today, what

I did find interesting and so did the modelers was that the seams marked on

the balloon when the continents were all together, appear as the mid-ocean

crest system as the globe expands. Like the continents the ridges themselves

do not move laterally being simply transported on an expanding surface. In

that they stretch longitudinally but remained systematically centered between

the continents. And since the Pacific Basin was surrounded only by the

continents there is no mid-ocean ridge in the Pacific.



15/17

.

In 1980s Dr Hugh Owen wrote Atlas of Continental Displacement: 200

Million Years to Present, it was published in 1983.He agreed to the Expanding Earth concept with a little twist. The basis for

his thesis was in asking the question, Are the pressure and heat in the interior

of the Earth enough to maintain a plasma core? They probably are, and the

solid nickel-iron core of the textbooks may be a myth. He states that, the

behavior of waves (seismic) passing through a plasma core would be similar to

that in a solid iron-sulfur core.

Dr. Owen suggests that if the inner core is plasma there is a potential for

expansion when the core changes from plasma into an atomic state. The

Earths outer core may be molten because it has already changed into its

atomic state there is a direct tie to this change happening if a large

extraterrestrial object slammed into the Earth some 200 300 million years

ago and breaking the gravity envelope.

In a recent report (2006) researchers from Ohio State University told us they

have located an impact crater in Antarctica that is 300 miles in diameter that is

dated to have slammed into our Blue Ball around 250 million years ago (+/-)

300 miles in diameter, now that is some big object, take a minute and compare

that to the one that smacked into the Chicxulub region on the Yucatan

Peninsula some 65 million years ago with a diameter of 112 miles. 300

hundred miles could cause a major shakeup.



16/17

The proposal that in breaking the gravity shield and the plasma changing to

an Atomic state isnt so far fetched.

Both Dr Owen and Professor S Warren Carey propose a global expansion of

millions of years and that a tremendous disturbance of a gravity-condensed

plasma core (such as a break in its envelope by a celestial body impact), could

have produced the same effect in a much shorter time period. This scenario

would have resulted in an expanded Earth and NOT an expanding Earth.

Dr Owen after researching the continental shelves, showed that even over a

long period of time, little erosion or deformation had occurred at that depth

meaning that if the continents had drifted, erosion would be expected along

the shelves.

Looking down at the smaller planet picture you would show spaces between

the coasts, the continental shelves which extend beyond the coastlines would

slope down to meet each other.

The conclusion he reached is that after the initial movement of the

continents and after the solidification occurred they no longer moved simply

because the expansion period was over.

There are some glaring differences between our currently held positions (by

the majority) on Plate Tectonics, which in reality goes against all we have

discovered within our own solar system. In our observations of our neighboring

planets we see evidence of global extensional rifting, very over-whelming

actually. And we also see no evidence of crustal subduction, some say it only

means they have finally stopped expanding.

To me the book is still open, but as I study the material that is slowly

becoming available for how long that book will remain open is questionable.

Remember, science teaches us that all alternatives should be listed and

considered and over time reviewed once in a while. Assumption should be

identified and marked whereas the Plate Tectonics Theory was put forth

under the assumption and belief of a constant size earth. Just as the

Expanding Earth Theory is an assumption it must be revisited with an open

mind, and with as much enthusiasm as other theories.



17/17

Note: I have taken a much more detailed look at this subject in my paper

The Oceans of our Mind


the expanding earth and plate tectonics-jnperson

Documents