So the earth doubled in size in the last 65 million years? right....

[Zacharine]

I'm not saying the guy is right per se, but it's wrong to discredit him because YOU think it's wrong.

Just a note here.

We are not laughing at him because we think he is wrong. We are laughing at him because we know he is wrong, and can show it to boot. We have the evidence that says his hypothesis makes even less sense than Earth being flat.

He is not being derided because he is going against mainstream science. He is being derided however because we can show with evidence how absolutely ludicrous his position is.

Evidence decides it all. Copernicus and Galileo had it, the Church did not; that is why their ideas won over in the end.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob.

Wrong. That idea stems from Sir Francis Bacon's claim that in the Middle Ages the Church would kill you for denying the Earth's flatness, later popularized by French rationalists in the 19th century and American journalists during the anti-Irish craze in the US. But not only is there no historical record indicating that to be true, there are multiple references to the Earth being round in medieval writings. And ancient writings as well. In fact, there is no evidence that anyone seriously claimed the Earth was flat in historical times.

Just thought I'd throw it out there.

OT: I wouldn't say he's trolling, you have nutjobs everywhere. Human population numbers billions, you can find people believing pretty much anything if you look hard enough.

Also, the Earth's core is hot, right? And hot air expands, right? Balloons... Hmmm... It's all obvious now! The planet expands! It also explains why polar bears find fewer ice floes now - they're just further apart!

Also, I find it amusing how the Standard Troll Filter for most people seems to be "this guy claiming different religious/political/whatever views than me who says stupid things is serious, and this guy claiming the same religious/political/whatever views as me who says stupid things is trolling." (not directly related to this thread, I just thought of it)

I hate it when people say "science hasn't figured everything out yet" and then use that as "reasoning" for any easily discredited bizarro hypothesis.

I hate it too. However, I also hate it then people say "science has explained a lot of stuff" and then use that as "reasoning" for assuming that ANYTHING a guy with a science degree says must be true. I'm not aiming it at your comment though. This post does go on a tangent a number of times...

 

[Adam Galli]

So apparently this crackpot has some crazy idea's about how the earth has evolved the past 180 million years.

This guy is not in anyway a scientist/geologist (in fact he draws, buys and sells comic's which might explain why his theory is so "imaginative" lets say).

His argument is basically that the movement of tectonic plates etc is a lie by geologists who actually know that the earth is growing. Also, in his words, this "fact" would blow most science out of the water, if his theory had a leg to stand on.

Thought you guys might like a look if anything for a chuckle made me smile that someone would think the earth was growing without actually explaining how

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ&feature=share

Who's to say this guy is wrong? I think its wrong that you lable him a "crackpot" when most of the important thinkers in our time such as Copernicus (who came up with the idea of the heliocentric model) was considered a crackpot. Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob. Science has still yet to figure out everything about the universe.

There's tons of evidence for tectonic motion of plates - physical evidence that can be substantiated.

I hate it when people say "science hasn't figured everything out yet" and then use that as "reasoning" for any easily discredited bizarro hypothesis.

Science has worked out a hell of a lot - see that internet you're using? Science. Satellites? Science. OK, there are still questions, but those are mainly about such highly specialised fields because so much of the everyday stuff is now well understood.

Please, go and have a look at the papers on plate tectonics before saying stuff like that.

I'm not saying the guy is right per se, but it's wrong to discredit him because YOU think it's wrong. That's the same thing the Catholic church did with everyone who had ideas about the universe that didn't agree with their own. Galileo was excommunicated from the church because he supported the heliocentric model of planetary motion. Was he wrong? No, he was in fact correct, but the fact that his views differed that everyone else's at the time he was thought of as a nut.

All of the examples you have used are people who discredit with no evidence, the people who discredited Copernicus diddnt try to understand, the catholic church have different motives to science. This guy thinks that he is putting a sound argument forward, which is why it is funny. its like me saying that gravity does not exist its actually invisible unfindable gremlins pulling us back down to earth, actually my argument against gravity is better than his because mine cant be disproven his can.

It's funny that you say "no evidence" when that is pretty much what you're doing as well. We don't have access to all the data that we need to make a sound decision on the matter ourselves. This guy claims that there is no sea floor record prior to 70 million years ago. He may be right and he may be wrong. We don't know for sure because we don't have the papers. Most people are condeming this man because of the "evidence" presented in our text books. We are discrediting this man because of the "facts" we were tought. The same thing that happend in the middle ages.

I'm not taking a stance one way or another on this matter. I just think its funny that everyone thinks he's crazy because he has a view different than public opinion.

 

[8-Bit Grin]

I like this hypothesis.

I wish the truth was nearly as imaginative and interesting...

 

[DEAD34345]

So apparently this crackpot has some crazy idea's about how the earth has evolved the past 180 million years.

This guy is not in anyway a scientist/geologist (in fact he draws, buys and sells comic's which might explain why his theory is so "imaginative" lets say).

His argument is basically that the movement of tectonic plates etc is a lie by geologists who actually know that the earth is growing. Also, in his words, this "fact" would blow most science out of the water, if his theory had a leg to stand on.

Thought you guys might like a look if anything for a chuckle made me smile that someone would think the earth was growing without actually explaining how

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ&feature=share

Who's to say this guy is wrong? I think its wrong that you lable him a "crackpot" when most of the important thinkers in our time such as Copernicus (who came up with the idea of the heliocentric model) was considered a crackpot. Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob. Science has still yet to figure out everything about the universe.

There's tons of evidence for tectonic motion of plates - physical evidence that can be substantiated.

I hate it when people say "science hasn't figured everything out yet" and then use that as "reasoning" for any easily discredited bizarro hypothesis.

Science has worked out a hell of a lot - see that internet you're using? Science. Satellites? Science. OK, there are still questions, but those are mainly about such highly specialised fields because so much of the everyday stuff is now well understood.

Please, go and have a look at the papers on plate tectonics before saying stuff like that.

I'm not saying the guy is right per se, but it's wrong to discredit him because YOU think it's wrong. That's the same thing the Catholic church did with everyone who had ideas about the universe that didn't agree with their own. Galileo was excommunicated from the church because he supported the heliocentric model of planetary motion. Was he wrong? No, he was in fact correct, but the fact that his views differed that everyone else's at the time he was thought of as a nut.

You're right. Except, it is the maker of the video that is acting like the Catholic church did. It is him claiming that plate tectonics is wrong, despite the overwhelming amount evidence of evidence supporting it, and instead claiming that what he says is correct, despite having no actual evidence, or even reasoning other than that if you shrink the Earth it kind of looks like it all fits together like that.

 

[FeanortheBrave]

An imaginative hypothesis, even if it doesn't take account the evidence that pretty much disproves it.

 

[jeff02x2]

So apparently this crackpot has some crazy idea's about how the earth has evolved the past 180 million years.

This guy is not in anyway a scientist/geologist (in fact he draws, buys and sells comic's which might explain why his theory is so "imaginative" lets say).

His argument is basically that the movement of tectonic plates etc is a lie by geologists who actually know that the earth is growing. Also, in his words, this "fact" would blow most science out of the water, if his theory had a leg to stand on.

Thought you guys might like a look if anything for a chuckle made me smile that someone would think the earth was growing without actually explaining how

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ&feature=share

Who's to say this guy is wrong? I think its wrong that you lable him a "crackpot" when most of the important thinkers in our time such as Copernicus (who came up with the idea of the heliocentric model) was considered a crackpot. Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob. Science has still yet to figure out everything about the universe.

There's tons of evidence for tectonic motion of plates - physical evidence that can be substantiated.

I hate it when people say "science hasn't figured everything out yet" and then use that as "reasoning" for any easily discredited bizarro hypothesis.

Science has worked out a hell of a lot - see that internet you're using? Science. Satellites? Science. OK, there are still questions, but those are mainly about such highly specialised fields because so much of the everyday stuff is now well understood.

Please, go and have a look at the papers on plate tectonics before saying stuff like that.

I'm not saying the guy is right per se, but it's wrong to discredit him because YOU think it's wrong. That's the same thing the Catholic church did with everyone who had ideas about the universe that didn't agree with their own. Galileo was excommunicated from the church because he supported the heliocentric model of planetary motion. Was he wrong? No, he was in fact correct, but the fact that his views differed that everyone else's at the time he was thought of as a nut.

All of the examples you have used are people who discredit with no evidence, the people who discredited Copernicus diddnt try to understand, the catholic church have different motives to science. This guy thinks that he is putting a sound argument forward, which is why it is funny. its like me saying that gravity does not exist its actually invisible unfindable gremlins pulling us back down to earth, actually my argument against gravity is better than his because mine cant be disproven his can.

It's funny that you say "no evidence" when that is pretty much what you're doing as well. We don't have access to all the data that we need to make a sound decision on the matter ourselves. This guy claims that there is no sea floor record prior to 70 million years ago. He may be right and he may be wrong. We don't know for sure because we don't have the papers. Most people are condeming this man because of the "evidence" presented in our text books. We are discrediting this man because of the "facts" we were tought. The same thing that happend in the middle ages.

I'm not taking a stance one way or another on this matter. I just think its funny that everyone thinks he's crazy because he has a view different than public opinion.

If you want come to Birmingham (England) and ill take you through the geology department and look at some samples and evidence of tectonic movement, if not GO TO ANY MUSEUM, talk to a professor.

To be honest though you have a point to a degree and some theories you can do this with, but do you not think this is obviously flawed? There is tonnes of evidence out there and records of enough things to show that is is not how it works. E.g. ill edit a comment by one of the youtubers who watched and his argument for how the earth grows is just as crazy and would not be looked at twice.

 

[twistedmic]

Maybe that guy can explain to me how magnets work. I don't want to talk to a scientist, those motherfuckers are lying and getting me pissed.

 

[jeff02x2]

Maybe that guy can explain to me how magnets work. I don't want to talk to a scientist, those motherfuckers are lying and getting me pissed.

Its invisible undetectable gremlins pushing things together, those scientists don't know nothing

 

[twistedmic]

Maybe that guy can explain to me how magnets work. I don't want to talk to a scientist, those motherfuckers are lying and getting me pissed.

Its invisible undetectable gremlins pushing things together, those scientists don't know nothing

That makes much more sense than what I was thinking. I was positive that it was either magic or a miracle.

 

[Adam Galli]

So apparently this crackpot has some crazy idea's about how the earth has evolved the past 180 million years.

This guy is not in anyway a scientist/geologist (in fact he draws, buys and sells comic's which might explain why his theory is so "imaginative" lets say).

His argument is basically that the movement of tectonic plates etc is a lie by geologists who actually know that the earth is growing. Also, in his words, this "fact" would blow most science out of the water, if his theory had a leg to stand on.

Thought you guys might like a look if anything for a chuckle made me smile that someone would think the earth was growing without actually explaining how

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ&feature=share

Who's to say this guy is wrong? I think its wrong that you lable him a "crackpot" when most of the important thinkers in our time such as Copernicus (who came up with the idea of the heliocentric model) was considered a crackpot. Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob. Science has still yet to figure out everything about the universe.

There's tons of evidence for tectonic motion of plates - physical evidence that can be substantiated.

I hate it when people say "science hasn't figured everything out yet" and then use that as "reasoning" for any easily discredited bizarro hypothesis.

Science has worked out a hell of a lot - see that internet you're using? Science. Satellites? Science. OK, there are still questions, but those are mainly about such highly specialised fields because so much of the everyday stuff is now well understood.

Please, go and have a look at the papers on plate tectonics before saying stuff like that.

I'm not saying the guy is right per se, but it's wrong to discredit him because YOU think it's wrong. That's the same thing the Catholic church did with everyone who had ideas about the universe that didn't agree with their own. Galileo was excommunicated from the church because he supported the heliocentric model of planetary motion. Was he wrong? No, he was in fact correct, but the fact that his views differed that everyone else's at the time he was thought of as a nut.

All of the examples you have used are people who discredit with no evidence, the people who discredited Copernicus diddnt try to understand, the catholic church have different motives to science. This guy thinks that he is putting a sound argument forward, which is why it is funny. its like me saying that gravity does not exist its actually invisible unfindable gremlins pulling us back down to earth, actually my argument against gravity is better than his because mine cant be disproven his can.

It's funny that you say "no evidence" when that is pretty much what you're doing as well. We don't have access to all the data that we need to make a sound decision on the matter ourselves. This guy claims that there is no sea floor record prior to 70 million years ago. He may be right and he may be wrong. We don't know for sure because we don't have the papers. Most people are condeming this man because of the "evidence" presented in our text books. We are discrediting this man because of the "facts" we were tought. The same thing that happend in the middle ages.

I'm not taking a stance one way or another on this matter. I just think its funny that everyone thinks he's crazy because he has a view different than public opinion.

If you want come to Birmingham (England) and ill take you through the geology department and look at some samples and evidence of tectonic movement, if not GO TO ANY MUSEUM, talk to a professor.

To be honest though you have a point to a degree and some theories you can do this with, but do you not think this is obviously flawed? There is tonnes of evidence out there and records of enough things to show that is is not how it works. E.g. ill edit a comment by one of the youtubers who watched and his argument for how the earth grows is just as crazy and would not be looked at twice.

I'm not here to argue that this guy is right. Honestly, I believe he is wrong. The point in my original post was that I thought is was wrong to call the guy a "crackpot" because he had a different opinion that the rest of society, as did many other "crackpots" who in the end were correct.

 

[DeadlyBritishDisease]

Who's to say this guy is wrong? I think its wrong that you lable him a "crackpot" when most of the important thinkers in our time such as Copernicus (who came up with the idea of the heliocentric model) was considered a crackpot. Before that everyone who thought the earth was round was considered a nutjob. Science has still yet to figure out everything about the universe.

Here's the thing, we have something known as the fossil record to prove that the earth has not been growing. If the earth were indeed growing the lower level of gravity in the past would be shown by the evolutionary traits of the creatures in the fossil records. Less gravity would mean that larger land creatures would requires less bone density to support their body's weight and the quantity of large land creatures would have been much greater than we are finding. If gravity were increasing steadily over time from the earth growing(and by extension it's mass increasing) the trend in the fossil record would be for the abundance of large creatures with less bone density to gradually disappear from the fossil record, replaced by more and more small creatures that display an increase of bone density.

Science proved him wrong long ago, so I'm free to call him a crackpot. Especially when he comes to the table with not a single shred of legitimate evidence to speak of other than his word against that of well tested and well observed scientific fact.

Just a few things I want to clear up. Firstly, if we assume the Earth's mass is constant, then as it "grows" (or becomes less dense), then everything on the surface moves further away from the center of mass. If this is the case then gravity is DECREASING. Gravity will only increase if the mass increases, which I find hard to believe it would do so significantly enough to cause any real change.

Your point still stands, but it would just be the other way around (denser bones first, then gradually becoming less dense).

OT: Dude's a spaz.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I got to the point about the platypus roaming free across the plains of Africa, and I had to stop..

I'm not taking a stance one way or another on this matter. I just think its funny that everyone thinks he's crazy because he has a view different than public opinion.

His view basically comes down to having mass spontaneously generated from nothing specifically on the ocean floor but nowhere else in the world.

As for evidence..

 

[Matthew Dunn]

If this is true (Im not saying its right or wrong Im being neutral here)then our planet must have been alot smaller when Dino's around
So as the magma reaches the surface it is also expanding the distance between the landmass
And the continental plates arnt just moving but are also growing
But wait at one point the landmass may meet up again and be crushed by the pressure from behind
like pushing two eggs together
yea i can understand his theory
so there is no point calling him a nutjob for explaining his view on something
So be nice and IF he is proven totally wrong then discard the idea
I cannot stand idiots who openly on others for having different ideas

 

[Zacharine]

It's funny that you say "no evidence" when that is pretty much what you're doing as well. We don't have access to all the data that we need to make a sound decision on the matter ourselves. This guy claims that there is no sea floor record prior to 70 million years ago. He may be right and he may be wrong.

Ahahahahha!

I think [http://eos.ubc.ca/~mjelline/453website/eosc453/E_prints/1999RG900016.pdf]
you need [http://www.sciencemag.org/content/255/5050/1391.short]
to do [http://www.bookfinder.com/dir/i/Earth_Systems_History/0716728826/]
some [http://jgs.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/abstract/146/1/97]
light [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC219809/]
reading [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics#References]

We know perfectly well there was a sea and a sea floor over a billion years ago. How do we know this?

Atmospheric composition analysis. Paleontology. Geology. Formation of the solar system.Physics.

Just because someone makes an outlandish claim doesn't mean that they are possibly right. Doesn't mean they are automatically wrong either, but with how much we know of our planet this guy most certainly is.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

I like this hypothesis.

I wish the truth was nearly as imaginative and interesting...

And less asylum material.

That is one of the most silly explanations ever, and I don't have a single GSCE, only a single Pass in BTEC ICT.

 

[ConnorCool]

HERETIC! BURN HIM!

This phrase alongside your picture is utterly terrifying.

OT: Silly

 

[jeff02x2]

If this is true (Im not saying its right or wrong Im being neutral here)then our planet must have been alot smaller when Dino's around
So as the magma reaches the surface it is also expanding the distance between the landmass
And the continental plates arnt just moving but are also growing
But wait at one point the landmass may meet up again and be crushed by the pressure from behind
like pushing two eggs together
yea i can understand his theory
so there is no point calling him a nutjob for explaining his view on something
So be nice and IF he is proven totally wrong then discard the idea
I cannot stand idiots who openly on others for having different ideas

Ill send the guy who walks around the city centre explaining his ideas that "eating babies will make him live longer" your way I'm sure he will appreciate someone who will give him the time of day and an understanding ear.