Walt Brown's super-tectonics

This is a response to whatever. Being warned that the thread was going off-topic, I decided to open a new thread.

quote:

---

the slow moving evolutionists techtonic plate theory doesn't address the fractured rock they are finding under the granite mantle, etc...

---

And neither does Brown's scenario. If the continents tried to move that fast, the entire continents would be fractured. More to the point, if the mountains were raised as fast as this scenario states, the mountains would be formed of shattered boulders and rocks, not the folded layers that we actually do see.And there is still the objections that:so much water could not exist in such large caverns as Brown suggests - this would be too unstable and would have collapsed right away.the collapse of so many of these caverns should leave obvious traces on the earth's surface - evidence that the land sunk dramatically (more fractures!) as well as the exit points of the water - massive craters.the water would have been very, very hot - the world would not have drowned, it (along with Noah and his floating zoo) would have been steamed.There is too much wrong with this "theory" for it to be true. If Brown's ideas were correct, then the signs should be so bloody obvious, but like every other flood scenario there just isn't any real signs of it.

Walt's theory seems to be that there exists a granite ocean mantle approximately 5 miles thick beneath the basalt oceans floor, and that it was this plate that moved laterally, hydraulically, when the waters erupted out from beneath this plate, however, where the plate met the continental plate it literally crushed the granite, the tremendous pressures and temps converting this granite into the metamorphic rock when it pressed up crushing this granite plate under, the continental granite plates, interestingly, the two deepest wells ever drilled, russian kola well and the german well, support this is in fact what happened, they are finding fracture metamorphic rock, water, and other fluid solutes, etc...

The earth gets hotter by about 25 degrees C for every kilometer of depth. Ol' Walt's "cavern" of water at 10 miles = 16 km down would have been at about 400 degrees C, above the critical point for water. How do you cool this erupting water to avoid sterilizing the surface? Can you, or Dr Brown, show me the numbers for its exchange of heat with the vacuum of the upper atmosphere to cool it enough to allow life on the surface?Where is even a shred of seismic evidence for Dr Brown's "granite layer"? There is quite a considerable body of deep seismic data available now. What are the folks gathering it overlooking?I've already mentioned to you that ALL deep wells contain pore water in their porous rocks, that this has been common knowledge in the oil business since the 70's, and that it is what a geologist would expect from deep rocks.Do you really believe Brown when he claims that steam can erupt violently enough to launch hundred-mile-across chunks of rock at 25,000 miles per hour, while simultaneously changing their chemical composition, so that they can then defy all laws or orbital motion to take up orbits utterly unrelated to ours?Do you really want me, and people like Edge and Bill Birkeland that know much more geology than I, to start dissecting Dr Brown's site? There won't be any more left afterwards than there is after my cat dissects a mouse.....

Coragyps, It's just a theory, however, they are finding clams on top of Mt. Everest, with sediments 3,000 feet thick, however its a granite mountain, was this under the oceans at one time, if so, then why is it granite, if the oceans bottom is suppose to be basalt.I thought the supersonic heated waters rose upward as the fountains of the deep were erupting laterally into each other, containing the heat upward (so the entire earth wasn't over heated), the volumes of ash going into the upper atmosphere, where the steam condensed around an ash particle to turn into rain, snow, the glaciers were a result of this steam condensing back into snow, the sediments the fossils are found within, caused by the cavitation supersonic forces eroding the techtonic plates, when the waters erupting upward, into the upper atmosphere, etc...P.S. Its hard to believe that rocks of any great size could of been launched over 22,000 miles, though gravity does decrease as one goes up, however, Mt. St. Helens that was only a lateral eruption, and it was still able to launched ash that remained into a lesser orbit for years, etc...

quote:

---

Coragyps, It's just a theory, however, they are finding clams on top of Mt. Everest, with sediments 3,000 feet thick, however its a granite mountain, was this under the oceans at one time, if so, then why is it granite, if the oceans bottom is suppose to be basalt.

---

I am sorry, whatever, but Walt's story is not a theory, it is a dream. In fact, I dare say it is an hallucination. Virtually every sentence you write about it is so stocked with misunderstanding and misinformation that it makes no sense at all and defies a rational response. For instance, 'clams' are not found on Mt. Everest. Pelecypods are found within the strata that make up Mt. Everest. Sedimentary rocks cannot make up a 'granite mountain'. And the ocean bottom is not basalt. Nor is there any part of the oceanic crust that is composed of granite. You are either in gross misunderstanding of Walt's thesis or he has gone off the deep end himself, or both. Frankly, I have been unable to read his stuff either. It makes utterly no sense at all. You are being deceived by Walt Brown. The 'hydroplate theory' is not even in the same area code as real science.

whatever:
It's just a theory, however, they are finding clams on top of Mt. Everest, with sediments 3,000 feet thick, however its a granite mountain, was this under the oceans at one time, if so, then why is it granite, if the oceans bottom is suppose to be basalt.Mt. Everest is composed of continental crust that has been pushed upward by the collision of the Indian and the Asian plates. Its fossils are 100% explicable; they were buried before the collision, when Mr. Everest had been part of a continental shelf.

Whatever, the granites that are part of the stratigraphy of Mt. Everest are sills. They have intruded along the contact (a natural weakness) between the overlying marine sediments and underlying metamorphics.I have not seen any mention of basalts, but it's possible they are the protoliths to the metamorphics.As for volcanic material launched into the air, I would think there is a world of difference between rocks and ash. Rocks would not stay suspended by wind currents or the atmosphere, but the finest grained ash particles certainly would.

They say they are finding clams in the closed position, which infers that they were buried alive, it says they are finding these clams in sedimentary rocks all over the world, including, Mt.Everest.
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=5
P.S. I thought Pelecypods included the clams, oysters, etc...[This message has been edited by whatever, 12-29-2003]

There are a number of questions you have to answer, whatever. You speak of 'clams' in the rocks at the "top" of Mt. Everest. But are they the same clams you find in the beach sand around that area now? If they aren't why is that? How are they related to other "clams" in other places?------------------
Common sense isn't

NosyNed, The link, said that the top 3,000 feet of sedimentary rock of Mt. Everest was packed with sea shells and other ocean dwelling creatures, including clams, which are found in sedimentary rock all over the world, testifying that the oceans once covered the entire earth, leaving these fossils behind, etc...

Geez, we've known since the 15th century that the clams and such that are found on top of mountains were not deposited there by a flood or floods. Leonardo da Vinci figured that out by actually looking at them and thinking, a process which Kent Hovind has never considered; he prefers the stuff he makes up.

Check out the USGS site for Understanding Plate Motions and scroll down to Convergent Boundaries, Continental-Continental Convergence. It will explain in rather simple terms how the Himalayas and Tibetan Plateau were formed.

quote:

---

They say they are finding clams in the closed position, which infers that they were buried alive,

---

Dead clam shells can be found at the beach in both open and closed positions.

Now stop half a minute and think about that statement, Whatever. 3000 feet of marine sediment, including seashells, on the currently highest piece of rock in the world. How long do you think it might take to deposit a 3000-foot-thick bed of limestones, etc.? Do you really think that enough shells to do such a thing can grow in about one year, while Noah is floating around in boiling water? Like someone just posted, daVinci saw this same thing in the Italian Alps back about 1500 AD. He looked at beds of clams, many in their growth positions, that were many feet thick. He had some idea of how fast clams coud grow, and its not several hundred generations in a single year. He concluded pretty much what every geologist for the last 170 years has concluded: they didn't get there from a worldwide Flood. Instead, the positions and levels of seas have changed over time. Lots of time.

Odd, I thought I already posted this?Could you tell us what specific species of clams they are? "Found all over the world" --- found today? NO! Just what is the distribution? Are any of today's "clams" mixed in? No! Why not?All I saw at your reference is a single line that explains nothing at all. Care to try again?------------------
Common sense isn't