Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Seashells on tops of mountains.
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4630 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 101 of 343 (426510)
10-07-2007 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Buzsaw
10-07-2007 9:09 AM


Re: Mountains lower
What effect would trillions of tons of additional water have upon the surface of a planet
Lets say that the flood was to the height of Everest (8.8 km).
Why do you believe that the weight of the water would be of any significance compared to the weight of the crust itself?
quote:
Plate thickness also varies greatly, ranging from less than 15 km for young oceanic lithosphere to about 200 km or more for ancient continental lithosphere (for example, the interior parts of North and South America)
USGS
I just don't see why you come to the conclusion that the weight has anything to do with it. I am perfectly willing to accept that I am wrong, just from my view it would do next to nothing. From simple logic (and no geology education) I would be tempted to think that extra weight would only tend to slow the movement down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Buzsaw, posted 10-07-2007 9:09 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024