Has anyone proposed how the earth is supposedly growing? Or is this thread basically about "Look the earth is growing and its doing this by...uh...oh look a shiny object" *runs away*

Anymore questions?

Anymore questions?

Yeah. Anything falsifiable?

Anymore questions?

Small examples? The Geode comes to mind.

I have one. Why keep going back to "theories" that have already been proven false.

I'm not sure... despite overwhelming evidence for a growing earth, people still revert back to plate tectonics...

that's a leap that needs more explanation than what's been provided thus far.

Aether

Accretion

Dirac’s

Atomic Core Reactions

Neal Adams Prime Matter

Graviton

The entire question as to where the additional mass comes from to explain an increase in Earth radius is a very important core issue to Expansion Tectonics, but a very difficult question to answer. Because the Earth has always been considered the same size since creation; from either a cosmological or religious point of view, it has not been necessary to ask this question. Because the question has not been asked, or taken seriously, where the additional mass comes from remains speculative."

Where the required excess mass came from was considered at length by Professor Carey. Knowing Einstein’s equation E=mc2 implies that matter and energy are inter-convertible. Matter is therefore the antithesis of energy where matter is created from energy and vise versa. Carey further considered that new mass added to the Earth must appear deep within the core. But, he also considered the ultimate cause of Earth expansion must be sought in the cosmological expansion and complementary generation of new matter processes within the entire Universe.

The proposed causal model for Expansion Tectonics, while still largely speculative, involves an increase in mass by condensation, or segregation of new matter from energy within the Earths core. This new matter accumulates at the core-mantle interface and the increase in volume results in swelling of the mantle. Mantle swell is then manifested in the outer crust as crustal extension and is currently occurring as extension along the mid-ocean-rift zones. Matter generation within the Earths core is seen as an endothermic reaction, which will ultimately result in a decay of matter formation in the core and cessation of expansion with time.

If you can't provide such, what you are saying isn't science. It's merely wishful thinking.

my sheer amazement increases by about 10 orders of magnitude! What's next? The Steady State Theory is true and the Big Bang false? The Plum Pudding model of The Atom is actually correct? The Luminiferous Aether actually exists and so Einstein’s Relativity is in fact wrong?... Oh hold on... I see that you are already there on the Aether...

Ok... So now the Earth's been growing for... What...? Millions, if not billions of years. Then why Light...? Why is the orbit of the Earth sooo stable? Would not a growing Earth affect its orbit around the Sun? With all sorts of serious implications for Life?

We still don't fully understand the mechanisms for things like 'light' and 'gravity' ... yet we know they are there, and we accept that they are working.

Serious implications for life... have you put much thought into this question?

We still don't fully understand the mechanisms for things like 'light' and 'gravity' ... yet we know they are there, and we accept that they are working.

Now... in comparison to the age of planet earth... 4.5billion years we have seen about 0.01% of what this planet is going to do.

And it's looking increasingly more like it was a gradual change of this planet than as big asteroid.

I think the real key we need to accept is that, we can NOT stop this planet to changing, and the real truth we have to accept is that we may not have billions of years before the sun dies... we may only have a few hundread million before this planet isn't suitable for our way of life as we know it.

We know that the average size of a creature that lived on this planet used to grow to 4 times the size of average creatures today.

We know that it used to be a hell of a lot hotter on this planet then it is today.

We know there digging up dinosaur bones in Antarctica now.

We know that something massively wiped out a species that was around for million of years... not a .5 million.... MILLIONS... and it's looking increasingly more like it was a gradual change of this planet than as big asteroid.

We know that the biggest creatures today like the elephant can barely manage their weight, if they sleep on their side, they will crush themselves. Their bones are reinforced super solid bones to put up with the weight. Dinosaurs had hollow bones... more like those of the ultra light weight BIRDS than of massive multi ton monsters we think of them. Yah... I would say serious changes have taken place...

Well... As Neal pointed out in one of his radio talk shows, that is a much deeper question than first meets the idea. He talks extensively about various aspects that would have to change if we accept that the earth is growing, you can listen to that section of the interview here if you want.

Also... Would not the Moon be trapped by the growing gravity of the Earth, due to its growing mass? And who knows... Resulting in the Earth growing sooo big as to bring the Moon crashing back down on our heads!

So... Just from the simple point of Newtonian Mechanics and orbits... Why hasn't your Growing Earth upset this delicate, gravitational balance, that's basically kept Life sustained here for ages?...

Nonetheless the Earth's orbit IS stable... If it were not, we would not be here. And a stable Earth orbit equates to a stable Earth mass.

I think the underlying premise of Storms' statements are that the Earth isn't growing substantially in mass... but it *is* growing in volume...

But to go from relatively minor fluctuations in density, to proposing that the whole Earth was significantly smaller a hundred million years ago... that's a leap that needs more explanation than what's been provided thus far.

Not to mention a testable and predictable mechanism. That would help, too.

Yeah... This was my first concern when I had the misfortune to participate in this thread. I wanted to know if it was simply the Earth's volume increasing in size or it's mass.

Neal Adams, in the pursuit of inventing such Physics, has basically rewritten that entire subject from scratch. This is totally unacceptable! Especially when such an outlandish proposal is put forward by a comic book artist. Hell… This would be totally outrageous even for an eminent Physicist to do… Unless he or she could come up with concrete, verifiable evidence.

No, this is a great example of people misunderstanding math. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the mass-energy equivalence and physics in general.
I wish I could be naive enough to follow one of these theories since saying "god did it" or "magic physics" is much much easier then actually doing the research, the experiments, and the math to understand the universe.

quite correct. but it makes no more sense to think that because earth's mass is increasing because of meteor and asteroid impacts means that it someday will double in size than it makes sense that god created earth because it exists.

And again, you're making a lot of assumptions about how the physiology works. Have you done kinetic analysis of these structures and how they might have worked or are you simply assuming that, because they were big and because they had hollow sections of bones that it had to be because the Earth was smaller?

And how did these animals breathe? One consequence of a smaller, less massive planet is a thinner atmosphere. So far from having enough oxygen to support larger body types, they'd likely be much smaller. Since large insects predated the dinos, then the atmosphere would have had to be even more oxygen rich. But then, if it predated the dinos, Earth would have had to be even smaller.

And? So what? Does that mean that because we don't understand all the mechanisms of gravity that we have to assume there is some mechanism for a phenomenon that simply doesn't make sense? We may not fully understand light or gravity, but at least it's phenomenon we can observe and can test. By your own admission, the growth mechanism is a "mystery." Convenient.

Citation? That seems a bit of a made up number to me. Actually, it's a very made up number. And just what is this planet going to "do?"

do?

Oh please! The evidence for an asteroid impact at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary is a lot stronger than your "growing earth" fantasy...I mean, "theory." Are you even aware of what that evidence is?

Let's be clear...there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for this growing earth fantasy, as much as you might want to try to shoehorn bits and pieces to make it fit. Sorry to disappoint. Science marches on.

Correct me if I'm wrong... But blue whales still exist right? Perhaps the largest creature ever to have existed (as far as we can tell).

Gradual changes? Then how can we account for the wealth of evidence that shows mass extinction level events? Only a very dramatic event, such as an asteroid impact, could account for this.

Yes it's called Evolution and Natural Selection... And your point regarding the Growing Earth Theory is...?

Why is the Earth's orbit sooo stable? Wouldn't the orbit change if the Earth WAS growing?

Did you know they say the T-Rex... that awesome kind of the dinosaurs you saw chasing down cars in movies couldn't have run much faster than 30mph due to it's weight... I find that interesting... and when I think that it could have been much lighter that assumed based on todays gravity, it makes more sense.