Talk:Expanding Earth

Retrofit[edit]

Is this made to retrofit the YEC so the Global flood can manage the flow of water afterwards? wait. That still doesn't explain the source of water. But it might be a start. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 22:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Some people actually believe this, is all I can say. --

21:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

OMG , this explains GLOBAL WARMING perfectly. A bigger earth must be closer to the sun , so warmer. perhaps the water from the flood soaked in , and is making everything swell up ? Hamster 22:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I really am quite good at avoiding these pseudo-scientific BS "theories", so this last November, I was at a dinner party, and someone across from me at the table says, "I believe in the expanding earth thing, now". Since I had literally no idea, I asked, and he explained it. So I came back with, "But... Pangaea formed. it created the Appalachian mtns... So.. Did it shrink first?" "What do you mean, Pangaea formed?"... Yeah, there wasn't much more productive from that, but I did get to explain that he was wrong. So it was kinda' fun, especially to debunk on my feet like that. Quaru (talk) 11:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

references?[edit]

maybe CUR can find some links to websites that espouse this stuff and put them in the article? Amin7b5 22:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

ya dont needs CUR when Hamster is on the job - finder of FACTS for all occasions

there ya go , its a start :) 23:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard of the word "subduction"[edit]

At least I don't think I have. Does this place me at a high risk of believing that the world is swelling up like a baloon? Wèàšèìòìď ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 15:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully not. --

21:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

they would have you believe (geologists that is ) that the entire earths surface floats on liquidy rocks and that the ocean floor goes under the continents as it expands from the center (subduction). [laughter]

Obviously this is false cause the crust would slide around , try it , blow up a balloon and spread jam or jelly on it, then spin the balloon really fast , where does the jam go ? And if a hole got punched in the crust the liquid rock would come out. What happens when the liquid under a floaty thing comes up through a hole ? Thats RIGHT it sinks ! so the first volcano would sink the continent its on and that just has not happened 9 well maybe atlantis but that was long ago Hope this helps :) Hamster 16:14, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I do hope you're joking, Hamster. If you took a sphere of water and stuck puzzle pieces on it so they fit together, it wouldn't matter if they all had holes punched in them, they still would fit together and not sink. Note also that the mantle isn't exactly water- more like syrup. --

21:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

no distortion[edit]

something that is constantly mentioned in the videos supporting this theory is the idea that the landmasses do not distort as the earth expands . . . even though they do, very clearly, distory (particularly alaska). It is also suggested that it is a "conspiracy in science" even though there is no valid reason to keep knowledge of a phenomenon like this surpressed . . . also, water . . . wouldnt everything be covered in water if the earth was much smaller? 71.238.243.98 (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Just like a tree growing[edit]

According to a nutter on the blog post - David Gerard (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Babble moved from article[edit]

Posted by 59.93.25.17:

Alternative Explanation

The Expanding earth failed to attain any valid credibility because the process of expansion can no longer be observed. Calling it Expanded earth theory rather than expanding earth theory would solve the problem. The reason the theory failed is that no know principle of matter and gravitation can account for the increase in mass of the planet upto twice the size of the original. Another less accepted theory read together with the expanded earth theory would help validate both theories, and that is the David Hudson Ormus or ORME state of matter. David Hudson explains that when certain elements reach an Orbitally Re-arranged Monoatomic (or di-atomic) state it exhibits different properties compared to the original element and the mass of the element is reduced by about 56%. Assuming a young earth having a monoatomic core would increase to about twice the original size when the atoms change to the present known elemental state.

http://www.asc-alchemy.com/hudson.html

- David Gerard (talk) 12:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Another flaw in the argument[edit]

As the Earth expands balloonwise, gravity decreases proportionately according to the relevant laws.

There were 'rather large dinosaurs' in the past - and the stronger gravity would have 'squashed them into flatfishlikes' - and/or modern creatures would have much stronger skeletal systems as a legacy.

As with the 19th century argument summarised as 'the sun is a coal-fired body, so we will eventually freeze to death', a plausable idea at the time overtaken by subsequent knowledge. 171.33.222.26 (talk) 18:27, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

BON's contribution[edit]

Originally added into the article, moved here by FCP.--ZooGuard (talk) 07:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Evidence for an expanding earth is a decreasing rate of rotation <ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/30/extra-second-added-to-clo_n_1639588.html</ref>. In the hollow earth variant the mass remains the same, with a constant surface gravity resulting from the dominant local gravitation (i.e. no inverse square law at boundary conditions). Failure of the Newtownian model at boundary conditions is evidenced by the theoretical location of the Earth-Moon neutral point not matching the actual location.<ref>http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/Neutral_Point.html</ref> ^{— Unsigned, by: 118.149.169.215 / talk}

Earth's rotation is slowing down due to interaction with the Moon (see wp:Tidal acceleration). Also, thank you for reminding me that RW needs an article about John Lear.--ZooGuard (talk) 07:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

It isn't expanding?[edit]

Technically, doesn't the Earth "grow" over time as more and more meteors and comets collide with it? I know solar wind wipes away a chunk of the atmosphere, but I was under the impression the Earth is very slowly gaining mass? CorruptUser (talk) 05:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Meteors etc[edit]

I came across reference to a 19th century book where the author feared that the 'material falling on the earth from outer space was overloading the surface' (paraphrasing): mentioning it here as the most appropriate place. Not necessarily wrong but not necessarily a problem. Anna Livia (talk) 16:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Terra-centrism[edit]

As with the modern Flatfoots - why do the modern puffer-uppers consider only Earth is expanding (or has done so)? (The 19th century group were logical according to the theories of the time). Anna Livia (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2018 (UTC)