[Sys1]

Expanding Earth is nonsense. We have GPS which proove tectonic theory by recording continents movements.
It's impossible for Earth to grow because its mass is the same. You can't create mass out of nowhere. Moreover, growing earth can't explain mountains. Third, if Earth mass changes constantly, its speed of revolution around Sun would have to change accordly in order to stay on the same orbit. Forth, you can't have oceans coming out of nowhere. Fifth, if Earth mass expands, then moon would crash on us.
This theory is super BS and those believing in it should get back to school, period.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'M')ost ppl here are very conventional with their thinking and belief systems and tend to be what I call sheeple. Looking outside 'the box' is unacceptable behavior. Just look at the 'cold fusion' thread.

[Sixstrings]

Some perspective on sizes, planets and stars:



Now here's what I'm not clear about. As far as I know there's an upper limit to how big a solid planet can get before it starts looking like a gas giant:




See, that solid rocky core is about the size of Earth. I didn't know this before, but looks like the majority of Jupiter is actually "metallic hydrogen" (the gray part). Pretty cool, I wonder what that looks like.

As far as I know, if a gas giant gets big enough then it ignites into a star:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]The process of further shrinkage with increasing mass would continue until appreciable stellar ignition is achieved as in high-mass brown dwarfs around 50 Jupiter masses.[26] This has led some astronomers to term it a "failed star", although it is unclear whether the processes involved in the formation of planets like Jupiter are similar to the processes involved in the formation of multiple star systems.

Although Jupiter would need to be about 75 times as massive to fuse hydrogen and become a star, the smallest red dwarf is only about 30 percent larger in radius than Jupiter.[27][28] Despite this, Jupiter still radiates more heat than it receives from the Sun; the amount of heat produced inside the planet is similar to the total solar radiation it receives.[29] This additional heat radiation is generated by the Kelvin–Helmholtz mechanism through adiabatic contraction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter

[JohnRM]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('steam_cannon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnRM', '.')..if the Earth were half its diameter 65 million years ago, it would have to have grown only 1/3 of a foot (10 cm) per year, since then. That is not at all unreasonable to believe...

[vision-master]

Sixstrings also believes in evolution. Too bad, what really is happing is devolution with our species. Sixstrings is your classic in-the-box thinker.

[diemos]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sureshbansal342', '
') first let me introduce myself as a independent scientist researching on earth formation .

[diemos]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnRM', 'O')f course, once you go into the science of it and do the math, it may be proven wrong, but it is reasonable for the average person to believe.

[bjarneorn]

I must say I find this discussion pathetic, as well as funny. Especially when I read people denying expansion, at the same time as they claim knowledge in physics.

GPS satellites, have an error at about 1 meter. Even the military one, have an error around that, or the best references at around 1 dm, or about 10 centimeters. This is the very best, and here comes NASA and claims, earth grows at 0,1mm per year. Mr. Wu says "well within current measurements uncertaintees". Most certainly is, because there is nothing we have to calculate it to such accuracy. So, what NASA has actually done, is confirm that Earth is in fact, growing. And using most concervative methods, they could find ... they came down to, no more than 0,1 mm per year, or about 8% growth. This with an error margin around 1dm, or 10 cm at least ... practically validating Earth Expansion, even to the radical Neal Adams.

To those who claim the know Physics, here is a little headache. Earth can grow, without ANY additional matter whatsoever. Why? Because inside the earth is liquified plasma, and metallic plasma. The liquified plasma is magnetic, and referred to as magma. The plasmatic material, will seek it's gaseous state as it cools ... yes, gaseous state. And to understand what is happening with this plasma, when it is combined with minerals. You can make a bread dough, with yeast inside and watch the wet dough increase as gas bubbles are built within it. As you put it in the oven, and bake it ... gas bubbles will continue to create, and the "crust" of the bread, that is outside ... will rip, and break. Very similar to the earths crust.

And here is another headache, gravity on the surface can change without any additional matter whatsover. Because surface gravity, depends on radius to the core and not the mass of rock on the earth. You can verify this, by walking on top of a mountain. On the top, gravity is less ... even if you have more rock under your feet, because you are further away from the liquified and metallic plasma beneath you. You can also view volcanic activity underneath, by viewing gravitational changes. Gravity will increase, as magma moves underneath you ... and the earth will rise, and mountains swell, literally as well. They will shrink, and gravity will decrease noticably. This is very notisable change, that proves beyond doubt, that it is the plasma inside the earth that constitutes for the gravity of the earth ... not the granite you stand on.

So, anyones bright idea, that earth cannot grow without added material is bogus. Anyone with half a wit, who peeks out there into the universe will notice planets and stars in all sizes. Did God create them like that, with a fixed size and material ... or did they grow from one single entity, just like life grew from one single organism.

I think the worst thing that has ever happened to science, is the amount of illogical, religious freaks that spend all their time, searching for the "God element". Or what did they call them in "Star Wars" movies? Mito clonitos or something like that?

And for all of you Physics experts ... Plate Tectonics is a perpetual machine. Now, I can understand a theologist wanting the earth to be a perpetual machine, made by God himself. But anyone with a scientific and scrutinous mind, should dismiss this idiocy by hand. It basically says, that the same force that breaks through the earth ... is pushing it back in ... and in any physics, that is BS.

[JohnRM]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnRM', 'O')f course, once you go into the science of it and do the math, it may be proven wrong, but it is reasonable for the average person to believe.

[Sixstrings]

I googled this a bit. Basically the "expanding earth" stuff is Youtuber crackpottery. Seems to be Australians who are pushing this. You know what.. moon landing denial is big down there too. They're odd birds, those Aussies.

From Wiki:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')cientific consensus

Generally, the scientific community finds no evidence to support the expansion of the Earth theory, and uses the following arguments to dismiss it:

Measurements with modern high-precision geodetic techniques show that the Earth is not currently increasing in size to within a measurement accuracy of 0.2 mm·y−1.[13] Furthermore, the motions of tectonic plates and subduction zones measured by a large range of geological, geodetic and geophysical techniques supports plate tectonics.[14][15][16]

Mass accretion on a scale required to change the Earth's radius is contradicted by the current accretion rate of the Earth, and by the Earth's average internal temperature: any accretion releases a lot of energy, which would warm the planet's interior. Expanding Earth models based on thermal expansion contradict most modern principles from rheology, and fail to provide an acceptable explanation for the proposed melting and phase transitions.

Paleomagnetic data has been used to calculate that the radius of the Earth 400 million years ago was 102 ± 2.8% of today's radius.[17][18]
Examinations of data from the Paleozoic and Earth's moment of inertia suggest that there has been no significant change of earth's radius in the last 620 million years.[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_earth

[vision-master]

Where did the water come from 6?

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'u')t anyone with a scientific and scrutinous mind, should dismiss this idiocy by hand. It basically says, that the same force that breaks through the earth ... is pushing it back in ... and in any physics, that is BS.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'W')here did the water come from 6?

[vision-master]

What if the Earth's core is Plasma?

[dolanbaker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'W')hat if the Earth's core is Plasma?

[vision-master]

an you are an boob-tube.

[dolanbaker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'a')n you are an boob-tube.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'W')hat if the Earth's core is Plasma?

[vision-master]

Problem is, it's all just theory, no one has drilled taht far an brougt up a sample.... lsol

[Sys1]

The Earth is not growing, but this thread troll does.