MrGamma Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 (edited) I would be curious what others think about the video series from Dr. James Maxlow ( PHD - Geology ) on the Growing Earth Theory. Essentially the theory claims that the earth has grown in almost twice it's size in the last 400 million years and is continuing to grow. It also quotes NASA officials regarding the detection of a vertical radius movement in the Earths at a rate of 18mm per year via thier Space Geodesy Systems ( GPS included ). I did attempt to post this in another thread but due to the lack of the academic credentials of some of the materials it was moved elsewhere. So This thread focuses on the materials provided by a recognized PHD who uses real world data. Dr. James Maxlow Geologist PHD ( introduction ) Geological Map of the World Indian Ocean South Pacific Ocean Pangean Super-Continent Gravitational Collapse of Crust Permian to Archaean Geology Archaean to Future Geology Global Data Sets ( Crustal Geology , Ancient Magnetic Poles , Ancient Geography , Ancient Climate , Mechanism for Expansion ) Ancient Magnetic North Pole Late Palaeozoic Coral Reefs and GPS systems http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loA5OomrUUU Proposed Mechanism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7E4OKdmyYQ Summary and Conclusions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULBYjrg-4e4 Any Thoughts? I think it's quite a plausible thoery. It fits much more nicely with current real world data and as Occam's Razor suggests we should strive to use theories which make as few assumptions as possible. I see virtually no assumptions in this theory. While current popular theories make quite a few. What do you think? Edited August 3, 2008 by MrGamma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 Youtube is not a credible resource. Also see the links to other threads in my reply in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrGamma Posted August 3, 2008 Author Share Posted August 3, 2008 Youtube is not a credible resource. What? Youtube is a place to put videos... it's free... everybody does it... How does youtube effect this lecture series? That is honestly the worst excuse for anything I have ever heard. Well... I have Seen George Bush and CNN on Youtube... So I guess they are not credible? If I registered a domain name and put the videos there would it make a difference to you or does the video have to be hosted at NASA itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 No CNN is not credible. You need peer reviewed journals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 I don't really see the need for two threads on this. Original is here: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34472 FYI we do not repost the same topic just because the thread is moved or we don't like the replies it gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts