( .. "the sense common to the other five" .. )
Basically, this blog is an attempt to help turn the Big Ship of Plate Tectonics around and point it in the direction of Earth expansion so that others can see it's ok to question Plate Tectonics, and thereby maybe too help funding bodies offer a worldful of newbies hope that they can find relevance in Earth science other than the derelict cadaver of Plate Tectonics.
.  |
 |
Fig.1. Flat Earth versus Round Earth
But for a few enthusiasts committed to the flatness of plates, everybody knows that the Earth is round. There is something intrinsically silly therefore, about a worldful of geologists (guided by the foremost educational institutions of the world), persisting in representing global geology on a flat map with its inherent distortions, .. unless, of course, the intention is to conceal *THE TRUTH* that it is in fact *ROUND*.
Oh yes, .. I know, .. about claims of 'truth', and there being none, and about whoever mentions it in the context of science being a nut-case, and about all there is being chaos and doubt. But that depends on us (dunnit?), whether we prefer to live in a world of misery and fear, or one of tolerable contentment and security.
George says :- "To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle." ~ George Orwell, In Front of Your Nose, Tribune (22 March 1946)
George says it again :- "The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield." ~ In Front of Your Nose, Tribune (22 March 1946). [ Platies, .. still shifting the goalposts and twisting the bones of this cadaver :-:-: after fifty years.]
George says it again :- "The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield." ~ In Front of Your Nose, Tribune (22 March 1946). [ Platies, .. still shifting the goalposts and twisting the bones of this cadaver :-:-: after fifty years.]
Fig.2. Outfit necessary for scaling glass mountains , rescuing beautiful maidens from dragons, hobnobbing with the cognoscenti and speaking truth to power (seen here taking a break from all four).
The site is ostensibly an on-line exercise in writing about the dichotomy between the contradictions of the *theory* of Plate Tectonics and the commonsense reality of Earth expansion, but really (by extension) (and regardless of whichever side of veracity the solution to that particular dichotomy lies), *it's more about the abuse of common sense generally*, albeit illustrated here through the keyhole of geology.
So why be so sceptical about Plate Tectonics in relation to common sense?
[ BBC Is the Knowledge Factory Broken?]
[ The Cult of the Expert.] (Both right on cue as I write this page). But the odd expert going awry is not the issue. This is a wordful of them I'm taking issue with here.]
Because the facts don't cut it. Never do. So what does? Context. Context is King. Whether in science, government, judiciary, business, religion, .. anything (/everything). Facts are only part of the story. It's context that counts. Con-artists spinning the facts like fairy floss from the head,
floss from the navel and ignoring context .. (need not apply).
Context is tricky because it's to do with pattern, and reading pattern in nature is not always easy, but one thing nature does that is helpful, is that when it finds itself doing something that's 'successful' [whatever that means in the natural world], then it keeps doing it over and over again in different but similar ways. (Read it before?). Context is about 'dominoes', .. getting them in the right order and the right way round.
...........................
Of course, I have to be prepared to wear that abuse of common sense (mentioned above), because who but an idiot /crackpot /nutter with their own limited experience /knowledge /understanding of geology would take issue with something that the rest of the informed world of Earth science would appear to regard, not only as 'settled science', but as high achievement. ['Science', mark you, .. that bastion of truth by which civilisation authenticates itself.]
The point regarding 'abuse in general', is that if science can get it so wrong to the extent that its deficiencies can be so easily and casually seen through - and maintain that error in the face of wilful contradiction of common sense - what does that say for areas that others profess to similarly see? Are those areas also examples of abuse? And if they are, shouldn't we be doing something about them? Or should we be complacently resting our security in the common beliefs /knowledge(?) /consensus mores of others - and "live in the love of the common people", guided by purveyors of deficiency - that is, nutjobs (who are not me) (or you, dear reader).
It is not only geological texts that are highlighted by this example, but the societal problems that arise from the ethical and moral tensions of expediently and conveniently 'going with the flow'. However, the question whether or not we should deal with them (and if so, how) is very pertinent, because setting things to rights can be very destabilising if place and time are not right. Trump does not always truth lies, half-truths, and avoidances (even) if the object is peace and harmony.
So what's the big deal? Simply this :-: If the Earth is getting bigger then there is a whole lot about the 'subatomic world' that is misconceived. (BBC video here, at about 9:10mins.)
Plate Tectonics is the paradigm for the whole of Earth science. It is taught in universities schools and colleges across the world and underpins postgraduate research. It is the foundation for numerous top-level media presentations to the public. [1] [2] It is even creeping into the language of public discourse as "tectonic consequences" [and "tectonic shifts". Children get enculturated in school in case they intend to be geologists when they're older. There's even a 'Kidipede' on the internet (at least there used to be [original link] and I wouldn't be surprised if there are kindergartens (with 'activity-going-forward') where they get to play at bumping around being mountains when they collide, and falling on the floor as 'subduction zones' when they don't. You know how involved children can be when they do science (bless their 'earts and malleable little minds). Get them when they're young, sit them on your knee and convince them of the sanctity of 'The Church', then send them out into the world as sleepers with a belief-belt - and a game of deck quoits before a leisurely evacuation of The Big Ship is assured. What can possibly be wrong with that? Disturbing 'the love' in a panic in the name of sudden awareness that there is 'truth' the size of an iceberg bearing down you can be very destabilising indeed .. and even unnecessary (=>George says more stuff)
So 'disturbation' is not something to be undertaken lightly. Doing it is usually a 'time-of-life' thing - you know, .. when you get to that uncertain age and tired of the bullshit that we have to keep wallowing in because of societal and economic structures that have been built up over a lifetime by nutters (who again, are not me - nor of course you) (dear reader) and you realise that if nobody else is going to do something about cleaning it up then in whatever poor way you can you're gunna have to 'girt yer loins', pull Excalibur from the stone, scale the glass mountain, and rescue the beautiful maiden before consigning yourself to oblivion.
It's about "Narrative Therapy" in other words, .. related to 'things' in general, but trying to keep a lid on them by squeezing them through the keyhole of self-evident geology to see where the balance of this dichotomy in common sense lies - with that of others, or with the self, .. i.e., getting 'dominoes' in the right order and round the right way and thereby hopefully (whichever side the deficit falls) raising some points worth consideration, .. thereby further helping :-
- 'EXPERTS' to be a bit more open and accountable to the public about the extent of their expertise and their partisan politics when it comes to their own self-interest (usually funding).
- MEDIA cheer-squads to be a bit more critical of they handouts they're given.
- THE PUBLIC to be a bit more critical of both, and conscious therefore of the insignias by which the 'leu.u.u.ve' that ensures common-wealth and the security of future generations is made manifest. 'Love' is not immune from the lessons to be learnt from the memes of geology.
Reading /layout.
There is no particular chronology, or order. Just dip in anywhere and see where it takes you. I expect the site will largely be found through random web-searches on the topic of Plate Tectonics or Earth expansion so some repetition of points will be unavoidable. I'm trying to structure it so that 'the facts' on which the geological text turns are more deeply buried than the subtext of complaint. ["The subtext, not the text, counts." (the geology is largely wysiwyg-self-evident).]
There is a little blue icon at the top-left corner of each page that will take you to a front page of sorts whence there are some leading links that will give the gist. The main thing I want to get across is that even on its own terms Plate Tectonics is silly. The points supporting Earth expansion are for afficionados of the topic and will only be found through deeper reading of relevant links (or by chance via search engines).
A definitive floor plan will be worked out in due course for those interested. The site is continually in flux to accommodate additions and changing links as I try to structure it better.
It's in two parts. The first part is essentially a deconstruction of Plate Tectonics - a painting of holy cows black - and goes round in a circle to keep some sort of focus. It's like a wheel with circumferential issues (like 'plates', 'spreading ridges', 'mountains' (/'mountain belts'), 'ocean floors', etc.) joined by spokes of repeat-links that focus them back the central theme of Plate Tectonics' illogic. Sometimes it takes a more three-dimensional spherical form as it extends into areas of confrontational societal discourse (like religion, to which science is often compared and without which a whole lot of people would arguably be a whole lot better off).
[Spoiler alert re. religion. Being of an atheist persuasion myself I never thought I would, but I find its frontmen, the two words 'intelligent', and 'design', certainly worth considering (though without the overlay of 'gods'). There is something about existential reality that is very challenging when seen from the perspective of returning from the subatomic world back up through the keyhole of the atom into the molecular, physical, palpable one, particularly in the way it downgrades the sentience and 'intelligence' of life (that we so wonder at) to common-or-garden mundanity, enjoyed even by insects.
But first there needs to be a better answer than what we've got to the wh/wh/wh/wh/ and how of the creation of the material stuff that makes up the Earth's mantle (that's making the Earth bigger), that as a geologist I find incumbent upon me (for what it's worth) - to "share". The comparison between Plate Tectonics and Religion is a powerful one since popular beliefs in both are rooted in the mysteries of the Earth with its fossils and implications for evolution and all. So just thought I'd make that point up-front.]
The second part is Earth expansion. My version at any rate; others thinking similarly can speak for their own). Besides, I don't much know what's in them, but there is sure to be overlap. It's demanding enough trying to pull all the threads of my own thinking together without critiquing others', so if you are looking for a general review of the subject-according-to-others you won't find it in these pages. This is a revision of an earlier, first-pass draft I put together in the early-to-mid 2000's, before I was aware that Google earth had been released to the public (~ Feb. 2005). But it grew out of much earlier work originating in the mid-1960's, coincidentally enough when Plate Tectonics was also being formulated, but when I was in ignorance of that formulation (link). I'm now trying to illustrate the connection between that earlier work and Earth expansion using Google's *excellent* facility. That work has been up on the web in various forms over the years, so those who know how will be able to find some of it in various archives. However the revised version has more contemporary comment and will be more inclusive of Plate Tectonics' goalpost shifts (e.g.) as it orientates itself towards Earth expansion. Once you see the restructured simplicity there's no going back to the flungabout nonsense of Plate Tectonics.
It is said that it takes thirty to fifty years for progress to catch up with a 'cutting edge', so this is in the hopeful expectation that the time is better than it was half-a-century ago when Earth expansion first seriously surfaced. However, it has become more of a 'labour-of-leisure' than dictated by any urgency deriving from a conviction of 'Truth'. Change is not easy, and with the help of media spin-merchants, 'naked emperors' do indeed manage to strut their stuff with impunity.
Also, it is well-known that when it comes to change the facts themselves don't cut it. Factors of resistance are mightily at work including (substantially) time for consensus /'groupthink' to reorganise itself (which is already happening). These are more nebulous and cultural /socio-political, related more to how humanity behaves, than they are to factual 'scientific' objectiveness. [Or perhaps, it should be said rather, how it doesn't behave) (considering the above reflections re. 'leuve', the BBC, and the "Cult of Experts") (noted above and under scrutiny as I write).
Some other strategy is called for. With more than half a century already under the bridge since the inception of both Earth expansion and Plate Tectonics, facts are not going to cut through a monolithic consensus of a worldful of professionals with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo of P.T., .. nor that of an even bigger worldful of slates who have learned their rote lessons by digging the dirt, watching glitzy media presentations, and feeling 'the leuve' of tribal connectedness. And anyway, with its two-dimensional foundations removed, Plate Tectonics of its own accord will eventually segue into the wysiwyg construction of 3-D (Fig.1 above). (Eventually.) [=> [Tracking the change.']
So right now it is more important to prepare the ground for substitution by dismantling the foundations of Plate Tectonics and showing why it is wrong, than to provide anything of my own 'crackpot' personal view how the Earth is getting bigger. It will be some time yet before The Big Ship turns around, and a lot of crying and lying and shooting and dying is going to have to occur before there is any progress from self-styled "Centres of Excellence".
The take-home message re common sense.
Those promulgating it at the present time (in respect of global geodynamics at least) are not serving us very well when it comes to 'noses-on-faces', 'glass mountains' and 'beautiful maidens'. (And others more informed than me comment on other COE's every day on the National News.) So what's holding us up? Well, .. that's the "Million Dollar" question (baby) that we all must be more cognisant of, because as 'scale' and 'sense-of-proportion' ("dominoes") it is one that concerns us all when it comes to human affairs, and (geologically speaking) is well illustrated by the difference between 'smooth' and 'rugged' as those words apply to planet Earth in much the same way as the words 'flat' and 'round' (Fig.1 above) still do.
Fig.3. Common sense 2 - Sense of proportion :-: 'Smooth' versus 'rugged' in the McKenzie Mountains, Alaska. Erosion, .. making the Earth flatter (and smoother) than it used to be.
See? .. how smooth it is (when you look at the flatness of the horizon)? Exactly the same challenge to observation as 'flat' v. round is. So I think that's it, .. I think I've finally sussed what it's about :-: *Common Sense* as a scale thing :-:
(repeat link)
Seeing the Earth as smooth or rugged meets *exactly* the same dichotomy as whether it's flat or round. So long as 'mountains-in-the-round' on a round Earth is ignored (as it is), Plate Tectonics is itself no more than a Flat-Earth appreciation society (=> click on text) for which reason it should be careful about whom it ridicules (link). Having got the "Not flat, But round" part finally worked out (after centuries), it seems that taking the next step up the mountain - the "not rugged, but smooth" bit - is for some strange reason more difficult for people - perhaps because it is closer to the nose, .. more "in our face" as they say.
[Something here about Hillary's Step and scaling Everest as a pinnacle of individual achievment, and its dangers.]
Well I'm not so sure about that. As those mountains in Fig.3 show, scaling up is not the same thing as scaling down. Seems to me that polarity matters (notwithstanding that bit about "seeing the world in a grain of sand"). The Earth is not a great big mountain any more than a mountain is a poor small Earth (notwithstanding gravity either)! Other factors apply.'Scale invariance' :-: "From a billionth the size of the atom to the scale of the universe - " (.. "the same mathematics apply") (?).
How can we possibly have anything but the *slightest inkling* of an insight into the quantum world, if we can't get a grip on what 'smooth' means on a round Earth? Mm.m.? You tell me. [That box below.]
[Segue /flashback :-:-: to where it all began, with Arthur Holmes choice of convection crumpling the crust to build mountains, over its gravitational collapse to create a flat earth. (also links to AH). But First, ... (as they say) ..
(Feedback page to first edition.)
[20180704] "Dunnit" and "innit" (..the Yin /Yang Polarities of Reason of the Common Man.)
No comments:
Post a Comment