I don't want you to get me wrong. I applaud your efforts in this arena. It takes guts and no little stamina to stand up to the mainstream science community/paradigms. But my own model of rapid drift slowed now to a near stop is not a mainstream concept by any means. Subduction is an essential of mainstream plate tectonics because they must offer a vehicle to maintain a process for hundreds of millions of years, which is not the case in the catastrophic scenario. The plate movement vectors in your referenced diagram aptly describe a process which has virtually halted by the sheer simple force of frictional resistance. The movement I describe is no longer happening*, nor can it under the present conditions. This is where both your electrical discharge machine and my rapid mechanical drift model depart from the uniformitarian presuppositions of mainstream geology. The model to which you object is the SM version of plate tectonics, with which I find as many objections!
(*with the acknowledgement of the measured fingernail growth pace oft quoted in the literature)
But I will leave off this discussion for now and let your thread proceed without further debate from me.
it was not my intention to stifle any debate, we can leave that to mainstream science.
It was my intention to offer an electrical alternative to the consensus view in the Earth sciences, by definition this meant the current Plate Tectonic paradigm; I included Expanding Earth hypotheses as proponents of this group of ideas cite the same
evidence, minus subduction, in support of their views.
In my opinion, proponents of the Electric Universe should be weary of adopting ideas from consensus science without question. The Plate Tectonic paradigm is a perfect example, despite claims of success at ‘explaining’ geological features on Earth it has failed abysmally elsewhere in the solar system even at Earth’s ‘twin’- Venus. Plate Tectonics arose to dominance before
we had global maps of any of the inner planets and satellites of the outer planets- would this have been so if we had prior knowledge of the surfaces of these bodies? Geologists view the solar system through earth-coloured spectacles, are volcanoes on Earth, Venus, Mars, Io and Titan the same phenomena?
The consensus view that an internal heat source drives tectonic activity here on Earth has led to the reliance on tidal heating or hidden oceans on worlds considered too small to have an active internal heat source. How simpler is it to view that all geologic activity, regardless of how it manifests on the surface of a planet or satellite, is driven by an external electrical source?
An electric discharge driving geologic activity on terrestrial planets and satellites produces a wide variety of features both similar to and different from, features we find on Earth depending upon the make-up of the body and its environment.
Perhaps the radical departure from conventional geological thought is one reason my views are not viewed in a favourable light, or maybe they are just plain wrong; with this in mind and not wanting to take the path taken by mainstream peer reviewed science, all comments are welcomed!