Interesting conjectures throughout the OP articles.
However, I'm failing to see how these various terrestrial structures would be unique to Earth based on the premise of an electrified plasma environment... why not the other planets and moons as well, don't they have plasma environments and alleged electrical discharge features?
As for me, I'm still a rapid continental drift adherent. The current Plate Tectonics model would have come into place after the seafloor spreading came to a halt.
The currently accepted New Global Tectonic paradigm is based on a process unique to Earth, ‘plates’ have never been identified on any other terrestrial body in the solar system and I am sceptical of their existence on Earth.
Plate Tectonics is geology’s Big Bang, it is another example of Big Science and just like any other branch of Big Science it attracts lots of funding and makes lots of careers to the exclusion of alternatives and competition as such criticism is limited to groups such as NCGT (http://www.ncgt.org/)
Yes, other planets and moons do have their own plasma environments and electrical discharge features and that is the point; Plate Tectonics cannot explain any of the features on say Mars, Io or Titan.
What I have suggested will not explain all of the features on Mars, Io or Titan because each body has its own unique history but we can find landforms that have some degree of overlap formed during a period when their plasma environments were at least as active as Earth’s and probably more active- perhaps with the exception of Io, it’s still pretty active there! For example, the uplift of planation surfaces to form mountains, even today, is a complete mystery- despite the claims of Plate Tectonicists. My suggestion to look at Johnson and Anderson’s work would provide a solution not only on Earth but elsewhere in the solar system.
In modern geology Plate Tectonics is the starting point for explaining not only the Earth’s surface features today but also of the distant past. In the spirit of the Electrical Universe paradigm I have suggested an alternative- Earth’s electrical nature and environment is the driver of global tectonic activity- not moving plates. Like Plate Tectonics I have suggested that Earth was different in the past unlike Plate Tectonics I have suggested that Earth’s present surface features formed rapidly during a period of electrical instability.
I’m highly sceptical of continental drift in the modern guise of Plate Tectonics and the ‘Fast Forward’ version Catastrophic Plate Tectonics, as you can probably guess.
Just consider the following, when we look at a map of Earth it is easy to see the ‘fit’ between South America and Africa- it looks as if they split apart only yesterday!
However, that is just the problem- we are told the two continents were last in contact some 150 million years ago! During this time dinosaurs came and went, sea levels rose and fell and the occasional asteroid collided with Earth. Yet, during this vast expanse of time South America and Africa conspired to preserve their coastlines as evidence of a former connection for our benefit today. Really? Given the known modern rates of erosion the continents would have eroded to sea-level in some 10 million years. Plus, because of the fractal nature of coastlines you can virtually fit any coastline to any other coastline producing absurd continental arrangements.
Could it be that the idea of continental drift and development of the New Global Tectonics paradigm of movable continents whether on a static or expanding Earth was misguided from the start? Based on a geometric illusion no more valid than seeing faces in the clouds?