Electrically charged rocks?

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:57 pm
Location: Sarasota, FL, USA

Re: Electrically charged rocks?

Unread post by MarcusDrake » Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:22 pm

GaryN wrote:Hi Marcus,
What I was alluding to was your statement about a shell earth not being able to support itself. How strong is a pinpong ball, or an egg when you try to squeeze it, why are many deep sea probes spherical? A thin shelled geodesic half sphere has a snow load capability of about 5 miles. The shell of a theoretical hollow earth need not be very thick at all.
Pinpong balls, eggs shells and geodesic domes are very strong if they are completely intact. One crack and the entire structure fails, just like a soap bubble. The earth's crust is not intact, it is broken into many pieces which float about ramming into each other, sliding past one another and pulling away from each other. Eggs have a tough outer shell that maintains it's strength due to a matter scale. A chicken egg 3 feet in diameter would crack under it's own weight.

After viewing the links so kindly provided to the hollow earth ideas, I still don't see how it is entirely possible. The main problem I have is that the science is in the wrong order. Using great ideas and software, earthquake models were created and changed until just the right model supported the theory. This is not the way science is supposed to operate. In addition, when the model that fit was finally arrived at, the crust of the earth was much more than 1000 km thick, it was much closer to 3000 or more, leaving just enough room for the standard model core. In the end, I was unconvinced.

To be fair, I do not think that the mainstream has all the answers, and they use botchy science the same as any other hack trying to prove a theory.
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." Albert Einstein

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Electrically charged rocks?

Unread post by Lloyd » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:00 pm

MarcusDrake: Now, back to Lloyd. Lloyd, it is quite obvious that there are a great number of people here, yourself included, that have come to the conclusion that the Earth and solar system are quite young for some reason. I'm curious to know if the idea of a young earth came before or after the discovery of the EU, and what gave you the idea of a young Earth to begin with.
DaveS: I don't know of any EU theorist who thinks the Earth is only maybe 6000 years old, or 10,000 years old, or even 4.5 billion years old.
* The main EU theorists have not offered suggestions that I know of about the age of the Earth or the Solar System, but they have offered much reasonable speculation about the age of Venus and possibly Titan, the moon of Saturn that has a dense atmosphere. Venus is considered to have first been visible to the ancients as a comet that seemed to come from the planet Saturn over 5,000 years ago. If Venus fissioned or was ejected from Saturn, or Jupiter etc, between 5 and 10 or so thousand years ago, it likely would have been incandescent when it first formed, over 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Velikovsky was the first to suggest this in 1955 or so, when he wrote Worlds in Collision. Our same main EU theorists also suggest that Saturn flared up every few thousand years. It may be that it ejected a planet or moon each time it did so. Therefore, Venus and Titan probably formed during the last 2 flare-ups. Since planets and moons cool down after they form and since Earth is the next warmest of the planets, it may be just a few thousand years older than Venus. And Mars may be a little older than Earth. On the other hand, it's possible that most or all of the bodies formed when Saturn formed much earlier.
* However, Robert Gentry found that Earth's basement granite rock crystallized almost instantly, instead of over millions or billions or years, so this suggests that Earth is much younger than millions of years old. Some of the TPODs point out that many surface features on Earth, like mountain ranges etc, are only a few thousand years old, instead of hundreds of millions of years. The main EU theorists seem to support this, since they control what is published as TPOD articles. They also definitely support the fact that conventional dating methods are all based on uniformitarian assumptions, which makes them generally worthless in a system that has experienced catastrophes a few thousand years ago. Although our main theorists have apparently not yet stated their own views on how old the Earth and Solar System are, a number of the informed readers and posters to this forum have stated that they think it's likely or very possible that both are rather young.
MarcusDrake: After viewing the links so kindly provided to the hollow earth ideas, I still don't see how it is entirely possible.
* Hollow Earth is not yet considered a likely aspect of EU theory. It's merely based on a comparison with geodes, concretions etc, which are thought to be formed electrically and so are the planets, moons etc [thought to be formed electrically]. I think not all geodes, concretions etc are hollow, so, even if the comparison is apt, it wouldn't necessarily follow that Earth is hollow. Caves are hollow and sometimes have similarities to the insides of geodes. I haven't heard of meteors being hollow, but it seems to be uncertain whether they formed during planetary formation, or if they form from megalightning striking the Earth, or both.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests