# Expansion Tectonics



## Silveryou (Oct 31, 2020)

For those interested in this topic, I suggest to watch the recent interviews of the modern "Founding Father" of the expansion tectonics model, Dr. James Maxlow. Here the first part of the ongoing series on the Dissident Science channel. Worth a look!


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO609uOKM2I_


----------



## Whitewave (Oct 31, 2020)

For those of us low on data who can't watch a whole movie, could you give a summary of the main points? TIA.


----------



## Silveryou (Oct 31, 2020)

Whitewave said:


> For those of us low on data who can't watch a whole movie, could you give a summary of the main points? TIA.


ahahah  yeah right.
The problem is that I'm not really fluent with your language, as you can see! And I'm not even a geologist, so my explanation would be really bad. Anyway you should watch at least the part from 11:40 to 35:15. The rest is on you.
In a nutshell... the earth was once much smaller than it is now and this is proved by the interlocking of continents on ALL sides, not just the atlantic, but also the pacific and all the other seas. Maxlow proves that with a precise reconstruction giving in depth explanations.

	Post automatically merged: Oct 31, 2020

Second part. I suggest to watch from 15:30 to 37:52


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFaD5XKMVOE_


	Post automatically merged: Oct 31, 2020

Third part... 12:45 to 38:50


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M7n5-Wxx-Q_


----------



## anselmojo (Nov 2, 2020)

FINALLY! I've been on this topic forever!!! But anytime I bring any of this up to anyone with half a brain and some education they are like: "that's impossiple!"...

Of course the earth grows...just like every other thing...always growing never shrinking...time and space are illusions, there is only thought(light) which is everywhere and still. It is time and space which are both exploding into thought at the speed of time and space. Unfortunately as the little meat bags that we are, we only notice the 3D aspect of space (and ignore the scalar expansion) while noticing the scalar expansion of time (as the "arrow" of time) and ignoring the 3D aspect of time (unless of course you are traveling at "relativistic" speeds). Zero is not real! It is a con-cept. The anchor is 1 (the speed of light). You can go faster or slower than 1, but there is no zero speed nor infinite speed... (This is my paraphrasing of thoughts gleaned from Dewey Larson's reciprocal theory, Maurice Cotterell's Science of the SuperGods, and a little Dr. Bronner thrown in)...

The earth does not appear to grow, because we are all growing along with it, and the EM/Gravitics, Bouyancy, etc.etc. all compensate to give the illusion of stillness. I don't know what shape the world is, when i take off my glasses and look down I am in a fish bowl. When I put them on and look up, I am on top of the hill...When I find my horizon, meridian, and balance, I can feel the stillness of matter while EM/thought stream through me. We are neg-entropy beings. We defy thermodynamic "laws". LOVE-GROW or HATE-WITHER, choice is yours...

so sayeth I
ANSELMO JOSE ALONSO RODRIGUEZ GARCIA MERACDO PEREZ HOMS ? GANDULLA
the KUBAnacan BORIQwon ATL-ANTE-AN, neo-Taino, Tejano, Phoenecian, BarBarYan, PYR-ATE!
who now prefers to pharm, for I have lost me shame...
Shaman-you Shaman-me... I&I Bless...


----------



## Silveryou (Nov 2, 2020)

Together we will win (WWW)


----------



## Six (Nov 2, 2020)

Great video, thanks for posting it. Unfortunately, to many FEers on this platform.


----------



## Silveryou (Nov 2, 2020)

Six said:


> Great documentary, thanks for posting it. Unfortunately, to many FEers on this platform.


I like flat earthers. I think they have a unique point of view on things and therefore they make really good observations. But they lack on the theory side, probably because they are a little too much on the religious dogmatic train. Science has sadly done a poor job in opposing tradition no matter what. I think the combination of the two is the best thing. This presentation has the vantage point of being a visual reconstruction on which a lot of words are not needed. Good observers should appreciate this kind of approach


----------



## Onijunbei (Nov 2, 2020)

There are no tectonic plates. The crust of the planet broke apart as the earth expanded. As the cracks exposed internal gasses to the atmosphere they cooled creating the salt water we call the oceans. The earth only expands because of a drop in pressure... The pressure stemming from the Sun. If internal pressure remains the same but outer pressure drops, eventually we get expansion of the magnitude of Jupiter. The Pressure also assists in the strength of the electric field of the planet. When the electric field of Jupiter falls to the point where the gas planet touches the coldness of space, the gasses will solidify and contract... Think Neptune and Uranus. We start off small,grow to adulthood, then start to shrink as grandparents. The planets go through the same cycle.


----------



## Jd755 (Nov 2, 2020)

For those who prefer to read about theories rather than listen and watch people chatting about them here's the place.
https://www.expansiontectonics.com/_papers.htmHere is the authors personal website James Maxlow | Dr. James Maxlow
This site Expanding Earth Knowledge Co
Was found through this one. Earth expansion: main scientific evidence that the Earth is expanding


----------



## lee57 (Nov 3, 2020)

An other theory of the Expansion Earth is 
Hydridic Earth: the New Geology of Our Primordially Hydrogen-rich Planet by Vladimir N. Larin 
The book on archive.org
The main point is that our planet contains in the core metal-hydride, i.e. iron-hydrogen. Density of hydride is higher then that of pure iron. And hydride is an unstable material. Losing hydrogen, the Earth's core expands. Hydrogen reacts with carbonate materials and produces petroleum.


----------



## codis (Nov 3, 2020)

lee57 said:


> Hydrogen reacts with carbonate materials and produces petroleum.


Remembers me of a related Russian theory, about petrol being synthesized from carbon dioxide and water under high-temperature / high-pressure conditions. That synthesis works at least out in a lab.
But AFAIK, scientists are less sure about the properties of the earth's core than public figures tell us. It is mostly derived from a calculated mass of the earth (based on Newtonian forces and it's orbit) and the observed rise in temperature when digging deeper.
And the fact that it has a magnetic field of it's own, of course.
A thing that e.g. Mars does not have, which makes him basically uninhabitable.


----------



## Tarheel (Nov 3, 2020)

Academically trained geologist here. I have questioned the subduction theory since my days in "Geology 101". And I have contemplated this expansion-only idea, along with other abstract theories that challenge the state education I was indoctrinated with, but have never done the proper research to really restructure my knowledge foundation. But I dang sure will now. So as I continue to grow intellectually, these types of theories are quite intriguing to myself and I look forward watching and reading the above links.

Thank you for sharing OP and I will be sharing my thoughts once I get through the material.


----------



## Silveryou (Nov 28, 2020)

For those who love spherical earth of different sizes, here is part 4!!!
24:16 to 51:40 the most interesting part.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEWPtca_RSI_


----------



## Bitbybit (Jan 22, 2021)

This video is really really good:

_View: https://youtu.be/tiCMFzpMnZM_


----------



## OfTheBrave (Jan 22, 2021)

Don't have two hours to watch the video at the moment but I saw the following video many years ago and it really rings true to me.
You can discount the shape of our earth if you like, as well as the "millions and billions of years" talk and substitute it with whatever earth shape/timeline you're comfortable with.
As we all probably know by now, geological dating is likely mislead and is always being built upon many assumptions.


----------



## Silveryou (Jan 22, 2021)

OfTheBrave said:


> Don't have two hours to watch the video at the moment but I saw the following video many years ago and it really rings true to me.
> You can discount the shape of our earth if you like, as well as the "millions and billions of years" talk and substitute it with whatever earth shape/timeline you're comfortable with.
> As we all probably know by now, geological dating is likely mislead and is always being built upon many assumptions.



I have specified the essential minutes to watch in the third and thirteenth posts, give them a try!


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 2, 2021)

I think when we established the plate tectonics it was probably a mistake. Expansion theory should've been the logical assumption back then.
However, the reason for keeping the theory of static volume could have economic reasons for a big industry.  It looks like fossil fuels are not fossil, but abiotic (created automatically by the planets/moons).  And if its abiotic, it could well be connected to internal expansion as well since this all new scientific territories with old science thrown out the window.

_View: https://youtu.be/zSff0pwc1Xc_

This is a shorter version of the clip i linked previously:

_View: https://youtu.be/mCszeXd8Hfs_


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 2, 2021)

Bitbybit said:


> I think when we established the plate tectonics it was probably a mistake. Expansion theory should've been the logical assumption back then.
> However, the reason for keeping the theory of static volume could have economic reasons for a big industry.  It looks like fossil fuels are not fossil, but abiotic (created automatically by the planets/moons).  And if its abiotic, it could well be connected to internal expansion as well since this all new scientific territories with old science thrown out the window.
> 
> _View: https://youtu.be/zSff0pwc1Xc_
> ...



But I sort of liked the "theory" of fossil fuel coming from ancient petrified giant trees...


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 11, 2021)

Some points of contact between continents...


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 11, 2021)

Yes. Those seems to be correct imho


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 11, 2021)

​An interesting channel on expansion tectonics. Not a fan of the way things are presented but still interesting.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LOypeKBWd0_


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 12, 2021)




----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 12, 2021)

Those last two is also very good.
The baltic sea (and others) looks a bit suspucious too. Its not shallow not off the continental shelves, so i guess that split couldve taken place a much longer time ago. 
Northern europe seem pretty seismically dead compared to the current expansion zones.


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 12, 2021)

Bitbybit said:


> Northern europe seem pretty seismically dead compared to the current expansion zones.


Yeah. Pretty much...

Look at this... amazing!


​Taken from this video, even though the author seems to not have noticed it.

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cH3A9FoyEU_

This is probably better, don't know!





​After New Chronology, welcome to... NEW GEOGRAPHY!!!


----------



## Sovereine (Feb 13, 2021)

So glad this thread here; I had been meaning to look if there was any talk of this here when I first saw some Neil Adams videos a couple years ago. Blew my mind and gave me chills. It all fit so perfectly and made so much sense that the earth is expanding and that many of our geographic features are stretch marks (expansion) rather than compression artifacts.

Just goes to show how an assumption of constant planetary size leads to flawed conclusions with far reaching ripples of flawed conclusions in other disciplines too. 

This theory is one of the most earth-shattering (haha) paradigm shifts for me in recent times.


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 13, 2021)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5562589/Is-Africa-splitting-TWO.html

_View: https://youtu.be/wO7s5zIhX6k_



Silveryou said:


> Six said:
> 
> 
> > Great documentary, thanks for posting it. Unfortunately, to many FEers on this platform.
> ...



The positive with Flat earthers is that they at some point started to develop a critical eye to mainstream science.
But if someone would choose to believe the earth is sausage shaped, it doesnt mean they are right.
Flat earthers for me fills a function as a reminder to always reflect several times on new ideas. The rather large FE community is evidence of how easy it is to get lost if you never allow yourself to step back and allow counter arguments.


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 13, 2021)

Sovereine said:


> I first saw some Neil Adams videos a couple years ago.


That was the beginning for me too.









Bitbybit said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5562589/Is-Africa-splitting-TWO.html
> 
> _View: https://youtu.be/wO7s5zIhX6k_
> 
> ...



It could be that even expanding tectonics are wrong. To me it's just the last frontier... that's why I like it!


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 14, 2021)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx1u351MrfI_



Silveryou said:


> It could be that even expanding tectonics are wrong. To me it's just the last frontier... that's why I like it!


I feel that ET is correct. And its quite easy to imagine if all people were thought in school of Expansion tectonics, and its reason why dinosours were big etc. And then someone would suggest a theory that the globe is constant but the continents expanding edges are diving beaneath eachother, every academic would laugh it off just as hard as they do today.


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 14, 2021)

Bitbybit said:


> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx1u351MrfI_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



About dinosaurs this is a (very long) interview with Stephen Hurrell, author of the book "Dinosaurs and the Expanding Earth" (shown in the video you posted):
VERY INTERESTING!!! By the way, is that Hurrell's channel?

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpFFzyMvdZM_


I also think ET is correct, or at least the MOST correct theory right now. Who knows what kind of crazy and impossible things (according to modern thinking) we will discover in the future!


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 18, 2021)

The dissident science interview with Hurrell is really good.
When looking in books about dinosours, so many of them look like they are in the middle of adapting from low to high gravity.
I brought up the modern Ostrich with its minimized wings, head and neck before as an example as a possible weird leftover.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...-fuzz-gives-ostrich-mimic-dinosaur-a-new-look



I also noticed some news about microbial lifecycle of hydrocarbon, perhaps could be related to the cause of ET but its just speculation of course:  Microbial production and consumption of hydrocarbons in the global ocean


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 18, 2021)




----------



## Sasyexa (Feb 20, 2021)

Sounds good, the one thing left is to fit old maps and mudflood stuff into this model.


----------



## Bitbybit (Feb 20, 2021)

Sasyexa said:


> Sounds good, the one thing left is to fit old maps and mudflood stuff into this model. View attachment 6803



Its not necessary to fit mudflood into ET. And the old maps fit just fine.


----------



## Sasyexa (Feb 21, 2021)

Bitbybit said:


> Sasyexa said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds good, the one thing left is to fit old maps and mudflood stuff into this model. View attachment 6803
> ...


I meant all the man(?)made stuff, like when Alaska got kamehameha'd into oblivion


----------



## Silveryou (Feb 27, 2021)




----------



## Bitbybit (Mar 6, 2021)

if the creation of oceanic plates started wilh expansion ~200 mill years ago. Did earth expand before that on same manner during the ”small years”, if so, what should we be looking for?

_View: https://youtu.be/5Fsg1XJTbKA_


----------



## Silveryou (Mar 7, 2021)

Well I don't really know. In the images above I found many strange similarities between various zones of the world. Far by me the truth. I cannot give a proper explanation to anything, but the "visuals" are there, unless I am simply mad or in need of an eye examination.

In any case I wonder how Neal Adams did the video above. It seems that Maxlow has some problems with the 3d reconstruction.


----------



## Forrest (Mar 13, 2021)

Silveryou said:


> Well I don't really know. In the images above I found many strange similarities between various zones of the world. Far by me the truth. I cannot give a proper explanation to anything, but the "visuals" are there, unless I am simply mad or in need of an eye examination.
> 
> In any case I wonder how Neal Adams did the video above. It seems that Maxlow has some problems with the 3d reconstruction.



Adams uses a 3D animation program, either 3D StudioMax or something equivalent. I shall guess:

*Maxlow* used an older, 3D modeling program which may not have had animation capability. I think Maxlow built his 3D models very meticulously by 'hand'. meaning at each successive decreasing Earth radius, call it R-1, he first subtracted the most recent ocean floor (from the 'Rainbow Map') at radius R, which left gaps in the maps. He then unwrapped* (or did it entirely on a sphere?) and stitched together the remaining ocean and continents on a smaller image of the map, sized to wrap around the R-1, smaller globe. This process didn't use the mechanics of animation 'Tweener algorithms, which can 'fill in' frames automatically for you, given the starting and ending frames.

Or, he did the entire thing with actual spheres of different sizes, only using a computer program to manipulate 2D images, then print them out as gores, and glue them onto the spheres. He talks about it in his book, which I haven't read in awhile.

*Adams* uses an animation program with Material Layers & Libraries, which are much like the Layers in Photoshop-type 2D programs. He starts with an unwrapped map, like the one for Ganymede from Nasa. From that he makes two or more distinct Layers, and/or Materials. One Layer/Material has the dark areas (the continents), and the other Layer has the light areas (the oceans). For both materials, the rest of their maps are made transparent, so that the other map shows through. When these are mapped onto the same sphere, the result should be indistinguishable from a single, solid map without the transparency tricks.

He then wraps these Materials onto two different spheres of the same diameter. Both spheres are animated with a Shrink/Scale tool, but with different UVW (surface) modifiers for their maps. The Continent Material UVW** modifier shrinks the transparent areas while leaving the opaque, Continent areas alone. The Ocean Material might do the same, not sure, haven't looked that close. I also don't know if this part about the UVW modifiers is exactly true, I'm guessing. There are other ways to do it.

The two spheres are then centered on the same point in the 3D space and shrunk at the same rate. The animation Tweeners fill in the details from one frame to the next.

*"Unwrapped" means to make a flat image, or map, out of the surface of a sphere or other 3D object. A Mercator Projection map is a particular type of Unwrap of the sphere.

** "UVW Modifiers" operate on the surface Map of a 3D object, much like the Scale, Skew, etc. tools of Photoshop operate on flat images.


----------



## Silveryou (Mar 24, 2021)




----------



## Silveryou (Apr 17, 2021)

Part 5 with Dr. James Maxlow!!!
The core from 28:46 to 1:00:40

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92j7wur0l-I_


----------



## Silveryou (Dec 23, 2022)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBecHjplQAA_


----------

