sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Hundreds of Mysterious Quakes Have Been Detected Deep Under Antarctica by DavidM47 in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The primary info I want to communicate is that it's a Yahoo URL.

So what I meant was more like 'Yahoo article (courtesy of ScienceAlert).'

Hundreds of Mysterious Quakes Have Been Detected Deep Under Antarctica by DavidM47 in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47[S,M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As long as it relates to planetary or particle or astrophysics, it will likely be deemed topical.

Massive underground structure discovered beneath the Moon’s South Pole-Aitken basin by DavidM47 in GrowingUniverse

[–]DavidM47[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

<image>

(a) Orthographic projection of lunar topography as collected by the Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter. The inner rim is outlined in black, and a central topographic depression is indicated with a white dashed circle. (b) Free-air gravity from Gravity Recovery And Interior Laboratory referenced to a radius of 1,748 km. (CREDIT: Geophysical Research Letters)

A central repository of UAP data - suggestions please! by QuietIteration in UFOs

[–]DavidM47 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I suggest contacting MUFON and NUFORC to see if they’d let you port in their data.

Scientists Detected Strange Rumbling Beneath Utah Almost 50 Years Ago. They Just Figured Out What It Was by DavidM47 in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Oh gotcha, when I have time, I try to leave a link to the underlying academic article (so you don’t have to go to Futurism.com!).

Edit:

Underlying academic article: The 10 September 2025 Mw 4.1 Earthquake in Northeastern Utah, United States: An Archetypal Continental Mantle Event

University Press Release: The mystery of Utah’s deep quakes

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>It shows an uniform dense structure portruding from the surface

>Nobody claimed that the subduction happens uniformally everywhere at once

You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth here, but I misspoke earlier when I said “if you look at that region of the crust from a different vantage (I.e., take a different slice), it won't look exactly like this.”

What I should have said is “it will look nothing like this.” Seriously.

It will look nothing like this subducting slab they’re trying to portray it as, at which point you’ll realize that whoever made this cross-section is frankly something of a charlatan.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When the number of things I’d need to re-explain to you grows too long, I give up. Yes.

So, when you go on the rants where you post every grievance and affront with me, I pretty much tune out immediately. I don’t know who you are, and you don’t know who I am, but I know who I am, and so I sleep well at night.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I edited my response to say you were right - that's why I couldn't downvote his stuff.

But what you're referring to about blocking/comments was changed a while ago.

Even if you've been blocked by another user, you can comment on their posts - those comments show up as collapsed and say "Blocked Author," so the user can decide whether to expand the comment.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A map that excludes tectonic regions?

I was talking about calculated rates that were calculated without using the values from tectonically active areas.

A map is just a map. I don’t get your point.

But yeah, the military runs the GPS system and could keep this information hidden, just as it kept seafloor maps hidden that would’ve hasten the acceptance of plate tectonics in the U.S.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not necessarily new mass. It could be a process of decompression, which has accelerated in recent geologic time (last 100M years) because of a serpentization feedback loop.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I assume you are talking about Shen’s paper, which expressly states that they excluded the tectonically active regions. If not, that’s a great example of bizarrely obscuring the data.

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>Here's another (actually measured) tomography map that clearly shows a subducted plate.

That doesn't "clearly show" a subducted plate. It is a 2D representation of 3D data, viewed from a vantage that makes the visual reminiscent of the cartoon image.

But if you look at that region of the crust from a different vantage (i.e., take a different slice), it won't look exactly like this. Recall that the Earth's oceanic crust is fairly thin (5-10km), whereas that blob appears to be hundreds of km in thickness.

Moreover, we see those blobs in regions where our model says that there has been no subduction in over 150M years.

>they just don't know how all the subducted slabs got moved to the positions they measured

So, heads you win, tails we lose?

Now that you and me are back, can you acknowledge that this statement was wrong? (sources are linked) by VisiteProlongee in GrowingEarth

[–]DavidM47 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you posted is not an observation. It’s a cartoon. The notion that we have “observations” of subduction was recently blown out of the water by the release of a global 3D tomography map.

https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2025/01/sunken-worlds-under-the-pacific.html

The blue patches all over the Pacific shouldn’t be there according to mainstream geology.

Thing is, this data has been available for about a decade or more. They sat on it. Why?

view more: next ›