Sunday, December 23, 2007 12:37:23 PM
"'Intersting theory, but does not that require that the Earth was kind of flooded in the past. Or where would all the water that is in the ocean now have come from otherwise.` `Comets. turn to the science Channel once in awhile.`"
Um, ok. Except for the fact that for this to be as the guy said, trees would have to be around while the comits were bringing water. As we all know life came from the oceans first, trees came much, much later.
Friday, November 30, 2007 4:45:58 PM
It would be interesting if he had any evidence. 1.) there is no reason to believe the earth is stretching nor does he offer one. Where is the extra mass coming from. I was under the impression that mass could not be created or destroyed; that was just me I guess. 2.) Where is all the water coming from. Most of the earths surface is water. If the earth was smaller like he says then the earth would be nothing but water not swallow lakes. 3.) If ocean trenches do tell that the earth is growing because they are stretch marks they are running the wrong way. A horizontal stretch mark indicates a north and south growth not a east an west. 4.) Any mathematician can stretch any two figures and make them fit together.
There is more but i am running out of characters. This "theory" makes no sense. This is the worst theory i have ever heard and yes i am including creationism. They at least have an explanation even though it is an asinine one.
Friday, November 16, 2007 11:42:37 PM
It's an interesting theory and makes you consider the alternatives. But this particular theory has only managed to instigate doubt and a compelling need to contemplate and nothing more. There is no substantial evidence whatsoever making it hard to accept this theory as real. But it is nonetheless a possibility and was,for sure,very interesting. The debatable comments were very intriguing as well.