Posted: Apr 19, 2012 9:59 am
Light Storm wrote:
Said best by James Maxlow...Space geodetics is modern technology that uses satellites and radio telescopes to routinely measure the dimensions of the Earth and plate motions of the continents to sub-centimetre accuracy. During the early 1990s, when enough ground stations were established to form a global network, the global excess in radius was found to be 18 mm/year – i.e. the measurements showed that the Earth was expanding by 18 mm/year.
This value was considered to be “extremely high” when compared to expected deglaciation rates during melting of the polar ice-caps, estimated at less than 10 mm/year. The researchers in fact "expected that most … stations will have up-down motions of only a few mm/yr" and went on to recommend the vertical motion be "restricted to zero, because this is closer to the true situation than an average motion of 18 mm/yr". This recommendation is now reflected in current mathematical solutions to the global radius, where global solutions are effectively constrained to zero.
These recommendations are justified from a constant Earth radius Plate Tectonic perspective. The 18 mm/year excess was considered to be an error in atmospheric correction, so was simply zeroed out. What must be appreciated is that without an acknowledgment of a potential increase in Earth radius NASA had no option but to correct this value to zero, and hence adopt a static Earth radius premise. From an Expansion Tectonic Earth perspective, however, the 18 mm/year excess equates with a present day value of 22 mm/year increase in Earth radius, determined independently from measurements of areas of sea floor spreading. ~James Maxlow ref: James Maxlows Home Page
I note that Maxlow has neglected to provide any citation or reference for his assertion of massive and systematic fabrication of data by NASA. I guess it doesn't really matter, not like it's a serious allegation or anything
No matter how you dress up the simple question "Where does the extra mass come from" the answer will remain "Unknown"
That question does not answer the empirical observations of an Expanding Earth Hypothesis.
It's very easy to "prove" the hypthesis when you can simply claim your opponents are fabricating data - even if there's no evidence that they are.