Posted: Jun 14, 2010 12:27 pm
Most people are familiar with neal adams interesting animations.
My interest is actually psychological regarding this. I am training in neuropsychology and am interested in the mechanism behind the reaction of disbelief itself. I am presuming there will be not be many here in favour of expanding earth hypothesis.
The point is can this thread force readers to answer the primary question of the thread first. i.e. Can the poll question itself actually be answered with a yes or no ? EDIT. The question is "Do the continents "look" as if they wind back to a sphere ?"
Most of us would agree it is a simple visual question. Either it does or does not. Anybody who answers the poll can state buts after the question has been answered with a yes or no. So the buts would presumably explain away the trickery behind the animation itself, and add some geological data.
I am interested in the mechanism of denial itself. Do we fight ourselves to deny. For example you could take an allergic reaction to a toxin, and hallucinate without drowsiness. Many people may believe their hallucination for a while at least. Some would experience some deep discomfort, if they had a high level of baseline rationality and keep it to themselves.
SO this thread is primarily about psychology. You can post on how the video itself made you feel. Conflicted, angry etc.
I would also like to make these following points to introduce that the topic has an educated, reasoning and respectable proponent. The point of this thread is not to debate the geology though. These points are just stated to offset the damage having an artist proposing the subject has done. It should be remembered though that in spite of his background Neal Adams claims that the plates were not shrunk or altered in the 3d modeller. The ins and outs of geology is a different subject from this and should be started on the earth sciences section.
http://www.jamesmaxlow.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj_JTn4o ... r_embedded
Maxlow claims that
A. Traditional tectonics can validate pangea model of continental drift because earth expansion is really just a variant of tectonics. i.e. Expansion tectonics. So that is why it is not hard for paleomagnetic data to fit a traditional model.
B. Physics does not need to be rewritten for earth expansion, and he provides more practical geological mechanisms.
C. Expanding earth is consistent with the 1990 paleomagnetic dataset, where as traditional tectonics has never been checked in this regard.
I am not trying to push this theory, nor do i endorse it. I am interested in the processes at play when faced with difficult questions in a social setting.
So if we can stick to the topic poll question first and not derail or trash the thread.
Thank You
My interest is actually psychological regarding this. I am training in neuropsychology and am interested in the mechanism behind the reaction of disbelief itself. I am presuming there will be not be many here in favour of expanding earth hypothesis.
The point is can this thread force readers to answer the primary question of the thread first. i.e. Can the poll question itself actually be answered with a yes or no ? EDIT. The question is "Do the continents "look" as if they wind back to a sphere ?"
Most of us would agree it is a simple visual question. Either it does or does not. Anybody who answers the poll can state buts after the question has been answered with a yes or no. So the buts would presumably explain away the trickery behind the animation itself, and add some geological data.
I am interested in the mechanism of denial itself. Do we fight ourselves to deny. For example you could take an allergic reaction to a toxin, and hallucinate without drowsiness. Many people may believe their hallucination for a while at least. Some would experience some deep discomfort, if they had a high level of baseline rationality and keep it to themselves.
SO this thread is primarily about psychology. You can post on how the video itself made you feel. Conflicted, angry etc.
I would also like to make these following points to introduce that the topic has an educated, reasoning and respectable proponent. The point of this thread is not to debate the geology though. These points are just stated to offset the damage having an artist proposing the subject has done. It should be remembered though that in spite of his background Neal Adams claims that the plates were not shrunk or altered in the 3d modeller. The ins and outs of geology is a different subject from this and should be started on the earth sciences section.
http://www.jamesmaxlow.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj_JTn4o ... r_embedded
Maxlow claims that
A. Traditional tectonics can validate pangea model of continental drift because earth expansion is really just a variant of tectonics. i.e. Expansion tectonics. So that is why it is not hard for paleomagnetic data to fit a traditional model.
B. Physics does not need to be rewritten for earth expansion, and he provides more practical geological mechanisms.
C. Expanding earth is consistent with the 1990 paleomagnetic dataset, where as traditional tectonics has never been checked in this regard.
I am not trying to push this theory, nor do i endorse it. I am interested in the processes at play when faced with difficult questions in a social setting.
So if we can stick to the topic poll question first and not derail or trash the thread.
Thank You