nealadamsdotcom (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Wynston and all. Think about this. You're an archeologist and you find ten broken pieces of a vase that look like they fit together, Someone else puts them together on the side of a big urn and they fit like a big patch on one side. Pissed, you take them off and put them simply TOGETHER and they make a WHOLE... SMALLER perfectly COMPLETE vase, no pieces missing. Sure they fit on the bigger vase, in a KIND OF PATCH. But NOW YOU KNOW, what it really IS! Live with THAT!

FunnyKidChronicles (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

if this theory is correct you'd basically have to throw out EVERY OTHER SCIENTIFIC THEORY EVERthat alone destroys itno matter how much bullshit you use to back it up

okturus (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

maybe global warming really has to do with us getting closer to the sun from the earth's growth.

dr3aming (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Good teory

trymil (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Cruso, I see Neals work in two parts; One is the evidence for growth, which may be strong or weak, that is debatable, but traditional geologists need to come up with some answers. The other is the mechanism for this growth which seems badly founded, but I dont know, I am not an expert on the field. If he is "widely discredited by actual geologists" is to me an invalid argument. There are ACTUAL geologists who support EE-theory. They, & Neal are facing the Inquisition. I admire them for that!

nealadamsdotcom (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Diamonddave, OH, I see no other theories are based on measurements. Daaave. The sun's magnetic field a hundred years ago? We measured it? I'm sorry Dave...It's a theory! I pointed out the massive flaws in your logic, What else can I do. If I take the feather away the Earth still orbits. Earth isn't going to JIG around. Slowly, over massive time the orbit is ballanced. You're acting very frustrated, Dave.

WynstonCruso (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

AhHa!! No I wont be back!!Oh damn you got me....No I dont think your a Nazi, thats pretty harsh, and I'm not meaning to attack you, just that I think we need to accept all theories as exactly that, theories. I've looked into quite a few different opinions and theories and I still like to put stock into the one I was originally taught, but still accept that it is just a theory, much like yours. I guess we'll never be 100% certain of anything. Good luck though, now I'm really going this time

nealadamsdotcom (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Wynston. No, heh, you'll be back. Try to get a balanced bunch of research under your belt, in order to be of some value, instead of exposing your more lemming-like traits. Avoid being part of the machine. Hey, You finished your first encounter without calling me a Nazi. That's pretty good.

WynstonCruso (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Im tired of arguing over this shit now, Neal your so emotionally invested in this theory that I'm affraid your going to burst a blood vessel. Face it, your theory is derivative at best and as you should well know has been widely discredited by actual geologists, which you are not. I'm not posting here any more, your ignorance is frustrating me to no end and I'm affraid I have only become dumber having read your posts. To every one else, keep up the good work :)

trymil (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Sorry, typing errors: They might well be, but THAT is independent of whether the magnetic field is constant or not. and...we DONT see it, because it seems chaotic.