On Aug 28, 5:24 am, Weatherlawyer <
weatherlaw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 28, 3:13 am, Skywise <
i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Weatherlawyer <
weatherlaw...@gmail.com> wrote in news:7c147e7c-a50a-465c-
> >
a066-b0d447b98...@vo6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:
>
> > > This webpage is being phased out and is no longer maintained.
>
> > Yeah, it sucks. I go to that page sometimes multiple times a day
> > as I can get in a quick glance of a couple seconds the newest
> > activity since the last time I looked.
>
> > I can (and have used) the new map. It has it's pro's and con's. It's
> > been especially nice being able to zoom way in on the Brawley activity
> > to see the fault trend patterns. Before I'd just load it into Google
> > Earth, but that's on the other computer so this saves me from starting
> > it up just for that. On the other hand, it's not as quick to see the
> > list as described above.
>
> > So far the list is still being updated. I'll continue hitting it until
> > it 404's.
>
> They got so much praise when they asked for comments that they must
> have been walking on water. Now they think they are Oriel.
>
I have had a great adventure the last few days on Wikipedia
researching how two people rewrote the thinking on plate tectonics to
include rotation as a mechanism,normally a step like that would be
announced as a major modification to the previous thinking based on
thermal 'convection cells' - I even got a laugh from some unknown
contributor who edited the newly introduced text to read 'Alfred
geraldis' instead of Alfred Wegener .
I don't look for something as irrelevant as praise or
recognition,anyone over the last 7 years could have discussed or added
to the core driver of crustal evolution and its destruction by way of
differential rotation but men are small in this era and prefer to
behave like thieves and that is why the attempt to introduce a
rotational mechanism without attribution is crude.If they wanted the
whole concept of rotation drawn down from observing rotating celestial
objects all they had to do was ask instead of being dullards flailing
around trying to make a Frankenstein's monster mechanism that students
are bound to encounter.
That is the real insult,not that they tried to steal a concept which
anyone in sci.geo.geology could have read about 7 years ago but that
they mangled the straightforward reasoning.So much for
geologists !,there were once great men of stature and integrity but
not today,just welfare recipients who can't make the effort or do not
have the talent to handle that discipline where astronomy and
terrestrial sciences mesh.
Thank God I never was a part of the dreary empirical culture ! - I
missed nothing.