[geocentrism] Re: Grew

  • From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:41:21 +1000

Allen the Newtonian/Einsteinian gravity is calculated upon the centre of 
gravity, which does and has to take into consideration those factors of shape 
volume etc. .. or so I believed. 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Allen Daves 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:50 AM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Grew


  In Newtonian/Einsteinian gravity the strength or pull of gravity is based 
solely on the mass of the object where I would argue for VG theory ... In VG 
theory gravity is a function of the mass as well as shape/ volume of the 
object(s) in question like the sand on the sound boards shape/volume is just as 
important as mass/density.... if the earth were 1/3 the size it is now the 
gravitational effects would not be that much different since the relative 
distance to the center of mass would be nearly the same when accounting for the 
increase in density that a earth 1/3 the size would have. Although water does 
not compress generally, the density of tap water is less than the density of 
sea water, the density of the earths crustal core with a hydration of say .007% 
would be far more dense then the water itself. In this way if the earth 
stretched due to a sudden catastrophic release of say ~1/7 of that water 
(popcorn effect) the density would decrease while the volume would increase 
this would account for the apparent increase in gravity 
(http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html) although the total mass 
of the earth would have stayed the same. Floating on the flood waters the 
effects for Noah would be nothing more then a ride on a conventional elevator. 
It has been calculated that the heat distribution of rain water itself is not 
sufficient for the task as well as the fact that scripture go to a lot of 
emphasis about the fountains of the great deep. If the catastrophic release 
were a nonlinear curve of water release ( Genisis 7:11 in that day all the 
fountains of the great deep broken up) then it is quite reasonable to suspect 
that the earth was flooded primarily due to the volume of water release greater 
than the expansion rate until such time as the water release came began to stop 
then the expansion overtook the water volume and the flood waters subsided into 
the now ocean basins. The weight of the water over the cracks at some point 
would keep the water from spewing out into space and given the gravitational 
effects for the earth at 1/3 size the necessary force for escaping the 
gravitational pull would be greater since the differences in gravity would not 
be a strict linear curve in a VG enviroment..... I cannot ignore the fact that 
the contents only fit together on a smaller globe and the geology is one of 
stretching not subduction unless you assume it first and ignore everything 
else,......in fact there is no engine for subduction except the overall 
"gravitational' effects of HC cosmology.. Umm.... Where a popcorned 
  (Relatively slowly primarily say over 1 year) earth would explain how and why 
so many fossils are found on land and were not simply all wiped away in to the 
ocean basins themselves particularly since if the flood took place on the earth 
at its current size ..well do the math the present surface of the earth is 80% 
water the erosion of all of the land masses would have dissolved almost 
entirely into the oceans themselves unless the land mass was much greater in 
the past but that poses a whole new set of problems in any explanation as well 
as the fact that the continents do mach up together, one simple must ignore the 
patterns....... other such evidence such a palladium halos, the fossile record 
(size of animals and insects note there were giants in those days Genisis 
6:4...ummm ...decrease in gravity would have that affect on a normal 6-7 foot 
tall man today & dinos too, maybe even affect longevity ?) testify to the 
quickness & totality of the event as well as the narratives of the food story 
which demand a sudden catastrophic event rather then any mild gradualistic 
event which also must take into account the recessional effects of the water 
which would be quite different if the water flowed in to a basin that opened at 
a rate almost consistent with the volume of water created rather then a volume 
of water over the whole earth that recesses into a gaping basin the erosion 
factors/ effects are entirely different. That would be the effect if the size 
of the earth were the same and the water that covered the whole earth is now 
all contained in the oceans..unless of course you are to argue that some of the 
water that was then does not now exist here on earth......Quite simply there is 
no other mechanical explanation that can account for all the necessary 
variables that this model can intrinsically and with what is observed. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgidAICoQI




  Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
    The earths crust is .05% or .005% (I cant remember which) water right now. 
A realese of only 2/5ths of what is curently contained in the rocks would 
accout for all of todays oceans ......

    Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgidAICoQI

      You have to see this the more i think about it the more sense it makes 
from a biblical stand point the whole quickness of the water level rise and 
fall in the flood thing as well as gravity oxegen density dinos and ???..I dont 
belive what I see this.."yoohoo"... actualy figured it out minus a few details 
like the age of the earth.......look at the strech marks..I cant belive what 
thoughts I have had over the last several hours.....!
      http://www.nealadams.com/challenge.html



      Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


        I ran across this by accident, I have never heard of this ,  I'm 
certainly not endorsing this,  but in terms of perportions, ratios and such 
there are some interesting underlying ideas. Granted they may led nowhere but 
his basic idea bings to mind the biblical flood/water issues..I have seen 
Walter Brown's model and others which have many strengths but still problems, 
however the basic idea here as far fetched and crazy as it may seem strikes me 
very curiously....at first I thought this was a joke and did not think much 
about it.....this guy is a entertainer not a professional scientist but after 
reading much of the supporting pages and arguments and issues, it occurred to 
me that by hook or by crook these wacked out ideas/theories may be worth the 
effort & time to tear apart............ 

        http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html
        http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/newest.html
        http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/fromthedesky.html
        http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html
        http://www.nealadams.com/PhysicsOfGrow.html










------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/751 - Release Date: 7/04/2007 
10:57 PM

Other related posts: