Origin stuff from 50 million years after the solar system formation 4.5 billion years ago, is still being extruded, exploded (or created, transformed) on our planets surface.
Earth's mantle is made of solid rock that nonetheless circulates slowly over millions of years. Some geologists assume that this slow circulation would have wiped away any geochemical traces of Earth's early history long ago. But a new study of volcanic rocks that recently erupted from volcanoes in Hawaii and Samoa reveals surprising geochemical anomalies - the 'fingerprints' of conditions that existed shortly after the planet formed. Ancient Earth's fingerprints in young volcanic rocks | Science Daily
With relatively near genesis material still found to be coming out from the surface is less and less of the planets inner material recycled and regurgitated?
"Nearly all of these anomalies formed within the first 50 million years after the solar system formed," Mundl said. "Higher than normal levels of tungsten-182 are seen in very old rocks that most likely contained a lot of hafnium long ago. But lower levels of tungsten-182 are rare, and resemble what we might expect to see deep beneath the surface, in or near the planet's metallic core." Ancient Earth's fingerprints in young volcanic rocks | Science Daily
Who left their fingerprints at the crime scene?
Could peer reviewed science be right? Could these original element compounds have been unchanged for 4.5 billion years?
If the material was much younger than geology theory suggests could it have survived a shorter period of time?
If there was 'simple' globe expansion outwards and not classical plate tectonics with its at least seven supercontinents formations and breakups, could unchanged planet formation material still be beneath us?
Ptolemy and Johannes Kepler appeared to have recorded the wrong latitude and longitude for various ancient cities. Or did they?
Edmund Halley, he of the comet fame, suggested this was due to changes in the Earths/Moons rotation properties. Has relatively recent movement of the Earth's continents moved the locations of ancient cities?
Edmund Halley (1695, p. 174), as part of a discussion of the identity and location of ancient cities relative to the geography of his time, explained discrepancies in recorded latitudes as a "change in the axis of the Earth" and longitudes (based on lunar positions) as evidence that "the Moon's motion does accelerate".
Ptolemy and Keplar did not record the wrong data for where these cities were located, the longitudes and latitudes were correct for their time?
The physical co-ordinates have actually moved as the planets crust and continents have grown or expanded?
An Expanding Earth or Growing Earth in theory changing the positions of ancient cities?
[Edmund Halley] then turned to the geography of the region identifying Aleppo, Andrene and Efree with the ancient cities of Berrhaea, Androna and Seriane respectively and stating that Ptolemy and more recently Kepler in the Rudolphine Tables (followed by Bullialdus and others) gave incorrect latitudes and longitudes for these cities. Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Study of the Moon’s Motion (1691-1757)
Another painful blow and bite for plate tectonics theory and especially the very visually bizarre and seemingly impossible ultra rapid movement of the Indian Plate? Also for the idea of the supercontinent Gondwana and its breakup?
And all this trouble for and evidence against plate tectonics from one of the smallest and most annoying insects on the planet, the dreaded swarming biting midge?
India gradually drifted away from Africa and Madagascar towards the north and collided with the Eurasian plate. Scientists assumed for a long time that the subcontinent was largely isolated during its long journey through the ocean and unique species of plants and animals were therefore able to develop on it. However, paleontologists at the University of Bonn are now showing using tiny midges encased in amber that there must have been a connection between the apparently cut off India and Europe and Asia around 54 million years ago that enabled the creatures to move around. India was by no means as isolated as we thought | The Archaeology News Network
Our planets environmental conditions seem to have changed rapidly and from one extreme to another in the same area. Fossils of creatures, plants and life show very varied habitats in the same physical locations. Geology also seems to back this evidence up.
What would be the physical and environmental changes to our globe if it did increase in size or mass/weight?
But could the data be used as evidence to prove or deny the Growing Earth and Expanding Earth theories? Or will it always depend on your interpretation of the data?
To be really effective, the team's maps need to be sensitive to movements of about 1mm per year over 100km ... As a proof of principle - and to give an example of what the new system can do - the COMET group showed off its maps of Turkey at AGU.
This also suggests that life forms were already thriving only 500 million years after the planet was formed.
Don't eat the stromatolites!
The date of the stromatolites is derived from volcanic ash and tiny crystals of zircon with uranium and lead particles which are of course used in dating methodologies. The piece of rock itself is described as ancient sea floor and here is a mystery.
In Plate Tectonics theory ancient sea floor is regularly subducted down into the Mantle - so why is a bit of sea floor dating back almost to the birth of the planet still existing on the surface of Greenland? Was it subducted and then brought back up again - and if so why did it not erase evidence of the stromatolites? If sea floor can survive for 3700 million years on Greenland where does this leave Plate Tectonics?
In the scientific community, studies are still being conducted that hope to solve the big question of the Isua Greenstone Belt: What processes caused its formation?
This area remains under controversy in the scientific community because it is arguable that there were different tectonic processes, or styles, occurring in Archean times that would have affected the outcome of what we see today: a mass of very old rocks surrounded by younger rocks that have been heavily altered in some areas and are separated by tectonic and depositional contacts.
Are the North American mountain building periods (orogeny) evidence that sections of the planets surface can grow upwards?
The Laramide orogeny, a mountain building period mainly in the North America continent, has puzzling geological features including upward thrusts, wedges and intrusions. The Nevadan orogeny was an even bigger event.
It is now suggested that these events of parts of the Earth growing upwards were actually multiple events and not just a one of period.
Why do you seem to get hill and mountain ranges that abruptly rise out of the ground, yet do not seem to effect the level ground close to them?
Laramide orogeny, a series of mountain-building events that affected much of western North America in Late Cretaceous and Paleogene time. (The Cretaceous Period ended 65.5 million years ago and was followed by the Paleogene Period.) Laramide orogeny | Encyclopædia Britannica
The Laramide orogeny was a compressional event that took place from approximately 80-40Ma and coincided with rapid convergence of the North American and Farallon plates. Basement-cored uplifts dominate the structures that define the Laramide orogen throughout western North America.
Elevation differences between the uplifts and basins can be 10,000 ft plus and landscape can change between steep rugged mountains and rolling prairies within only hundreds of miles. The Laramide Orogeny | Dakota Matrix Minerals
Mountain and land growing upwards
Could uplifts be evidence that selected parts of our landscape have grown upwards?
The Laramide uplifts are characterized by basement involved low angle thrust faults that overlapped sections of crust.
Some scientists have suggested, due to the totally geology theory surprising visual evidence that was not predicted, that Pluto may be expanding.
Similar cracks, fissures, rifts, cliffs, escarpments, geological features on Mercury, due to pre existing theories, have scientists suggesting that planet Mercury is shrinking. Mercury is a tiny planet and was considered geological dead before recent findings.
If planet Earth (and others) have expanded could they have periods of expansion spurts with reduced or non growth episodes between?
Planets do not have to grow continuously. If there is such a thing as an expanding Earth and expanding planets this goes against standard science.
A start/stop expansion cycle is an acceptable proposal for those interested in exploring all the possibilities of why the continental plates appear to fit together on a smaller globe.
A recent proposal by a planetary scientist after a new plate tectonics simulation suggests that in their model the movement of the plates can suddenly start and stop depending on how internally hot a planet is.
Estimates of the early Earth’s temperatures suggest Earth may have begun in a hot stagnant lid mode, evolving into an episodic regime throughout most of the Archaean, before finally passing into a plate tectonic regime. The implication of these results is that, for many cases, plate tectonics may be a phase in planetary evolution between hot and cold stagnant states, rather than an end-member.
... The new timeline suggests that Earth’s plate tectonics is just a midpoint in the planet’s evolution between two stagnant states. Planets with different starting temperatures than Earth’s follow different trajectories, the team found. Colder planets may exhibit plate tectonics throughout their history while hotter planets could go for billions of years without plate tectonics. A window for plate tectonics in terrestrial planet evolution?
Expansion of planets and moons?
A geodynamicist commenting on the paper proposes this could mean planet Venus (other planets and moons?) might trigger plate tectonics again in their future.
The long delay before full-blown plate tectonics hints that the process could one day begin on currently stagnant planets, says Julian Lowman, a geodynamicist at the University of Toronto who was not involved in the research. “There is a possibility that plate tectonics could start up on Venus if conditions were right,” he says. Plate tectonics just a stage in Earth’s life cycle
Earth expansion episodes
Hugh Owen through his slow expansion hypothesis and book Atlas of Continental Displacement suggests that our globe suddenly started expanding and triggered the recent plate tectonic break up of Pangea, the last super continent, from around 200 million years ago.
Grace Shephard and colleagues have also studied if there are more agreement between the various tomography models at certain depths of the mantle. They have made discoveries that suggest more paleoseafloor can be found at around 1,000 – 1,400 km beneath the surface than at other depths.
"If these depths are translated to time – and we presuppose that the seafloor sinks into the mantle at a rate of 1 centimeter per year – it could mean that there was a period around 100–140 million years ago that experienced more ocean destruction. However, it could also identify a controversial region in the Earth that is more viscous, or 'sticky,' and causes sinking features to pile up, a bit like a traffic jam. These findings, and the reasons behind, bear critical information about the surface and interior evolution of our planet," explains Shephard.
The theory of the Cambrian Explosion holds that, beginning some 545 million years ago, an explosion of diversity led to the appearance over a relatively short period of 5 million to 10 million years of a huge number of complex, multi-celled organisms.
Moreover, this burst of animal forms led to most of the major animal groups we know today, that is, every extant Phylum.