Did Earth coalesce from 2 medium sized planets?

When Worlds Collided.

Heaven and PreEarth were planets, a binary system orbiting the Sun. This happy arrangement continued for countless years, until, some unfortunate circumstance caused Heaven to collide with PreEarth, forming the Earth.

We investigate the evidence that the Earth is the child of such a collision. We show that the planets Heaven and PreEarth were of similar size and mass. We show that many of the Earth's topographical features, such as mountain chains and ocean basins, were created during the collision. We show that certain hard to explain features of the Earth, such as its magnetic field, can now be more easily understood. And, in establishing all this, we uncover a new theory on the origin of the Moon.

Much of PreEarth's crust survived the impact and is today the continental crust of the Earth. Although broken and contorted, giant pieces of the ancient crust acted as ships floating on a newly molten interior, insulating, and protecting, life from the fires below. Heaven itself, together with its crust, if it had one, disappeared into the interior of the PreEarth, never to be seen again. If we put the broken pieces of PreEarth's crust back together, we obtain the following map.



This map is a flat representation of part of a globe. Hence, some distortion is inevitable.....

Read the rest here: http://preearth.net/

 

what?

 

I'm with the penguin on this one. WTF

 

Answer is no.

 

The whole idea of the theory is summarized by this animated GIF:



The impact area was that within the circle.

Pangea (considered as a land area on PreEarth) was outside the circle.

The collision caused PreEarth to expand in size. It was this expansion in size that caused the continents to spilt apart and break up into what we now call continents.

 

This is a perfect example of what I am talking about with so called science. Its the same science that thinks carbon dating is any where near accurate, the big bang theory, or Darwinism.

Oh yeah and global warming. :biggrin:

 

I understood the theory from reading the page my foolish friend. My WTF was angled more towards you and any friends you may have.
Will you be waiting to suicide when a comet comes by? I think there is one tonight, go for it.

:biggrin:

 

Let's take a step back here. I find global warming to be more or less a marketing strategy, but doubting carbon dating is backward. It's used in investigative forensics to help identify remains and the approximate year of murder or decease. Apparently any carbonaceous material such as bones or hair, contain a certain element know as Radioisotope Carbon-14. The C-14 dissipates exponentially over time at a regular rate, once you know the rate you can determine the age of the material by observing the quantity left over. Doubting it would be like saying that counting the rings on a tree stump to know the age of the tree is fraudulent.

 

I binged "accuracy of carbon 14 dating" and immediately found people refuting the technology. What do you know I'm not the only one.

So you take the current amount of c14 and the known half life of c14. Inject an assumed number indicating the original amount of c14 and come up with a number indicating time.

Sounds pretty shaky if you ask me.

 

Of course you will find people refuting it. People refute everything.

These people claim that the Earth is in fact flat and that we are all brainwashed. They call themselves the Flat Earth Society.

Tell me anything you want, no matter how true or socially accepted as fact, and I will find a website somewhere that refutes it.

As for carbon-dating, usually it's religious groups that refute it. The concept has been published in hundreds of peer-reviewed journals and has been widely accepted by the international scientific community.

It's a matter of religious views. There is no point in arguing about that.

 

The big bang theory is "widely accepted".

Do you also believed that there was nothing and from this matter was formed?

 

Are you seriously asking me if I know how matter came to be in the universe? What I do know is that the Big Bang theory explains the expansion of galaxies, I don't think it explains the provenance of matter. Who knows? I don't know, you don't know, and some asshole living 4000 years ago doesn't know.

 

Doesn't matter to a Canadian if its "widely accepted" fact it simply must be true. The land of the lemmings.

 

Coming from Mr. Bible-Belt.

 

I live in Texas fucktard.

 

Arkansas is Texas cousin

 

The area in red constitutes the Bible-Belt. Texas seems to be part of it.

 

Well you dumbass that is not the Bible Belt. That is just the Protestant section. The blue is the Catholics tan is the Mormons etc. The "Bible belt" is the mid South area.

Both Carolinas , Tennessee N. Alabama, N. Mississippi, N. Louisiana, Kentucky. A term from way back that is not a dynamic region that follows wherever Baptist are.

 

Google "Bible Belt" and you get the red section from the map the Wizard posted.

 

So I got a Canadian and a North Easterner pointing out a web page created by Canadians and North Easterners illustrating to all the dumb asses who want to think they know something what geographic area a philosophical slang term encompasses.

Thanks for the education dumb-asses.