Where Did The Minerals Come From? This Question Leads To A Heart Attack Of Geologists - Alternative View

Where Did The Minerals Come From? This Question Leads To A Heart Attack Of Geologists - Alternative View
Where Did The Minerals Come From? This Question Leads To A Heart Attack Of Geologists - Alternative View

Video: Where Did The Minerals Come From? This Question Leads To A Heart Attack Of Geologists - Alternative View

Video: Where Did The Minerals Come From? This Question Leads To A Heart Attack Of Geologists - Alternative View
Video: Geologic and human time scales How can we salvage our global civilization 2024, March
Anonim

Authors and followers of all sorts of new and radical theories, for example - the theory of the Flat Earth, the theory of the Earth-farm, the theory of a living and intelligent planet always and as a rule face fierce criticism of adherents of "scientific dogmas" about that the Earth is round, that nuclear fusion in the core is impossible that geology and astronomy are science, and everything else is heresy.

We will not argue with these adepts, since the program code circulating in their heads and setting the keyboard / language in motion is of little interest to us. However, heretics of all scientific and religious confessions, we want to please a little, to offer them for discussion a fundamental question of geology, which for some reason no one raises. And the question is actually very simple: where did the rocks come from on Earth?

We understand that adherents of the scientific faith will now start screaming hysterically that all rocks are taken from magma, so the question will have to be clarified with the following figures.

Figure one - a quarry for the extraction of granite:

Image
Image

Figure two - iron ore quarry:

Image
Image

We will not give a lot of drawings, since they reflect everything in the same way - that is, the fact that all deposits, all rocks and all minerals in the world lie COMPACT. Sometimes it is even possible to draw a demarcation line that is clear as a mathematical surface, to the left of which there is a breed, but not to the right. How can this be explained?

Promotional video:

Let's turn for explanations to the beacons of modern scientific thought from the program “Visiting a Fairy Tale”:

Thus, according to the light adepts, the Earth was formed from a conglomerate of some protoplanetary matter, consisting of cosmic dust and gas. That is, atoms of aluminum, atoms of iron, uranium, strontium and everything else from the Mendelev's table were flying, and even, most likely, more than that. Then, under the influence of microgravity, electrical and some other magical forces, all this good began to form conglomerates. Then, when these chunks of space rock interspersed with gases gathered into very large lumps-protoplanets, these lumps began to heat up and formed “rock layers”.

One could, of course, offer adherents of the scientific faith to make a mental or some other experiment by throwing sugar, salt, washing powder, sand and flour into a large saucepan, and then suggest to mix everything, boil and taste the dish, but we are engaged in inhuman experiments we will not. Such experiments and without us are carried out every day around the world and they are called by the term steel-making furnace:

Image
Image

This piece is loaded with pre-processed iron, to which chromium, nickel, copper, titanium or whatever else is added as desired. The output is something like this:

Image
Image

Thus, the steel-making furnace is a real miracle: they loaded black rusty rails into it - and we got such shiny metal bars. So where are nickel, chrome and titanium? Where is the BED? !

The mantle and, moreover, the earth's core is exactly the same furnace, only the temperature there is much higher. And cooking does not take two shifts, but four, as they say, billion years.

If you repeat this process in the laboratory, then the initial elements will be mixed not only to nanometers, but to atoms. There will be a uniform substance, where in any square centimeter all atoms will be in equal proportion. Well, how, one wonders, did the rocks and minerals turn out? Where did the so-called "deposits" come from?

Some minerals can be easily explained, for example - the so-called sedimentary rocks. That is, in some prehistoric primary sea, some mollusks swam, then they died, covering the bottom with shells, after which limestone formed.

Gold deposits can also be explained by assuming the fall of a huge golden meteorite (there are even such in the asteroid belt). But how to explain the iron ore deposits?

With iron ore, “academicians” begin to play and twist, talking about magmatogenic, exogenous and metamorphogenic species. That is, exogenous deposits are, as it were, the same sedimentary rocks, obtained from dust that has been torn off the rocks as a result of weathering. Then some of the layers of dust that fell to the bottom of the lakes were exposed to high temperatures and became metamorphogenic deposits, while magmatogenic deposits were obtained as a result of volcanic eruptions.

99.99% of students absorb all this heresy, stupidly memorizing and not pondering the meaning, then become "academicians" and teach the next generation of the same certified morons. But why no one asks a simple question: how did it happen that an “iron rock” appeared in the mountains, from which the future iron ore was obtained by “weathering”? It's a vicious circle!

How is it possible that molten iron poured out of a volcano or tectonic fault? Why not uranium? Or not weapons grade plutonium? And that, since iron floats in lumps in the mantle, then there must be lumps of gold and lumps of plutonium. Furthermore.

There is an example from the theory of probability, which clearly illustrates a possible, but extremely unlikely event. The example describes a jet airliner flying over a landfill. If this liner makes circles over it for millions, billions and trillions of years, then on the next circle, the garbage raised by turbulence will fold into a color TV. And if you still drive the plane along a miraculous route, then you can even order a brand of TV.

With the formation of conglomerates of chemical compounds and elements inside the mantle, the probability, of course, is a little higher, but still it is ridiculously small.

The only way to explain the appearance of local accumulations of chemical elements is to use the theory of meteorites and the formation of the planet not from some kind of "gas disk", but from a belt of ready-made space stones.

A protoplanetary stone disk would be a wonderful, ideal and purely “academic” solution to a fundamental geological problem, without which all geology turns into a circus. And this decision would be “academic” not because it is somehow very clever, but because “academicians” are nothing more than officials from science. And how do officials deal with the problem? That's right - they are playing the problem on the head of colleagues from the neighboring ministry.

The neighboring ministry of “academicians” from geology is headed by “academicians” from astronomy and cosmology. Therefore, if they push the theory about the emergence of the Earth from the asteroid belt, where the minerals were already distributed among individual blocks, another question arises: how did these blocks appear? Why is one asteroid made of basalt and the other of pure iron?

A paradox will arise that will pour all this cosmology down the toilet, so the problem must be solved. And there are only two solutions here: either to kick the problem back to geologists and say that protoplanetary clouds of stones appeared as a result of defragmentation of planets in which minerals were already compactly dispersed, or to merge everything into the ministry of theoretical physicists so that they would revise their theory of the so-called “big bang””.

According to this theory, at first there was “nothing”, from which later, as a result of the explosion, “everything was formed”. Not immediately, of course, but gradually: helium and hydrogen atoms, heavier atoms, and so on. Why atoms? Why not just one hundred-kilometer blocks of basalt and asteroids of iron ore? And at the same time - people, birds, jet planes and weed in pots.

In general, as we have clearly shown, modern geology is based on very shaky dogmas: geology studies minerals, but it cannot substantiate the formation of accumulations of minerals, which geology cannot study. But all science is based on minerals, absolutely everything. Take the pebbles from the geologists and they will have nothing left.

But if you continue to believe the stories of uchOny adherents about deposits of various rocks floating under the continents, then you need to believe in a color TV floating in magma - for what will not happen to atoms if you give them freedom for four billion years. But if someone believes that a color television is floating in magma, then why doesn't he believe in Flat Earth? Everything is possible in the fairy tale generated for the farm by the Matrix.