Why would you let UN bureaucrats filter your science?
sciencedirect.com:Toward a myth-free geodynamic history of Earth and its neighbors
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...12825219302636
Disclaimer: I've only read the abstract and introduction. Wherein they weave a tale about science being rejected by major journals.
Quote:
My title is adapted from “The persistent myth of crustal growth” by Richard L. Armstrong (1991, published posthumously2). Armstrong recognized that the then (and now) dominant view of Earth as having a mostly unfractionated mantle “is a myth dating from the 19th century and was established as geochemical dogma in the 1950s and 1960s.” He provides a detailed account of the history of the concept and recognized as spurious the geochemical assumptions cited in its support.
.... The popular view in North America and many other places, then and for almost 20 years more, was that such motion was impossible and the evidence was false. A 1962 manuscript by Canadian geophysicist L.W. Morley, the first to correctly interpret the magnetic lineations of oceanic crust as resulting from sea-floor spreading during alternating periods of normal and reversed geomagnetic polarity, was rejected by both Journal of Geophysical Research and Nature. Morley's insight was the key to plate tectonics, but others were credited with its discovery. In the same era G.J.F. MacDonald received major awards for his mathematical proof, based on wrong assumptions of mechanism and Earth's physical properties, that motion of the continents was impossible. Plate tectonics has now been accepted across the board.
|
I do recommend scanning the Abstract. It starts out
Quote:
|
Several defective assumptions have hindered understanding the evolution of Earth and its nearest neighbors. These include the claim that the Lu-Hf and Sm-Nd isotope systems can uniquely define oceanic rocks, acceptance of the “CHondritic Uniform Reservoir” (CHUR) model and a steadily depleting but fertile mantle, and belief that Proterozoic rocks exhibit features resembling those of Phanerozoic plate tectonics. Earth's Archean was the era of internally mobile crust. In the period ~4.0–2.5 b.y. tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) crust formed by hydrous partial melting of a mafic protocrust leaving dense, depleted, garnet-rich residue. This delaminated and sank to at least 200 km beginning top-down re-enrichment of the mantle. The remaining stabilized TTG crust was then directly underlain by primordial low-density dunitic shallow mantle. Archean crust is granite and greenstone with no modern analogue. During the Proterozoic basins of volcanic and terrigenous sedimentary rocks formed on and between Archean shields. Where these basins thickened to ~40 km their deep regions partly melted by their own radioactivity and they were “inverted” by materials rich in highly evolved hydrous granites rising to mid-crustal level. This hydrous melting was enabled by a bombardment of icy bolides. Proterozoic dynamics were driven by vertical variations in density, reflect primarily the deposition and collapse of basins, and involved small horizontal motions only. Proterozoic paleomagnetic data cast doubt on the existence of a strong dipolar magnetic field at that time and there is no compelling evidence for Phanerozoic-like plate tectonics. Only near the end of the Proterozoic did downward recycling of fusible components enable a weak asthenosphere to develop over which lithospheric plates could slide. The Phanerozoic is the era of plate tectonics....
|
That's half of a paragraph!