Tuesday, October 14, 2008

The Mysterious Receding Seas


NEW YORK, NEW YORK, Oct. 8 -/E-Wire/-- Richard Guy in his latest book shows how all ancient civilizations worldwide evolved in high mountains. The fact that they did originate in high mountains has never been subject to historical scrutiny or research. Guy does an in-depth expose of this anomaly in his new book "The Mysterious Receding Seas." He takes his readers on an interesting journey back into ancient history to show how sea levels have influenced the development and dispersion of civilizations from pre-history up to the present.

Did you ever stop to seriously consider why the oldest civilizations known to mankind all resided at extremely high altitudes? Did you ever wonder whatever became of important port cities like Pithom and Ramses in Egypt or Ostia, the harbor city of ancient Rome? Did it ever strike you as odd that the legendary Sinbad the Sailor sailed from Baghdad harbor which was on the Persian Gulf? Today, Baghdad is some 350 miles from the sea and one hundred and twenty five feet above sea level. Author Richard Guy is a structural engineer. His work has taken him all over the world. And Richard Guy has a theory. Guy believes that the earth is constantly expanding as a result of seismic activity and volcanic eruptions. Furthermore, the consequences of our expanding earth are a slow but steady decline in sea levels worldwide.

"The Mysterious Receding Seas" presents Guy's incredible hypothesis for your consideration. As it says on the back cover of this book "This book will not only convince you but will forever change your perspective on the way our civilization developed."

As a structural engineer with forty years of experience in this field, He has built roads, harbors, docks, oil refineries and airports on lands that were once under the sea. Richard Guy developed a relationship and respect for the seas and oceans. His vast experience, direct observations, as well as acquired knowledge from a keen interest in the subject, is clear and evident throughout the book. His enthusiasm for the subject is contagious. His book is dedicated to showing how sea levels have changed over the millennia and how new land develops, that mankind is oblivious to this fact, and that the creation of new topography is a natural phenomenon.

Given that the volume of water in the oceans is relatively constant, the changes in land development are shown from ancient times into the present. It is a continuing process where estuaries and wetlands are by nature temporary. They will dry up as seas recede and new land claims their space and displaces the life forms dependent on this habitat. The author provides a fascinating look at the earth and environment, as it used to be in the past and how it is developing for the future. This book opens up new vistas of understanding nature and the vastness of earth changes. The reader comes to realizes how brief and temporary our existence is on planet earth and how large and infinite the possibilities for these change really are ... This book is about earth expansion theory and how this relates to receding sea levels. A fascinating read. "The Mysterious Receding Seas" is published by Xlibris www.widemargin2000.com


Quantum_Flux said...

intersting theory

Anaconda said...

What's also interesting is the reality that the diameter of the Earth can be measured, now. Science currently has the technology to measure and record specific observations, data points, that can either falsify or confirm Expanding Earth theory if a commitment is made to take measurements and record observations over time.

This is a common methodology in scientific investigations.

Yet, when these data points and scientific tools to measure them have been pointed out to the established scientific community, silence has been the response.


If science knows the data points can be measured and has the tools to measure those data points, and those data points can either falsify or confirm such a provocative theory, it seems strange that science would fail to take the opportunity to do so.

Then again, if "proving" the Expanding Earth theory would "upset the apple cart" in various scientific circles, it becomes clearer why said scientific circles would be reluctant to do so.

The questions becomes: Who controls the measuring tools and what motivates them to either use the tools or refrain from using them for a given scientific purpose?

Quantum_Flux said...

Take it as a given that FCC Iron Structure at one atmosphere of pressure and 1180+ kelvin will undergo a specific volume expansion by a factor of 1.09 to a BCC Iron Structer as it cools down to 1180- kelvins. I think some of the energy from that expansion might be going into Earth's diameter and other of that energy might go into compression of substances such as oil and diamond and some of that expansion energy is lost in Earthquakes, etc.

Geologists do generally claim the Earth spins slower today than it did some hundred millions of years ago with the dinosaurs, which would be consistent with the increasing inertias due to an expanding Earth.

Certainly an expansion is possible, stress can steadily build up at the tectonic plates and be released, volcanism can be fueled in such a way.

Perhaps there is expansion also due to the ending of the last ice age and the glaciers melting and receding/running off the continental crusts relieving some of the induced pressure related stresses on those plates, perhaps people migrated to higher altitudes at that point to avoid the erosive forces of the glaciers.

Anaconda said...


Science doesn't have to leave it to speculation. The Earth can be measured over time. Specific spots can be measured in various locations like the Pacific Ocean.

In the scientific method, hypothesis leads to making observations that test the hypothesis.

Are the observations consistent with the hypothsis's predictions of how the measurements will change over time?

If the measurements are inconsistent with the predictions of the hypothesis, then the hypothesis has been falsified.

If the measurements are consistent with the predictions of the hypothesis then the hypothesis has been validated and may constitute a theory as greater specificity is laid out and more observations confirm the additional specifics of the "now" theory.

With the Expanding Earth theory (I say theory because there are points of observation which are already consistent with the hypothsis), the hypothesis is simple enough: The Earth is expanding. The hypothesis can be falsified over time with exact scientific measurements.

If the Expanding Earth theory is validated by scientific measurement, the race will be on to explain the "mechanism" that causes the Earth to expand.

(And, Quantum_Flux, your hypothesis will be in the running!)

That's the great thing about Expanding Earth theory: It can be validated and possibly more important, it can be falsified.

Where's my measuring tape?

Or more important, still, where is Science's "measuring tape?"

Quantum_Flux said...

One possible competing factor in the measurement will be rising sea levels due to, well, more receding glaciers such as in the Artic and Antartic.

According to my hypothesis, if the continental land mass below Antartica suddenly rises due to relieved pressure stresses from receding glaciers, that would be something else! (wouldn't that make the levels rise quicker though...possibly why people withdrew to higher altitudes was because of changing sea levels due to "radial crustal expansion")

Anyhow, it is quite a lot of speculation at this point.

Quantum_Flux said...

Keep this speculation out of the minds of the dems, they'll turn it into gospel.

Quantum_Flux said...

If a continent were to pop up at once, it would create huge tidal waves, but if it were to slowly rise up over time, you might see slowly receding coastlines, and then also slowly encroaching coastlines as well (depending on the rate of continental rise relative to all the other continents).

Anaconda said...

Okay, I'll throw my hypothesis in the hat, too.

Assuming for the sake of discussion that the Earth is Expanding, then the next question is what mechanism causes an expanding Earth?

There are two basic ideas: Mass expands to take up more space, thus causing the Earth to expand; or matter is added to the Earth causing it to expand.

My hypothesis, and that's all it is -- a hypothesis -- is that the Electric Universe theory has validity and electromagnetism plays a much larger role in chemical and physical interactions and relationships both on Earth and in the Cosmos than is currently accepted in the general scientific community. This position would seem to have validity when one remembers that electromagnetism is the "strong" force compared to gravities being the "weak" force.

Electric Universe theory states that plasma, the ionic forms of single atoms or molecules is a dominant force in terrestrial and extraterrestrial phenomenon.

In fact, ions and electrons flow off the Sun in large amounts in what is known as the Solar Wind. This Solar Wind over time sends flowing out tremendous amounts of matter: "The total number of particles carried away from the Sun by the solar wind is about 1.3×1031 per second.[15] Thus, the total mass loss each year is about (2–3)×10-14 solar masses, or 6.7 billion tons per hour. This is equivalent to losing a mass equal to the Earth every 150 million years."

There is evidence of that the Earth receives large amounts of these ions and electrons.

As expressed by the constant striking of Earth by lightning, which is energy in the form of plasma.

And Earth's Aurora (pictures) which also is a form of plasma energy as described here.

My suggestion or hypothesis, is that these ions and electrons are caught in Earth's magnetic shield, not deflected.

Then these ions and electrons are conveyed into the Earth through the two auroras and lightning where these particles, though a process of fusion then are turned into more massive forms of matter.

The Earth is a "building machine" that puts together atoms out of atomic particles and then higher constructs larger atomic weight atoms by way of electricalmagnetic plasma forces.

This process would account for increased size and mass and also increased gravity.

Electricity, may act as a catalyst of fussion, thermo-molecular chemical bonding, and even fission.

(Radioactive elements like Uranium and plutonium may able to be "broken down" into no radioactive constituent components."

Lightning may actually be able to be "tapped" for its energy because it isn't just electrons, but also ions.

Plasma theory opens the door to unprecedented energy "tapping" by man for his uses.

The Earth and Cosmos are literally littered with energy waiting for man to figure out how to harness it for his use.

Anaconda said...

I checked out the video series at the book's website.


And it brought to mind a personal experience or I should say observation.

I travelled to Hawaii a number of years ago and was visiting one of the more remote bays on Oahu, the most populace island, where Honolulu is located.

Well, anyway, in the back of the bay, actually on dry land against the cliff walls was a coral quarry where coral was actually mined for commercial use.

This old coral stretched up the side of the cliff at least a 100 feet.

At the time, I assumed that the extended coral was from some sort of warming period in ages past when seas where higher. But after watching the Mysterious Receding Seas video, I'm left wondering if that was an example of the receding seas?

And evidence of an expanding Earth?

Anaconda said...


One of the ideas regarding expanding Earth theory is that ocean basins or oceanic crust is made-up of basalt which is denser than continental crust which is made of granite. But also, basalt has a higher iron content than granite.

What does that matter?

Iron is a key catalyst in the serpentization process that scientifically documented theory contends forms abiotic hydrocarbons.

Many oil deposits have magnetite trace elements of iron. Also, iron and iron ions are very good electrical conductors.

Could electromagnetic currents present in the Earth act a facilitating force in the thermo-molecular bonding of hydrocarbons in the serpentization process where iron is a catalyst?

Does Expanding Earth theory suggest that hydrocarbons can be formed by three forces, rather than the traditional two forces of ultra high pressure and temperature?

And that the third force is electromagnetism?

Which also could be the moving "mechanism" behind Expanding Earth theory.

Also, remember physical forces, time and time again, are found to be scale independent.

If a physical or chemical process or reaction is noted on a large scale or a small scale, that process or reaction should be able to be replicated at the opposite end of the scale because the chemical or physical laws constraining the process or reaction remain the same.

This also should mean that man can duplicate and control processes and reactions man observes in nature.

Naked theory is not good enough, replication in the laboratory or detailed observation in the field is necessary.

Man can control energy processes if he truly understands the underlying "mechanism."

Quantum_Flux said...

Photons, particularly the ones that resonate at the wavelength of molecules, are a major source of ionizing radiation in the Universe too. UV light tends to ionize the hydrogen and helium atoms (and other prominate molecules) in the Earth's upper atmosphere as well, which is another cause of voltage potential difference between the ground and the atmosphere, and hence lightning occurs. Although, I think the ground state is usually more positive than the ionosphere. Of course, the processes that occur below your feet are somewhat a mystery.

Anaconda said...


The best way to envision or picture how Earth collects ions and electrons from the Solar Wind, is to think of two funnels on each end of a balloon each having an access point into the balloon.

As the liquid swirls down each funnel at both the North Pole and South Pole, the balloon expands. The aurora has been described as made up of Birkeland currents, as described in this linked photo of Jupiters aurora.

These parabolic funnels don't catch all the electrons and ions that are trapped by the Earth's magnetic field, which interacts with the Sun's Solar Winds as pictured here. and in the theoretical sense here.

Those electrons and ions not caught and conveyed at the poles do eventually find a conduit into the Earth though lightning bolts, which result from the excess electrons and ions getting stirred up in the turbulance of hot and and cold air colliding.

Anaconda said...

The aurora has been described as made up of Birkeland currents, as described in this linked photo of Jupiter's aurora.

Anaconda said...


It's good to get perspectives from other people. In that vein these links are provided. Reflections on the 33rd International Geological Congress, by Karsten Storetvedt. The reflection is on the state of scientific creativity. You think that is an oxymoron? You could be right.

Here is a link to Louis Hissink's Crazy World where he gives his take on biomarkers and the lack of scientific evidence for subduction.

Anaconda said...


Was Einstein right?

Is Einstein the new Aristole that is so worshipped that his ideas stultify our minds.

Watch the video, it just might blow your mind.

Asking questions isn't an embarrasment, it's a necessity.

When we stop asking questions, we doom ourselves to be dominated by the past and not guided by it.

To reach the future, Aristotle must be put to bed.

Be greatful, but not slavish.

Can we think anew and for ourselves? That is the true freedom.

The second part of Gravity Behaving Badly, if you dare.

Quantum_Flux said...

For 3 body interactions, there happens to be chaotic orbits that can only be computed using Euler or Runge Kutta Method, typically done by computers. In Einstien's day, it was women that did all the computations instead of computers, at least up until around the time of the Atomic Bomb Research in the Manhattan Project when (I think) IBM computers were used.

However, for many body systems, it is more instructive to compute based on energy conservation than by forces. That is true for all interactions, even on the quantum realm, it is because many body systems obey probabilistic and thermodynamic laws.

The electromagnetic force is photonic in nature over longer distances, and hence relativity has shown doppler effects of photons within different velocity reference frames.

In particle physics, high speed time dialation has been confirmed by the rates of decay of smashed particles. This fits into quantum mechanical model of the wave-particles quite nicely. I'm reading on Penrose's Twister Theory in between doing my schooling, and I like how much more concise Penrose's theoretical mathematics is than Feynman's experimental mathematics.

However, I've recently came upon something neat....Beautiful New Theory of Everything

.... of course, experimentation with the LHC should clear up many of the competing theories in particle physics. That's when I'll learn which one works and which one doesn't (I'm not even going to mess with String Theory).

Most importantly, I hope to see some practical applications to all this in terms of quantum computing, nanotech eventually, space travel, and whatever else.

Quantum_Flux said...

Flyby Anomalies Explained?

Quantum_Flux said...

This latest article I wrote is good enough to piss everybody off:

Group Think

Anaconda said...


Whether Albert Einstein is right or was wrong is not my baliwick.

There are others who spend much more time with these issues and have the best knowledge and insights.

(The tenses of my lead sentence are intentional, if Einstein is right his theories still describe the forces in the Universe; if Einstein was wrong, then his ideas are simply statements from the past that have no relation to the present or the future.)

But I will give my opinion, for what it's worth:

The idea that time is a varible is dubious in my opinion. This is not a new opinion, I've had quetions about this idea for a long time.

I've also had questions about light speed being the terminal velocity for a long time.

But I didn't have much to base it on. Just call it lingering doubts.

My opinion was based on the idea that time is not a continuum, but a constant.

It's not a force that can be warped or distorted.

Besides, elementary 'forces' are constant: They can't be "waived" or distorted.

One observation latched on to by Einstein's supporters was the observation that light from a distatant star was "bent" as it went past the Sun, leading to the conclusion by Einstein's supporters that the light was "bent" towards the Sun by the warping of the space-time continuum or the curvature of space.

But there is a much easier explanation that doesn't require any time warp at all: The gravitational pull of the Sun "bent" the light (photons) towards it and you don't need "the curvature of space" for that explanation.

In the Plasma concept, I suppose it would be said that the electromagnetic field of the Sun bent the light (photons), but again, no resort to time warping is needed for that explanation.

As far the idea that the speed of light is the terminal velocity of the Universe is concerned, my thoughts turned to the law of physics where constant force equals acceleration.

Einstein's explanation that a body would convert to energy as it approached the speed of light wasn't convincing.

But again, the basis for my doubts were admittedly slim.

So, I'm not the one to "make a stand" on those issues, others can do that, but I will point out one thing: Many more technological inventions based on discoveries of electromagnetic principles have been made as opposed to technological inventions based on Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

With the notable and substantial exception of the atomic bomb.

Perhaps the great equalizer on that score.

Although, it can be argued that the concepts underlying the atomic bomb do not rely on the Theory of Relativity.

It's important to remember that Einstein eschewed laboratory experiments -- his were "thought" experiments alone. It's not even clear how much Einstein relied on field observations.

Electromagnetic principles were confirmed by discoveries in the laboratory and close observations in the field, which others could replicate and make similar observations.

Mathamatics must be the servant of science, not the master.

Mathamatics divorced from physical observations in the lab or the field can conjure up any possibiltiy man can think of. In that sense, mathamatics can be the greatest science fiction story ever told.


Because mathamatics always starts from the assumptions of the mathamatician.

One test of whether man understands a natural process or mechanism is man's ability to harness that process or mechanism for man's use.

Nikola Tesla's work is a great example of the above principle.

There are many others who explored electromagnetic principles -- they always confirmed their work in the laboratory and the field.

In that sense, electromagnetism wins hands down.

Observation in the field also suggests electromagnetism is not only the "strong" force in the Universe, but also the most "active" force.

These points should be pondered before a blind acceptance of "thought" experiments that so far have had limited application in the 'real' world.

Quantum_Flux said...

(1) Maxwell derived the speed of light in a vacuum using his equations of electromagnetism, and those are based on experimental evidence in the lab.

(2) The doppler shift of light at various velocity reference frames also fits with experimental evidence as obtained from the telemetry by NASA's many space missions.

(3) In particle physics, time dialation has been confirmed by the observation of the decay rates of speeding particles. It is a fact that equal particles in equal velocity reference frames decay at equal rates.

(4) Similarly, as the momentum of the particle increases, the particle's masses increase instead of velocity when nearing light speeds, hence momentum and energy are conserved.

(5) Then, general relativity, when gravitation is incorporated is where the unification of quantum mechanics and gravitation falls short. For all intents and purposes, astrophysics hasn't really been confirmed with reality yet, perhaps EM physics really does play a larger role in galaxy formation than is commonly believed.

Anaconda said...


I see a responsive chord has been struck.

1) I don't dispute the speed of light, rather, I have doubts about it being the terminal velocity of the Universe.

2) Be careful that assumptions don't color the observations and the conclusions drawn from those observations.

3) "Time dialation" is an idea. The plasma hypothesis has an competing idea. Electromagnetic forces impact the rate of radioactive decay. The faster an object is going, the more electromagnetic force is being applied to the object. Thus, rates of decay are not reliable scientific evidence of varible time. There is some scientific observation to support the plasma concept of varible decay dependent on strength of electromagnetic field.

4) QF states: "Similarly, as the momentum of the particle increases, the particle's masses increase instead of velocity when nearing light speeds, hence momentum and energy are conserved."

You are simply parroting the theory in this instance, there has been no observations to validate your statement that I'm aware of.

5) QF states: "...perhaps EM physics really does play a larger role in galaxy formation than is commonly believed."

It doesn't hurt to try and find out.

Also, should the researcher discover a new principle or devise a new way to harness electromagnetism, there are technical applications that can advance mankind.

Practical results are the best persuasive tool man has at his disposal.

Quantum_Flux said...

4) QF states: "Similarly, as the momentum of the particle increases, the particle's masses increase instead of velocity when nearing light speeds, hence momentum and energy are conserved."

Anaconda responds: You are simply parroting the theory in this instance, there has been no observations to validate your statement that I'm aware of.

QF states: The way that mass is measured is based on sound principles. The very same technology that is used to separate out ionized nuclear isotopes by mass is also used to measure the mass of the subatomic particles. They use a standardized magnetic field centrifuge and observe the radius of curvature, they derive the velocity indirectly from the theoretical amount of kinetic energy gained from the voltage potential. Since the relativity equations for conservation of momentum consistantly predict the radius, then it is assumed true (I assume there is integrity in particle physics using particle accelerators and that experimental physicists such as Richard Feynman aren't just making the math up).

Quantum_Flux said...

Regarding #1: In Big Bang cosmology, physicists claim that the expansion of space time allows for the exceeding of the speed of light much in the same way that a rock thrown into supercritical water flow will create a wave pattern that exceeds the speed of the surface wave velocity of the water.

Anaconda said...

In the previous comments I offered a hypothesis of how Plasma Universe theory could account for added matter to the Earth as a mechanism for Expanding Earth theory.

Subsequently, in a another comment thread, BF provided a report from NASA that gives added weight to my hypothesis. Not final proof, but at least added weight.

Here is the link to that report: Science@NASA Magnetic Portals Connect Sun and Earth, October 30, 2008. "During the time it takes you to read this article, something will happen high overhead that until recently many scientists didn't believe in. A magnetic portal will open, linking Earth to the sun 93 million miles away. Tons of high-energy particles may flow through the opening before it closes again, around the time you reach the end of the page.

"It's called a flux transfer event or 'FTE,'" says space physicist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible."

Also, there is another report, not cutting edge, yet demonstative of the power plasma has upon reaching the Earth from the Sun, which is linked: Science@NASA Solar Superstorm, October 23, 2003. "Newly uncovered scientific data of recorded history's most massive space storm is helping a NASA scientist investigate its intensity and the probability that what occurred on Earth and in the heavens almost a century-and-a-half ago could happen again."

Plasma Universe theory is demonstrated to have an impact, here, on Earth.

"Big bang" theory, not so much.

Richard Guy said...

I certainly appreciate the review of my book on "Oil is Mastery" the author did justice to the concept.
All I am saying is that the earth is expanding and as it does the seas recede. If the seas are receding the earth is expanding. If the seas are not receding the earth is not expanding. My book shows without a doubt that seas are receding so the earth must be expanding. If we ignore the facts many more bridges will fail because the anomaly affects engineering and engineering structures specifically bridges and dams. Have you ever pondered why several bridges spanning the Mississippi have failed mysteriously. We all know that the Mississippi is a major earthquake fault but engineers do not know that it is expanding enough to topple a bridge. In the last bridge failure on the Mississippi did you notice that all the approach spans on the bridge remained intact: the only span that failed was the actual span across the Mississippi. That should tell us something. The proof is overwhelming and yet it is ignored. We should not ask if Einstein was wrong we should be taking issue with Darwins theory.
Darwin observed raised beaches in South America and the Islands of the Pacific. He deduced that the land rose from the sea. Other after him picked up on this erroneous deduction and built the theory of Isostatic rebound or Post Glacial Rebound. That has become the bedrock of Geology and it is totally wrong because the original premise on which it was based is wrong. So let us get rid of these outdated theories and come up to speed. The seas are not rising they are receding and will continue to do so. The melting icecaps dont figure in this equation. They will not melt totally and sea level rise is negligable in comparison to sea level recession. See "The Mysterious Receding Seas" on youtube. By Richard Guy Thanks again Oil is Mastery.

Richard Guy said...

On another issue of earth measurement. It is quite impossible to measure the earths expansion with the methods in use today. The expansion of our planet will only be possible with methods not yet developed. The earths expansion is difficult to detect. When we have an earthquake that is an indication that expansion is taking place in that location. There are more than 10000 earthquakes every day around the circumference of the earth. Each one is telling us that expansion is taking place in their respective locations. So if you read up on the method of current earth measurement with GPS you will soon learn that accuracy of measurement, to the degree necessary, evades GPS. We will someday arrive at a method of measurement that will be accurate enough to measure th earths exoansion rate but not yet. All we have to go by at the present time is that the seas are receding and that is an indication that expansion is taking place. See the video series 'The Mysterious Receding Seas" by Richard Guy on youtube. Or listen to Richard Guy Lecture at richard_guy72@yahoo.com
tel: 347-290-5300. New York

Richard Guy said...

The diameter of the earth cannot be measures with the present technology GPS fails to deliver the degree of accuracy necessary.
The expansion of the earth is enigmatic and linked to earthquake action. Earthquakes are a manifestation of expansion. See the Video Series "The Mysterious Receding Seas" by Richard Guy on youtube. or hear Richard Guy lectures. richard_guy72@yahoo.com
Tel: 347-290-5300

Richard Guy said...

Read the New York Times article
Published June 5 1981.
"Jersey Rights to shore prove costly to Casinos." That will enlighten you on the anomaly of receding seas.Richard Guy

Richard Guy said...

It is all well and good to hypothesize and speculate on the universe the cosmos and landings on Mars but in the meantime bridges are failing here on earth because and lives are being lost in the process. We engineers have to start paying attantion to earth expansion and seismic creep and the part these factors play in bridge design. At the present time engineers are still designing bridges for finite spans. Special attention has got to be paid to bridge design over rivers because all rivers are earth expansion joints. The Mississippi River has been the scene of many bridge failures and we still dont know why. The last great failure on the Mississippi claimed 14 lives. We have to pay attention to what I am saying. We cannot keep designing bridges across rivers without factoring an equasion for expansion. All the major existing bridges are being retrofitted for earthquake resistance. This is an admission that earthquakes were never factored into the original design. Now we have to go further and factor expansion of river valleys into bridge design. Years ago an old engineer in London made this statement. " You dont learn engineering in university you learn it in the field" I have worked all over the world as a structural engineer and seen the anomaly of earth expansion in reality. I have built Highways, Airports Docks and Oil Refineries on lands that were once under the sea. This is the indication that all continents are expanding and the expansion points are river valleys and we engineers builod dams and bridges across them. It is time engineers know that our bridges are not safe.

Richard Guy said...

Engineers will have to be taught that river valleys are expanding. We engineers build bridges across Rivers without knowing about seismic creep. It must stop because lives are at stake,
Richard Guy: Structural Engineer

Richard Guy said...

Isostatic Rebound is a mistaken anomaly. What is really happening is that the Earth is growing and as it increases in size the sea levels fall worldwide. We have been hampered in this discovery because the reality is clouded with the Post Glacial Rebound concept which is a fallacy. We will sooner or later have to relinquish all these outdated concepts and com into the light of reality. We cannot keep blindingly adopting Agazzis and Darwins mistakes from two hundred years ago as being relevant in todays context. We have to open our eyes. Patagonia is in South america and entirely remote to the North where Agazzis said was prone to Isostacy. The fact is that the apparition occurs worldwide as land appears to rise and sea levels ebb lower. This is what we call Isostacy but in reality is earth growth and the resultant sea level recession. Isostacy does not exist it is a mistaken concept. Richard Guy