Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

New article in the latest ish of Scientific American on the effects of crustal heat fluxes on topography contains this gem:

 

"Were it not for the effects of a cold slab of subducting oceanic plate that insulates it from the hotter mantle underneath, the average elevation of Seattle would be 1,813 meters (5,949 feet) above sea level."

  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
New article in the latest ish of Scientific American on the effects of crustal heat fluxes on topography contains this gem:

 

"Were it not for the effects of a cold slab of subducting oceanic plate that insulates it from the hotter mantle underneath, the average elevation of Seattle would be 1,813 meters (5,949 feet) above sea level."

 

We were robbed! We could be living in alpine meadows. :mad:

Posted

Imagine the size of the container cranes down at the port. It would take weeks to unload a ship if you had to lift each container a mile. And how would Todd Shipyards launch a new hull, send it over a waterfall?

Posted
Imagine the size of the container cranes down at the port. It would take weeks to unload a ship if you had to lift each container a mile. And how would Todd Shipyards launch a new hull, send it over a waterfall?

 

ooh, a 5000+ foot waterfall. Excellent kayaking run... and maybe we'd get some frozen WI in the winter right in our back yards...

Posted
All you spell check fuckers ought to just have your own running thread where you can correct others' spelling to your hearts' content.

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the correct grammer should be "All of you spell check fuckers..."

 

But what do I know? I'm just a chicken.

 

COCK A DOODLE DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted
New article in the latest ish of Scientific American on the effects of crustal heat fluxes on topography contains this gem:

 

"Were it not for the effects of a cold slab of subducting oceanic plate that insulates it from the hotter mantle underneath, the average elevation of Seattle would be 1,813 meters (5,949 feet) above sea level."

Dru, would you care to explain this to us non-geologists?

 

If it were not for the insulating effect, the continental plate above would be hotter, would it not? How would this lead to a greater elevation? Is it simply that warm rock is less dense and therefore would be more bouyant?

Posted
All you spell check fuckers ought to just have your own running thread where you can correct others' spelling to your hearts' content.

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the correct grammer should be "All of you spell check fuckers..

 

"grammar"

 

Kids, notice archenemy's correct use of the plural possessive.

Posted
All you spell check fuckers ought to just have your own running thread where you can correct others' spelling to your hearts' content.

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the correct grammer should be "All of you spell check fuckers..

 

"grammar"

 

:blush:

 

:anger: :anger: :anger:

Posted
All you spell check fuckers ought to just have your own running thread where you can correct others' spelling to your hearts' content.

 

I intentionally don't proofread my posts - it gives the spell-checking, fuckwad losers something to do.

 

Posted
New article in the latest ish of Scientific American on the effects of crustal heat fluxes on topography contains this gem:

 

"Were it not for the effects of a cold slab of subducting oceanic plate that insulates it from the hotter mantle underneath, the average elevation of Seattle would be 1,813 meters (5,949 feet) above sea level."

 

In short: The deeper the trench, the smaller the bulge.

Posted
New article in the latest ish of Scientific American on the effects of crustal heat fluxes on topography contains this gem:

 

"Were it not for the effects of a cold slab of subducting oceanic plate that insulates it from the hotter mantle underneath, the average elevation of Seattle would be 1,813 meters (5,949 feet) above sea level."

Dru, would you care to explain this to us non-geologists?

 

If it were not for the insulating effect, the continental plate above would be hotter, would it not? How would this lead to a greater elevation? Is it simply that warm rock is less dense and therefore would be more bouyant?

 

buy the fucking magazine like i did, cheapskate! :fahq:

or get mckillop drunk

you forgot that warm rock expands too.

Posted (edited)

Catbirdseat - you are considering only the density of the continental crust and any density differential that would occur due to heating. However, the entire lithospheric rock column below Seattle includes a cold, dense oceanic slab, which, if removed, would greatly increase the bouyancy of the overlying continental crust, because it is currently thinner and hotter than average continental crust.

 

The statement in Sci-American is b.s. for a number of reasons.

 

1. If not for the subducting slab in the PNW - there would BE NO FUCKING MOUNTAINS.

2. Continental crust along passive margins - i.e. where there is no active subduction - is significantly cooler, often thicker, and always MORE dense than continental crust along an active margin, like the PNW.

3. If Seattle were at 5000' of elevation, the coastline would exist significantly further to the west of its current location. Continents don't drop off abruptly. If the slab didn't exist the entire make-up of the continental margin would be different.

4. If you want to know what Seattle would be like without a subducting slab, come to New York.

Edited by E-rock

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...