David;

> I thought you were a geologist, Roger?

No, I was a seismologist/programmer. You I understand, are an accountant?

Well, I wouldn't debate double entry bookkeeping with you and I suggest you shouldn't argue seismology with me.

>> Look at the numbers. The earth is (very roughly) 4000 miles in radius and a good sized apple is about 2 inches in radius. If we say the ocean is 4 miles deep (an overstatement) then it's 4/4000 of the radius which is 0.001.

> The earth has a 4000 mile radius, but that has nothing to do with this calculation. The crust, that portion of the planet near the surface and floating on molten rock, is only 6 miles thick under the entire Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Ocean has an average depth of about 2.5 miles deep. The ratio of ocean to crust is about 40 percent. That is a huge ratio and definitely one capable of supporting an ocean driving tectonic theory.

No it isn't.

> To give a correct perspective, the Pacific Plate is like a giant cookie sheet with 1" deep sides and filled 40 percent with water. This is a very unstable structure.

Bad analogy. The crust rests on the mantle which is about 1700-1800 miles thick. The mantle is solid, not liquid.

> Your incorrect assumption that the planet is a solid all the way through is completely at odds with your previous statements that tectonics are driven solely by magmatic convection.

Because I made no such assumption. The mantle can deform plastically because it is so hot but that's a VERY slow process.

>> The motion of the Pacific plate(s) is a counterclockwise rotation, not a simple east-west movement. The Atlantic has no seismicity belts on either side to speak of despite the spreading from the mid-atlantic ridge.

> You're a geologist? There is only one Pacific Plate. The Nazca is completely separate and has a west to east movement. There is a slight rotational component to the Pacific Plate but it's primary vector is from east to west. And what's more, the rotational component of the Pacific plate follows exactly the path of the daily tides, which also has a slight counterclockwise component across the Pacific Ocean.

Oh baloney. The pacific plate in the vicinity of California is moving north-northwest. In the Aleutians, it's subducting toward the northwest. Toward Japan it's moving west and subducting. At South America it's subducting to the east.

> The Atlantic Ocean is not supported by a single plate, as the Pacific Ocean is. All the real estate (aside from an insignificant square miles of islands) of the Pacific Plate is submerged. It is conveniently submerged begining at the plate boundaries and thus supporting my theory.

Why does that support your hypothesis?

> In contrast, the Atlantic Ocean is supported by several plates that join in the center of the ocean.

Actually, they're separating there.

> The Atlantic Ocean is also one third the size of the Pacific. They are two completely different animals.

The western Atlantic plate includes North America. Not all that small.

Roger