Although some scientists still think in terms of an expanding earth model in opposition to the Plate Tectonics theory they are in no way united in how such a model might work. Robert sent in some links on the subject – including www.dinox.org/expandingearth.html … which is useful for anyone who wants to read up on the subject. There is also a page on dinosaurs and gravity, which others might be interested in. The dinosaur and gravity theory is all about how these great big lumbering giants were able to move their bodies around as modern animals do not reach such a size. Let alone run and chase after prey. A lot of the arguments have been superseded by the discovery that dinosaur bones were bird like – much lighter and therefore not so heavy to hinder their walking and running activities. It makes much more sense than gravity restrictions.
See also www.eearthk.com/expanding-earth-theory/ … an article by Charles Warren Hunt and K Wilson. Hunt has been a strong adherent of an expanding earth model for many years and his books can be found in second hand bookshops. In this piece Warren Hunt gives forth on hydrogen as a major component of internal earth. Hydrogen, he says, was one of the ingredients in the formation of the earth and is liable to seep into the continental crust, the oceans and the atmosphere. It is hydrogen that makes the crust somewhat crusty, and hardens it. One might compare it with the crust on an oven cooked loaf of bread. In other words, he seems to be saying the force responsible for earth expanding comes from within – and the inside of the earth is somewhat different to that perceived by Plate Tectonics people.
Primordial earth and its first atmosphere, we are told, were elevated by hydrogen. Also note that water = H2O [hydrogen and oxygen] which he thinks might account for the oceans. Previous ideas about comets as dirty snowballs favoured an origin for water on earth from space. If, however, hydrogen, and oxygen, are present in the innards of the earth, this may well be a rival candidate. Hydrogen is released by pressure, it continues, and density changes can be caused by impacts [which is where comets might come in], polar shift [definitely not allowed by mainstream], as well as sedimentation processes [a rapid build up] and volcanism [described as exhalation].
Some other ideas are also interesting, whether relevant or not. For example, poracity is usually considered as empty space – but this is not true he says. Poracity is space occupied by any materials that are less dense than the surrounding material. Thus, in the instance of the earth, when material is de-densified it becomes buoyant. This means it is isostatically positive and rises up as a plume while the surrounding material subsides to fill empty space. My first thought was the Steve Mitchell article at SIS on rising land as a factor in sea level changes in the past. Isostacy is usually defined as the lifting of a great weight – such as the melting of the Late Glacial ice sheet, or the construction of a dam and a mass of water depressing the land, and so on. One might suspect isostacy is convenient for geologists but perhaps a subject that requires further research as far as differing ideas might suggest. Hunt claims plumes from the Mantle can rise into the lithosphere – and in Plate Tectonics we have subducted material rising up from the depths of the Mantle, as well. Similar idea but a different mechanism. The plumes rise until they are affected by oxydising conditions and their hydrates oxidise with the release of latent chemical energy [which may be double speak for not knowing why]. These, they claim, initiate magnetism, earthquakes and volcanism, among other things such as mineralisation. He even pictures mountain building with an origin in such plumes, and of course subsidence of the land. It sounds like an interesting theory but has been mainly ignored for the last 60 years or so. How much truth there is in it is another question. Kudos for persistent endeavour. See also Robert's third link. This time to a Russian advocate, C. Larin … http://hydrogen-future.com/en/list-c-larin-en.html.
What triggered Robert's attention and a relook at the expanding earth model was an article at https://phys.org/news/2021-05-hydrogen-earth-core-oceans.html …. where we learn, from very recent research, that scientists now think there may be 70 times more hydrogen in earth's interior than previously thought, the very ingredient that had been predicted by C. Warren Hunt, and C Larin. Not only that but there is also a lot of hydrogen in the oceans. That is not to say the expanding earth model is more favourable than plate tectonics. It is only that new findings seem to show it is not as impossible as uniformitarians allow. Robert is not advocating an expanding earth model and neither am I by writing this post. It is a theory that deserves a closer look. Why put all your eggs in a single basket, as required by Plate Tectonics theory [and the way it is taught as fact]. Food for thought.