For subduction to be a valid consideration there must be several things that happen.

1) The potential for subduction requires a location and method of initiating the subductive process.

2) The initiation processes must demonstrate locations of failed subduction. Hard geologic evidence of failed subduction.

3) The initiation process must demonstrate locations of successful subduction.

Around the lovely Ring of Fire we have what are commonly called 'subduction zones'. Cue Disney "Rites of Spring" music and animation.

BUT they're better served being called compression zones. These compression zones are marked by subducting plates of some sort. Subducting under other plates at near volcanic upwelling.

The location of these "zones" is far from the continents, hundreds of miles, in fact.

Most Interestingly the "Subduction" comes from the ocean side and pushes inward, toward, but not to, the continents,...

If you want to find out about things that contribute to growth of the Earth, you need to go to the final resting place of material that accumulate from space. These only occur on the abyssal plains of the major oceans far away from the contributions from eroding continents. Eroding continents add additional material to that contributed from space for a couple of hundred mile out from shore. Beyond that only what falls from the sky ends up distributed on the abyssal plains.

Based on Neal Adams' Prime Matter Positron-to-Proton Theory

The New Hydrogen Nucleus Structure is a geometric model which demonstrates a count calculation of the layered Prime Matter particles bound by the force of a core positron, to form a proton. As an electron is attracted to the new proton, a new Hydrogen atom is born.

In his elegant theory for emergence of new atomic matter in the universe, Neal Adams states that new protons effectively emerge in the cores of celestial bodies through layered accumulation of 918 Prime Matter particles around a positron, in a process commencing with Pair Production. A Prime Matter particle is the combined electron and positron fields which are theorized to neutralize each other upon converging in the Positronium state, thus rendering themselves undetectable and are assumed to annihilate. Each Prime Matter particle carries an electron weight of two (2), one positron and one electron. The accumulated electron weight of the predicted 918 Prime Matter particles in the model is therefore 1836, same as the electron weight of a proton.

A verifiable calculation of the number of particles in a geometrically sound model is considered crucial to the veracity of Positron-to-Proton Theory.

Physics and expanding (growing earth/growing universe) theory. When this "expanding earth" theory was first presented 40 years ago by Professor of Geology, Samuel Carey and others, the major objection was how could the increased mass that this growth required be accounted for. This and "The Theory of Subduction" caused science to turn it's back on expanding... or "growing" earth.

It was not enough that the continents fit together. Or that dinosaurs in a lighter gravity grew to 4 times the size of modern animals on average, or that the atmosphere was less dense, and mountain's prolific growth is a modern series of events which did not exist for the most part in the ages of dinosaurs.

The proposers of this theory needed to explain where the mass that made this newer bigger earth came from. Why consider the ramifications if the theory was wrong?

In science, as in every activity, it is worth the proverbial saying "to take this case with a grain of salt" and to carefully use scientific achievements functionally with our premises of the EE. Afterwards, we probably must ponder that our forum is not in unison for why and how the Earth's radius is enlarged. For example, we all negate the interpretation of convection and subduction as is expressed in the Pangea theory, but these processes and phenomena have their great role in the embryonic phase of core creation, and gradually, with the Growing process and crust thickening, their role in order to circulate the crust failed and, was progressively less important and finally was totally eliminated forever, at least for last Eon.

Hydrogen was super-abundant when the solar-system formed, and it may have been similarly abundant in the original materials from which comets formed. If the Earth accreted from that same reservoir of materials at a rate sufficiently fast to have trapped alot of hydrogen in the zone which became the core, then the Hydrogen may have been absorbed into the abundant metals at pressures and temperatures that would have allowed the diffusion of the Hydrogen as a naked proton. (Remember that Hydrogen IS a metal, and unlike any other element, becomes an entity of Nuclear rather than Atomic dimensions with the loss of only one electron...) Russian theory and experiments suggest that the protons could fill the interstices between atoms and perhaps even some volumes inside the outermost valences of Iron and Nickel atoms.

I presume it would be the application of a huge force (enough to overcome the repulsive forces of the atoms themselves to some small degree) since we know that there is a "HUGE" amount of space between atoms, even solids compared with their size. Applying this force, which compacts them beyond their normal means of cohesion. This would seem to have two effects:

1 - The heat conductivity would go up.
2 - The material is stiffened against further compression.

Concerning the physical cause of Earth expansion Creer (1965) maintained that, "we should beware of rejecting the hypothesis of Earth expansion out of hand on grounds that no known sources of energy are adequate to explain the expansion process". Creer further considered that, "it may be fundamentally wrong to attempt to extrapolate the laws of physics as we know them today to times of the order of the age of the Earth and of the Universe".

In Dec. 1982, I presented my 1980 discovery that the Asian trenches fitted North America, and the Australian trenches fitted South America. They fit perfectly, so, therefore, one MUST conclude that the entire Pacific Ocean basin has been added to Earth's surface area in the last ~200 Ma. But the establishment won't buy it because of their belief Earth's diameter has been the same for ~4.5 billion years and that subduction (UGHH!) keeps it the same size--despite the very rapid increase (~8-16 cm/yr) in the South Pacific seafloor along the East Pacific Rise AND continued expansion of the Atlantic by ~2-4 cm/yr--to say nothing of the seafloor increase in the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica that is increasing the entire Antarctic plate and expanding it outward from Earth's center.