I built a structured Earth science learning site — would genuinely love feedback from people who know this stuff

I’ve been building a geology/earth science learning platform called Facet for the past several months. It covers geology, oceanography, atmospheric science, volcanology, climate, seismology, hydrology, glaciology, geomorphology, astrobiology, and planetary science — structured as proper learning paths with quizzes and a progress system.
I just opened up the first chapter of every single foundation path for free — no account needed to browse, no card ever. That’s now about 50 free lessons across all 11 subjects. The content comes from USGS, NOAA, NASA, NSF, and OpenStax — I haven’t written anything from scratch, I’ve structured and sequenced material from primary sources.
I’m posting here because honestly the hardest part isn’t building it, it’s finding out whether the content is actually good. You can tell pretty quickly if something is dumbed down to the point of being wrong, or if the sequencing makes no sense to someone who actually studies this.
So — if you have 10 minutes and want to poke holes in the geology/seismology/oceanography sections (or whatever is your area), I’d really appreciate it.

Site URL: facet.academy

Things I’m most unsure about:
• Does the depth feel appropriate, or does it feel like a Wikipedia summary?
• Is there anything that’s technically accurate but framed in a way that would bother a geologist?
• What’s missing that you’d expect to see in a foundations curriculum?

Not fishing for compliments — if something is wrong or shallow I want to know before more people use it.