Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Terrestrial Evidence of a Nuclear Catastrophe in Paleoindian Times
Mammoth Trumpet ^ | March 2001 | Firestone/Topping

Posted on 07/24/2006 12:03:03 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-277 next last
To: phoenix0468; ForGod'sSake; baynut

On the subject of lightning in strange places. In the course of studying vulcanism, plinian eruptions, and severe pyroclastic flow, I was surprised to discover that heavy lightning was a major association.

Regarding sources of tsunamis and large ice as high as 600 feet, how high do scientists think the tsunami caused by a great chunk of mountainside sliding into the sea in the Canary Islands might have been?

In a separate vein, I have come to a moderately strong belief that there was an important boloid event associated with the Younger Dryas. At that time sea ice extended far down into the Atlantic. My intuitive hunch has been that the boloid whould have been in the upper north Atlantic. Any evidence for or against? As I said this is a strong hunch. Years ago I read something about tectite strew fields in Georgia and/or the Carolinas. I think the age they mentioned was around 12kya. Any info on this?


151 posted on 07/27/2006 2:01:57 AM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

Ah yes, do. Then pose the question : is Arnold Swartenegger a neanderthal throwback from austria(where the celts originated).


152 posted on 07/27/2006 6:02:41 AM PDT by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

FGS, this link and associated material should be right up your alley now: http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/caseof.html


153 posted on 07/27/2006 7:04:56 AM PDT by baynut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: baynut
I can't remember off the top of my head. Someone did a transect of deep borings across either Big Hellhole Bay or Little Hellhole Bay in Charleston County and discovered the infilled river valley. It might have been Ray Daniels. I'd suggest contacting the South Carolina Geological Society to see if someone there remembers the paper. If Ray Daniels is still alive (he'd be close to 90 now), he'd know for certain, but I don't have an address for him. If you contact the Agronomy Department at N.C. State University, you might get an e-mail address for Ray Daniels or Ehrling Gamble. In the mean time, if you have access to archives of the journal Southeastern Geology, you should review every paper written by Daniels and Gamble that was published in that journal. Those two are the preeminent authorities on coastal stratigraphy of the Carolinas.
154 posted on 07/27/2006 11:27:55 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: timer

Before posting the article I saw, I did an FR search of Neanderthal Genome and found the info has already been posted several times in much more detail. Look there for what I was going to post and lots more.


155 posted on 07/27/2006 1:44:07 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman

BP = Before Present, a bit more erudite-sounding than "YA"


156 posted on 07/27/2006 5:35:41 PM PDT by King Prout (many complain I am overly literal... this would not be a problem if fewer people were under-precise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin
Regarding sources of tsunamis and large ice as high as 600 feet, how high do scientists think the tsunami caused by a great chunk of mountainside sliding into the sea in the Canary Islands might have been?

There doesn't seem to be a lot of agreement on the size of a tsunami generated from there. I've seen anywhere from 100' to 300' as estimates. Bottom line, it would be a doozy regardless.

In a separate vein, I have come to a moderately strong belief that there was an important boloid event associated with the Younger Dryas. At that time sea ice extended far down into the Atlantic. My intuitive hunch has been that the boloid whould have been in the upper north Atlantic. Any evidence for or against? As I said this is a strong hunch. Years ago I read something about tectite strew fields in Georgia and/or the Carolinas. I think the age they mentioned was around 12kya. Any info on this?

Can't add anything to your comments but if you're able to dig up something else, it could be very interesting.

157 posted on 07/27/2006 7:13:21 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: baynut
FGS, this link and associated material should be right up your alley now: http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/caseof.html

OMG, MORE reading!

I'll take a look ;^)

158 posted on 07/27/2006 7:14:51 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; blam; Renfield; baynut; gleeaikin; Fred Nerks; All
Lookie here! Just published. Civ, we'll be needing a review ASAP.

FGS

159 posted on 07/27/2006 7:22:43 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Huh. Looks like that $47 I spent at the Enormous Chain Bookstore yesterday wasn't the last trip until fall, after all. :') Maybe I'll check the email, see if I've got more coupons. I love the CD selection, there's a young kid who likes odd old stuff, like ISB (broke up circa 1975).


160 posted on 07/27/2006 7:50:25 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
I love the CD selection, there's a young kid who likes odd old stuff, like ISB (broke up circa 1975).

(((scratching head)))Islamic Society of Baltimore???

Nope, can't be them, they appear to be going strong. ISB?

161 posted on 07/27/2006 8:15:36 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

Been done already. Let's see... hmm, looks like they managed to escape the long arm of the GGG keyword people...

Scientists Plan to Rebuild Neanderthal Genome
New York Times | July 20, 2006 | Nicholas Wade
Posted on 07/20/2006 7:06:56 PM EDT by CobaltBlue
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1669474/posts

Project plans map of Neanderthal genome
The Globe and Mail | 7/24/06 | GEIR MOULSON
Posted on 07/24/2006 2:41:28 PM EDT by doc30
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1671396/posts


162 posted on 07/27/2006 8:53:55 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
"... looks like they managed to escape the long arm of the GGG keyword people... "

LOL. Grrrr!

163 posted on 07/27/2006 9:40:02 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Incredible String Band. Seen by 100s of 1000s when they played at Woodstock, but none of them remember now, oops, I mean, they didn't make it into the movie or soundtrack AFAIK. ISB was (in part) world music before anyone heard of that; mostly just a very quirky, very talented band. Licorice, a longtime female member, I heard disappeared in the 1980s while hitchhiking across the US. The founders though are all living, and have done some recent reunion CDs and previously unreleased, that kind of thing.

ISB is definitely not for everyone. :')


164 posted on 07/27/2006 9:56:05 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: blam

It's hard to explain, since one of them had the standard GGG message, but I'd added neither to the keyword. Or, the keyword met with foul play... Miss Scarlet... with the lead pipe... in the library...


165 posted on 07/27/2006 9:57:26 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

There is some evidence of an Arctic Ocean impact (that is, a sort of broad scar on the ocean floor, which has erroneously I believe been attributed to a glacial floe), but not that recently I don't think.


166 posted on 07/27/2006 10:00:03 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Thanks Renfield, for the post and the FReepmail.


167 posted on 07/27/2006 10:06:33 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

see however Renfield's reply above.
A Re-evaluation Of The Extraterrestrial Origin Of The Carolina Bays
by J. Ronald Eyton & Judith I. Parkhurst (April 1975)
Luis E. Ortiz & Susan Gross, editors
Abstract: Controversy as to the origin of the Carolina Bays has centered on terrestrial versus extraterrestrial theories. Meteoritic impact has been considered the primary causal mechanism in extraterrestrial models, but alternatives such as comets and asteroids have not been adequately considered. Comets may explode during fall and produce depressions which would conform to the morphology of the Bays. Only a comet appears to satisfy the constraints imposed both by extraterrestrial requirements and observed terrestrial characteristics.

168 posted on 07/27/2006 10:08:08 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin
"For thirty years, nobody disputed this 'fact'. One group of scientists abandoned their experiments on human liver cells because they could only find twenty-three pairs of chromosomes in each cell. Another researcher invented a method of separating the chromosomes, but still he thought he saw twenty-four pairs. It was not until 1955, when an Indonesian named Joe-Hin Tjio travelled from Spain to Sweden to work with Albert Levan, that the truth dawned. Tjio and Levan, using better techniques, plainly saw twenty-three pairs. They even went back and counted twenty-three pairs in photographs in books where the caption stated that there were twenty-four pairs. There are none so blind as do not wish to see." (p 23-24)
The author avoids technical language and explains what is known about genes and chromosomes with simple metaphors. While he airs some dirty laundry (as above), he still writes from a reductionist perspective. He's a Briton and emphasizes the achievements of other Britons, but manages to cover the Earth.

Genome: The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters Genome:
The Autobiography of a Species
in 23 Chapters

by Matt Ridley


169 posted on 07/27/2006 10:31:57 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

BTW, thanks Fred, for that link, I guess I'd either not seen it, or hadn't visited in a very long time. :')


170 posted on 07/27/2006 10:32:49 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Daniels Gamble search using Scirus:

http://www.scirus.com/srsapp/search?q=Daniels+Gamble&ds=jnl&g=s&t=all


171 posted on 07/27/2006 10:35:33 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Whoops, I neglected to remove you from the "to" field. Sorry.


172 posted on 07/27/2006 10:36:06 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, July 27, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Solar flares must be banned! If only one life can be saved.............


173 posted on 07/27/2006 10:38:50 PM PDT by Lockbar (March toward the sound of the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

MOst of their papers were written in the 1960s and 1970s, and won't be found on line.


174 posted on 07/28/2006 4:44:43 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

I don't assign much credibility to Eyton and Parhkurst's work. They propose a late Pleistocene-Early Holocene date for Carolina Bays. If that were the case, bays would occur on the Wando formation in the Carolinas...which was surficially exposed at that time...but they do not. The Wando was deposited ~90,000 years ago, and was exposed certainly during Wisconsinian glaciation, if not well before. Bays are well expressed, however, on the Socastee formation, which was laid down around 200,000 years ago, and exposed by the time the Wando was forming. Bays are commonly found as far inland as the Duplin formation (~2.6 to 3.8 Million ya)(and, by the way, at substantially higher elevations than mentioned by Eyton and Parkhurst). They are very rare on the landward Tar Heel formation (upper Cretaceous), although I have found a couple. I have not identified any on the Middendorf formation (also upper Cretaceous, but older and more landward than the Tar Heel). There aren't many stable Palic landforms on the Middendorf, but there are a few, and one would think that if bolide impact caused the formation of bays, some would be found on the Middendorf. In the absence of shocked quartz, I still maintain that the phenomenon is best explained hydrologically.


175 posted on 07/28/2006 5:10:58 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

"....Years ago I read something about tectite strew fields in Georgia and/or the Carolinas...."

My friend Peter Vogt, a marine geophysicist, says that those tektites resulted from the meteorite that struck at what is now the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, at the end of the Eocene...which would be ~33.7 million years ago, NOT 12,000.


176 posted on 07/28/2006 12:12:50 PM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
I am going to try to compose a coherent response to this reply and your Freepmails into one. I made a promise to myself I wouldn't stay up this late again, but I have spent literally hours trying to piece some things together, and if I don't do it now....

Most indicators tell us the bays themselves are old; maybe very old. One thing that bothers me about them being in excess of say 100,000 years old, is the apparent lack of erosoin of their features. Also, the elevations these things are found in the US and especially other places around the world(which I would like to see you address) all but preclude their being created by sea level fluctuations. BTW, best I could determine, the last time we saw sea levels greater than they are now was ~120,000 years ago. They have more or less steadily risen since then. A relatively crude map but about as good as I could find:

In the absence of shocked quartz...

Do you know if this feature was found at the Tunguska site?

I still maintain that the phenomenon is best explained hydrologically.

While not impossible at elevations of 1500 - 1600 feet(maybe more?) at other sites around the world, there may have been something else at work. Fast melting glaciers? Ice dams giving way? We would maybe find some of these "up north" then? Maybe the great flood was somehow involved???

All's I know is it's way past my bedtime........again!

FGS

177 posted on 07/28/2006 10:55:09 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

In the southeastern US, Carolina Bays are found on flat, very stable landscapes. The only erosion on those landscapes is usually wind erosion; bay rims are material, deposited by wind, that was eroded by wind, from somewhere upwind.

Sea level fell during the last glaciation, to a low of about 330 feet below modern sea level. It began rising about 12,500 years ago. Most of the rise took place between 12,500 and 7000 years ago.


178 posted on 07/29/2006 3:57:40 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cbayint.html

For the morning....


179 posted on 07/29/2006 4:09:06 AM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Thanks for the reply. I've got to run and will be away from a computer most/all of the day, but I wanted to point out a mis-statement in my last post: While it may have been ~120,000 years since sea levels were the same or greater than they are today, you're right, the rise in fact didn't begin until ~12,000 - 15,000 years ago.

Would you take a crack at a couple of other questions I asked in my last post re elevations, shocked quartz, etc? Gotta run.

FGS

180 posted on 07/29/2006 5:04:22 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks
I've pored over that one a number of times, but with my improved knowledge since beginning this thread, I'll have another look. Seems the dates are a problem with this one, no?

Later.

181 posted on 07/29/2006 5:06:48 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
This was for you. I don't know how I ended up sending it to myself.....duh. BTW, the elevations I mentioned were re "bays" in tht 1500 - 1600 feet elevations; particularly in South Africa. There was one other point I can't recall right now that hopefully will come to me later.

FGS

182 posted on 07/29/2006 1:07:46 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

dates are a problem with this one, no?

----

No, not really. I came across the name W F Prouty in 'An Address Before the Graduate College Forum of Princeton University on October 14, 1953' of which the title was 'Worlds in Collision in the light of Recent Finds in Archeology, Geology and Astronomy.'

It's a supplement to my copy of Earth in Upheaval...in which Velikovsky writes:

'The tens of thousands of oval formations on the Atlantic coast of the United States, especially in the Carolinas, some of them attaining a length of a few miles each, were conclusively identified, in a monograph by W. F. Prouty (1952), as having been caused by the fall of large meteorites. And finally, the largest crater formations, situated in Quebec north of Sept Iles, in Canada, and occupying an area of 680 square miles, is under investigation as to its meteroric origin by a group of Mines Department scientists led by Dr. J. S. Innes.'

I picked up the link I posted whilst looking for W.F. Prouty's work. IMO all the heavy lifting on this subject was done in the 50's...but that's just me...


183 posted on 07/29/2006 3:48:44 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

I don't know anything about bays in South Africa. can you send me a reference?


184 posted on 07/29/2006 4:28:28 PM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Renfield; Fred Nerks; baynut
I don't know anything about bays in South Africa. can you send me a reference?

Glad to. In my searches for additional "bay" evidence I ran across a group of Google Earthers who apparently spend much of their time searching for bay type features around the world. They have located many such features, most of which have what appear to be identical characteristics to the Carolina bays. Many, like I said, nowhere near any oceans past or present, and some at elevations above 1500'.

If you'll start HERE you can go to the various sites where bay type features have been found so far. The Australian and South African sites are the most interesting, but there are others as well. Click on the individual posters "placemarker" to go to the particular site they have found(You'll need to load the Google Earth program if you don't already have it).

Now, due to my lack of communication skills I have apparently not made one point in particular very well. ~120,000 years ago sea levels were at their highest recorded level during the past 500,000 years. It was ~30m(~125') above current sea level. So it would seem to me that any bay type feature above ~125' would not be a good candidate for ocean hydrologic activity since sea levels have never been higher than that. I may be missing something, but it wouldn't be the first time.

Re the absence of shocked quartz associated with the bays; FWIW, the Tunguska impactor apparenlty left little trace of itself behind either. Another note re Tunguska: One descripton of the first people on the site found NO crater, but a few "sinkholes" in the vicinity. Sinkholes???

There's still another point I'm forgetting(which is par for the course I'm afraid), but maybe it will come back to me.

FGS

185 posted on 07/29/2006 7:49:36 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Renfield; Fred Nerks; baynut
What may be and AHA! moment from Pravda: Tunguska Meteorite Fragments Must Be in a Different Place

~snip~

Professor of physical chemistry from the Altay State University Vladislav Batenkov thinks that traces of the Tunguska meteorite should not have been searched for not directly under the meteorite’s course, but rather in the opposite direction.

Professor Batenkov graduated from the Chemistry Department of Tomsk State University; he currently deals with transistor electrochemistry. He has published several substantial monographs. Vladislav Batenkov is the creator of 14 inventions. The professor said in an interview to the newspaper Altayskaya Pravda: “The mystery of the Tunguska meteorite can be solved with the help of the physicochemical properties of water. The explanation is based upon water’s ability to decompose in oxygen and hydrogen at temperatures of over 1000 degrees centigrade. At the temperature of 5000 degrees centigrade, the decomposition occurs with detonation. When the temperature of the oxygen and hydrogen (the detonating mixture) drops below 1000 degrees centigrade, water is generated again together with the detonation.

The rest of the article goes on to explain his hypothesis. Compelling reading.

Interesting, no?

186 posted on 07/29/2006 8:13:04 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Brainfart ALERT! ~30m ~100'. Which indicates to me that any bays above ~100 feet elevation would be suspect for ocean hydrology. That is of course unless I've missed something.
187 posted on 07/29/2006 9:17:22 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Did you say Sinkholes?!

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/26448/an/0/page/791

http://www.dep.state.fl.us/geology/geologictopics/sinkhole.htm

http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/guide/sinkholes.html

http://www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/Geologic_hazards_sink_holes_karst/sinkholes.htm

http://www.rootsweb.com/~txwinkle/WINK_SINK.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1484280/posts



188 posted on 07/29/2006 10:01:56 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Iceland. Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Maybe?

189 posted on 07/29/2006 10:11:38 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
When the temperature of the oxygen and hydrogen (the detonating mixture) drops below 1000 degrees centigrade, water is generated again together with the detonation. which reminds me... Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
190 posted on 07/29/2006 10:14:39 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/lecture/lect4.html

On water.


191 posted on 07/29/2006 10:33:04 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Your #122 - You recall those 100 pound hailstones mentioned in the Bible(and possibly elsewhere)? To be honest, that seems as plausible as anything else I've read so far. And that's my story and I'm stickin' to it ;^) ----

Methinks we've come full circle.

192 posted on 07/30/2006 4:49:18 AM PDT by Fred Nerks (Read the bio THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD free! Click Fred Nerks for link to my Page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

"....It was ~30m(~125') above current sea level. So it would seem to me that any bay type feature above ~125' would not be a good candidate for ocean hydrologic activity since sea levels have never been higher than that...."

You should take a course in historical geology. Sea levels have in fact been much higher than that. During the late cretaceous, sea levels in the Carolinas were at least 350 feet higher than today. Even Tertiary marine sediments may be found at elevations of 270 feet.

I don't have a cable-modem, so Google Earth is out for me. Rather than sending me to some group of amateurs, point me to papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals. I can get access to them.


193 posted on 07/30/2006 5:08:40 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Check out this report on Arctic lakes from Nasa. The mechanism they propose for formation has nothing to do with comets.

Also note that the oriented arctic lakes POINT DOWNHILL!!


194 posted on 07/30/2006 5:45:14 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Here's another view of oriented arctic lakes, from this site: ~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.agiweb.org/geotimes/sept05/NN_arcticlakes.html ~~~~~~~~~~

'......They report in the June 3 Science that the spatial pattern of lake disappearance suggests that the lakes drained away when the permafrost below them thawed, allowing the lake water to seep down into the groundwater. However, the team also found that lakes in northwestern Siberia actually grew by 12 percent, and 50 new lakes formed. Both of the rapid changes are due to warming, they say, and if the warming trend continues, the northern lakes will eventually shrink as well. “These two processes are similar, in that we’re witnessing permafrost degradation in both regions,” says co-author Larry Hinzman, a hydrologist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks, who in previous studies documented shrinking lakes in southern Alaska. “In the warmer, southern areas, we get groundwater infiltration, but in the northern areas, where the permafrost is thicker and colder, it’s going to take much, much longer for that to occur. So instead of seeing lakes shrinking there, we’re seeing lakes growing.” That finding is consistent with the second study, which focused on a set of unusually oriented, rapidly growing lakes in northern Alaska, an area of continuous permafrost. Jon Pelletier, a geomorphologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson, reports in the June 30 Journal of Geophysical Research — Earth Surface that the odd alignment of the lakes is caused not by wind direction but by permafrost melting faster at the downhill end of the lake, which has shallower banks.....'

195 posted on 07/30/2006 6:52:43 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

Gee thanks Fred! Looks like I'm gonna have to take vacation jsut to give myself any chance of digesting this info. I'll get there eventually. Your efforts are appreciated.


196 posted on 07/30/2006 9:58:11 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
I can't begin to compose a respectable response til this evening, but I think I detect some strawmen in your reply. Not the least of which is marine sediments, which have been found at thousands of feet of elevation. Also, for pusposes of discussion, as recently as ~5mya sea levels were at roughly 100m above where they are now. Are you suggesting the bays may be that old, or older?

I'll be back with more this evening.

197 posted on 07/30/2006 10:03:32 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

What I have suggested (in a much earlier post) is that the bays formed sequentially, on each terrace, after the sea regressed from that terrace. I absolutely do not think that they all formed at the same time. And you can see from the links I posted above, that on the artic slope, the formation of those elongated lakes is an ongoing process. I don't think that exactly the same process formed the Carolina Bays (so far there is no evidence of permafrost on the southern Coastal Plain), but I think Carolina Bay formation would have appeared similar to some observer watching from on high, through geologic time.

What's this about a "straw man"? I'm being as straightforward as I can be.


198 posted on 07/30/2006 10:10:07 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
Let me begin by apologizing for not responding last night as I promised. I had gone searching around Australia for some additional formations, and after about three hours of that my eyelids slammed shut.

Something that really stumped me was the apparent lack of a seashsore and the elevations some of these bays, or oriented lakes, are located around the world. BTW, some of which are as much as a mile in elevation(South Africa). Anyway, Australia is a good place to look around because of the near flat surface. What I discovered when I found these oriented lakes(very few true "bays" because of soil type???), was many/most of them are associated with depressions; that is, areas that may have held water in the past. Inland seas for example. I also discovered many oriented lakes and apparent bays near present or past river courses. Ahem, so what I'm saying is, I may be getting to a place where I may concede a point: That there is the possibility the Carolina Bays may have been formed by hydrologic forces.

I don't have a cable-modem, so Google Earth is out for me.

FWIW, I took this as a strawman. Where there's a will, there's a way?

Rather than sending me to some group of amateurs...

Tacky. Just tacky. Not to diminish the pros, but you would agree that "amateurs" have made significant contributions in various disciplines over the years? I have come to a "trust by verify" mode from the scientific community. Inherent problems with that approach should be obvious for a layman.

Just one other point re the elevations(~5,000') some of these bays/oriented lakes are found and associated marine sediments. Tectonic forces have raised areas that were previously near or even under water? Is there any other explanation for this anomoly?

Have to run again, but will check back this afternoon.

FGS

199 posted on 07/31/2006 6:19:03 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake
Just thought I'd snag 200 before heading out ;^)
200 posted on 07/31/2006 6:20:47 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-277 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson