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

To: Renfield
I had the same problem as blam; I couldn't view the file either. I'm interested in taking a look at it and will send you an email addy via Freepmail. I was able to look at the ABSTRACT, but it wasn't all that helpful.

Now, I ran across another graphic I had to do some work on to get it sized to fit a standard(800 X 600 resolution) window. You'll notice re our previous discussion a possible(?) sea level "spike" at ~80,000ya. This more or less coincides with a previous argument about the age(s) of the bays being ~70,000ya. HOWEVER, the sea level indicated at that time was only ~30' above present level(s).

I know you have stated you believe the bays were formed within a marine environment, and if you're correct, something is amiss. What are the chances these marine sediments could have been deposited in existing bays by something like a "mega" tsunami? Or possibly some other process??? Or are there actual sediments deposited over a long period of time?

Anyway, getting late, so here's the graphic witout further comment. Original found HERE.


257 posted on 09/06/2006 11:15:23 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 254 | View Replies ]


To: ForGod'sSake
I din't say that bays were "deposited in a marine environment". They formed subaerially on marine sediments after marine regression. I forwarded the paper on to you. Read it carefully, especially the last section wherein the authors propose a mechanism for bay formation. I think they've nailed it.
258 posted on 09/07/2006 2:42:05 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies ]

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