|
|
Post by hummingbirdstones on Apr 13, 2022 9:52:52 GMT -5
Here's your answer: It was mohs!   |
|
RWA3006
Cave Dweller 
Member since March 2009
Posts: 4,625 
|
Post by RWA3006 on Apr 13, 2022 10:44:44 GMT -5
Here's your answer: It was mohs! The evidence is compelling. I'll bet our pal Mohs has been richly entertained at our expense. Bravo. |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 13, 2022 11:52:18 GMT -5
That a h.p.th.i. Highly probable theory indeed  |
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Apr 13, 2022 12:25:31 GMT -5
I was thinking all those ovals and eggs look like a template sheet.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 13, 2022 12:28:52 GMT -5
Miraculous conclusion mohs should have known ! |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 13, 2022 12:40:34 GMT -5
I was thinking all those ovals and eggs look like a template sheet. Ellipses to the east, ovals to the west.  |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 13, 2022 15:20:58 GMT -5
another h.p.th.i.
how the heart bay originated through a natural occurring geological process by slicing one those Carolinian Oval bays length ways at a 12 degree angle. Then through a fault block inversions, caused by some Appalachian rumbling, those halves were inverted ! a heart is sure to form Mohs has been doing it for eons Another
miraculous conclusion  |
|
|
|
Post by RickB on Apr 13, 2022 17:23:40 GMT -5
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 13, 2022 22:42:48 GMT -5
Bays were critical water sources in much of south east and south central Georgia too. Most of Georgia has many small creeks close to each other except those areas. Deep sand deposits hides a lot of ground water. |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 13, 2022 22:50:08 GMT -5
another h.p.th.i.
how the heart bay originated through a natural occurring geological process by slicing one those Carolinian Oval bays length ways at a 12 degree angle. Then through a fault block inversions, caused by some Appalachian rumbling, those halves were inverted ! a heart is sure to form Mohs has been doing it for eons Another
miraculous conclusion So that's how you create those hearts. I figured you used a template. |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 13, 2022 23:02:25 GMT -5
Here's your answer: It was mohs! I just know got the heart bay Robin. My mind deep in a the mysteries of geology. I must be in my own world. Sorry, I was hoping to find a recent geological event that caused a recent extinction that disproves evolution. This one may be just the one. |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 14, 2022 13:10:19 GMT -5
Yo jamesp If I read you correctly Your looking for a 'recent geologic event that caused a recent extinction that disproves evolution' ? Way interesting have a difficult time imaging such an event according to MY geological reading Extinction events are fairly common yet life always seems to rebounds maybe into some other cladogenesis I just read- never did the fieldwork- that would make all the difference altho question just arose with mystery of how quantum mechanics works such as a particle can be in two place at once and/ or pop into existence seemly out of nowhere does micro-bio have the same uncanny aspect ? that is- if my scanty interpretation of q.m. is anywhere near correct ? question of cause & effect again Probably way off base here interestingnontheless….mhs |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 15, 2022 9:00:17 GMT -5
Yo jamesp If I read you correctly Your looking for a 'recent geologic event that caused a recent extinction that disproves evolution' ? Way interesting have a difficult time imaging such an event according to MY geological reading Extinction events are fairly common yet life always seems to rebounds maybe into some other cladogenesis I just read- never did the fieldwork- that would make all the difference altho question just arose with mystery of how quantum mechanics works such as a particle can be in two place at once and/ or pop into existence seemly out of nowhere does micro-bio have the same uncanny aspect ? that is- if my scanty interpretation of q.m. is anywhere near correct ? question of cause & effect again Probably way off base here interestingnontheless….mhs This is all about tangible evidence of the recent ice age Ed. What's the truth ?(tired of the fake news) New technology is helping, such as the use of Lidar technology to find many undiscovered impact sites, civilizations and other anomalies. Lidar certainly opened the door to 'anomaly science' which nearly cancels the need for geological analysis on many levels. And the analysis of the view from above is improving rapidly. The delicate Carolina Bays initiated this curiosity when there were claims this was not a fairly recent ejecta impact site. Mathematically and structurally they appear to be a classic ice/mud ejecta to soft soil event. Science is arguing their origin even though there are +500,000 similar bays to analyze. Ejecta analysis by way of math makes this look more like a mathematical DNA match with extremely high probability outcome. Is there 500,000 similar grouped geologic structures anywhere on this planet ? The shear number of samples is exactly what makes the bays humbling to the scientific community. Dating ? Well they have dated the bays anywhere from 6000 to 140,000 years old and some say they are much older. Hello, there are issues with dating. The 500,000 bays are making the daters look real bad. No problem, it makes perfect sense that dating is a tricky science. I'm not criticizing the complicated dating science, just their faulty claims. They have no benchmark for dating which further increases the difficulty of accuracy. Back 1500 years ago in 536 the 'Volcanic Winter' occurred. Darkness, drop in temp, crazy weather, red skies, crop devastation, etc. A historically recorded event. Indirectly it was said to have killed half the population on earth. Those in tropical zones fared best and many people immigrated to to warmer zones. The temperature was said to have dropped 5F in the civilized world. 5F and low solar radiation is a recipe for disaster. A BIG EVENT, a heavy sulfur layer in Greenlandic ice core samples suggests it was a volcanic event. But an impact event is not ruled out as the cause. Science is arguing it's origin. 1500 years is a short period of earth time and we can't prove it was volcanic or impact ? Some say it was a volcano in Iceland. Not known for sure. Not trying to belittle the scientists(unless they knowingly lie !), but it sheds light on how little we really know. We are better off admitting to what we don't know. Check out the Younger/Dryas graph:  It is highly unlikely man survived the cold temperatures shown 12,000 years ago. Are we supposed to believe we were Neanderthals just after this 12,000 year warm up, that we evolved that quickly to Cro-Magnon ? We didn't just fly in on the Starship Enterprise ! Can't have cake and eat it too. Either the graph is wrong or we didn't evolve; but there is big evidence of a recent extinction level ice age. The bipolar seesaw theory(north hemisphere got colder, south hemisphere warmed) is about trashed by now. Lot's of mysteries. |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 15, 2022 9:18:09 GMT -5
The Hiawatha impact site discovered by accident by radar in 2018. No slouch at 31 kilometers(19 miles)across. Another slightly smaller impact site found just to the northeast shortly after discovering the Hiawatha.
Scandinavian scientists dated the sand flowing from beneath the glacier to be at the age of the dinosaur extinction.
Assumed to have happened during a warm era they concluded the impact was free of thick ice.
Another 1 mile crater was discovered in China after the above two(at 8:20 of video).
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Apr 15, 2022 9:35:25 GMT -5
Another theory about the Hiawatha impact including high speed lab experiments of a high speed projectile striking ice at an angle.
Life is complicated.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 15, 2022 17:57:04 GMT -5
Yo jamesp If I read you correctly Your looking for a 'recent geologic event that caused a recent extinction that disproves evolution' ? Way interesting have a difficult time imaging such an event according to MY geological reading Extinction events are fairly common yet life always seems to rebounds maybe into some other cladogenesis I just read- never did the fieldwork- that would make all the difference altho question just arose with mystery of how quantum mechanics works such as a particle can be in two place at once and/ or pop into existence seemly out of nowhere does micro-bio have the same uncanny aspect ? that is- if my scanty interpretation of q.m. is anywhere near correct ? question of cause & effect again Probably way off base here interestingnontheless….mhs This is all about tangible evidence of the recent ice age Ed. What's the truth ?(tired of the fake news) New technology is helping, such as the use of Lidar technology to find many undiscovered impact sites, civilizations and other anomalies. Lidar certainly opened the door to 'anomaly science' which nearly cancels the need for geological analysis on many levels. And the analysis of the view from above is improving rapidly. The delicate Carolina Bays initiated this curiosity when there were claims this was not a fairly recent ejecta impact site. Mathematically and structurally they appear to be a classic ice/mud ejecta to soft soil event. Science is arguing their origin even though there are +500,000 similar bays to analyze. Ejecta analysis by way of math makes this look more like a mathematical DNA match with extremely high probability outcome. Is there 500,000 similar grouped geologic structures anywhere on this planet ? The shear number of samples is exactly what makes the bays humbling to the scientific community. Dating ? Well they have dated the bays anywhere from 6000 to 140,000 years old and some say they are much older. Hello, there are issues with dating. The 500,000 bays are making the daters look real bad. No problem, it makes perfect sense that dating is a tricky science. I'm not criticizing the complicated dating science, just their faulty claims. They have no benchmark for dating which further increases the difficulty of accuracy. Back 1500 years ago in 536 the 'Volcanic Winter' occurred. Darkness, drop in temp, crazy weather, red skies, crop devastation, etc. A historically recorded event. Indirectly it was said to have killed half the population on earth. Those in tropical zones fared best and many people immigrated to to warmer zones. The temperature was said to have dropped 5F in the civilized world. 5F and low solar radiation is a recipe for disaster. A BIG EVENT, a heavy sulfur layer in Greenlandic ice core samples suggests it was a volcanic event. But an impact event is not ruled out as the cause. Science is arguing it's origin. 1500 years is a short period of earth time and we can't prove it was volcanic or impact ? Some say it was a volcano in Iceland. Not known for sure. Not trying to belittle the scientists(unless they knowingly lie !), but it sheds light on how little we really know. We are better off admitting to what we don't know. Check out the Younger/Dryas graph: It is highly unlikely man survived the cold temperatures shown 12,000 years ago. Are we supposed to believe we were Neanderthals just after this 12,000 year warm up, that we evolved that quickly to Cro-Magnon ? We didn't just fly in on the Starship Enterprise ! Can't have cake and eat it too. Either the graph is wrong or we didn't evolve; but there is big evidence of a recent extinction level ice age. The bipolar seesaw theory(north hemisphere got colder, south hemisphere warmed) is about trashed by now. Lot's of mysteries. Again, there is a lot of evidence against this being an impact event. For example:
-How shallow the impressions are, especially the larger events. We are talking about impacts that would have had kilotons to megatons of energy released from the impacts, which would have left impressions deeper than 10 feet max.
-Lack of alteration of rocks consistent with impact events.
-If this were a strewn field, again strewn fields leave an eliptical field with larger impact craters being further out from the impact zone and smaller craters closer to the impact zone. In this case though I see no evidence of an eliptical strewn field and the depression sizes are highly varied, not consistent with impact events.
-Still no evidence of a major flood. And impact event, especially of the suspected size, would have melted a large portion of the ice cap instantly from impact melting, and thus would have led to a massive flood. In fact, if you think about it, any ejecta would travel at a much faster speed than flood waters and thus any ejecta craters would have been hit by flood waters after ejecta impacts and thus would have filled in with debris such as rocks, soil and trees. Smaller ejecta craters would likely have been completely wiped out.
-An impact shock wave would have leveled trees in one direction. No evidence of this either.
-Again the directions of supposed ejecta from a shallow angle impact should have spread out in a 180 degree pattern, which is not the case here.
-In fact, from the graphs I have seen there are actually 2 directional sets of elipses. In fact, you posted a pic of this when you wrote "Ellipses to the east, ovals to the west.".
-Then there is the 54,000 year age difference between the ages of the various depressions. I know you keep trying to pass this off as inaccuracies of the testing, even though such testing is fairly accurate especially if samples are taken from deeper layers to reduce contamination. The testing cannot determine an exact year, but can accurately predict within several thousand years. The irony here is that you are claiming this testing is not accurate while using graphs that rely heavily on this kind of dating.. Such as the carbon dating of ice cores.
By the way, you still have not answered my question to your response of "I am curious though as to how you think a shallow impact, if it had occurred, would explain away the dating claims of the bays varying in ages from 6,0000 to 60,000 years. Can you explain in detail why you think a shallow impact event would supposedly explain this away?"
Also very curious as to why if this was an impact event there was no signs of shock to the underlying rock. Even with an ice cap the amount of force that would have been required to eject massive ice chunks that far South would have sent forces down to the bedrock leaving deformation features. At the speed of impact there would not be time for ice deformation to absorb energy from an impact. Think about it this way. If a person jumps from the Golden Gate Bridge, when they hit the water it is the equivalent of hitting solid concrete. Why? Because at the speed the person hits the water there is not time for water displacement to absorb the initial force. A comet of meteor hitting at thousands of miles per hour is going to hit wit much more force and even if there was ice there the force would simply transfer down to the bedrock again creating deformation features if there was an impact. Look at the Chicxulub crater, which was formed when a shallow impact meteor hit the ocean with a normal depth of around 1,600 feet. Parts of the crater formed from this shallow impact in water left a crater than in areas is nearly 4,000 feet deep. So how did the force of the impact go through 1,600 feet of water then still have the energy to produce a crater nearly 4,000 feet deep? Again, an impact hitting an ice sheet will do the same thing. So where is the crater and evidence of rock deformation at the supposed impact site if there was really an impact? So far, nobody has produced any real evidence of an impact.
I am not ruling out an impact altogether. In fact, early on I mentioned the possibility of a comet breaking up over the area as opposed to impacting first then creating secondary ejecta. This would make a lot more sense with the shallow impressions and lack of deformation features with the ejecta hypothesis.
On the other hand there are still various other hypotheses that can explain these features that have been mentioned. Until there is some solid evidence to what really caused these bays to form we should not assume that it was from this or that and present the assumption as fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Apr 15, 2022 19:09:18 GMT -5
Right on jamesp The Earth past drastic climate shifts, and corresponding extinctions, that scientist/geologist intuit and, lay out; is mind boggling, indeed. The dating methods such as - zircons lead decay or radiometric dating - etcetera... is fanciful. Ice core samples seem to be rock solid evidence. As to the question of the species best able to survive the radical fluctuations of climate - hot house through ice house-, Sean B. Carroll in his book, “ A Series of Fortunate Events," deals with that question directly . He claims it is Us. homotechnohs. The original handy man. With our capturing of fire, stone tool techniques, skins for clothing, & big brain reasoning ha …. makes all the difference. Guess there is some truth to it. Because here we be. In this book Sean makes a lot out of human beings resiliency To back up this claim he points to a site in Kenya called, Olorgesailie. The cache of stone tools & debitage found there in 1910, and further excavated by the Leaky's in 1942 is abundant. This site dates back 500,000 years, with increasing skill of stone tool techniques, throughout the geological layers. The area went through many past drastic climates changes. Although it may not have ever have experienced a glacial Ice covering. Sure it got darn cold though Not sure any of this adds any value & suppose its off base from what original intent of the thread is enjoying the process … |
|
RWA3006
Cave Dweller
Member since March 2009
Posts: 4,625
|
Post by RWA3006 on Apr 16, 2022 0:43:07 GMT -5
James and James, I appreciate your interesting comments on this subject and it's been fun to ponder this mystery with you. I've shared many of the same thoughts and feel compelled to ask if there are any conclusions about the difference of an impact of comet ice versus meteorite material upon the landscape, especially a landscape with a mile of ice on the surface.
In my line of work I'm involved in the manufacturing of ammunition where I do a fair bit of R&D of bullet behavior upon impact. I have actually made bullets from ice and after providing a gas check upon the base of the ice projectile have fired it against various surfaces. Ditto with various alloys of metals.
I can tell you that in this context an ice bullet impacting at typical handgun velocities, around 1100 feet per second, will simply vaporize upon a hard surface into mostly steam with minimal penetration compared to a metallic or polymer bullet. Even pure lead will begin to liquify upon impact upon steel plate at that velocity.
After a small amount of tests it becomes apparent that the higher the melting point of a bullet alloy, the higher the penetration upon most metallic surfaces. High intensity big game rifles that run metal alloy bullets above 3000 feet per second simply melt their way through regular plate steel an inch thick by liquifying themselves and the steel contacted.
Interestingly some of these projectiles will actually penetrate deeper through mild steel than thick skin and tissue of large game animals due to how they interact with what is being impacted. Extensive testing by P.O. Ackley and the military discovered these phenomena before I was even born and perhaps some of the same dynamics may apply to the Carolina Bays. I truly don't know, nor do I promote any theory. Just food for pleasant contemplation.
In light of some of these ideas I have to wonder if we are denied a distinguishable crater of an impact if the object hurtling into the earth was an icy, loosely packed comet striking an ice cap? Could it have been a major steam event instead of a major bedrock penetrating event? I have no clue, but it's fun to think about it.
It's hard to reconcile all the evidence in this mystery.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 16, 2022 2:45:58 GMT -5
James and James, I appreciate your interesting comments on this subject and it's been fun to ponder this mystery with you. I've shared many of the same thoughts and feel compelled to ask if there are any conclusions about the difference of an impact of comet ice versus meteorite material upon the landscape, especially a landscape with a mile of ice on the surface. In my line of work I'm involved in the manufacturing of ammunition where I do a fair bit of R&D of bullet behavior upon impact. I have actually made bullets from ice and after providing a gas check upon the base of the ice projectile have fired it against various surfaces. Ditto with various alloys of metals. I can tell you that in this context an ice bullet impacting at typical handgun velocities, around 1100 feet per second, will simply vaporize upon a hard surface into mostly steam with minimal penetration compared to a metallic or polymer bullet. Even pure lead will begin to liquify upon impact upon steel plate at that velocity. After a small amount of tests it becomes apparent that the higher the melting point of a bullet alloy, the higher the penetration upon most metallic surfaces. High intensity big game rifles that run metal alloy bullets above 3000 feet per second simply melt their way through regular plate steel an inch thick by liquifying themselves and the steel contacted. Interestingly some of these projectiles will actually penetrate deeper through mild steel than thick skin and tissue of large game animals due to how they interact with what is being impacted. Extensive testing by P.O. Ackley and the military discovered these phenomena before I was even born and perhaps some of the same dynamics may apply to the Carolina Bays. I truly don't know, nor do I promote any theory. Just food for pleasant contemplation. In light of some of these ideas I have to wonder if we are denied a distinguishable crater of an impact if the object hurtling into the earth was an icy, loosely packed comet striking an ice cap? Could it have been a major steam event instead of a major bedrock penetrating event? I have no clue, but it's fun to think about it. It's hard to reconcile all the evidence in this mystery. I agree that there can be a difference in impacts between something like rock and something like ice. Although, we also have to consider the size of the impressions in correlation with the depth. All the bays are 2-10 feet deep. Yet some of the bays are rather small, and some more than a mile in diameter. Larger impressions would have to be made from larger masses, which being hurled high enough and far enough to reach that far South would pack a tremendous amount of energy behind them. Massively higher amounts than would be provided by the very small mass of a bullet made of ice being fired from a gun. Thus there would be significant differences in depth depending on mass of the ice if these were from ejecta.
Look at this way. Let's say you go way up in to the atmosphere and simply dropped a 22 bullet and allowed it to hit the ground. Would likely only see a very tiny little crater if at all. Now if you substituted a large shell like those used in the large German artillery from the same height, and same location there would be a significant crater where it hit from the greater amount of energy behind it. Now add the extra energy of an ejection event capable of sending ice lets say a thousand miles through the air then impacting hard enough to form a crater over a mile in diameter that amount of energy would certainly leave a crater deeper than 10 feet.
Also, the greater the mass there is not only more energy behind the impact, but there is also less time fro deformation in the case of ice even if it melted instantly in to water. Consider the power of a water jet and how easily it can punch a hole in the ground as the water behaves more like a very temporary solid at that velocity.
One of the most basic characteristics of impact events though is the eliptical field formed with smaller craters forming at the leading edge and larger craters forming at the ending edge as the larger mass pieces have more energy and thus travel further. Again this is how meteorite impact fields are mapped and direction of flight are determined. I just don't see anything like this going on with the photos of the bays including the lidar images.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Apr 16, 2022 11:02:17 GMT -5
The one conclusion I can postulate from this is that theories are like asteroid holes, everyone has them.
Bottom line is we weren't there, and those that were ain't talking.
|
|
Nov 14, 2024 18:17:57 GMT -5
*
Nov 14, 2024 18:17:57 GMT -5
*
Nov 15, 2024 17:44:51 GMT -5
Nov 15, 2024 17:44:51 GMT -5
