Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology => Topic started by: coden33 on 06/01/2014 07:14:56
-
USA Carolina Bay formation theories:
Recently, I came across a discussion referencing Carolina Bay formation theories. So I thought it might be interesting to discuss the various theories within its own thread:
What is most commonly known about structures called Carolina Bays is that they are flat bottomed, circular depressions, from a few feet to tens of feet in depth and from a few acres to thousands of acres in area; usually filled with water, when not drained for agriculture. Many thousands are evident on the Central Atlantic coastal plains of the USA. However, it should be noted that similar structures, with many different names, can be found over much of Earth's surface.
The most popular theory had all of the hundreds of thousands of these depressions formed by impacts from fragments of meteors or comets. Unfortunately, the age of deposits inside varied widely, requiring tens of thousands of different fragments to impact a limited area over tens of thousands of years. Furthermore, the fragments ALL had to impact in nearly the same NE direction and it would not be logical for all the meteors or comets to travel in only one direction. Plus, their flat bottoms and the relatively level layers of geologic strata beneath them rule out any impacts by anything.
Others believe high pressure winds formed these structures, which I consider physically impossible. Strong winds can form long rows of sand dunes, but not circular structures, surrounded by 10 to 30 foot high borders of sand; which would have been blown away by high winds.
A few believe swirling water currents somehow produced these structures, with the assumption that the areas where they are now located was then under water. This is an interesting concept, but not likely when one considers the destructive power of wave action, especially during storm surges, which would have wiped out the still existing borders of sand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay
Finally, the nearly uniform NE direction of the long axis of oval depressions is more aligned with the slope of surrounding soils, demonstrating a dependence on the angle of preexisting geological deposits and little else.
Google Earth LIDAR images and http://www.georgehoward.net/cbays.htm.
In recent years, research teams have drilled half inch diameter holes in and around many of these depressions, around two meters deep; where the soil was above water. Substantial amounts of hydrogen gas were detected inside the depressions' borders, with very little or none found outside. This was the same result in similar depressions tested in the USA [North & South Carolina, Kansas, Nebraska], Russia, Ukraine and Oman, Africa.
What I found more interesting was the fact that little or no hydrocarbons were found. However, when the vegetation within some depressions was set on fire, by lightening or man, fires would often spread over relatively large areas. Some fires resisted being extinguished and lasted for weeks. Their flames also appeared nearly invisible after the vegetation was burnt off. This is a characteristic of hydrogen gas fueled fire, unlike the more colorful flames resulting from decayed vegetation gases or natural gas fires; which can also last for extended periods.
Vegetation was also affected by increased hydrogen gas emissions in core areas. The difference is visible to the naked eye, with crops, grasses, shrub or trees appearing markedly paler in color.
Water is most commonly associated with hydrogen emissions, which is understandable since hydrogen is a reactive gas and can combine with oxides to form water [HOH]. Indeed, many similar structures have fresh water springs; the water of which appears to have no carbon 14 and therefore could not have come from the surface.
In Africa, some oasis water holes are thought to be evidence of hydrogen emissions creating water by combining with sub-surface oxides; with no useful rainfall for extended periods. One oasis village in Mali, Africa, had a well drilled in search of pure water. The drillers were surprised to find 98% hydrogen gas. So they rigged up a hydrogen powered generator to supply the local village with electricity. When a driller asked the village chieftain what he wanted most from the new found electrical power, he answered, “Refrigeration to make Ice Cream.” [He got it.]
Now other companies are considering drilling exclusively for hydrogen gas, but that activity has some potentially dangerous problems; which I first encountered while working with Shell Oil in 1956.
NH2E.com
One possible answer to how a relatively flat plain became populated by circular depressions is based on the fact that hydrogen atoms are small enough to uniquely reside within the atoms and molecules of many other elements. Their presence creates no increase in sample size; only increased density. Hydrogen atoms can also pass slowly through other atoms and molecules, much like water moves within aquifers.
However, when stressed by external forces, hydrogen atoms can effuse more rapidly from within the other elements and combine to form hydrogen molecules between their grain boundaries; splitting them apart. This ability of hydrogen atoms to pass through other elements as well as weaken their grain boundary bonds makes the storage and pipeline transport of hydrogen a difficult, expensive and potentially wasteful process. This behavior of hydrogen is known in the materials industry as Hydrogen Embrittlement, a continuing threat to the strength of materials. This is especially common in drilling equipment utilized in deep wells; which are often found to be saturated with hydrogen gas.
http://www.uni-saarland.de/fak8/wwm/research/phd_barnoush/hydrogen.pdf
Dr.-Ing. Afrooz Barnoush, December 1, 2011
I suggest that Carolina Bay type depressions appear to have been formed by hydrogen emissions which had a greater flow rate in the past. I suspect that hydrogen emissions were the result of stresses created by earth tides and were substantial enough to allow the combining hydrogen molecules to produce an expansion of Earth's crustal layers. This would then elevate the surface of the ground in a circular manner; in effect a hydrogen bubble.
If true, the elevated surface would eventually become weathered and eroded surface materials would be deposited around the elevated surface. Then, with a decrease in the flow rate of hydrogen emissions, the now eroded surface would deflate and become a shallow, flat bottomed, circular or oval depression, surrounded by now elevated borders of eroded materials, usually sand.
Fact remains, hydrogen researchers testing Carolina Bay type structures have found significant amounts of hydrogen gas emissions, but only in the interiors of the depressions.
Because hydrogen gas “seeps” are found all over the world, the concept of utilizing hydrogen gas wells to obtain sufficient quantities of hydrogen to power electrical generating systems and produce substantial amounts of anhydrous ammonia for fuel and fertilizer may become a world changing activity. However, just for my personal interest, If anyone has a better idea as to how the “Carolina Bays” were formed, I would sincerely appreciate their explanation.
-
What would be the effect on coastal areas from dropping the sea level by 120 meters or so? Could it have caused a significant drop in water tables along the coast?
If so, could these be ancient sinkholes?
I don't know about the hydrogen gas. Perhaps there are some bacteria species that generate hydrogen, like some produce methane.
-
I have no idea as to what the effect of lowering sea levels might do. Remember, there are similar depressions all over the world with no prior or current relationship with sea levels. I think Hydrogen expansion is the probable cause here. Still interested in the contributions of anyone with a better idea as to how these depressions were formed, as I freely admit I don't really know for sure. I'm a Metallurgist, not a Geologist; but I'm interested in the possibility of finding a source of free hydrogen to be utilized in production of ammonia. Would be cheaper than Haber-Bosch process.
-
There is this guy on Google Earth who claims that they were created by an impact in the Saginaw Bay. His theory is that the bays are "splash marks" of trillions of tons of lofted sand and that the bays have cousins in Nebraska made from the same impact.
If that were the case wouldn't the sand in the coastal plain be made from shocked quartz? Would this not be easy to either verify or debunk?
I do not think that is what happened. Best I can figure is that they are remnants of wind/water erosion since there does not seem to be any other logical explanation.
I ever read that they are remnants of giant fish nests from when the water level was higher. But what fish would be big enough to clear out a bay the size of lake Waccamaw?
-
Apparently many of the Carolina Bay have an orientation. I think there have been some reports of microdiamonds and magnetic spherules suggesting a possible asteroid impact, but apparently this is controversial. I could imagine an asteroid or comet breaking up and creating a shotgun pattern of impacts.
I'm not sure about the accuracy of the age determinations. 14C dating generally requires dating life, when the goal here is to date a geological formation.
As far as I can tell, all Carolina Bays around the world are within 50 or 100 miles or so from the coast, and between whatever coastal mountain range and the sea. Perhaps one would have a different name for a similar formation in Kansas. However, only finding them near the ocean might indicate some other formation than a shattered asteroid or comet.
I can imagine bubbles of methane or hydrogen, but other than sinkholes, I can't imagine how they would form the bays.
For the formation of Hydrogen, look for bacteria that might generate hydrogen. And, if you've found a good source of hydrogen, if it is created by microorganisms, then it would be reasonable to determine what critters are making it as they might be useful for commercial production.
If it is occurring near the surface, it may be difficult to capture on a wide area, but perhaps one could install the equivalent of perforated drain tubes to collect the hydrogen. If deeper, perhaps one could isolate a few more concentrated sources and put in wells.
I think this is one of the issues with methane release from permafrost is that it would be a great resource, but is difficult to collect over millions of square miles of ice and snow.
-
I forgot about Giant Fish Spawning Nests and shocked quartz, along with meteor fragments, that are among the many other stories about Carolina Bay formation. Meteor or comet breakup doesn't seem logical to me because of the widely varied dates of Bays with the same orientation in the same area, same as in many other parts of the world. I can't find any evidence of “shocked quartz” or meteor fragments being found either.
Plus the now elevated surrounding borders of largely sand, some 10 to 30 feet wide and similar in height, and higher in the low end of ovals, would have been long gone if wind and waves were involved. Same for “Bays” in Nebraska, Kansas, Indiana, even Viet Nam, Australia, Africa, etc. Out here in Colorado we call them “Buffalo Wallows;” which make for good water holes. All ovals seem to have the same ground slope orientation, regardless of their date of apparent evolution; whereas on level ground they are round.
As for the hydrogen, which is physically capable of expanding the materials in which it is effusing, a quote from the Kola Superdeep Borehole Project might be of interest: Finally, after drilling 7.6 miles deep into Russia's Kola Peninsula, project geologists were quoted as “surprised to find large quantities of hydrogen gas and water.” Furthermore, no radioactive elements, long assumed to create Earth's internal heat flow, were found.
Another physical fact to consider: When hydrogen combines with oxides an exothermic reaction occurs, releasing some 3,200 F degree of heat. Possibly why many deep water Carolina Bay types do not freeze over during intensely cold weather; while deeper man-made lakes provide good ice skating. I lived in North Carolina so that is just a personal observation.
-
Hundreds of thousands of circular, sometimes oval depressions can be found all over the habitable world; from Africa to Australia. These are often water filled and can range from a few to thousands of acres, usually ringed by substantial borders of sand. Known by many names, in North and South Carolina there are tens of thousands called “Carolina Bays.”
http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/wetlands/carolinabays.html
Many theories have been proposed for their formation. From comet or meteor impacts, fish nests and beaver ponds, to wind and water activity.
http://cintos.org/SaginawManifold/Distal_Ejecta/CarolinaBays/index.html
Problem for me is that the borders which have been dated vary in age by thousands of years. There are even younger ovals which have formed inside older ovals, as well as ovals with overlapping borders of different ages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay
Then there are the “Ghost Bays,” with their depressions now completely filled in and their barely visible borders leveled by erosion. I can't find any formation dates for them, but they appear older than the more obvious ovals.
http://www.georgehoward.net/cbays.htm Item 14.
Seem to me that that Carolina Bays begin when a parcel of land is elevated by gas pressures. Then, over time, wind and/or water will erode the elevated portion and surface materials, such as sand, will wash down the sides and collect around the outer edge. Then, with a reduction of gas pressure beneath the elevated portion, the eroded surface will collapse, forming a depression surrounded by a border of sand.
This possibility may be supported by the fact that measurable amounts of gas still effuse from inside the borders of many Carolina Bays, with no gas flow to be found outside. (I assisted in this research, peer review publication pending.) The same behavior was identified in similar depressions with raised borders in Russia; where another one appeared during the last decade.
http://uahe.net.ua/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=132&Itemid=1&lang=en
LIDAR measurements of elevations also indicates the varied NW-SE orientations of these ovals are more aligned with the slope of the land in which they formed than any alignment with celestial related impacts or the effects of wind or water erosion in the past.
http://ned.usgs.gov/
So I came up with the following, based more on logic than geology: gas pressure elevates an oval portion of sloped land. (Flat lands have circular depressions.) Over time, eroded materials collect around the outer edge. Eventually, reduced gas pressure allows the eroded, elevated portion to collapse into a depression. The surrounding materials remain as a raised border indicative of a Carolina Bay.
If anyone has a better answer, I will sincerely consider any alternative.
-
You started an almost identical topic last year.
I went ahead and appended the new topic to the previous topic.
Perhaps there will be new insights to the question.
-
Been working on my hypothesis and may try to get it published: There are circular or oval depressions all over the world. Most are ringed with borders of apparently eroded materials. They are found in regions of freezing cold and intense heat, in regions of considerable moisture and scorching deserts. They range in size from a few acres to thousands, from 200 feet to 5 miles across and more.
Many hypothesis are offered to explain their formation. From comet or meteor impacts, through freeze-thaw activity and melting glacial boulders, along with chemical reactions and giant fish nests or beaver ponds, with prehistoric winds and water activity becoming more plausible. (1)
Many depressions are found along the Eastern Seaboard, from Cape Cod into Georgia. They are known locally by different names, but in North and South Carolina they are Carolina Bays. (2)
Carolina Bays' borders can be 24 feet high or more, with substantial width at the downhill end. These borders often contain large amounts of quartz or white sand. (3)
One hypothesis has these depressions created by impacts from fragments of comets or meteors. (4) Many claim their largely NW-SE orientation resulted when a cosmic object blew up overhead. Later, others claimed they resulted from glacial ice blown outward after a cosmic impact in the Great Lakes region. This hypothesis also claims the rims resulted when impacts displaced the soil. (5)
However, layers of sediment show no impact displacement and elevated rims are nearly uniform in altitude, within a few feet, over rim circumferences of 15 miles or more. There are also circular depressions and some ovals are E – W in their orientation; near Bethel, NC, for example. (6)
Another popular hypothesis is based on water freezing in loose soils, claiming this produces surface expansion or Frost Heaves, which would then thaw and shrink, forming Thermokarst depressions. However, Frost Heaves are small in comparison to Carolina Bays. In addition, Frost Heaves seldom produce raised borders and have never occurred in warmer regions where depressions with borders are common; South Carolina for example. (7)
Some claim that repeated cycles of Freeze-Thaw will enlarge and deepen depressions, then intense NW winds will break up surface ice on water filled depressions and cause ice flows to grind against shallow bottoms. Then these NW winds are said to carry bottom deposits onto the shores, supposedly producing the wider SE rims.
This might make sense for some, but not for a Carolina Bay with thousands of surface acres and a rim height little different than others far smaller in area. For example, Lake Waccamaw, NC, originally a depression 5.77 by 3.37 miles, some 14,000 acres or 22 square miles in area, with a uniform rim height around 39 feet.
Step outside and look towards an object five miles distant, then try to imagine a Frost Heave that large in South Carolina or anywhere else.
Another related “Theory” is the origin of Kettle Holes or Kettle Lakes and wetlands, with as many as 365 identified in Cape Cod alone. They are found in regions of the world once glaciated in the past, including Indiana and Nebraska, Canada and Alaska. Here again we have many circular to oval depressions, often ringed with deposits of materials, similar to Carolina Bays. Again, mostly one mile or less across, with a few up to six miles across. (8)
Kettle Hole origin theory, still taught in northern schools of geology, is that ice boulders, calved from retreating glaciers, are responsible. They claim these boulders, some six miles across, sank into soft ground and thawed in place. Some claim they may have existed for thousands of years before finally melting and forming depressions.
I have vacationed in Alaska and closely observed many slowly melting, retreating glaciers. No ice boulders were seen or reported. Not much support for glacier boulders supposedly breaking off from melting rivers of ice on land. Again, look outside to a point six miles distant and think.
Meanwhile, deposits of materials around Kettle Hole margins, called ramparts, are said to result from sudden floods of sediments, occurring when ice dams break. These floods are called Jokulhaups. Since Kettle Hole rims are fairly uniform, this is highly unlikely.
The Violent Winds hypothesis has supporters making convincing demonstrations as to how these winds blew circular depressions into the soil. Unfortunately, the rims of Carolina Bays, Kettle Holes, etc., are very uniform in altitude, which makes such a uniform displacement by winds in every direction an impossible feat, especially when concentric rims are seen within rims formed during an earlier period. (9)
A more scientific hypothesis claims depressions resulted from a chemical reaction subsidence or shrinkage in alluvial deposits. The mechanism is said to be effusing hydrogen gas, which is so reactive that it can split the oxides out of other minerals, hydrogen and silicon-oxide for one. This produces water (HOH) which is said to evaporate and shrink the volume of surface deposits. Makes sense, but, again, this fails to explain the elevated rims of materials.
LIDAR measurements of surface elevations indicate depressions are more aligned with the slope of the land in which they formed, in addition to having rims or borders at nearly the same altitude completely around the depression's circumference. The greatest deposits are found at downhill ends and the least at uphill ends, which is how materials erode from elevated surfaces, whether the oval orientation is NE – SW, E – W or N – S. (6)
Apparently, no current hypothesis or “theory” for the formation of Carolina Bays is valid, when their raised borders are considered. Especially after Optically Stimulated Luminescence was used to date the ages of their borders. These dates ranged from 7,000 to 140,000 years in rims sampled in South Carolina.
Then consider that many rims overlap the rims of other depressions with different ages. There are also “Ghost Bays,” with their depressions completely filled in and their barely visible borders leveled by erosion. (10) These may be millions of years old, but their borders have yet to be dated.
My hypothesis is that these depressions, whether Carolina Bays or Kettle Holes or Russian Seeps, developed after land was elevated by internal gas pressures; which would increase porosity and volume. Eventually, wind and/or water eroded the elevated land and surface materials washed down the sides of these elevated parcels, collecting around their margins.
Later, with a reduction of gas pressures, the now eroded surface deflated, resulting in a depression surrounded by a raised border. One recent example of land elevated by gases appeared off the coast of Pakistan on September 13, 2013. Previous examples exhibiting the same behavior in the same region have since eroded and become depressions with borders. (11)
This hypothesis is supported by the physical fact that measurable amounts of flammable gas vent not only from the Pakistan “island”, but continue to vent inside borders of Carolina Bays, with little or no gas flow found outside. In Russia, the same behavior of flammable gas seeps was identified in depressions similar to Carolina Bays, with another depression appearing there during the last decade. (12) This investigation was published in the peer reviewed journal NATURAL RESOURCES RESEARCH.
Critical evidence appears in concentric rims occurring in the center of larger depressions. OSL dating established the fact that interior rims are progressively younger, reflecting a regressive sequence over time. This proves these depressions are not the result of a single impact, freeze-thaw event or violent winds, but instead evolved due to a process that was active episodically over a long period of time. The very fact that concentric rims exist, with younger ages than those of outer rims, reinforces the possibility of sub-surface forces being responsible.
The mechanism which elevates surface areas can be found in another hypothesis of mine, gaseous emissions inside Earth created by the sun's and moon's gravitational attraction. Gravity produces land tides twice each day inside the crust. Earth's surface at the equator rises and falls around 8 inches. This is evidenced by twice daily pressure changes within the earth; observed by drillers of boreholes over many years. (13)
While crustal distortion is less at Carolina latitudes, the stress on materials inside the crust must still be substantial. One result of this stress is the effusion of atomic hydrogen contained within sub-surface crystals. This produces molecular hydrogen between the crystals, creating expanded pores or spaces within the earth. Obviously, expansion within sedimentary pores may elevate surface layers. This gaseous expansion activity is known as Hydrogen Embrittlement. (14)
My partners, Viacheslav Zgonnik and Nikolay Larin drilled small boreholes into many North and South Carolina depressions and also outside their borders. Then they measured emerging gas flow. In one Carolina Bay of 998 acres, gas flow inside depression was estimated at 52 tons per day while gas flow outside its borders was nil. The composition of this gas was verified by laboratory analysis to be largely hydrogen. Previously, they measured hydrogen flows in Kettle Holes in Nebraska and in earlier in Russian Seeps (12), being the only scientists to do that. (Publication pending peer review.)
Summary: Internal gas pressures can elevate a portion of land, sometimes 20 square miles in area. Over time, eroded materials from elevated surfaces will collect around its margin. Eventually, reduced gas pressures will allow the eroded, elevated portion to collapse into a depression. The surrounding materials often remain as a raised rim or border indicative of a Carolina Bay or Kettle Hole or Russian Seep type depression. References follow:
1. Review of different explanations for the formation of Carolina Bays: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay
2. SOILS AND NEAR SURFACE GEOLOGY OF CAROLINA BAYS: A REVIEW http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/bitstream/1840.16/5874/1/chapter1.pdf
3. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources report on Carolina Bays: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/wetlands/carolinabays.html
4. Interpreting Carolina Bays as Glacier Ice impacts
http://www.scientificpsychic.com/etc/carolina-bays/carolina-bays.html
5. Corelating the Orientation of Carolina bays to a Cosmic Impact
http://cintos.org/SaginawManifold/Distal_Ejecta/CarolinaBays/index.html
6. National Elevation Dataset: http://ned.usgs.gov/
7. Detailed analysis of Frost Heaves: www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA295688
8. Brief review of Kettle Holes or Lakes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettle_(landform)
9. Magnificent LIDAR images of depressions along the Easter Seaboard as well as in Nebraska, said to result from violent winds: http://cintos.org/LiDAR_images/
10. Report on possible effects of masses of ice bouncing back from major celestial impact in the Great Lakes region, resulting in Carolina Bays, including “Ghost Bays”: http://www.georgehoward.net/cbays.htm Item 14.
11. Recent island that emerged off coast of Gwadar, Pakistan “emits flammable gas” :
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24272552 Photos and size of island: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/10/06/new-photos-pakistan-earthquake-island/
12. Investigation into Hydrogen seeps in Russia. http://hydrogen-future.com/en/news-en/51-articlehydrogenseeps-en.html
13. Explanation of Sun-moon earth tidal gravitational effects: https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/scenario/tides.htm
14. Detailed report on the manner in which hydrogen can pass through as well as be stored within other materials, i.e. Hydrides: http://www.uni-saarland.de/fak8/wwm/research/phd_barnoush/hydrogen.pdf
-
Greetings:
At times I become conflicted about which is the greater failure of science: the failure to protect these exotic habitats from destruction or the failure to arrive at a proven solution to their origin.
Consider that the Venus Flytrap ONLY exists within Carolina bays, as do a mirad of other exotic flora and fauna. In my satellite, aerial and LiDAR survey of ~44,000 bays, it appears that over 99% of bays have been ditched, drained and converted to farmland or built on. A precious few, such as Antioch bay, are currently preserved in their natural state. Sadly, per a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, they are not protected by the Clean Water Act.
On the origin side, there seems to be much misinformation arising from 70 years of sporadic research. My survey documents an aspect that has been observed since the 40's - that their orientation rotates "systematically by latitude", and is shown to be clockwise from NY (W-E) to Alabama (N-S), and that rotation continues that trend out to Nebraska, where the "Rainwater Basins" are orientated SW-NE.
Another facet that is disturbing to me is that the vast majority of dating has been done within the upper most 50 cm in the obvious (as seen in the LiDAR) wind-reworked dunes off to the SE ends of the bays. No attempt has been undertaken to use the latest 10Be/26Al cosmogenic dating technologies that can offer older dating than the 50ka of C14 or the 120ka of OSL. This is important since those older techniques can only offer "not younger than" age when sampling those rim sands. I theorize they are far older than given credit for being. Remember those exotic plants and animals? They did not evolve over a glacial cycle or two.
The links to Cintos.org listed above reference my work.
-Michael Davias
-
This is an interesting topic, and I only came across it because of my research into the cause of the Younger Dryas (Y-D) cooling, and the Y-D impact hypothesis. Some background on the Younger Dryas impact theory can be seen in this video, where there are many geological indicators for a NE America impact 12,900 bp causing the Y-D cooling era:
.
And the proposal for a large impact on the Laurentide ice sheet gives the distinct possibility that the Nabraska and Carolina bays were secondary impacts radiating out from the primary Laurentide impact. Furthermore, it gives the distinct possibility that these secondary impacts were low-velocity ice impacts, not rock or meteoric material at orbital speeds. Now the guy in the following video is not a geologist, but he gives the best explanation I have seen for this secondary impact hypothesis.
.
However, I would like to suggest a slight modification to this explanation. The main problems with the impact formation of these bays are:
They only form on loose material.
They are shallow impacts, not craters.
They are nicely uniform ellipses.
The slight modification that might explain all of these points, is that the author of this video may have over-estimated the strength of ice-blocks. Ice is very brittle, and will easily shatter through impact or thermic stresses. In which case, the ice-bolide may well end up as more of a loosely compacted snowball than a cohesive chunk of ice. And when a snowball impacts the ground it will:
Only deform loose surface materials.
Create a shallow impact 'splash', rather than a crater.
Form nice regular ellipses.
So I think the secondary ice-impact theory is the most reasonable and logical answer to the Carolina bays, but someone might need to re-do these impact experiments with a snowball hitting mud, rather than a lump of ice hitting mud.
Ralph
-
You might also like this page on the Carolina bays. Their figs 2 and 10 correct the flight-time for the secondary ice-bolides for coriolis effects, and this places the primary impact right in the middle of the Great Lakes. And this makes the eastern and western bays all roughly equidistant from the main impact site, which again supports the theory that these 'bays' are all secondary projectile impacts.
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcintos.org%2FSaginawManifold%2Fintroduction%2Ffiles%2Fmanifold_portrait_arrow.jpg&hash=db798385e807661e30ad0d89f0db319e)
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcintos.org%2FSaginawManifold%2Fintroduction%2Ffiles%2Fbutterfly_portrait.jpg&hash=8c1e3846e993e2a978700a53a153d654)
.
This may even suggest that the Great Lakes were formed or enhanced in some manner by this primary impact, which would suggest that the primary impact was very large indeed.
It will not let me post the url, for some reason, so please google for:
"Correlating the Orientation of Carolina bays to a Cosmic Impact"
They also do some simple splatter tests with viscous materials, making elliptical impacts similar to the bays. But I really think they need some more examples and more experiments with this aspect of the theory. It is quite important that the theoretical impacts mimic the actual bays.
-
I have written a new article about the Carolina Bays:
The Carolina Bays and the destruction of North America
What created the many elliptical Carolina Bay landform depressions?
And what caused the Younger Dryas cooling period 12,900 years ago?
Could these two seemingly disparate topics be linked in any way? Ralph Ellis takes a look at current research on both of these subjects, and discovers that they are likely to be linked to a large meteoric impact in the Great Lakes region some 12,900 years ago. It was the ejecta from this impact that created the Carolina Bays, and it was the same ejecta that blanketed the Earth and caused the Younger Dryas cooling period.
Please search for the title on Adademia.edu.
Ralph
-
The depressions are actually where the water under the crust burst through at great velocity and quantity at the start of The Flood 4,400 years ago. As th waters covered the entire land and was kept moving for 150days the depressions naturally filled with sediments washed off surrounding land and like all liquid mud it all settled very flat.
Darwin pointed out the source of all the fill matter but his work is rubbished and hidden unlike his Evolution'.
The radioactivity in the materials in the craters may be different to the surrounding but it may be necessary to drill deep to find the strongest radioactivity and C14.
The science is found at:http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/PartI.html
-
The depressions are actually where the water under the crust burst through at great velocity and quantity at the start of The Flood 4,400 years ago.
Wow, is this what counts for science in Cambridge University nowadays??
I knew that standards in academia had slumped to a new low in the last couple of decades, but I would never have guessed that it had sunk this low. Geez, I get better responses down at the local kindergarten.
Ralph
-
The depressions are actually where the water under the crust burst through at great velocity and quantity at the start of The Flood 4,400 years ago.
Wow, is this what counts for science in Cambridge University nowadays??
I knew that standards in academia had slumped to a new low in the last couple of decades, but I would never have guessed that it had sunk this low. Geez, I get better responses down at the local kindergarten.
Ralph
You make an interesting assumption, which I assume is incorrect.
I agree with you about the 'quality' of the response, but not of its source.
Open forums attract a wide range of posters, just look at new theories!
-
Open forums attract a wide range of posters, just look at new theories!
And what is wrong with the new theory?
All too often, academia will not even consider something new. A NIH response. This results in a few ill-considered objections to a new theory, which are easily deflected, and then a flat denial. So despite not being able to falsify an argument, it is declared false anyway 'because it has to be'. Seen this too many times.
Ralph
-
And what is wrong with the new theory?
There is nothing wrong with a well researched theory based on sound scientific analysis. However, if you look at the New Theories section you will see posters claiming the earth is flat, rockets cannot work in space, gravity is due to air pressure etc, would you wish to defend them?
What I was pointing out is that very few of the people who post here belong to the Naked Scientist programme or to Cambridge University. This is an open forum not academia.
-
This post describes a theory which has been previously published elsewhere. This is not allowed under the forum rules which all users agree to on registration.
-
trying to convince the gradualist elites that catastrophic things DO happen.
Here's a bit of advice, I was reading your post with interest until I hit this last part. Calling a competing idea elitist makes me think you are emotionally tied to your theory and therefore possibly biased in your evaluation of data. Implying that a gradualist does not accept that any cataclysms existed Is also hyperbole. Your last sentence makes me question your entire post.
-
To me they look like markings you get in clay where water pools.
-
Great Question.
Back in 2015 I watched the thunderbolts.info video "The Lightning-Scared Planet Mars"
My intuition was saying "yes."
A few years later I watched the vimeo model of "Mars Earth Shock 747 B.C." 137043235
I know I'm going out on a limb here, But I propose that the Carolina Bays (and all the other elliptical craters on North America) are the result of a thunderbolt from Mars back in the year 747 BC as it floated by like a passing god and slammed a lightning static charge exchange into the State of Michigan epicenter.
As a result of that thunderbolt... Old Atlantis did not sink like many speculate... Old Atlantis was blasted into annihilation.
It seems the song "Live - Lightning Crashes (Official Music Video)" reflects upon that type of lightning.
The thunderbolt theory sounds more honest than the wind doing it considering the Nebraska Basins also pointing towards Michigan... Why do "They Call the Wind, Mariah"?
Thanks,
James