[meteorite-list] Observations on Age of Carolina Bays: Paul H: Rich Murray 2009.11.15

From: Rich Murray <rmforall_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:12:26 -0700
Message-ID: <B62E2DB9A4B246199B69E72CB409E356_at_ownerPC>

Re: [meteorite-list] Observations on Age of Carolina Bays: Paul H: Rich
Murray 2009.11.15
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.htm
Sunday, November 15, 2009
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/32

Hello all,

I am very appreciative of Paul's conscientious, careful
contributions, based on civility, reason, and public evidence.

Will there be many confirmations of ET markers in classic
Carolina Bays? And in similar clusters in many parts of the
world?

Will a single place and time be found for a single or multiple
sources, or multiple sources with multiple places and times?

Are data already available for mineral elements and isotopes
at classic and possible Carolina Bay type craters?

I find cracked, broken, overturned, and tossed bedrocks
up to 2 m size at many craters near Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Many of these rocks have white, grey, greenish, red-brown,
and black glazes or coatings, from 0.1 to 10 cm thick, even
curled around the edge of bedrock layers for 10 cm,
often with rough surface textures with little wind or water
erosion.

Also ordinary white quartz rocks up to 20 cm, glazed on one
side with what appears as 0.2 to 3 cm melted quartz,
sometimes with a yellow tinge.

And 3 m thick level sandstone layers, exposed roadcuts
about 30 m above the landscape, that have up to 10 cm white
and gray mineral layers that appear to have been plastered on
the vertical surfaces.

I will glad to show visitors my samples, and to give tours of
accessible sites -- many right beside public roads.

I will be happy to search for sites with Google Earth for free
within 80 km of any location, so they can be studied by those
who live near the center coordinates.

Best, Rich Murray

exact Carolina Bay crater locations, RB Firestone, A West, et al,
two YD reviews, 2008 June, 2009 Nov, also 3
upcoming abstracts: Rich Murray 2009.11.14
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.htm
Saturday, November 14, 2009
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/31

nanodiamond evidence for 12,900 BP Clovis extinction impact,
Santa Rosa Island, discussion on Scientific American website,
Carolina Bay type craters east of Las Vegas, NM:
Rich Murray 2009.09.15
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.htm
Friday, July 24, 2009
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/28

widespread Carolina Bay type craters from Clovis comet
12,900 Ya BP? -- 0.7 M long NS crater with fractured
red sandstone on SW rim, CR C 53A, 20 miles E of
Las Vegas, NM: Rich Murray 2009.06.08
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.htm
Monday, June 8, 2009
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/27
_____________________________________________________


----- Original Message -----
From: <oxytropidoceras at cox.net>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 12:46 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Observations on Age of Carolina Bays
 ______________________________________________
 http://www.meteoritecentral.com
 Meteorite-list mailing listis
 Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
 http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

As I will discuss in a paper that I am preparing, Carolina Bays
are not at all difficult to date in terms of their age relative to the
Younger Dryas as documented in a number of published, peer-
reviewed papers and specific Cultural Resource Management
reports. There is a huge amount of information available about
either the age or relative age of the Carolina Bays to be found
by carefully and persistently digging through the large number
of publications about them and the geomorphology of the
Atlantic coastal plain.

1. Radiocarbon dates are all minimum dates indicating
when ground water conditions allowed the preservation of
organic material within them. All the basal dates tells a person
is the last time that a bay was permanently filled with water
because of a rising groundwater table, which is greatly influenced
by rises and falls in eustatic sea level. Despite the fact that the
radiocarbon dates are only minimum dates, they clearly
demonstrate that the Carolina Bays predate the Younger Dryas
event.

2. Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dating is now
a well established and proven dating method, which gives
credible dates for the age of these landforms. A person might
argued for mxing of older and younger sand, except that
Dr. Ivester, whom I personally discussed this matter with
on the GSA 2008 Meeting sand mantle, biomantle, mima
mound field trip told me that he did not find the anomalies
in the raw data for his dates that such mixing would create.
Also, a person can always use single-grain OSL dating to
unequivocally test for such mixing. Given that Dr. Ivester is
a very experienced Quaternary geologist, the claim he dated
the wrong material, in my opinion is the type of lame excuse
that I hear from Young Earth creationists when the data
refutes what they want to believe is the truth. If a person is
 going to make this claim, they need to back it up with hard
and well-documented facts for it to be credible in any
manner at all.

3. The pollen records from several Carolina Bays clearly
go back to the last Glacial Maximum and in one bay,
back to Oxygen Isotope Stage 5a. In many more Carolina
Bays, the paleoenvironmental records start during full
glacial conditions, several thousands of years before the
hypothesized Younger Dryas event. Common sense and
basic stratigraphic principles dictate that the Carolina Bays
containing these records existed before any hypothesized
Younger Dryas events, as it is physically impossible for
any sort of exterrestrial event / impact to create craters
thousands of years before it occurs. It is impossible for
mixing of sediment to have produced these records, as
the paleoenvironmental records recovered from Carolina
Bays correlate precisely in time and nature to palynological
records from non-Carolina Bay lakes and swamps in the
same area as a Carolina Bay.

4. Cross-cutting relationships between well dated fluvial
terraces (lacking Carolina Bays) cut and inset into older
terraces and the Carolina Bays they exhibit establish the
minimum age of Carolina Bays. Similarly the superposition
dunes fields, which formed during the Late Glacial
Maximum and lacking Carolina Bays, upon Carolina
Bays that they partial bury, establish the pre-Younger
Dryas age of the Carolina Bays. Both cross-cutting
relationships and superposition are documented in great
detail by LIDAR DEMs available for large parts of the
Atlantic Coast.

5. Stratified archaeological sites demonstrate how
Carolina Bays have been modified after the Younger
Dryas. Carolina Bays on restricted government
reservations indicate how historic argriculture and
urban development have modified Carolina Bays
during the last few decades by comparison.

6. All the presence of hypothesized impactites filling
the Carolina Bays indicates is that preexisting Carolina
Bays was filled by material from this hypothesized impact.
The presence of hypothetical impactites within the loose
soils of coastal plain sands forming the rim of Carolina
Bays indicates that bioturbation mixed material fell
on the surface into the loose sand forming the rims.
The churning of surface materials deep into thick sandy
epipedons is a well documented and well known process.

7. In the northern extent of the distribution of Carolina
Bays, their orientation varies by over 120 degrees, and based
upon cross-cutting relationships and great differences in
the degree of degradation of their rims, there are strong
indications of multiple generations of Carolina Bays having
formed at greatly different times. The claim by Firestone that
both the Carolina Bays and playa and other lakes point at a
central point is based on him having overlooked a significant
amount of orientation data that both subtly and grossly
contradicts and ultimately refutes his claim.

8. Although it is still in the realm of speculation, there
appears to be evidence that indicates that the Carolina Bays
in the Midlothian area are much older than the typical
Carolina Bays that are found on Pleistocene coast-wise
terraces.

In my opinion, as far as the Carolina Bays are concerned,
they are a nothing more than a time-consuming red herring
of gigantic proportions. Even if the Carolina Bays are impact
features of some sort, they clearly are much too old be
connected in anyway with a Younger Dryas event.

I am not going into references and figures because I am
pulling this all together into a paper that I am working on
and will submit to a journal that I know will both welcome
it and have it rigerously peer-reviewed. Before submitting
it, I will also have two or three select people review it.

Yours, Paul H.
_____________________________________________________


Rich Murray, MA
Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology,
BS MIT 1964, history and physics,
1943 Otowi Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505
505-501-2298 rmforall at comcast.net

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AstroDeep/messages

http://RMForAll.blogspot.com new primary archive

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/messages
group with 142 members, 1,588 posts in a public archive

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartame/messages
group with 1204 members, 23,955 posts in a public archive

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rmforall/messages

participant, Santa Fe Complex www.sfcomplex.org
_____________________________________________________
Received on Sun 15 Nov 2009 05:12:26 PM PST