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

From: E.P. Grondine <epgrondine_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:18:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <562587.44196.qm_at_web36901.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi Rich, Paul -

I think that they're looking at secondary craaters from ice chunks thrown out by original imapcts. While the Shawnee remembered multiple comet fragments hitting at the YD, my guess is that the bays may be from a different impact than the YD.

There seem to be other oriented tangential impact crater fields. There were other ice ages, and other impacts. Bottom line, there's been more impacts than we ever imagined.

We'll see - good luck with your research. Your white layers sound like impact "flour", but that wouldn't be from the YD.

The big wait is for the USGS cores from the Carolinas, which should be most informative. Gene Shoemaker's accident was truly misfortunate, as in my opinion if he were still with us this all would have been cleared up by now.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas

--- On Sun, 11/15/09, Rich Murray <rmforall at comcast.net> wrote:

> From: Rich Murray <rmforall at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Observations on Age of Carolina Bays: Paul H: Rich Murray 2009.11.15
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Cc: AstroDeep at yahoogroups.com, oxytropidoceras at cox.net
> Date: Sunday, November 15, 2009, 4:12 PM
> 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 06:18:40 PM PST