[meteorite-list] Dennis Cox comments re researching YDB ice comet fragment air bursts, USGS geochronology database: Rich Murray 2010.10.12

From: Rich Murray <rmforall_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:10:13 -0600
Message-ID: <8B44CC53E0FA44748BBE314471614EF0_at_ownerPC>

Dennis Cox comments re researching YDB ice comet fragment air bursts, USGS
geochronology database: Rich Murray 2010.10.12
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.htm
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
[ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/73
[you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser]
_______________________________________________


I would enjoy guiding people for free to walk over public access sites in
Santa Fe, New Mexico...

The accelerating flood of evidence and new paradigms provided by Dennis Cox
and others this year will spark a global contagion of collaboration, since
so much can be confirmed by anyone via Google Earth -- usually verifiable on
the ground near every location.

I spent 2 hours with my buddy Michael on Sunday afternoon, hiking on a level
public trail around Two Mile Reservoir, a little duck and beaver pond, just
east of the end of Cerro Gordo Road at Upper Canyon Road, taking photos of
air burst geo-ablative rocks and collecting two dozen GPS coordinates on its
steep north slope.
Truly, "...the answer was ablowing in the wind"...
35.687928 -105.894945


http://cosmictusk.com/tusk-exclusive-vance-holliday-provides-powerful-critique-of-the-younger-dryas-boundary-theory#comments

27 comments

Dennis Cox October 3, 2010 9:39 am [ http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/ ]

''...And any work which threatens to completely overturn the standard view
on any given subject has almost no chance of getting published.
Revelation of new, empirical fact often seems to take second place to
maintaining a "standard model" or status quo.
But the Internet is a way to make up for that.

For example, I've cataloged hundreds of structures in the American southwest
that indicate that, while his orbital dynamics don't fit the Taurid complex,
(We can't get an icy moon of one of the gas giants as the point of origin
for the Taurid progenitor.),
it can be shown that E.M. Drobyshevski's theories about the explosive
chemistry of icy bodies still hold up.

[ http://tmgnow.com/TMG1/2009/12/28/a-different-kind-of-catastrophe/

http://theholocenecomet.blogspot.com/2010/01/planetary-scaring-of-younger-dryas.html

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0903/0903.3309.pdf
18 pages
Tunguska-1908 and similar events in light of the New Explosive Cosmogony of
minor bodies
Edward M. Drobyshevski
Ioffe Physical-Technical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences,
194021 St-Petersburg, Russia
E-mail: emdrob at mail.ioffe.ru

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23234/

2009.03.27 article with comments ]

And there are quite literally too many of the non-standard, two-bowl
craters, that he describes, to count in west Texas and New Mexico.

I may not live long enough to see any of it in the refereed literature.
But I can make the data and galleries of image maps freely available online.
This might be the best way anyway.

Since we are talking about an event more violent than anything ever imagined
before, much less studied, there are no words in any language to properly
describe much of what I see.
But I've found that the old and simple, tried and true, primate method of
point and grunt seems to be working pretty good.
So I've decided to simply put everything I find online --
to then let the whole world do the peer review part.
I hope I'm not being too naive in hoping that the truth only needs to be
brought out into the light in order to flourish."


Dennis Cox October 5, 2010 11:45 am

"...From ground level, a pyroclastic density current of airburst melt is
indistinguishable from ordinary volcanic tuff.
But the motive force for a volcanic density current is gravity pulling the
high velocity materials down a slope.
It doesn't work on flat ground.
There is no provision in the standard model for it.

But the motive force for airburst melt is atmospheric pressure, pushing the
geo-ablative melt from behind, like the froth and foam, on a storm tossed
beach.
In both cases the materials are in atmospheric suspension while in motion.
And the differences in motive force result in distinctly different forms in
the patterns of movement and flow.
And those patterns of movement become frozen in time at the moment of
emplacement.
The truth becomes written in stone.

This means that we can scope out geologically young airburst melt in good
satellite imagery with a very high degree of confidence.
The final test has to be in the chemistry though.
And it is going to be something our grandparents would never have thought to
test for.
The key here is going to be in the isotopes.

Horton Newsom, at UNM, assures me that "a siderophile element enrichment
(Ni, Co, Cr, etc.) will be an important piece of evidence supporting an air
burst origin".

But, while we are looking at the isotopic mix, we need to get a better
handle on the geo-chronology.
Much of our assumptions in that area are due to using observed erosion rates
in our estimates.
No geologist of the past could have imagined such a thing as a geo-ablative
airburst storm that can melt and ablate a terrain like wax under a high
pressure blowtorch.

Nor could they ever have imagined that such an event can produce more mass
movement in seconds than normal hydrologic forces of weather could in many
millions of years --
with the unfortunate result that some of the youngest terrains on the
continent are assumed to be the oldest.

If the state of the science of geochronology is expressed by the USGS then
consider this:
I tried to download the USGS's geo-chronological database.
What I got was a huge spreadsheet in MS Excel format that you could print
out and cover a wall with.

And with more than 90% of the cells left empty.
To explain the empty cells, they included a disclaimer that none of the
"anomalous" data had been included in the database.
They didn't include any explanation of what they consider anomalous, or why.
And without free access to the whole dataset, warts and all, I remain to be
convinced of the validity of any of it.

And there are no entries for anywhere on the continent in the 'Age Since
Melt' column.
I am told that they only test the K/Ar ratio if an impact event is
suspected.
That a "full suite of impact markers" should first be presented.
And that test would not be reliable if the specimen is more than 30,000 or
40,000 years old.
So it is rarely done.

In the geophysical world according to me, if a specimen came from central
Mexico, the American southwest, or the Great Lakes region, and your eyes and
instincts tell you it was recently melted or burnt, never mind what your
grandpa thought; it probably was.

Detailed isotopic analysis, and age since melt, should be the first tests
you do.
Especially if the material is in pristine, unweathered condition on the
surface, and you're having a hard time identifying a volcanic system to take
the blame."


Dennis Cox
October 6th, 2010 10:36 am

"Hi Ed,

If we can ever get the chemistry and geo-chronology untangled, we should see
that the Taurid airburst storms have been a reoccurring disaster for
millennia since the main event.
And that multiple airburst, geo-ablative impact storms are the common rule.
Not the exception.
They have happened many times, all over the world.
And the Taurids aren't through with us...."


Dennis Cox
October 9th, 2010 4:11 am

"...As for me, my thinking is also founded on observable mass movement.
But being semi retired, and poor as a church mouse, gives me a certain
freedom that Bretz didn't enjoy.
I have no funding to lose.
I have no concern for the consequences of those observations to the
uniformitarian confabulation.
And thanks to the internet, I have no intention of being ignored, or
forgotten."


Dennis Cox
October 10th, 2010 1:58 pm

"...But perhaps the most significant questions that will remain after we
have worked out all those geomorphological and zoological details are the
human ones.
The impact storms of the Taurids weren't just disasters of biblical
proportions.
Those impact storms and their after effects were the very catastrophes our
ancestors remembered.
Those weren't just children's bedtime stories or religious myth.
Mega-floods, and 40 days and 40 nights of torrential rains, over an entire
hemisphere are an expected consequence of instantly evaporating a few
thousand cubic miles of water or ice directly into the atmosphere....


...As for funding, I don't see where that should remain a problem.
Zahi Hawass in Egypt demonstrates a good model for popularizing good
science.
His example makes it clear that good field work can make for darned
interesting TV.
And the success of shows like 'Meteorite Men' make it clear that the public
can't get enough of impact science.

I've got a great big catalogue of impact structures in some of the damnedest
terrains on Earth to get things rolling.
A science reality show like that with a brand spankin' new, undocumented
impact crater or geo-ablative airburst structure in every episode would
probably do well.
Especially if it is also doing revolutionary paradigm shifting science."



Dennis Cox
October 11th, 2010 11:08 pm

"30 years is way too long to wait.
I for one have no intention of doing so.
Geologically speaking, it's not a tough problem folks.
It's only been a few thousand years.
And the geomorphology of the event is still exposed, undisturbed, on the
surface.
The problem with recognizing the airburst geomorphology of the event is with
a failed 19th century uniformitarian geophysical model that's gone
unquestioned for far too long.

I know Ed thinks I'm looking at an older event.
He may be right.
I have no confidence in the state of the science of geochronology.
I am content to work out what happens to the ground in one of these events,
leaving the question of when it happened to others.
But for the record the materials I am studying come in an almost endless
variety.
What they all have in common is that they are all in perfectly pristine
condition, undisturbed and on the surface.
Whatever else these blast affected materials are, geologically old they ain't.

And since I can't figure out how anything in Central Mexico, Southwest
Texas, or the Great Lakes region could have survived, I really like it for a
prime suspect in the megafaunal extinctions.

If academia chooses to drag their feet for so long, chasing butterflies,
comparing notes, and and exhausting every conceivable non-catastrophic,
uniformitarian assumptive possibility, before simply looking at the ground
and recognizing that the pristine blast affected materials of the event are
right under their feet, they will find me waiting at the finish line,
happily saying, 'I told you so!'

Sometimes I get reminded of the Wizard of Oz, frantically trying to cover
himself while shouting into the microphone, "Pay no attention to the old man
behind the curtain!"
But Toto just won't go away.

It was no empty boast when I said I'd like to present a new, undocumented
crater a week.
If I leave out the geo-ablative airburst structures and melt, and
concentrate on just the normal craters, there are more than 200 in that
catalogue averaging the size of the Odessa crater, in Texas.

No bluff, no boast, somebody might want to check me on that.

Empirical demonstrable facts:

Airburst events come in all sizes.
And they can happen at any altitude.
Large ones are much more common than has been assumed.
Multiple airburst events are the rule, not the exception.

Large geo-ablative airburst storms can and do produce significant planetary
scarring.

Sir Charles Lyell was terribly wrong.
The present is not the key to the past at all.
The comfortable conditions we have enjoyed on this world during "recorded
history" give us no clue of how dangerous this solar system can be.
But understanding what happened in the past might be the key to surviving in
the future."


Dennis Cox

October 12th, 2010 12:54 pm

"[ Ed Grondine said, "
'Dennis, once again, you have to estimate the kill zone for each of those
impacts as precisely as you can based on the surviving ground data.

It doesn't matter what you can demonstrate, Dennis, if A) no one can hear
you, or B) no one will listen to your demonstration.'


That's Cassandra's curse.
She could see the truth.
But she couldn't share it.

I'm not willing to settle for that.
And if the stats on my blog page are any indicator, I don't have to.
People are listening.
But more importantly, they are looking where I am pointing with open eyes
and minds.

But in your use of the words "each of those impacts" you've expressed a
fundamental misconception in the distribution of the fragments.
And the actual nature of the event.
The misconception comes from the 'standard' impact model.
And it's one that almost everyone still shares.

You're still thinking from the assumption of single bolide impact.
You have to think plural.
Have you seen images of SW-3 or comet Linear, taken soon after their
respective breakups?
If you have, then you've a good idea of the fragment distribution and
particle density in the clusters.
Except you need to scale it up.
Linear and SW-3 are just little puppies.
Bring the debris streams of gravel and ice, into the atmosphere at a low
angle and about 30 km/sec.
And you begin to get the picture that the distribution of the blast affected
materials on the ground in the impact zones describes.

Surviving ground data isn't a problem.
The environment is one of the most arid on Earth.
After only a few thousand years the materials are pristine.
But trying to determine the kill zone for a single fragment is like trying
to determine which pellet in a shotgun round was the fatal one.

The zone of total devastation and maximum geo-ablation in north central
Mexico and West Texas covers more than 50,000 square miles.
And it produced well over 350,000 cubic miles of geo-ablative airburst melt.
Whenever it happened, it would have left a horizon in sedimentary strata,
the likes of which hasn't been seen in 65 million years.
Was it the YD event?
You tell me."
_______________________________________________



http://epswww.unm.edu/facstaff/newsom/

Horton E. Newsom, Ph.D., University of Arizona, 1982.
(Research Professor and Senior Research Scientist III, Institute of
Meteoritics)
(505) 277-0375; Email: newsom at unm.edu

Research and Academic Interests:

Geochemistry.
Co-investigator and science team member for the ChemCam instrument on the
Mars Science Laboratory;
research interests include understanding the origin and evolution of
planetary bodies, including planets, moons and asteroids,
geological effects of impact cratering on the Earth and Mars including
hydrothermal and atmospheric effects,
weathering and soil formation on Mars,
and educational outreach initiatives in K-12 science teaching.

http://meteorites.asu.edu/files/past%20recipients.pdf

Recipients of the Nininger Meteorite Award

1977-78 Horton E. Newsom -- University of Arizona "Primitive Metal
Condensates from the Solar Nebula, a clue from the Bencubbin Meteorite"

http://tin.er.usgs.gov/karage/

Mineral Resources On-Line Spatial Data
Mineral Resources > Online Spatial Data

K/Ar ages from the National Geochronological Database

A subset of the National Geochronological Database as of 1995.
Shows the distribution of published K/Ar and Ar/Ar age determinations in the
US.
Sample location, rock description, analytical data, age, interpretation, and
bibliographic reference are given.

View:
Show in a web browser window:

Continental US
Show in your GIS using OGC WMS:
http://mrdata.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/mapserv?map=karage.map&request=GetCapabilities&service=WMS&version=1.1.1
Download: Download data for geographic areas you choose
Get the entire data set [ locations on relief map ]
karage.zip (1 Mb zipped shapefile expands to 39 Mb)
[ http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochronology/karage.html

Potassium-Argon ages of materials
A subset of the National Geochronological Database as of 1995.
Shows the distribution of published K/Ar and Ar/Ar age determinations in the
US.
To zoom in, hold shift key and drag mouse.
Click a site for details. ]

[ three dates near Santa Fe, New Mexico ]

Documentation:
Metadata:
[Outline] - [Questions & Answers] - [Plain text]
About the database fields
All database fields, by category
Database field categories
Source of the database:
National geochronological and natural radioelement data bases (CD-ROM)
Related topics
Geochronology, Geospatial datasets, Radiometric dating, Rocks and deposits
DBF, Delimited text, HTML table, KML, OGC WFS, OGC WMS, Shapefile
Mineral Resources Eastern Central Western Alaska Minerals Information
Spatial Data Crustal Imaging & Characterization Other Mineral Related Links
Accessibility FOIA Privacy Policies and Notices
 U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey
Page Contact Information: Peter Schweitzer <pschweitzer at usgs.gov>;
Page Last Modified: Tuesday, 06-Jul-2010 14:23:32 EDT

Sample ID 8325
Record ID 10597
Rock type MONZONITE
Mineral dated Biotite
Age estimate 30.200001
Age uncertainty 0.7
Analytical method Conventional K-Ar
Comment age of volcanism
Potassium (%) 8.16
Argon (mol/g) 3.58
Radiogenic Argon (%) 9191
Decay constant 4.962E-04;0.581E-04;1.167E-04
Latitude 35.566666
N/S N
Longitude -106.175003
E/W W
State NM
Location precision Latitude/longitude accurate to within 1 minute (~1 mile)
NGDB ref ID 80-41
Reference: Baldridge, W.S., Damon, P.E., Shafiqullah, M., and Bridwell,
R.J., 1980,
Evolution Of The Central Rio Grande Rift, New Mexico: New Potassium-Argon
Ages:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 51, p. 309-321.
Geologic unit: basalt and andesite flows, Pliocene


Sample ID 8711
Record ID 11118
Rock type ANDESITE
Mineral dated Whole-rock
Age estimate 25.299999
Age uncertainty 0.6
Analytical method Conventional K-Ar
Comment age of volcanism
Potassium (%) 0
Argon (mol/g) 1.89
Radiogenic Argon (%) 84
Decay constant 4.72E-04;0.584E-04;1.19E-04
Latitude 35.633335
N/S N
Longitude -105.966667
E/W W
State NM
Location precision Latitude/longitude accurate to within 1 minute (~1 mile)
NGDB ref ID 78-41
Reference: Bachman, G.O., and Mehnert, H.H., 1978,
New K-Ar Dates and The Late Pliocene To Holocene Geomorphic History Of The
Central Rio Grande Region, New Mexico:
Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 89, p. 283-292.
Geologic unit: Upper Santa Fe Group


Sample ID 8328
Record ID 10599
Rock type ANDESITE
Mineral dated Whole-rock
Age estimate 29.299999
Age uncertainty 0.6
Analytical method Conventional K-Ar
Comment age of volcanism
Potassium (%) 4.04
Argon (mol/g) 1.72
Radiogenic Argon (%) 909093
Decay constant 4.962E-04;0.581E-04;1.167E-04
Latitude 35.705555
N/S N
Longitude -105.944443
E/W W
State NM
Location precision Latitude/longitude accurate to within 1 minute (~1 mile)
NGDB ref ID 80-41
Reference: Baldridge, W.S., Damon, P.E., Shafiqullah, M., and Bridwell,
R.J., 1980,
Evolution Of The Central Rio Grande Rift, New Mexico: New Potassium-Argon
Ages:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 51, p. 309-321.
Geologic unit: Lower and Middle Santa Fe Group
_______________________________________________


Dennis Cox reports YDB ice comet fragment airburst melt
rocks now in labs for expert study: cosmictusk.blog:
Rich Murray 2010.10.08
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.htm
Friday, October 8, 2010
[ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/72
[you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser]

Dennis Cox blog, plain text, with images of samples of magnetic
black glaze on melt rocks from 13 Ka ice comet fragment
extreme plasma storm geoablation in Fresno, California:
Rich Murray 2010.07.02
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_07_01_archive.htm
Friday, July 2, 2010
[ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/53
[you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser]

Vance Holliday shares critique of the Younger Dryas
 Boundary impact theory,
responding to many comments: www.cosmictusk.com Rich Murray 2010.10.03
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.htm
Sunday, October 3, 2010
[ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/71
[you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser]

large expansion of fine website with global images and sensible
ideas re Holocene ice comet fragment impacts:
Pierson Barretto: Rich Murray 2010.09.24
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_09_01_archive.htm
Friday, September 24, 2010
[ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/69
[you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser]
_______________________________________________


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 148 members, 1,613 posts in a public archive

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartame/messages
group with 1215 members, 24,105 posts in a public archive

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

participant, Santa Fe Complex www.sfcomplex.org
_______________________________________________
Received on Wed 13 Oct 2010 01:10:13 AM PDT