Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Back to the fundamentals
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 49 of 65 (28263)
01-01-2003 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Watson
12-24-2002 1:31 PM


quote:
I could not find any heat generated rocks
associated with glacial movement.

I know a little terminology and I would prefer we used it. Specifically what "heat generated rocks" are you refering to?
quote:
Now look at the direction of the
niagarafalls escarpment east to west. common sense tells me the
glacier had nothing to do with Niagara.

What led you to that conclusion? Continental glaciers moved south, east, and west. Long Island, in fact, is a terminal moraine left by a eastbound glacier.
quote:
forming a 35mile wide impact creator made of heat generated rocks
Again, that's too ambiguous. And plus, heat-associated metamorphism is not an indicator of impact cratering, shock metamorphism is.
quote:
I know there is a lot of
politics involved in keeping this quite.

How's that? More than 120 impact craters are currently known. Nobody is keeping them quiet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Watson, posted 12-24-2002 1:31 PM Watson has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Watson, posted 01-02-2003 2:47 PM gene90 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 51 of 65 (28323)
01-02-2003 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Watson
01-02-2003 2:47 PM


You mean this?
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/erie.jpg
I'll admit that's interesting, and I'm not sure what it is. It could be a graben, or a glacial feature. Really I think you'd need to drill rather than look at topography to be sure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Watson, posted 01-02-2003 2:47 PM Watson has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Watson, posted 01-02-2003 8:35 PM gene90 has not replied
 Message 53 by Watson, posted 01-11-2003 1:45 PM gene90 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 59 of 65 (28918)
01-12-2003 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Watson
01-11-2003 1:45 PM


I don't have enough information to venture a guess about the origin or nature of these "glass rocks" you speak of. I will point out that the information I could get on the hardness of tektites (believed to be impact glass) ranges from about 5-6. Also I know of no references to tektites ever being found in that part of the country. I will also point out that a lot of minerals look glassy or have a vitreous luster so that isn't telling me much. As for metal spheroids I cannot say much, except to point out that there are metal inclusions (not necessarily spheroids) in some varieties of quartz.
quote:
Also I have a burial mound 30 feet wide 175 long
15 feet high, the mound dates 1340.aprox.

Has it been excavated? How did you get the age?
quote:
Meteorite crust is used in ancient cement.
I've never heard of this, it is something I know nothing about.
quote:
The question I have
is how much meteorite crust does it take to make enough cement
to cover a area 4 inches high 30 feet wide and 175 feet long?

See above.
quote:
I gave you the location of a new creator on a silver platter
The best I can do is try to find an explanation for the trench at the bottom of Erie. I think it's a glacial scour of some kind but I can try to ask around. Not that local faculty would be useful at that but I suppose I can try.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 01-12-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Watson, posted 01-11-2003 1:45 PM Watson has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Watson, posted 01-14-2003 8:13 PM gene90 has not replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 60 of 65 (28919)
01-12-2003 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by John
01-11-2003 2:08 PM


quote:
I can't find another crater that looks like what you propose to be a crater.
All your craters are terrestrial. One concern about terrestrial craters is that they're a bit too round. There don't seem to be any craters the shape of the proposed Erie depression on Earth. This could be because of physics involved with our thick atmosphere.
I would consider the Erie depression to be a bunch of other things before a crater but it isn't impossible.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-362/ch5.2.htm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by John, posted 01-11-2003 2:08 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by John, posted 01-12-2003 4:54 PM gene90 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 61 of 65 (28920)
01-12-2003 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Watson
01-11-2003 6:27 PM


Mineral hardness doesn't change. Quartz cannot be as hard as a diamond.
What labs did these analyses?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Watson, posted 01-11-2003 6:27 PM Watson has not replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3853 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 63 of 65 (28927)
01-12-2003 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by John
01-12-2003 4:54 PM


quote:
Reasonable, yes, since Lake Erie is also terrestrial?
Perhaps reasonable. You realize that there are few craters on Earth and plenty on other planets, therefore, you could find a lot of better arguments than simply saying that this doesn't look like terrestrial craters. That there are no blatantly elliptical craters is not evidence against a proposed crater merely because it is elliptical. In fact, I have heard that there's a possible elliptical in South America, and meteoritic material has been found.
quote:
Ok, but I am missing why this is important given that we are talking about the Earth at a time when it had pretty much the same atmosphere as now?
I feel that it is important to point out that there may be a reason why there are no known ellipticals. I am not claiming that there are no ellipticals to find or that they cannot be produced in our atmosphere however it is a distinct possibility that there are no ellipticals to find.
I personally am sitting on the fence.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 01-12-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by John, posted 01-12-2003 4:54 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by John, posted 01-12-2003 6:58 PM gene90 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024