Mississippi Embayment/Bolide Astrobleme

[Nacon]

Nacon,
If you had read the thread properly, you would have noticed that I came here looking to have my rocks verified, not misjudged from afar. I never said that I had identified nanodiamonds, I said some of the rocks had the APPEARANCE of nanodiamonds. They are covered in tiny glistening, crystaline carbon particles, spherical molecular structures, that are quite obvious to see! What do you mean in a "morphed sedimentary matrix'. The rocks are NOT and could NOT be sedimentary, they are all metamorphic from an impact.

And- What do you mean- "Have been following these pages for a number of years"?-please clarify! Your "constructive guidance" was a suggestion to contact ones who can do nothing.


1) Verification: It would appear that others besides myself have informed you that you are dealing with sedimentary materials. You have been provided with the name and genesis of the formation of concern. A serious researcher would have pursued these references. As qualified research would not appear to be your forte, additional information:

http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sg ... it=MSEOt;0

http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0448b/report.pdf

2) Nanodiamonds: To quote, verbatim, minus the "ums and ahs" "And you'll see evidence of what appears to be shock quartz and nanodiamonds" "Kalopin" - Fox News 13 ca 2:53-2:55

3) The "years" reference was to the forum in general. Rest assured that your recent contributions have been thoroughly read.

4) The "constructive guidance" quite likely did put you in touch with individuals who could have easily verified the sedimentary origins of your "examples". Did you actually, specifically ask them this? Or did you request some other fanciful determination?

.

[Kalopin]

Nacon,
If you had read the thread properly, you would have noticed that I came here looking to have my rocks verified, not misjudged from afar. I never said that I had identified nanodiamonds, I said some of the rocks had the APPEARANCE of nanodiamonds. They are covered in tiny glistening, crystaline carbon particles, spherical molecular structures, that are quite obvious to see! What do you mean in a "morphed sedimentary matrix'. The rocks are NOT and could NOT be sedimentary, they are all metamorphic from an impact.

And- What do you mean- "Have been following these pages for a number of years"?-please clarify! Your "constructive guidance" was a suggestion to contact ones who can do nothing.


1) Verification: It would appear that others besides myself have informed you that you are dealing with sedimentary materials. You have been provided with the name and genesis of the formation of concern. A serious researcher would have pursued these references. As qualified research would not appear to be your forte, additional information:

http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sg ... it=MSEOt;0

http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0448b/report.pdf

2) Nanodiamonds: To quote, verbatim, minus the "ums and ahs" "And you'll see evidence of what appears to be shock quartz and nanodiamonds" "Kalopin" - Fox News 13 ca 2:53-2:55

3) The "years" reference was to the forum in general. Rest assured that your recent contributions have been thoroughly read.

4) The "constructive guidance" quite likely did put you in touch with individuals who could have easily verified the sedimentary origins of your "examples". Did you actually, specifically ask them this? Or did you request some other fanciful determination?

.

Sorry, but with all due respect, I believe it is your research skills that are quite slacking! Your links are to general information about the geology, and not specific to Northeastern Marshall County, Mississippi. First link describes the geological units in vast general terms. The second link was published in 1964 and is also just a general description. There is very little/if any geological information available. There is no LiDAR, no core samples, no rock samples, no tree ring data,...or any studies done to make any dertermination. Do you not realize this?

1. There is NO sedimentary process that can produce a circular pattern on boulders, fuse huge slabs together, forge hollow spaces and holes throughout, and show such obvious signs of melt. You are mistaken, sorry! [look more closely at the photos, especially where I am pointing!]

2. Yes, that is right, I said- "...what ""APPEARS" to be shocked quartz and nanodiamonds..." When something APPEARS to be, it does NOT mean that it has been proven, it just means that it looks as IF it could be. But 'we' may never know with such ignorant attitudes!

3. You have to read a lot more than what I have posted. You have to read ALL the original accounts, study the rocks in much better detail and where I point to in the pictures!, You have to spend a lot more time studying the satellite view! Why would I say this?! Judging by your comments, you have not put the study in .

4. No, nothing 'fanciful' just asked them to look at something unusual. They already knew what was up- I say this because of how quickly and surely the guy responded, as if 'matter of fact', Prof. Swann was already on his mind, and it was predictable. There are many that do not wish to have this discovery found to be fact, so they play their little games.

I do plan on showing more soon. So far I have been disappointed in the majorities lack of investigative skills and understandings of these events. But, there are many intelligent enough to understand, so I still have hope that history, impact science, geology, public safety,... will find the study, facts and truths .

I have shown the rocks to many. Most have no idea what they are, but admit their 'strangeness'. There have been several to have no problem understanding that they have to be impactites and could no way be concretions. I can name a few that you may know, though not at this time!
In other words- If you want to continue this argument, you had better put in the study first!

[Nacon]

"Kalopin"

...not specific to Northeastern Marshall County, Mississippi. First link describes the geological units in vast general terms. The second link was published in 1964 and is also just a general description.

There is NO sedimentary process that can produce a circular pattern on boulders, fuse huge slabs together, forge hollow spaces and holes throughout, and show such obvious signs of melt.

Yes, that is right, I said- "...what ""APPEARS" to be shocked quartz and nanodiamonds..."

You have to spend a lot more time studying the satellite view!

No, nothing 'fanciful' just asked them to look at something unusual. They already knew what was up- I say this because of how quickly and surely the guy responded, as if 'matter of fact', Prof. Swann was already on his mind.

1) The first reference was supplied in order for you to clearly understand that the formation upon which your land resides is of sedimentary origin. Thus, the bulk lithic materials recovered at that locale are more than a bit likely to be of sedimentary origin. The second reference was provided in order to provide you with a broader understanding of the geology in your area. From all appearances, you could likely benefit from a thorough reading of such.

2) As previously noted, lithic materials of sedimentary origin can be, and are, subject to quite a number of post-formational alterations, i.e., erosion (both aeolian and hydrological) and chemical/thermal metamorphoses. For example, you speak of "melt". In what manner have you defined this determination? Or are you misinterpreting (for example) quartzite? You do remember that this formation dates to the Eocene?

3) Re: "appears". Despite the previously underlined emphasis, you would appear to have missed the operative in your statement, that operative being "see". The effective diameter of meteoric nanodiamonds falls between .1 nm and 10 nm (Daulton, et. al., 1996). One nanometer = one billionth of a meter. To provide you with a possibly more graspable conversion, one nm = 3.93700787 E-8 inches or .0000000393700787 inches. Understood?

4) Rather than playing with "Google Earth", it may be advisable for you to consult the 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadrangle for your location. You will hopefully find such to be quite enlightening.

5) This last is quite telling. It would tend to indicate that a) you did not request a straightforward identification of lithic material and that b) the local residents/professionals are quite aware of your "research". And they are not impressed.

.

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi nacom -

In the meteorite collecting community, specialists are regulaly approached by individuals who have found a "lunar meteorite" or "meteorite from Mars" lying in their drvieway or backyard. They are desperately seeking to have their "finds" confirmed, and when they are told that they do not have a rock from the Moon or Mars, they regularly engfage in hissy fits.

Of couse, the real "fun" starts when they try to sell their "finds" as rocks from Mars or the Moon.
They are then surprised to find themselves facing fines and jail time.

[Kalopin]

"Kalopin"

...not specific to Northeastern Marshall County, Mississippi. First link describes the geological units in vast general terms. The second link was published in 1964 and is also just a general description.

There is NO sedimentary process that can produce a circular pattern on boulders, fuse huge slabs together, forge hollow spaces and holes throughout, and show such obvious signs of melt.

Yes, that is right, I said- "...what ""APPEARS" to be shocked quartz and nanodiamonds..."

You have to spend a lot more time studying the satellite view!

No, nothing 'fanciful' just asked them to look at something unusual. They already knew what was up- I say this because of how quickly and surely the guy responded, as if 'matter of fact', Prof. Swann was already on his mind.

1) The first reference was supplied in order for you to clearly understand that the formation upon which your land resides is of sedimentary origin. Thus, the bulk lithic materials recovered at that locale are more than a bit likely to be of sedimentary origin. The second reference was provided in order to provide you with a broader understanding of the geology in your area. From all appearances, you could likely benefit from a thorough reading of such.

2) As previously noted, lithic materials of sedimentary origin can be, and are, subject to quite a number of post-formational alterations, i.e., erosion (both aeolian and hydrological) and chemical/thermal metamorphoses. For example, you speak of "melt". In what manner have you defined this determination? Or are you misinterpreting (for example) quartzite? You do remember that this formation dates to the Eocene?

3) Re: "appears". Despite the previously underlined emphasis, you would appear to have missed the operative in your statement, that operative being "see". The effective diameter of meteoric nanodiamonds falls between .1 nm and 10 nm (Daulton, et. al., 1996). One nanometer = one billionth of a meter. To provide you with a possibly more graspable conversion, one nm = 3.93700787 E-8 inches or .0000000393700787 inches. Understood?

4) Rather than playing with "Google Earth", it may be advisable for you to consult the 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadrangle for your location. You will hopefully find such to be quite enlightening.

5) This last is quite telling. It would tend to indicate that a) you did not request a straightforward identification of lithic material and that b) the local residents/professionals are quite aware of your "research". And they are not impressed.

.

Thanks, but
1. I would think anyone involved SHOULD already be aware that the entire Mississippi embayment is nothing but gravel, sand, dirt and water [basically]

2. What formation dates to the Eocene? You realize this discovery will prove that ALL the land throughout the valley was reformed just two centuries ago. The current topography is not ancient. All the glacial melt gravel and inland sea sands were catastrophically redistributed.
No, I wouldn't think anyone could misinterpret the obvious signs of melt, hundreds of examples with iron dripping and running across the surfaces! Although there may be heat within sediments, there is no way near the amount it would take to form such rocks. They are not volcanic, not sedimentary and they are obviously not native to this area. There is no reason for so many large stones to be at the surface with such odd designs...

3. Yes, I realize how tiny nanodiamonds are, and again I state that it appears you can see them, because you can. Nanodiamonds may be tiny but they 'clump' together and in a raw state are not of high quality and have many inclusions that are quite visible, some info.- http://www.diamonds1000.com/powders/index.html & http://sustainable-nano.com/2013/04/24/ ... the-movie/ [mmm-biological nanodiamonds ]

4. I have looked at many satellite views and used several different servers, Noaa, Terraserver, Flashearth, Google Earth and USGS. They ALL show the same, unmistakable shockwave pattern, and it is my hope that YOU will study each view until YOU have been enlightened. USGS just took a LiDAR of Weaubleau, no problem, so what's the 'holdup'?

5. No, Certain individuals in certain positions are TOO impressed and do not want this information known, what reasons? You tell me. I requested identification from many and have recieved nothing! [although a few professors are waiting on slides, at my cost, that I have also been unable to find a petrographic lab to slice!]

You see, regardless of any professional investigation, there is more than enough to give proof to this impact scenario. Anyone who puts in the study will see that the impactites were found at the center of a shockwave patter viewable on ANY satellite. The fact that so may have not been able to understand the topography does not change any fact that the evidence is clear to the ones who give study. Just go to North Slayden and follow the direction of impact straight up to New Madrid.
Again, common sense should tell you that if so much land was changed by these events and every line in the topography surrounds a certain point, then that is where it began.
The surface shockwave pattern has several names and is widely known. 'The New Madrid Lines' are a surface shockwave pattern and it has already been determined that a deep fault can not create a surface shockwave. Ask a seismologist

[Kalopin]

Hi nacom -

In the meteorite collecting community, specialists are regulaly approached by individuals who have found a "lunar meteorite" or "meteorite from Mars" lying in their drvieway or backyard. They are desperately seeking to have their "finds" confirmed, and when they are told that they do not have a rock from the Moon or Mars, they regularly engfage in hissy fits.

Of couse, the real "fun" starts when they try to sell their "finds" as rocks from Mars or the Moon.
They are then surprised to find themselves facing fines and jail time.

Mmmm, If March winds and April showers bring pretty May flowers,
do April fools and May poles give you the June bugs
[lets ask the wise old owl-E.P. ]

P.S. Again you state the obvious.
Do you have anything constructive ?[-yea, I'm sure we are all aware that I should know better than to ask ]

[Minimalist]

This thread has amazing staying power given the lack of substance.

[Ernie L]

This thread has amazing staying power given the lack of substance.

Pull up a chair Min..have some popcorn

[Nacon]

Hi nacom -

In the meteorite collecting community, specialists are regulaly approached by individuals who have found a "lunar meteorite" or "meteorite from Mars" lying in their drvieway or backyard. They are desperately seeking to have their "finds" confirmed, and when they are told that they do not have a rock from the Moon or Mars, they regularly engfage in hissy fits.

Of couse, the real "fun" starts when they try to sell their "finds" as rocks from Mars or the Moon.
They are then surprised to find themselves facing fines and jail time.

Chuckle! Quite true. We also deal with the cultural parallel, i.e., geofacts that the finders are most confident are actual artifacts. We always attempt to be quite gentle and informative.

.

[Nacon]

Min and Ernie (and E.P.) - First, my apologies for bypassing any form of introduction. Limited time.

That said, yes, this would appear to be an exercise in futility. Nonetheless, personal attempts at enlightenment will continue to be made for at least a bit longer. Suggest additional popcorn reserves.

.

[Nacon]

Kalopin

Will address your most recent tomorrow. More pressing obligations. You may wish to consider learning advantageous editing protocol.

Edit: Format

[E.P. Grondine]

Chuckle! Quite true. We also deal with the cultural parallel, i.e., geofacts that the finders are most confident are actual artifacts. We always attempt to be quite gentle and informative.
.

Hi nacom -

I met one fellow from North East Ohio who had found a couple of beautiful "Adena" artifacts in his back yard. He then dug all of his backyard up, and every rock was an "aritifact" which he was very proud to display and share with everyone.

[E.P. Grondine]

Do you have anything constructive?

No, Certain individuals in certain positions are TOO impressed and do not want this information known, what reasons? You tell me. I requested identification from many and have recieved nothing! [although a few professors are waiting on slides, at my cost, that I have also been unable to find a petrographic lab to slice!]

Yes, Kalopin, I still suggest to you that you contact Dennis Cox, Mark Boslough, and David Morrison.
Also, in my opinion, you should never ever try to sell any of your "impactites".
But that is just my opinion.
Who knows, perhaps you are the kind of person who might enjoy jail.

[Nacon]

Kalopin

1. ...SHOULD already be aware that the entire Mississippi embayment is nothing but gravel, sand, dirt and water [basically]

2. What formation dates to the Eocene?

You realize this discovery will prove that ALL the land throughout the valley was reformed just two centuries ago.

... hundreds of examples with iron dripping and running across the surfaces! ...

3. and again I state that it appears you can see them, because you can.

4. I have looked at many satellite views

5. No, Certain individuals in certain positions are TOO impressed and do not want this information known, what reasons? [/quote]


1) On a number of occasions you have phrased your comments in such a manner as to imply that you property resides on the Mississippi Embayment. This would be inaccurate. First, let us look at the surface aspects of the feature. While utilizing Wiki as a reference is below professional standards, it will suffice for the moment:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Miss ... _map_2.svg

As you can observe, your property lies some 100 to 110 miles to the east of the Embayment. Let us now look at the aquifer of the Embayment:

http://ar.water.usgs.gov/meras/images/studyarea1.png

As can be observed, your property lies some 35 to 45 miles to the east of the Embayment aquifer.
.

2a) The Tallahatta Formation of the Clairborne Group, as previously explained. For your edification:

http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/st ... eology.jpg

The Clairborne also outcrops in your area. Additional mapping can be provided.

2b) Of course it will...

2c) Documentation? It would be interesting to view such.

3) Of course you can see them. Under magnification. And yes, they can, under certain conditions, agglomerate. Still at a microscopic level. You may also wish to actually read your references. The largest of the artificials is quoted at 14.08 nm. And you do realize that those photos were taken under magnification? What you are visually identifying as nanodiamonds are quite likely simply silicates. Quite common in certain sedimentary materials.

4) But have you actually studied a detailed topographic map? And, if so, do you know how to interpret such?

5) Ah, yes, the perpetual cry of the fringe. That nasty conspiracy by qualified researchers to hide the nefarious truths of geomorphology.

Edit: Reference

[Nacon]

Correction to the above

The property in question lies approximately 42 miles east of the current surface features of the Embayment and within the Embayment aquifer.

Apologies for the error.

.