Mississippi Embayment/Bolide Astrobleme

[Kalopin]

Chicxulub, idiot.

kalopin, please perform the energy calculation I requested from you earlier, or leave.
Your Electric Universe nonsense is not only not amusin, it is weaarying.

You are funny!: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater and go down to "Astronomical Origin of Asteroid"- It has just recently been SUGGESTED that the impactor was of cometary origin. It has NOT been proven and it, more than likely can not be proven, quite unlike this situation, IF it finds the study!

This is my thread, stop responding

Any calculations would be great estimates, as the ones given, and would not be useful. If you would like some numbers to look at, I have an idea, go to "Ask an Astrophysicist": http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_a ... nomer.html

EU Theory is, for the most part, correct! It takes a spark to set it all in motion and different amounts of plasma fill the universe. Without electricity there is nothing! And, so far the thread at EU is, by far the most intelligent and polite conversation I have had.

I do appreciate your insights as well as the incites.
I have little doubt that this impact scenario will soon find the research it deserves and that it will be proven.
What will have been your position?

[E.P. Grondine]

Chicxlub was proven to be a cometary impact 30 years ago.

Thanks for finally clearly stating that your "study" relies on "Electric Universe" physics.

That explains both your confusion:
http://neutrinodreaming.blogspot.com/20 ... unked.html
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questi ... c-universe
http://www.tim-thompson.com/electric-sun.html
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread665703/pg1
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=8260067

as well as your entire lack of evidence of a cometary impact in 1811.

[Nacon]

Hi nacom -

I am interested in animal migration paths through the various landscapes that existed between 48,000 kya and 13,000 kya.

Hi E.P.

Am unaware of any mapping from the mid to late Pleistocene that would be capable of demonstrating such. One must take into account the many variables. The rather minimal imprint of game pathways, the changes in game movement patterns in response to ever-changing seasonal and climatological factors, the effects of bioturbation on minimal landform disturbance, and, last but not least, the various Holocene-related changes to the land scape and soils/vegetation patterns(glacial wasting, the Altithermal, etc.). Could go into more detail, but am quite confident that you understand the various factors that would make the determination of latter Pleistocene game trails quite problematic.

.

[Nacon]

Kalopin

I have explained the embayment as it appears to me.


Yes, you have. However, as repeatedly demonstrated, your understanding of the topic is tragically limited.

My schedule will be quite busy for the next few days. In the interim, please amuse yourself with the following:

1) Kindly explain why the Mississippi Embayment presents a consistent (approximately) north to south syncline.

2) Believe that E.P. or yourself may have previously referenced the following program. If so, good. If not, please enter your hypothetical data. Record such entries in detail, along with the results. Please report back.

http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/

To date, it has apparently been demonstrated that you have no confirmed/credible lithic data (i.e., nanodiamonds or molten ferric materials appearing in sedimentary deposits)to support your position. If such exists, kindly present.

Your "critique" of other professionals that you have contacted is quite telling. And does little to contribute to your credibility.

.

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi nacom -

"I could go into more detail, but am quite confident that you understand the various factors that would make the determination of latter Pleistocene game trails quite problematic."

Yes, but even some rough help with the effects of the draining of Glacial Lake Agassix would make that task easier.
Up north, we have the Teays River to deal with.

Kalopin will waste as much of our time as we allow him to.
While I have my own unusual views, they are backed up by hard physical evidence.

As these guys have ruined other bbs forums before with their delusional fantasies,
perhaps it is time to ask for Michelle's help here.

[Kalopin]

Hi nacom -

"I could go into more detail, but am quite confident that you understand the various factors that would make the determination of latter Pleistocene game trails quite problematic."

Yes, but even some rough help with the effects of the draining of Glacial Lake Agassix would make that task easier.
Up north, we have the Teays River to deal with.

Kalopin will waste as much of our time as we allow him to.
While I have my own unusual views, they are backed up by hard physical evidence.

As these guys have ruined other bbs forums before with their delusional fantasies,
perhaps it is time to ask for Michelle's help here.

You two need to get a room
My study relies on the physics that took place! There were many catastrophes occurring at the same time. It was not just one little earthquake.
Believe me, you two have more than enough to study if you want to learn the truth of these events.
You are not going to see any animal migration from draining a lake! Focus man
If you want to continue trying your best to argue your position of past beliefs ["...their delusional fantasies..." ], you will have to concentrate your efforts in learning ALL the facts of 1811-1812.
Although, I know you want an easy-out, so I will let the defense rest for now. I have just recently contacted some good people that may be of help and will be quite busy as well, so Thanks-

["I'm so glad we had this time together,..."]

[Kalopin]

Kalopin

I have explained the embayment as it appears to me.


Yes, you have. However, as repeatedly demonstrated, your understanding of the topic is tragically limited.

My schedule will be quite busy for the next few days. In the interim, please amuse yourself with the following:

1) Kindly explain why the Mississippi Embayment presents a consistent (approximately) north to south syncline.

2) Believe that E.P. or yourself may have previously referenced the following program. If so, good. If not, please enter your hypothetical data. Record such entries in detail, along with the results. Please report back.

http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/

To date, it has apparently been demonstrated that you have no confirmed/credible lithic data (i.e., nanodiamonds or molten ferric materials appearing in sedimentary deposits)to support your position. If such exists, kindly present.

Your "critique" of other professionals that you have contacted is quite telling. And does little to contribute to your credibility.

.

"My understanding of the topic" has many years of long thought and hard study, unlike your snide remarks that are quite telling of YOUR credibility.
I have demonstrated many times to many individuals that all physics are easily plausable, as you have demonstrated your inability to understand simple accounts, simple impactites and a simple satellite view.
The embayment's "north to south incline" is exactly what I am describing to you. It is known as "The Upland Formation" and is a shockwave pattern from a cometary serial impact, as [if you will look?] there are several smaller craters all around this one, some I believe may be from ejecta fallback and others from late following impactors. 'The Kilmichael Structure' is just to the south http://www4.uwsp.edu/geo/projects/geowe ... ichael.HTM

[Kalopin]

Chicxlub was proven to be a cometary impact 30 years ago.

Thanks for finally clearly stating that your "study" relies on "Electric Universe" physics.

That explains both your confusion:
http://neutrinodreaming.blogspot.com/20 ... unked.html
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questi ... c-universe
http://www.tim-thompson.com/electric-sun.html
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread665703/pg1
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=8260067

as well as your entire lack of evidence of a cometary impact in 1811.

Didn't ask for a bunch of b.s. threads with misunderstandings about physics, asked for proof of a cometary impact,so- 'callin' ya' out'. Wikipedia says- it was SUGGESTED NOT 'PROVEN' in "2013"- Give me the link that backs up your belief, thanks...

[E.P. Grondine]

Well, that explains a lot:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/wikipe ... epen,2007/

I am not here to discuss stochastic periodicity and probability with you.

While physics has changed, and new frameworks have been adopted,
I am not here to have my time wasted with the imaginary physics of a coherent delusional framework.
I am not here to discuss imaginary "impacts" with you.
If you want to waste you life being a martyr for those idiots it is not my problem, and I do not have to watch.

Kalopin, as others have learned, there is no point in showing you anytrhing that conflicts with your delusions,
as you simply can not see it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Electric_Universe

More politely, this is not the place to discuss crank physics concepts, as we spend our time here discussing crank archaeological concepts. But we are able to see hard evidence.

[Cognito]

... as we spend our time here discussing crank archaeological concepts. But we are able to see hard evidence.

So true. Some concepts more crank than others. Thanks for the above Mantra, EP.

[Kalopin]

Well, that explains a lot:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/wikipe ... epen,2007/

I am not here to discuss stochastic periodicity and probability with you.

While physics has changed, and new frameworks have been adopted,
I am not here to have my time wasted with the imaginary physics of a coherent delusional framework.
I am not here to discuss imaginary "impacts" with you.
If you want to waste you life being a martyr for those idiots it is not my problem, and I do not have to watch.

Kalopin, as others have learned, there is no point in showing you anytrhing that conflicts with your delusions,
as you simply can not see it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Electric_Universe

More politely, this is not the place to discuss crank physics concepts, as we spend our time here discussing crank archaeological concepts. But we are able to see hard evidence.

You have NO answers, I do! The only things delusional and imaginary are yours and many others present beliefs!
Please name ONE thing that 'conflicts' with my hypothesis! There would be a 'point' if there was any!

This impact will be proven correct and all the ones trying so hard to fight it will look like the idiots that they are!
Because that is all you are trying to do. You are not trying to give any investigation. You made your stance from the beginning that you "assure'd me I had not found any impact. But as time passed, you found absolutely no rebuttal and attempted to mask the truths with inuendos, baseless accusations, put-downs, and unfounded criticism. I just feel sorry for you.
Read the thread, study the facts and you will see who is right!
YOU are wasting MY time!
Admit the truth or just shut-up!

[E.P. Grondine]

Love cats, have had many, but currently- no.

I think we've found the problem.

[MichelleH]

Play nice children or I will lock the topic.

[Nacon]

Hi nacom -

"I could go into more detail, but am quite confident that you understand the various factors that would make the determination of latter Pleistocene game trails quite problematic."

Yes, but even some rough help with the effects of the draining of Glacial Lake Agassix would make that task easier.
Up north, we have the Teays River to deal with.

Kalopin will waste as much of our time as we allow him to.
While I have my own unusual views, they are backed up by hard physical evidence.

As these guys have ruined other bbs forums before with their delusional fantasies,
perhaps it is time to ask for Michelle's help here.

Hi E.P.

Am unsure to what degree that you have studied the Lake Agassiz breaches, so will supply just some basics and we can go from there.

Lake Agassiz actually breached a number of times, through at least three routes. The first two of these routes would be the eastern breach through modern Lake Nipigon, Ontario, Canada, into the north shore of Lake Superior and thence to the north Atlantic. The second of these would be the southern breach that formed Glacial River Warren, now known as the Minnesota River and thence into the Mississippi River drainage. The third of these breaches has only been documented rather recently, based a great deal on the research of Murton et al. This research has identified the northern breach via the Mackenzie River into the Arctic Ocean. The following is an abstract:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 ... 08954.html

As noted in the abstract, it has been hypothesized for quite some time that the onset of the Younger Dryas may have been triggered by the sudden discharge of the cold freshwater of Lake Agassiz into the north Atlantic which resulted in a disruption of the thermohaline flow. The impacts of this event have been documented in the alteration of western European weather patterns.

Can provide further details at your request.

.

[Nacon]

Kalopin

"My understanding of the topic" has many years of long thought and hard study, unlike your snide remarks that are quite telling of YOUR credibility.
I have demonstrated many times to many individuals that all physics are easily plausable, as you have demonstrated your inability to understand simple accounts, simple impactites and a simple satellite view.
The embayment's "north to south incline" is exactly what I am describing to you. It is known as "The Upland Formation" and is a shockwave pattern from a cometary serial impact, as [if you will look?] there are several smaller craters all around this one, some I believe may be from ejecta fallback and others from late following impactors. 'The Kilmichael Structure' is just to the south http://www4.uwsp.edu/geo/projects/geowe ... ichael.HTM

Once again, it would be suggested that you actually read your references. As Dutch notes, the Kilmichael Structure has nothing to do with an impact event. As an aside, have had some professional contact with Steve. He would be amongst the first to discount your speculations.

.