When you showed how they allinged to the Nastapoka arc it all came together for me. Probably a shoemake-Levy style impact. Incredible how they all must have hit the ice and not a single one stuck hard frim land
Good work gentlemen! The Nastapoka Arc and Belcher Islands are an unexplained geologic or geographic artifact of a relatively recent event, apparently an astrological impact. Thanks for casting light on this enigma.
Got your recent book as I’m a UT Geophysicist that has been following you from your first papers. You have had a lot of deniers as so many scientist have over time. Congratulation! I have a lot of friends who live on or very near the Carolina lakes as I have lived here on the beach near Cape Fear for some time. I’ll try to get them to order your colored hardbacks! It’s fun to try and explain geology to them! Especially with meteors and ice bomes. Tech has really advanced. Love the tools that can time the layers in the lakes!
Dr. Z, I'm a business owner, not an archeologist, but i find your work fascinating. Thank you for publishing in on an accessible platform. Im in South Carolina many times a year, and each time I look at satellite shots (google maps) for bays that I might notice along the way.
How much does it cost to do bay rim core dates? It seems that a few dozen results all showing inverted stratigraphy with mid rim dates consistent with the age of the YDB impact would be extremely helpful.
I would like to see someone date the cores at different depths. I once suggested to George Howard to get some cores of the "eolian" sand sheet by Big Bay. I would expect some younger dates underneath. One problem with OSL dating is that the samples have to be taken at least one meter below the surface to avoid cosmogenic dose errors, but the YDB can be 60 cm from the surface which forces researchers to dig deeper and get older dates. Ted Bunch's experience shows that dates do not increase with depth on land that has Carolina Bays.
I imagine you see this as a very steep uphill battle but history will recognize the value of your work. Wondering, has any analysis been done to see if anomalous rock types are present in Carolina bays? It might not have been all ice. If rocks unique to the Michigan area are found in Carolina bays in Nebraska, the Carolinas, etc., that would be a big clue. Probably a naive and/or unoriginal idea but there you go.
Actually, it is a very good idea. That was one of the predictions in the 2017 paper that introduced the Glacier Ice Impact Hypothesis. We went digging at the apex of a bay to see if we could find something from Michigan: th-cam.com/video/2IjnWHqa_0U/w-d-xo.html
That appears to be consistent with recent analysis presented by Nick Zentner concerning wood fossils found in Seattle at different depths, about 15 kya and 14kya with respect to depths.
I speculate the sarcophagi are thorium nuke reactor containment vessels. Heat sourcing for the chemical reaction chambers (King's chamber, queen's chamber, etc.) is from the vast thorium (uranium, gold, etc also) black sand reserves, kilometers thick, forming the Nile delta.
I would think extra attention should be paid to the outliers. Aren't we looking for anomalies? Throwing out information that doesn't agree with your previous observations should lite a fire not create disdain. This really helped me visualize the timing and made sense to me. As far as those bays oriented farther north? Might we not expect that from all the debris flying there must have been some ricochet effects? Also how would the Shockwave from one impact effect the projectiles from another impact that had hit moments before and what would the deflection look like? Just seems that they were all pointing to a similar origin. Thanks!
the irregular features were most likely made by the glacial debris after impact resting beside the crater.. as displayed in your other video about spaceX. As they melted they poured into surrounding craters bringing sediment & flattening the bays..
I recently watched a video from the Cosmic Summit with speaker Chris Cottrell. He indicated that there are others (Michael Davias) who feel the CB's may be as old as 770,000 years old. I'm still in the Zamora camp but want to know your thoughts on this.
I know that Michael wants to correlate the origin of the Carolina Bays to the Australasian tektites, whereas Chris would like to use the dating based on some marine shelves. My calculations of the energy of emplacement of ~8 megatons per square kilometer lead me to associate the CB emplacement to the time of extinction of the North American megafauna 12,900 ya. In addition most of the dates for the Nebraska basins and the CBs are
@@Antonio_Zamora Agreed. The 770Ka date is also supposed to include periods of sea level rise which were supposed to cover the CB's. The wave action alone would, I think, have erased any CBs. However, I'm not a geologist so I can only speculate.
Most of the Coastal Plain of the East Coast has been exposed to surface activity for over 1 million years, with the exception of the terraces I mentioned in that video. The age of the paleo-Atlantic shorelines and the terraces between them are supported by the Marine Oxygen Isotope data collected from the Greenland and Antarctic ice core data. Those shorelines are made from the same materials the CBs are...if they survived being so well defined, then so could have the Carolina Bays. This is actual evidence to support a hypothesis, not a feeling, or a hunch... assumptions are what got us into this mess in the first place.
@@DabblersDen based on my understanding, it's very likely countless bays initially formed but were subsequently eroded, leaving a substantially smaller number of bays we see today that were able to withstand 12.9k years of erosional forces. specific soil compositions and conditions had to exist at the time of ice boulder impacts in order for the bays to both form AND resist erosion long enough to last until today, so it doesn't follow that the bays are as old as the soil they were emplaced in just because that soil type was most conducive for creating bays that can last 12.9k years.
Great work Antonio. I think it would be good to look at human populations going from 20000 to 10000 ybp. I saw a map once on a Russell Carlson video showing lots of humans east of the Rockies before the YD boundary and nothing there until the end of the YD. That plus this current video are really squeezing out the possibility that the bays are older. I sure hope Cottrell comes to his senses about the many kinds of erosions impacting coastal bays and how that affects aging them. I fear he lost his way.
I knew it! A couple years ago I did a deep dive into the Hudson Bay Area. Now there’s proof. There’s another area that is a probable impact point… the entire Arctic Sea Basin. Eventually the truth will come out. Big enough to change the tilt of Earth’s axis.
AZ, do the 3 proposed bays you described in MN have raised rims? It's remarkable they have the same trend. Could one say they point to and are perpendicular to the trend of the Great Lakes?🦖
here's a thought: Use the 5 point method to specify an ellipse and then use the least squares measurements to 'prove' the fact in the sense that measurement meets prediction. Proof of your Conic Section hypothesis.
@@NathanMyers-c8y Can you please explain the other geologic processes that result in elliptical geometry? not ovoid, or egg shaped, but perfect ellipses. thanks.
@@NathanMyers-c8yThe dating of that loess is ultra important. Can you provide references? I also agree with the Long Island landforms. Are you still using your USGS email? I tried reaching you there.
@@NathanMyers-c8y To be honest I think you are a fruit loop. You could have quite well posted your diatribe as a post of your own instead of dumping on mine. If you engage your other brain cell you'll realise that what I was saying was akin to proving acceptance of the elliptical nature of the bays. That you fail to realise the import of such and instead go off and babble on about all stuff is what is called OBFUSCATION ... you are running interference to hide the truth. If you don't actually understand my original post then I suggest you take a remedial course in Mathematics.
@@NathanMyers-c8y Being as you are clearly not a member of the set of rational people how on earth do you justify your vitriolic nonsense? My assertions are not only Mathematically sound they are common sense to members of Rational Society. Perhaps you ought to stick to cleaning toilets?
have "they" used OSL to try dating overlapping bays? it stands to reason that any bay which cuts into another one need to be younger. formed by wind and water, pfh. so many features over such a large area supposedly formed by the same mechanisms, it must have been an extremely common phenomenon. yet we see no bays forming today...
Most of the reported OSL dates are from one sample at one location rather than samples at different depths in one location. The samples have been taken assuming that the Carolina Bays are eolian features created by uniformitarian mechanisms. Even the example cited in this video found the inverted stratigraphy by accident.
I have been living all of this since about time The Older and Younger Dryas events were discovered along with the 11, 600 sudden melt and mass continental flood... 400ft sea level rise in 1300 years is sudden. My collection includes much Fauna and Mega Fauna from the Younger Dryas impacts here in Western Ohio. Fossils of animals and humans. Mucho
I think we need to stop using the Long Island depressions as CB examples. They don't meet the 3 requirements like the other bays to the south do, especially when it comes to orientation.
I noticed that Michael has found more bays in Long Island since last year. Regarding the shapes, we would also need to discard the bays in NJ that look like grapeshot, and the guitar pick shaped bays by the Savannah River that you used in one of your latest short videos. Of course, that would be like throwing out the baby with the bath water. :-)
Thumbs up people, give support to Antonio and others who are beating the truth out of our ignorance of the past.
👍👍👍
Good video. A few core samples of other raised rims giving similar "folded over" Statigraphic dating would be powerful evidence.
When you showed how they allinged to the Nastapoka arc it all came together for me. Probably a shoemake-Levy style impact. Incredible how they all must have hit the ice and not a single one stuck hard frim land
Hey Antonio, thanks for the mention! Let's hope this really opens up a can of worms and gets people thinking outside the box.
Good work my man. To me this makes the evidence pretty undeniable.
@@VARVIS_ Thanks! You ain't seen nothing yet! ;)
@@AustinKoleCarlisle you have found more? I am very excited
@@VARVIS_ Well, I can tell you that I found a lot of very interesting things, but I'll leave it up for Antonio to decide if there is something to it!
@@AustinKoleCarlisle Good work, I have subscribed, and now will watch a load of Antonio's previous videos too. Spotted Nastapoka Arc in this one :)
viscous relaxation. I'm always learning new terms from Antonio.
personally, i'm fan of "penetration funnel"
Good work gentlemen! The Nastapoka Arc and Belcher Islands are an unexplained geologic or geographic artifact of a relatively recent event, apparently an astrological impact. Thanks for casting light on this enigma.
Got your recent book as I’m a UT Geophysicist that has been following you from your first papers. You have had a lot of deniers as so many scientist have over time. Congratulation!
I have a lot of friends who live on or very near the Carolina lakes as I have lived here on the beach near Cape Fear for some time. I’ll try to get them to order your colored hardbacks! It’s fun to try and explain geology to them! Especially with meteors and ice bomes. Tech has really advanced. Love the tools that can time the layers in the lakes!
I bet I could find some high school libraries that would not find your books too nerdy. Especially with the old fashion maps.
Dr. Z, I'm a business owner, not an archeologist, but i find your work fascinating. Thank you for publishing in on an accessible platform.
Im in South Carolina many times a year, and each time I look at satellite shots (google maps) for bays that I might notice along the way.
How much does it cost to do bay rim core dates? It seems that a few dozen results all showing inverted stratigraphy with mid rim dates consistent with the age of the YDB impact would be extremely helpful.
I would like to see someone date the cores at different depths. I once suggested to George Howard to get some cores of the "eolian" sand sheet by Big Bay. I would expect some younger dates underneath. One problem with OSL dating is that the samples have to be taken at least one meter below the surface to avoid cosmogenic dose errors, but the YDB can be 60 cm from the surface which forces researchers to dig deeper and get older dates. Ted Bunch's experience shows that dates do not increase with depth on land that has Carolina Bays.
I imagine you see this as a very steep uphill battle but history will recognize the value of your work. Wondering, has any analysis been done to see if anomalous rock types are present in Carolina bays? It might not have been all ice. If rocks unique to the Michigan area are found in Carolina bays in Nebraska, the Carolinas, etc., that would be a big clue. Probably a naive and/or unoriginal idea but there you go.
Actually, it is a very good idea. That was one of the predictions in the 2017 paper that introduced the Glacier Ice Impact Hypothesis. We went digging at the apex of a bay to see if we could find something from Michigan: th-cam.com/video/2IjnWHqa_0U/w-d-xo.html
I look forward to your uploads!
That appears to be consistent with recent analysis presented by Nick Zentner concerning wood fossils found in Seattle at different depths, about 15 kya and 14kya with respect to depths.
I like your response to Dabblers Den re: Long Island bay dating. Well done.
I speculate the sarcophagi are thorium nuke reactor containment vessels. Heat sourcing for the chemical reaction chambers (King's chamber, queen's chamber, etc.) is from the vast thorium (uranium, gold, etc also) black sand reserves, kilometers thick, forming the Nile delta.
I would think extra attention should be paid to the outliers. Aren't we looking for anomalies?
Throwing out information that doesn't agree with your previous observations should lite a fire not create disdain.
This really helped me visualize the timing and made sense to me.
As far as those bays oriented farther north? Might we not expect that from all the debris flying there must have been some ricochet effects? Also how would the Shockwave from one impact effect the projectiles from another impact that had hit moments before and what would the deflection look like?
Just seems that they were all pointing to a similar origin.
Thanks!
I speculate further the pyramids (pyrre-fire, mid-middle) of Egypt were constructed after meltwater pulse 1A, and before mwp1B.
the irregular features were most likely made by the glacial debris after impact resting beside the crater.. as displayed in your other video about spaceX. As they melted they poured into surrounding craters bringing sediment & flattening the bays..
Thank you, Mr. Z.👍👍
I recently watched a video from the Cosmic Summit with speaker Chris Cottrell. He indicated that there are others (Michael Davias) who feel the CB's may be as old as 770,000 years old. I'm still in the Zamora camp but want to know your thoughts on this.
I know that Michael wants to correlate the origin of the Carolina Bays to the Australasian tektites, whereas Chris would like to use the dating based on some marine shelves. My calculations of the energy of emplacement of ~8 megatons per square kilometer lead me to associate the CB emplacement to the time of extinction of the North American megafauna 12,900 ya. In addition most of the dates for the Nebraska basins and the CBs are
@@Antonio_Zamora Agreed. The 770Ka date is also supposed to include periods of sea level rise which were supposed to cover the CB's. The wave action alone would, I think, have erased any CBs. However, I'm not a geologist so I can only speculate.
Most of the Coastal Plain of the East Coast has been exposed to surface activity for over 1 million years, with the exception of the terraces I mentioned in that video. The age of the paleo-Atlantic shorelines and the terraces between them are supported by the Marine Oxygen Isotope data collected from the Greenland and Antarctic ice core data. Those shorelines are made from the same materials the CBs are...if they survived being so well defined, then so could have the Carolina Bays. This is actual evidence to support a hypothesis, not a feeling, or a hunch... assumptions are what got us into this mess in the first place.
@@DabblersDen Keep the info coming. I'm all ears....or eyes in the case of videos.
@@DabblersDen based on my understanding, it's very likely countless bays initially formed but were subsequently eroded, leaving a substantially smaller number of bays we see today that were able to withstand 12.9k years of erosional forces. specific soil compositions and conditions had to exist at the time of ice boulder impacts in order for the bays to both form AND resist erosion long enough to last until today, so it doesn't follow that the bays are as old as the soil they were emplaced in just because that soil type was most conducive for creating bays that can last 12.9k years.
Excellent Work!
I look forward to your videos. Thank you sir.
Great work Antonio. I think it would be good to look at human populations going from 20000 to 10000 ybp. I saw a map once on a Russell Carlson video showing lots of humans east of the Rockies before the YD boundary and nothing there until the end of the YD. That plus this current video are really squeezing out the possibility that the bays are older. I sure hope Cottrell comes to his senses about the many kinds of erosions impacting coastal bays and how that affects aging them. I fear he lost his way.
Here is a video about the human population: th-cam.com/video/SuJ_U_3gUVE/w-d-xo.htmlsi=hZRRw21IorTFo4Kj
Good stuff, sir.
I knew it! A couple years ago I did a deep dive into the Hudson Bay Area. Now there’s proof. There’s another area that is a probable impact point… the entire Arctic Sea Basin. Eventually the truth will come out. Big enough to change the tilt of Earth’s axis.
Excellent. Thanks again for your research.
AZ, do the 3 proposed bays you described in MN have raised rims? It's remarkable they have the same trend. Could one say they point to and are perpendicular to the trend of the Great Lakes?🦖
here's a thought: Use the 5 point method to specify an ellipse and then use the least squares measurements to 'prove' the fact in the sense that measurement meets prediction. Proof of your Conic Section hypothesis.
@@NathanMyers-c8y Can you please explain the other geologic processes that result in elliptical geometry? not ovoid, or egg shaped, but perfect ellipses. thanks.
@@NathanMyers-c8yThe dating of that loess is ultra important. Can you provide references? I also agree with the Long Island landforms. Are you still using your USGS email? I tried reaching you there.
@@NathanMyers-c8y To be honest I think you are a fruit loop. You could have quite well posted your diatribe as a post of your own instead of dumping on mine. If you engage your other brain cell you'll realise that what I was saying was akin to proving acceptance of the elliptical nature of the bays. That you fail to realise the import of such and instead go off and babble on about all stuff is what is called OBFUSCATION ... you are running interference to hide the truth. If you don't actually understand my original post then I suggest you take a remedial course in Mathematics.
@user-om2os5yr6i Ah, well... some other Nathan Shores does.
@@NathanMyers-c8y Being as you are clearly not a member of the set of rational people how on earth do you justify your vitriolic nonsense? My assertions are not only Mathematically sound they are common sense to members of Rational Society. Perhaps you ought to stick to cleaning toilets?
Thanks Tony .. ..
have "they" used OSL to try dating overlapping bays? it stands to reason that any bay which cuts into another one need to be younger.
formed by wind and water, pfh. so many features over such a large area supposedly formed by the same mechanisms, it must have been an extremely common phenomenon. yet we see no bays forming today...
Most of the reported OSL dates are from one sample at one location rather than samples at different depths in one location. The samples have been taken assuming that the Carolina Bays are eolian features created by uniformitarian mechanisms. Even the example cited in this video found the inverted stratigraphy by accident.
wonderful, thank you.
I'm disappointed that this doesn't involve getting a few drinks with Miss Bays
Dating Carolina Bays sounds very romantic indeed, but the impacts are followed by viscous relaxation. So be careful.
@@Antonio_Zamora Hahahaha!
@@Antonio_Zamora, 👍👍👍
@@Antonio_Zamora
The puns! LOL
Next level
Thanks
I have been living all of this since about time The Older and Younger Dryas events were discovered along with the 11, 600 sudden melt and mass continental flood... 400ft sea level rise in 1300 years is sudden. My collection includes much Fauna and Mega Fauna from the Younger Dryas impacts here in Western Ohio. Fossils of animals and humans. Mucho
Stay tuned. I am preparing a presentation about Ohio.
I am confused: none of the maps show ice on Saginaw bay after the last retreat of the Iowa ice.
I think we need to stop using the Long Island depressions as CB examples. They don't meet the 3 requirements like the other bays to the south do, especially when it comes to orientation.
I noticed that Michael has found more bays in Long Island since last year. Regarding the shapes, we would also need to discard the bays in NJ that look like grapeshot, and the guitar pick shaped bays by the Savannah River that you used in one of your latest short videos. Of course, that would be like throwing out the baby with the bath water. :-)
"open a can of worms" ... lol ... while I'm sure you're right, given what we know ... ;-)
Riveting stuff