Pleistocene/Holcene Impact Site

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by JusDennis, Jan 15, 2009.

  1. JusDennis Registered Member

    There has been much research published lately that describes, in detail, an explosion of extra terrestrial origen that wiped out North America about 12,900 years ago. But where did it happen? The answer is that the site of the Pleistocene/Holocene comet impact event some have described has been right under our feet all along. But the stupendous size of the thing is almost beyond comprehension. And that is why we never realized what we were standing on. And until we saw Shoemaker-Levy 9 hit Jupiter, it would have been incomprehensible that such a thing could possibly happen at all.

    The story of finding it is a lot like the ancient story of the blind men and the elephant. The blind man who feels a leg says the elephant is like a pillar; the one who feels the tail says the elephant is like a rope; the one who feels the trunk says the elephant is like a tree branch; the one who feels the ear says the elephant is like a hand fan; the one who feels the belly says the elephant is like a wall; and the one who feels the tusk says the elephant is like a solid pipe.

    And then someone explained to them:

    All of you are right. The reason every one of you is telling it differently is because each one of you touched the different part of the elephant. So, actually the elephant has all the features you mentioned

    You see, all of this time we've all been like the fleas on an elephants back, who, when asked what they were standing on, replied; "Why, this is our world of course!"

    The scars left by a billion megaton explosion that devastated an entire continent shouldn’t be that hard to spot, should they? Not aftter only a few thousand years anyway. As it turns they are as plain as day for all the world to see. We just needed to get a little distance.

    Simply turn on Google Earth (not Google Maps it's too slow) set it to the highest resolution you can get, open your eyes, then zoom out to about 1300 miles, and then look closely at the eastern USA. If you know some one who has military experience with aerial surveillance photos have them look with you. The two circles you see centered on north central Alabama are not mere artifacts of the software. I believe they were caused by the compression waves of rapid, multiple explosions of unimaginable magnitude. And that they are the ghostly signature of the beginning of the Pleistocene / Holocene extinction.

    The explosions didn't cause a crater in the normal sense. But it could be confused as one if you don’t look close enough. Careful analysis of sedimentary deposits all over North America on will give results that are consistent with a large exploding comet about 12,900 years ago..

    The circles are approximately 250 miles in diameter and are part of a compression wave structure from an above ground explosion a billion times more powerful than Tunguska, and should not be confused as the rim of a crater at all.

    The comet fragments look to have exploded in the air like the Tunguska event. But it was a rapid series of objects 2 to 4 miles in diameter exploding above ground. And each explosion was so powerful that they broke the very bedrock and left a giant compression wave frozen in the earths crust like a ripple in a pond. And at the center you’ll find a fracture star like a stone fracture in a windshield. But this one is 12 miles long and 6 miles wide. And the town of Marshal Alabama is at the center of it. There were other fragments too, and if you look closely you can see their footprints in the perfect circular depressions 30 or 40 miles wide around and near Marshal. The other major explosion left a circular impression 65 miles wide, with another set of compression waves centered on eastern Tennessee and with a splash curtain extending over 400 miles to the northeast.

    The amazing thing is that as incomprehensible and fantastic as it may seem that such an immense impact structure could be real, and that it has been under our feet all this time, the explosion that caused it is precisely what is described in exquisite detail by R.B. Firestone etal. In their research entitled:

    Evidence for an extraterrestrial impact 12,900 years ago that contributed to the megafaunal extinctions and the Younger Dryas cooling.

    And in another paper by C. Vance Haynes Jr.
    Departments of Anthropology and Geosciences, PO Box 210030, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721

    Younger Dryas ‘‘black mats’’ and the Rancholabrean termination in North America

    Dennis Cox
    P.S. I have both of the papers mentioned above in PDF format for all who may be interested.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. John Connellan Valued Senior Member

    Where exactly is the town of Marshal Alabama?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. JusDennis Registered Member

    North Central Alabama.
    34deg. 23' 50.97" N
    86deg. 16' 41.12" W
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. JusDennis Registered Member

    Look Closely

    Study this very carefully. It is clearly too important to allow any room whatsoever for personal bias or error. Please disprove it if you can. If I am mistaken then this thread should be removed and erased immediately, no hard feelings, maybe even a sigh of relief. However, If I am correct then this discovery, and the research which precedes it, and made it possible, represent the turning point of what may be the single most significant paradigm shift in history.
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  8. Dr Mabuse Percipient Thaumaturgist Registered Senior Member

    It's wrong.

    Do the whole 'delete the thread' and 'sigh' thing.

    No history here.
  9. matthyaouw Registered Senior Member

    On what grounds do you believe these circles are formed by compressional waves?
    Check a geological map:

    The stripes seem to corespond pretty closely to the underlying rock units. I say that you are seeing changes in vegetation and topography caused by the characteristics of the underlying rock. If you still favour your explanation over mine, please say why.
  10. JusDennis Registered Member

    Excuse the histrionics, But it did get some debut going. Keep your insulting opinions though. I've got some of those too. show me recent science. That denies the possibility.

    Here's an excerpt from the R.B. Firestone paper:
    I can't find a way to get this editor to display notation and exponentials right so I had to write them out the long way.

    Nature of the Event. The evidence points to an ET event withcontinent-wide effects, especially biomass burning, but the size,density, and composition of the impactor are poorly understood. Even so, current data suggest that this mpactor was very different from well studied iron, stony, or chondritic impactors (e.g., at the K/T boundary). The evidence is more consistent with an impactor that was carbon-rich, nickel–iron-poor, and therefore, most likely a comet. Although the current geologic and geochemical evidence is insufficient to fully understand impact dynamics, we can offer speculation for future work.

    Toon et al. (46) suggest that an impact capable of continent-wide damage requires energy of 10 to the 7 megatons, equivalent to an impact by a _4-km-wide comet (figure 1 in ref. 46). Although an impactor that size typically leaves an obvious large crater, no such late Pleistocene crater has been identified. The lack of a crater may be due to prior fragmentation of a large impactor, thereby producing multiple airbursts or craters. Hypervelocity oblique impact experiments (P.H.S., unpublished data) indicate that a low-impedance surface layer, such as an ice sheet, can markedly reduce modification of the underlying substrate if the layer is equal to the projectile’s diameter. These results suggest that if multiple 2-km objects struck the 2-km-thick Laurentide Ice Sheet at _30°, they may have left negligible traces after deglaciation. Thus, lasting evidence may have been limited to enigmatic depressions or disturbances in the Canadian Shield (e.g., under the Great Lakes or Hudson Bay), while producing marginal or no shock effects and dispersing fine debris composed of the impactor, ice-sheet detritus, and the underlying crust.

    Toon et al. (46) also noted that if airbursts explode with energy of 10 to the 7 megatons at optimum height, they will cause blast damage over an area the size of North America that is equivalent to a ground impact of 10 to the 9 megatons (figure 5 in ref. 46). Such airbursts effectively couple the impactor’s kinetic energy with the atmosphere or surface (47, 48), producing devastating blast waves well above hurricane force (70 m_s_1) (46). In 1908, at Tunguska, Siberia, a object _150 m in diameter, either a carbonaceous asteroid or a small, burned-out comet, produced a _15-megaton airburst with an intense fireball (10 to the7 °C) that scorched_200 km2 of trees and leveled _2,000 km2 of forest yet produced no crater or shock metamorphism (49). A debris shower from a heavily fragmented comet (11) would have produced an airburst barrage that was similar to, although exponentially larger than Tunguska, while causing continent-wide biomass burning and ice-sheet disruption, but again possibly, without typical cratering.

    Is it so tough to believe they may have got it right? Please note they were only guessing at the location.
    You are right about the underlying rock. In the area of the circles. it's smashed and broken. Thus it's better farmland than the surrounding area due to better drainage. What do you think broke the bedrock in such a perfect circle? Do you think it is a coincidence that the site matches so well what was predicted?
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  11. matthyaouw Registered Senior Member

    I see no evidence for this. What do you base this on?

    It is not a perfect circle. Look here for the bigger picture:
    Tectonic uplift and subsequent erosion are most likely responsible for their distribution. Why do you think a meteorite or comet would bend beds of rock in to round vaguely concentric shapes? They don't. They blow the crap out of rock and leave brecciated rock, shocked quartz crystals, shatter cones and metamorphosed rocks. I have seen no evidence of these.

    I see no match because I see no evidence of a crater. I see bands or rock in an arcuate shape and this is in no way evidence for an impact. If you have any evidence for an impact by all means put it forward.
  12. JusDennis Registered Member

    This would be much easier if you had bothered to read the excerpt above.

    This thing won't let me post links in a thread yet otherwise I would post links to the actual research papers.

    I said it in the first post. It was also brought up in the excerpt above. But you must not have seen the words on the page. so I'll say it again three times. There is no crater. There is no crater. There is no crater. There wasn't a crater at Tunguska either. Because the thing never hit the ground. No impact, no impact shock, no shock fractured rocks. A 15 megaton explosion, with no cratering. I made it pretty clear in the first post that we aren't looking at cratering. We are looking at the at the blast effects of a massive above ground explosion.

    Since the energy of the explosion described by R.B. Firestone et al. was something on the order of a billion megatons. And produced a fireball of about 10 million degrees centigrade. Which caused continent wide devastation. I don't think it is too much of a stretch to assume there was enough energy to make the bedrock soft and pliable.

    Soft and pliable superheated crust + compression shock waves + tectonic forces acting on continental landmass = warped, and folded bedrock.
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2009
  13. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    www . actual_research_papers . com
  14. matthyaouw Registered Senior Member

    My mistake.

    Then we should see thermal metamorphasism and most likely a good deal of melting in this curved section of rock that we do not see in the more distant parts of the same bed. Have you any evidence of this?
  15. JusDennis Registered Member

    I give up. I won't even dignify that with an answer.

    I think the moderaters should just delete this thread. I won't be back anyway. It's a silly waste of time to try discuss this kind of stuff with people who only get their science from The Discovery chanel.

    By the way, That's metamorphism, not metamorphasism. You should spell check your stuff before you post it.

    Is a phoney link. no such page exists.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  16. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    :bugeye: Duh..

    I'm just showing you that you can post the link if you put spaces around the dots (for instance). The forum won't recognize the text as a hyperlink then..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  17. matthyaouw Registered Senior Member

    I will take that to mean no, you have no evidence of that. Most probably no evidence period. Thanks and goodbye.
  18. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member


    I am posting this on the off-chance that you do return. I hope you do, since I found your speculation quite interesting. We have moved, over a period of less than half a century, from viewing terrestrial impacts as rare and insignificant in geological and biological terms, to a point where we have recognised the frequent and dramatic effects they have had on the biosphere and the planet's geology (including powerful economic consequences) and have identified many impact sites, including ones over 2 billion years old.

    Recent identifications have been made with state-of-the-art 3D seismic, or by using Google Earth. So your own investigations are intriguing.

    If you do return for further discussion I would like you to consider two things.

    First, I found your passion for the topic rather exploded into an aggressive, over the top exposition of your speculation, accompanied by an emotional response, even to quite reasonable questions.

    And that would be my second point. Matthyaouw's query about evidence of thermal metamorphism was wholly appropriate. If you feel it was not, then you need to lay out your arguments clearly. Simply stating you will not dignify the question with an answer is not at all helpful.

    I am ready to conduct a dialogue with you on this fascinating speculation. However, if you do return to take part in such a discussion I would ask that you take heed of the two points I raised above.
  19. doodah Registered Senior Member

    Intriguing indeed. I would echo Ophiolite's response.

    I worked several years in Central Alabama and throughout the southern Appalachians- and have been curious about several "circular" features. There is a similar sized feature just south of Marble Valley, AL (NE of Marshall) that disrupts the tectonic grain of the local Appalachian metamorphic rocks. Rocks in the area are more highly fractured than surrounding lithologies. I always suspected that the circular feature was the result of igneous processes, but could never find evidence on the ground to support that hypothesis. So your blast hypothesis is intriguing indeed.

Share This Page