Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Re: [Geology2] How to make a new home page image



Sounds like I am a polymath as well,first time I have heard the term, but I have not studied at a school since college in 1973-74 when I was an art major. I have on my own been a naturalist and spent more time in wild places than society, where I only come to work normally a few months a year to make enough to live on in the outdoors and on the road cycling. I usually live on about $150-300 a month depending on whether I am just backpacking or bicycle touring. My next goal is to spend a week hiking the Grand Canyon then heading south down the Arizona Trail to Tucson, then buying taking Amtrak to southern Florida at Key West, the going north to Maine, west to Seattle, back to Alaska, then back south to southern California and finally back to southwest Utah.

In 2006 I rode (my bicycle) from Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean down the Dalton Highway to Fairbanks then on down the highway to Homer Spit below Anchorage on the northern Pacific Ocean.

Last fall from Sept 9th to Dec 26th I rode from Jackson WY south through western WY, then through eastern Utah and diagonally southwest through Arizona from Monument Valley to Yuma, to the Salton Sea, up to Joshua Tree NM then east back into NW Arizona and down to Tucson. Last spring I rode up here to southwestern Utah in 14 days from April 2nd to the 16th. I have been working since then and have been buying new outdoor gear to do my trip with next fall. Now I am working to save for that trip to be on the road,trail and rail for two years around the USA.



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] How to make a new home page image



πŸŽ‰ 🎊 A little too much to drink already? πŸŽŠπŸŽ‰  <grin>

🌹🌺 Lin is very much a lively female 🌺🌷 who loves all kinds of critters but especially penguins 🐧. 

She is already moaning up in Jackson TN about not being stuck in the ice on that Russian ship in Antarctica with all those lucky voyagers.  I sent her a few photos of the penguins curious visits to that ice locked science expedition down in their world.

She has an interesting back ground and it is well worth taking the time to get to know her over time.

😎 Victor




On Dec 31, 2013, at 11:08 PM, <cgptsnaz@yahoo.com> wrote:

Just curious Lin, are you a woman or man?


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[Geology2] Fwd: ? San Francisco - Gold Rush to Cable Cars - 1906 Earthquake Live Quake Footage - Railcars & Railways - YouTube




The March of Progress - San Francisco's East Bay Transport development from early 1900's to 1940's, the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge & railcars. Trains are shown. Railway construction. The 1906 earthquake with live quake footage of falling buildings. Market Street after the fires. Dashcam pics of the streets shown. Opening of Oakland Bay Bridge. Trains, buses, trams.


--


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] How to make a new home page image



Wow. I'm duly impressed. Btw, I am female. Lin is short for Linda, which I disdain and unless you want to piss me off, don't call me that. LOLOL  But I admire your sense of adventure and I can't even begin to imagine what all you've seen and experienced. I've spent most of my life in school, either taking courses or teaching them. I've also spent a large amount of time in nature, but mostly in Tennessee and Southern California. After gaining a degree in Biology, I became a herpetologist and was happy with that role for about 10 years, but although I taught the paleo program at Coon Creek Science Center in West Tennessee, I was bowled over by the many geological formations in SoCal. At Cal State Fullerton, I began a Geology degree, but alas, did not get to finish it due to family circumstances. I returned to Tennessee and finding no courses here in vulcanology, I simply opted to complete an MA in English because I wanted to learn how to write well. I taught English comp to incoming freshmen for a while and really found it rewarding. I was accepted into the PhD program at University of Memphis and almost made it until narcolepsy stopped the bus once and for all.

I still spend a great deal of time learning, and I am a penguin, wolf, and big cat advocate. My work with the latter three categories (pun intended) keeps me going... that and my 8 cats and a chihuahua. Smile. I've written one book and I'm working on another. I've been told I'm a polymath. Who knows...

Happy New Year Everyone,

Lin



On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 10:08 PM, <cgptsnaz@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Just curious Lin, are you a woman or man? I am not familiar with the name Lin so I am not sure. I am guessing woman but unsure, not that it matters but?

 Where do you live, I live near Zion, Bryce and the Grand Canyon Nat Parks, in the middle between them at the southwest edge of the Grand Staircase Nat Monument. In a small community of 500 people and am a cook for a local business.

I am 58 (in January) and have been an adventure traveler for almost 40 years. I travel by bicycle and backpack, never driven a motor vehicle since I was 16 in 1972 when I had a moped. I have been to and traveled all over the USA mainland including Alaska.  I have bicycle toured for 31 years traveling about 5000 miles a year and have done many multi night backpacking trips as well. I have lived outdoors about 276 days a year since 1982.

I worked from 1982 to 2009 in Jackson WY as I mentioned before during the summers and then took September to May off on my adventure travels. I am currently work for the next 9 months to take off a couple years in late 2014 to mid 2016 to just travel by bike,foot and train. 




--


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] Statistical Justification for Antipodal Volcanism



Ben, I have to concur with Dr. John. He makes a very valid point. Odds are great at Vegas, but lousy source material for a paper. What you need is a means to justify the impact of the Chicxulub event, via good old research on past masters, whether they are for or against your theory. Once you present your reading list so that the reader can see that you are well educated on impact events, then you can move forward.

However, even then, you'll need to find sources to lend support to your theory. Wegener didn't just up and declare tectonics as a viable process; he stood "on the shoulders of giants" before him and from there, lent his voice to the conversation.

Correlation is like searching a family tree for missing members. Do that and you'll have a base from which to work. Good luck!

Lin


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:24 PM, John Rasmussen <john@rasmussengems.com> wrote:
 

Ben, you present qualitative arguments, including your statistics.  You have not presented any correlative statistics to support your thesis.  Have you looked at ANOVA or Chi Square analyses?  Your universe of 4 events is also extremely small to use for statistical certainty.  What are your error calculations?  I don't necessarily think you are incorrect, just that you actually do not present statistical calculations to support your thesis.  Calculating odds is for gambling.  Correlating events with a large enough population is statistics.

John


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Ben Fishler <benfishler@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Lin,

The purpose of this email is to present a paper entitled "Large Impacts & Contemporaneous Antipodal Mantle Plumes:  A Statistical Justification for Cause and Effect." This paper is attached in PDF form.

Statistics has its limitations, but powerful statistical evidence can go a long way toward establishing a new way to look at reality.

In many ways, what I am trying to do is to create a way to look at large impacts and their consequences in a different way ... to see reality through a different lens.

The purpose of the attached page is to provide the statistical justification for using this different lens. The next email will provide a geologically sound mechanism for understanding how the process works.

Again, I am always looking for comments.

Regards,

Ben Fishler




--
John Atwell Rasmussen, Ph.D., AJP
Rasmussen Gems and Jewelry LLC
"A Time to Stop Living at Work; A Time to Start Working at Living."




--


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] How to make a new home page image



Just curious Lin, are you a woman or man? I am not familiar with the name Lin so I am not sure. I am guessing woman but unsure, not that it matters but?

 Where do you live, I live near Zion, Bryce and the Grand Canyon Nat Parks, in the middle between them at the southwest edge of the Grand Staircase Nat Monument. In a small community of 500 people and am a cook for a local business.

I am 58 (in January) and have been an adventure traveler for almost 40 years. I travel by bicycle and backpack, never driven a motor vehicle since I was 16 in 1972 when I had a moped. I have been to and traveled all over the USA mainland including Alaska.  I have bicycle toured for 31 years traveling about 5000 miles a year and have done many multi night backpacking trips as well. I have lived outdoors about 276 days a year since 1982.

I worked from 1982 to 2009 in Jackson WY as I mentioned before during the summers and then took September to May off on my adventure travels. I am currently work for the next 9 months to take off a couple years in late 2014 to mid 2016 to just travel by bike,foot and train. 



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] Statistical Justification for Antipodal Volcanism



Ben, you present qualitative arguments, including your statistics.  You have not presented any correlative statistics to support your thesis.  Have you looked at ANOVA or Chi Square analyses?  Your universe of 4 events is also extremely small to use for statistical certainty.  What are your error calculations?  I don't necessarily think you are incorrect, just that you actually do not present statistical calculations to support your thesis.  Calculating odds is for gambling.  Correlating events with a large enough population is statistics.

John


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Ben Fishler <benfishler@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Lin,

The purpose of this email is to present a paper entitled "Large Impacts & Contemporaneous Antipodal Mantle Plumes:  A Statistical Justification for Cause and Effect." This paper is attached in PDF form.

Statistics has its limitations, but powerful statistical evidence can go a long way toward establishing a new way to look at reality.

In many ways, what I am trying to do is to create a way to look at large impacts and their consequences in a different way ... to see reality through a different lens.

The purpose of the attached page is to provide the statistical justification for using this different lens. The next email will provide a geologically sound mechanism for understanding how the process works.

Again, I am always looking for comments.

Regards,

Ben Fishler




--
John Atwell Rasmussen, Ph.D., AJP
Rasmussen Gems and Jewelry LLC
"A Time to Stop Living at Work; A Time to Start Working at Living."


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] Statistical Justification for Antipodal Volcanism



Statistics by their very nature cannot demonstrate causation, only correlation. Without causation you have no theory... maybe a hypothesis at best.


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Ben Fishler <benfishler@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Lin,

The purpose of this email is to present a paper entitled "Large Impacts & Contemporaneous Antipodal Mantle Plumes:  A Statistical Justification for Cause and Effect." This paper is attached in PDF form.

Statistics has its limitations, but powerful statistical evidence can go a long way toward establishing a new way to look at reality.

In many ways, what I am trying to do is to create a way to look at large impacts and their consequences in a different way ... to see reality through a different lens.

The purpose of the attached page is to provide the statistical justification for using this different lens. The next email will provide a geologically sound mechanism for understanding how the process works.

Again, I am always looking for comments.

Regards,

Ben Fishler




--
Check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/
Read my blog at http://eclecticarcania.blogspot.com/
My Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/derkimster
Linkedin profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/kim-noyes/9/3a1/2b8
Follow me on Twitter @DisasterKim


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[Geology2] Statistical Justification for Antipodal Volcanism



Dear Lin,

The purpose of this email is to present a paper entitled "Large Impacts & Contemporaneous Antipodal Mantle Plumes:  A Statistical Justification for Cause and Effect." This paper is attached in PDF form.

Statistics has its limitations, but powerful statistical evidence can go a long way toward establishing a new way to look at reality.

In many ways, what I am trying to do is to create a way to look at large impacts and their consequences in a different way ... to see reality through a different lens.

The purpose of the attached page is to provide the statistical justification for using this different lens. The next email will provide a geologically sound mechanism for understanding how the process works.

Again, I am always looking for comments.

Regards,

Ben Fishler


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] I'm Baaack! More Impact Theory with Antipodal Volcanism



I was just in a debate with a guy over the topic of legalization of pot in Washington State being the cause of an increase in DUI arrests. He insisted the former caused the latter. I pointed out his inability to connect the two and reminded him of the logical fallacy of causation-correlation.


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:16 PM, ChuckB <gumboyaya@cox.net> wrote:
 

Ben,

Just keep in mind what Mark Twain said about statistics (...lies, damn
lies, and statistics). You will need to account for many variables
before a statistical argument will be viable.

Chuck




--
Check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/
Read my blog at http://eclecticarcania.blogspot.com/
My Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/derkimster
Linkedin profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/kim-noyes/9/3a1/2b8
Follow me on Twitter @DisasterKim


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] I'm Baaack! More Impact Theory with Antipodal Volcanism

Ben,

Just keep in mind what Mark Twain said about statistics (...lies, damn
lies, and statistics). You will need to account for many variables
before a statistical argument will be viable.

Chuck


------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/geology2/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/geology2/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
geology2-digest@yahoogroups.com
geology2-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
geology2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Re: [Geology2] Gold Mining Company Restructures Debt, Aims to Continue Development of Amador County Mine



I thought that area was played out a long time ago. Allison


From: Kim Noyes <kimnoyes@gmail.com>
To: CentralCoastRockhounds <centralcoastrockhounds@yahoogroups.com>; goldcountryrocks <goldcountryrocks@yahoogroups.com>; Geology2 <geology2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 3:52 AM
Subject: [Geology2] Gold Mining Company Restructures Debt, Aims to Continue Development of Amador County Mine

 

Gold mining company restructures debt, aims to continue development of Amador County mine

By Mark Glover
Published: Monday, Dec. 30, 2013 - 6:11 pm
Last Modified: Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2013 - 12:06 am
Sutter Gold Mining Inc., which two years ago envisioned an underground gold mining bonanza at its Lincoln Mine Project near Sutter Creek in Amador County, has restructured its debt and expressed renewed hopes of ultimately making its foothills venture pay off.
The company released a statement last week saying it had reduced its interest expenses by securing a conventional loan totaling $40 million from RMB Australia Holdings Limited – money that would be used to replace existing debt and "for continued development of the Lincoln project and general corporate purposes."
Sutter said underground work on the mine is running ahead of schedule, but work at an on-site mill "was hampered by poor design elements, inappropriate equipment selection and improper installations." The company said adjustments were made and mill operation "has recommenced, and the process of commissioning the milling facilities for production is underway."
The company, based in Vancouver, British Columbia, also said it is finalizing a budget for the next phase of work at the Lincoln Mine Project.
"We have been very pleased with the underground development we have completed and have an improved understanding of our principal veins and our approach to continued development and mining," Rick Winters, president and CEO, said in the prepared statement.
"The issues we experienced as we began running the mill were more troublesome than we expected, though we are confident we have identified the problems and bottlenecks and addressed them to allow for sustained processing of our existing stockpiles and commissioning of the processing facilities over the next three months," he said.
Winters projected "initial revenue in the first quarter of 2014."
In 2012, officials touted the Lincoln Mine Project as the first commercial underground gold mine operation in California's historic Mother Lode region in more than 50 years.
After a prolonged regulatory and approval process, underground development started in the fall of 2012, buoyed by expert projections of 223,000 ounces to perhaps 680,000 ounces of gold at the site.
However, spirits sagged in July, when Sutter Gold announced that President and CEO Leanne Baker was being replaced on an interim basis by Winters, president of RMB Resources Inc., a merchant banking division of the FirstRand Group of South Africa, a major funding source of the project.
In addition, Sutter Gold eliminated a third of its workforce, leaving about 15 people staffing the Lincoln Mine site.
At the time, Sutter Gold said those moves were "in response to recent gold market volatility and uncertainty in financing markets."
After peaking at nearly $1,900 an ounce in September 2011, gold has been slipping, holding steady of late at around $1,200 an ounce on the New York Mercantile Exchange in New York.
Historically, gold prices drop when the economy improves and the dollar gains strength.
Source: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/12/30/6036503/gold-mining-company-restructures.html

--
Check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/
Read my blog at http://eclecticarcania.blogspot.com/
My Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/derkimster
Linkedin profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/kim-noyes/9/3a1/2b8
Follow me on Twitter @DisasterKim




__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] I'm Baaack! More Impact Theory with Antipodal Volcanism




On 12/30/2013 8:43 PM, Ben Fishler wrote:
 
Dear Lin,

The last time I wrote in to the group was back in late May, 2013, as I was getting heavily involved in the busy season for our businesses. Things have calmed down and I can devote some time to proper responses to the several questions that were raised about my theory of extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact.


Just a suggestion:


                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Occam's razor


In recent years, several other craters of around the same age as Chicxulub have been discovered, all between latitudes 20°N and 70°N. Examples include the disputed Silverpit crater in the North Sea and the Boltysh crater in Ukraine. Both are much smaller than Chicxulub, but are likely to have been caused by objects many tens of metres across striking the Earth. This has led to the hypothesis that the Chicxulub impact may have been only one of several impacts that happened nearly at the same time. Another possible crater thought to have been formed at the same time is the larger Shiva crater, although the structure's status as a crater is contested.

Silverpit crater If one assumes the meteor impact theory is right, the size of the crater can be combined with assumptions about the speed of an impacting object to estimate the size of the impactor itself. Impacting objects are generally moving at speeds of the order of 20–50 km/s, and at these speeds an object about 120 m (393 feet) across and with a mass of 2.0×109 kg would be required to form a Silverpit-sized crater, if the object was rocky. If it had been a comet, the crater would have been larger.

For comparison, the object which struck the Earth at Chicxulub is estimated to have measured approximately 9.6 km (6 miles) across, while the object responsible for the Tunguska event in 1908 is thought to have been a comet or asteroid about 60 m (196 feet) across, with a mass of about 4×108 kg.[12]

Boltysh Crater is located in central Ukraine, in the basin of the Tiasmyn River, a tributary of the Dnieper River. It is 24 kilometres (15 mi) in diameter, and is surrounded by an ejecta blanket of breccia preserved over an area of 6,500 square kilometres (2,500 sq mi). It is estimated that immediately after the impact, ejecta covered an area of 25,000 square kilometres (9,700 sq mi) to a depth of 1 metre (3.3 ft) or greater, and was some 600 metres (2,000 ft) deep at the crater rim.

The crater contains a central uplift about 6 kilometres (3.7 mi) in diameter, rising about 550 metres (1,800 ft) above the base level of the crater. This uplift currently lies beneath about 500 metres (1,600 ft) of sediment deposited since the impact, and was discovered in the 1960s during oil shale deposits exploration.

The Deccan Traps are a large igneous province located on the Deccan Plateau of west-central India (between 17°–24°N, 73°–74°E) and one of the largest volcanic features on Earth. They consist of multiple layers of solidified flood basalt that together are more than 2,000 m (6,562 ft) thick and cover an area of 500,000 km2 (193,051 sq mi) and a volume of 512,000 km3 (123,000 cu mi). The term "trap", used in geology for such rock formations, is derived from the Swedish word for stairs[1] and refers to the step-like hills forming the landscape of the region. There are some who suggest that an impact of sufficient speed and size could have blasted through the earths crust and into magma that in turn bled up onto the land.

The Shiva crater is a another huge impact crater located under the Arabian Sea off the coast of India near Bombay. This crater also dates from the K-T boundary, 65 million years ago, when the Chicxulub crater at the tip of the YucatΓ‘n Peninsula also formed. Although it has shifted because of sea floor spreading, when pieced together it would be about 370 miles (600 km) by 280 miles (450 km) across and 7.5 miles (12 km) deep (and may be just part of a larger crater). It is estimated to have been made by a bolide (an asteroid or meteoroid) 25 miles (40 km) in diameter.



All of these have been contested (???) as if there is a concerted effort to keep impact from being the cause, but perhaps to be considered anyway.

B.R.S.















The discussion last spring was positively Rumsfeldian for me. I found out that there were several things that I didn't know that I didn't know. Of course, finding these things out was a major purpose in contacting the group, so that was a good thing.

The major things that I didn't know that I didn't know were:

1.  SIMA VS. SIAL — I didn't know that the surface of the Earth was composed of two different types of material, with the lighter continents floating higher than the heavier basaltic material. I had assumed it basically all the same stuff, rather than being differentiated. (thanks, EMAN)

2.  LIQUID MANTLE — I found out that the mantle isn't really liquid in the ordinary sense. Rather, it is more like wet cement. It's only liquid in reference to a geological time scale. For all intents and purposes, it acts more like its solid. (thanks, ChuckB)

3.  TRAPPED EXTRUSION — I found out that the impact from a six-mile-in-diameter rock (the Chicxulub impact object) was not nearly big enough to force extrusion of material at the antipode of impact. I found that my mechanism for trapped extrusion (as in the cold heading business) would only work in the case of a much, much bigger impact (because the cold heading trapped extrusion process is a near field phenomenon). (Thanks, ChuckB)

4.  RAPID SURFACE MOVEMENT — I found out that I could not have continents "pinwheel around" into position in a way that would be much too fast  for them to get there (specifically my movement explanation for Western Antarctica). (Thanks, EMAN)

All of these factors have to be integrated into my theory if my theory is to make any sense. And, mostly, they can.

But, I think that there is an even bigger issue involved here. And that issue is the question:  "Why is Ben even bothering to pursue this theory when so many of the premises have been proven wrong?"

I believe that it is legitimate for members of the group to wonder why discussion of this theory is not unlike trying to answer the question:  How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

First, you have to show some evidence of the existence of angels before anyone is going to take you seriously. Unlike the angel question, I actually do have some evidence to present for the case of extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact. The evidence is statistical.

The initial statistical evidence was the very reason that I started looking at this possibility in the first place. In an informal way, I asked myself this question about the Chicxulub impact and the Deccan traps: What are the odds that the largest (by far) impact of the past 100 million years would occur at virtually the same time as the largest (by far) igneous province eruption of the past 100 million years?

As I examined impacts and possibilities of antipodal volcanism, I found more statistical evidence. The odds these were random, unrelated coincidences grew smaller and smaller.

During the summer and fall of this year, I approached this statistical question in an even more organized and methodical way. I will present my findings in the next email.

The reason that I did not bring up the statistical question to begin with was due to the fact that I had not developed it fully and because I didn't think that it was necessary. I thought that I had a theory that worked, that was internally consistent and that fit the facts. Why bother with the reason why I began looking into the matter to begin with?

At this point, I believe that it is important to share the mounting evidence of statistical improbability that large impacts and antipodal volcanism are unrelated.

But, even if I present a convincing statistical case for extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact, that will not be enough. Without a viable mechanism for this activity to occur, the theory will be ignored. As Alfred Wegener found out, evidence without a convincing mechanism does not win the day.

Will I be doomed to wander the earth in search of a mechanism until I die in a blizzard in Greenland? Not an appealing prospect. Not even a posthumously commemorative song by the Amoeba People is likely to relieve the bitterness of unrequited  vindication.

So, my second email will present a revised mechanism. This mechanism will actually conform to geological reality. I promise to do this without relying on Ancient Aliens, Cryptozoology or even a Sharknado Apocalypse. However, I may need to invoke the wisdom of that eminent musical geologist, Elvis Presley.

And, of course, I will be looking for comments.

After I get through these first two detailed emails, I will address the other questions that have been posed, as well as some interesting additions. These include:

1.  EMAN's question about rapid surface movement.

2.  Lin's question asking why the Indonesian island chain isn't just a convergent subduction zone as opposed to being a hotspot trail leading to a mantle plume at Lake Toba in northern Sumatra.

3.  The creation of the moon.

4.  Explaining India's rapid movement during its journey to a crash landing in Asia, as compared to the significantly slower movement of other tectonic plates.

Is this ambitious enough?

Regards,

Ben Fishler







__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] I'm Baaack! More Impact Theory with Antipodal Volcanism



Hi Ben,

Welcome back... and yes, I'm looking forward to your revised thesis. Go to, as the bard would say... go to!

Lin


On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Ben Fishler <benfishler@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Lin,

The last time I wrote in to the group was back in late May, 2013, as I was getting heavily involved in the busy season for our businesses. Things have calmed down and I can devote some time to proper responses to the several questions that were raised about my theory of extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact.

The discussion last spring was positively Rumsfeldian for me. I found out that there were several things that I didn't know that I didn't know. Of course, finding these things out was a major purpose in contacting the group, so that was a good thing.

The major things that I didn't know that I didn't know were:

1.  SIMA VS. SIAL — I didn't know that the surface of the Earth was composed of two different types of material, with the lighter continents floating higher than the heavier basaltic material. I had assumed it basically all the same stuff, rather than being differentiated. (thanks, EMAN)

2.  LIQUID MANTLE — I found out that the mantle isn't really liquid in the ordinary sense. Rather, it is more like wet cement. It's only liquid in reference to a geological time scale. For all intents and purposes, it acts more like its solid. (thanks, ChuckB)

3.  TRAPPED EXTRUSION — I found out that the impact from a six-mile-in-diameter rock (the Chicxulub impact object) was not nearly big enough to force extrusion of material at the antipode of impact. I found that my mechanism for trapped extrusion (as in the cold heading business) would only work in the case of a much, much bigger impact (because the cold heading trapped extrusion process is a near field phenomenon). (Thanks, ChuckB)

4.  RAPID SURFACE MOVEMENT — I found out that I could not have continents "pinwheel around" into position in a way that would be much too fast  for them to get there (specifically my movement explanation for Western Antarctica). (Thanks, EMAN)

All of these factors have to be integrated into my theory if my theory is to make any sense. And, mostly, they can.

But, I think that there is an even bigger issue involved here. And that issue is the question:  "Why is Ben even bothering to pursue this theory when so many of the premises have been proven wrong?"

I believe that it is legitimate for members of the group to wonder why discussion of this theory is not unlike trying to answer the question:  How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

First, you have to show some evidence of the existence of angels before anyone is going to take you seriously. Unlike the angel question, I actually do have some evidence to present for the case of extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact. The evidence is statistical.

The initial statistical evidence was the very reason that I started looking at this possibility in the first place. In an informal way, I asked myself this question about the Chicxulub impact and the Deccan traps: What are the odds that the largest (by far) impact of the past 100 million years would occur at virtually the same time as the largest (by far) igneous province eruption of the past 100 million years?

As I examined impacts and possibilities of antipodal volcanism, I found more statistical evidence. The odds these were random, unrelated coincidences grew smaller and smaller.

During the summer and fall of this year, I approached this statistical question in an even more organized and methodical way. I will present my findings in the next email.

The reason that I did not bring up the statistical question to begin with was due to the fact that I had not developed it fully and because I didn't think that it was necessary. I thought that I had a theory that worked, that was internally consistent and that fit the facts. Why bother with the reason why I began looking into the matter to begin with?

At this point, I believe that it is important to share the mounting evidence of statistical improbability that large impacts and antipodal volcanism are unrelated.

But, even if I present a convincing statistical case for extinction level volcanism at the antipode of a very large impact, that will not be enough. Without a viable mechanism for this activity to occur, the theory will be ignored. As Alfred Wegener found out, evidence without a convincing mechanism does not win the day.

Will I be doomed to wander the earth in search of a mechanism until I die in a blizzard in Greenland? Not an appealing prospect. Not even a posthumously commemorative song by the Amoeba People is likely to relieve the bitterness of unrequited  vindication.

So, my second email will present a revised mechanism. This mechanism will actually conform to geological reality. I promise to do this without relying on Ancient Aliens, Cryptozoology or even a Sharknado Apocalypse. However, I may need to invoke the wisdom of that eminent musical geologist, Elvis Presley.

And, of course, I will be looking for comments.

After I get through these first two detailed emails, I will address the other questions that have been posed, as well as some interesting additions. These include:

1.  EMAN's question about rapid surface movement.

2.  Lin's question asking why the Indonesian island chain isn't just a convergent subduction zone as opposed to being a hotspot trail leading to a mantle plume at Lake Toba in northern Sumatra.

3.  The creation of the moon.

4.  Explaining India's rapid movement during its journey to a crash landing in Asia, as compared to the significantly slower movement of other tectonic plates.

Is this ambitious enough?

Regards,

Ben Fishler







--


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [Geology2] How to make a new home page image



No, unfortunately, I haven't uploaded my 11 rolls of film of my summer at Yellowstone, so I borrowed that image. I understand your love for the area, as I found the entire experience beyond my wildest imaginings. To top off the summer, we went camping at Craters of the Moon, Idaho, so I had a first hand opp to see the hot spot trail leading up to its current position. I saw so many geological features I never dreamed that I would ever see. While my friends were oohing and ahing over the waterfalls and mountains of rhyolite, I was noting the extent of past eruptions, areas of glaciation, and the cyanobacteria in the geyser pools. Once a geek, forever a geek. lol

Despite my penchant for watching anything blow up (in nature, mind), Yellowstone is one place I hope never pops its proverbial cork again. The natural history and geological record is so rich that one could spend several lifetimes deciphering its processes.

Lin




On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 5:27 PM, <cgptsnaz@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Your welcome! Did you take the picture of the Yellowstone Hot Springs? I lived in Jackson Hole near the Grand Tetons for 30+ summers and visited Yellowstone many times.




--


__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___