Moontanman

Ponderer, you made a positive assertion, then refused to support it, then you acted put upon because we would expect you to support the positive assertion. then you got rude and boorish about the idea that we would have the audacity to think that you should support a positive assertion you had made, I wish you a long and interesting life....

maybe they are part octopus?

Underwater geysers? In the sense of what we see on land as geysers I would say there are none but underwater the mechanisms that would produce a geyser produce what are called smokers where super critical water is released from the mid ocean ridges. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent I don't think they pulse or emit steam like land geysers but they are the same or a very similar process....

yeah, but dead horses can't get away....

have you ever read the Complete Book of Swords"? by Fred Saberhagen? great universe he created in that series.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Swords

Think of the possibilities of pr0n sites using this, your phone buzzes and tells you just around the corner is a beautiful young woman desperate to hook up with you but you get there and there is another buzz telling you some even better looking girl is just a short walk away and you go to that place and ... yes another buzz from your phone directing you someplace else.... get some exercise anyway....

Race realists...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPWHfrU3PSQ

Every time I see this stuff I think of how advanced the genetic engineering would have to be to actually cross a human from earth with a reptile from another planet, it also begs the question of how would an animal from another planet even be considered a reptile. We can't even make human petunia hybrids and we share 3.5 billion years of evolutionary history with petunias how could we hybridize with creatures we share no evolutionary history with? many of these people seem to think that all you need to do to cross a human blood line with another species is have sex with them and you have a viable cross breed and its fertile.... yeah, lets hear it for Centaurs.....

So yet another interpretation of an already bad work of fiction is going to save the world.... I call horse feathers....

I am God....

You seem to be equating belief with faith, I do not need faith to believe a theory that is supported by verifiable facts. To believe in something that is verifiable by observable and repeatable evidence is not the same as faith. Like the word theory, which hold different meanings in different contexts, in the context of belief with no evidence i hold no such beliefs. I do not believe anything that cannot be verified, if how ever you are talking about things i believe in do to faith then I hold no beliefs...

Awesome craftsmanship....

You are correct Appolinaria but I still question the actual depth, I bet 4000 meters is a typo of sorts...

Hey anyone want to see me nekked?... no wait I'm not a woman... but I'll get a moontan in a heart beat....

I never said that oval craters were impossible or didn't happen but they are rare but the main thing you have to answer about the Carolina Bays is why there is no evidence of any impact at the sites, their ages are around 100,000 years old not a few thousand and there is no shocked quartz or any other mineral, no evidence of any extraterrestrial material associated with the bays, core samples do not indicate they were once deeper and filed with sediment. You show all the triangulation in the world but the fact remains there is no evidence they were caused by impacts, none, shape alone does not a crater make and incredulity about aeolian and water explainations do not make them invalid. I had to go no further than wiki to find the explanation that was given me by local experts who have studied this stuff most of their lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay Theories of Origin More than a dozen bays are shown in this photo in southeastern North Carolina. Several are cleared and drained for farming. Theories of the origin of the Carolina bays fall into two major categories: that these features were created by forces within the Earth, or that they were gouged by an astronomical event or set of events. [edit]Geomorphology Various geomorphological theories have been proposed to account for the bays, including action of sea currents when the area was under the ocean or the upwelling of ground water at a later time. One major theory within the earth sciences academic community is that a combination of processes created the shapes and orientations of these ancient landforms, including climate change, the formation of siliclastic karst by solution of subsurface material during glacial sealevel lowstands and later modification of these depressions by periodic eolian and lacustrine processes. Various proposals that they were either directly or indirectly created by a meteorite shower or exploding comet are disputed by many scientists for an apparent lack of extraterrestrial material, absence of shocked quartz and "bedrock" deformation associated with larger bays, and extremely low ratio of depth to diameter of the larger bays. More information on these theories can be found at: Carolina Bays. Quaternary geologists and geomorphologists argue that the peculiar features of Carolina bays can be readily explained by known terrestrial processes and repeated modification by eolian and lacustrine processes of them over the past 70,000 to 100,000 years. [2]. Also, quaternary geologists and geomorphologists believe to have found a correspondence in time between when the active modification of the rims of Carolina bays most commonly occurred and when adjacent sand dunes were active during the Wisconsin glaciation between 15,000 and 40,000 years and 70,000 to 80,000 years BP [3]. In addition, quaternary geologists and geomorphologists have repeatedly found that the orientations of the Carolina bays are consistent with the wind patterns which existed during the Wisconsin glaciation as reconstructed from Pleistocene parabolic dunes, a time when the shape of the Carolina bays was being modified [4]. [edit]Impact event The cometary impact theory of the origin of the bays was popular among earth scientists of the 1930s and 40s. It said that they were the result of a low density comet exploding above or impacting with the Laurentide ice sheet about 12,900 years ago.[1] New hypotheses arose again in the 1980s and 1990s, spurred on by various attention to impacts such as the Tunguska event, Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event and a theorized link to the unsolved scientific mystery of the Younger Dryas event. Impact geologists determined the depressions are too shallow to be impact features. Reports of magnetic anomalies turned out not to show consistency across the sites. There were no meteorite fragments or impact crater geologic structures. None of the necessary evidence for an impact was found. The conclusion was to reject the impact theory at the Carolina bays.[2] And no, wiki is not my only source of information but this particular article was concise and to the point, here is another... http://www.georgehoward.net/cbays.htm Yes I agree that meteor impacts have probably had more influence on the Earth than we give them credit for but every impression in the ground is not a meteorite crater.... An impact that would generate so many craters should have had profound impact on the climate of the day and you are postulating that such oval impact craters were made by more than one impact? While oval craters are occasionally found 100,000's of thousands of them in a small area from more than one impact seems a bit of a stretch to me... especially when more likely causes are logically possible... and again, there is no evidence of impact at any of the bays, even the ones that are miles across....

I never said that oval craters were impossible or didn't happen but they are rare but the main thing you have to answer about the Carolina Bays is why there is no evidence of any impact at the sites, their ages are around 100,000 years old not a few thousand and there is no shocked quartz or any other mineral, no evidence of any extraterrestrial material associated with the bays, core samples do not indicate they were once deeper and filed with sediment. You show all the triangulation in the world but the fact remains there is no evidence they were caused by impacts, none, shape alone does not a crater make and incredulity about aeolian and water explainations do not make them invalid. I had to go no further than wiki to find the explanation that was given me by local experts who have studied this stuff most of their lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay Theories of Origin More than a dozen bays are shown in this photo in southeastern North Carolina. Several are cleared and drained for farming. Theories of the origin of the Carolina bays fall into two major categories: that these features were created by forces within the Earth, or that they were gouged by an astronomical event or set of events. [edit]Geomorphology Various geomorphological theories have been proposed to account for the bays, including action of sea currents when the area was under the ocean or the upwelling of ground water at a later time. One major theory within the earth sciences academic community is that a combination of processes created the shapes and orientations of these ancient landforms, including climate change, the formation of siliclastic karst by solution of subsurface material during glacial sealevel lowstands and later modification of these depressions by periodic eolian and lacustrine processes. Various proposals that they were either directly or indirectly created by a meteorite shower or exploding comet are disputed by many scientists for an apparent lack of extraterrestrial material, absence of shocked quartz and "bedrock" deformation associated with larger bays, and extremely low ratio of depth to diameter of the larger bays. More information on these theories can be found at: Carolina Bays. Quaternary geologists and geomorphologists argue that the peculiar features of Carolina bays can be readily explained by known terrestrial processes and repeated modification by eolian and lacustrine processes of them over the past 70,000 to 100,000 years. [2]. Also, quaternary geologists and geomorphologists believe to have found a correspondence in time between when the active modification of the rims of Carolina bays most commonly occurred and when adjacent sand dunes were active during the Wisconsin glaciation between 15,000 and 40,000 years and 70,000 to 80,000 years BP [3]. In addition, quaternary geologists and geomorphologists have repeatedly found that the orientations of the Carolina bays are consistent with the wind patterns which existed during the Wisconsin glaciation as reconstructed from Pleistocene parabolic dunes, a time when the shape of the Carolina bays was being modified [4]. [edit]Impact event The cometary impact theory of the origin of the bays was popular among earth scientists of the 1930s and 40s. It said that they were the result of a low density comet exploding above or impacting with the Laurentide ice sheet about 12,900 years ago.[1] New hypotheses arose again in the 1980s and 1990s, spurred on by various attention to impacts such as the Tunguska event, Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event and a theorized link to the unsolved scientific mystery of the Younger Dryas event. Impact geologists determined the depressions are too shallow to be impact features. Reports of magnetic anomalies turned out not to show consistency across the sites. There were no meteorite fragments or impact crater geologic structures. None of the necessary evidence for an impact was found. The conclusion was to reject the impact theory at the Carolina bays.[2]

How can the Idea of impact forming them be obvious as the nose on your face when none of the data supports the idea of impacts, there is no shocked quartz, many of the bays are of different ages, and a natural method formation has been worked out and it doesn't involve impacts, do you only read that which agrees with you? On top of that oval craters are quite rare, even coming in at an extreme angle usually makes a round crater, we are not talking about bullets here, these impacts would been hugely energetic and when the ice chucks hit they would be balls of hot plasma not chunks of cold ice....

So even though I easily found information that debunks the impact theory completely you are gonna go with an impact anyway? There is no evidence for impact event The bays are of differing ages and show sign of being gradually formed over time They are not as accurately placed as many would have you believe All I had to do was go to wiki and see the very things that people here who actually study these thing have demonstrated to be true.... have told me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay

I'd think you'd have to go a bit deeper than 4000 meters in most places to get 100c temps but I wonder if there is an error about the depth and maybe an extra few zeros were added to the miles measurement?? I messed up. 4000 meters would be 2.4 miles.... I can't even get my measurements right.... but 4000 meters still seems quite deep....

In the USA probably never...

Another thread would be a good idea and i'll see if I can come up with anything to support my assertion other than an old memory... Bold is mine, this is what I was told.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Bay

John, I honestly don't know the details, I've had it explained to me many many years ago by a geologist and a oceanographer, actually over the years more than 3 or 4 of them as a matter of fact. The mail deal is that no evidence of meteor impact at the sites and the fact that many of them point in odd directions and that an actual impact is highly unlikely to leave a oval crater much less many of them, some in odd directions, all in the same place. The deal with the currents didn't stick all that well in my memory but I have dived in the ones that are full of water and they all (the ones I've dived in anyway) have springs issuing from the bottom and there is no fractured rock strata associated with them...

Mediocre videos? Surely you jest....

John, I live among the Carolina Bays, I also know scientists who study them (not personally but I have met some) very few if any real geologists think the Carolina Bays were formed by meteorite impacts, most think the bays were formed underwater by currents in a shallow sea, there is no evidence of impact forming those bays....

Any new species would probably be microscopic, such a "river" would actually be flowing through sand gravel and porous rocks, it would not be a cave like channel beneath the surface river. There are other such "rivers" that flow underground that have little or no association with surface rivers. This does not mean there are no under ground channels or areas where water flows through the ground but for the most part these water flows go slowly through porous materials not an open cave like channel...