Thank you for continuing to push your theory. You are asking the right questions, show us how these are perfect ellipses by wind and water or some other mechanism. They don't seem to want to acknowledge the difference in shape because then that would logically invalidate their arguments.
About 1 year ago you made a video titled Deformed Carolina Bays. It's content proves that the eolian process can't be the cause of the bay formation. You described bays that formed on inclined terrain. A lake or pond will not form on inclined terrain, as far as the laws of physics are concerned. Kacz., et al, now have no valid point. A body of water would wash away the incline as it drained away. That didn't happen. I hope that helps. Good luck. Thank you, keep working.
I hope that the various videos that I have made on different aspects of the Carolina Bays will eventually reach a critical mass that convinces geologists to start studying the bays from an impact perspective.
Keep doing what you're doing, Antonio. This is the smoking gun they ask for. It's a matter of time before your *proof* changes the whole epic novel and you become one of those rare "I told you so" scientists that *didn't quit nor give a shit about their fits.*
Doctor Zamora, in Wisconsin and Michigan, there are kettle moraine lakes which are created by the morphology of melting ice from the last ice age. Water and debris fill the depressions left. The elliptical shape is not prevalent in those structures either. This part of wisconsin is where the glaciers stopped. Tens of thousands of lakes in canada and the northern midwest do not represent elliptical shapes.
Mr Zamora thank you for your methodical and instructive video, I was particularly interested in your observation about the mathematical properties of ellipses.., I'm thinking of doing this project: take a random sample of Carolina Bay structures (that is, some number of topographic representations of Bay structures), and compare with a simiilar random sample of topographic views of thermokarsts. What is the minimum number of data points needed to approximate the outline of each of the structures for both samples, say using least squares?
You make a very sensible proposal. The number of points required to represent a shape depends on the regularity of the shape. A fairly elliptical Carolina Bay requires 8 to 15 points. The irregular shape of a thermokarst lake requires many more points. I have needed over 100 points for some thermokarst lakes.
The features should be (statistically) compared to extraterrestrial bodies without atmosphere! If it's a fit, all erosion-based arguments are basicallly out 😉
My geology professor told me in 1974 that Lake Waccamaw, NC, (it's elliptically shaped as well), and several similar lakes were the result of a meteor strike in the distant past.
1:12 the part at the top left at the start looked like a giant footprint or even a footprint with 3 sets of toes. Pretty cool this is why I love geology
Do the long axes of the ellipses converge on a center somewhere northwest? Are there additional such features due southwest of a possible center? Great work.
Wonderful presentation & clear explanation. Thank you! 🤗 This bothered me for a while since they are obviously ellipses, have a clear directionality and the *only* way we know this can be produced is by impact.
chatgtp appear to confirm your analysis - "What Makes the Carolina Bays Unique? The Carolina Bays exhibit: A consistent alignment across thousands of features. High accuracy of ellipticity despite being natural formations. An unexplained uniformity in their major and minor axes' proportions. Few other geological features exhibit the same level of regularity and alignment, making the Carolina Bays an exceptional case in geomorphology."
Because Antonio has published extensively on the subject, and ChatGTP just regurgitated based on volume first, probability second? A strange, strange world we live in.
@@DogChowGurl his detractors have published extensively too. it couldn't cite other examples of natural geological mathematical ellipses. I think its a point of interest but i don't regards its output as authoritative but its a useful tool, i often have fun getting it to contradict itself.
Thank you, Antonio. Ray Charles could see the impact modality needed to form these formations. Protecting their postion exposes their blatant bias. They are not trustworthy, unlike you, Sir.
There are indeed many of these elipses in many areas on the east coast that could have been subject to elastic rebound/viscus relaxation at the appropriate time. It is hard to account for them using wind and frozen karsts hypotheses.
Great Shakespearian paraphrasing, i was not expecting that! Id be very interested in more experiments with with different grain sizes, from powder,to sand & mixed & with different degrees of wetness, ill go back to your earlier vids on your original experiments. Thanks for all your efforts.🙏🫡
Hi Antonio, while perhaps some of your evidence can be questioned, I feel that overall you present a good argument for your beliefs regarding the origin of the Carolina Bays. I find the hostility displayed by some with opposing views to be closer to the behavior one finds in politics, rather then those seeking to arrive at a flexible consensus. I say that because with my background in historic geology, I can't help but notice that new discoveries are being made seemingly all the time these days. As such, it seems that a flexible mind is in order, rather then one that is fettered by a specific dogma. Rather then having not presented any evidence, I think what's going on here is an example of what's called "Confirmation Bias" in psychology. That is, people only perceive in what they already believe, and summarily filter out anything contrary.
Has anyone done any kind of deeper geologic underground seismic survey that would reveal the triangular conic section of a bay? Presumably this would settle any disputes, even the soil is shown to be perturbed (or indeed, especially id the soil is perturbed at depth, which wind/water could never do)? I know you have already shown older rocks and soils overlaying younger soils at the surface...
Viscous relaxation reduces the depth of a cavity from the bottom up and at the same time it restores the previous stratigraphy. Digging in the Carolina Bays will not find any evidence of a conical structure, but it is known that the apex of a bay is slightly deeper. This is where you will typically find lakes inside a bay. See the video about viscous relaxation: ua-cam.com/video/k0KV5H6f7vU/v-deo.html
@@AustinKoleCarlisle An impact is governed by the laws of physics. Momentum is conserved (mass*velocity). The initial contact transfers the greatest energy to the surface and the ground is parted at great speed. As the projectile penetrates it continues to transfer energy to the medium but with less intensity since the projectile loses energy by transferring it to the medium. When the energy of the projectile is exhausted, the projectile is at the apex of a conical cavity or penetration funnel. The shape of the funnel corresponds to the rate of transfer of momentum. In a medium of low resistance, the shape of the conical cavity would be more tubular in shape than in a denser viscous medium.
The deletion of your Wiki edit is a strong indication that you are being victimized by the "refuted by an expert" excuse, which is a fallacy in this situation because the argument for the elliptical scars having been caused by a cataclysmic event have not been scientifically refuted. This is a question of the integrity of the people who refute the cataclysmic event theory. Modern "science" is, unfortunately, not always science. I applaud your tenacity, Mr. Zamora.
Is there a way to model what the continent looked like at the time of the catastrophe ( reverse erotion/ uplift / ocean level / pre flood shorelines etc.) Using the computer generated shading this could help with trend evidence.
The Carolina Bays don't line up with Lake Nipigon. I am aware that Randall Carlson keeps mentioning it as a potential ET impact site, but I have not seen any geological evidence to support that idea.
We have a huge problem with professional scientists on this planet not understanding what you and others have proven about the nature of the Carolina Bays. Actually, I think they may realize you are correct but their egos and past professional publications are at such severe risk, they remain committed to their disproven theories. This behavior is atrocious for someone calling themselves a scientist. I will also NEVER support Wikipedia after they sequestered your contributions as well as what they have done to other great researchers like Graham Hancock. This is a real bad century for true science so far, and we can only hope an educated public will be the force that turns it back in the right direction. Thank you Antonio, for your diligence and the good fight for truth.
Has there been any deviation in the elips shape due to one side of an impact being on solid rock areas vs an impact area of soft soil or sand all in the same impact crator. The resistance difference may alter the raised rim shape. Such evidence could ( or would) only be made by an impact of a softer lower speed material such as ice.
The Carolina Bays may be deformed at the time of emplacement due to terrain conditions, such as inclined terrain, or later by water erosion and human activity. Take a look at the video about deformed bays: ua-cam.com/video/_m2vkxBSfIc/v-deo.html
While I agree with the secondary impact hypothesis of huge chunks of ice from the original impact on the Laurentide ice sheet, wouldn't such high speed high energy impacts have created some shocked quartz in the sand? I've never asked this question to you. But, I just wonder, if I went to one of the closest Carolina Bay from Atlanta, if I brought a pail and a shovel, and just looked in the sands if I would find some. Penny for your thoughts?
interesting question! I would be curious to know for certain as well, but I personally don't think much of the debris, assuming it being mostly ice, would have carried that much energy. I can see some of the debris making it to higher altitudes, but not enough to match the energy of something coming directly from space. We're talking hundreds of km/hr compared to tens of thousands km/hr.
Exploration of Flamingo Bay in South Carolina found shocked-fractured quartz. ua-cam.com/video/K434-CP0FEk/v-deo.html Also, take a look at my video about how to get shocked quartz using a hammer. ua-cam.com/video/u44F6kT6U5E/v-deo.html
@Antonio_Zamora I don't think some prevailing wind would make shocked quartz. That should be the proverbial smoking gun. It was with Chixilub. And the lack of platinum and iridium should prove that they are not primary impacts. Funny how every time I see somebody using a blow torch to make merangue or sweating copper pipe, I think of your demonstration of your propane torch on a block of ice.
I had a discussion with an archaeologist. I told him I believed there used to be Giants. He said I believed in a fairytale. He said, "show me the skeletal remains of a giant". I said, "Show me the skeletal remains of a clovis person". 😂 he said , we have skeletal evidence of Clovis people". I said, " Google it. Let's take a look at that marvelous piece of backhoe archeology and forth times a charm dating. Then I will ask you if the shoe was on the other foot, would that be good enough evidence for Giant people"? He refused to Google it, he refused to talk to me anymore. I laughed and said, " now, which one of us believes in a fairytale"?
We have, in fact, one (count it, 1) Clovis-associated skeleton. There are no _Clovis-people_ skeletons because there was no "Clovis people": Clovis identifies a style of stonework that became a popular trade good across the continent, until trade networks collapsed under the end-Pleistocene comet strike and its continent-spanning fires and subsequent extinctions. Animals big enough to hunt with Clovis-industry points disappeared, although the people who had been using the points did not. They switched to a variety of styles better suited to smaller game. Note that, according to the tens of thousands of years of undisturbed stratigraphy on top of them, the bays have ages (plural: they vary) much greater than that event. The karst-lake explanation does not make sense, but neither does the secondary-impact one. A correct scientific activity would seek another explanation compatible with the physical evidence, not remain fixated on a second falsified one, howsoever appealing on appearances.
Love your videos Antonio! You are demonstrating the current scientific orthodoxy at work. Off the back of academic rigidity and conformity, science today is a religion - only true believers need apply, outsiders are banned, we all parrot the party line. I think that your theory will be accepted one day by the mainstream because once I saw the Lidar images you present, then I understood the geometry - as an NZer I am aware of the liquification of unconsolidated ground since the Christchurch earthquake - it's like seeing how the coastlines of Africa and South America interlock, which led to plate tectonic theory.
@@psychonauthacker Bubbles make circular features. The size of the bubbles would be determined by the surface tension of the liquid. I don't know of any liquid that would make kilometer-sized bubbles.
A solar plasma is a superheated, ionized gas that makes up the Sun's outer layers, primarily composed of hydrogen and helium. The charged particles interact with Earth's magnetic field, causing them to be channeled towards the poles where they collide with atoms in the atmosphere and create colorful auroras. Solar plasma is diffuse and would not be able to produce the conic sections that characterize the Carolina Bays.
@@ryanj9364 The Sun is composed of ionized hydrogen and small amounts of ionized helium and therefore it is not possible for it to produce "impactors".
I say they were made by chunks of ice coming back down from the magnetosphere compression event that carved the Grand Canyon and blew apart the Laurentide Icesheet.
If these structures are the result of terrestrial forces then there must be other places where such perfect ellipses form. Can the contrarians name any such locations?
“An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning.” ~ Max Planck
Many Thanks
We have two problems here: 1. The actual scientific question about the features. 2. The people whose livelihood depends on *them* being *right* .
"Should we just suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous geology?" has me ROTFLMAO. Well played, very well played. It's the thing.
Inspiration from the Bard.
Keep up the fight. The truth will eventually get through.
For some reason I can't see my tupig, but good video and hang in there
Thank you for continuing to push your theory. You are asking the right questions, show us how these are perfect ellipses by wind and water or some other mechanism. They don't seem to want to acknowledge the difference in shape because then that would logically invalidate their arguments.
What an excellent point! If the bays are the result of natural winds, why are they not found all over the world?
Right you are. Most geologist can only reconise gold or oil. Nothing else.
Stay the course. Unfortunately minds are slow to change and it takes persistence to make a difference. Love the Shakespearian reference. Bravo!
About 1 year ago you made a video titled Deformed Carolina Bays. It's content proves that the eolian process can't be the cause of the bay formation. You described bays that formed on inclined terrain. A lake or pond will not form on inclined terrain, as far as the laws of physics are concerned. Kacz., et al, now have no valid point. A body of water would wash away the incline as it drained away. That didn't happen. I hope that helps. Good luck. Thank you, keep working.
I hope that the various videos that I have made on different aspects of the Carolina Bays will eventually reach a critical mass that convinces geologists to start studying the bays from an impact perspective.
@@Antonio_Zamora We are all working toward that goal. Thanks again.
Keep doing what you're doing, Antonio. This is the smoking gun they ask for. It's a matter of time before your *proof* changes the whole epic novel and you become one of those rare "I told you so" scientists that *didn't quit nor give a shit about their fits.*
Don't forget the fish swimming about and forming the Bays...Lol.
Doctor Zamora, in Wisconsin and Michigan, there are kettle moraine lakes which are created by the morphology of melting ice from the last ice age. Water and debris fill the depressions left.
The elliptical shape is not prevalent in those structures either. This part of wisconsin is where the glaciers stopped. Tens of thousands of lakes in canada and the northern midwest do not represent elliptical shapes.
Mr Zamora thank you for your methodical and instructive video, I was particularly interested in your observation about the mathematical properties of ellipses..,
I'm thinking of doing this project: take a random sample of Carolina Bay structures (that is, some number of topographic representations of Bay structures), and compare with a simiilar random sample of topographic views of thermokarsts. What is the minimum number of data points needed to approximate the outline of each of the structures for both samples, say using least squares?
You make a very sensible proposal. The number of points required to represent a shape depends on the regularity of the shape. A fairly elliptical Carolina Bay requires 8 to 15 points. The irregular shape of a thermokarst lake requires many more points. I have needed over 100 points for some thermokarst lakes.
The features should be (statistically) compared to extraterrestrial bodies without atmosphere! If it's a fit, all erosion-based arguments are basicallly out 😉
your detractors often use low angle photos of thermokarst lakes, never what you show at 4:00
My geology professor told me in 1974 that Lake Waccamaw, NC, (it's elliptically shaped as well), and several similar lakes were the result of a meteor strike in the distant past.
Meteorite impacts can vary in size. They don't have to be catastrophic or fatal. The story of Lake Waccamaw is well established: waccamaw-siouan.org/
1:12 the part at the top left at the start looked like a giant footprint or even a footprint with 3 sets of toes. Pretty cool this is why I love geology
Eye opening as always Mr. Z.👍👍
Happy Holidays to you and yours. Stay safe & warm.
Do the long axes of the ellipses converge on a center somewhere northwest? Are there additional such features due southwest of a possible center? Great work.
I love these questions for which I have already worked out the answers. Here is the video about convergence: ua-cam.com/video/DzAu-XE29qc/v-deo.html
Wonderful presentation & clear explanation. Thank you! 🤗 This bothered me for a while since they are obviously ellipses, have a clear directionality and the *only* way we know this can be produced is by impact.
chatgtp appear to confirm your analysis -
"What Makes the Carolina Bays Unique?
The Carolina Bays exhibit:
A consistent alignment across thousands of features.
High accuracy of ellipticity despite being natural formations.
An unexplained uniformity in their major and minor axes' proportions.
Few other geological features exhibit the same level of regularity and alignment, making the Carolina Bays an exceptional case in geomorphology."
Because Antonio has published extensively on the subject, and ChatGTP just regurgitated based on volume first, probability second?
A strange, strange world we live in.
@@DogChowGurl his detractors have published extensively too. it couldn't cite other examples of natural geological mathematical ellipses. I think its a point of interest but i don't regards its output as authoritative but its a useful tool, i often have fun getting it to contradict itself.
Thank you, Antonio. Ray Charles could see the impact modality needed to form these formations. Protecting their postion exposes their blatant bias. They are not trustworthy, unlike you, Sir.
There are indeed many of these elipses in many areas on the east coast that could have been subject to elastic rebound/viscus relaxation at the appropriate time. It is hard to account for them using wind and frozen karsts hypotheses.
Great Shakespearian paraphrasing, i was not expecting that! Id be very interested in more experiments with with different grain sizes, from powder,to sand & mixed & with different degrees of wetness, ill go back to your earlier vids on your original experiments.
Thanks for all your efforts.🙏🫡
🤯Intellectual Tyrannosaur🔬🦖 🥼
Thank you, Sir. I love a big dose of reason and truth on a Sunday morning.
Hi Antonio, while perhaps some of your evidence can be questioned, I feel that overall you present a good argument for your beliefs regarding the origin of the Carolina Bays. I find the hostility displayed by some with opposing views to be closer to the behavior one finds in politics, rather then those seeking to arrive at a flexible consensus. I say that because with my background in historic geology, I can't help but notice that new discoveries are being made seemingly all the time these days. As such, it seems that a flexible mind is in order, rather then one that is fettered by a specific dogma. Rather then having not presented any evidence, I think what's going on here is an example of what's called "Confirmation Bias" in psychology. That is, people only perceive in what they already believe, and summarily filter out anything contrary.
Has anyone done any kind of deeper geologic underground seismic survey that would reveal the triangular conic section of a bay? Presumably this would settle any disputes, even the soil is shown to be perturbed (or indeed, especially id the soil is perturbed at depth, which wind/water could never do)? I know you have already shown older rocks and soils overlaying younger soils at the surface...
Viscous relaxation reduces the depth of a cavity from the bottom up and at the same time it restores the previous stratigraphy. Digging in the Carolina Bays will not find any evidence of a conical structure, but it is known that the apex of a bay is slightly deeper. This is where you will typically find lakes inside a bay. See the video about viscous relaxation: ua-cam.com/video/k0KV5H6f7vU/v-deo.html
@@Antonio_Zamora could the projectiles have simply punctured through the viscous soil without creating giant holes in the ground?
@@AustinKoleCarlisle An impact is governed by the laws of physics. Momentum is conserved (mass*velocity). The initial contact transfers the greatest energy to the surface and the ground is parted at great speed. As the projectile penetrates it continues to transfer energy to the medium but with less intensity since the projectile loses energy by transferring it to the medium. When the energy of the projectile is exhausted, the projectile is at the apex of a conical cavity or penetration funnel. The shape of the funnel corresponds to the rate of transfer of momentum. In a medium of low resistance, the shape of the conical cavity would be more tubular in shape than in a denser viscous medium.
The deletion of your Wiki edit is a strong indication that you are being victimized by the "refuted by an expert" excuse, which is a fallacy in this situation because the argument for the elliptical scars having been caused by a cataclysmic event have not been scientifically refuted. This is a question of the integrity of the people who refute the cataclysmic event theory. Modern "science" is, unfortunately, not always science. I applaud your tenacity, Mr. Zamora.
Good Job.
Having walked the Nebraska Rainwater Basins, this theory makes sense
Is there a way to model what the continent looked like at the time of the catastrophe ( reverse erotion/ uplift / ocean level / pre flood shorelines etc.) Using the computer generated shading this could help with trend evidence.
Mr. Zamora, how do these line up with Lake Nipigon in Canada?
The Carolina Bays don't line up with Lake Nipigon. I am aware that Randall Carlson keeps mentioning it as a potential ET impact site, but I have not seen any geological evidence to support that idea.
It could be an impact site, just not related to the YD time, probably far older.
the CBs don't converge anywhere near that site
We have a huge problem with professional scientists on this planet not understanding what you and others have proven about the nature of the Carolina Bays. Actually, I think they may realize you are correct but their egos and past professional publications are at such severe risk, they remain committed to their disproven theories. This behavior is atrocious for someone calling themselves a scientist. I will also NEVER support Wikipedia after they sequestered your contributions as well as what they have done to other great researchers like Graham Hancock. This is a real bad century for true science so far, and we can only hope an educated public will be the force that turns it back in the right direction. Thank you Antonio, for your diligence and the good fight for truth.
where do you get this lidar data
@@adairjanney7109 You have to use Google Earth and download the KMZ file from lidar-hrtm.cintos.org
Has there been any deviation in the elips shape due to one side of an impact being on solid rock areas vs an impact area of soft soil or sand all in the same impact crator. The resistance difference may alter the raised rim shape. Such evidence could ( or would) only be made by an impact of a softer lower speed material such as ice.
The Carolina Bays may be deformed at the time of emplacement due to terrain conditions, such as inclined terrain, or later by water erosion and human activity. Take a look at the video about deformed bays: ua-cam.com/video/_m2vkxBSfIc/v-deo.html
While I agree with the secondary impact hypothesis of huge chunks of ice from the original impact on the Laurentide ice sheet, wouldn't such high speed high energy impacts have created some shocked quartz in the sand? I've never asked this question to you. But, I just wonder, if I went to one of the closest Carolina Bay from Atlanta, if I brought a pail and a shovel, and just looked in the sands if I would find some. Penny for your thoughts?
interesting question! I would be curious to know for certain as well, but I personally don't think much of the debris, assuming it being mostly ice, would have carried that much energy. I can see some of the debris making it to higher altitudes, but not enough to match the energy of something coming directly from space. We're talking hundreds of km/hr compared to tens of thousands km/hr.
Exploration of Flamingo Bay in South Carolina found shocked-fractured quartz. ua-cam.com/video/K434-CP0FEk/v-deo.html
Also, take a look at my video about how to get shocked quartz using a hammer. ua-cam.com/video/u44F6kT6U5E/v-deo.html
@Antonio_Zamora I don't think some prevailing wind would make shocked quartz. That should be the proverbial smoking gun. It was with Chixilub. And the lack of platinum and iridium should prove that they are not primary impacts. Funny how every time I see somebody using a blow torch to make merangue or sweating copper pipe, I think of your demonstration of your propane torch on a block of ice.
I had a discussion with an archaeologist. I told him I believed there used to be Giants. He said I believed in a fairytale. He said, "show me the skeletal remains of a giant". I said, "Show me the skeletal remains of a clovis person". 😂 he said , we have skeletal evidence of Clovis people". I said, " Google it. Let's take a look at that marvelous piece of backhoe archeology and forth times a charm dating. Then I will ask you if the shoe was on the other foot, would that be good enough evidence for Giant people"? He refused to Google it, he refused to talk to me anymore. I laughed and said, " now, which one of us believes in a fairytale"?
The lack of fossils in the East Coast is remarkable. Take a look at the Black Mat video: ua-cam.com/video/yxqCjXsasBY/v-deo.html
We have, in fact, one (count it, 1) Clovis-associated skeleton. There are no _Clovis-people_ skeletons because there was no "Clovis people": Clovis identifies a style of stonework that became a popular trade good across the continent, until trade networks collapsed under the end-Pleistocene comet strike and its continent-spanning fires and subsequent extinctions. Animals big enough to hunt with Clovis-industry points disappeared, although the people who had been using the points did not. They switched to a variety of styles better suited to smaller game.
Note that, according to the tens of thousands of years of undisturbed stratigraphy on top of them, the bays have ages (plural: they vary) much greater than that event. The karst-lake explanation does not make sense, but neither does the secondary-impact one. A correct scientific activity would seek another explanation compatible with the physical evidence, not remain fixated on a second falsified one, howsoever appealing on appearances.
Great addition!
Love your videos Antonio! You are demonstrating the current scientific orthodoxy at work. Off the back of academic rigidity and conformity, science today is a religion - only true believers need apply, outsiders are banned, we all parrot the party line. I think that your theory will be accepted one day by the mainstream because once I saw the Lidar images you present, then I understood the geometry - as an NZer I am aware of the liquification of unconsolidated ground since the Christchurch earthquake - it's like seeing how the coastlines of Africa and South America interlock, which led to plate tectonic theory.
Could these be caused by some kind of bubble coming up from beneath?
@@psychonauthacker Bubbles make circular features. The size of the bubbles would be determined by the surface tension of the liquid. I don't know of any liquid that would make kilometer-sized bubbles.
Davenport tablets
Their explanation, and their credibility is bloated like American football!
Thank you. Could you address the possibility of the Carolina Bays being made by a rain from a solar plasma storm?
A solar plasma is a superheated, ionized gas that makes up the Sun's outer layers, primarily composed of hydrogen and helium. The charged particles interact with Earth's magnetic field, causing them to be channeled towards the poles where they collide with atoms in the atmosphere and create colorful auroras. Solar plasma is diffuse and would not be able to produce the conic sections that characterize the Carolina Bays.
It is also possible that the sun produced impactors from a solar outburst that then impacted the ice sheet to create the Carolina Bays.
@@ryanj9364 The Sun is composed of ionized hydrogen and small amounts of ionized helium and therefore it is not possible for it to produce "impactors".
Stubbornly adamant that space falls do not happen to this world.
I reIwwex
I say they were made by chunks of ice coming back down from the magnetosphere compression event that carved the Grand Canyon and blew apart the Laurentide Icesheet.
Electric discharge from when the "gods" warred in the sky
If these structures are the result of terrestrial forces then there must be other places where such perfect ellipses form. Can the contrarians name any such locations?
they will generally mention thermokarst lakes again as if they're broken records lol
“An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning.” ~ Max Planck