He is desperately trying to look smart, and the more he tries, the more of an unintelligent half-wit he sounds like.
MegaButtHurtz, Wikipedia is NOT your friend.
Mysterious earthquake swarms in Alabama. What's going on?
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
He is desperately trying to look smart, and the more he tries, the more of an unintelligent half-wit he sounds like.
MegaButtHurtz, Wikipedia is NOT your friend.
At least I provide a link to some theories made by experts. You imagination is your sole source of your theories. Yet you answer zero questions, a sure sign of a fuktard ot a troll, in your case probably a combination of both. Where did the dissolved limestone end up or does cement float on water in your world.
Nobody not part of the collective is your friend. A troll who can't even support his 'friend' flawed theory. All you are proving is that liars get stupider the more they try to float their bull****.
So are sinkholes now the sole result of water dissolved rock? (as in theses 6,000 sinkholes)
http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=60f19f56de714eeb8b3ca5e1b96d49ee
That doesn't prove that water made the void in the first place. One problem with the underground river theme is why would the water leave an area so a void exists in the first place, it would be full of the same water and there is an explanation lacking of how a river flows back uphill and where it eventually exits the ground again.
Florida is the sinkhole king, but Alabama is not far behind | AL.com
Sinkholes, from USGS Water-Science School
Both of these artistic drawings have the void there at the start of the process they are claiming creates the void in the first place. Must be put out by the same people who went to the moon.
I almost forgot your need to support the collective long after you have run out of relevant things to add. At least with the caliber of input here they are getting the cheapest help available and it really, really shows.
I see you two are back to your usual high standards in your posts. I suppose water dissolved some rock to create Hudson Bay also. I can see why you guys don't get out much.
Nothing stops and earthquake in its tracks than a mouthful of buckshot in the faultline.
It's the very edge of one of the oldest landmasses on earth ... the Precambrian shield. I doubt that it was "eroded" away but it must be part of a billions year old formation.
When I look at Hudson's Bay, I see a perfect semicircle on the Quebec shore that cries out "impact crater" to me. Such a perfect circle of such vast size couldn't originate any other way. If it is, it must be extremely ancient, before life maybe, because if it is an impact it would have made the little one that ended the dinosaurs look like a firecracker. No one has ever said that it is an impact but to me, it is glaringly obvious.
You're education.. live and learn..
It was formed by pressure from the last glacier. The land there is still rebounding, and the water that currently covers it will flow elsewhere as the land rises...
...and read under Geology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_Bay
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentide_ice_sheet
Do you even read your own links (this was posted earlier btw)
The Bay is near the centre of a major gravity anomaly which has been mapped in some detail by the GRACE satellites. Current theory suggests that about two-thirds of this effect is due to downwards mantle convection under the Bay area, while one-third is due to post-glacial rebound since the Laurentide ice sheet melted. Lands to the west of the Bay are rising as much as 17 millimetres (0.67 in) per year.[19]
Some geologists disagree about what created the semicircular feature, known as the Nastapoka Arc, of the bay. The overwhelming consensus is that it is an arcuate boundary of tectonic origin between the Belcher Fold Belt and undeformed basement of the Superior Craton created during the Trans-Hudson orogen.
Some geologists have argued that Hudson's Bay is possibly related to a Precambrian extraterrestrial impact and have compared it to Mare Crisium on the Moon. However, no credible evidence for such an impact crater has been found by regional magnetic, Bouguer gravity, and geologic studies.[20]
A reasonable person would conclude 3.7B years ago the downward flow of magma would be the best situation in which a sinkhole would form as the crust was still very thin.
In the rebound theory there is you answer for how voids to form in the crust without water eroding anything. The same mass occupying a larger area means expansion has to take place.
A glacier flows downhill, it would have to flow out of the Bay to dig the hole.
Yes I know it was, by you I think, yet you still asked the question how the Hudson Bay was formed..
Do you even read your own links??
As I stated earlier too, Wikipedia is not your friend. Wikijunkie
The word you are looking for is erosion. Have to ever been to the Canadian Shield in Ontario?? Check out some of the rock formations??
Glaciation's a lot of weight. It takes a lot longer for rock to rebound than it does for ice to melt. I read somewhere that Churchill still has 72 feet to climb.