<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Mystery of the Carolina Bays</title>
	<atom:link href="http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/</link>
	<description>Why bother seeing the world for real?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 07:48:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ronjamin</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-205487</link>
		<dc:creator>ronjamin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-205487</guid>
		<description>Use Occam&#039;s Razor.

The angle of the oval shape indicates that whatever made these shapes came from north-north west direction, and angled inclination impact.  There are NO perfectly circular bays that would mimic a meteor impact from directly above.

These are impact craters caused by massive, speeding chunks of ice.  Specifically,  ejecta (large chunks of ice) from a glacial ice sheet in the northern hemisphere, that was hit with either a meteor or more likely, a comet....most likely, the Laurentide ice sheet.

The Laurentide ice sheet was massive, over a mile thick in some places.  The great lakes are a remnant of these massive repositories of water and earth-scouring power.    If a comet hit this massive ice sheet at a slight angle, the pressure wave would have blasted a huge amount of the sheet outward.  Some would have been vaporized into steam, other parts pulverized.  But yet, ice is more friable than bedrock, and it is reasonable to assume that large, and even mountain-sized chunks were ejected along with smaller sized pieces.  These chunks rapidly flew across the ancient sky, toward what today is the Carolinas, and they landed in approximately and relatively the same place at the same time. 

Do an experiment on a frozen pond.  Fire a bullet at an angle into the ice.  Watch the dispersal pattern of the ice fragments into the surrounding snow.  They have similar patterns as carolina bays.

Furthermore, there may be NO evidence of the crater itself, although future space based sensors may discover it.  An impact of a comet into mile-thick ice would be relatively instantly erased, both by the flooding of the impact site with new snow and water, and the fact that the majority of the impact was absorbed by the massive ice sheet, which has melted away along with the crater.

Simply, Carolina bays are the splashes of ice from a massive impact event on the glacial ice sheet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Use Occam&#8217;s Razor.</p>
<p>The angle of the oval shape indicates that whatever made these shapes came from north-north west direction, and angled inclination impact.  There are NO perfectly circular bays that would mimic a meteor impact from directly above.</p>
<p>These are impact craters caused by massive, speeding chunks of ice.  Specifically,  ejecta (large chunks of ice) from a glacial ice sheet in the northern hemisphere, that was hit with either a meteor or more likely, a comet&#8230;.most likely, the Laurentide ice sheet.</p>
<p>The Laurentide ice sheet was massive, over a mile thick in some places.  The great lakes are a remnant of these massive repositories of water and earth-scouring power.    If a comet hit this massive ice sheet at a slight angle, the pressure wave would have blasted a huge amount of the sheet outward.  Some would have been vaporized into steam, other parts pulverized.  But yet, ice is more friable than bedrock, and it is reasonable to assume that large, and even mountain-sized chunks were ejected along with smaller sized pieces.  These chunks rapidly flew across the ancient sky, toward what today is the Carolinas, and they landed in approximately and relatively the same place at the same time. </p>
<p>Do an experiment on a frozen pond.  Fire a bullet at an angle into the ice.  Watch the dispersal pattern of the ice fragments into the surrounding snow.  They have similar patterns as carolina bays.</p>
<p>Furthermore, there may be NO evidence of the crater itself, although future space based sensors may discover it.  An impact of a comet into mile-thick ice would be relatively instantly erased, both by the flooding of the impact site with new snow and water, and the fact that the majority of the impact was absorbed by the massive ice sheet, which has melted away along with the crater.</p>
<p>Simply, Carolina bays are the splashes of ice from a massive impact event on the glacial ice sheet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dennis Henley</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-204867</link>
		<dc:creator>Dennis Henley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:45:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-204867</guid>
		<description>Shoemaker-Levy Nine proved a cometary mass can desetigrate creating a bombardment of gargantuate proportions. I&#039;m sure those impacts seen from the earth were the larger ones and thousands or even millions of smaller fragments collided but could not be seen. The age of the Bays suggest the area was under a shallow sea at times. Fragmentary impact into water and at an angle could account for the Bays. If the fragments were cometary in origin,then it is highly possible they were ice and carried fewer traces of irriduim that an iron meteorite would. Of course the ice would have vaporized upon impact leaving no traces. It would also account for the overlapping of the Bays,one atop the other as they frequently appear. This would be true for a &quot;stream&quot; of debris traveling along in a line,impacting at differnt intervals. The best test of my theory would be to simply toss various sized stones into a semi-dry mud puddle then observe the markings when it dried. This type of disaster would also leave a distinct carbon layer from decaying vegitation much like that that was found at Tunguska.This is my theory.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shoemaker-Levy Nine proved a cometary mass can desetigrate creating a bombardment of gargantuate proportions. I&#8217;m sure those impacts seen from the earth were the larger ones and thousands or even millions of smaller fragments collided but could not be seen. The age of the Bays suggest the area was under a shallow sea at times. Fragmentary impact into water and at an angle could account for the Bays. If the fragments were cometary in origin,then it is highly possible they were ice and carried fewer traces of irriduim that an iron meteorite would. Of course the ice would have vaporized upon impact leaving no traces. It would also account for the overlapping of the Bays,one atop the other as they frequently appear. This would be true for a &#8220;stream&#8221; of debris traveling along in a line,impacting at differnt intervals. The best test of my theory would be to simply toss various sized stones into a semi-dry mud puddle then observe the markings when it dried. This type of disaster would also leave a distinct carbon layer from decaying vegitation much like that that was found at Tunguska.This is my theory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A.Alaalas</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-201195</link>
		<dc:creator>A.Alaalas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:21:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-201195</guid>
		<description>They are geological formations not unidentified stationary mysteries.  Try following the history of plate tectonics in that region and you will see how the formations occurred.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They are geological formations not unidentified stationary mysteries.  Try following the history of plate tectonics in that region and you will see how the formations occurred.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob E.</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200386</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob E.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:39:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200386</guid>
		<description>Maybe those rivers were customers of Google ad-words...did you see the one for this entry?  &quot;Crater -- Looking for Crater? Find exactly what you want today.&quot;

--Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe those rivers were customers of Google ad-words&#8230;did you see the one for this entry?  &#8220;Crater &#8212; Looking for Crater? Find exactly what you want today.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8211;Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob E.</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200385</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob E.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:36:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200385</guid>
		<description>That ignores any explanation for why they are all oriented in the same direction...over very wide areas!  I&#039;m not convinced a meandering river would be so orderly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That ignores any explanation for why they are all oriented in the same direction&#8230;over very wide areas!  I&#8217;m not convinced a meandering river would be so orderly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Purple Wyrm</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200382</link>
		<dc:creator>Purple Wyrm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200382</guid>
		<description>As a West Australian I have to point out that the ovoid lakes highlighted in the links above are actually salt pans following the course of an incredibly ancient river system - dating from when Australia was still connected to Antarctica. You can actually follow it (and other similar formations) for hundreds of miles across the landscape. I suspect the oval shape has more to do with water pooling between slight, parallel ridges on a mostly flat landscape than any impact event.

I guess any impacts *could* have fortuitously landed right on the course of the river bed, but it seems to be stretching things a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a West Australian I have to point out that the ovoid lakes highlighted in the links above are actually salt pans following the course of an incredibly ancient river system &#8211; dating from when Australia was still connected to Antarctica. You can actually follow it (and other similar formations) for hundreds of miles across the landscape. I suspect the oval shape has more to do with water pooling between slight, parallel ridges on a mostly flat landscape than any impact event.</p>
<p>I guess any impacts *could* have fortuitously landed right on the course of the river bed, but it seems to be stretching things a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Billbad</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200378</link>
		<dc:creator>Billbad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 06:34:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200378</guid>
		<description>I live right amongst most of those images and it just seems obvious to me how this happens. Over my lifetime, I&#039;ve watched some of these &quot;bays&quot; actually form. If you study the aerial photography over the course of a decade, you can see that they&#039;re CAUSED BY RIVERS.

A river constantly moves, eroding away its banks and changing its path. They short-circuit themselves often, leaving loops of relatively stagnant water. The loops usually settle over the years as the center erodes into the deeper water, forming a pond with a well defined, very uniform edge. The ponds eventually fill and grow over with new wetland life.

From that point, all I can offer is conjecture, but I&#039;d imagine that it takes hundreds of years for larger plants and trees to grow in these voids. After so much time, the climate and the predominant species of plants has changed and, so, you get a near-perfect circle of contrasting species of plants thriving in the newest and best topsoil around.

That&#039;s my story and I&#039;m sticking to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I live right amongst most of those images and it just seems obvious to me how this happens. Over my lifetime, I&#8217;ve watched some of these &#8220;bays&#8221; actually form. If you study the aerial photography over the course of a decade, you can see that they&#8217;re CAUSED BY RIVERS.</p>
<p>A river constantly moves, eroding away its banks and changing its path. They short-circuit themselves often, leaving loops of relatively stagnant water. The loops usually settle over the years as the center erodes into the deeper water, forming a pond with a well defined, very uniform edge. The ponds eventually fill and grow over with new wetland life.</p>
<p>From that point, all I can offer is conjecture, but I&#8217;d imagine that it takes hundreds of years for larger plants and trees to grow in these voids. After so much time, the climate and the predominant species of plants has changed and, so, you get a near-perfect circle of contrasting species of plants thriving in the newest and best topsoil around.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s my story and I&#8217;m sticking to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200362</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:14:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200362</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t forget to check out the recent paper in the PNAS, with data from the Carolina bays: 
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0706977104v1.pdf 

And supporting info with pics of bays:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/0706977104/DC1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t forget to check out the recent paper in the PNAS, with data from the Carolina bays:<br />
<a href="http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0706977104v1.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0706977104v1.pdf</a> </p>
<p>And supporting info with pics of bays:<br />
<a href="http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/0706977104/DC1" rel="nofollow">http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/0706977104/DC1</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jel</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200360</link>
		<dc:creator>Jel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200360</guid>
		<description>The massive crater from Chixulub&#039;s in the sea off the west side of the Yucatan peninsula, see the rest of the geological website. However, the argument&#039;s that that was just the big chunk, the other sites may well have been backsplash from the buckshot caused the first big collision in the asteroid belt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The massive crater from Chixulub&#8217;s in the sea off the west side of the Yucatan peninsula, see the rest of the geological website. However, the argument&#8217;s that that was just the big chunk, the other sites may well have been backsplash from the buckshot caused the first big collision in the asteroid belt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dr.R.</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/05/30/the-mystery-of-the-carolina-bays/comment-page-1/#comment-200356</link>
		<dc:creator>dr.R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 11:01:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/?p=1960#comment-200356</guid>
		<description>It seems nobody of you has actually read the Wikipedia article. It says that the impact theory is controversial, to say the least, and that &quot;the orientations of the Carolina Bays are consistent with the wind patterns, which existed during the Wisconsin glaciation.&quot;

But it&#039;s already something that nobody suggested the Bays are the remains of a so-far unknown but highly developed civilisation, or prehistoric alien messages similar to crop circles...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems nobody of you has actually read the Wikipedia article. It says that the impact theory is controversial, to say the least, and that &#8220;the orientations of the Carolina Bays are consistent with the wind patterns, which existed during the Wisconsin glaciation.&#8221;</p>
<p>But it&#8217;s already something that nobody suggested the Bays are the remains of a so-far unknown but highly developed civilisation, or prehistoric alien messages similar to crop circles&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
