[Turtle]

Originally Posted by bigfatpothead

Maybe you need to upgrade your google earth, 4 year old versions may not read the file I posted. My file has a ton of impact craters placemarked, not just one. they exist in a pattern that is consistent with an impact in the area I have suggested.

here is what it looks like from way up

http://www.bigfatpothead.com/earth/8.jpg

If I may, maybe you need to consider who you are talking to. Hill is a longtime Moderator at GoogleEarh Community, and as such is intimately familiar with the workings of GoogleEarth. You aren't the first to think you have found the 'big one', nor will you be the last. If you have a real interest in the topic and discovering how much you are right and how much wrong, then by all means take the time to read the links we have offered and accept some guidance of those who have gone before you.

Gettin' all puffy with tons of kill, ain't gonna fly very high here. (We do luv it however at PostMagnet - Index )

[Cedars]

Originally Posted by bigfatpothead

Maybe you need to upgrade your google earth, 4 year old versions may not read the file I posted. My file has a ton of impact craters placemarked, not just one. they exist in a pattern that is consistent with an impact in the area I have suggested.

here is what it looks like from way up

http://www.bigfatpothead.com/earth/8.jpg

I also tried your file and there was one placemark as hill described. My GE is recent. The picture above is not what loaded for me via the kmz.

Is it possible that you linked to the wrong file?

[bigfatpothead]

DOH!

I am such a stoner..

I have put the right file up
sorry. ;(

http://www.bigfatpothead.com/craters.kmz

Originally Posted by Cedars

I also tried your file and there was one placemark as hill described. My GE is recent. The picture above is not what loaded for me via the kmz.

Is it possible that you linked to the wrong file?

[C1ay]

The National USGS Elevation Map appears to be somewhat contradictory. The impact site you've indicated seems to be near or at the highest point in Alabama. I would expect an impression there. The semi-circle type feature you've marked looks to be the lowest elevation through Alabama and Mississippi. I would expect some remnant of a crater rim there composed of relative highland instead of regional lowland. IMO the elevations in Alabama and Mississippi do not support an impact theory to explain these features.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by C1ay

The National USGS Elevation Map appears to be somewhat contradictory. The impact site you've indicated seems to be near or at the highest point in Alabama. I would expect an impression there. The semi-circle type feature you've marked looks to be the lowest elevation through Alabama and Mississippi. I would expect some remnant of a crater rim there composed of relative highland instead of regional lowland. IMO the elevations in Alabama and Mississippi do not support an impact theory to explain these features.

You havew to admit it's an unusual looking place. Maybe it's an ancient colasped caldera? A billion years or so should be about right! Time for it to have been uplifted unevenly but still retain part of it's shape, Wow, it would have been a huge eruption!

[REASON]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

You havew to admit it's an unusual looking place. Maybe it's an ancient colasped caldera? A billion years or so should be about right! Time for it to have been uplifted unevenly but still retain part of it's shape, Wow, it would have been a huge eruption!

Oh, now you're encouraging him.

[Cedars]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

You havew to admit it's an unusual looking place. Maybe it's an ancient colasped caldera? A billion years or so should be about right! Time for it to have been uplifted unevenly but still retain part of it's shape, Wow, it would have been a huge eruption!

There may be some validity to this point. Years ago I remember hearing these kinds of thoughts on how Lake Superior (its depression) came to be, only it was described as a collapsed ancient lava flow/mountain range or something along these lines. I dont know if this was resolved.

[REASON]

Based on the topography mapping C1ay referenced, I'm beginning to think this is similar to seeing "faces on Mars."

If today's advanced topography mapping techniques can uncover a massive crater estimated to be approximately 65 million years old off the Yucatan Peninsula, beneath the Gulf of Mexico, and theorized to have been the remnant of a collision that rendered the dinosaurs extinct, how could a blatent impact crater across the Southeastern United States manage to get overlooked except for by an addmitted pothead zoning out on Google Earth?

The Man in the Moon is imaginary.

[Cedars]

Originally Posted by REASON

Based on the topography mapping C1ay referenced, I'm beginning to think this is similar to seeing "faces on Mars."

If today's advanced topography mapping techniques can uncover a massive crater estimated to be approximately 65 million years old off the Yucatan Peninsula, beneath the Gulf of Mexico, and theorized to have been the remnant of a collision that rendered the dinosaurs extinct, how could a blatent impact crater across the Southeastern United States manage to get overlooked except for by an addmitted pothead zoning out on Google Earth?

The Man in the Moon is imaginary.

And yet GE users have discovered craters.

NASA - In Search of Crater Chains

Google Earth Blog: New Crater Discovery Using Google Earth?

Encouraging enough for you?

[REASON]

Originally Posted by Cedars

And yet GE users have discovered craters.

NASA - In Search of Crater Chains

Google Earth Blog: New Crater Discovery Using Google Earth?

Encouraging enough for you?

Actually yes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it can't be done, Google Earth is a great tool, and I definitely don't have anything against potheads based on personal experience.

Its just in this instance the topography does not appear indicative of an angular impact, and considering its prominent location, would likely have been detected long ago if it did, IMHO. But at a glance, I could see how it might appear as the remnant of an impact due to the curved region.


The National Map - Elevation, Fact Sheet 106-02 (November 2002)

But don't let me burst anyone's bubble. Collect more data, develop a theory, submit a paper, write a book. That's what it's all about with science, right?