Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

oklahoma

Expand Messages
  • mike white
    im no expert, just a person trying to learn and understand. im not argumentative, so would welcome discussion, even opposing viewpoints. i admit i have
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
       
         im no expert, just a person trying to learn and understand.  im not argumentative, so would welcome discussion, even opposing viewpoints.  i admit i have radical ideas sometimes, just to see where they lead, and if they have merit. 
         when ive thought about an inland sea in mid-america in the past, it was the low country, primarily the mississippi valley, for the most recent event.  i felt that the high plains had been inundated in an earlier period.  many might agree this far, its assigning dates for these that we may differ. 
         limestone only forms under the sea.  its logical to assume that limestone near the surface had been seabed fairly recently.  coal forms when limestone caps organic deposits.  great time and pressure are not necessary to form coal.  the coal of oklahoma, illinois, and kentucky formed under shallow seas, with no great pressure involved. 
         its known that oklahoma and kansas had been flooded by the sea, then dry land, several times in prehistory.  the record depends upon geologists to date the deposits, and their science is badly flawed due to their clinging to the gradual uniformity theory.  so we need to ignore the millions of years that they state, and think on our own. 
         lets look at the fossil record for the areas.  in my brief review of this record i seem to find dinosaur fossils that were frequently covered by seas, a huge collection of marine deposits, and a scanty megafauna record, usually along rivers that may have been carried there from elsewhere.  if im mistaken, plz acquaint us with better info. 
         i will admit that its unlikely that the sea covered oklahoma and subsided in the last 3500 years.  its more reasonable to consider that people of a high culture were mining the coal, and the relics were lost in the mine.  over centuries coal dust may have settled upon them or carried by a slurry enveloped them, and filled the tunnel, covering all traces of a former shaft.  its only natural in areas of few trees to discover early that coal may be burned. 
         i still think that the low country in mid-america had been covered by sea within the last 12,000 years.  in this geology comes close to my estimation, giving 18,000 years since the mississippi began cutting its bed. 
         if im wrong, we should be able to find ample evidence of herds of bison, and the megafauna before them in this region.  i seem to recall blow-outs revealing bison bones in the southwest, but not sure if this includes eastern oklahoma and kansas.   we find paleo sites in the southeast, and the far west, but with large spans of time of no land animals in the areas we are considering.  im hoping we can reason this out. 
       
      regards
      mike white
       
       
    • mike white
      more member participation would be nice. we have fascinating subjects to discuss. i realize that my views are not shared by the majority. other members
      Message 2 of 2 , Jun 2 3:19 AM
      • 0 Attachment
         
           more member participation would be nice.  we have fascinating subjects to discuss. 
           i realize that my views are not shared by the majority.  other members should feel free to start a thread. 
           while using google earth awhile back, i happened to scan oklahoma from a higher altitude, and noticed what looked to me like signs that the arkansas river once flowed further south thru oklahoma.  the terrain seemed gouged out in west-east direction passed wilburton and heavener.  this made me wonder if the relics found in that region had been deposited by people who came in by river. 
           firsthand on the ground experience beats looking via google earth, so i place it before the group to see what others think.  i havent read enough reports by geologists to know what they have said about that river having changed course in recent times. 
           imho, its fairly certain that portions of tx and ok had been seabed not so long ago.  the red clay, and so many missing pieces of the fossil record, point to that conclusion.  i think we will find that human habitation was much longer and more continuous in nm than in tx and ok.  the presence of coal and oil indicate caps over organic matter laid down by former seas.  the erosion i noted may have been from seas washing on or off the land. 
           much of what ive seen in my travels across america suggests that much of the land is unstable, and these mysteries have not been explained adequately by our geologists, who are muddled by gradualism and a mya dating perspective. 
         
        mike
         
         
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.