Petersen's New Insights, reply to Glenn Morton

Joseph Mastropaolo (mastropaolo@net999.com)
Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:16:13 -0700

Hi Glenn:
Your review touches superficially on many points, most of which seem
largely irrelevant so there is no particular need to comment. However,
you do challenge me to explain why I consider Petersen's core evidence
unassailable, and to this I will reply.
Indeed, it appears that you yourself consider this evidence
unassailable because you nowhere so much as mention it--to say nothing
of offering to rebut it. I refer here to the calcareous nodules that
constitute one characteristic feature of the loess.
Briefly stated, the loess is a silty, superficial deposit that covers
large areas in the U.S., South America, Europe and Asia. It is
especially common in China where it covers hundreds of thousands of
square miles with little interrupted continuity. Because it covers hill
and valley alike, like a blanket, it is universally recognized as having
been deposited through the atmosphere.
As you stated the silt is widely thought to have been carried on the
wind from neighboring deserts or glacial outwash. However, neither of
these options suffices because neither can account for ALL of the
attributes of the loess.
The aforementioned nodules are found scattered more or less randomly
throughout the deposit of loess. They occur in various shapes and in
sizes that range down from that of a large sweet potato, and in color
from tan to snowy white depending on the proportion of calcite
included. In Germany these objects are known as "loess dolls" and in
China they are called "loess ginger". Petersen includes several
photographs of these objects in his book. Iâm sure you saw them.
Now the significant fact about these nodules is that they are not
solidly filled and have a mud-flat texture on the inside. The first
inescapable conclusion to be drawn from this structure is that they were
at one time muddy on the inside and nearly dry at the surface. Then,
when they did eventually lose their moisture, the mud-flat texture
formed on the inside. There are no cracks at the surface. Petersen
also shows photographs of several examples of this mud-flat texture.
The second inescapable conclusion to be drawn is that those relatively
massive objects did not waft into place on the breeze from some other
location. They could only have dropped into place directly from above.
Petersen then shows photographs of some of these nodules with snail
shells embedded in their surface, the shells being largely filled with
the same material as constitutes the nodule itself.
I consider it manifestly impossible to account for these nodules, the
snails, and the silt itself by any mechanism agreeable to the known laws
of physics and the Principle of Uniformity. If you are able to do so,
then please speak up. However, if you are not able to do so, then you
might well refrain from making snide remarks about Petersen's appeal to
a fourth dimension of space.
Joseph