Something that really stumped me was the apparent lack of a seashsore and the elevations some of these bays, or oriented lakes, are located around the world. BTW, some of which are as much as a mile in elevation(South Africa). Anyway, Australia is a good place to look around because of the near flat surface. What I discovered when I found these oriented lakes(very few true "bays" because of soil type???), was many/most of them are associated with depressions; that is, areas that may have held water in the past. Inland seas for example. I also discovered many oriented lakes and apparent bays near present or past river courses. Ahem, so what I'm saying is, I may be getting to a place where I may concede a point: That there is the possibility the Carolina Bays may have been formed by hydrologic forces.
I don't have a cable-modem, so Google Earth is out for me.
FWIW, I took this as a strawman. Where there's a will, there's a way?
Rather than sending me to some group of amateurs...
Tacky. Just tacky. Not to diminish the pros, but you would agree that "amateurs" have made significant contributions in various disciplines over the years? I have come to a "trust by verify" mode from the scientific community. Inherent problems with that approach should be obvious for a layman.
Just one other point re the elevations(~5,000') some of these bays/oriented lakes are found and associated marine sediments. Tectonic forces have raised areas that were previously near or even under water? Is there any other explanation for this anomoly?
Have to run again, but will check back this afternoon.
FGS
"...I don't have a cable-modem, so Google Earth is out for me. FWIW, I took this as a strawman. Where there's a will, there's a way?..."
Google Earth specifically states that users need high-bandwidth connections, which I don't have at home. We wanted to load google earth on our work computers, but were forbidden to do so. Those were my only options. I'd love to have it, but can't at the moment.
"...Rather than sending me to some group of amateurs... Tacky. Just tacky. Not to diminish the pros, but you would agree that "amateurs" have made significant contributions in various disciplines over the years? I have come to a "trust by verify" mode from the scientific community. Inherent problems with that approach should be obvious for a layman...."
Peer-reviewed journals exist in order to weed out wild speculation. There is nothing "tacky" about insisting upon the use of credible sources.
"...Just one other point re the elevations(~5,000') some of these bays/oriented lakes are found and associated marine sediments. Tectonic forces have raised areas that were previously near or even under water? Is there any other explanation for this anomoly?..."
I don't know which bays/oriented lakes you refer to here, but tectonism affects every place in some way or another. A geologist sent me an abstract on Friday concerning some work he's been doing in our area, which suggested (among other things) that this area (Southern Maryland) had been uplifted ~40 meters in the last 37,000 years (mostly, he thinks, due to forebulge during the Wisconsinian glacial maximum). 5000 feet, however, is quite a bit of uplift to have occurred during the relatively short interval of the Quaternary period.
"....Have to run again, but will check back this afternoon...."
Please see if you can review this paper:
Daniels, R. B. and E. E. Gamble. Relations Between Stratigraphy, Geomorphology and Soils in Coastal Plain Areas of Southeastern U.S.A. Geoderma, 21 (1978) pp. 41-65.
This will help acquaint you with coastal plain stratigraphy. Geoderma is an arcane and outrageously expensive journal; you'll probably have to go to the library of the agronomy department at your nearest land-grant university to find it.