That's is? Just one short, snarky post from Robert and nothing else to say in the subject?
By the way, the direction it flows is to the sea, and that "torque" you mentioned is some kid pivoting in the sand while walking on the beach, on top of the wet money. Prove me wrong.
Since EU has apparently removed his original post with the diagram, I will just refer you to Figure 7 in the money analysis section of Tom Kaye's web page.
He hasn't. Take another look.
The caption for Figure 7 there reads as follows:
"Figure 7. Reconstruction of the positions of the bills in the stack when buried. The upper left hand corner of this bill shows a stack of fragments which were used in the reconstruction of their positions."
So by "corner," do you mean the rounded areas of the bills where the corners used to be? Because nobody has ever found a corner of one of these bills.
That stack of fragments plus the drawn outline suggests to me that the bills were on top of a stack that was exposed to water flow which would basically be from the bottom of the bills to the top of the bills as shown. I might add that this is my interpretation and not necessarily that of anyone else.
This positioning looks like playing cards spread in a player's hand, revealing the edge of each card only slightly. This can be observed when a magician is spreading cards, or when a student drops his papers, when a book is simply left open. Why would you come to the very specific conclusion that water flow did this, and that something held the bills in place?
So the Columbia River flows toward the sea? Are there exceptions to this? Are you aware that there is about a 1 to 2 foot tidal action at Tina Bar each day?
In that gravity pulls things to a lower level of potential energy, no there is no exception. But if you have some specific point, like certain geographical spots on a map or different branches of a river or what have you, please demonstrate it instead of asking me to, since you want to keep this to "one short, snarky post."
To keep this to "one short, snarky post", let me ask you another question. How about defining "sea level" for us? I am sure that with your nautical knowledge, you won't have any trouble with the definition. Anchors aweigh!
I honestly don't give a shit about the definition of sea level or what credentials you believe you or I have. Either your argument is a good one or it is not. Make one or don't. Defend your statements or don't. In the meantime, all this "anchors aweigh," "would you like to guess" crap is snarky as hell and you're just proving that I wasn't imagining it. If you don't want to be called out on being snarky, don't be snarky.
Poll