You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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."

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

So Figure 7 is still on this thread?  There must be something wrong with my computer since it can't find it.

The fragments are exactly where Tom Kaye said they were in the caption that I quoted.  Have you actually seen Figure 7?

When the tide come in, is the water moving toward the land or toward the sea?

You seem to be well versed on how to make snarky posts?

Just a quick post about diatoms ... Kaye's work with diatoms ?  Kaye hasn't posted about this in months so impossible to know where this sits. Ulis is in touch with Kaye and has referred to Tom's work on diatoms but again will not post any real details ... so we are left to wonder and wait ... perhaps all waiting for some release as a feature at the next CooperCon run by Eric Ulis and his friends/associates.

The last I knew people were saying since the May-June diatom a formosa was found on a Cooper bill, that means the Cooper bills arrived in May-June of some year just prior to the Ingrams finding those bills. 1979?

Not so fast! The issue is  'exposure' vs 'arrival'. All that is required to find diatoms is that the Cooper bills were 'exposed' to diatoms in some year close to the time of discovery. That does not mean the bills 'arrived' in that year! Exposure and arrival are not the same thing. Finding a 1979 diatom on a bill does not mean the bill arrived in 1979, but was only present near the surface to be 'exposed to diatoms' in 1979!  The bill could have arrived and been buried earlier - years earlier.   

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Likely, or at least hopefully, because shortly after his last post in February, Tom started wondering why the A. Formosa in the photo he posted (see attached) hadn't taken on a round shape like all of the other A. Formosa colonies found in nature.  And hopefully, in the three months since, he has spent some more time researching a diatom called Fragilaria crotonensis (see attached) which is a dead-ringer for what is actually on 377's bill...and has a notable secondary bloom in February.

Well I must say this is very interesting. Assuming what I'm reading above is accurate, it appears that the 377 diatom species may not actually be the formosa referenced by Tom.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Likely, or at least hopefully, because shortly after his last post in February, Tom started wondering why the A. Formosa in the photo he posted (see attached) hadn't taken on a round shape like all of the other A. Formosa colonies found in nature.  And hopefully, in the three months since, he has spent some more time researching a diatom called Fragilaria crotonensis (see attached) which is a dead-ringer for what is actually on 377's bill...and has a notable secondary bloom in February.

Well I must say this is very interesting. Assuming what I'm reading above is accurate, it appears that the 377 diatom species may not actually be the formosa referenced by Tom.

This is exactly why Tom needs to work with a diatom expert at U-Wash, right next to the Burke Museum where Tom works. But I dont expect that will happen. Even a casual look shows that Fragilaria crotonensis (left side) and a formosa (right side) are structurally different. Fragilaria crotonensis has serrated edges with a bulging middle and its tubes lock together in the middle as shown below. A-formosa locks together by its end bulbs and forms circular stars. An expert would probably know why Tom's versions haven't evolved into locked star patterns ... maybe lack of space or time in a stable environment ?   

The original point still stands. Diatoms dont come with a serial number or date of birth stamped on them. There could be several seasons of diatoms on 377's bill. The only thing Tom can claim is diatoms are there, as his photos document. That has nothing to do with the date of arrival of the money. Tom also has 4-5 other diatom species to deal with in his photos each with a seasonal history! 

Test: If I laid a fresh bill on the wet sand at Tina Bar say in September (or January, or April) and picked it up five minutes later would that bill now contain diatoms, to be seen under a microscope, from several diatom seasons? 

Go on the internet and look up the word: Fragilaria crotonensis ............... then look up images of the word. Tubes of Fragilaria crotonensis bond in the middle section and can form large rectangular formations - like the photo below. A-forma uses a different attachment geometry. It forms circular patterns after joining bulbs on the end of the tubes.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

This photo Tom posted shows he marked where a formosa joins at its ends vs Fragilaria crotonensis which joins in its serrated middles ... see Tom's words "connected at base" in his reference to a-formosa.

I guess keep repeating it until it's your idea and not mine?  Do you have any thoughts of your own on the matter, or were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing?