Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

2014/15 Winter Banter and General Observations

Baroclinic Zone

By Baroclinic Zone,
in New England

Recommended Posts

JC-CT

JC-CT

Posted
Posted

Going to be a tough week personally.

Big-time OT.

My dad passed early this morning. Age 91 would have turned 92 on the solstice, fitting it be Dec 7th. A WW2 vet. Still getting word out to the whole family. This is my first and only mention on social media. I consider many here my friend and in many ways extended family. Tears from heaven all week...fitting.

Sorry to hear Don. My thoughts are with you and your family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ono

ono

Posted
Posted

Unfortunately, I don’t think the Mahoosucs is appropriate for both Sugarloaf and Sunday River. As if the lack of a tersely-named range over there wasn't already making it challenging enough to simplify, the mountains for the two ski resorts aren't even in the same sub-ranges until one gets all the way up to the level of the Northern U.S. Appalachians, and we know what a huge area that is. Also note that the Wikipedia page above indicates that the Mahoosuc Range's highest peak is 4,180-foot Old Speck Mountain, and Sugarloaf is taller than that. Anyway, the specific breakdown for the ranges from Peakbagger.com (a fabulous mountain-related resource by the way) for those wanting to figure out how to lump the two resorts.

Continent: North America

Range2: Appalachian Mountains

Range3: Northern U.S. Appalachians

Range4: Longfellow Mountains

Range5: Rangeley-Stratton Ranges (Highest Point)

Peak: Sugarloaf Mountain 4,240'

Continent: North America

Range2: Appalachian Mountains

Range3: Northern U.S. Appalachians

Range4: White Mountains

Range5: Mahoosuc Range

Range6: Bear Mountain Area (Highest Point)

Peak: Sunday River Whitecap 3,335'

For comparison, the breakdown for Mt. Mansfield is bit easier:

Continent: North America

Range2: Appalachian Mountains

Range3: Northern U.S. Appalachians

Range4: Green Mountains (Highest Point)

Range5: Northern Green Mountains (Highest Point)

Range6: Mount Mansfield Area (Highest Point)

Peak: Mt. Mansfield 4,395'

This is a good point. A little bit of a side note- what often gets lost is the fact that, while geographically considered part of the Appalachians, the Whites are geologically distinct from the rest of the Apps, which are roughly 3x older than the whites- wgich were born out of the New England hotspot around the time of the dinosaurs. Tangent over!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drz1111

Drz1111

Posted
Posted

This is a good point. A little bit of a side note- what often gets lost is the fact that, while geographically considered part of the Appalachians, the Whites are geologically distinct from the rest of the Apps, which are roughly 3x older than the whites- wgich were born out of the New England hotspot around the time of the dinosaurs. Tangent over!

 

This is, alas incorrect.

 

You are confusing a bunch of different concepts.  First off, there are some mountains in the Whites that are underlain by granites emplaced during the passing of the Great Meteor hot spot at ~125ma - the "white mountain batholith".  This is the source of the granites you see in, e.g., Conway or Franconia Notch.  

 

But that's not all of rocks you see exposed in the Whites - or even most of the rocks in the Whites.  The Presidential Range, for example, is NOT generally underlain by igneous rock; rather, it's high grade metasediments that got squeezed and fried in the Acadian Orogeny. 

 

This is interesting because the Acadian Orogeny is a different mountain building episode than the Taconic Orogeny that was responsible for the Greens (and indirectly, the Taconics) (although IIRC, there was additional uplift and deformation in the Greens during the Acadian Orogeny).   It's  later than the Taconic Orogeny - Ordovician, rather than Devonian.  But it still happened well before the dinosaurs.  And there are plenty of other hills and mountains in the Appalachians that are generally thought of as products of the Acadian Orogeny.

 

But none of this gets to the more interesting question of how mountains are "born".  I.e, why are the Whites, well, mountains, but the Montenegran hills are isolated hills in a dead-flat plain and Great Meteor itself is now underwater? Put differently, there are tons of Ordovician metamorphics up and down the NE coast, and only the Whites are 5,000ft+ monsters, and there are lots of Great Meteor-age igneous rocks in Quebec and (probably) in MA that are much much lower than, say, Mt. Lafayette.  Why?  The short answer is that no one really knows - there's clearly been some sort of recentish uplift (by geological standards, so meaning in the last few tens of millions of years) because they are so high and they're not that rounded.  And you have that uplift without any obvious tectonic reason for mountains to pooch up - the crust hasn't gotten thicker and there's no evidence of active faulting or deformation.  So people suspect exotic stuff like mantle flow or temperatures in the lower crust or mantle (Great Meteor's legacy may still have kept the region under New England warm, so maybe that's why it generally sits higher than the New York Bight even though the crust may not be thicker). But basically, no one really knows why the Whites are so high, or more broadly why the Appalachians are not a beveled plain.

 

/end rant. 

 

PS - Tell whoever teaches you geology that teaching someone a BS oversimplified explanation is in some ways worse than teaching them nothing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ono

ono

Posted
Posted

This is, alas incorrect.

 

You are confusing a bunch of different concepts.  First off, there are some mountains in the Whites that are underlain by granites emplaced during the passing of the Great Meteor hot spot at ~125ma - the "white mountain batholith".  This is the source of the granites you see in, e.g., Conway or Franconia Notch.  

 

But that's not all of rocks you see exposed in the Whites - or even most of the rocks in the Whites.  The Presidential Range, for example, is NOT generally underlain by igneous rock; rather, it's high grade metasediments that got squeezed and fried in the Acadian Orogeny. 

 

This is interesting because the Acadian Orogeny is a different mountain building episode than the Taconic Orogeny that was responsible for the Greens (and indirectly, the Taconics) (although IIRC, there was additional uplift and deformation in the Greens during the Acadian Orogeny).   It's  later than the Taconic Orogeny - Ordovician, rather than Devonian.  But it still happened well before the dinosaurs.  And there are plenty of other hills and mountains in the Appalachians that are generally thought of as products of the Acadian Orogeny.

 

But none of this gets to the more interesting question of how mountains are "born".  I.e, why are the Whites, well, mountains, but the Montenegran hills are isolated hills in a dead-flat plain and Great Meteor itself is now underwater? Put differently, there are tons of Ordovician metamorphics up and down the NE coast, and only the Whites are 5,000ft+ monsters, and there are lots of Great Meteor-age igneous rocks in Quebec and (probably) in MA that are much much lower than, say, Mt. Lafayette.  Why?  The short answer is that no one really knows - there's clearly been some sort of recentish uplift (by geological standards, so meaning in the last few tens of millions of years) because they are so high and they're not that rounded.  And you have that uplift without any obvious tectonic reason for mountains to pooch up - the crust hasn't gotten thicker and there's no evidence of active faulting or deformation.  So people suspect exotic stuff like mantle flow or temperatures in the lower crust or mantle (Great Meteor's legacy may still have kept the region under New England warm, so maybe that's why it generally sits higher than the New York Bight even though the crust may not be thicker). But basically, no one really knows why the Whites are so high, or more broadly why the Appalachians are not a beveled plain.

 

/end rant. 

 

PS - Tell whoever teaches you geology that teaching someone a BS oversimplified explanation is in some ways worse than teaching them nothing at all.

 

Wow... that's a bit rude, and pedantic!  Just so we're straight here- any intrusive complex will almost invariably contain country rock as well....  So the White Mountain Batholith/Igneous province- which forms the core of the White Mountains- is not distinct from the Appalachian orogenies? Ok, I disagree.  The bulk of the rocks exposed are Ordivician-Devonian Taconic/Acadian?  Well, since we're being pandantic and arrogant- this is INCORRECT.  The bulk of the rocks exposed in the region are quaternary, right?  Glacial deposits!

 

The point was- that the core composition of the mountains of New Hampshire, by and large as it pertains to what the public understands the Granite state to be- were formed by a geologic process that most unique to the White Mountain Region- most basically, the mountains are a magmatic/volcanic province distinct from the tectonic metamorphic pelites which comprise the rest of New England's mountains.  

 

You make some technical points about the intricacies of the White Mountains, but please learn some manners- and don't assume your erudition translates to not appearing arrogant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drz1111

Drz1111

Posted
Posted

Wow... that's a bit rude, and pedantic!  Just so we're straight here- any intrusive complex will almost invariably contain country rock as well....  So the White Mountain Batholith/Igneous province- which forms the core of the White Mountains- is not distinct from the Appalachian orogenies? Ok, I disagree.  The bulk of the rocks exposed are Ordivician-Devonian Taconic/Acadian?  Well, since we're being pandantic and arrogant- this is INCORRECT.  The bulk of the rocks exposed in the region are quaternary, right?  Glacial deposits!

 

The point was- that the core composition of the mountains of New Hampshire, by and large as it pertains to what the public understands the Granite state to be- were formed by a geologic process that most unique to the White Mountain Region- most basically, the mountains are a magmatic/volcanic province distinct from the tectonic metamorphic pelites which comprise the rest of New England's mountains.  

 

You make some technical points about the intricacies of the White Mountains, but please learn some manners- and don't assume you know everything.  

 

 

I did my undergrad in Geology at Dartmouth where I learned my [stuff] from, among others, Jim Aronson, Page Chamberlain and the late Half Zantop, each a master of New England geology. Then I got my masters at Columbia, where, among other things, I did a major research project on the paleotopography and current uplift of of the Adirondacks, which interestingly may be related to the high elevations of the Whites.

 

Which is a roundabout way of qualifying myself to determine the following:   Mr. Ono, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

PS: Glacial deposits aren't rocks, unless they're tillites.  And unconsolidated till in New England aren't tillites, though you can see cool late Precambrian tillites in Atlantic Canada, IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SnowMan

SnowMan

Posted
Posted

I did my undergrad in Geology at Dartmouth where I learned my [stuff] from, among others, Jim Aronson, Page Chamberlain and the late Half Zantop, each a master of New England geology. Then I got my masters at Columbia, where, among other things, I did a major research project on the paleotopography and current uplift of of the Adirondacks, which interestingly may be related to the high elevations of the Whites.

 

Which is a roundabout way of qualifying myself to determine the following:   Mr. Ono, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

PS: Glacial deposits aren't rocks, unless they're tillites.  And these aren't tillites, though you can see cool late Precambrian tillites in Atlantic Canada, IIRC.

:popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkO

MarkO

Posted
Posted

I did my undergrad in Geology at Dartmouth where I learned my [stuff] from, among others, Jim Aronson, Page Chamberlain and the late Half Zantop, each a master of New England geology. Then I got my masters at Columbia, where, among other things, I did a major research project on the paleotopography and current uplift of of the Adirondacks, which interestingly may be related to the high elevations of the Whites.

 

Which is a roundabout way of qualifying myself to determine the following:   Mr. Ono, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

PS: Glacial deposits aren't rocks, unless they're tillites.  And unconsolidated till in New England aren't tillites, though you can see cool late Precambrian tillites in Atlantic Canada, IIRC.

I know this is off topic, but interesting none the less. The NH DES sells a detailed map of this: http://des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/publications/geologic/documents/generalized_bedrock.pdf in their office on Hazen Drive in Concord. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ono

ono

Posted
Posted

I did my undergrad in Geology at Dartmouth where I learned my [stuff] from, among others, Jim Aronson, Page Chamberlain and the late Half Zantop, each a master of New England geology. Then I got my masters at Columbia, where, among other things, I did a major research project on the paleotopography and current uplift of of the Adirondacks, which interestingly may be related to the high elevations of the Whites.

 

Which is a roundabout way of qualifying myself to determine the following:   Mr. Ono, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

Congrats on your credentials.  Does that make you correct, or just dropping names and credentials?  I hope those departments don't carry the same attitude toward others, and that the Ivy league still believes in modesty and manners.  Still, it takes a certain someone to jump on another, tell them their full of BS, and then fall back on the "hey, checkout this piece of paper a univeristy handed me, everyone!"  Pretty sad.

 

Guess where I got my degree?  grad school?  The world doesn't care.  But let's just say it's in a similar field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
powderfreak

powderfreak

Posted
Posted

 

Which is a roundabout way of qualifying myself to determine the following:   Mr. Ono, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

 

Wow, talk about thinking highly of one's self...that's not really how this forum works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drz1111

Drz1111

Posted
Posted

Congrats on your credentials.  Does that make you correct, or just dropping names and credentials?  I hope those departments don't carry the same attitude toward others, and that the Ivy league still believes in modesty and manners.  Still, it takes a certain someone to jump on another, tell them their full of BS, and then fall back on the "hey, checkout this piece of paper a univeristy handed me, everyone!"  Pretty sad.

 

Guess where I got my degree?  My master's?  The world doesn't care.  But let's just say it's in a similar field.

 

 

I note that you've not acknowledged that you're wrong about the geology of most of the White Mountains, which, of course, you are.  Unless you propose to argue that the summit of Mount Washington isn't high-grade metasedimentary rock that was cooked in the Acadian orogeny, in which case, see e.g. the various papers by that guy who works at Bates. But keep plucking that chicken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...