truth
good luck
m
>From: "bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@...>
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: new online legal supplement to bus&ss
>discovered
>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:03:48 -0000
>
>Truce. I will try to get the proof.
>BJB
>
>--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "m donner" <maxivan82@h...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "bjbutlerus"
> >
> > >Sorry if I made you feel insecure.
> >
> > & silly of me not to understand why you think in these terms
> > for i would rather be silly than sorry insecure etc
> >
> > & it is of course ones own thought that primarily makes one feel
> > not anothers
> >
> > m
> >
> > & you are the accredited geologist here
> > so i am listening to you closely about all that loam
> > for i am only a punctologist
> >
> > but yes please do give me the proof
> >
> > >
> > >The facts from BUS&SS that you mention are the very ones I am using in
> > >my hypothesis. We have a difference of opinion as to whether the Bois
> > >de Sioux could produce a meander of approximately 450 feet over the
> > >course of 110 years (or less, depending when the river was
> > >channelized). The soil in that area is loamy and not particularly
> > >resistant, so I think a meander of that size would be quite possible.
> > >Further evidence is provided by the other meanders north and south of
> > >the one in question. The pattern is unmistakably that of a meandering
> > >river.
> > >
> > >But are right about needing further information to reach a conclusion.
> > > I am trying to get some details about where the river flowed just
> > >prior to being straightened.
> > >
> > >BJB
> > >
> > >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "m donner" <maxivan82@h...> wrote:
> > > > brian
> > > > i know you have offered this opinion before
> > > > nor did i disagree out loud a second time by offering these new
>sources
> > > > because you already heard me once
> > > > so this time i will only note 2 facts from bus&ss p4f
> > > >
> > > > 1
> > > > when bed & channel are changed by the natural & gradual processes
> > >known as
> > > > erosion & accretion the boundary follows the varying course of the
> > >stream
> > > >
> > > > 2
> > > > if the stream from any cause natural or artificial suddenly leaves
> > >its old
> > > > bed & forms a new one
> > > > by the process known as avulsion
> > > > the resulting change of channel works no change of boundary
> > > > which remains in the middle of the old channel tho no water may be
> > >flowing
> > > > in it
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > now i believe a stream of this small size couldnt possibly have
> > >accreted
> > > > anywhere near so much as you believe it has
> > > > namely several times its own width
> > > > even in these 11 decades
> > > >
> > > > if streams could routinely sneak around that way they wouldnt make
> > >very good
> > > > boundaries
> > > > & accretion would be a terrible problem
> > > > which it generally isnt
> > > >
> > > > yet somehow usgs has gotten the idea that mnndsd has moved
> > > > & this cant be entirely ignored or poopooed until we know for sure
> > >why they
> > > > think this
> > > > but in the meantime i think they probably mistook an avulsion or
> > >work of man
> > > > for an accretion
> > > >
> > > > remember
> > > > except for only the very minor inching of accretions
> > > > only a supreme court decision or act of congress could actually make
> > >the
> > > > tripoint move
> > > >
> > > > so i continue to think mnndsd will be found basically unmoved
> > > > & moreover since the witness rock pinpoints it
> > > > this tripoint might be uniquely empowered to withstand even
>accretion
> > > > & thus remain absolutly unmoved even despite accretion
> > > >
> > > > in any case it will be interesting to see how far the 9 chains fall
> > >from the
> > > > thalweg today
> > > > & then we can see what there is to argue about
> > > > probably very little
> > > > because tho i myself reached & identified this usgs mnndsd position
> > >first i
> > > > still just cant see it as even being worth talking about
> > > > unless substantiated by something real
> > > >
> > > > m
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@b...>
> > > > >Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@y...
> > > > >To: BoundaryPoint@y...
> > > > >Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: new online legal supplement to bus&ss
> > > > >discovered
> > > > >Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:31:31 -0000
> > > > >
> > > > >Except, of course, for the unratified means of erosiion and
> > > > >accretion. I still like the hypothesis that MNNDSD moved gradually
> > > > >from the point 9 chains east of the nearby witness monument to the
> > > > >position shown on the topo map (or thereabouts) and was then frozen
> > > > >at that position by the man-made avulsion of straightening and
> > > > >leveeing the river. A possible discrepancy would occur if the topo
> > > > >map was not made at the time the river was rechanneled (a likely
> > > > >discrepancy). We really need to see the maps that were used during
> > > > >the construction project. Also, this hypothesis leads to an
>infinite
> > > > >number of paleoMNNDSD points along the 9-chain line segment east of
> > > > >the witness monument.
> > > > >
> > > > >BJB
> > > > >
> > > > > > if you are searching for a particular topic such as mnndsd for
> > > > >example then
> > > > > > you can simply scan the list & see that the court at least has
> > > > >never ruled
> > > > > > on any of the 3 interstate boundaries that terminate there at
> > > > >mnndsd
> > > > > > & thus can conclude that if any change has occurred in the
>mnndsd
> > > > >position
> > > > > > since its creation it would have had to have been approved
>by the
> > > > >only other
> > > > > > possible means of ratification
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> > > > http://www.hotmail.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device:
http://mobile.msn.com