Catastrophic Subglacial Drainage and Rapid Landscape Formation in Canada, with Special Emphasis on the Niagara Escarpment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of subglacial sheetfloods has gained momentum in recent years and some authors have explained certain features of the Niagara Escarpment as caused by such events. However, this author found enough evidence in the field that the entire Niagara Escarpment was created by such floods. The geographic distribution and the individual characteristics of potholes as well as similarities between subglacial flow conditions and karst drainages strongly argue for a set of events linked in a close sequence that are responsible for the catastrophic genesis of the Niagara Escarpment. Meltwater accumulation under the Laurentide Ice Sheet coupled with englacial pseudokarst has resulted in at least two episodes of subglacial sheetfloods and the rapid disintegration of the ice sheet. As large chunks of the ice sheet were ripped away from the main body and resettled as separate “islands,” flow and erosional patterns consistent with present-day glacial sediments formed. For the young earth creationist geoscientist such a scenario does not only provide valid arguments for rapidly forming geomorphology in the Late Quaternary but also provides valuable insights to the mechanics of flood erosion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".