How a New Cenozoic Geology and Glacial History Paradigm Explains Anomalous Monongahela River Drainage Basin Topographic Map Evidence, PA, WV and MD, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recently proposed and fundamentally different Cenozoic geology and glacial history paradigm (new paradigm) is used to explain previously reported and other anomalous Monongahela River drainage basin drainage system evidence (observable on detailed topographic maps in the form of barbed tributaries, asymmetric tributary drainage basins, large abandoned meander cutoffs, and poorly explained transverse drainages and abandoned transverse drainages). The north-oriented Monongahela River drainage system according to the accepted Cenozoic geology and glacial history paradigm (accepted paradigm) originated during preglacial times and was blocked by continental icesheets to form today’s Ohio River. Based on Missouri River drainage basin topographic map evidence the new paradigm predicts the Monongahela River drainage system developed during immense and prolonged south- and southwest-oriented continental icesheet melt water floods. The new paradigm also predicts icesheet caused regional uplift created a deep “hole” in which a thick icesheet was located and which forced south-oriented melt water floods to flow in southwest directions along the deep “hole’s” southeast rim (now the Ohio River-Atlantic Ocean drainage divide) until continued deep “hole” rim uplift and the deep valley headward erosion from space being opened up by icesheet melting reversed the flow direction to create the north-oriented Monongahela River drainage system. This new paradigm interpretation explains previously reported and other anomalous Monongahela River drainage system topographic map evidence and suggests the Monongahela River drainage system developed while a continental icesheet melted and not during preglacial time as has been commonly reported.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".