Talk:Teays River

Incoherent Indiana?[edit]

The Indiana section was written by someone possessing neither knowledge of Indiana geography nor possessing a map? For starters, Wabash County is not on one of the State's borders (far from it). Second, 3 meters (then conveniently translated into KM?) from Lafountain makes no sense at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twohlford (talk • contribs) 17:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stream capture[edit]

Is this really an example of stream capture? I was under the impression that the Teays was happily flowing across central Ohio and Indiana until the Ice Age plunked down a mile-thick slab of ice in its way. The water running off the west side of the Appalachians had to skirt the edge of the ice sheet, and eventually dug a new channel, which was deep enough to remain after the ice melted. It doesn't seem like a coincidence that the Ohio--and Missouri--now run roughly along the terminal moraines of the ice sheet. —wwoods 03:00, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I think it is. Consider this map [1]. The galaciation of Ohio did not extend as far south as Portsmouth. I have been through there many times, and the area clearly does not share the same characteristics as the plains of northern Indiana and Illinois. I think that the prevailing hypothesis is that glaciation altered the course of the present-day Allegheny, causing it to meet the Monogahela and form the Ohio, which departed from the glacial boundary and flowed west, capturing the Teays.

This article is way too Ohio-centric. It needs to mention the remaining Teays-Mahomet aquifer, and the still remaining New-Kanawha river system which was the upper third of the ancient Teays-Mahomet system and still exists today. A link to New River (West Virginia) and Kanawha River would be appropriate. The Teays flowed under what is present-day Lafayette, IN and just north of Champaign, IL, and likely was coincident with the lower present-day Illinois River. Many sources exist on the web. Would do this myself, but I am too busy right now. -Mm35173 19:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Early Evidence Reference[edit]

G. Frederick Wright's June 1894 article "The Cincinnati Ice Dam" in the magazine "The Popular Science Monthly" contemporaneously describes the early discoveries related to the Teays River Theory.

G. Frederick Wright "The Cincinnati Ice Dam" The Popular Science Monthly, June 1894, pp. 184-198

Laughingskeptic (talk) 04:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"These valleys were carved in the late Cenozoic"[edit]

This is not very helpful as we are now living in the late Cenozoic. 69.255.153.126 (talk) 14:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing from the article is an upper age limit for the Teays (possibly unknown??).69.255.153.126 (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Teays River. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]