Talk:Reelfoot Lake

message: This is hard to document.  It is a fact that there was a legendary Chief Reelfoot; the legend is ubiqutous in the area and states that he was a clubfooted Chicksaw whose marriage to a Choctaw princess displeased the god or gods and they sent an earthquake as retaliation; his village sank into the ground and the lake was hence named for him.  This legend, or a variation of it, is available at every restaurant, gift shop, etc., in the Reelfoot area, so the existence of the legend is easy to document.  What seems to be hard, if not impossible, to verify, is whether this legend has any real basis in fact; i.e., if there ever really was a clubfooted Chicksaw chieftan called "Reelfoot" by the whites.  Rlquall 17:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The existence of the legend, as well as other facts in the article, is documented by the referenced Tennessean article.  The very nature of a "legend" is that it is unverifiable, so I'm not noting the legend as a fact, just that there's such a legend.  As to the disputed nature of the river running backwards, I've heard geologists dispute it, but that constitutes original research and I still need to find a reputable published source where one or more of them has done so in print, and I solicit your help.  Rlquall 16:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: However we view the origin of the name Reelfoot, the lake, having been formed in about 1811-1812, clearly took its name from the Reelfoot river, which appears and is documented at least 26 years earlier by Rutherford's survey of 1785, as well as the Morse map of 1794.  The legendary origin of the name of the lake is clearly wrong; if anything, it might be the legendary origin of the name of the river.  Any rumors about the lake being named Reelfoot because of its shape are, frankly, fanciful and absurd.  As a slight move toward some kind of agreement between the legend and the truth, I've edited the relevant part to tie the legend to the name of the river.2600:1700:EA01:1090:19A3:3060:FE41:EE13 (talk) 00:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of name

message: This might not be the place (probably should find a blog) but I am wondering if there are ever any reports of american alligator sightings in this area due to feral introductions or natural migration. Also, are there any flora or fauna unique to the area? Info on the flora and fauna of Reelfoot in the article would be good as it seems to be a big wildlife/fishing destination; will try to find some cited info to add if time allows (pretty busy). Thanks. --Paulsprecker (talk) 18:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Gaters?

message: As a suggestion, it would help the article to point out the size of the lake. The Tennessee Historical Society states that the lake is 18,000 acres.This converts to 28.125 square miles. Also , it might provide more information to use different words when describing the formation of the lake. Stating that the region "subsided" may be the appropriate technical description, but stating that Reelfoot Lake was formed by three earthquakes in the area, occuring between Dec.1811 and March 1812, causing the land to drop 5.2 ft. to 19.6 ft. or 1.5-6 meters (U.S.Geological Survey.) gives more description to what went on. (The New Madrid earthquakes 7.7- 7.8 magnitude, are in the top 20 of magnitude for all earthquakes recorded in the U.S.)
User:nosmiley/s.dow/nosmiley(User talk:nosmiley/s.dow/nosmiley)]  —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems a WP:reliable source would be required for such and not our speculation based on Google Earth observations. Vsmith (talk) 16:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size and formation 

message: There are some antipodal impact signatures connected to the formation and the annotated New Madrid quake of Dec 16, 1811.  Generally under the chaotic terrane concept included are sand fountains, sunken ground collapse, and eruption of granitic plutons from the Moho.  Reelfoot lake was an example of sunken ground.  An antipodal impact signature of 180 km diameter @ 36.4S, 91.0E is seen on seafloor images (Google Earth), likely a giant mud wave rim, typical of underwater impacts, & very different from impacts on land.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeptiker (talk • contribs) 08:42, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems a WP:reliable source would be required for such and not our speculation based on Google Earth observations. Vsmith (talk) 16:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antipodal Impact Signatures of Formation