"Geomorphological map of the South Belet Region of Titan (Icarus). This paper describes varieties of terrain on Saturn’s largest moon,
Titan, focusing on the South Belet Region that stretches “from longitude 60°E to 120°E and from latitude 60°S to 0°, encompassing both equatorial and southern mid-latitude regions.” The last bullet point says, “Only one crater has been identified with confidence.” Over billions of years, this massive moon should have the most craters, but it does not. Why?
They make up a story that buries the evidence: “Complete burial of craters, especially in and around the Belet Sand Sea, may explain the dramatic lack of craters in this region.” They can’t even find secondary craters with confidence. “The general lack of a large primary impactor is likewise problematic.” They offer five possibilities for what might have buried the craters. Perhaps some crescent-shaped features are scars of impacts, they suggest. Whatever happened, their explanation is a story requiring evidence, not founded on evidence.
Regardless of origin, the preponderance of pseudo-circular features, whether as pits or crescents, on the surface of Titan suggest a complex erosional process that necessitates a more developed understanding of atmosphere/surface interactions, of the role of fluids in Titan’s icy substrate and organic regolith, ....
— They also admit, “Evidence for impact processes have also been identified, but their relative scarcity attest to a geologically young surface.”
Bingo. That’s the science. They refer to earlier papers saying the same
thing going back to 2007 when Cassini took its first images of Titan.
Scientists were baffled then; they are baffled now." CEH