More Support for Younger Dryas Impact

[E.P. Grondine]

George -

I have explained how I made a dating mistake in 2000.
I have set out here in plain language my current estimate.
I do not think I can clear up your confusion further, and trying to do so would only waste my time further.
Further, any attempt on my part would likely give you only more material to misunderstand and misquote.

EP, I'm not talking about your mistake in 2000, but the one you made here . i.e.
"The Holocene Start Impact Event is dated to ca 10,850 BCE.
That roughly corresponds to the Allerod in Europe.
The Younger Dryas began about 1,000 years later."
Like all the quotes I have provided it is a direct copy and paste so there couldn't possibly be any misquotes just as there is no confusion . Your estimate for the YD is out by a millenium and you can't provide any evidence to support this mistake , whilst all the expert opinion suggests ,as was mentioned originally "The YD is usually dated about 10,800-9500 BC"

George

George, there is a difference between "can't" and "won't".
A lot of times, I simply do not share openly what I am up to.
That particularly includes site-specific information, and other information as well.
I've learned to do that through bitter experience.

One thing that particularly irks me is when one person demands I spend time with them working on their specific problem.
I have a very small interest in effects of glacial melt water drainage and the Atlantic Conveyor,
and no interest at all in getting caught up in the vicious CO2 debate.
This is an archaeology bbs, and I resent people trying to use it principally for that debate.

When I publish my phytolith materials collection, you will be able to buy a copy of them then.
Aside from that,
if you want to make specific demands on my time,
1) you better check with me first, and
2) send along a conveniently large amount of money.

When I tell you its the Holocene Start Impact Event, it is;
when I tell you its the "Grondine Maxima" (formerly "Grondine Vertex") that is missing, it is;
when I give you my own (from others) current best paleo climate date estimates, that is what they are.

In the meantime, why don't you research the phytolith materials yourself instead of pulling this stunt?

[Tiompan]

EP ,I'm not asking for you to share anything ,or spend time working on a problem and am not interested in your phytolith collection . I am simply pointing out the error, it's out by a millenium , in your comment ,
"The Holocene Start Impact Event is dated to ca 10,850 BCE.
That roughly corresponds to the Allerod in Europe.
The Younger Dryas began about 1,000 years later."
From my perspective his has nothing to do with any CO2 debate and is directly related to archaeology ,further it is not a stunt , however your continual evasion of the point may well be. Any maxima or vertex of yours will not change the facts. The date for the YD as was mentioned many posts ago " about 10,800-9500 BC " has evidence to support it but there is none for your claim .

George

[Frank Harrist]

Give it up, George. He's not going to admit his mistake. Just comfort yourself by knowing that everyone else has seen it. Ed is being deliberately obtuse on that particular subject. I can't see where it's all that important as long as we all know the truth. It's another exercise in futility. Wasted effort.

[E.P. Grondine]

You're right.
As accuracy in important in any field of scientific inquiry, and nomenlcature as well,
I'll simply have to differ with both of you.
In other words, in my opinion, you're wrong.

Now as someone pointed out to me, since "my" maxima is actually a missing maximum minimum temperature,
it's the "Grondine Minima" which is NOT shown in the box in the graph linked to above.

You know, with all of this back and forth,
I never have had the chance to post here about the biggest mistake I personally made in my impact research.

Despite our differences of opinion,
I wish both of you the best of luck in your studies of Pacific Current temperature and the North American phytolith series.

[Tiompan]

You're right.
As accuracy in important in any field of scientific inquiry, and nomenlcature as well,
I'll simply have to differ with both of you.

It's not two who you differ from , it's everyone who knows about the dates for the YD and who have evidence to support these dates , unlike your evidence free contention .


[/quote]I never have had the chance to post here about the biggest mistake I personally made in my impact research.
I wish both of you the best of luck in your studies of Pacific Current temperature and the North American phytolith series.[/quote]

Your other mistakes , the Pacific Current temperature and the North American phytolith series, were not being discussed .

George

[E.P. Grondine]

I forgot to add AGW pro and con fanatics to the list of nuts I am hounded by.

[Tiompan]

I forgot to add AGW pro and con fanatics to the list of nuts I am hounded by.

And also forgot to provide any evidence to support your mistaken YD date .
What do these "nuts " have to do with it , do they also get it wrong ?

[Frank Harrist]

Awwwww, poor Grondine! Hounded all the time.

[E.P. Grondine]

Hello guys -

Why the hell don't you cheap bastards send along a whole lot of cash with your questions?

I've already told you to check out the phytolith records for yourselves.
Otherwise, when I publish the phytolith data I've gathered together you can buy a copy, just like everyone else.

[Tiompan]

There are no questions , you are being told that you are wrong about the dates of the YD .

[Frank Harrist]

Yeah, hold your breath waiting for that cash, Ed.

[E.P. Grondine]

Fair enough.

Your objections are noted.

I anticipate seeing even more lengthy posts from both of you about "ether" in the future.

[Tiompan]

Fair enough.

Your objections are noted.

I anticipate seeing even more lengthy posts from both of you about "ether" in the future.

It was your objections that were noted and found wanting i.e. lacking in any supporting evidence ,( not dissimilar to the "aether"), contrasting with multiple convergent data .
I don't anticipate any evidence to be forthcoming supporting your erroneous dating of the YD but do anticipate further diversionary mentions of equally unscientific pheneomena /data as your YD dating .

[E.P. Grondine]

An acquaintance once strongly advised me to not waste my time on these online bbs.
But when you are diabetic, outrage can produce adrenalin, which helps whatever insulin you have left.
And now that gets the left side of my body working.

Thanks for the spelling correction. "aether" is the correct spelling of the faulty concept in physics.
By way of thanks, the relevant correct spellings of correct concepts in impact science that you are looking for are "Grondine Minima" and "Holocene Start Impact Event".

Please do yourself the favor of not demonstrating your ignorance further.
I think you do not want to be remembered for it.

And there are so many other people completely able to provide my morning stimulation.

[Tiompan]

E.P , you have failed , yet again , to provide any support for your erroneous dating of the YD or any evidence to refute the current understanding .It appears all you can provide is further demonstrations of your ignorance on the subject mixed with a little bile and diversionary comments about health and pseudoscience .
You made a mistake about the dating of the YD , read the literature , no need to own up about youir mistake ,that's understood by anyone reading this ,but stop embarrassing yourself with obfuscatory comments and evading the issue .