Archaeologica.org

It seems, unfortunately, that no scenario accounts for everything -- at least, the way they'd like it to.

E.P. Grondine wrote:I am not on my home machine, but seem to remember [...] I will correct these dates when I get to my computer.

If you install TeamViewer http://www.teamviewer.com/index.aspx on your home computer and also carry it on a USB-stick on your person (it's peanuts: 10,5MB zipped) then you can access and operate your home computer, and all your data, from across town or from Oz. From wherever you have access to the internet.

TeamViewer is a small footprint, FREE cross-platform (it runs on Windows and Macs) remote desktop application. If you have access to the internet, you have access to your own computer and everything that's on it. And you can operate your computer remotely, run your applications, send and receive messages and files on it and from it, just as if you were sitting in front of it. Because you are. You see your own desktop on the screen in front of you. And you can click, drag & drop, and type to your hearts content. Just as if you were home. Password protected, on an encrypted connection.
TeamViewer is also ideal for remote maintenance of another('s) machine. Saves you having to physically go there. Or vice versa: someone helping you out can do so immediately, from their home, or wherever they are. You don't have to wait for them to find an opportunity to come physically down to your place.
And no, I don't work for them. I'm just a contented user.

If you see no point in delay, then get it here: http://tinyurl.com/ygn88e7. Contains both the Windows and the Mac versions. Install it, and run it. That's all there is to it.
When you go out, start up TeamViewer on your PC and leave it running, and make a note of the ID and password (on your USB stick). When at your destination you can simply use the TeamViewer on your USB stick to log in on your own PC via any internet connected computer.

FWIW :

http://www.mondovista.com/paleonuke.html

I'm not disputing that the solar flare has problems, and not advocating for it. The stuff I put up is FWIW -- the determination of which is up to the reader.

Continuing in that vein,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3182500/newneutrons

uniface wrote:It seems, unfortunately, that no scenario accounts for everything -- at least, the way they'd like it to.

Yes, Uni. Problem there is that a hypothesis should account for all the evidence OR make a case why a given piece of evidence does not apply. Simply ignoring something because it does not help is a sign of a bad hypothesis.

It is not just a sign of a bad hypothesis, it is proof of a bad hypothesis!

That's silly.

Something that big generates a lot of different hypotheses. These are useful in that their limitations get explored in the process of discussion. Eventually a point is reached where tree plus rope plus wall plus snake equals elephant.

If every attempt to account for something had to either be right the first time or discarded as rubbish, nobody'd get anywhere.

It doesn't have to be right.... but a cop who investigates a body and fails to consider the ramifications of six gun shot wounds will not last long on the job.

You're citing an example where what's involved is simple and straightforward. Black/white, yes/no.

By the time you get the ramifications of everything involved on everything else involved sorted out, accounting for the Big Bangs appears to be anything but. The on-its-face face simplicity of it is disguising a multitude of accounting-for-it complexities. The picture's simple, but the bookkeeping is a can of worms.

"Solar flare" does not explain the nanodiamonds found.

I'd say this makes for a bad hypothesis unless the proponent can deal with the question of why nanodiamonds are irrelevant.

There was a UK TV programme about this last evening and we were informed that the nano diamonds have now also been found at six sites in northern Europe.
Also Clovis was described as the 'earliest well documented' inhabitants of the Americas. Things are a changing!
An interesting bye line was by an anti who refused to accept the comet theory on the basis that it was 'statistically improbable!!!'

Roy.

I guess he wants one to hit him in the head?

I think he has been hit on the head Min!

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AGUFMPP13C1473W

Roy.

Rokcet Scientist wrote:

E.P. Grondine wrote:I am not on my home machine, but seem to remember [...] I will correct these dates when I get to my computer.

If you install TeamViewer http://www.teamviewer.com/index.aspx on your home computer and also carry it on a USB-stick on your person...

Thanks for the advice, RS, but given the number of hacker attacks I've been subjected to, that is unlikely.

uniface wrote:It seems, unfortunately, that no scenario accounts for everything -- at least, the way they'd like it to.

Hi uniface, Bill Napier has done a new analysis which works very well, still in press.

In it he shows how a massive comet disintegration produced a debris chain, of which Comet Encke is a part. A few years back the meteorite hunters retrieved a sample from a relative of Comet Encke, the Tagish Lake meteorite, and it was filled with the proper nano-diamonds.

Fragmentation is examined in detail, and the fires and nano-diamonds explained.

Moving on to neutron source, it may be possible that the source may not have been a nearby super-nova, or a solar flare, but possibly just simply neutrons released in hypervelocity impact. But we know very little about the composition of the cores of very large comets, which my account for the isotopes, and other hypervelocity impact sites have not been examined for neutron release yet...

Why? Because NASA and other government bodies continue to deny that comets hit, and spend more money trying to rationalize away impacts than investigating them. As Napier puts it:
"To estimate impact risks at say the 10 (to the -4) per annum level by extrapolating from »10 yr of Spaceguard surveys is analogous to forecasting three years' weather by extrapolating one day's observation."

NASA just increased its budget for NEO detection for this year to $20,000,000 out of their budget of $18,000,000,000 and according to the NRC an order of magnitude short of the $250,000,000 per year requested by Congress. (Write a thank you note to Administrator Bolden, and tell him you want NASA to focus like a laser on this hazard.)

Just to add to the fun, the last estimates were that the Earth should be in the debris stream of Comet Schwassmann Wachmann 3 in 2022, and it just formed a really nice long debris chain on its last pass through the inner solar system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann

It is too bad Bear Sterns has not picked up "Man and Impact in the Americas" (yet), as I could sure use the cash right now. If any of you do not have copies of this "landmark" book yet, PM me about the current special on personally signed copies of the first edition. It wil make a great investment.

It also makes a great gift.

Also, I am accepting donations for my campaign to be elected Chairman of the Minor Planet Committee of the International Astronomical Union.