More Support for Younger Dryas Impact

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi Cognito -

I have no idea of which plague it was.

The marker here was quarry abandonment, and the advent of new tool technologies.
A "cultural discontinuity", accompanied by DNA and population data if you have it.

Now what disease ended Dorset Culture, that's an interesting question.

But I'm going to pass on making any statements,
as I am working in depth with other materials from much later times right now.
Its an NDN thing, and you would not understand it at all.

Have any of you ever thought about sending nicely sized amounts of money along with your questions?

Say about $200 per hour, besides the research and field expenses?

By the way, I've had a stroke, and do not work or type that fast.

[Tiompan]

Hi George -

8,350 BCE is a rough date for the end of the YD drainage.

Hi EP .
I was talking about your comment
"Please get this straight:
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."

Which didn't mention anything about drainage and is wrong by approx a thousand years .
As I had said "The YD is usually dated about 10,800-9500 BC "

George

[Frank Harrist]

ts an NDN thing, and you would not understand it at all.

That's pretty condescending, Ed.

[Cognito]

It's an NDN thing, and you would not understand it at all.

That's pretty condescending, Ed.

Hey Frank, no problem. I was simply testing E.P.'s 8350BCE maritime archaic plague statement.

Since I'm the one with the Medical Microbiology & Pathology degree from the University of Washington School of Medicine, I'm not concerned about any condescension. However, I won't be sending him $200 for his non-answer.

[MichelleH]

E.P.

While I am a sarcastic, snarky individual myself, please refrain from doing so in your debates here. While you have been give a lot of latitude here, I have a low tolerance for personal attacks.

Michelle

[E.P. Grondine]

E.P.

While I am a sarcastic, snarky individual myself, please refrain from doing so in your debates here. While you have been give a lot of latitude here, I have a low tolerance for personal attacks.

Michelle

Hi Michelle -

Just to show you how oblivious I have become, exactly what personal attack(s) are you speaking about?
I am unaware of insulting anyone.

Right now, my speaking fee is $200, plus accommodation, etc., if I feel like doing it.
On the other hand, I do a lot of events gratis in dollar terms.

I am in Ohio. My paleo-climate notes are in Illinois, along with my plague materials, and I don't exactly type all that fast. plus I have to take time dig them out, loosing time and concentration on significant current work.

I try to be polite, but some people here expect instantaneous answers, and demand that I provide them with a research path (bibliography), or instantly provide them with quick and easy instant links, often to research not available in that form.

I don't think I volunteered to provide George with a phytolith and paleo-climate bibliography. All I can do in that regard is simply to suggest to him that he might want to re-check, particularly the current work done. I assume he has an internet search engine available, but I do not know if he has an academic search engine available.

In any case, its not my problem; when I publish my work (or if I am able to get to publication), he can buy a copy, and use the bibliography I will provide there to anyone interested.

I tend to think of this place as a nice quiet "kitchen party", to use the old Russian term.
I would appreciate it if some people did not try to turn it into "work".

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi cog -

I have no idea what the exact vector was. If the hypotheses in "Plagues and Peoples" holds, it may have been some domesticate (cattle,goat, sheep) disease that transferred to people in EurAsia and then was brought to North America. That strikes me as a good path to start checking. Best of luck in your work; if I "stumble" across anything more, I will try to get it to you.

[E.P. Grondine]

Okay - in Quebec this time - but does the location really matter?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 162707.htm

Sep. 2, 2013 — For the first time, a dramatic climate shift that has long fascinated scientists has been linked to the impact in Quebec of an asteroid or comet, Dartmouth researchers and their colleagues report in a new study funded by the National Science Foundation.

Yes. The debris field really matters.
The major impact locations really matter.
Researchers at Dartmouth really matter.
NSF research funding really matters.

As far as the OT goes, "The Bible as History" was an all time best seller. I had hoped to get to "Man and Impact in the Ancient Near East", but was quite firmly set on a different path.

As Sid put it,
"You know how to make the Great Spirit laugh?"
"Tell him your plans."

[Tiompan]

I don't think I volunteered to provide George with a phytolith and paleo-climate bibliography.

EP , You continue to evade the problem .
Your original comment was
"Please get this straight:
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."
Your dates for the YD are wrong and this was pointed out to you .
You response didn't accknowledge the mistake but changed the content to
"The melt of the ice cap begins ca. 10,850 BCE. That corresponds to the Allerod in Europe.
It continues for roughly 1,000 years, then the drainage of glacial ice water begins.
That corresponds to the Younger Dryas in Europe.
That drainage continues until ca 8,350 BCE." A further repsonse showed that you still had it wrong
i.e. "So I published 8,350 BCE in the Cambridge Conference.As that date coincides with the Younger Dryas, "
Cognito provided one example of a precise date for the end of the YD which you also ignored .
Your dating of the YD is wrong no matter what type of search engine you use ,academic or otherwise , bluff and evasion will not change that .

George

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi George,

While I am not going to provide you with a full publication here at this bbs,
I think I have made my current thinking clear.

You and anyone else can think otherwise if you want to.
I also have to deal with everyone from Mormons to nuagers.

There is so much heated debate on AGW,
I refuse to get involved with it.

[Tiompan]

Hi George,

While I am not going to provide you with a full publication here at this bbs,
I think I have made my current thinking clear.

Hi EP ,

No need for a full publication , just any evidence to support your thinking , which differs by a millenium from the most recent findings and understanding .

George

[E.P. Grondine]

http://www.climate4you.com/images/Vosto ... 0%20BP.gif

Sorry George, but you are not current.
The missing maximum vertex for the most recent ice age is known as the "Grondine Vertex".
In the illustration there is a little rectangular box showing where it should have been.

The phenomenon was caused by the Holocene Start Impact Event,
which caused a change in the temperature of the Pacific Current.

[Tiompan]

http://www.climate4you.com/images/Vosto ... 0%20BP.gif

That chart does not support your your claim for the dating of the YD .Further, being from Vostok it includes the ACR which preceded the YD which skews the impression .
See if you can find any mention of the YD starting at 9,800 BC as you claimed, on the climate4you site .

As Cognito's link showed http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2150968/posts your dating for the start of the YD was quite close to the end of the YD .

George

[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.

[Tiompan]

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