Archaeologica.org

Roy, you missed Chris' point:

She said the trip was fueled by chocolate.

Obviously, they came to the Americas for chocolate!

Ah, I see, all is revealed!

Roy.

Maybe the GS cannot stop, but it can stall. This is a big concern for Warmist who fear a large fresh water incursion from Canada into the North Atlantic can turn W. Europe into a freezer. Or are they all wet?
(oh, oh oh, I think, a pun?)

I can't see any difference between 'stop' and 'stall' Chris, and yes, the warmists have promoted this, such is their desperation in trying to sell their ideas.
Look at the physics Chris. The water in the Gulf is trapped due to the local geography, as it warms it expends, to the point that it stands several feet higher than the Atlantic. This is why the GS flows, it is running downhill!
Once out of the Gulf it is forced to flow north 'cos oceans stand higher at the equater due to the centrifugal force from the Earth's spin. Thus it is again running downhill!
Geography again plays its part by forcing the current eastwards.
The UK's greatest warmist supporter played that card some years ago, and was eventually forced, the pain of the hot irons was so great, to withdraw his statement, corrected by NASA!
Arctic meltwater could force the GS further south, then once the ice had melted it would cease to have that effect.
The only way the GS could stop flowing is to reduce the Sun's heat, considerably, close the Gulf off so that it became a fresh water lake, or open the Isthmus.
Another argument promoted is the affect that the loss of the GS would have on northern Europe, the answer is, not much!
It would have a devastating effect here in the UK, but its warming does not extend very far into Europe. Look at Germany's winter temps compared with here in west Wales.
We have an Atlantean climate here, a high summer temp would be about 18 degrees, a low winter temp would be minus 3.

Roy.

Yes, Chris. The fear that the Gulf Stream would stop resulted in the following movie:



Basically, the world froze over within a few days. A problem with the fears associated with the movie: the Lake Agassiz Rapid Cooling event at 6200bce resulted from the catastrophic draining of Lake Aggasiz and Lake Ojibway into the North Atlantic with an ice dam rupture, thereby affecting the Gulf Stream for 200 years.



We don't have ice age lakes today that will dump trillions of tons of fresh water into the Atlantic (and don't count on Greenland). Further, as Roy pointed out, the Gulf Stream doesn't really shut down, it just weakens and moves south in the worst case scenario. Regardless, tropical water remains warmer and moves its way north. Made for a popular action adventure a la fiction, though, even if scientific feasibility was thrown out the window.

That movie stunk.

That movie stunk.

Actually, it was outright horrible.

To be perfectly honest most movies aren't worth the effort to look at them.

Anomalous Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in the Cherokee

In the past, whenever a geneticist or anthropologist conducting a study of Native Americans has encountered an anomalous haplogroup, that is, a lineage that does not belong to one of the five generally accepted American Indian mitochondrial DNA haplogroups A, B, C, D and X, it has been rejected as an example of admixture and not included in the survey results. This is true of the two examples of H and one of J reported by Cherokee descendants by Schurr (2000:253). Schurr takes these exceptions to prove the rule and regards them as instances of European admixture. The governing logic of population geneticists seems to go as follows:
Lineage A, B, C, D and X are American Indian.
Therefore, all American Indians are lineage A, B, C, D and X.

"The geneticists always seem to cry 'post-Columbian admixture,'" says Stephen C. Jett, a geographer at the University of California at Davis, "but fail to take into account that there are no plausible post-Columbian sources for the particular genetic mix encountered."

"Anomalous Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in the Cherokee" concentrates on the documented or self-identifying Cherokee descendants whose haplotypes do not fit the current orthodoxy in American Indian population genetics. Here are some highlights, organized by haplogroup . . .

http://dnaconsultants.com/_blog/DNA_Con ... _Cherokee/

uniface wrote:Anomalous Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in the Cherokee



"The geneticists always seem to cry 'post-Columbian admixture,'" says Stephen C. Jett, a geographer at the University of California at Davis, "but fail to take into account that there are no plausible post-Columbian sources for the particular genetic mix encountered."

"Anomalous Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in the Cherokee" concentrates on the documented or self-identifying Cherokee descendants whose haplotypes do not fit the current orthodoxy in American Indian population genetics. Here are some highlights, organized by haplogroup . . .

http://dnaconsultants.com/_blog/DNA_Con ... _Cherokee/

Um, who cares what Stephen C. Jett, A GEOGRAPHER, thinks about GENETICS???

Um, who cares what Stephen C. Jett, A GEOGRAPHER, thinks about GENETICS???

You're off on the wrong foot, CS.

The world has had more than enough of the Guru Syndrome already.

You're looking for someone to trust. Someone well-informed to believe.

Belief is a mode of functioning that is immune to facts, logic, experience and even personal experience. It's a world unto itself. The funny part is, it impersonates Science, and gets upset when people don't take it seriously.

In actual science, theory is adjusted to account for facts. For a (presumably) familiar example of what happens when it isn't, from years past, the pre-Clovis 14C dates at Meadowoopd Riockshelter and Mesa Verde. You (again, probably) saw the way that went. The Establishment only sat down and shut up when it realised that people were laughing at it.

In Practice, Archaeology -- unfortunately -- is a clone of 16th Century Roman Catholicism. Complete with Ordination (a PhD), a priesthood (tenured professors), elaborate dogmatics, persecution of heretics, and control over the dissemination of information to the public (what used to be the requirement to secure an Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat for publication is now acceptance by a "Professional Journal" after -- of course, "Peer Review." [aka, examination by the Village Soviet]. The names and the small details change, but the system endures).

Review the archaeological Party Line Orthodoxies of the last hundred years and tell me -- with a straight face -- that more Faith in the dogmatic certainties (that change every ten years) of the Hierarchy is the proper response. Or if it might be reading with an open mind to see whether the new information (or old information re-formulated) makes sense.

And finally, whether the requirement actually relevant to the issue might be, not a PhD from the "right" school and tenure at the "right" university, but the ability to think far enough outside the current box to identify information germane to the question. A useful model of which might be the little child in the tale of "the Emperor's New Clothes."

Nobody needs a special license to see what's in front of his face.

Really.

You asked

uniface wrote:

Um, who cares what Stephen C. Jett, A GEOGRAPHER, thinks about GENETICS???

You're off on the wrong foot, CS.

The world has had more than enough of the Guru Syndrome already.

You're looking for someone to trust. Someone well-informed to believe.

Belief is a mode of functioning that is immune to facts, logic, experience and even personal experience. It's a world unto itself. The funny part is, it impersonates Science, and gets upset when people don't take it seriously.

In actual science, theory is adjusted to account for facts. For a (presumably) familiar example of what happens when it isn't, from years past, the pre-Clovis 14C dates at Meadowoopd Riockshelter and Mesa Verde. You (again, probably) saw the way that went. The Establishment only sat down and shut up when it realised that people were laughing at it.

In Practice, Archaeology -- unfortunately -- is a clone of 16th Century Roman Catholicism. Complete with Ordination (a PhD), a priesthood (tenured professors), elaborate dogmatics, persecution of heretics, and control over the dissemination of information to the public (what used to be the requirement to secure an Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat for publication is now acceptance by a "Professional Journal" after -- of course, "Peer Review." [aka, examination by the Village Soviet]. The names and the small details change, but the system endures).

Review the archaeological Party Line Orthodoxies of the last hundred years and tell me -- with a straight face -- that more Faith in the dogmatic certainties (that change every ten years) of the Hierarchy is the proper response. Or if it might be reading with an open mind to see whether the new information (or old information re-formulated) makes sense.

And finally, whether the requirement actually relevant to the issue might be, not a PhD from the "right" school and tenure at the "right" university, but the ability to think far enough outside the current box to identify information germane to the question. A useful model of which might be the little child in the tale of "the Emperor's New Clothes."

Nobody needs a special license to see what's in front of his face.

Really.

You asked

My son is a published geneticist. He always has to run the gauntlet of the peer review process before he can publish.
No peer review system is perfect. Nor will it ever be entirely free of agendas, hatreds & jealousies.
However, I much prefer a flawed system of checks & balances to your conspiracy theory laden drivel.

Belief is a mode of functioning that is immune to facts, logic, experience and even personal experience. It's a world unto itself.

Yes Indeed, I trust you will remember that statement, as I will.

Roy.

I much prefer a flawed system of checks & balances to your conspiracy theory laden drivel.

De gustibus non disputandem.

For my own part, I much prefer looking through the windscreen to see the road ahead. The sight of which, while not "proven" yet, suffices for ordinary purposes. Going about it your way is about like driving in reverse, depending on the rear view mirror.

For my own part, I much prefer looking through the windscreen to see the road ahead.

Unfortunately that road has led you to some dead ends in the past.

Roy.