Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

E.P. Grondine

Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by E.P. Grondine » Tue May 17, 2011 9:49 am

My comments on this are over at http://cosmictusk.com

Aside from those comments, note that Dalton has been sitting on this information for a year, and that he fails to mention where he got that information from. I think that Dalton or someone else believes that CO2 has been responsible for all of the climate reversals during the last 300.000 years.

On the other hand, West's background may explain many of the problems that have been encountered in teaching how to locate, sample, and analyze YD boundary layer samples.




Edit: Okay. Fixed it for you E.P. with an assist from Dannan's sharp eyes.

Min.

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15801
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Minimalist » Tue May 17, 2011 11:36 am

I can't get the link to work, E.P.

I originally tried deleting the period at the end but even that did not help.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

dannan14
Posts: 481
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:47 pm

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by dannan14 » Tue May 17, 2011 6:22 pm

try changing .ccm to .com :)

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15801
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Minimalist » Tue May 17, 2011 8:40 pm

Shit. I saw the period but didn't even notice that.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

dirtscratcher
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:06 am

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by dirtscratcher » Fri May 20, 2011 10:18 am

It's probably a lot harder to find the comet evidence lurking in the black mat, than not. There were other researchers independently corroborating the findings. I'm familiar with the occurrence in Sheriden Pit(cave) in Ohio. It would seem that one requirement may be a large drainage area that concentrated the runoff into a dense layer in a limited space such as Sheriden. One early critical paper described taking a core sample in a lake, and not finding anything, and therefor dismissing the comet theory. No Kidding, I bet that If I dug a hole in my garden and tested it, there'd be nothing there either. I'm sure that ultimately the jury is still out, but to a non scientist, a lot of the criticisms are almost laughable. Of course, that may be partly the fault of reporters who as a rule don't know of what they write.

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Forum Monk » Wed May 25, 2011 12:13 pm

The North American comet theory is dead.
May it rest in peace.

E.P. Grondine

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by E.P. Grondine » Wed May 25, 2011 6:54 pm

Hi Forum Monk -

Please use your real name in your posts.
That will make it easier for us in the future to remind you of the stupidity of your comment when we want to have a laugh.

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Forum Monk » Thu May 26, 2011 6:50 am

Hi Mr. Grondine,


Stupidity, eh? Maybe stupid is continuing to support a theory that is proving increasingly improbable.

As originally introduced by Firestone, the impact hypothesis was put forth as a possible explanation for forcing climate change coincident with and contributing to megafaunal extinction and the demise of Clovis culture and/or peoples. At the time of publication there were other theories which offered explanations for the sudden climate change. Ongoing research is refuting the conclusions of YD impact as causation, plain and simple. Additionally there is reasonable evidence that the Clovis peoples did not die out, but merely evolved their tool making methods to adapt to the changes in their environment. We need not even discuss the serious damage Allen West did to the credibility of the project.

In spite of support from the popular media, when scientists are no longer considering an impact as a major driver of rapid climate change, and the evidence of impact is appearing to be misidentified and/or out of sequence with the accepted timeline of YD climatic changes and megafaunal extinction, and independent research can not reproduce the results, its a dead theory. A theory with no credibility among peers is a dead theory. Exploding impactor or not, the original premise of the theory has fallen and all of Kennett's men can not put Humpty together again.

kbs2244
Posts: 2472
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:47 pm

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by kbs2244 » Thu May 26, 2011 9:26 am

I don’t have an opinion one way or another on the impact theory.
Both sides seem to have evidence to support their views.

But, Monk, you are describing “consensus.”
A word that has taken on some bad connotation recently.

E.P. Grondine

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by E.P. Grondine » Thu May 26, 2011 10:52 am

Forum Monk wrote: Hi Mr. Grondine,

Stupidity, eh? Maybe stupid is continuing to support a theory that is proving increasingly improbable.
Among those who actually work with this time period, the acceptance of simple cometary impact is gaining.
Forum Monk wrote: As originally introduced by Firestone, the impact hypothesis was put forth as a possible explanation for forcing climate change coincident with and contributing to megafaunal extinction and the demise of Clovis culture and/or peoples. At the time of publication there were other theories which offered explanations for the sudden climate change.
Just as there were other hypotheses explaining the extinction of the dinosaur.
And as a matter of fact, just as at the KT, they are among the most vocal.

I do disagree with Firestone on the injection mechansim, and his impact mechanics were pretty bad.

By the way, my own book "Man and Impact in the Americas" is much better than Firestone et al's, IMO. While it has too small type, too many typos, and not enough pictures, more impacts are discussed.
Forum Monk wrote: Ongoing research is refuting the conclusions of YD impact as causation, plain and simple.
An elephant requires something like 200 kg of fodder a day. Any interuption in that for a sufficient period of time leads to death by starvation.
That is probably true for most large mammals.

What is almost hilarious in all of this is that the 14C dates used by those in opposition have wide variance, which they continue to ignore.
As they do the 14C and 10Be spikes.
Forum Monk wrote: Additionally there is reasonable evidence that the Clovis peoples did not die out, but merely evolved their tool making methods to adapt to the changes in their environment.
I can't speak for others, but I never said "Clovis Peoples" died out. As a matter of fact, I stated exactly who survived where, and I did not use a made up name (Clovis Peoples) to do so.

Note carefully the massive human die off indicated by quarry abandonment.
Forum Monk wrote: We need not even discuss the serious damage Allen West did to the credibility of the project.
Ah, but we should discuss it, and re-examine the data to determine what damage was done, and have that work repeated.
Forum Monk wrote: In spite of support from the popular media, when scientists are no longer considering an impact as a major driver of rapid climate change, and the evidence of impact is appearing to be misidentified and/or out of sequence with the accepted timeline of YD climatic changes and megafaunal extinction, and independent research can not reproduce the results, its a dead theory. A theory with no credibility among peers is a dead theory. Exploding impactor or not, the original premise of the theory has fallen and all of Kennett's men can not put Humpty together again.
You remind me of Benny Peiser, FM. He demonstrated to some degree that the J curve was a statistical artifact and that thus AGW was a dead theory.

Science does not proceed by jump and shout proofs, FM.
It is not done by consensus either.

"Scientists no longer consider impact as a major driver of rapid climate change"?

Please use your name, FM, so we can laugh at your remarks in the future.

User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Digit » Thu May 26, 2011 12:46 pm

Nice to see you back Monk!
Gaining ground, losing ground, neither makes for proof gentlemen, history has proven time and again that established theories end up being wrong.
Time will tell.

Roy.
First people deny a thing, then they belittle it, then they say it was known all along! Von Humboldt

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Forum Monk » Thu May 26, 2011 2:46 pm

kbs2244 wrote:I don’t have an opinion one way or another on the impact theory.
Both sides seem to have evidence to support their views.
Then what's the point of your post? If you take a point of view we can debate it, otherwise, you're a bystander.
kbs2244 wrote: But, Monk, you are describing “consensus.”
A word that has taken on some bad connotation recently.
Pseudoscientific alternative theorists, loath the consensus view, KB. Archaeologica used to rip up alt-theorists using mainstream science. What happened?

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Forum Monk » Thu May 26, 2011 2:49 pm

Digit wrote:Nice to see you back Monk!
Gaining ground, losing ground, neither makes for proof gentlemen, history has proven time and again that established theories end up being wrong.
Time will tell.

Roy.
There is no established theory in this case, Digit. Its open for discussion and that's what I was hoping to do.

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Forum Monk » Thu May 26, 2011 3:33 pm

Hi Mr. Grondine,
E.P. Grondine wrote: Among those who actually work with this time period, the acceptance of simple cometary impact is gaining.
This is something we can examine. I would love to see the papers.
E.P. Grondine wrote: Just as there were other hypotheses explaining the extinction of the dinosaur.
And as a matter of fact, just as at the KT, they are among the most vocal.
Worthy to discuss at another time, but not relevant to this thread.
E.P. Grondine wrote:I do disagree with Firestone on the injection mechansim, and his impact mechanics were pretty bad.
I await your analysis.
E.P. Grondine wrote: By the way, my own book "Man and Impact in the Americas" is much better than Firestone et al's, IMO. While it has too small type, too many typos, and not enough pictures, more impacts are discussed.
Noted but for now, irrelevant.
E.P. Grondine wrote: An elephant requires something like 200 kg of fodder a day. Any interuption in that for a sufficient period of time leads to death by starvation.
That is probably true for most large mammals.
Ok - so what? Climate change or hungry hunters killed the mammoths. Neither view is without precedent.
E.P. Grondine wrote:What is almost hilarious in all of this is that the 14C dates used by those in opposition have wide variance, which they continue to ignore.
As they do the 14C and 10Be spikes.
The archaeological investigation is a big part of the controversy and biomass burning may have contributed to any variances indicated.
E.P. Grondine wrote: I can't speak for others, but I never said "Clovis Peoples" died out. As a matter of fact, I stated exactly who survived where, and I did not use a made up name (Clovis Peoples) to do so.

Note carefully the massive human die off indicated by quarry abandonment.
My comments have nothing to do with what you may have said in the past. I addressed my comment to the Firestone paper which introduced this theory. I don't recall seeing your name on it. This is the premise of the theory:
Evidence for an extraterrestrial impact 12,900 years ago that contributed to the megafaunal extinctions and the Younger Dryas cooling
R. B. Firestone, A. West, J. P. Kennett, L. Becker, T. E. Bunchf, Z. S. Revay, P. H. Schultz, T. Belgya, D. J. Kennett, J. M. Erlandson, O. J. Dickenson, A. C. Goodyear, R. S. Harris, G. A. Howard, J. B. Kloosterman, P. Lechler, P. A. Mayewski, J. Montgomery, R. Poreda, T. Darrah, S. S. Que Hee, A. R. Smith, A. Stich, W. Topping, J. H. Wittke, and W. S. Wolbach
...In this paper, we provide evidence for an extraterrestrial (ET) impact event at ~12.9 ka, which we hypothesize caused abrupt environmental changes that contributed to YD cooling, major ecological reorganization, broad-scale extinctions, and rapid human behavioral shifts at the end of the Clovis Period.
...Many sites indicate that both Clovis people and extinct megafauna were present immediately before the YD event, but, except in rare cases, neither appears in the geologic record afterward.
E.P. Grondine wrote: Ah, but we should discuss it, and re-examine the data to determine what damage was done, and have that work repeated.
Perhaps we will discuss it, then. It depends on how this progresses.
E.P. Grondine wrote: You remind me of Benny Peiser, FM. He demonstrated to some degree that the J curve was a statistical artifact and that thus AGW was a dead theory.

Science does not proceed by jump and shout proofs, FM.
It is not done by consensus either.
Your disdain of the "consensus" is not relevant. The consensus view, like it or not, means the a theory is a chapter in a text book and not a footnote or sidebar.
E.P. Grondine wrote: Please use your name, FM, so we can laugh at your remarks in the future.
You need to get over yourself, Mr. Grondine. This is not about you or your personal theories. Either we discuss this without the quips and snide remarks or I ignore you contribution and perhaps others on this board would be willing to explore the topic.

edit: cleaned-up a few typos

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15801
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Comet Theory field geologist's competency in question

Post by Minimalist » Thu May 26, 2011 5:16 pm

It does seem as if it is up to Firestone to defend his theory and his methods. He ran it up the flagpole, others have now fired on it. The ball is in his court.

I do hope that he does not try to fall back on native american folklore for "evidence." however.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

Post Reply