Kerr Watch

Elapsed time since Richard Kerr failed to inform his Science readers of the confirmation of nanodiamonds at the YDB: 5 years, 9 months, and 4 days

CT Post Calendar

September 2016
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

The Cosmic Tusk Newsletter

Loading...Loading...


Awkward but promising: Compromise paper from Andronikov & Van Hoesel

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-01-14-am

The presence of a possible meteoritic component in the same sediments suggests that an ET event occurred at approximately the same time. However, whether the presence of the meteoritic component is due to a local meteorite impact/airburst or to a much stronger event remains unclear. Anyway, it is quite possible that some short and dramatic event took place just before the onset of the Younger Dryas climate oscillation, but, as was emphasized by Haynes et al. (2010), an understanding of what happened at c. 12.9– 12.8 ka BP requires further research.

Download (PDF, 976KB)

 

Close to home

 

Regular readers of the Tusk know we don’t dwell here on modern day cosmic interactions. But that was yesterday. Today a best buddy and long-time co-worker, Worth Creech, came into my office shocked to report….he had actually seen…..a daytime fireball in Raleigh!

Well, I’ll bee. The Tar Heel State had an encounter with the incredible. Worth, and the moms, dads and kids at soccer practice, watched slack jawed as a bolide streaked across our state at the fringe of atmosphere to explode over eastern North Carolina Wednesday afternoon.

It surprised me that the media coverage of the encounter was so relatively light. I had always believed that daytime fireballs result in brief — but intense — local press. The Raleigh Fireball of 2016 was barely noted, demonstrating how uncomfortably common such interactions must be.

creech

Worth Creech

B&W

img_7484-3

Multi-ringed depressions beneath Hudson Bay imitate impact craters

Screenshot 2016-08-01 19.55.39

 

Download (PDF, 1.29MB)

UofA: Short, enigmatic event causes geochemical changes at start of Younger Dryas

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), default quality
Unfiltered

More independent confirmation of the Younger Dryas Boundary event.

Download (PDF, 1.25MB)

Here They Go Again: Holliday and Surovell use dozer not trowel

bulldozer-drawing-black-and-white-dromgff-top-clipart

Surovell-Holliday 2012 Tusk commentary

Vance Holliday and Todd Surovell published a paper in PLOS One this week. It is unsurprising but again disappointing that these hacks continue their jihad on the YDB hypothesis based on negligent analysis.

Particular galling is their wanton substitution of an optical microscope for an electron microscope. I say “wanton” because the publication history regarding magnetic spherules resulting from impacts clearly calls for the more sensitive instrument to document a spherule as a melt product – not, for instance, rounded sand.

It is impossible to characterize a spherule (of cosmic or terrestrial material) as being of impact origin using a tool that is orders of magnitude less sensitive than what is called for and used to produce the previously published data.

It is as if someone double-checked Holliday and Surovell’s own archeological work by bulldozing an adjacent square, rummaging about, and tossing manhandled contrary items onto the balk.

From LeCompte (2012):

Because those authors did not perform SEM imaging and EDS analyses, it is impossible for them to reach reliable conclusions about what they found. Surovell et al. did not perform SEM imaging or geochemical analyses, and yet, like Pigati et al., asserted that all magnetic spherules are cosmic in origin. Pinter et al. and Haynes et al. did not report the results of their spherule SEM analyses and likewise concluded spherules were of cosmic origin without supporting data. Lacking SEM imaging and/or EDS analyses, the accuracy of their spherule counts and speculations about origin are highly suspect. As an example of this, Pinter et al. reported observing large numbers of framboids and detrital magnetite well outside the YDB and then speculated that most YDB spherules are simply these other particles. Our results and images indicate their claim to be unfounded. There are fundamental and easily observed differences between quench-melted spherules, unmelted detrital magnetite, and authigenic framboids.

 

Download (PDF, 2.18MB)

TEDx: Graham Hancock on Lost Civilizations and the Younger Dryas Boundary Impact

Comets and the Early Christian Mosaics of Ravenna

Hat Tip to Malaga Bay

Q-Mag