folder Filed in Random Tusks
Blast from past: YD team member diciplined by Golden State geo board in 2002
event May 15, 2011 comment 96 Comments

I have nothing but an iPhone until later tomorrow. So this post is necessarily brief.

Allen West has taken a hit to his credibility (and to some extent the Tusk’s) from charges by Younger Dryas Hypothesis critics ranging from professional misconduct to falsifying lab results.

As an advocate of Allen’s and someone who has spent years watching him personally sacrifice with no financial gain from this subject, I am probably as surprised as anyone these charges have emerged.

There is surely some truth here — but more than a little spin.

For one Allen never claimed he was any more credentialed than he was — the first time I spoke with him he claimed only a philosophy doctorate from an obscure school in Nebraska. That said, it is hard to find out someone you know once went by different name.

I am in touch with Allen and hope to have more to say soon.

http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/comet-claim-comes-crashing-to-earth-31180/

Comet Theory Comes Crashing to Earth
An elegant archaeological hypothesis, under fire for results that can’t be replicated, may ultimately come undone.
By Rex Dalton

Even though they can’t replicate their work, the authors of a controversial scientific theory about a comet impact that caused the Clovis catastrophe refuse to give in to their many critics. (Wikimedia Commons)

It seemed like such an elegant answer to an age-old mystery: the disappearance of what are arguably North America’s first people. A speeding comet nearly 13,000 years ago was the culprit, the theory goes, spraying ice and rocks across the continent, killing the Clovis people and the mammoths they fed on, and plunging the region into a deep chill. The idea so captivated the public that three movies describing the catastrophe were produced.

But now, four years after the purportedly supportive evidence was reported, a host of scientific authorities systematically have made the case that the comet theory is “bogus.” Researchers from multiple scientific fields are calling the theory one of the most misguided ideas in the history of modern archaeology, which begs for an independent review so an accurate record is reflected in the literature.
“It is an impossible scenario,” says Mark Boslough, a physicist at Sandia Laboratory in Albuquerque, N.M., where he taps the world’s fastest computers for nuclear bomb experiments to study such impacts. His computations show the debris from such a comet couldn’t cover the proposed impact field. In March, a “requiem” for the theory even was published by a group that included leading specialists from archaeology to botany.

Yet, the scientists who described the alleged impact in a hallowed U.S. scientific journal refuse to consider the critics’ evidence — insisting they are correct, even though no one can replicate their work: the hallmark of credibility in the scientific world.
The primary authors of the theory are an unusual mix: James Kennett, a virtual father of marine geology from the University of California, Santa Barbara; Richard Firestone, a physicist at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in California; and Allen West, an unknown academic from the mining industry who lives in Dewey, Ariz.
“We are under a lot of duress,” said Kennett. “It has been quite painful.” So much so, that team members call their critics’ work “biased,” “nonsense” and “screwed up.”

Such intransigence has been seen before in other cases of grand scientific claims. Sometimes those theories were based on data irregularities. Other times, the proponents succumbed to self-delusion. But typically, advocates become so invested in their ideas they can’t publicly acknowledge error.

A new look at the comet claim suggests all of these phenomena may be in play, apparently creating a peculiar bond of desperation as the theory came under increasing attack. Indeed, the team’s established scientists are so wedded to the theory they have opted to ignore the fact their colleague “Allen West” isn’t exactly who he says he is.

West is Allen Whitt — who, in 2002, was fined by California and convicted for masquerading as a state-licensed geologist when he charged small-town officials fat fees for water studies. After completing probation in 2003 in San Bernardino County, he began work on the comet theory, legally adopting his new name in 2006 as he promoted it in a popular book. Only when questioned by this reporter last year did his co-authors learn his original identity and legal history. Since then, they have not disclosed it to the scientific community.

West’s history — and new concerns about study results he was integrally involved in — raise intriguing questions about the veracity of the comet claim. His background is likely to create more doubts about the theory. And the controversy — because it involves the politically sensitive issue of a climate shift — is potentially more broadly damaging, authorities suggest.
“It does feed distrust in science,” says Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at Columbia University and an international dean of climate research. “Those who don’t believe in human-produced global warming grab onto it.”

West is at the nexus of almost all the evidence for the original comet claims. His fieldwork is described in the 2006 book he authored with Firestone, The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes.

To show the comet’s deadly plume, West collected various sediment samples from 25 archaeology sites across the United States. He used a magnet to find iron flecks reportedly from the comet, scooped up carbon spherules reflecting subsequent fires, and argued that high concentrations of such material at particular sedimentary levels supported their theory.

The team has argued a 4-kilometer comet tumbled into ice sheets 12,900 years ago, leading to the so-called Younger Dryas, when the temperature cooled for more than a thousand years.

The flying debris appeared to answer questions about the Clovis peoples’ disappearance that had defied prior explanation. The supposed remnants of the comet hadn’t received intense scrutiny by researchers previously probing sediments at archaeology sites. And water from melted ice flowing into the oceans could explain the precipitous temperature drop.

But all these claims have been sharply disputed in a series of scientific articles over the last 18 months. Examples include:
University of Wyoming archaeologist Todd Surovell and his colleagues couldn’t find increased magnetic spherules representing cosmic debris at seven Clovis sites. Nicholas Pinter and his colleagues at Southern Illinois University Carbondale argue the carbon spherules are organic residue of fungus or arthropod excrement. And Tyrone Daulton of Washington University in St. Louis and his colleagues reported that supposed nanodiamonds formed by the impact were misidentified.

Speaking of the various reports, Surovell said, “We all built a critical mass of data suggesting there was a serious problem.”
Now, Boslough and colleagues have conducted new analysis of purported comet debris samples that raises even more troubling credibility questions.

On March 25, Boslough reported that radio-carbon dating of a carbon spherule sample shows it is only about 200 years old — an “irregularity” that indicates is it not from the alleged 12,900-year-old impact time.

This means that a sample from a layer purporting to show a high concentration of spherules at the inception of the Younger Dryas actually only was about as old as the Declaration of Independence.

About two years ago, as his doubts on the theory were building, Boslough contacted West to secure carbon spherule samples for analysis. West sent him 16 spherules, purportedly from the Younger Dryas boundary sediment layer at an archaeology site called Gainey in Michigan — a location with the highest spherule count of studied locations.

Boslough subsequently forwarded the unopened package of spherules to the National Science Foundation-funded radio-carbon laboratory at the University of Arizona in Tucson. There, a dating specialist randomly selected a spherule — the one ultimately found to be about 200 years old. Boslough reported these results at an American Geophysical Union conference in Santa Fe, N.M.
Afterward, Boslough said: “I don’t think there is any reason to accept what West reported. I have a serious problem with everything from him.”

Did someone salt a sediment layer to increase the spherule count? Or did the 200-year-old sample inadvertently get mixed in somehow? Boslough says he can’t provide an answer, but there was some form of “contamination.”
But an answer is needed, he said: “I wouldn’t sweep it under the rug.”

After his presentation, West wrote Boslough that he believed that the questioned sample somehow got mixed naturally over time into a lower sediment layer. Both Kennett and Firestone agreed.

But Vance Holliday, a University of Arizona archaeologist who has studied Clovis sites for 30 years, found this explanation nonsensical. Such mixing of spherules from different eras could invalidate any conclusion that higher spherule counts represented evidence of a comet impact.

“I suspect something very odd is going on,” adds Holliday, who also has become a critic of the comet theory.
After the theory was first announced in 2007 in Acapulco, Mexico, Holliday had attempted to collaborate with Kennett to test the idea. But Kennett effectively blocked publication of the study last year after the results didn’t support the comet theory.
And those results were blindly analyzed by an independent reviewer selected by Kennett himself. That independent reviewer was none other than Walter Alvarez — an esteemed University of California, Berkeley, geologist and son of Luis Alvarez, the Nobel Prize-winning physicist who first proposed an asteroid struck the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico about 65 million years ago, wiping out the world’s dinosaurs and most life.

The Holliday-Kennett study has never been presented publicly. The results were obtained independent of the two authors. Holliday then agreed to discuss events; Kennett also answered questions about the study but didn’t reach the same conclusions as his colleague.

For decades, Holliday has studied a Clovis site at Lubbock Lake Landmark State Historical Park in Texas, just east of the original location where the Clovis people’s distinctive fluted projectile points were first discovered in New Mexico. After a visit there in the summer of 2007, Holliday examined sediments from an exposed section that included the signature of the inception of the Younger Dryas. He then took samples from six sedimentary layers within a 35-centimeter section encompassing the Younger Dryas.

The study then worked like this: Based on analyses of the layers, both Kennett and Holliday sent to Alvarez their predictions on which layer reflected the geochemical characteristics for the beginning of the Younger Dryas. But neither Kennett nor Alvarez knew the order of the sediment layers; not knowing this order would add credibility to their conclusions.

In a surprise, Kennett’s analysis included sedimentary counts for what he called nanodiamonds — which his group says were produced by the enormous energy from comet explosion.

Holliday accurately predicted what layer was associated with the Younger Dryas boundary. But Kennett did not. Kennett’s selected nanodiamond-rich layer was 25 centimeters above the Younger Dryas boundary — meaning it was about 1,000 years younger than the claimed impact time. To Alvarez, this indicated a comet-impact hypothesis was incorrect.

After considerable behind-the-scenes arguing, Holliday said, Kennett ultimately complained last summer that the study was “fundamentally flawed” and wouldn’t allow him to publish his results. Now, Kennett says, he is continuing to analyze the data.
“It is very peculiar,” Holliday said. “They propose an idea, a study contradicts it, then they criticize the scientists or the work.”
Both Kennett and Columbia’s Broecker, are elected members of the prestigious U.S. National Academy of Science; near age peers, they are also old friends. Years ago, Broecker noted, Kennett published seminal discoveries on ancient climate shifts by studying cores drilled deep into the ocean floor.

Speaking graciously of Kennett, Broecker lauded his friend’s early climate studies as extremely important. But when the comet theory came along, Broecker immediately was highly skeptical. Kennett repeatedly called him to lobby for the comet until Broecker cut him off saying he didn’t want to hear about the theory anymore.

“It is all wrong,” said Broecker, if not “very likely total nonsense. But he never gives up on an idea.”
Kennett seems fixated on the Younger Dryas, Broecker added, “He won’t listen to anyone. It’s almost like a religion to him.”
Acknowledging the dispute, Kennett said, “I know he thinks I’m wrong; maybe he’ll change his mind someday.”

About 20 years ago, Broecker noted Kennett had proposed a similarly wayward theory that a burst of methane from the ocean floor — sometimes called “a methane gun” — warmed the climate, ending the Younger Dyras.

“He pushed the methane-gun theory for years,” said Broecker. “He predicted an enormous methane peak would be reflected in ice-core records. But there wasn’t one; it was a ridiculous idea to begin with.”
Then he switched to the beginning of the Younger Dryas, Broecker added, “He was determined to make a splash; it blinded his judgment.”

Ironically, he may be making a different type of impact with his odd-couple collaboration with West.

West has no formal appointment at an academic institution. He has said he obtained a doctorate from a Bible college, but he won’t describe it further. Firestone said West has told him he has no scientific doctorate but is self-taught. West’s Arizona attorney refers to him in writing as: “A retired geophysicist who has had a long and distinguished career.”

In the early 1990s, a new-age business West was involved in Sedona, Ariz., failed, and his well-drilling company went bankrupt. Then he ran afoul of California law in small Mojave Desert towns in a scheme with two other men, with court records saying they collected fees up to $39,500 for questionable groundwater reports.

He originally was charged with two felonies for falsely representing himself as a state-licensed geologist but agreed to a no contest plea to a single misdemeanor of false advertising as part of plea bargain in which state records say he was fined $4,500. Two other men in the scam also were sanctioned.

Acknowledging he made a mistake, West has sought to downplay the 9-year-old conviction. And last September, after his impact theory colleagues learned of it, he went back to court in Victorville, Calif., convincing a judge to void the old plea.
After earlier denying any impropriety with his Younger Dryas work, West declined a recent interview request. Last month, he wrote a letter charging it was “highly prejudicial and distorted” to bring up his legal past in the context of his current studies. He is a member of “a group of two dozen dedicated scientists performing cutting-edge, although controversial, research,” he wrote.

Initially last year, Kennett was speechless when confronted with West’s history. He and Firestone learned of it because of this reporter’s questions. Since then, he has continued to collaborate and publish research with West. Within weeks of learning of West’s background, Kennett pushed for news coverage last September of an article contending nanodiamonds in Greenland supported their comet theory. But the article didn’t sway critics.

Today, Kennett won’t discuss West’s criminal past at all — saying West is “wonderful, an absolutely remarkable researcher.” Firestone acknowledges West “did some strange things” but continues to defend that his work is above reproach.
Among the theory’s critics, there are decidedly differing opinions.

“This is so far beyond the pale — outside of normal experiences in conducting science — you can’t ignore it,” Southern Illiois’ Pinter said. Asked if he would collaborate with West, he said, “I would run screaming away.”

And the three years and research dollars spent on the claim leave a bitter memory for some. “My response is not publishable,” said Pinter.

Some academic institution needs to thoroughly examine the issue and answer the obvious questions that abound, critics say. Several said they already would have reported the events to administrators at their respective universities.
UCSB is the most likely institution to conduct a review, since Kennett used an NSF grant there on comet studies. But this will mean questioning an esteemed faculty member — Kennett — who is seen as having helped put the campus on the international scientific map.

Among those who believe a formal inquiry should be initiated to determine if there was any misconduct is Jeffrey Severinghaus, an isotopic chemist at the University of California, San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography. An inquiry is the first level of such scrutiny; an investigation that could lead to sanctions would follow if the inquiry finds evidence of impropriety. Such probes have sniffed out questionable data from cases such as the rejected cold fusion claim and the false Korean assertion of cloning human embryos from stem cells.

“Wow,” said Severinghaus upon hearing of the latest developments in the comet theory, which he initially doubted because of his earlier ice-core studies. “It certainly sounds like there is sufficient evidence to justify an initial inquiry.”
Asked if he would seek such a move, he said, “Absolutely. It is really important to maintain the public trust in science. That means if there is a bad apple, it is rooted out and exposed.”

Bruce Hanley, UCSB’s director of research compliance, declined to be interviewed, although in an email he wrote that UCSB “is extremely interested in maintaining a high level of integrity” in research, and has a formal process for review of “unacceptable research practices.” Such a review is done confidentially.

Meanwhile, the next stop for the comet proponents’ road show is Bern, Switzerland. In July, they are scheduled to present research to a major international conference that studies the last 2.5 million years, the quaternary.
With many leading impact scientists in Europe equally skeptical of the theory, their welcome may be as icy as that period often was.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Cancel Post Comment

  1. The same website (miller-mccune) also reports a study [Amy Owen et al, Duke University] a smaller volume of the hippocampus for religious people – catholics, born-again evangelicals, and people who had a life- changing religious experience.

    This result is very easy to understand for us Jesus-freaks: We have fewer lies to remember [the hippocampus is a brain region involved in forming memories].

    My own life changed in a beautiful Gothic church on a visit back home to Germany. My wife and children watched in surprise as I sat down and sobbed for a while. Must have been something in seeing the light shine through the stained-glass windows and hearing the organ play beautiful music. Years later, I started to attend meetings at Rhema Church in Broken Arrow OK and heard “Dad” Hagin explain the Bible. Played his audio tapes in my car over and over to get the fine points (a need that us maths folk acquire on the job).

    My memory is pretty good, though: Since then I have published two maths phil papers and don’t forget my passwords. Just forgot all my youthful missteps, now forgiven by heaven after I accepted Jesus as my savior.

  2. And here you are, George, a simple country boy from Carolina curious about the odd shape local ponds, and you now find yourself involved in this. You think you saw heavy hitting while you were working on the Hill? You haven’t seen nothing yet.

    As Pinter put it, “This is so far beyond the pale — outside of normal experiences in conducting science — you can’t ignore it,” and I definitely agree with him on that. The entire Morrison& Mueller vs Clube& Napier “debate” over cometary injection mechanisms is going to make a fascinating adn one of the great stories in the history of science.

    Myself, I just started out with a simple op-ed piece, and a deep interest in the end of the Minoans (LM 1B). Even with a background in Soviet and post Soviet relations, the “sh…tuff” I’ve seen with this since then has everything I saw then beat by a mile.

    Let me start at the beginning…

  3. Initially, I had dismissed Teller et al’ warnings of the hazard as simply the ravings of nuclear scientists looking for work… Then I stumbled into modern impact studies, and when I realized that the Minoan military forces had been killed by impact, leaving them open to conquest by the Achaeans, my interest increased greatly.

    (If you have any doubts as to the background of this particular piece, its interesting to note how Dalton covers Kennett’s change of mind on what caused the end of Clovis, and Kennett’s reaction when he became aware of the magnitude of the impact hazard.)

  4. To continue, at the time NASA was doing nothing. I response to the movies “Deep Impact” and “Armageddon” Wesley Huntress decided that he would have to do a little bit. Here’s when I became aware of the “debate”

    I was covering hearings on the impact hazard, and making guesses as to who would get the NASA office. I thought it would be Eleanor Helin, and was surprised to learn that it was Yeomans at JPL. When I reported the story Morrison accused me of making it up, and thinking he was of good spirit, I revealed to him my source, a young Native American intern. When I found him in the NASA lobby holding his head, I asked him what was wrong, and he declined to say, but I never saw him again.

    As near as I can figure out today,
    Morrison hoped that the work would go to him and Arizona, instead of to JPL, and simply took his frustration with Huntress’s decision out on the guy who reported it. Of course, without the subpoena powers of either the House and/or Senate space subcommittees, or the NASA GAO auditors, including their access to sworn testimony and NASA e-mail archives, it is impossible to know.

    I had no idea of the depth of bitterness of the “debate” between Morrison and Mueller/Clube and Napier. I also had no idea how hard Ed Weiler would fight to resist taking on any responsibility for the safety of the citizens of this country.

    That would come later.

  5. Dalton writes: “Walter Alvarez [..] who first proposed an asteroid struck the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico about 65 million years ago, wiping out the world’s dinosaurs and most life.”

    Not a word about Shiva a much larger impoact/ crater at almost exactly the same time [exact timing of the two craters still unknown].

  6. Hi George – damn here we are at Part 3 – not too good for an elevator briefing, and there’s a whole lot more to come.

    By 2002 I pretty much had it down in my piece:

    WORKSHOP FOR MITIGATING THE EFFECTS OF PUBLIC CONCERN ON THE NASA BUREAUCRACY:
    TWO DAYS IN WASHINGTON, 2002

    I really was getting tired of it, and DC, and it was time to do some books on impacts in history.

    At that point, Alex R Blackwell, a “planetary scientist” who made his living in Hawaii by pumping out watery Mars crap that defied the laws of state for vacuums, told me he had been in contact with several US “impact specialists”, who he declined to identify. Blackwell claimed that these “impact specialists” received threatening e-mails from me, e-mails which they forwarded to the NASA security office.

    Blackwell additionally claimed that these “impact specialists” alleged that I intruded into office areas at NASA headquarters in an attempt to confront them, and that they had this inserted into the headquarter’s security log. Blackwell’s final claim was that these reports had resulted in me being put on a NASA security “watch list”.

    Of course, I had no way of checking on any of this, but after 9/11 security was tight. I was packing up to do the books and really did not need the stress of running it all down.

    (Why I would be so stupid as to write threatening e-mails giving warning before taking action was not explained to me.

    As far as moving around in HQ, yeah, the impact office was another floor down from the press office at the time. The press office had called me about the NASA impact detection budget; I arrived at HQ at their invitation, and had checked in there before they led me down there to try and find the NASA impactor detection budget, which was part of my journalistic responsibility and their duties.

    Its a wonder they did not accuse me of being a spy for Russia or China. But who knows given the atmosphere of attack politics in DC, maybe they did. I guess that makes you Comrade George now, Tovarich.)

  7. I arrived in Kempton, Illinois in 2004. At that point Benny took the Cambridge Conference over to Global Warmng Scepticism, thus eliminating the sole channel impact researchers had for rapidly disseminating information, and further burdening the Morrison & Mueller/Clube and Napier debate by deeply involving it with what in my view are largely extraneous matters.

    The effects of this are seen in today’s Dalton piece:
    “And the controversy — because it involves the politically sensitive issue of a climate shift — is potentially more broadly damaging, authorities suggest.

    “It does feed distrust in science,” says Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at Columbia University and an international dean of climate research. “Those who don’t believe in human-produced global warming grab onto it.”

    Yeah, well, B*** S***, Wally.

    Or more politely, Dr. Broecker, while what you are saying about the AGW sceptics is true, that does not mean that a comet impact(s) did not occur at 10,850 BCE, and that it (they) might not have triggered a fundamental shift in the Earth’s climate. Neither does West’s involvement or his past record change the fact that some 10 separate major laboratories have validated the YD layer impactites.

    The problem that I have with all of them, AGW and anti, is that NONE of them work on the science of solar variability and ozone valving. That includes EVERYONE, including Benny, who in my opinion shifted from covering climate science to pumping out propaganda.

    NONE of them talk about the TOMS satellite data series, or the GLORY or OCO losses.

    Given that that debate degenerated into propaganda long ago…

    F*** em all.

  8. 2004-2005 was spent putting together “Man and Impact in the Americas”, with the intention of following that test run with “Man and Impact in the Ancient Near East” using the library of the Oriental Institute, certainly one of the finest collections of Near Eastern texts in the world.

    Then I had a stroke.

    Followed by having my email accounts hacked, and being impersonated online.

    But the Congress passed the George Brown Jr Amendment in December 2005 telling NASA to get on the impact hazard.

  9. Which brings us to 2006, and more crap.

    2007, NASA Administrator Mike Griffin blows off the Congress’s direct instructions to get on the impact hazard, relying on ATK’s support for cover against contempt of Congress charges, and Weiller and Morrison’s “science” for justification for doing so.

    Late 2007, Firestone et al’s paper hits. Whatever Weiler/Morrison and Mueller can do, they can’t f**k with DOE funding of one of their top nuclear chemists. Nor change all of that strange 14C/10Be and other data, including the peppered mammoth and musk ox bones, which finally turn out to be from yet more and different iron asteroid impacts than the YD comet.

  10. In the meantime, I’m trying to launch a book with too many typos, not enough pictures, and too small type. At first I am unable to type and I eat my tongue with dinner…
    and then there’s always the denial of G** D*** F****** Mars Nuts to deal with, who want to pretend that NASA has no other purpose or use than to spend billions to fly a few men to Mars for a few days.

    But enough about my problems…
    In the deal to let Mike Griffin walk on Contempt of Congress, an order is sent to the NRC to study the hazard, and for the President to take action.

    The NRC panel is managed by Dwayne Day, a man with no background in impact studies, and largely populated with “scientists” who agree with Morrison and Mueller.
    That Morrison and Mueller’s hypothesis does not agree with the data is irrelevant.

    2009 – President Obama and the world watches Jupiter get hit without warning. Obama/Holdren report to Congress that an impact office needs to be set up in FEMA.

    2010 – The Shiva impact becomes publicized, hominids discovered in SE Asia killed by impact 1.9 mya.

    The WISE orbital telescope proves that Morrison and Mueller’s Nemesis companion to our solar system does not exist. Cost: somewhere around $750,000,000 or so.

    2011 – One month ago, Yeomans trots out a hazard estimate of his from 1982 which sets the cometary impact hazard at less than 1% of the total hazard, down from Morrison and Mueller’s 5%. Morrison agrees to need for orbital telescope for impactor detection. Cost: somewhere around $750,000,000 or so.

  11. 2011 – Dalton is unaware that Mueller was an associate of Luiz and Walter.

    The major oil companies have their own perspective on this, as they continue to explore impact fissures for pools of oil.

    Debate on the YD events still ongoing, with little to no money for actual data recovery and analysis.

    Here at the Tusk, Native American accounts of the YD comet impacts dismissed as a bunch of nonsense from stoned injuns by Boslough’s good buddy Dennis Cox.

    “Man and Impact in the Americas” still not in iBook format.

    NASA Administrator Bolden believes major decisions on NASA’s future course will be made in June/July of this year.

    OCTOBER, 2011 – 73P makes close approach. Don Yeoman’s forecast that it will turn into dust (a forecast made on a sample of 1, Comet Biela) will be compared with Comet 73P’s actual evolution.

    By the way, NASA’s CONTOUR spacecraft to study 73P was lost a decade ago due to a faulty motor from ATK.

    George, if you have any Hill contacts left, perhaps its time to give them a call.

    Patton’s instructions to the Chaplain at the Bulge come to mind: Hermann, if you got any good prayers, maybe you want to pull them out now.

  12. Please forgive the typos and grammatical errors in the above.

    The facts are as I recall them, and should be carefully checked against the actual events. There’s more, but I think I included most of the key ones.

    Did I mention my stroke earlier?

  13. Ed, just about all here on this blog will be very grateful to you for this bio. . Just one Q: Did you disclose your own ethnic affiliation anywhere and what is it. Recently, you asked another CosmicTusk or email correspondent, forgot whom, to reveal such bio data (2nd time, you indicated). — Myself, I am German most of my ancestors having converted from Judaism centuries ago. My parents never made antisemitic remarks, the whole Hamburg clan was entirely good-natured in all deals, as behooves a city proud of its international trade center status.

  14. No, Hermann, I never did reveal my ethnic affiliations here, or in seceral other exchanges, as they don’t bear on the topic at hand.

    Perhaps I should have quoted Dennis Cox’s remarks directly, but anyone who wants to can go back and read them, unless George has removed them already.

    CL claimed to be Native American and demanded that I stop passing on Native American historical traditions, hence my questions to CL about his claims.

    Hermann, Patton told his Chaplain that if his prayer didn’t work he’d replace him.

  15. Its pretty clear why Dalton timed the release of this story, but unfortunately when elephants fight, mice get crushed. I will be going out to powwow and events over the next two weeks, and will have to speak to this.

    I suppose the thing to do will be to point out that the nanodiamonds were confirmed by 10 different major labs, and just label the story as a smear campaign to cover that up.

    Hopefully, no one will stumble across the pictures of me with the crack pipe and Fifi.

  16. CL is a guy?! Holy sheit, Kemo Sabe! I woould have sworn with all the gushing and meandering mentality, he was a chick of the New Age persuasion (no offense to chicks or New Age people intended)…ROFL

    * * *
    If anyone is interested in the slightest, I am of very mixed blood.

    Known heritage: English, Irish, Mexican Indian, French, Cherokee. The Cherokee is 1/8th, on my mother’s side. The rest is not clearly known by me.

    Suspected heritage: Jewish, Huastecan, a Habsburg connection.

    English side – was told “we” came over before the Mayflower.

    French side – father’s family came over to Mexico with the French contingent along with the Emperor Maximilian in the 1860s. When Max bit the big one in front of a firing squad in Querétaro, the family conveniently Mexicanized the family name from Garces to Garcia.

    French side – Mother’s side – assertions in the family of being the first line of French kings, and also related to Mary Queen of Scots (which it seems half of the Northern hemisphere can claim).

    Huastecan suspicion is solely based on the Mexican region where distant relatives live.

    Cherokee – maternal great grandmother was Cherokee, who married into N Texas aristocratic family in the 1890s.

    So, lots of admixture. Grew up poor, never had reason to be anti-anything, except perhaps anti-hillbilly and anti-trailer park folks.

    Oh, I AM anti-stupid and anti-narrow-minded. And anti-Republicans (the IGMFEE*** party).

    *** I Got Mine; F___ Everybody Else

  17. Patton and the Battle of the Bulge:

    Outside Italy, that was the only time the Americans came close to running into the full force of the German war machine, and that one lasted only about a week, because they literally ran out of gas. And bullets.

    I think if the Americans had had to fight a battle like Stalingrad – against either the Germans or the Soviets, we’d have been slaughtered. We lost 300,000 total in both theaters of the war. The Germans lost 750,000 dead, the Soviets 500,000. All told on the Eastern Front, the Germans lost 5-8 million soldiers (I’ve seen different estimates), while the Soviets lost 10-12 million soldiers. I counted: the Soviets had over 1,100 military divisions fighting the Germans; the US had 17. By the time the US and UK had entered the war (only 11 months before the war ended), the Soviets had been fighting the Germans for 36 months, and the end of the war was inevitable by June 1944: The Soviets would crush Germany, with or without the Western Allies. They’d already pushed them out of 60% of the occupied territories by Aug 1944. If we had not joined in, the war would have been over in the summer of 1945, and the Soviets would have overrun Europe – so it is fortuitous for Europe that we finally deigned to join the fray.

    The war in Europe lasted from SEP 1939 to MAY 1945, a total of 68 months if I count right. The US sat out 57 of those months, not counting the efforts in N Africa and Italy – both peripheral actions, N Africa in the extreme (it amounted to several hundred soldiers on each side). Casino and the Battle of the Bulge are the only direct and heavy fighting between the US and Germany. Compared to Stalingrad, those were pimples on Hitler’s bum. The War in the East was so big, and Americans simply don’t even know about it.

    …and even THAT little bit had Patton – our most ferocious leader – asking for divine intervention.

  18. BTW, Ed –

    MUCH thanks for the history lesson. Though I’ve talked with you plenty, having it down in black and white is a very instructive outline. And much appreciated.

    I get the impression you don’t much like Morrison…lol

  19. HI George

    When the simulations are made ​​from meteoritic impact for multiple events distributed in time and space with different scales, I believe that data obtained in a single nucleus of comet on “an impossible scenario” investigated by Mark Boslough, a physicist at Sandia Laboratory, the data would can answer most questions.

    How did the global extinction at the end of the Ice Age? Why are there so many elliptical structures (palaeolagoons) around the world with the presence of megafauna fossils or rock clasts (possible impactites)?

    regards
    pierson

  20. Steve, that entire war was a much closer run thing than you know. You do need to read about Hitler and the Thule Society to understand its origins.

    Pierson, you have models, and then you have data.

    The fundamental error in Dalton’s article is that in fact the nanodiamonds have been confirmed by some 10 major international laboratories.

    Given the difficulty in locating, sampling, and processing YD boundary samples, West’s background may explain some of the difficulties that have been hit in validation. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who simply want to deny the facts, and will go to any length to do so.

    The fear of death by impact leads many to denial. Many other people have their professional careers tied up in other theories to explain the data.

    Dalton likely falls into this second class, with CO2 being involved in glacial cycles. All I would point out is that in the YD case, the glacial lake outflow was triggered by impact, not seismic activity nor simply lake growth to the point of overwhelming ice dams.

    There is a Atlantic data bias to current models, as reflected in Dalton’s temperature comments. From what I know of the current data, the Pacific and Arctic data are going to be critical in modeling the YD climate change.

  21. While we here are being battered by this news, I think we’re losing sight of the long term.

    Perhaps some comparisons with the istory of research on the KT event will be useful here.

    When the Alavarez’s first announced their hypothesis around 1980, there was extreme public and scientific resistance for a decade, until the Chicxulub astrobleme was found.

    (What occurred in “smaller” circles from the mid 1950’s on is entirely another story.)

    In that case, it was an impact in the far past involving dinosaurs, and not one in the relatively recent past involving people.

    At that point, it was assumed that Chicxulub was the only impact, and that it was an asteroid. No one suspected the impacts of multiple fragments of a long period comet.

    Then the other major extinctions were noted.

    Mueller came up with his “Nemesis” hypothesis to explain the KT and other extinctions, a hypothesis which Gene Shoemaker’s co-worker David Morrison quickly adopted.

    Clube and Napier came up with the hypotheses of cometary impact, with gravitational perturbation as their injection mechanism to explain all of the extinction data.

    I met a professor at Champaign who worked with Shoemaker some years later to try and explain the global distribution of the KT impactites. They developed an “unusual” ballistic model to do so. Neither of them suspected the Shiva impact and astrobleme.

    As a matter of pubic record, some 41 of the world’s major scientists signed a letter stating that the KT impact had killed the dinosaurs shortly before the Shiva astrobleme gained public notice.

    In the popular press and imagination, it is still “the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs” which left the Chicxulub crater. General knowledge of Shiva is nil.

    On the other hand, the long term is just composed of a series of short terms. What Dalton’s effort is going to hit is the resources for impact research, which were little to nil before the latest.

    This is all particularly difficult for me, as my own hypotheses are even more outrageous than Firstone and Kennett’s: several peoples remembered the events of 13,000 years ago, and remembered where they were. And thus their accounts may be used to try to delimit the areas of search for geological impact data, and the peoples themselves may be locked onto the archaeological record from that point.

    Oh yes, by the way, since this impact killed people, the archaeological data may also be used to try to delimit the area of searches for impact.

    Less controversially, another hypothesis is that the distribution of impactites may be used to delimit the area of search for astroblemes.

    Finally, while it would have been far better for Firestone and Kennett to have had a geological field worker with better qualifications to do the sampling, West was available.

    Also in the short term, the orbit of asteroid Apophis is being refined, and Comet 73P is making a loop through the inner solar system.

  22. MY first thought was “Oh crap, here we go again with tainted science.”. But, on consideration, this is probably the best for scientific advancement. The ‘Big guns’ have so much ego and prestige invested that they are unlikely to gain a new perspective. But, fatal flaws in research projects force eveyone to go back over details and assumptions. And I believe that the spectacular crashes open the field for competing ideas.

    As I’ve mentioned before; ego’s and funding requirements can degrade the quality of science, whether it be YD impacts or climate Global Warming data.

    I think this may be a wake-up call for a lot of budding impactologists. I don’t poo poo education, but I think it must be viewed in perspective. Much more could be said on that, but I can already anticipate the stoning..:)

  23. Paul –

    To support you re education:

    When my son got his MA in Economics, he then went into Urban Planning for his MS. The Department Head actually told him they preferred people who did NOT take Urban Planning as undergrads, because there would be too much to unlearn. (That school is U. of IL at Chicago, which has the biggest UP program in the country – but until three years ago did not even offer it at the undergrad level.)

    Additionally, my son had originally wanted to be an architect, but to work as one it really takes at least a Masters, and he was advised as a sophomore to NOT take Architecture as an undergrad, because then they would have to undo the damage in the Masters program.

    So, twice my son was specifically told that the higher educational system puts stuff into people’s minds that is worthless and counterproductive. There is a perspective that can be pumped in, that then needs to be pumped out, in order to help one have a better mindset. Now, which one is really correct – the “before” or “after” – I don’t know.

    I DO think people need the basic physics, chemistry and math understandings, and need to be taught technical disciplines and procedures, like how to conduct a field study. It is in the interpretation (80%+ of archeological papers) where the “-ology” (the “study of”) can go awry; the data is what the data is (providing they haven’t fudged it as they have done in Global Warming). It is in extrapolating meaning that egos can take over.

  24. Hi Paul –

    I don’t know if using a non-degreed field worker to gather samples amounts to a “fatal flaw”.

    Given the difficulties in sampling and sample preparation, of course it would have been better for a fully papered worker to have done it. You have to remember the amounts of funding available. Given those restraints, one uses any resource one can scrounge. It is also certain that there is no money for vetting.

    There is no academic institution which gives degrees in impact studies, and at this point even the relatively hard science of geological understanding is undergoing development.

    I certainly have no degree myself in anthropology, physics, linguistics, nor astronomy, and my own personal abilitites have declined greatly since my stroke. But the facts I assembled before that stroke stand quite separate from my own credentials and my abilities now. In my work I always left a good as references as I could so that others could follow, and I am accutely aware of the places where events made that impossible.

    While I have no opinion on AGW, I do know that that debate has degenerated, as no one is looking closely at solar variability and ozone valving. I also am of the opinion that the AGW folks have every right to be bitter after having their mail hacked and selectively released with propaganda.

    Your note to aspiring impactologists should be noted by quite a few people whose names come immediately to mind.

    Quite frankly, its amazing how many people will authoritatively point to the survival of Wrangle Island mammoth, not realizing that they were the size of a large dog.

  25. LOL Steve; My experience somewhat parallels your son’s.
    Many (many!) years ago, I was double majoring in Geography and Economics (In Canada). I was hot to save the world from haphazard and indiscriminate urban sprawl. So I too was headed for land use and urban planning. (Yesterday I used my enlightening moment to give my own son a hint.)

    I was lucky enough to encounter two planners from the city I lived in and pumped them for information. Lucky for me, they were young enough not to be burried in the beuracratic morass. Both were quite pesimistic of my intent to make a difference and explained the realities of City Hall to me…..Soon there after, I saw a job posting for a tiny Northern community: with only 5000 population, they were demanding a masters degree??

    The definition of education has been perverted from the ‘pick and shovel’ tools of research, to some artificially exaulted status symbol. Universities have promoted this view, probably as a means of increasing tuitions and grants.

  26. My main complaint about researchers making decptive claims is that when the deceptions are exposed, they cause wholesale destruction. The story of “The boy who cried wolf” comes to mind.

    Humanity is fragile because of our density and our interdependance, and we face many threats. Tensions everywhere are elevated by governments tightening restrictions with ‘terror threats’. The result of discredited environmental or astrophisical reseaches is that any new theory or discovery is automatically rejected. And any possible positive actions are also rejected.

    The threat level from combined sources is now so high that people are giving up. “Party on”! At the same time, trust and integrity appear to be reaching new lows. Leading to the same response. For most people a new discovery is worth nothing more that a few minutes distraction or entertainment. Sadly for real science, those few minutes can be very lucrative.

  27. Hi Paul –

    There are sins of commission and those of omission.

    Did West actually make aqny false claims about his cretentials? Ever?

    Should he have let his colleagues know of his qualifications and past diffficulties? Yes.

    Given that locating the YD boundary, sampling it, and processing those samples is non-trivial, most definitely “yes”.

    Does West’s lack of credentials copromise to some degree the data recovered? Yes.

    Does it compromise all of that data fatally? NO.

    Much of it was collected without West’s involvement in any manner.

    One of my main problems is researchers making demonstrably false claims.

    Another problem is the psaychological phenomena of denial.

    I just wish your statement about how lucrative impact research is was true. It’s not.

    Impact research certainly has not been lucrative professionally.

    Perhaps I was myself simply not skilled enough to write real disaster porn that would give readers an easy thrill.

    “A light hearted book about the deaths of millions of people.”

    On the other hand, maybe that book was not what was needed to be written, at least by me.

    Impact seems to do better on TV – with the inexpensive CGI, multipled shows have been done.
    The problem is that the researchers make no money on those tv shows – they are used as free talking heads to fill between the shots.

    Impact studies are real science.

    Recent impacts are not imaginary phenomenon, nor artifacts of data collection.

  28. This is me now without the input spell correction program.

    This batttle has been brutal, George.

  29. HEY MR ED?
    now what was that ?
    I read you saying that the ‘neanderthals’ came here by haplogroup C and A.
    now that there is just a piece of work.
    SO Like since when ED has ‘neanderthals'( THAT IS YOUR RELIGIONS CONSTRUCTS. NOT MINE) ever been associated with those haplogroups OR EVEN HH, in anyway shape or form? when have those tools IN NORTH AMERICA ever been associated to those haplogroups?
    HH IS my line , MY direct matrilineal is line is OLLIE/ she was ALLEGEWI, she is my ancestor at least 4 or 5 times that I know of … IN BRAZIL IT IS the line ELISANI some kind of like clan name.
    YOU MISSED IT big time Mr ED , YOUR 180 degrees out from the truth , AND NOT EVEN CLOSE AND NOT EVEN HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
    YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO STUDY THE BIBLE SAY ” LET THE BIBLE INTERPRET ITSELF”
    WELL ED ,
    it would be best that you let native and every kind of eye witnessed history interpet itself too , as obviuosly
    ‘logic’ is no man’s strong suit or else they wouldn’t be where they are today..
    you must really let eye witnesses interprets themselves, it does that so very nicely.
    truth , it really doesn’t need any help from those who would like to and have hijack it, used it , raped it and bi*chslap everyones ancestors who were eye witnessed to these things .

    FYI just because no one can talk about the truth,
    doesn’t mean they will ever really be buying what you and your priests of “logic” and “magic” machines are selling.
    something huge happened just 2800 and 3200 years ago! until everyone and anyone explains that to my satisfaction, they will have not have earned one tiny right to tell me or any of mine what happened one day before those dates are explained.

  30. @Ed Grondine: Above on May 18, you write these (to me somewhat enigmatic) words:

    All I would point out is that in the YD case, the glacial lake outflow was triggered by impact, not seismic activity nor simply lake growth to the point of overwhelming ice dams.

    Do we know of impact triggered outflow events from the glacial Great Lakes?

    There was a Kankakee Torrent, dated vaguely as pre-YD. It has left spectacular formations SW from Chicago.

  31. Hi Hermann –

    Yes, wehave 2 accounts that line up with the geological evidence. Both of those accounts used to be here, but Dennis graffitied the Assiniboine account. The Mohawk account is still here.

  32. CL –

    Delusional frameworks are impenetrable.

    I do tend to get angry when people put words in my mouth. Your summary of my post on the distribution of the b0006 haplotype at the archaeologica forum is inaccurate.

    Once again, “Allegewi” is a name made up by a colonist. There were none.

  33. From the French allegue… pretendu, le suspect.

    “Delusional frameworks are impenetrable.”

    Oui. But CL, now I’m thinking you’re a Joseph Smith fan.

  34. “Unless HN maritime technology is found, which may be submergered right now, then my working assumption currently is that b0006 survived from HH among HSS C and A mt DNA haplogroups. Of course, correlation studies would be nice.”

    You were saying those genes got here in haplogroup C and A!

    I thought maybe your lies, and stretches in reality and just plain ol ignorance were because you were forgetting stuff because of your stroke, I was really trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. how does that go?
    lies , lies and more lies and then damn lies then statistics/sciences. now I know you are just another run of the mill liar.
    there is no such thing as HH or HN, that is more of you’all scientific communities “proved” in their own circular reasoned and special kind of “Logic ” and other magic machines of faith….. but it truely reveals is just their profound ignorance and racism .

    those are just female clan line types dummy rotf !!!!
    and Ollie was Alle gewi/ Alleg and Ellishah
    Mengewi were Menes or his twins people lost here during the event/s?.
    like it or not buddy!
    you can all go back to your fantasy YD land now.

  35. Ed, thanks!

    The Mohawk flood is well-timed to YD, 13,350 BP, predecessor of Lake Ontario draining. The Kankakee Torrent must have been simultaneous, draining Lake Michigan. Will look for First Peoples accounts.

  36. Vandalism and pointless destruction are the worst of society’s crimes. They are evidence of some latent psycotic gene hidden in our structure. In every field of endevour we find traces of this irrational and violent behavior. Sometimes, it expesses as anti social behavior, sometimes as random violence. The common trait is that there is never a constructive intent.

    Some displays on this forum are a perfect example. There is nothing to be gained by randomly attacking posters (whether one agrees or not). Most of us are here seeking information, a few have work that they post to get support or rebutal. Some seek any venue to post, wild, annonymous and ranting attacks on everything, without ever posting support??

    It almost appears as if one of our members has a multiple personality disorder?? Perhaps George could check the ip’s for that. lol

  37. “The common trait is that there is never a constructive intent”
    sir THE TRUTH IS ALWAYS CONSTRUCTIVE!
    what I love though is way you seem to have forgot 200 or 300 or 400 years of beating the hell out of our stories and every eye witnessed kind of history and killing off just about everything else that can stand in the way of your very special limited
    knowledge” and inferior very circular
    “logic”.
    so one person stands up and says to the man who is speaking for native americans to
    ” please just stop it” because he is clueless…. I asked nice at first .. he fluffed and screamed about his veiws being discriminated against because he is quoting native americans and claiming some kind of holy ground because he asked them a few questions.. he fluffs some more and calls me a liar and I told him three times who my ancestor was and he calls my ancestors liars, in the same post he is lieing to me in. I’m not calling his ancestors liars I am calling him a liar. when he clearing is trying to link haplogroup A and C with HH and HN.. calling me all kinds of names and every sort of inferences .

    nothing random to it.. I was talking to him
    then you start talking about
    ” destructive and violence. in society ” dude look in the mirror!

    no random to it! I wanted one man to stop his cra and his lies and pushing his man made up bag of tricks and magic on everyone who don’t have even the slightest clue because for 200+++++ years your non destructive “society” has beat the hell out of everyone. and now you all want the rest of it .
    NO . there is
    no violence to it. I never hit or will hit anyone ever.
    at first I was asking nice as I could in the start.
    So maybe you fellas are such drama queens maybe? or you dish it, but cant take what you dish out?
    sorry but you old farts started calling me names remember?
    such ahhhh “violence ” yes there was violence in this society and for 300 or four hundred years that you seem to have forgot!

  38. Chicken Little; Thank You for the explanation. The “Beating the crap out of”..all things, Native American has being going on for 500+ now. It has been part of the process of conquest and subjugation. I do not condone this form of violence or any other. It happened, it is the reason we are communicating on a computer today.

    I don’t know if Mr Grondine suggested that he could speak for early North Americans. I am fairly confident that with reliance on oral transmision of history, nobody really can. Including yourself. If you are a ‘Native American’, if shamanist or aristocratic lineage and have spent your entire life steeped in the traditions, then you would have a much better claim to do so. However, for credibility you would need to post your family tree as far as you can do so.

    If what you say is true, I can completely understand that might be outraged if you felt your ancestors were being misrepresented or maligned in some way. I don’t understand how that could happen in this context.

    Mr. Grondine appears quite ‘Professorial’ at times, but he always seems polite. I know that you have probably detailed your complaints in the forum. I have not seen anything except angry posts. If you could write your case in a word doc and post it here, I would appreciate it and I’m sure others would too. If you don’t want to post it here, you could email it to me at >> [email protected] <<. That is my real email so please don't spam me into having to change it. lol

    I have no claim to your personal information, and I don't have any special qualifications requiring the information. I would just like to understand your side of the story. Every culture in the world has 'Catastrophy Myths', most including cosmic arrivals. I think all of us agree that there have been impacts. What we don't know is how many and what effects they have had on people.

  39. Hi Paul –

    I’ll get to our nuager CL in a minute, but lets start with Mr. Cox:

    Jusgophukyerselph Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:29 PM
    From: “Dennis Cox”
    To: “Ed Grondine” ,
    “George Howard” Ed said

    “Dennis graffitied the Assiniboine account.”

    I don’t know if I’d call it graffiti. It was just the sweet unvarnished truth. Especially the things I said about you.

    I think you have delusions of grandeur Ed. I don’t know what you think you are. But the dean of impact science you ain’t.

    I know for a fact that many prominent planetary scientists think you’re full of shit. Whenever someone doesn’t go along with your thinking you use personal ad hominem attacks instead of providing references, and speaking to the science. And you persist in the public lie that David Morison is a supporter of the nemisis hypothesis, no matter how many times he has corrected you.

    But of course you need to devalue his opinions, since he also thinks you’re delusional, and unreliable.

    He, and some of the planetary scientists at NAU, and NMU tell me that I should just ignor your sorry delusional ass. But you make it hard when you keep bringing me up in public. Maybe I should just publish those emails in a blog of it’s own so I can plop down a public link to them every time you spew some more of your crap. Folks might be interested in reading what the scientists you keep bad-mouthing have to say about you.

    Since I can prove you’re a common, ordinary, liar, I stand by every word in that Assiniboine thread. You are a liar, and a fraud, right up there with Velikovsky.

    Just go fuck yer self Ed.
    Dennis

  40. Hello Dennis –

    NASA has been understating the comet impact hazard for years.
    Morrison has still not formally renounced Muller’s Nemesis hypothesis,
    and has earlier presented himself as a neutral peer in debates on comet impact and injection mechanisms,when he has not been.

    If the public safety were not involved in estimates of the comet impact hazard, this would all be academic.

    A bolg detecated all to me? I’m flattered.
    Why don’t you publish those emails, Dennis?
    We could all use a good laugh.

  41. Hi CL –

    I am sorry that the histories have been so destroyed that you have been taken in by
    a fronitersman’s creation, the “Allegewi”.

    I have not called you a liar, simply confused.

    If I recall correctly, Barbara Mann discussed the “Allegewi” fabrication and its abuse extensively.

    The fictional creation of “Allegewi” is now being used by Nuagers, and they act like you.

    So far, no tradition keeper has made any demands similar to yours, period, and further,
    your way is not the way these matters are discussed, at least among those I know.

    I did and do as best I could and can.

    Given your behavior here, I simply ask you for what original mention of “Allegewi” you have, your nation and your teachers.

    If you care to take this up at NAFPS, “New Age Frauds and Plastic Shamans” weith me, please feel free to do so.

    But not here.

  42. Hi Hermann –

    Now that the usual is over with, on with the discussion

    “The Mohawk flood is well-timed to YD, 13,350 BP, predecessor of Lake Ontario draining. The Kankakee Torrent must have been simultaneous, draining Lake Michigan. Will look for First Peoples accounts.”

    13,350 – 2000 = 11,350 BCE, unless you are using the 1950 correction.
    What is your source for that date?

    The Mohawk people’s account of the drainage of Lake Agassiz is given here.
    Whether that was down the Mohawk River valley, and when are still being analyzed.

  43. Hi Ed –
    for a moment there I was worried whether you would get to answer me, what with all the flak, AAA, SAC missiles, etc.

    Sorry to be vague on the BP, my aging brain is weak on exact dates, when exactly do we believe the YDB event occurred? The 13,350 BP date is from Wikipedia, as most of my info is nowadays.

    “The Mohawk people’s account of the drainage of Lake Agassiz is given here.” Can you give a link or http address? I looked through the Tusk and could not find it.

  44. Ed; As always your civility does you credit. The same cannot be said of others??

    To paraphrase Yogi Berra, ‘prediction is difficult, specially about the future’. lol
    Much the same can be said reguarding devination of long past events when the evidence chain is muddied and broken. The best we can hope to do is sort the clues looking for a pattern which conforms to reality as we know it.

    There is nothing wrong with telling someone, ‘you are an idiot’ in a heated debate if you have facts to back you up, and you expose your ‘facts’ for public scrutiny. When faced with unsupported sniping from the peanut gallery, it might be smarted to just ignore them.

    I hope to be proven wrong, but I don’t expect a response from Ckicken Little.

  45. There seems to be a lot of confusion about catastrophic discharge events from glacial lakes: L. Agassiz (modern Lakes Winnipeg, Manitoba), L. Iroquois (L. Ontario), L. Chicago (L. Michigan), etc. Exact times are not known apparently, but are estimated at or before the YDR boundary. The Older Dryas may be possible as well.

    Also among times given is the Intra-Allerod cold period of 150 year duration, stated as “shortly before the YDR.” This seems very strange! How long is “shortly before??”

    Papers and books found by web search (Google) often relate the flood events to Thermo-Haline Circulation disruption, a hypothetical cause of the deglaciation. From all that I have seen, this theory, which is a main competitor for cometary impact causation, appears to be complete bogus, having been disproved by recent results on the Gulf Stream which keeps the N Atlantic warm (details archived on the old CCNet).

    It would not seem surprising if several of these events were simultaneous at the exact YDR boundary.

  46. Hi George:
    You manage an interesting blog, but I venture two clemency suggestions. First, this particular thread has perhaps aired Mr. West’s indiscretions long enough and it is getting long?? Second, in the top left corner of your web page is a box where you update a situation which will obviously not be addressed??

    I spent the day well entertained @ …craterhunter… Mr. Cox has done a nice job on the site. As usual I have ideas on his theories, but he does not really seem to invite input from the peanut gallery. Not that I can fault him for it, given how CT and other blogs quickly devolve into sniping and bickering.

  47. Hi Paul,
    how sad, that last line above of yours. To remedy that deplorable situ, would you be willing and/or able to add to my inquiry into glacial lakes flooding dangerously, specifically for the three events mentioned in my penultimate post? Much is known about each, and the web offers info plentifully & readily.

    E.g., for each of the three glacial lakes there are famous discharge chasm, cut by the torrents or overflows:

    1. Lake Agassiz overtopped Big Stone Moraine and cut Traverse Gap, MN, and
    on through the Minnesota River excavating an enormous gorge. Ironically, L. Agassiz is supposed to also have discharged toward the North Atlantic, which seems contradictory.

    2, Lake Chicago discharged in the Kankakee Torrent toward the Illinois River and carved spectacular cliffs at Kankakee, also rearranging the course of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers.

    3. Lake Iroquois drained for most of the last iceage through the Mohawk valley,
    a West-East cut from Lake Ontario to Albany NY, there joining the Hudson River.
    But there was also a great,catastrophic flood draining a large volume of water from Lake Iroquois in a short time, excavating roccks near Albany and elsewhere,
    which happened “shortly before” the YDR events!!

    The exact times seem to be much less well known than the gorges and waterfalls left by these catastrophic floods.

  48. The GRAND HYPOTHESIS (GH) is that ALL THREE LAKES HAD A MAJOR DISCHARGE AT YDR BOUNDARY TIME, ~12,900 cal BP.

    Please note that GH would seem to follow almost automatically from the YDR results proposed by our host George Howard’s teamk, i.e., a major ET (cometary) attack on the N American Ice Sheet. The impact explosion alone should have created enough air pressure as to blast the waters South. Additional surface melt would have added the floods.

    AND: The marvelous thing is that the time usually about 13,000 BP is frequently cited for all three lakes!!

    The Lake Agassiz discharge about 13 K BP is a RECENT scientific result, generally accepted, and went down the MacKenzie River into the Arctic Ocean. Maybe smaller amounts caused floods through Traverse Gap and also toward the N Atlanic Ocean.

    Analogous results seem to be available for the Mohawk and Kankakee torrents. But these require better references than I could find.

    REVERSE LOGIC: If the GH is true that would strengthen the George Howard team’s ET cometary impact hypothesis.. In other words, the best of all possible worlds..

  49. Hee hee Herm; Maybe you should advertise in the classifieds. Position available: Resident glaciologist. Cosmic Tusk. No previous experience necessary.

    I’m an intellectual diletant. I’ve never had any motivation for the hard work of solid research. Sorry, I don’t need a ‘job’.

    As you seem to suggest; an allignment of these three discharges with YDB would be very interesting if true. Pretty hard to prove, since all four were cataclysmic events.
    The problem with this type of study is that we are always looking through the wrong end of the telescope. Even events as recent as 13,000 years are very dim. And current computer simulations are no better than an ‘Artists reconstruction’. At present we cannot even reconstruct recent human history.

    We build ‘Castles in the sky’ of fancy theories, with the most fragile of evidence. Perhaps some day I’ll work up the nerve to post some of mine.

  50. Paul”:

    The problem with this type of study is that we are always looking through the wrong end of the telescope. Even events as recent as 13,000 years are very dim. And current computer simulations are no better than an ‘Artists reconstruction’. At present we cannot even reconstruct recent human history.

    We build ‘Castles in the sky’ of fancy theories, with the most fragile of evidence.

    And this is how it should be – as long as we don’t take them too literally or take ourselves too seriously, or identify our egos with them too much. We SHOULD be trying to have a construct in our minds as to what happened. But we should also be aware that we are probably wrong, in much of the detail and in much of the connections. We need to understand that we are working with incomplete info. I don’t even say “data,” because the data is only a little bit more reliable than the framework we try to plug it into. Data has to have some framework within which to make sense of it. Data tells nothing, without a framework. Data is limited by the sensors we use, and those are set up within our mental framework – even intended to give what we want the data to give us. Some would argue that thermometers, e.g., are completely objective. But look at global warming, where they argue that 0.8C over a century is significant, yet 99% of the people can’t tell the difference between 25°C and 25.8°C, so a mountain is made of a molehill, just on the tree-hugging and industry-hating propensities of a handful of insiders.

    Arkies extrapolate enormous of “facts” about ancient cultures, based on artifacts from graves and stone structures – which is like someone in the future telling all about our culture from skyscrapers and cemeteries. And that is such a ludicrous proposal – yet we accept the arkies’ POVs, time and time again, as valid and true.

    Geologists, ditto. So many assumptions, much of it based on uniformitarianism thinking and avoidance of Noah’s Flood.

    Astronomers, ditto. So many assumptions, much of it based on the Doppler effect. Yet, read astronomer Halton Arp sometime. Without the Doppler interpretation, there is no such things as black holes, nor a Big Bang.

    They are all doing their best, within what they believe the overall truth of the matter is. I do not doubt that. But they are also like the person who sees things that aren’t there – we should say to them, “Now, now, we know that is what you think you saw, and we believe that you yourself believe it” – as we all slide to the far end of the bench… Yet we don’t do that for scientists in these extrapolative disciplines. To have guesses as to the overall picture, that is natural. But to believe that only several decades or a few centuries into these we will really have the truth of the big picture, well that is pretty deluded.

    I myself don’t have the truth of the matter, either. I have my own guesses, as does everyone who visits CT. But they are only guesses. If I were to come back in 200 years and see what I suggested, I would laugh at myself. I suggest that the arkies, geologists and astronomers would do the same.

    In the meantime, I take every one of their theories with a grain of salt, while trying to glean some bits out of what they have studied that can fit together with other bits. A collection of gleaned bits does not make a theory – for them or for me. Not IMHO. In time, enough bits will be collected to do so. But that time is not now.

    So, Paul, yes, I agree – it is as though we are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. But unlike the bulk of the Creationist side (as an example), it is still incumbent upon us to go out and try to identify those bits and try to make sense of it – out of the facts we collect – and to not accept as gospel all that is said in translated (and mistranslated) holy volumes. The Bible (especially the florid King James) is only one of many accounts from indigenous tribes around the world. That it was compiled along trade routes made it seem more important, while those trade routes were important. We have no imperative to accept one indigenous account over any others, and to do so blinds us, culturally, historically, and scientifically. Both science and religion are attempts to understand the universe around us. Both are piecemeal and incomplete. Both have something to add to the discussion, but neither has it all. Heck, together they don’t have it all. One deals in quantified bits, and one deals in qualities of bits of recorded tales (some put down in writing long after the fact). Both are like the blind men and the elephant, as Dennis has talked about.

    Our cultural history (in which I include science) is rife with people positing interpretations without adequate information. I suppose it will always be so. Fortunately, others come along and are skeptical of an existing interpretation and try to improve on it. Over time – a long time – we will get better and better understanding of our past and our universe.

    But that time is not now.

  51. Steve; next time you want to posta book, I can recomend a good publisher..:)

    I have to appologise for my casual attitude here. I use The Tusk as an escape from the “Real World”. I offer the coolest video I’ve ever seen as compensation.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ5N_0XIRtc

    If anyone wonders; this is my ‘real world’, the one we have to deal with every day.
    http://prism-magazine.com/2011/05/no-fly-list-live-video-discussion-on-prism-tvs-rights-and-security/

  52. Really bad summary, Steve.

    One of the key problems with our current geology, biology, history, anthropology, climate, planetology, archaeology, etc. is that they did not take and do not take into account impact. The “debate” over comet impact and asteroid impact in particular leaves a large number of peoples’ lives at risk.

    Thus this is not an academic debate done for entertainment.
    And the level of proof is not “well, it could be.”

    Paul, while what you say is definitely true for many people, you are overgeneralizing.

    I am still waiting for a public denial by Morrison of Muller’s “Nemesis Hypothesis”,
    and serious adjustment upward of NASA’s impact hazard estimates.

  53. "I do my best to ignore Grondine. He is not reliable. For more than a decade he has consistently written that I favor the Nemesis hypotheses, and he sticks to this unfounded belief no matter how many times I correct him. He used to show up at scientific meetings to ask weird questions, but he doesn’t seem to travel any more. As you note, however, his rejections by scientists have no effect on his vast self-confidence. I have no idea who he refers to as “some people from Arizona”. He has had run-Ins with my colleagues from California, Colorado, and New Mexico more than Arizona. But it doesn’t matter, as we all now ignore him."

    ~David Morrison

    He didn’t author the Nemesis Hypothesis. And he says your claims are unfounded. Since when did the senior scientist at the NASA Astrobiology Institute, NASA Ames Research Center, become responsible to provide an answer to your lies? 

    Since you think the nemesis hypothesis is such a heinous thing to be supportive of, the burden of proof is on you to provide proof of such scandalous heresy.

  54. Steve; next time you want to posta book, I can recomend a good publisher..lol:)

    I have to appologise for my casual attitude here. I use The Tusk as an escape from the “Real World”. I offer the coolest video I’ve ever seen as compensation.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ5N_0XIRtc
    It may have some relevance to the ‘Nemisis’??

    If anyone wonders; this is my ‘real world’, the one we have to deal with every day. I’ve always been facinated with astronomy and orbiting bodies, I just recognise that they are beyond my influence.
    http://prism-magazine.com/2011/05/no-fly-list-live-video-discussion-on-prism-tvs-rights-and-security/

  55. My GH [above] in comments here is only supported feebly by one out of four (4) distinguished commenters (Paul), the other three knowledgable gentlemen ignoring it (in favor of their engaging in ad hominem diatribes against their fellow ET impact students).

    I think GH is a pretty neat not to say sensational hypothesis, and by no means deserving to be ignored or even ridiculed (never mind my status as an amateur glaciologist – I am still an experienced scientist).

    One of the strongest arguments in favor of GH is that none of the online sources which I have consulted give the slightest hint for why each of the three glacial lakes should have had a torrential, catastrophic discharge causing huge channel excavations. There are also numerous other channels left as scabs all over the Northern Midwestern States, including SW of Saginaw Bay and the famous, spectacular Finger Lakes in upstate NY.

    Are you guys are not a fine bunch of ET cosmic cometary and asteroidal terrestrial impact enthusiastic students who don’t need a job, and think this is a spectator sport??

  56. No gold panning, pure desk job life experience. As a penniless student, I went to work in a vinegar factory. They also made pickles and sauerkraut.

    Tried to make sense of your, remarks, but not sure how the PRISM MAG link relates.

    Paul J. Rebstock Sr., 81, had an uncle was a Karl May illustrator. He has a magnificent picture of Kara Ben Nemsi. This is Karl May’s Arabized self in his novel “The Slave Caravane,” “autobiographical” (fake, KM never traveled outside his home state of Saxony).

    If you suffer from arrested rotation then probably you are having some health problems, sorry to hear.

  57. Thanks HB; A little help tracking down venerable ancestors is always helpful. This is definitly related. As to making up stuff, what can you expect from someone whose name means ‘grapevine’.lol The family tree itself was quite creatively (extensivly) altered to allow certain predecessors to manufacture uniforms for the German Army and not get paid with sarin gas.

    As to the gold panning: I love being obscure..:) My point was, if a large incoming body 10+ G tonnes struck the earth counter rotation (think Chicx…) the impact would certainly pause the Eastward rotation of the planet. Now if you can find evidence of simultaneous tsunami/floods on the Western Coasts of the four main continents???? ..we would have enough to announce a theory..:)

  58. Karl May was the only one about whom I wrote, above, that he made stuff up. He was a prolific author of novels . . most of my ancestors were Ashkenazi or Sephardic but we changed our name to a common ancient German one going back to one of Charlemagne’s courtiers. This way, we avoided the sarin. There was a law that four generations of baptismal records among your ancestors made you legally Aryan.

  59. Hi Dennis –

    Morrison is only responsible for his own statements.

    Morrison presented the “Nemesis” injection mechanism as “the standard paradigm”, while it is not.

    Morrison making that assertion is well documented.

    The “Nemsis” paradigm was also used in the NASA impact hazard estimates which Morrison co-authored, and there is a big difference between ELE’s at the rate of 1 per 100 million years versus ELE’s at the rate of 1 per 26 million years, which is in fact what the data shows.

    Thus it is necessary for Morrison to make a public statement on Muller’s injection mechanism and Clube and Napier’s, and to publicly point out the earlier seriously low underestimates in the NASA impact hazard estimates.

    All that Morrison has to do is to make a public denial that the “Nemesis” hypothesis is not “the standard paradigm”, which should not be too hard for him to do as the WISE data has shown that “Nemesis” does not exist.

    The possible existence of “Tyche” is another question, and an open one. My guess is that chaotic cyclicality is the accumuation of planetary gravitational perturbations instead, but it certainly does not hurt to look.

    Theoretically, since Huntress awarded the impact problem to JPL, Morrison in his role in astrobiology at Ames has a responsibility to issue a formal statement on the rate of ELE’s as part of his job description.

    In my view, Morrison’s job description includes formally addressing the rate of impacts on Mars, and the effects of impacts there, including what (asteroid or comet) hit there, and when.

    I reported on impact forums, and generally raised “strange” questions about what NASA was doing to handle the COMETARY impact hazard and protect the lives, health, and safety of the people of this nation. You can find links to that reportage here.

    Morrison knows damn well that I’ve had a stroke.

    Dennis, as I’ve told you before, I do not know if what you have found are impact structures, and if so when they occured. All I personally directly work with are the archaeological record (such as the PIDB study cited here) and the First Peoples’ oral histories, and some knowledge of scaling laws. They lead me to be sceptical of your own hypotheses concerning the dating of the features you are studying.

    Dennis, you need to understand that serious public impact studies only began 30 years ago, and the field is under development. Thus I have been wrong before, and reserve the right to be wrong both now and in the future.

  60. One final note about David Morrison et al before I go back to lurking on the sidelines.

    I find it sad that skeptical scientists of such caliber tend to get smothered in ad hominem invalidation here on the Tusk, instead of their concerns, or objections, being answered respectfully with real data.

    It is no wonder that none of the actual planetary scientists involved in the YD debate, from either side of the isle seem to be interested in participating in these discussions on the Tusk.

    If the YD impact hypothesis has any validity at all, it can withstand the criticisism from scientists like Dave Morrison. And become stronger in the process. The proper way to deal with them is to dig up enough data to convince even the staunchest skeptic. And you don’t do that by running them down with ad hominem. Especially senseless, invalidating, off topic, ad hominem that has it’s foundation in a falsehood.

    You do it my stuffing good, sound, data in their face until all their concerns are answered. And they no longer have reason to doubt.

  61. Hi Hermann –

    Thanks for the additional geological data.

    But it seems to me you have left out of your statement of the GH the discharge of that glacial lake out west that the Assiniboine (Nakota now) remembered. If Dennis had not grafittied that post, then perhaps information on the western maritime tool kit distribution would have nailed that discharge down more tightly, and the search area for that impact point could have been narrowed.

    It needs to be noted that what led to the earlier discharges of the glacial lakes during earlier ice ages is an open question, and it is not likely to have been impact, but more likely simply overfilling and/or seismic activity. That observed cyclicality most likely explains some palaeo-climatologists reluctance to consider impact as a release mechanism at the YD.

  62. Hi Dennis –

    A friend once noted to me that what we find most irritating in others is what we find irritating in ourselves.

    The moderation of Benny Peiser is what made the Cambridge Conference so useful a tool for impact research. Thus some behaviors were discouraged. A good part of the discussion goes on with only major formal results published here at the Tusk. You may have noticed that those involved in those studies will not publicly reply to you here at the Tusk.

    If your own hypotheses have any validity, they will survive my scepticism and examination by others.
    And you won’t gain anything by ad hominem attacks on me, nor from ad hominem attacks on the First Peoples. Perhaps you may want to spend time collecting more data, instead of lurking here. I certainly have other uses for my time than dealing with your nonsense.

    As far as Morrison goes, he did pioneering work on impact, when the KT impact was widely viewed as a one off. But later Morrison made a serious mistake, and he still has not acknowledged it. That mistake has endangered human lives.

    Thus the damage to Morrison’s reputation is his own work as well, and as long as he does not publicly correct those earlier impact hazard estimates, there is a serious error in your assertion as to the calibre of his later work.

    Dennis, you act as though science was conducted in some kind of mystic realm, instead of here in the real world.

    You know better. As I have given you links to Morrison’s mistakes several times earlier, your repetition of the claim that I am liar is simply wrong, and you should know that. But then I’m sceptical of the timing and cause of your features.

    People believe what they want to believe.

  63. In point of fact I can’t find anything in the literature where Morrison said something favoring the Nemesis Hypothesis. Since you say you’ve given us links to his mistakes many times over, what links? And in what thread?

    He denies your claim that he favors the NH. And he says he has corrected you many times. Yet you persist.

    One of you is telling a bald faced lie. If the liar is David Morrison, then you will post the full text of the document that exposes his lie for all the honest world to read. Preferably with the text in question highlighted.

  64. Well, all bickering aside, we should get some concrete physical evidence during the Elinin transit in mid September. Given our relative impotence in the face of these threats the wait will be interesting. Aparently most astronomic groups feel the same. If there is nothing one can do, just prepare for the ride. I would suggest that a two month survival kit would be a reasonable investment, beyond that the goal posts are moved anyay.

    Did nobody find that video I posted interesting? I thought that gravity lens was very cool.

  65. Dennis –

    Basically, Dude, you’re an asshole. You dislike Ed intensely, and you latch onto any reason to call him a liar. Right now that situation is “He-said, he said,” and you assume Ed is the liar. And then you demand that Ed prove his side, but don’t ask Morrison to.

    One of these days, grow the hell up. You and Ed are both intelligent people, and you two should be able to come to some peaceful coexistence. You are of course, all pissed off because Ed isn’t signing onto your Y-D connection with your Google Earth findings. He keeps asking YOU to put up or shut up on the dating, and you don’t do any of “the work,” as you call it, to back up your assertions.

    Why don’t you FINALLY, actually DO something about Ed’s request, which has been out there for probably a year or more. Every time he asks, you divert attention to something else. And then the next post off you go again, asserting Y-D. I haven’t said squat about it yet, but I do agree with Ed: Put up or shut yer yap. You think you and your Google artifacts are facts, and that we should all be going, “WOW! That Dennis! He’s such a smart Dude! He’s going to have his name in all the geology textbooks!” And when Ed simply does what scientists do, when someone makes a claim – he says, “Where’s the beef?”

    And your fragile ego can’t take it.

    Grow the hell up, ya little weenie.

    Steve

  66. Damn, I guess you joined the Ed cult too, Steve. He doesn’t have any real date either to confirm what he assumes to interpret from Oral tradition of native peoples. Nor has he ever done any real science.
    “Myths tell us how the ancients perceived the universe, not necessarily how the universe really worked”~Pib Burns
    It didn’t work for Velikovsky either.
    But I did talk about a date for the craterfields in southwest Montana, and Northern Nevada. Both of them date to the early Holocene.
    And since I think Ed’s subjective interpretation of Native American oral traditions belongs on the same shelf with Velikovsky. I really don’t give a rip for Eds opinion of my work. Or yours for that matter.

  67. @Paul:

    Looked at the video, comet ELENIN transit later this year? Halfway between us and the sun, .45AU. Are we really supposed to worry about a slight shadowing for a couple of hours? Am looking into EM rations now . . ?’^)

  68. LOL Herman; I really try not to sweat those things hich are totally beyond intervention. But, on the other other hand, I really like to eat. That may explain some of my 25 extra pounds..:)

    I really enjoyed the little ‘flip’ in the aspect of that stargroup or whatever it was. Elinin is supposed to cross the eliptic less than .25 Au infront of us, and nobody seems to kno if she is pulling a train. Very little is known about this object??

  69. Hi Dennis –

    For Morrison’s endorsement of Muller, see here:
    http://www.csicop.org/si/show/is_the_sky_falling

    Although Morrison earlier states that the impact rate is random (it is demonstrably not random), later in the piece he has no problem with the Nemesis hypothesis, and weakly praises it.

    What is interesting is that Morrison has his own impact estimate based on the cratering history of the Moon, but the Moon is part of a 2 body system.

    In other words, the Earth probably swept up impactors that otherwise would have hit the Moon.

    I hope that Morrison’s future work with the impact history of Mars will finally point him in the right direction.

  70. A bit off the present topic…
    Morrison (from Ed’s link in the previous comment):

    Finally, we should realize that only a small fraction of the space around Earth is being monitored today…

    This makes no sense at all. The only place they need to be looking is in the plane of the planets. Any high declination object is so unlikely to hit the Earth as to be effectively impossible, certainly as compared to objects in the ecliptic.

    All they have to do is focus in the plane of the planets. That will find 99.999% of the ones that pose a threat.

    Why do I argue this?

    Basics:
    1. ALL objects revolving around the Sun travel in ellipses with the Sun at one focus.

    2. Item 1. is modified only by those effected by Jupiter – and other planets less so.

    3. Any elliptical orbit that is tilted out of the ecliptic has only two points at which the object crosses the Earth’s orbital plane.

    4. Any object whose elliptical orbit crosses the Earth’s orbital plane at some distance other than 1 AU is no threat to the Earth.

    5. Even for objects whose orbits cross our orbital plane at 1 AU can only be a problem if they do it while the Earth is at that one place in its orbit.

    6. At 1 AU, 1 angular degree is about 811,000 miles. That is slightly farther than far we travel in one day.

    7. Rough calculation: If we assume the Earth’s sphere of influence is half a million miles (which I think is too large by a factor of two or so) as a given, then that is about 5/8ths of 1 degree, in each direction, or 1.25 degrees in both directions.

    8. An NEO, thus, has to cross IN OUR PLANE within 1.25 degrees out of 360, which is about 00.35%, or 1 in about 288. Since it also passes out of the inner solar system again, on its way it passes our orbit again. So, make that 2 in 288, or 1 in 144.

    9. That was for high orbit NEOs that cross AT 1 AU, and that is just the timing factor. Few of the high orbit ones will cross at our orbit, just by the nature of their orbits having the Sun at one focus. Most of them cross at ONE point only – as they swoop up or down across the ecliptic, as the reach perihelion “on the far side of the Sun.” But depending on the orbit, the Earth just might BE on that other side of the Sun at that time.

    10. But given all that, we can ask how many NEOs drop up or down through the ecliptic AT 1 AU? Given the nature of comets, if their perihelia are at 1 AU, then their orbits are quite rounded (low ellipticity). That says to me short-period comets, and we know them already. It is the long-period ones we have to look at. And the only place to look is in the ecliptic.

    11. As to asteroids, they are, almost by definition, within or close to the ecliptic. Those ARE worth finding and keeping track of.

    12. As to meteors, are they the random rogue micro-planets we all think they are? Being an exploding planet advocate, I think not. But either way, once they are up and out of the plane of the planets, their orbits have to cross ours at 1 AU – otherwise they are not risk to us. But since I do think they are remnants of an exploded planet, I would predict that most within the ecliptic have been swept up by planets, leaving mostly high or low orbits, which are not a threat worth worrying about.

    13. I do not know exactly how astronomers account for high orbit objects of any kind, other than Pluto, which is declared to have passed too close to Neptune (above or below Neptune’s orbital plane) and whiplashed around and up (or down). While this may have happened to Pluto, to imagine that being a common occurrence for a microplanet seems unlikely in the extreme, not on a large scale. The conditions have to be nearly perfect, or else the object will impact or nothing much will happen.

    12. Eclipses are predictable purely by the fact that the Moon has to have 0° declination in order for the shadow of the Moon or the Sun to fall upon the other. I argue that the same reasoning must hold true for NEOs threatening the Earth. It seems a straightforward proposition to me, that an impact can only happen when an object crosses the ecliptic at 1 AU, and THEN it can happen only about every 2 out of 288 of those times.

    Anyway, the chance of a high (or low) orbit object hitting the Earth seems completely negligible. Those are my reasons for thinking that way. They should be focusing ALL their efforts on the ecliptic, and all of that effort looking OUT. That seems a completely manageable task for them.

  71. Steve; My head agrees with you.
    My gut says that inspite of the tiny period of Man’s cognisance we have witnessed quite a numer of impacts and near misses.
    Do you buy lottery tickets??

    Also, do you ever play pool? Not all shots have the intended consequences.

    I’m a very lucky person, but I’ve learned not to take it for granted.

    That said, I’m much more concerned with the activities here on earth.

  72. Hi Steve –

    IMO, your search strategy is weak.

    Asteroids we can find, and they will likely make passes close enough for detection before they could impact, and generally along the plane of our solar system.

    But once you understand that Long Period Comets and dead comet fragments form the bulk of the impact hazard, the search strategy changes significantly. As near as I know, they can come from any direction.

    As near as I know, the detection limit right now for Long Period Comets is 270 days. For dead comet fragments we might be lucky and get 3 days warning now, when what we need is at least 3 days warning with certainty – in other words the global ATLAS system, which would also be great for teaching student NEO astronomers.

    In my opinion, the key to getting that system in place is in getting Administrator Bolden to fire Ed Weiler. Until the folks at NASA with ultimately responsibility for dealing with the impact hazard realize that their pay is linked to their performance, this mess will continue.

    With my stroke damage, I’ll have to rely on others to go into the details of NEO search strategies with you – arcs, points, CCDs, optics, luminance, light frequencies, weather, etc.

  73. With respect Ed, I don’t critisize the effort or intent to detect incoming bodies. However, for even moderate sized space junk (1 mile diameter, or about 3-5 billion tons), the knowlege would be irrelevant at this time. People cannot stop the impact or divert it. At the best we might be able to calculate an impact site. For many, being directly at ‘ground zero’ might be preferable.

    Perhaps at some future time we may have the power to deal with comets and astroids. Certainly, the mole holes of the elite and the government seem to be a poor alternative.

  74. About NEOs.
    The URL below shows the graphical representation of all the orbiting objects NASA has detected for the previous 30 years added to the graphic as they are discovered. This is one of my favorite vids. There is color coding for each of the objects identifying them as asteroid or comet or earth orbit crossing. As the video continues and the numbers of objects increase in waves as our instruments detect them, I am astounded at just how much stuff is orbiting out there. I have seen mass numbers suggested for the amount of mass orbiting just in the main asteroid belt to be one tenth of the earth’s mass. Then there is all the stuff not staying just in the asteroid belt. Check out the vid in full screen 1080p!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_d-gs0WoUw

  75. Thanks ‘Yam’, cool video indeed.The rate of discovery is astonishing, but I suppose typical. Once you know what you are looking for things become obvious. The video might benifit from stressing that the only real change is the amount of man made objects.

  76. Hi Paul –

    “However, for even moderate sized space junk (1 mile diameter, or about 3-5 billion tons), the knowlege would be irrelevant at this time. People cannot stop the impact or divert it. At the best we might be able to calculate an impact site. For many, being directly at ‘ground zero’ might be preferable.”

    Wrong.

    This problem has been analyzed by multiple teams of nuclear physicists.

    The latest public statement was made earlier this year. I’ll try to find you an online link to it, but in the meantime you’ll just have to take my word that that public presentation exists.

  77. http://www.etheric.com/Downloads/SPE.pdf
    and this one just as wrong as the last ones !

    but after all maybe men didn’t
    ‘cover up” Gobleiki tepe”
    maybe God covered it up. wow !
    just to preserve it!

    maybe ‘for such a time as this!’

    just maybe he did it in these events yet to be explained not 8000 or 10000 or 12000 years ago but 2800 or 3200 years ago . and or maybe he did it that way just to see how crazy man’s crazy imagination could get before they figured it out ! to think of all those people who went to hell just because they wanted too.
    But hey really they decieved themselves , He didn’t even have to help them..

    they did it all by their lonesome!

    eating from that tree of human” Logic”, human ‘experience’ and thus “Knowledge” this is the very definitions God gives us for his definitions and concept of ‘death’.
    so really man has been worshipping their own imaginations. sad hum!
    and yep they pulled these special kind of fantasy consensus ‘science”s strait out of their wild unfettered and enhanced imaginations.
    them baby bloomers , it must have been Imaginations enhanced and inspired only by the stuff they were smoking to
    “free up their minds”,
    so YD ,it is their own special brand of herbal reality !

  78. @E.P. Grondine June 3, 2011 at 2:41 pm:

    …As near as I know, they can come from any direction.

    But the ones that are not in the plane of the planets cannot actually BE a threat. Infinitesimally less than objects in the ecliptic, yes – several magnitudes less.

    The seearch shoould not even be wasting time LOOKING for high orbit objects, since they can only impact Earth IF – and that is a huge “if” – they come “down” right on our orbit. The ones IN our plane are the ones that can hit us.

    In fact, if we want to push objects out of harms way, I have always thought the best place to put them is UP (or DOWN), not to the side. If we only push them sideways in our plane, then they can come back to haunt us later. As long as they stay in our plane, the risk is very much higher. Ones whose orbits cross our plane somewhere inside or outside our orbit CAN NOT hit us, period. It is a geometric impossibility.

    I disagree on this point, Ed, if that was why you said my search was “weak.” We need to spend the time looking for things that can hit us, not just things that are close. And things out of our plane can only hit us much, much less likely.

  79. Hi Steve –

    While it is true that the planes of the orbits have to intersect for the orbits to intersect, that does not mean that the planes of the orbits have to be identical.

    Speeding up and slow down
    potential impactors, as well as diverting them to the sides, have been considered.

    By the way, some earlier impacts have been of debris chains and dust loads, and thus do not yield to point source solutions.

    Damn but I’m tired.

  80. CL –

    Once again, there were no “Allegewi”.

    I am not a spiritual guide, and rely on others for that. What I can tell you is that everything you have written here finds no confirmation among them.

  81. @Chicken:
    they pulled these special kind of fantasy consensus ‘science”s strait out of their wild unfettered and enhanced imaginations.

    Sorry Chicken, I must second E.P. here (as elsewhere). As a scientist myself, I can attest to the fact that EMPIRICAL SCIENCE (so-called because based on experience, empirical* observation and description of plain facts) is our best effort to reflect in human language the realities of the Universe, of unknown origin. The so-called Big Bang theory is not entirely trustworthy, there is Inflation and the Bubble Universe, and any cosmologies have been drawn into question by Immanuel Kant in his famous Antinomies of Reason. The origin of the Universe simply is a subject matter we can not really investigate by EMPIRICAL SCIENCE.

    – – –
    *) Empirical is from the Greek word equivalent to Latin-based experience

  82. The scariest thing for me is that I understand much of the pseudo scientific claptrap in the paper posted by our resident ‘Tower of Babble’. I even recognize some of the citations it contains.

    The random scatter of evidence chains seem to afford opportunities for the cherry picked support of almost any “Theory”, yet few seem willing to admit that ‘their scenario’, is infact nothing more than a thin theory.

    As foolish as Chicken Little’s ‘God Concept’ appears, it has as much relevance as any of the scientific publications, if only because it is not possible to empirically refute the claims.

    We all, and myself in particular, suffer from a humility deficit. There are so many variables and so many unknowns in the chain of events we are trying to decipher, that the least error could place our theories outside the margins of the probability chart. Perhaps we would all be better employed taking a page from the great thinkers of the past. That is to be competent and patient observers of events, rather than clever children seeking patterns in tea leaves.

  83. CL…at the risk of repeating myself, allegwi is a slight mispelling of the French word, allegue. Prounced the same, it means pretend or made up. The Frenchman who made it up is still laughing his ass off at you.

    I’m not an atheist and all the word implies today… I consider myself a respectful agnostic. But I can look at the evidence and see your version of a creator isn’t necessesary. And I still think you are possibly a Joseph Smith enthusiast and therefore insane.

    I read this site for the science, not the opinions of nutjobs.

  84. Hi BW –

    CL’s source for “Allegewi” is a frontiersman who combind “Talegewi” from Delaware, with “Alle/ghenny” to get “Allegewi”.

    You can’t break through these kind of delusional frameworks. See “Combating Cult Mind Control” from Steve Hassan. As long as con men can use these gambits to separate fools from their money, we’ll continue to have to deal with victims like CL. Their spiritual theft is worse.

    Paul, “the problem” is the source of the 14C and 10BEe, combined with a complete lack of funds to look for “the crater”, as though there was only one.

    Firestone and LaViolette both hypothesize sources for the
    protons and neutrons separate from the impacts. In this paper, La Violette expounds a global pattern from a 14C sample of 1 from 1 location.

    Until NASA Administrator Bolden fires Ed Weiler, you can expect all research on recent historical impacts to struggle along.

  85. Ed and everyone else: please take my intemperate comments in the spirit of debate, and understand that people like Steve and myself enjoy the advantaged position of having nothing to loose by expounding any idea we may have at the moment. We have no professional qualifications to defend, we have no peers to compete against, and we don’t even need to be consistent in our arguments except to maintain credibility on this blog.

    Ed, if the various theories were tabled and I was required to choose, my inclination would be to tick, “all of the above”. It would appear that over the long term our little home has been subjected to every imaginable catastrophy, and probably some we can’t imagine. The tricky part for all the professionals is to sort the time line. I see that task as being similar to playing ’52 pick-up’ and sort into suits at the same time, all done in the dark. A task likely to keep many scientists busy for the remainder of Man’s existence on Earth.

  86. for those of you who did get it.
    the new theory/ aka reality wouldn’t be west boys . but north by north west.. over the north pole, crashing into central asia someplace like Göbekli Tepe the pot belly/womb of the world. which science-tism by consensus has said Gobekli tepe was covered up by humans 10000 years ago. any one want to put some money on it that it was covered up by a wave 2800 or 3200 years ago..ROTF. don’t bet against me because I already won.
    as far as Ollie/ Alleg and the brazilian traced Elis-ani lineage,
    AKA in other places and cultures as Eleusean mysteries , Elesippus and Elishah . you all better do a lot more digging, because Alleg it had nothing to do with a french man..

  87. Oh I just thought of another name.. also Elisippo( the horse people of Elis
    and a few more names I can’t think of.
    these names, words and concepts with ancient connections ( ‘ancient’ just means pre -turtle island/ pre- the disconnect).
    ask any native if they know of an ancient religion about hell and heaven and our journey there … with an unknown mysterious ‘purifying’ drink! ask any native american if they know what the drink would have been , and all of them will tell you exactly what it is even almost every ingredient.

  88. CL –

    The thought came to me that you should stay away from everything except sweats until your mind clears.

    Please try to find some spiritual guidance, and stop forcing yourself on those here.

  89. Chicken, if you get much more difficult to read and follow by the casual reader, or recklessly provocative to the regulars, I am going to take action — and digital feathers will fly.

  90. Love all the comments, gang, albeit on a sorry subject. Hits are way up and visibility in engines seem to be strengthening even further. I’ll try to post more and I’m always open to ideas. Best to send to [email protected].