Exploring abrupt climate change induced by comets and asteroids during human history

Faint Praise: Nanodiamonds Confirmed in Usselo Horizon, Dutch Sci Nonetheless Prevaricate and Backflip

Restored from the library fire 1/11/20

37 Responses

  1. Partway through this.

    As long as Kennett leaves it alone, Daulton’s accusation of misidentification of graphene and graphane as nanodiamonds will keep on coming up. Kennett needs to take his left over samples and run them once again to rebut Daulton. Yes, WE all thionk it is daulton doing sloppy work. If so, a re-run of the testing should clear it up and rebut. It makes little sense that Kennett has not done this yet. It probably leaves people with the assumption that he has already done so and found that he was in error.

    The only way to clear it up is to re-do it.

  2. Hi Steve –

    AS George puts it, “I think I know it all”, so here’s your answer:

    From what I’ve been told, to do a redo they’d have to re-take field samples, and prepare them, then view them, altogether a fairly expensive process.

    This is a new technology in a new field, leading to all the confusion over how to sample and process impactite samples.

    It takes money.

    Note carefully the “money” part here. While Purdue’s work with the LPBE impacitites was well funded,well publicized,
    and instantaneously accepted, their work dealt with asteroids and their formation, and not with comets.

    Note carefully again the key words “money”, “asteroids”, and “comets”.

    Now NASA by statute is the federal agency responsible for determining the hazard to our nation from impactors, and developing countermeasures, and the detection of those impactors which will present a hazard…

    And NASA management still has a BIAS against cometary impact. Note carefully the “bias” part, which I put in capital letters.

    That bias is why the small body advisory committee had to tell NASA management earlier this year that the image data recovery systems for comets needed improvement.

    This bias is also the reason we have no Hubble imagery of the current pass of Comet 73P’s debris stream.

    Finally, this bias is the reason why the rather complex techniques of recovering HSIE cometary impactites has been so badly duplicated. In each case, Dr. Firestone has had to explain to those trying to duplicate results where they messed up. In the previous case they did use the proper equipment, electron microscopes, to examine the spherules.

    There’s another key bias here, which is “DENIAL”. Some 32 years after the Alvarez’s work, the big stories are that anything but impact killed the dinosaurs. That extinction event is usually reported as THE asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, not the multiple comet impacts that killed the dinosaurs.

    And denial is the reason why there is wide publicity for each story where comet impact did not kill off the mammoth.

    As far as the HSIE goes, my plan is to focus on the location of gross features, proof where denial is impossible, and proof which does not rely on teaching a new technique.

    If I or someone else can accomplish this, I’ll know a whole lot more, but I still won’t know it all, as George has claimed.

    As far as HSIE impactite sampling goes, there is work that needs to be done in Africa and Asia and in other possible sample deposit areas. But that will take money, and NASA has a bias against spending money on cometary impact.

  3. There is no mention of Iridium in the Dutch paper (except in a biblio title). Should they not have found platinum group metals?

  4. Ed –

    I disagree on one point: Kennett would still have his original sample population that he took. There should be some left overs. I think it is more appropriate to test left overs than new samples – although new samples would also suffice. I think it is matter because it was not the samples themselves that Daulton questioned – it was the interpretation. New samples are not needed for that, just new lab tests.

  5. Ed –

    I do know what your POV is, about being accused of “knowing it all”. In some areas (other than impacts) I know a LOT. And when someone comes up with a new take on things, I can tell you in one second if it is right or wrong – but I’ll be damned if I can quote chapter and verse why not. Once one gets enough facts stored away in one’s head, things that don’t fit ring alarms and start red lights flashing. It’s like a broadcast radio signal – only what is on the tuned frequency is received without a lot of static. This may sound like b.s., but it works well, and all the time. The thing is to have facts in a cohesive whole – anything that doesn’t fit sticks out like a sore thumb. You are actually better on impacts than I am on even those other subjects, because you DO remember chapters and verses.

    Why anyone at NASA could play ostrich after July 1994 I have no idea. The ONE lesson there is this: Comets hit planets. What is complicated abut that? It’s not exactly rocket science. Pun intended as a broadside insult. No one with a microbe of a brain can ignore the risk. And it isn’t something subtle like 1.8C of global warming by 2100. An impact that takes us back to the stone age – there ARE no do overs.

    So, basically, we are up against willful and institutional stupidity. Call it bias or conservatism, but it is in the way of even taking the first steps.

  6. Steve, I think I finally have a plan to obtain Hubble images of 73P’s debris field, at least on its next pass.

    Now a lot of people know how incompetent government can be some times. There is another part that believe that it is not incompetence, but instead conspiracy.

    So my idea is simply to accuse NASA of having taken infrared images of Comet 73P’s debris field, but withholding them from the public to prevent a panic.

  7. Perhaps now is the time for the principles to abandon the hypothesis and save some face if necessary. What they are saying is that the black mat itself is the long term result of wetland accumulation during the climatic reversal, and so of course if you date charcoal particles throughout the layer you are going to get dates that are later than the start of the horizon. And another group is stating that the impact indicators accumulate at the bottom of the horizon via natural mechanisms, so of course there will be no lonsdaleite in the middle of the layer itself, they will have accumulated at the bottom of the horizon. So natural causes could be the explanation for the evidence in support of it.

    So unless something really dramatic shows up …

    I’m done.

  8. I want to remind all of you that there was simultaneous species extinctions across all continents, regardless of who populated them or where on the surface of the Earth they were located. In other words, a “nuclear winter” brought on by cometary impact dust loading.

    Since were dealing with US incompetence and idiocy here, the best solution is to look for adequate duplicative work done elsewhere: Europe (already), South America and Asia.

  9. EP
    The article deals with impacts, though of a different sort. Then to add another layer of complications, the folks over at Thunderbolts posit that comets, especially those only recently arriving in the inner solar system are electrically active, not ice balls at all. The comets tails are actually an electrically charged plasma, and thus have the ability to deliver energy during impact greater than simply the kinetic effects imparted by velocity. I have no real insights nor the back ground to make judgments, but since our civilization has barely 500 years of modern scientific observations and untold number of mis steps in our understanding, so maybe we did get whopped by a god awful big disintegrating comet that carried charge as well as mass and velocity.

  10. Reality check.

    The “Electric Comet” idea is brought to you by the same folks who invented the “Polar Configuration”. Ever heard of it? It’s a variation on a theme of Velikovsky’s “Worlds in Collision”

    Those same folks at Thunderbolts (AKA the Church of The Grand Velikovskian Delusion) totally disregard everything that’s understood about orbital mechanics, and more than 50 years of hypervelocity impact research at various facilities around the world.

    According to the mythologists at Thunderbolts, only a few thousand years ago the Earth was not in orbit around the sun. Instead, Saturn was the Earth’s primary, and it was held in a fixed position over the north pole by a giant “Plasma column” they call the “Polar configuration.”

    Completely discounting, and disregarding things like orbital mechanics, and all experimental data from hypervelocity impact research to date, the folks at Thunderbolts will tell you that ballistic/kinetic impact cannot believably account for the morphology of craters we see on the Moon, or Mars. And that they are better explained as the planetary scarring of vast interplanetary electric plasma discharge events during the breakup of the so called “Polar Configuration”

    Also according to them, Velikovsky was mostly right. And they will tell you that the breakup of the Polar configuration, and the Earth suddenly being thrown into orbit around the sun accounts for everything Velikovsky described in ‘Worlds In Collision”. They throw everything that’s known about orbital mechanics and physics right out the window, especially if it flies in the face of the ridiculous mutual-inter-assumptive confabulation they call the Polar configuration. And they would have us believe that impacts don’t happen at all. But that the charge differential of an incoming bolide is so great that it gets zapped, and destroyed before it can impact. According to them, craters are excavated by that electric discharge, not ballistic kinetic impact.

    One should note that when pressed to provide an explanation of the physics of the actual process that excavates the materials from the crater, and produces the planetary scarring, or exactly where the current comes from, they are always empty handed. In fact, when pressed to provide references to real science that’s supportive of their electric cratering process, or pretty much any other fantastic claim they make, it never happens.

    There is a good accounting of the background of the Thunderbolts group by Leroy Ellenberger in a piece he wrote in 1995 called An Antidote to Velikovskian delusions

  11. Amazing. Mark the date, May 10, 2012.

    Mr.Cox finally catches up with Leroy and myself on the “Electric Thunderdolts”. The problem is that they’re a different group than this one.

    Mr. Cox’s summary of the Thunderdolts’ Velikovskian Saturnian cosmology is correct.

    Leroy has been watching these guys for years. He runs a Velikovsky group, and issues emails every so often about the Thunderdolts’ latest antics.

    (If Mr. Cox wants to contact Leroy, the worlds’ foremost living authority on Velikovsky will tell him that my work bears no resemblance to Velikovsky’s AT ALL. I don’t know what is more insulting, being called “a Velikovsky wannabe” or “a liar”.)

    Popeye, about the only part of the “Thunderdolts” work that is salvageable is that some ancient pictographs may represent electric phenomenon in space.

    Sadly, once again Mr. Cox is confused, as while the Thunderdolts and Schoch et al. use the same distributors, Schoch et al. don’t rely on Velikovsky’s Saturnian model.

    Schoch et al.’s explanation for the data from 10,750 BCE is AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ANIMAL, even though they rely on the same mechanisms Velikovsky did: really bad linguistics and bad archaeology, and the denial/lack of knowledge of ancient impacts.

    For an earlier observation of mine on Schoch’s work, see:

    (Dennis, if I could only line you up with my half sister… In any case, since this is the Tusk, perhaps the Thunderdolts will stop by to discuss their theories with you.)

    Oh well. I have some other loons to deal with today, so I’m going to go get a coffee and a cigarette.

    (PS1 – NASA’s NEO office is still at JPL.)

    (PS2 – There is something seriously wrong with Purdue’s – Mellosh’s accretion model.)

    (PS3 – Archaeological evidence of a major ancient Atlantic tsunami has been recovered in Ireland.)

  12. Popeye –

    The charges and physics of comet tails were explored by the ESA in their probe to Halley’s Comet several years ago.

  13. Ed Said:

    “Sadly, once again Mr. Cox is confused, as while the Thunderdolts and Schoch et al. use the same distributors, Schoch et al. don’t rely on Velikovsky’s Saturnian model.”

    The confusion is yours Ed. And your childishly poor reading comprehension is biting you on the ass again. Either that or your delusions are talking in your ear again. Because I have never, at anytime in any comment, or correspondence,  mentioned or written about Schoch et al.

    And no, the electric comet thing is not coming from a “different Thunderbolts” The  High priests of the Church of the Grand Velikovskian Delusion, the Thunderbolts group and the whole Electric Universe idea are Wallace Thornhill, and David Talbott. They are also co-authors of the book “Thunderbolts of the Gods”. And the Electric Comet/Electric Cratering Hypothesis.

  14. “Because I have never, at anytime in any comment, or correspondence, mentioned or written about Schoch et al.”

    They say that marijuana impairs short term memory, Mr. Cox:

    “The “Electric Comet” idea is brought to you by the same folks who invented the “Polar Configuration”. Ever heard of it? It’s a variation on a theme of Velikovsky’s “Worlds in Collision””

    Perhaps my reading comprehension skills are not as good as they used to be, Mr. Cox, but then perhaps instead your writing skills are simply crappy instead.

    Once again, “pole shifts” are old theosophist crap, preceding Velikovsky’s wandering planets crap by a good 60 years at least.

    All of these cranks do use the same channels of distribution. And like you, they have no interest in facts interupting their “theories”.

    I do hope that either the EU folks or Schoch et al. latch onto your “ablation features”.

  15. EP,
    Thanks for the link. I guess you don’t go along with a theory that all the planets in the past have been in different orbits from todays modern alignments, well, except Earth. 🙂

  16. Ed:

    Your claim that I have ever written or said anything whatsoever about Schoch et al. anywhere, at anytime, is utterly and perfectly false. Your insinuation that I don’t remember it because my memory is faulty due to drug use is a rude and childish personal ad hominem insult.

    In point of fact Ed, You are delusional. It never happened.

    The Thunderbolts group have their own publishing house. It’s called Micamar publishing. They own it, lock stock, and printing presses. And Micamar doesn’t publish or distribute anyone else’s stuff unless it is perfectly consistent with, and supportive of their own. And since they claim to be the ones who originated “electric comet” theory, and the theory that all craters in the solar system were created by electric discharges, not impact, they most certainly don’t publish or distribute work by people like Schoch et al who don’t hold with their Saturnian views, and accuse them plagiarism of the electric comet idea.

    “The Polar Configuration” described by the Saturnian/Velikovskian folk of the Thunderbolts group refers to a completely different orbital configuration of the inner planets, not ‘Pole Shifts’ as you assume. They claim that until a few thousand years ago Saturn was Earth’s primary, not the Sun. And they say that instead of orbiting Saturn, the Earth and Saturn were held in a fixed position relative to Each other, with Saturn held in place over the Earth’s north pole by a giant plasma column extending between the two.

    The Saturn/Earth configuration with the Earth tethered to Saturn by a giant plasma column extending up from the north pole is what is described by them as the “Polar Configuration.”

    Your silly and simple minded assumption that the Saturnian “Polar Configuration” has something to do with pole shifts is a product of your childishly poor reading comprehension skills, not fact. Simply put, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

  17. You’re welcome, Popeye.

    Velikovsky’s wandering planets crap was real crap.

    You know, the planets did “wander” a tiny little bit, but it was 4.2 billion years ago, shortly after the events which created today’s asteroids. When that or those parent masses were fractured into asteroids, the proto-planets orbits did shift.

    Now a few observations more relevant to this announcement and the HSIE which I hope that you will enjoy:

    As far as Schoch goes, he started with an early date for the Sphinx. What the theosohpist cult did with that, and his involvement with them, is another issue.

    (I should mention here that I think that it is possible to likely that the temple near the sphinx might be an early megalithic structure. And as the blocks left over from that were used to build the Sphinx, it has generally been assumed that the two were built simultaneously, but it may be that they were not. There is another temple of that type in Egypt, and if I had not had gotten hit by my stroke, I would have taken a close look at copies of the excavation records in Chicago for “Man and Impact in the Ancient Near East”.)

    Schoch himself has never advocated wandering planets, to my knowledge, but then Velikovky studies is not my field. I never read his books, and rely on Leroy for anything involving him.

    Third, and this is much more relevant, is that nearby supernova should be accompanied by large electrical phenomenon in our solar system. Firestone has nearby advocated nearby supernova as the comet injection mechanism for the HSIE.

    Thus if Schoch et al. have pictographs from slightly before 10,750 BCE, that will be something that Firestone will have to deal with.

    The problems for me will be:

    1) To try to gather together some Native American elders who actually want to spend any of their time trying to explain the differences between ordinary lightening and lightening from Thunderbirds and Sky Serpents to these people.

    2) To locate and demonstrate clear and undeniable impact structures from the HSIE.

    3) To have the impact created global dust load demonstrated by the time of their publication.

    4) Given their distribution and PR contacts, to actually read their book and be able to make easily understandable comments on it.

    By the way, the approaching crap from the fringe for Native America will be the fringe’s latest theory that the mounds were constructed by Nephilim, who were the same as the Mormon “Nephites”, who were created by ancient alien modification of humans.

    With so much stupidity approaching, it is tough having my time wasted by simple miscalculations of blast effects in Boslough type (LDG type) impacts.

  18. Well, Dennis, I will graciously concede that you know far more about these folks than I do.

    In fact, a simply staggering amount more.

    (In journalism, that’s known as being drawn out.
    My g*d but that took me a long time, way way more than it used to.)

    One guess is that these folks got into contact with you about your “features”, but that would simply be a guess. There “may” be another explanation, perhaps one you want to share it with all of us.

    That said:

    In publishing you have printers, the folks who own the presses, and in the current economy they are hungry for work.

    You also have authors, often desperate to be read. Their psychological driver is validation; this is often accompanied by confirmatory bias.

    Then you have the DISTRIBUTORS.

    They’re the ones who make most of the money, not the authors or printers. Micamar is not these folks’ printer (who that is is usually entirely irrelevant), nor their DISTRIBUTOR.

    Micamar is more like something they created for copyright and other business purposes.

    So I did not even check who the publisher of Schoch et al’s latest will be, as the only relevant part is who their DISTRIBUTORS will be, and those people I know from the inside out.

    I have even written up a little piece on their history. Its great material, a great story, but I just can’t write as well as I used to. After 15 drafts I still have not reached the point yet where people tell their friends, “Hey, you have to read this.”

    And that’s working with really great material, material way better than anything nearly all of the most creative fiction writers could ever imagine, except for perhaps William Gibson.

    (I should also mention in this regard that while Morrison was fascinated by a very early draft of the piece, and was viewed by others as he ate up an early draft back in 2007.

    (So no, that was no hallucination on my part, and no, I don’t want to see Morrison killed, as he could actually be of some use.)

    But since then Morrison has been of absolutely no help to me in making contact with the “Sceptical Inquirer”.

    By the way, you may want to note that these distributors and these researchers work on the basis of “Once its out there, it’s fair game.” So you can imagine what they will do with Boslough type structures.

    (They do hit a problem when your work is already publicly well known and copyrighted.)

    For that matter, Dennis, you may even find your own “features” being used by them, regardless of whether or not any of them are LDG type impact structures. And they can do that with or without your consent.

    So it just might happen that you will neither be paid for your work, nor have your work cited by name (by the way 500 words is the limit for direct citation with acknowledgment, but footnotes use tiny type and no one reads them), nor your objections to their use of your work noted anywhere in it.

    A few other things you should know. Since there’s money to be made in confusion, these DISTRIBUTORS have no intention of straightening anyone out.

    The only reason Firestone got picked up was his use of the word “cycles” in his title, because of his publishers previous relationship with these distributors, and because these publishers sell fear along with confusion.

    A few final points: people believe what they want to believe, and there is damned little you can do to change that, particularly if the belief is tied to their religion or self image or income.

    Another point: These distributors use late night talk radio, so if you can’t afford advertising time for an issue, say the impact hazard, then writing a book on it gives you more radio time than you could ever pay for.

    Be sure to use large type and plenty of pictures.

    That’s all for today from this stupid, impaired, and delusional liar. The left side of my body is working well enough to go get a cigarette and some coffee.

  19. That should read:

    “The only reason Firestone got picked up was his use of the word “cycles” in his title, because of his publisher’s previous relationship with these distributors, and because these distributors sell fear along with confusion. And fear is something can always make money on.”

  20. Ed and Dennis –

    May I congratulate you both on your ability to keep your discussion this side of bare knuckles – if sometimes barely. I always thought you could.

    Dennis –

    That Saturn-Earth thing is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. It is FAR crazier than Velikovsky. As you lay it out it is stupefyingly in la-la land. And no, I have no need to go and inform myself on it. Sloppy thinkers on any level do not deserve attention. Sloppy thinkers on THAT level only cause me to shake my head and sigh. I am a relatively open-minded guy, but I have my limits. The Polar Configuration is much sillier than polar shift. Much much much sillier.

    Literally, I had had some level of respect for the things you point out, but this revelation (yes, Ed, you did out him) makes me wonder about your discernment, and thus it drops down you quite a bit in my estimation. Like you, I do think they (the establishment) have missed some pertinent points, but Saturn and Earth like that – wow… Can you say Flat Earth Society? Or Hollow Earth Society?

    Wandering planets? Oy vey.

    It makes me wonder what logic sequence could have taken them to that conclusion – but not enough for me to want to read it and find out where their error was. I suspect the error was in not paying attention in 4th grade science class and doing too many doobies in the school parking lot all through high school.

  21. Indeed Steve,

    The Saturnian “Polar Configuration” has got to be the silliest piece of pseudoscience bullshit to come along in decades. It wouldn’t even make a good scifi script.

    So in the interest of ‘considering the source’ it’s important to keep the ridiculousness of the PC in mind when talking about “Electric Comet” theory, or “Electric scarring of planetary bodies.” It’s all coming from the same sources.

    So far there are three different groups claiming credit for the electric comet idea. Each of them accuses the others of plagiarism. And I don’t see anything from any of them that’s worth being taken seriously.

    The Thunderbolts group needs both electric comet theory, and electric scarring of planetary bodies, to be true. Because according to them it was the electrical properties of Venus (They claim Venus is actually a giant comet that was captured by the sun only a few thousand years ago) that broke up the, until then stable, Polar Configuration, and the “golden age of man.”

    They blame all of the cratering we see on the moon and mars on tremendous inter planetary electrical discharges they assume must have happened in a worlds in collision scenario during the breakup of the PC. And most prominent among the scars they attribute to those giant electric plasma discharges is the Valles Marinaris on Mars. Even the giant volcanoes on Mars are seen by them as having been produced those giant “Thunderbolts”.

    “Electric Comet theory”, “Electric scarring of planetary bodies”, and the “Polar configuration” are all part and parcel to the very same body of Saturnian/Velikovskian ridiculousness that I’ve been referring to as the Church of the Grand Velikovskian Delusion, AKA the Thunderbolts group.

  22. The Venus = comet thing is straight Velikovsky. So is the electric discharge. I for one very much appreciated a lot of the factoids that Velikovsky pointed out – but his conclusions were absolute crap. He went back into the 1800s for a lot of it. But when he started putting 2 and 2 together and getting 15, I couldn’t disagree with him more. Still, if Harlow Shapley had simply done papers refuting him, science would have come out less injured. The witch hunt just made Velikovsky 10 times bigger than von Daniken and his ancient aliens were.

    All these people pretending that they invented this stuff if that is what they are doing) is hogwash.

    The discharge thing came from Velikovsky, and it doesn’t have a foot to stand on. Mostly because Venus didn’t come by (nor Mars). But SOMETHING did, and near the times he pointed at. And those somethings were very likely Taurid cometary fragments. But as some here point out, those two times weren’t the only times.

    The Saturn thing is so utterly silly. Venus coming by and Mars – there is not a chance they could have gotten into any decent orbits in the short time of humans, especially if in the time frames of Velikovsky. Venus has the most perfectly circular orbit. To have been a comet and then ended up in Venus’ present orbit is impossible, because once at the proper orbit something ELSE would have had to serendipitously nudge it (with more than a few trillion gazillion Newtons), Goldilocks-style (not too much and not too little), out of high ellipticity to the near perfect circle. Ditto with Saturn and Mars. And WTF was going to push Saturn around? So we are talking about bodily interference at least SIX times (2 each).

    It is all asking for miracles far beyond Moses and a burning bush. It is talking about God and magic wand stuff.

    I have such utter disdain for what I have come to call “Sloppy Thinking” – people who never learned how to assess facts and who jump to illogical conclusions and then build utter nonsense (what they ridiculously call) “theories” out of nonsense piled on nonsense – and they don’t even KNOW they are using logical fallacies. And then, when some newbie starts getting interested in the general subject, if that newbie gets hold of the nonsense Sloppy Thinkers’ ideas first, the newbie is off in la-la land and doesn’t even know it. It is pretty pathetic. The people don’t even know to compare their conclusions with ANYTHING resembling solid research.

    Literally, one of the reasons I’ve never put out any hypotheses is because all of mine have holes in them. They’ve had holes for 40 years, and I am still hoping. Holes HAVE been filled in – but not enough. From my POV things are moving in the right direction, but I don’t expect all the holes to be filled in before I die. The YDIH is a big step in that direction, but by itself will take another 30-50 years to vet itself. There certainly have been many more impacts than are accepted presently – but each one will have to run the gauntlet. Mankind has had a bad string of luck. Had we come along 100,000 years before the Encke progenitor, we’d have had uninterrupted development. As it is, we have had what are translated from the Mayans as the “different worlds.”

    Things are moving toward that understanding it seems, but science is slow. What’s new? But better science than half-baked sloppy thinking concepts. (My own included…)

    We in this YDIH world should be glad there is skepticism about the hypothesis. It helps weed out the parts that don’t hold water and makes the idea prove itself in the real world. It may end up to be only partly right, but that will be a victory, too. Even then it will have added to what we do know about our planet’s history.

  23. You’re right Steve,

    And if the Taurid progenitor object, or something hadn’t entered the solar system when it did, mankind might be a little more advanced than it is today. But we’d  also be far more clueless about the potential catastrophes that can come our way if there was no hint of something nasty in the past to wonder about.

    Also, you said:

    “Literally, I had had some level of respect for the things you point out, but this revelation (yes, Ed, you did out him) makes me wonder about your discernment, and thus it drops down you quite a bit in my estimation.”

    Pay attention Steve. Ed didn’t “out” anyone.

    In setting Ed straight, and correcting his silly uninformed, and naïve assumption that the Saturnian ‘Polar Configuration’ was somehow related to also ridiculous, but much more harmless  ‘Pole Shift’ theories, and explaining what the PC really means to the Thunderbolts group, I never once said anything supportive of it, or them.


    Alhough Tuskers probably already noted this, here is from YAHOO NEWS:



    Meteorites From Big Fireball Spark Space Age ‘Gold Rush’

    Scientists are on an epic treasure hunt for meteorite fragments from a spectacular fireball that lit up the daytime sky over California last month.

    The space rocks came from a minivan-size asteroid that plunged through Earth’s atmosphere and exploded into a dazzling daytime fireball over California and parts of Nevada on April 22. Meteorite fragments were scattered around Sutter’s Mill, an old sawmill in Coloma, Calif. — the same region where the first gold nugget was found, triggering the Gold Rush of 1848.

    Fragments from the so-called Sutter’s Mill Meteorite fell to Earth on April 22 at 7:51 a.m. PDT (10:51 a.m. EDT). At least one space rock landed in a horse pasture outside of Lotus, Calif., in the Sierra Nevada mountains, according to NASA officials. Merv de Hass, who owns the farm, found the meteorite, but has since donated it to NASA.

    Dennis, is this near where you live?

    Sorry, George, for non-topical comment.

  25. There’s no need to apologize to George, Hermann.

    What he had going on here was a fellow who claims millions of year old volcanic flows are evidence of recent LDG type impacts pointing out what a bunch of idiots the Electric Universe folks are,

    And another fellow who thinks that it is possible that Scottish vitrified forts are evidence of LDG type impacts pointing out that Vlikovsky was an idiot, but that his work was valuable none the less.

  26. You seem to be the only one who thinks science fiction about fantasy wars between ancient aliens should be dignified with a comment Ed.

    My beef with you has nothing to do with your book. According to the reviews I’ve read it’s a good read.

    But in your behavior towards me here on the Tusk, and your incessant barrage of childish off topic straw man arguments, and personal ad hominem attacks. Often without really knowing what you’re talking about, the “Polar Configuration” being one quick example, you’ve destroyed all traces of academic credibility you may have once had with me.

    There’s also the issue that in spite of no academic credentials whatsoever, you’ve always demanded that yours should be the final word, and absolute unquestioned authority in all things related to impact. And you never hesitate to ruthlessly invalidate the opinions of anyone you might disagree with. Yet when peer reviewed references to support what you say are demanded they were always answered with invalidation, and personal ad hominem attacks. Not even once have you ever provided a reference in refereed literature when asked.

    Remember the first comment you left on my blog a few weeks ago? You didn’t realize it was my blog. And you noticed my name in one of the comments below an article of mine that didn’t have a by-line at the top. And the first sentence of your comment was “Dennis, you never told us about this gentleman’s work before.”

    In that first sentence you made it perfectly clear that you had no idea that “this gentleman’s work” was in fact mine. It was also clear in that first sentence that the work you’ve been oh so desperate to discredit with an endless stream of ad hominem attacks for more than two years now was something about which you hadn’t even the faintest clue, because you had never really read a single word of it. You didn’t have a problem with it until you found out it was mine.

    And the fact that you had kept at me for more than two years about some silly places you called my “features” without ever reading a single word of what I really had written. And without ever giving the exact coordinates of even one of those “features” you were so fired up about so that I could have the opportunity to form a real opinion of the place, and answer the attack, spoke volumes about your academic integrity. The simple unassailable fact is that was never about the work. It was pure unadulterated personal ad hominem. And in the world according to you it didn’t even have to be the truth.

    Since from the very beginning your behavior towards me here on the Tusk destroyed all trace of academic credibility until I could not find it in me to believe a single word you say, what possible reason would I have to think something you’ve written somewhere in a book is any more credible?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe for Updates

Tax deductible donations to the Comet Research Group can be made here