Volcanoes can be like apples and oranges, Jacqueline. Pierson Baretto quoted me on this blog elsewhere regarding a possible ET impact origin of the Laacher See calsdera; ..every YDB paper that I have seen, if the Laacher See eruption is mentioned at all, the authors agonize about to dismiss it instead of embracing it as a case of impact volcanism, of which there can be little doubt that it is…..”
I.o.w., just by identifying YDB markers as volcanic, as you would like to do, does not mean that these markers are not of ET impact origin at the same time. There is plenty of proof for the latter, such as the Pt in Greenland ice cores, for one.
Hello Hermann
on this subject, Han Kloosterman commented to me that ….. “the explosion of the Laacher See was not the LAST, but the ONLY. I do not know of any method to determine if it was catalyzed by an impact, or else by an earthquake caused perhaps by an impact elsewhere. Much more research will have to be done!”
The pelaeolagoons I’ve been investigating in northeastern Brazil were not formed by glaciers, volcanoes, karst dissolution, by buried rivers meandering , wind, or tectonic …… some fields may be 12,900 years old ……. the impactites found in these ponds are too far from the Laacher See eruption event.
Establishment types are considerably wary of exploring outside established orthodoxy; but a plasma/electric universe view of cosmology goes far in explaining some of the conundrums.
Right now science appears to be stuck in a rut looking for smoldering craters to explain a the YDB event; as we recently saw in Russia earlier this year, a relatively small object can do quite a bit of damage without even hitting the surface of the planet. Consider the damage evidence of high voltage arcing and the temperatures involved in such an event.
3 Responses
Volcanoes can be like apples and oranges, Jacqueline. Pierson Baretto quoted me on this blog elsewhere regarding a possible ET impact origin of the Laacher See calsdera; ..every YDB paper that I have seen, if the Laacher See eruption is mentioned at all, the authors agonize about to dismiss it instead of embracing it as a case of impact volcanism, of which there can be little doubt that it is…..”
I.o.w., just by identifying YDB markers as volcanic, as you would like to do, does not mean that these markers are not of ET impact origin at the same time. There is plenty of proof for the latter, such as the Pt in Greenland ice cores, for one.
Hello Hermann
on this subject, Han Kloosterman commented to me that ….. “the explosion of the Laacher See was not the LAST, but the ONLY. I do not know of any method to determine if it was catalyzed by an impact, or else by an earthquake caused perhaps by an impact elsewhere. Much more research will have to be done!”
The pelaeolagoons I’ve been investigating in northeastern Brazil were not formed by glaciers, volcanoes, karst dissolution, by buried rivers meandering , wind, or tectonic …… some fields may be 12,900 years old ……. the impactites found in these ponds are too far from the Laacher See eruption event.
best regards
pierson
My non-credentialed opinion is that the electrical nature of comets ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34wtt2EUToo ) could explain a lot of the findings.
Establishment types are considerably wary of exploring outside established orthodoxy; but a plasma/electric universe view of cosmology goes far in explaining some of the conundrums.
Right now science appears to be stuck in a rut looking for smoldering craters to explain a the YDB event; as we recently saw in Russia earlier this year, a relatively small object can do quite a bit of damage without even hitting the surface of the planet. Consider the damage evidence of high voltage arcing and the temperatures involved in such an event.