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

Two Ivies in two months confirm YD impact: Pinter of Southern Illinois – Carbondale to NBC: “Fringe science,” questions integrity of National Academy of Sciences

Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter Nicholas Pinter

A meteor or comet impact near Quebec heaved a rain of hot melted rock along North America’s Atlantic Coast about 12,900 years ago, a new study claims.

Scientists have traced the geochemical signature of the BB-sized spherules that rained down back to their source, the 1.5-billion-year-old Quebecia terrane in northeastern Canada near the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. At the time of the impact, the region was covered by a continental ice sheet, like Antarctica and Greenland are today.

“We have provided evidence for an impact on top of the ice sheet,” said study co-author Mukul Sharma, a geochemist at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. The results were published today (Sept. 2) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences…..

See entire NBC article here

‘Fringe science’

…..Scientists on the other side of the impact theory debate are not so sure.

“At this point, the pro-impact literature is fringe science being promoted by a single journal,” said Nicholas Pinter, a geologist at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, who was not involved in the PNAS research.

9 Responses

  1. Yeah, well, Pinter’s got nuttin’, and he knows it. He’s resorted to ad hominem – the last resort of scoundrels.

    It’s the resort of those who are losing the argument, and they have nothing to add to the conversation.

    It is also the tactic of the side that THINKS it has the upper hand to resort to authority, or at least what they consider authority. And if they can’t get results that way they badmouth the other journals. Been there and seen that. Ouch! Their words really sting! NOT.

    And HOW many different PhDs is he saying are doing fringe science? 30? 40? They must be doing Voodoo Impactnomics… LOL

    …At the same time, let’s admit that in whatever interview Pinter was involved in, he certainly said more than just that one sentence. That choice was up to the writer, not him. Perhaps he did actually say more scientific things that sticking out his tongue and giving a Bronx cheer.

    And if he is actually doing something more – like real, original research (not kibitzing), then he should put up or shut up.

  2. Pinter never took a How To Recognize a Duck 101 class.

    He doesn’t know that if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck… it must be a duck. He thinks the quacking must really be clucking or oinking (or insect poop). He thinks the duck walk is actually swimming (or insect poop).

  3. Steve; I posted a comment about the nukes by me but it went to the new comments section. If you don’t find it please post here and I will try to repost. I’m sure if the national acdemy of science had a problem with ( fringe science) they would say something to that effect. I’m sure they’re not shy. I did crack that dolomite rock and there is no pin holes inside but it appears to be somewhat crystaline. It took 4 big swings with a long sledge to crack it open. I will get some pics to you inside and out. jim

  4. Jim –

    You got me confused about the “new comments” section. Re-post that nukes comment under here, I guess.

    …The NAS – geez, if Pinter from LOWLY SIU is claiming that the worst university in the country has higher standards than the NAS, the man is delusional.

    How do I know that SIU is a lowly college? Because I am from southern Illinois, and I went to the Edwardsville campus rather than the PARTY CITY CARBONDALE campus. Sorry, SIU, but ya got a terrible reputation as the biggest party college in the country. They draw much less than the top scientists because of that. And Pinter’s posturing against the TOP science association in the country is not helping the college one whit.

    And the man isn’t just taking on the NAS, but he is taking on HARVARD and PRINCETON, too (which is exactly George’s point to this blog post).

    Does the dude has some sort of death wish?. . . Let’s see now, here is my appeal to authority (which card I until now have never, ever played):


    That is a fair match, right? NOPE. If it was a football game, it would be like 86-3.

    SIU can’t hold their JOCK STRAPS.


    I will say this:

    If Pinter wants to get off his misplaced high horse and ADDRESS ACTUAL EVIDENCE, instead of making ad hominem attacks on the NAS, perhaps his side wouldn’t be losing the high ground they claimed with their INSECT POOP low blow.

    Oh? The insect poop low blow is NOT the high ground? Exccuuuuuuuse me! What was I thinking?

    Bwah haw haw!

  5. Actually, folks, this is a little too easy, like shooting fish in a shot glass.

    Pinter has thrown himself in front of the bus. So with him lying on the pavement it is a little too easy to just pull the bus over his carcass back and forth, flattening it out on the tarmac.

    If he had actually SAID anything factual – but what did he do? Accuse the NAS of being a second rate operation – AFTER it published papers from Harvard and Princeton.

    You see, INSECT POOP is not fringe science, but Harvard and Princeton are. Yep. They’ve got such low standards over there in the Ivy League. Everybody knows that. Such poor professors. Such lackadaisical principles. TERRIBLE curriculum. It’s hard to see how they can get people to pay so much tuition and donate so much money to the schools.

    How does this man’s mind WORK, anyway?

  6. Steve; Here’s my repost from yesterday.The nuke plant at Dresden is on the bedrock at the surface just South of the Illinois River on the same dolomitew praire as the national park. The Braidwood plant is on the sandyarea south (west) of the Kankake river. In the former coal producing areas. There a whole slew of strip mine holes all around that region plus some shft mines none of which are in use anymore. I would think that the YDB black mat would be above the coal seams so it should show in any deep excavations not exceeding the coal layer.Do you know if the lake Chicago and Saginaw bay impacts in the relatively same time frame or totally different? Has anyone looked further south in this state either directly or accidently for any YDB evidence?

  7. Jim –

    Thanks for the nuke plant geology info. BTW, having driven past on I-55 many times, even when they were building Braidwood, I am still confused why they built the plant there; it is the only nuke plant I’ve ever heard of that is not on the edge of a surface body of water. That is the clear impression I had when it was being built, and still do – and a look on Google Earth confirms it: Braidwood is not on any lake or river.

    No one knows when the Lake Chicago or Saginaw impacts (if they ARE impacts) occurred. I would also include the Chippewa basin, also in Lake Michigan, but about midway along its length. The knowledge about any of them is out in the future somewhere, probably a decade or more. Davias connects the Saginaw one with the Carolina Bays, which he places at around 45,000 years ago. I am not so sure of that myself. He knows more than I do, but I commented here once that Clovis artifacts were found in the subsoil under a bay rim (and now cannot find the comment, for the life of me). I pasted in a direct quote of a paper. I had – and still do – gone looking for papers with evidence of WHERE the C14 and OSL samples were taken. I think it makes a huge difference whether samples were taken under the bay bottom, in or under the bay rim, or outside the rim. If Clovis artifacts were found under a rim, in the subsoil – in even ONE bay – then doubt is thrown on the dating of the bays before the YDB.

    The OSL dates (earlier than YDB) are hard to argue with. Any soil exposed to sunlight for even a few seconds will be “reset”. And OSL is specifically best used on quartz – which is exactly what exists draped over the bays and rims and beyond the rims – so the Clovis artifact(s) in the subsoil under a rim seem to contradict what the OSL says. I would LIKE for the OSL samples to have been done wrong (sampled wrong), but that is a long shot. All I want to do is clear it up, and I haven’t been able to yet.

    OTHER dates for the CBs are at 130,000 years ago. There is such a huge difference between 45,000 years ago and 130,000 years ago that one has to wonder HOW different the sampling must have been. If one is correct, the other seems impossible. That opens the door to them BOTH being wrong – but don’t hold your breath.

    So, so far, the CBs seem to predate the YDB, which seems to mean that Saginaw (if it is even an impact) also predates the YDB. I think that when people begin to do field work on Saginaw there will be some big surprises for everyone.

    Lake Chicago (and the Chippewa Basin) right now are even more speculative than Saginaw – either about the dates or whether they are impacts or not. The geologists I don’t think are even remotely interested in them. Either would take a big, expensive field project to research properly regarding possible impacts.

    In all of this – including the YDB impact hypothesis itself – what happened is what happened, and nothing will change that. What happened may have been one impact, multiple impacts – or no impacts at all. I hope that when a final conclusion is drawn that the facts – reality of it all – comes out clearly, no matter which way the evidence shows. Right now we are all in the middle of it, and thus are in the middle of the forest, and we can’t see the trees.

    Does that suck? Heck no! We are getting to witness – at a pretty close distance – scientific developments as they are happening. It’s pretty cool.

  8. The nuke at Braidwood has a strip mine lake a ways behind the plant.
    Water is piped in and out. There are also lines that go into the Kankakee River (just in Case). I’ve always felt that alot of the scientific dogma was off. The answers just didn’t feel right (kind of like a duck quack). You’re right that we are living in a fablous time for discovery and confirmation.

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