Latest on 13 kya North America comet impact

[RichTravsky]

http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehistorichumansnotwipedoutbycomet,saysresearchers.aspx

Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.

Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact
or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the Earth’s
climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.
...
Researchers argue that no appropriately sized impact craters from that
time period have been discovered, and no shocked material or any other
features of impact have been found in sediments. They also found that
samples presented in support of the impact hypothesis were contaminated
with modern material and that no physics model can support the theory.

"The theory has reached zombie status," said Professor Andrew Scott from
the Department of Earth Sciences at Royal Holloway. "Whenever we are able
to show flaws and think it is dead, it reappears with new, equally
unsatisfactory, arguments."
...

[Eric Stevens]

What a frustrating snippet of information!

It claims "Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia

National Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United
States and Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a
large impact or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the

Earth’s climate and terminated the Clovis culture." but doesn't say a
word about what that evidence actually is.

It then goes on to describe what they haven't found: "no appropriately
sized impact craters ... no shocked material or any other features of

impact have been found in sediments"

This last appears to be definitely wrong. Not only are there the
original Firestone findings of nano-diamonds but now we have
http://www.polarfield.com/blog/nanodiamond-discovery-greenland-shed-light-mass-extinction/

For an interesting variation on the original Firestone theory see
http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastrophe/
which postulates a comet storm from the south.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Jim McGinn]

On Jan 30, 9:41 am, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehist...

So, uh, Rich. If we were to paraphase, your unstated assertion is
that zombies are a good thing. Right?

[Jim McGinn]

On Jan 30, 12:22 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehist...

> original Firestone findings of nano-diamonds but now we havehttp://www.polarfield.com/blog/nanodiamond-discovery-greenland-shed-l...
>
> For an interesting variation on the original Firestone theory seehttp://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastr...

> which postulates a comet storm from the south.
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens

I'm trying to get excited about the refutation of something nobody
believed anyway. But then I'm jaded. I've already been there and
back.

I love skiing.

[Eric Stevens]

I wouldn't say "nobody believed". I don't accept his entire theory but
I think he is on to something. Heaven knows exactly what it is, at
this stage.
>
>I love skiing.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Paul Crowley]

On 30/01/2013 17:41, RichTravsky wrote:
> http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehistorichumansnotwipedoutbycomet,saysresearchers.aspx
>
> Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
> Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
> published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.
>
> Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
> Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
> Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact
> or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the Earth’s
> climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
> explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.

> ....

> Researchers argue that no appropriately sized impact craters from that
> time period have been discovered, and no shocked material or any other
> features of impact have been found in sediments. They also found that
> samples presented in support of the impact hypothesis were contaminated
> with modern material and that no physics model can support the theory.
>
> "The theory has reached zombie status," said Professor Andrew Scott from
> the Department of Earth Sciences at Royal Holloway. "Whenever we are able
> to show flaws and think it is dead, it reappears with new, equally
> unsatisfactory, arguments."

> ....

There was a remarkable event some 13,000 years ago.
But ssssshhhhh -- no one in PA has ever heard of it.


Paul.

[Lee Olsen]

"Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived.
This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Feb 6, 9:43 pm)."

One of the problems with making a reply to someone who refuses to
archive (online) is that any comments to their post look like someone
is talking to a shadow because the original message disappears. So I
took the liberty to archive 'The Other Guys' post.

Message from discussion Latest on 13 kya North America comet impact
View parsed - Show only message text
X-Received: by 10.180.89.133 with SMTP id bo5mr2090650wib.
6.1359611030915;
Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:43:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: bp2ni7563wib.1!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!
news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!
mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Other Guy <KnewsKg...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo,sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Latest on 13 kya North America comet impact
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:43:26 -0800
Organization: OHLI
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <3t0kg85qca7l26og6...@4ax.com>
References: <51095B45...@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: KnewsKg...@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-
host="ec0e1477bacacd38a6a8f19648f322fb";
logging-data="26605"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-
september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Z6xVWG98dWC0CR4ZlMzl/"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130130-0, 01/30/2013), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:k4QK/QLsiM+3Hz3Sm4xYLD6g1hw=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
<traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
>Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
>Europe, have found evidence

Actually, they FAILED to find evidence with they THINK should exist.

However, they DIDN'T consider that the impact MGHT have been into a 2
mile thick glacier, so their theory is suspect, bigtime.

To reply by email, lose the Ks...
To reply online use this post...

On Jan 30, 9:43 pm, The Other Guy <KnewsKg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
>
> <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
> >Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
> >Europe, have found evidence
>

> Actually, they FAILED to find evidence with they THINK should exist.

Post Clovis continuity exists.

>
> However, they DIDN'T consider that the impact MGHT have been into a 2
> mile thick glacier,

"They" didn't need to as other papers have considered this and the
'scorched earth comet' theory still doesn't wash.
The Other Guy failed to consider the maximum thickness of ice was at
the glacial max at roughly 20k, and not at the time of Clovis or the
"black mats".

>so their theory is suspect, bigtime.

Sorry, see:
Thomas Kehoe
The Distribution and Implication of Fluted Points in Saskatchewan
American Antiquity Vol. 31, No.4 1966
or
http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Distribution_and_Implications_of_Flu.html?id=BaT0kQEACAAJ

>
> To reply by email, lose the Ks...

[Eric Stevens]

Oh yes they have! They have even given it a name: the 'Younger Dryas'
period. The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
satisfactory explanation for it.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Claudius Denk]

On Jan 31, 11:48 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:22:55 +0000, Paul Crowley
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <dsfdsfd...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:
> >On 30/01/2013 17:41, RichTravsky wrote:

> >>http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehist...

It seems to me that the most definitive evidence would involve whether
or not and to what degree extinction events can be associated with
that 13 kya date.

[Lee Olsen]

On Feb 1, 11:10 am, Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> It seems to me that the most definitive evidence would involve whether
> or not and to what degree extinction events can be associated with
> that 13 kya date.

http://csfa.tamu.edu/mammoth/issues/Volume-22/vol22_num1.pdf
See page 7

[Eric Stevens]

There is more to it than extinction events. There does appear to be
archaeological evidence as well.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Paul Crowley]

On 31/01/2013 19:48, Eric Stevens wrote:

>>> Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
>>> Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
>>> published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.
>>>
>>> Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
>>> Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
>>> Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact

>>> or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the Earth�s

>>> climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
>>> explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.

>> There was a remarkable event some 13,000 years ago.
>> But ssssshhhhh -- no one in PA has ever heard of it.
>
> Oh yes they have! They have even given it a name: the 'Younger Dryas'
> period. The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
> satisfactory explanation for it.

Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.

I was thinking of a broader trend, starting about
16 kya, of the ending of the last ice age, and
consequent rise in sea level. Perhaps it's a
little misleading to call it an 'event', since it
spanned many thousands of years. But those
who experienced it would have seen it as a
succession of drastic events, as the land their
grandmothers had known and cultivated was
flooded and all their wealth was destroyed.
This happened again and again, and at some
point the social structure that had supported
the Clovis culture could not longer cope.

The society at the time was probably roughly
similar to those found by 16th century explorers
and described by Thomas Harriot. Like almost
all other human societies, the bulk of the
population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
level. The devastation and dislocation caused
by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
would have lead to famine, and war. Life would
have been similar to, but much worse than, that
in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,
All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
points) would have ceased.

PA has long ignored, or been quite ignorant of,
(a) the rise in sea-level around this time; and
(b) the fact that humans predominantly live
at, or close to sea-level.


Paul,

[Eric Stevens]

On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 11:21:30 +0000, Paul Crowley
<dsfds...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:

>On 31/01/2013 19:48, Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>>> Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
>>>> Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
>>>> published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.
>>>>
>>>> Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
>>>> Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
>>>> Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact

>>>> or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the Earth�s

>>>> climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
>>>> explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.
>
>>> There was a remarkable event some 13,000 years ago.
>>> But ssssshhhhh -- no one in PA has ever heard of it.
>>
>> Oh yes they have! They have even given it a name: the 'Younger Dryas'
>> period. The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
>> satisfactory explanation for it.
>
>Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
>Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.

You can't properly say that in that we don't really know what
eliminated the Clovis culture. The presence of nano-diamonds in
association with a thin black layer appears to mark the limit of the
Clovis cultue but people are still arguing about what caused them or
even whether they exist.

>
>I was thinking of a broader trend, starting about

>16 kya, of the ending of the last ice age, ...

Oops! You are slipping a bit. Not long ago you were claiming 13,000
years.

> ... and

>consequent rise in sea level. Perhaps it's a
>little misleading to call it an 'event', since it
>spanned many thousands of years. But those
>who experienced it would have seen it as a
>succession of drastic events, as the land their
>grandmothers had known and cultivated was
>flooded and all their wealth was destroyed.
>This happened again and again, and at some
>point the social structure that had supported
>the Clovis culture could not longer cope.

I don't see why it should be a succession of events. I would have
thought that it would have largely been an ongoing process as it is
today. Of course this would have been punctuated by occasion real
events such as the collapse of ice dams and the almost instantaneous
collapse of glacial lakes. At least one of these may have coincided
with the onset of the Younger Dryas. I say 'may have coincided'
because the dating of the individual events is too uncertain to
support claims of simultenaety.

More likely, except for draining of the glacial lakes, there was a
slow and steady rise in sea levels which was hardly noticed by the
peoples of the time. The situation may have been different if they had
large and permanent structures, such as burial mounds or temple
pyramids, around which their cultures were anchored. However there is
no evidence of such things until many thousands of years later.

>
>The society at the time was probably roughly
>similar to those found by 16th century explorers
>and described by Thomas Harriot. Like almost
>all other human societies, the bulk of the
>population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
>level. The devastation and dislocation caused
>by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
>would have lead to famine, and war. Life would
>have been similar to, but much worse than, that
>in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,
>All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
>points) would have ceased.

I can't see that happening. Stone points were too fundamental to their
livelyhood. And then there is the problem of the nano-diamonds and the
black mat. There seems to be more to this than a mere North-America
wide cultural collapse.

>
>PA has long ignored, or been quite ignorant of,
>(a) the rise in sea-level around this time; and
>(b) the fact that humans predominantly live
>at, or close to sea-level.
>
>
>Paul,

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Tom McDonald]

On 2/3/2013 4:51 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 11:21:30 +0000, Paul Crowley
> <dsfds...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:

<snip>

>> The society at the time was probably roughly
>> similar to those found by 16th century explorers
>> and described by Thomas Harriot.

No. Harriot described the Algonquian culture in the Carolinas. They were
settled agriculturalists, and had been so for long enough to have gotten
the potato, which was first domesticated in South America. They would
have had little in common with mobile hunter/gatherers of the Clovis
culture.

> Like almost
>> all other human societies, the bulk of the
>> population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
>> level. The devastation and dislocation caused
>> by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
>> would have lead to famine, and war.

You'll have to explain that one. For one thing, Clovis people were thin
on the ground. (And lived all across North America, for that matter--not
bunched at the coasts.) For another, as Eric pointed out, the rise of
sea level would have been far too gradual (except in the case of local
catastrophes) to have inconvenienced mobile h/gs.

For a final thing, what makes you think there would have been war? Over
scarce resources? No--they would simply have moved to an area with
adequate resources. Famine? Famine is largely a problem of
agriculturalists due to their relatively large, relatively sedentary
population, in a landscape of other large groups of settled people. Even
in the case of agriculturalists, lack of resources in a
sparsely-populated area merely meant having to up sticks and move to a
more productive area. (Look up the Koster site in, I think, Illinois. It
was built and abandoned several times, probably due to exhaustion of the
soil or of easily-attained firewood.)

Clovis folks almost certainly didn't notice the sea level rise, even if
they lived on the coast. At most, they might have had a tradition of
their forbears exploiting an area that was now under water.

> Life would
>> have been similar to, but much worse than, that
>> in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,

No, for the reasons I mention above.

>> All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
>> points) would have ceased.
>
> I can't see that happening. Stone points were too fundamental to their
> livelyhood.

Yes. Also, of course, they obviously could an did manufacture their
stone tools all over the continent, from relatively local sources of
tool stone. Any trade of tool stone, or of pre-made points (or more
likely partially-worked blanks) would have been centered on sources not
many tens of miles from their home ranges. There would have been no
continent-spanning trade system to disrupt by the very, very gradual
rise of sea levels.

> And then there is the problem of the nano-diamonds and the
> black mat. There seems to be more to this than a mere North-America
> wide cultural collapse.
>>
>> PA has long ignored, or been quite ignorant of,
>> (a) the rise in sea-level around this time; and

They have long been aware of, and written about, that sea level rise.

>> (b) the fact that humans predominantly live
>> at, or close to sea-level.

You assume that based on where folks live today, when trade (especially
sea-borne trade) is vital to life. You, simplistically and falsely, IMO,
try to map modern patterns onto pre-agricultural cultures; it doesn't work.

I'm not sure you have a very good grasp of deep time and what PAs
actually know; or how they operate, come to that. Your apparent
commitment to trashing folks who do for a living what you do as a hobby
is too deep-seated and strident to seem other than sour grapes.

[RichTravsky]

Which doesn't mention craters.

> For an interesting variation on the original Firestone theory see
> http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastrophe/
> which postulates a comet storm from the south.

The actual paper is here

http://www.agu.org/books/gm/v198/2012GM001209/2012GM001209.shtml
GEOPHYSICAL MONOGRAPH SERIES, VOL. 198, PP. 13-26, 2012
Arguments and Evidence Against a Younger Dryas Impact Event

We present arguments and evidence against the hypothesis that a
large impact or airburst caused a significant abrupt climate
change, extinction event, and termination of the Clovis culture at
12.9 ka. It should be noted that there is not one single Younger
Dryas (YD) impact hypothesis but several that conflict with one
another regarding many significant details. Fragmentation and
explosion mechanisms proposed for some of the versions do not
conserve energy or momentum, no physics-based model has been
presented to support the various concepts, and existing physical
models contradict them. In addition, the a priori odds of the
impact of a >4 km comet in the prescribed configuration on the
Laurentide Ice Sheet during the specified time period are
infinitesimal, about one in 1015. There are three broad classes
of counterarguments. First, evidence for an impact is lacking. No
impact craters of the appropriate size and age are known, and no
unambiguously shocked material or other features diagnostic of
impact have been found in YD sediments. Second, the
climatological, paleontological, and archeological events that
the YD impact proponents are attempting to explain are not unique,
are arguably misinterpreted by the proponents, have large
chronological uncertainties, are not necessarily coupled, and do
not require an impact. Third, we believe that proponents have
misinterpreted some of the evidence used to argue for an impact,
and several independent researchers have been unable to reproduce
reported results. This is compounded by the observation of
contamination in a purported YD sample with modern carbon.

I need to snag the full paper later this week.

[RichTravsky]

So, uh Dimmie, your unstated assertion is that you can't read for
comprehension?

[RichTravsky]

Wrong. In fact, speculation about megafaunal extinction goes back to the 19th
century.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01744.x/pdf
Journal of Biogeography (J. Biogeogr.) (2007) 34, 1642�1646

Early Holocene survival of megafauna in South America

The debate over the causes of the Pleistocene megafaunal extinction dates
back to the early 19th century, and continues to generate considerable
controversy.
...

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
<traRvE...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

I've been ignoring this topic for a while but your article has set me
(metaphorically) digging.

I have already posted a link to
http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastrophe/

I have now found http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/ from the same
author. In particular you should note the openning paragraphs:

"On March 6, 2012 when Isabel Israde-Alc�ntara et al. reported
Evidence from central Mexico supporting the Younger Dryas
extraterrestrial impact hypothesis their new paper in PNAS
immediately superseded Firestone et al. (2007) as the flagship
paper for the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis. They reported a 10
cm thick impact layer in Lake Cuitzeo that�s similar to the
Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary which marks the impact event that�s
blamed for the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Meanwhile Terry Jones of Cal Poly has reported that the California
archaeological record is consistent with Younger Dryas disruptive
event. He tells us that there is a 700 year gap in human
occupation in California beginning at the start of the Younger
Dryas cooling. Also D.J. Kennet et al. reported Wildfire and abrupt
ecosystem disruption on California�s Northern Channel Islands at
the �ller�d�Younger Dryas boundary (13.0�12.9 ka)

And in central California some of the foothills of the western
slope of the Sierra Nevada mountains are blanketed with pristine
burnt facies that can�t be attributed to terrestrial volcanism.

We have a bit of a mystery here in California concerning what kind
of catastrophe happened at the beginning of the Younger Dryas
Cooling. There is compelling evidence that it is related to a large
cluster airburst event that hit the western half of the continent
12,900 YA. And there is currently a core drilling project underway
in northern California that has the potential shed a great deal of
light on things. "

.... read on for a description of a core-drilling project.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[RichTravsky]

Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
> <traRvE...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehistorichumansnotwipedoutbycomet,saysresearchers.aspx
> >
> >Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
> >Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
> >published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.
> >
> >Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
> >Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
> >Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact

> >or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the EarthīŋŊs

> >climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
> >explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.
> >...
> >Researchers argue that no appropriately sized impact craters from that
> >time period have been discovered, and no shocked material or any other
> >features of impact have been found in sediments. They also found that
> >samples presented in support of the impact hypothesis were contaminated
> >with modern material and that no physics model can support the theory.
> >
> >"The theory has reached zombie status," said Professor Andrew Scott from
> >the Department of Earth Sciences at Royal Holloway. "Whenever we are able
> >to show flaws and think it is dead, it reappears with new, equally
> >unsatisfactory, arguments."
> >...
>
> I've been ignoring this topic for a while but your article has set me
> (metaphorically) digging.
>
> I have already posted a link to
> http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastrophe/
>
> I have now found http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/ from the same
> author. In particular you should note the openning paragraphs:
>

> "On March 6, 2012 when Isabel Israde-AlcīŋŊntara et al. reported

> Evidence from central Mexico supporting the Younger Dryas
> extraterrestrial impact hypothesis their new paper in PNAS
> immediately superseded Firestone et al. (2007) as the flagship
> paper for the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis. They reported a 10

> cm thick impact layer in Lake Cuitzeo thatīŋŊs similar to the
> Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary which marks the impact event thatīŋŊs

> blamed for the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
>
> Meanwhile Terry Jones of Cal Poly has reported that the California
> archaeological record is consistent with Younger Dryas disruptive
> event. He tells us that there is a 700 year gap in human
> occupation in California beginning at the start of the Younger
> Dryas cooling. Also D.J. Kennet et al. reported Wildfire and abrupt

> ecosystem disruption on CaliforniaīŋŊs Northern Channel Islands at
> the īŋŊllerīŋŊdīŋŊYounger Dryas boundary (13.0īŋŊ12.9 ka)

>
> And in central California some of the foothills of the western
> slope of the Sierra Nevada mountains are blanketed with pristine

> burnt facies that canīŋŊt be attributed to terrestrial volcanism.

>
> We have a bit of a mystery here in California concerning what kind
> of catastrophe happened at the beginning of the Younger Dryas
> Cooling. There is compelling evidence that it is related to a large
> cluster airburst event that hit the western half of the continent
> 12,900 YA. And there is currently a core drilling project underway
> in northern California that has the potential shed a great deal of
> light on things. "
>
> .... read on for a description of a core-drilling project.
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens

If the data is conflicting, then more work can help clear it up.

[Eric Stevens]

Why should they? Nobody has positively identified any.

Fine, but the paper you have cited is _NOT_ the paper referred to in
the article from Polar Field Services Newsletter 'Field Notes'. The
paper you have cited has M Boslough as lead author and reports finding
no evidence. The paper the PFS Newsletter refers to the University of
Maine�s Dr. Andrei Kurbatov as a lead author and refers to the finding
of nano-diamonds. In particular it says:

"Today that debate has reached a boil following the publication of a
scientific paper in the International Glaciological Society�s
Journal of Glaciology documenting the discovery of a layer of
nanodiamonds in the Greenland ice sheet. Nanodiamonds are believed
to be evidence of an extraterrestrial event. Their presence in the
Greenland ice sheet is the first discovery of a heavy concentration
of a discreet layer of extraterrestrial matter in the Greenland ice
sheet, said University of Maine�s Dr. Andrei Kurbatov, lead author
on the paper.

�We can link this to events in time and we think it is in proximity
to the Younger Dryas,� said Kurbatov. �But we cannot yet determine
the definitive timing of the event.�

In this game, I suspect the finding of something trumps the
not-finding of something.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Eric Stevens]

On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:42:03 -0700, RichTravsky
<traRvE...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Eric Stevens wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:41:25 -0700, RichTravsky
>> <traRvE...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehistorichumansnotwipedoutbycomet,saysresearchers.aspx
>> >
>> >Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
>> >Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
>> >published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.
>> >
>> >Researchers from Royal Holloway, together with Sandia National
>> >Laboratories and 13 other universities across the United States and
>> >Europe, have found evidence which rebuts the belief that a large impact

>> >or airburst caused a significant and abrupt change to the Earth�s

>> >climate and terminated the Clovis culture. They argue that other
>> >explanations must be found for the apparent disappearance.
>> >...
>> >Researchers argue that no appropriately sized impact craters from that
>> >time period have been discovered, and no shocked material or any other
>> >features of impact have been found in sediments. They also found that
>> >samples presented in support of the impact hypothesis were contaminated
>> >with modern material and that no physics model can support the theory.
>> >
>> >"The theory has reached zombie status," said Professor Andrew Scott from
>> >the Department of Earth Sciences at Royal Holloway. "Whenever we are able
>> >to show flaws and think it is dead, it reappears with new, equally
>> >unsatisfactory, arguments."
>> >...
>>
>> I've been ignoring this topic for a while but your article has set me
>> (metaphorically) digging.
>>
>> I have already posted a link to
>> http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/a-different-kind-of-climate-catastrophe/
>>
>> I have now found http://craterhunter.wordpress.com/ from the same
>> author. In particular you should note the openning paragraphs:
>>

>> "On March 6, 2012 when Isabel Israde-Alc�ntara et al. reported

>> Evidence from central Mexico supporting the Younger Dryas
>> extraterrestrial impact hypothesis their new paper in PNAS
>> immediately superseded Firestone et al. (2007) as the flagship
>> paper for the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis. They reported a 10

>> cm thick impact layer in Lake Cuitzeo that�s similar to the
>> Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary which marks the impact event that�s

>> blamed for the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
>>
>> Meanwhile Terry Jones of Cal Poly has reported that the California
>> archaeological record is consistent with Younger Dryas disruptive
>> event. He tells us that there is a 700 year gap in human
>> occupation in California beginning at the start of the Younger
>> Dryas cooling. Also D.J. Kennet et al. reported Wildfire and abrupt

>> ecosystem disruption on California�s Northern Channel Islands at

>> the �ller�d�Younger Dryas boundary (13.0�12.9 ka)

>>
>> And in central California some of the foothills of the western
>> slope of the Sierra Nevada mountains are blanketed with pristine

>> burnt facies that can�t be attributed to terrestrial volcanism.

>>
>> We have a bit of a mystery here in California concerning what kind
>> of catastrophe happened at the beginning of the Younger Dryas
>> Cooling. There is compelling evidence that it is related to a large
>> cluster airburst event that hit the western half of the continent
>> 12,900 YA. And there is currently a core drilling project underway
>> in northern California that has the potential shed a great deal of
>> light on things. "
>>
>> .... read on for a description of a core-drilling project.
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Eric Stevens
>
>If the data is conflicting, then more work can help clear it up.

I get the impression that things are quietly moving. What the
conclusions will be are anybody's guess.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Paul Crowley]

On 03/02/2013 22:51, Eric Stevens wrote:

>>> . The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
>>> satisfactory explanation for it.
>>
>> Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
>> Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.
>
> You can't properly say that in that we don't really know what
> eliminated the Clovis culture.

There either isn't a good (or plausible) reason,
or there is. If so, let's hear it.

>> I was thinking of a broader trend, starting about
>> 16 kya, of the ending of the last ice age, ...
>
> Oops! You are slipping a bit. Not long ago you were
> claiming 13,000 years.

I'm saying that a process starting around 16 kya
took some 3 Kyr to wipe out this culture.

>> ... and
>> consequent rise in sea level. Perhaps it's a
>> little misleading to call it an 'event', since it
>> spanned many thousands of years. But those
>> who experienced it would have seen it as a
>> succession of drastic events, as the land their
>> grandmothers had known and cultivated was
>> flooded and all their wealth was destroyed.
>> This happened again and again, and at some
>> point the social structure that had supported
>> the Clovis culture could not longer cope.
>
> I don't see why it should be a succession of events. I would
> have thought that it would have largely been an ongoing
> process as it is today. Of course this would have been
> punctuated by occasion real events such as the collapse of
> ice dams and the almost instantaneous collapse of glacial
> lakes.

There is no need for events as dramatic as that
(not that they didn't sometimes occur). Consider
the effect of a rise in sea-level today of (say) two
metres. Most of New York City, (and London, and
most other coastal cities) would be destroyed by
the next 'super-storm'. So would the fields of any
settled populations.

> More likely, except for draining of the glacial lakes, there
> was a slow and steady rise in sea levels which was hardly
> noticed by the peoples of the time.

That's crazy. Was Hurricane Katriona noticed by the
population of New Orleans? In modern times, we
have good notice of such events. A century ago,
they arrived from nowhere. 15 kya, they'd also
have been without warning and just as devastating.

> The situation may have been different if they had large and
> permanent structures, such as burial mounds or temple
> pyramids, around which their cultures were anchored.
> However there is no evidence of such things until many
> thousands of years later.

Of course there's no evidence. How much would be
left of New Orleans after a few thousand Hurricane
Katrionas, tens of thousands of lesser storms and
ten million routine tides, ending with its site being
100 metres under the sea?

>> The society at the time was probably roughly
>> similar to those found by 16th century explorers
>> and described by Thomas Harriot. Like almost
>> all other human societies, the bulk of the
>> population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
>> level. The devastation and dislocation caused
>> by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
>> would have lead to famine, and war. Life would
>> have been similar to, but much worse than, that
>> in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,
>> All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
>> points) would have ceased.
>
> I can't see that happening. Stone points were too
> fundamental to their livelyhood.

If they could not get the tool they preferred,
they'd have used an alternative. Those skills
had got lost, presumably because the skilled
workers had died and their whole system
destroyed. Maybe, by that time, the huge
numbers of 'tame' herbivores (i.e. those that
did not see humans as predators) had wised
up and were no longer vulnerable to a quiet
approach by a slender biped.


Paul.

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 10:15:58 +0000, Paul Crowley
<dsfds...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:

>On 03/02/2013 22:51, Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>>> . The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
>>>> satisfactory explanation for it.
>>>
>>> Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
>>> Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.
>>
>> You can't properly say that in that we don't really know what
>> eliminated the Clovis culture.
>
>There either isn't a good (or plausible) reason,
>or there is. If so, let's hear it.

I've just said there isn't.

The graph in
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/01/sea-level-rise-jumpy-after-last-ice-age/
is the most useful guide I can quickly find to the rise in sea level
since the last ice age. I've printed it out to a usefully large (A4)
size and calculated the rate of rise during the worst period. This
just happens to be the so-called 'Meltwater Pulse' which appears to
terminate at the beginning of the Younger Dryas. The rate of rise at
this time appears to be about .028 metres/year.

At this rate your 2 metre rise would take about 71 years. I doubt that
this would take the members of the Clovis culture by surprise. In fact
I doubt they would even notice it.

>
>> More likely, except for draining of the glacial lakes, there
>> was a slow and steady rise in sea levels which was hardly
>> noticed by the peoples of the time.
>
>That's crazy. Was Hurricane Katriona noticed by the
>population of New Orleans? In modern times, we
>have good notice of such events. A century ago,
>they arrived from nowhere. 15 kya, they'd also
>have been without warning and just as devastating.

To what then are you attributing the demise of the Clovis culture? Is
it storms which can easily be accompanied by tidal surges of several
metres or is it the slow and gradual rise of sea levels?

In any case, even if you are correct and the sea wipes out the coastal
Clovis culture, what is it that extinguishes the culture hundreds of
miles from the sea?

>
>> The situation may have been different if they had large and
>> permanent structures, such as burial mounds or temple
>> pyramids, around which their cultures were anchored.
>> However there is no evidence of such things until many
>> thousands of years later.
>
>Of course there's no evidence. How much would be
>left of New Orleans after a few thousand Hurricane
>Katrionas, tens of thousands of lesser storms and
>ten million routine tides, ending with its site being
>100 metres under the sea?

But the construction of these things is not confined to the coast.

>
>>> The society at the time was probably roughly
>>> similar to those found by 16th century explorers
>>> and described by Thomas Harriot. Like almost
>>> all other human societies, the bulk of the
>>> population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
>>> level. The devastation and dislocation caused
>>> by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
>>> would have lead to famine, and war. Life would
>>> have been similar to, but much worse than, that
>>> in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,
>>> All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
>>> points) would have ceased.
>>
>> I can't see that happening. Stone points were too
>> fundamental to their livelyhood.
>
>If they could not get the tool they preferred,
>they'd have used an alternative. Those skills
>had got lost, presumably because the skilled
>workers had died and their whole system
>destroyed.

What killed all their skilled workers, all more or less at once?

>Maybe, by that time, the huge
>numbers of 'tame' herbivores (i.e. those that
>did not see humans as predators) had wised
>up and were no longer vulnerable to a quiet
>approach by a slender biped.

And this happened more or less all over the country at once, so the
entire Clovis culture was simultaneously eliminated by universal
starvation?

Nope, I think there has to be a better explanation.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Eric Stevens]

Further to the above: - see
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-03/space-rock-impact-could-have-caused-ancient-cooldown-new-evidence-says

or http://tinyurl.com/6togemj

"This time, the researchers studied a different location � a lake in
central Mexico instead of Greenland � and used a different set of
techniques to take their measurements. The team studied a
10-centimeter-thick, carbon-rich layer dating to 12,900 years ago,
which contained nanodiamonds, carbon spherules and other material.
Israde-Alc�ntara and colleagues at the Universidad Michoacana de
San Nic�las de Hidalgo in Mexico and the U.S. Geological Survey
report their results in the Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences.

The sediment layer came from a a 27-meter-long core sample drilled
from Lake Cuitzeo as part of a paleoclimate study. The team focused
on several microparticles they attribute to widespread burning �
such as carbon particulates � and nanodiamonds, which they measured
using even more precise techniques than Kennett et al. two years
ago.

These particles can�t be explained by any terrestrial mechanisms,
the authors say. They rule out a rain shower of cosmic particles;
wildfires; volcanism; human-related activities; and even particle
misidentification (like finding fool�s nanodiamonds). They say a
cosmic impact is the only viable hypothesis."
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Paul Crowley]

On 06/02/2013 23:32, Eric Stevens wrote:

>>>>> . The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
>>>>> satisfactory explanation for it.
>>>>
>>>> Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
>>>> Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.
>>>
>>> You can't properly say that in that we don't really know what
>>> eliminated the Clovis culture.
>>
>> There either isn't a good (or plausible) reason,
>> or there is. If so, let's hear it.
>
> I've just said there isn't.

Which is what I also said. But then you stated
that " . . you can't properly say that . . ."

>>>> I was thinking of a broader trend, starting about
>>>> 16 kya, of the ending of the last ice age, ...
>>>
>>> Oops! You are slipping a bit. Not long ago you were
>>> claiming 13,000 years.

No. We accept that something happened at
13 kya. You say it was some sudden unknown
event. I say it was the culmination of a series,
finally destroying a culture.

>> There is no need for events as dramatic as that
>> (not that they didn't sometimes occur). Consider
>> the effect of a rise in sea-level today of (say) two
>> metres. Most of New York City, (and London, and
>> most other coastal cities) would be destroyed by
>> the next 'super-storm'. So would the fields of any
>> settled populations.
>
> The graph in
> http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/01/sea-level-rise-jumpy-after-last-ice-age/
> is the most useful guide I can quickly find to the rise in sea level
> since the last ice age. I've printed it out to a usefully large (A4)
> size and calculated the rate of rise during the worst period. This
> just happens to be the so-called 'Meltwater Pulse' which appears to
> terminate at the beginning of the Younger Dryas. The rate of rise at
> this time appears to be about .028 metres/year.
>
> At this rate your 2 metre rise would take about 71 years. I doubt that
> this would take the members of the Clovis culture by surprise. In fact
> I doubt they would even notice it.

If they were hunters on the prairies, living on
something like buffalo, I'd agree. But IMHO
they were more likely setted on the coast,
having brought agricultural skills with them.
Although I'm thinking, more and more, that
there was a separate population which lived
off the tame fauna, until it had eliminated
every readily accessible species. That was
probably the basis of the Clovis culture.

>>> More likely, except for draining of the glacial lakes, there
>>> was a slow and steady rise in sea levels which was hardly
>>> noticed by the peoples of the time.
>>
>> That's crazy. Was Hurricane Katriona noticed by the
>> population of New Orleans? In modern times, we
>> have good notice of such events. A century ago,
>> they arrived from nowhere. 15 kya, they'd also
>> have been without warning and just as devastating.
>
> To what then are you attributing the demise of the Clovis
> culture? Is it storms which can easily be accompanied by
> tidal surges of several metres or is it the slow and gradual
> rise of sea levels?

Rises in sea levels manifest themselves by means
of successively destructive storms. A significant
part of the population wakes up to find the sea
surrounding them, with all their crops, possessions
and land destroyed. They then ask their neighbours
for help. In hard times, that cannot be provided and
they turn into ravaging bands.

> In any case, even if you are correct and the sea wipes out
> the coastal Clovis culture, what is it that extinguishes the
> culture hundreds of miles from the sea?

Rampaging refugees. Wave after wave of them.

>>> The situation may have been different if they had large and
>>> permanent structures, such as burial mounds or temple
>>> pyramids, around which their cultures were anchored.
>>> However there is no evidence of such things until many
>>> thousands of years later.
>>
>> Of course there's no evidence. How much would be
>> left of New Orleans after a few thousand Hurricane
>> Katrionas, tens of thousands of lesser storms and
>> ten million routine tides, ending with its site being
>> 100 metres under the sea?
>
> But the construction of these things is not confined to the
> coast.

I think, that if you look, you'll see that few or
none are built at an altitude of more than 100
metres above sea-level.

>>>> The society at the time was probably roughly
>>>> similar to those found by 16th century explorers
>>>> and described by Thomas Harriot. Like almost
>>>> all other human societies, the bulk of the
>>>> population would have lived at, or close to, sea-
>>>> level. The devastation and dislocation caused
>>>> by rising sea-levels, generation after generation,
>>>> would have lead to famine, and war. Life would
>>>> have been similar to, but much worse than, that
>>>> in the Roman Empire around and after 400 A.D,
>>>> All manufacturing and trade (of and in Clovis
>>>> points) would have ceased.
>>>
>>> I can't see that happening. Stone points were too
>>> fundamental to their livelyhood.
>>
>> If they could not get the tool they preferred,
>> they'd have used an alternative. Those skills
>> had got lost, presumably because the skilled
>> workers had died and their whole system
>> destroyed.
>
> What killed all their skilled workers, all more or less at
> once?

The four horsemen: Pestilence, War, Famine,
and Death

>> Maybe, by that time, the huge
>> numbers of 'tame' herbivores (i.e. those that
>> did not see humans as predators) had wised
>> up and were no longer vulnerable to a quiet
>> approach by a slender biped.
>
> And this happened more or less all over the country at once,
> so the entire Clovis culture was simultaneously eliminated
> by universal starvation?

That's the least problem. I'm suggesting that the
bulk of the human population lived at low altitude,
not far from coasts -- as it does now. The pattern
of events would have been similar all over the
country.

Paul,

[Eric Stevens]

On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:39:24 +0000, Paul Crowley
<dsfds...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:

> On 06/02/2013 23:32, Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>>>>> . The only problem is that they haven't yet been able to find a
>>>>>> satisfactory explanation for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nor is there any good reason why the 'Younger
>>>>> Dryas' should have eliminated the Clovis Culture.
>>>>
>>>> You can't properly say that in that we don't really know what
>>>> eliminated the Clovis culture.
>>>
>>> There either isn't a good (or plausible) reason,
>>> or there is. If so, let's hear it.
>>
>> I've just said there isn't.
>
>Which is what I also said. But then you stated
>that " . . you can't properly say that . . ."

We are now falling into the trap of arguing over subtlties of meaning.
The fact that we don't know what eliminated the Clovis culture means
that we don't have a plausible reason for its loss. That doesn't mean
that there isn't a plausible reason; it's just that we don't know what
it is.

>
>>>>> I was thinking of a broader trend, starting about
>>>>> 16 kya, of the ending of the last ice age, ...
>>>>
>>>> Oops! You are slipping a bit. Not long ago you were
>>>> claiming 13,000 years.
>
>No. We accept that something happened at
>13 kya. You say it was some sudden unknown
>event. I say it was the culmination of a series,
>finally destroying a culture.

As I understand it, the Clovis culture didn't just peter out, it
vanished abruptly. We do seem to have a geophysical event marker
beyond which there is no Clovis.

You have to bear in mind the probable short lifespan of the Clovis
people. If they lived twenty years they would see 0.56 metres rise. I
agree that in some places that might be signifiant but in many places
it would hardly be noticed.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[RichTravsky]

Well?

[JTEM]

Sick fuck, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://csfa.tamu.edu/mammoth/issues/Volume-22/vol22_num1.pdf
> See page 7

It pretty much destroys your long held
and (very) poorly defended position.

[Lee Olsen]

On Feb 10, 11:01 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
> Sick fuck,
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153

wrote:
> >http://csfa.tamu.edu/mammoth/issues/Volume-22/vol22_num1.pdf
> > See page 7
>
> It pretty much destroys your long held
> and (very) poorly defended position.

What position is that? Did they prove something about the sock
puppet "Beringer" population?

[Paul Crowley]

On 10/02/2013 01:01, The Other Guy wrote:

> On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:39:24 +0000, Paul Crowley

>> If they were hunters on the prairies, living on
>> something like buffalo, I'd agree. But IMHO
>> they were more likely setted on the coast,
>> having brought agricultural skills with them.
>

> Where WERE the majority of Clovis finds located?
>
> NOT on or near the coast.

See if you can identify the nearest
paleo-coastline to you, as of 16 kya
or 13 kya.

Do you think you'll be able to wander
along it, looking for Clovis Points?

Of course, if they were high cliffs then,
and are still roughly the same high
cliffs now, you will be roughly able
to do do. But who ever lived on top
of high cliffs, exposed to winds off
the sea?


Paul.

[Lee Olsen]

(note: since The Other Guy chose not to archive, I'll do it for him)

X-Received: by 10.180.82.1 with SMTP id e1mr1680312wiy.
1.1360458086224;
Sat, 09 Feb 2013 17:01:26 -0800 (PST)
Path: g1ni1730wig.0!nntp.google.com!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!
feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!
feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail

From: The Other Guy <KnewsKg...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo,sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Latest on 13 kya North America comet impact

Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 17:01:24 -0800
Organization: OHLI
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <o8sdh8d3svck6nu8p...@4ax.com>
References: <51095B45...@hotmail.com> <kednm6$s3d
$3...@speranza.aioe.org> <ihilg8pp6mmm3io7g...@4ax.com>
<kelhah$srt$2...@speranza.aioe.org>
<k0ktg8ddc9j0p411u...@4ax.com> <ketah6$5eu
$2...@speranza.aioe.org> <aqn5h85jp3bcjo69h...@4ax.com>
<kf68ns$uab$1...@speranza.aioe.org>
Reply-To: KnewsKg...@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-
host="ec0e1477bacacd38a6a8f19648f322fb";
logging-data="19599"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-
september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX195b21qppxXO6Tgtz34Btpj"

User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130209-1, 02/09/2013), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:WGK+XOobBAWB1EJAUyYzS57sB0I=

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:39:24 +0000, Paul Crowley

<dsfdsfd...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:


> > If they were hunters on the prairies, living on
> > something like buffalo, I'd agree. But IMHO
> > they were more likely setted on the coast,
> > having brought agricultural skills with them.

> Where WERE the majority of Clovis finds located?

> NOT on or near the coast.

The Paleoindian Database of the Americas:
http://pidba.tennessee.edu/maps.htm

[Lee Olsen]

On Jan 30, 9:41 am, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.rhul.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/prehist...
>

> Comet explosions did not end the prehistoric human culture, known as
> Clovis, in North America 13,000 years ago, according to research
> published in the journal Geophysical Monograph Series.

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/8/2519
Abstract
"It is widely accepted, based on data from the last few decades and on
model simulations, that anthropogenic climate change will cause
increased fire activity. However, less attention has been paid to the
relationship between abrupt climate changes and heightened fire
activity in the paleorecord. We use 35 charcoal and pollen records to
assess how fire regimes in North America changed during the last
glacial–interglacial transition (15 to 10 ka), a time of large and
rapid climate changes. We also test the hypothesis that a comet impact
initiated continental-scale wildfires at 12.9 ka; the data do not
support this idea, nor are continent-wide fires indicated at any time
during deglaciation. There are, however, clear links between large
climate changes and fire activity. Biomass burning gradually increased
from the glacial period to the beginning of the Younger Dryas.
Although there are changes in biomass burning during the Younger
Dryas, there is no systematic trend. There is a further increase in
biomass burning after the Younger Dryas. Intervals of rapid climate
change at 13.9, 13.2, and 11.7 ka are marked by large increases in
fire activity. The timing of changes in fire is not coincident with
changes in human population density or the timing of the extinction of
the megafauna. Although these factors could have contributed to fire-
regime changes at individual sites or at specific times, the charcoal
data indicate an important role for climate, and particularly rapid
climate change, in determining broad-scale levels of fire activity."

[RichTravsky]

"Nanodiamonds are believed to be evidence of an extraterrestrial event"

"The finding adds credibility to the theory that fragments of a comet struck"

"The most recent discovery is further evidence that suggests that sometime
before the Holocene, Earth was struck by Extra Terrestrial objects"

all imply crater.

What Polar Field Services newsletter?

> paper you have cited has M Boslough as lead author and reports finding
> no evidence. The paper the PFS Newsletter refers to the University of
> Maine’s Dr. Andrei Kurbatov as a lead author and refers to the finding
> of nano-diamonds. In particular it says:

which is what I posted referred to. It is the pertinent paper.

[RichTravsky]

An air burst would not necessarily leave one big crater, but quite possible
several smaller ones. And, it would be devastating at the area directly
underneath, which should have left interesting bio footprints. Consider
the Tunguska area

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

The Tunguska explosion knocked an estimated 80 million trees down over an
area covering 2,150 square kilometres (830 sq mi).

That's a lot of carbon, none of which apparently resulted in diamond nano
particles.

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 10:25:08 -0700, RichTravsky

Not all nanodiamonds are evidence of an extraterrestrial event.
However the presence of the hexagonal form of diamond known as
Lonsdaleite is generally regarded as indubital evidence of an
extraterrestrial event.
>

>"The finding adds credibility to the theory that fragments of a comet struck"
>
>"The most recent discovery is further evidence that suggests that sometime
>before the Holocene, Earth was struck by Extra Terrestrial objects"
>
>all imply crater.

No they don't. They imply the arrival of an Extra Terrestrial object
in the atmosphere. It's merely an assumption on our part that that
necessarily implies the creation of a crater. In fact it doesn't.

For example, consider Tunguska. Then there is the question of whether
or not a crater would be formed in the earth if the impact was with
2km of ice. It is also suggested that the impactor had already broken
up from it's original single coherent mass and had become a stream of
smaller objects. There are lots of reasons why an incoming impactor
may not have left a conventional crater.

The one I previously referred to at
http://www.polarfield.com/blog/nanodiamond-discovery-greenland-shed-light-mass-extinction/

>
>> paper you have cited has M Boslough as lead author and reports finding
>> no evidence. The paper the PFS Newsletter refers to the University of
>> Maine�s Dr. Andrei Kurbatov as a lead author and refers to the finding
>> of nano-diamonds. In particular it says:
>
>which is what I posted referred to. It is the pertinent paper.
>
>> "Today that debate has reached a boil following the publication of a
>> scientific paper in the International Glaciological Society�s
>> Journal of Glaciology documenting the discovery of a layer of
>> nanodiamonds in the Greenland ice sheet. Nanodiamonds are believed
>> to be evidence of an extraterrestrial event. Their presence in the
>> Greenland ice sheet is the first discovery of a heavy concentration
>> of a discreet layer of extraterrestrial matter in the Greenland ice
>> sheet, said University of Maine�s Dr. Andrei Kurbatov, lead author
>> on the paper.
>>
>> �We can link this to events in time and we think it is in proximity
>> to the Younger Dryas,� said Kurbatov. �But we cannot yet determine
>> the definitive timing of the event.�
>>
>> In this game, I suspect the finding of something trumps the
>> not-finding of something.

I see how it is we are at cross purposes. The point where you inserted
the URL pointing to Boslough et al's paper was after I had given the
URL for the Polar Field Services Newsletter 'Field Notes' which refers
to the Kurbatov paper which apparently reports the finding of a layer
of nanodiamonds in the Greenland ice sheet. It was the finding of
these nanodiamonds which led me to make the remark of the paragraph
above. I regret I do not have access to the Kurbatov paper.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[RichTravsky]

Well, "was struck" does.

> in the atmosphere. It's merely an assumption on our part that that
> necessarily implies the creation of a crater. In fact it doesn't.
>
> For example, consider Tunguska. Then there is the question of whether
> or not a crater would be formed in the earth if the impact was with
> 2km of ice. It is also suggested that the impactor had already broken
> up from it's original single coherent mass and had become a stream of
> smaller objects. There are lots of reasons why an incoming impactor
> may not have left a conventional crater.

The recent one in Russia only left fragments. And lots of broken glass.

Oh, blog....

I'll email it to you later in the week.

[Eric Stevens]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 19:21:12 -0700, RichTravsky

That's a misconception.

>
>> in the atmosphere. It's merely an assumption on our part that that
>> necessarily implies the creation of a crater. In fact it doesn't.
>>
>> For example, consider Tunguska. Then there is the question of whether
>> or not a crater would be formed in the earth if the impact was with
>> 2km of ice. It is also suggested that the impactor had already broken
>> up from it's original single coherent mass and had become a stream of
>> smaller objects. There are lots of reasons why an incoming impactor
>> may not have left a conventional crater.
>
>The recent one in Russia only left fragments. And lots of broken glass.

And no permanent crater (unless you count a hole in the ice on the
surface of the lake).

I've already explained I don't have access to the original paper.

Many thanks.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[RichTravsky]

Well, damn. There was a link on the left sidebar for downloading, and
it requires a member login.

[Eric Stevens]

That's why now neither of us have access. :-)
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[jer...@glocalnet.net]

Den tisdagen den 19:e februari 2013 kl. 20:26:09 UTC+1 skrev Eric Stevens:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:21:08 -0700, RichTravsky
>

> <traRvEskyMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 19:21:12 -0700, RichTravsky
>

> >> <traRvEskyMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>
> >> >> above. I regret I do not have access to the Kurbatov paper.
>
> >> >
>
> >> >I'll email it to you later in the week.
>
> >>
>
> >> Many thanks.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >Well, damn. There was a link on the left sidebar for downloading, and
>
> >it requires a member login.
>
>
>
> That's why now neither of us have access. :-)
>
> --
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens

Could it be this?

http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1176&context=ers_facpub

This one is also interesting.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2013/pdf/1046.pdf

JerryT

[Eric Stevens]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:56:00 -0800 (PST), jer...@glocalnet.net wrote:

>Den tisdagen den 19:e februari 2013 kl. 20:26:09 UTC+1 skrev Eric Stevens:
>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:21:08 -0700, RichTravsky
>>
>> <traRvEskyMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Eric Stevens wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 19:21:12 -0700, RichTravsky
>>
>> >> <traRvEskyMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> above. I regret I do not have access to the Kurbatov paper.
>>
>> >> >
>>
>> >> >I'll email it to you later in the week.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Many thanks.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Well, damn. There was a link on the left sidebar for downloading, and
>>
>> >it requires a member login.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's why now neither of us have access. :-)
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric Stevens
>
>Could it be this?
>
>http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1176&context=ers_facpub
>

That's the one. No doubt this paper will be attacked but on the
surface it seems quite robust.

>This one is also interesting.
>
>http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2013/pdf/1046.pdf
>

That's another anomaly again! The evidence seems to be piling up that
something strange of extraterrestrial origin occurred at the beginning
of the Younger Dryas. The question is, what on earth (!) could it have
been?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens