tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post6858968484328856573..comments2023-11-02T08:42:23.947+00:00Comments on The Subversive Archaeologist: Marco Langbroek Guest Comment: The YD Impact hypothesis--far too much impactthesubversivearchaeologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02730417511321512990noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-50035251734310357882012-04-11T16:54:19.062+01:002012-04-11T16:54:19.062+01:00Kt: I would be interested to hear about the "...Kt: I would be interested to hear about the "several putative Holocene and YDB impact candidates" you claim. I know the Carolina Bays have been proposed, but really, nobody in the impact science community takes that seriously. The Carolina Bays have a long history of attempts to explain them as impact craters, none of which has been convincing. Pinter et al (see main post) explicitly comment on that as well - and among the authors of that particular paper is Christian Koeberl, one of the nestors of impact science, so you can't say those are people that don't know their stuff. In addition, there is plenty of dating evidence to suggest that the Carolina Bays do not date to the Younger Dryas at all. <br /><br />The Corossal structure in Canada you bring up in one of your comments is interesting, but the structure is basically undated. The structure is also unusually shallow for a 4-km diameter impact structure - pointing to either an origin other than impact, or it being an old, strongly eroded feature like the other Canadian impact structures. That the structure is not (yet) listed on PASSC's Earth Impact Database points out that it is certainly not yet accepted as an impact structure. Linking this to the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis is completely premature at this moment.<br /><br />As for the controversies around the draining of Lake Agassiz: I don't see how controversies around this "prove" the YD impact hypothesis. You are setting up a straw man's argument here.<br /><br />(for the benefits of the readers: Lake Agassiz was a hughe glacial melt water lake south of the Laurentide ice sheet. One proposed cause for the Younger Dryas, is that the lake broke through to the Atlantic ocean, discharging large amounts of fresh water into the ocean leading to changes into the thermohaline circulation. There is some controversy about the exact "route" this breakthrough took)<br /><br />Draining of Lake Agassiz is one of the alternative explanations for the onset of the YD, as I noted in my essay. That there is some controversy around this as well is granted, but not the point. The essay is about the YD impact hypothesis, not these alternative causes for the Younger Dryas. If one of these alternatives is wrong or in need of amendment on details, that does not automatically prove the YD impact hypothesis is right. Nor does it make all that is wrong with the YD impact hypothesis, somehow magically right.<br /><br />Looking at how the argument about the YD impact hypothesis has evolved, much of what "believers" in the hypothesis feel is "strengthening" the hypothesis, are what Binford would have called "post-hoc accomodative arguments". Meaning that when the original arguments on base of which the hypothesis was proposed are falsified, proponents come up with new, slightly altered stories to cling to their original, disproved hypothesis.Marco Langbroeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-79587498559303800872012-04-10T22:16:55.693+01:002012-04-10T22:16:55.693+01:00Indeed, before I close the book on this chapter in...Indeed, before I close the book on this chapter in the life of the Subversive Archaeologist, I'd encourage any and all of you to have a look at this, the only work attributable to kT that made it into a bona fide publication--though, how that happened is a mystery to me. Have at it: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960000272_1996900272.pdfthesubversivearchaeologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02730417511321512990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-33055925446130144472012-04-10T22:16:19.735+01:002012-04-10T22:16:19.735+01:00And if you want to credibly research the Younger D...And if you want to credibly research the Younger Dryas and the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis, google and wikipedia are your friends.<br /><br />All I see is somebody who threw their hands up in exasperation after the first hint of trouble, and yet another academic commenting on something that he clearly is unfamiliar with. When you guys can show me that you are willing to put in the least amount of effort on this subject, do get back to me. I'm on the tubes.<br /><br />Thanks in advance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-82127734057885974552012-04-10T22:07:04.693+01:002012-04-10T22:07:04.693+01:00Anyone who wants to follow kT's accomplishment...Anyone who wants to follow kT's accomplishments can do so at cosmic.lifeform.org, the web site of one Thomas "Tommy" Lee Elifritz, rocket scientist. Scuze me while I kiss the sky.thesubversivearchaeologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02730417511321512990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-5969148190907697482012-04-10T22:00:41.637+01:002012-04-10T22:00:41.637+01:00I'm sneering at it because it is a poor essay,...I'm sneering at it because it is a poor essay, something I would expect from an undergraduate.<br /><br /><a href="http://theepistlesofpaul.blogspot.com/2011/04/corossol-structure-sept-iles-harbour.html" rel="nofollow">Corossol Crater</a><br /><br />The Younger Dryas itself boils down between a controvery between the Moorehead Phase dischage of Glacial Lake Agassiz, either to the Arctic as per Murton et al. and other coworkers, and somehow into Lake Superior and eventually out through the Champlain Sea and the St. Lawrence as per Rayburn and Carlson et al. and coworkers.<br /><br />You'll just have to dig the references up yourself, I don't have time to list them, but it is a fundamental prerequisite for auditing Younger Dryas 905.<br /><br />Commenting on this subject without understanding the broad and interdisciplinary implications of the various interacting forces results in essays of the type I have just brutally critiqued.<br /><br />Sorry if that offends you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-66252676427753702092012-04-10T21:49:12.316+01:002012-04-10T21:49:12.316+01:00Play nicely, kT. You might want to elaborate, for ...Play nicely, kT. You might want to elaborate, for us benighted archaeologists, just what you mean by the 'rerouting' and 'hydrogeological' hypotheses, and point us in the direction of those impact candidates you mention, along with a reference or two to enable us to follow up on your claims. Moreover, I think that no one here is trying to 'fool' anyone. So, again, I would ask that you do more than point and sneer at a guest of the Subversive Archaeologist and try to be just a little constructive. Thanks!thesubversivearchaeologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02730417511321512990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-37497093142662155552012-04-10T21:25:11.876+01:002012-04-10T21:25:11.876+01:00Sorry, seriously, Dr. Langbroek, it's that bad...Sorry, seriously, Dr. Langbroek, it's that bad. I mark you down for an F for your essay, not quite an epic fail, but a failure nevertheless. Clearly any YDB impact does not explain extinctions and climate reversal at the Younger Dryas Chronozone, but 'virtually no firm evidence' of an impact at the YDB fails completely when workers have already identified several putative Holocene and YDB impact candidates (albeit small and not continent busters), and only puts your entire essay in a bad light.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-17202706398126024672012-04-10T21:18:46.654+01:002012-04-10T21:18:46.654+01:00First of all, nobody clings to the 4km impacting b...First of all, nobody clings to the 4km impacting bolide hypothesis anymore, the fact that you bring it up, and all of the misidentified markers indicates to me that you haven't really looked at the Younger Dryas, neither the hydrogeological hypothesis nor the impact scenario.<br /><br />Nice try, I give you a D, though.<br /><br />The real action is in the Arctic verses the Lake Superior rerouting hypothesis and controversies. The fact that you brought none of that up indicates your unfamiliarity with the subject matter as well.<br /><br />Yes, I have spoken to Melott and Boslough, so you can't fool me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-78958107873051501512012-04-10T19:30:18.939+01:002012-04-10T19:30:18.939+01:00I s'pose you think that's funny, Wonderdog...I s'pose you think that's funny, Wonderdog! Lovely to hear from you.thesubversivearchaeologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02730417511321512990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3040099150725637733.post-59558899478523462662012-04-10T19:08:37.356+01:002012-04-10T19:08:37.356+01:00Wow! Nice essay. Rob, I think Marco deserves an &...Wow! Nice essay. Rob, I think Marco deserves an 'A' for that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com