Skip to comments.Challengers to Clovis-age impact theory missed key protocols, new study finds
Posted on 09/20/2012 7:18:47 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
An interdisciplinary team of scientists from seven U.S. institutions says a disregard of three critical protocols, including sorting samples by size, explains why a group challenging the theory of a North American meteor-impact event some 12,900 years ago failed to find iron- and silica-rich magnetic particles in the sites they investigated.
Not separating samples of the materials into like-sized groupings made for an avoidable layer of difficulty, said co-author Edward K. Vogel, a professor of psychology at the University of Oregon.
The new independent analysis -- published this week in the online Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences -- did, in fact, isolate large quantities of the "microspherules" at the involved sites where the challengers previously reported none. Lead author Malcolm A. LeCompte, an astrophysicist at Elizabeth City State University in North Carolina, said the findings support the climate-altering cosmic impact, but his team stopped short of declaring this as proof of the event.
The Clovis-age cosmic-impact theory was proposed in 2007 by a 26-member team led by Richard B. Firestone. That team included University of Oregon archaeologists Douglas J. Kennett and Jon M. Erlandson. While other groups have found corroborating evidence of a potential cosmic event, other groups reported difficulties doing so. One group, led by Todd A Surovell of the University of Wyoming, did not find any microspherule evidence at five of seven sites they tested, including two previously studied locations where Firestone reported large numbers of microspherules.
(Excerpt) Read more at eurekalert.org ...
Topper site in middle of comet controversy by Peggy Binette -- Albert Goodyear, an archaeologist in USC's College of Arts and Sciences, is a co-author on the study that upholds a 2007 PNAS study by Richard Firestone, a staff scientist at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Firestone found concentrations of spherules (micro-sized balls) of metals and nano-sized diamonds in a layer of sediment dating 12,900 years ago at 10 of 12 archaeological sites that his team examined. The mix of particles is thought to be the result of an extraterrestrial object, such as a comet or meteorite, exploding in the earth's atmosphere. Among the sites examined was USC's Topper, one of the most pristine U.S. sites for research on Clovis, one of the earliest ancient peoples.
Those bastards in the MSM will never cover this.
This scanning electron microscope image shows a magnetic impact spherule likely to have been created by an asteroid or comet impact 12,900 years ago, researchers say. CREDIT: Israde et al. (2012)
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
The debate is over! :') Seriously, the debunkers have been exposed as either grossly incompetent or prevaricators -- either way, they can't be trusted as researchers.
A thought ~ where did all the Aztec gold come from?
The Spanish found plenty of silver but little gold ~ except that which had already been acquired by the Indians. Which Indians is also a good question.
As DeSoto moved North from the Gulf of Mexico he asked the Indians where to find gold. They'd point further North.
Just so happens that was the correct and only answer ~
Is it Clovis NM? That’s near Roswell, isn’t it?
The comet or meteor seems to have destroyed most of them ~
you want to see some really nice Clovis points visit almost any of these traveling gun shows. There are always a few dealers around who scatter Clovis points among the pistols they have for sale.
I found one guy who had no idea what they were worth but just the day before I"d been reading the collectors catalog for arrowheads and spear points and this guy had several point lying about worth well over $10,000 each. He'd been unaware they had value but he could see how they could attract thieves at these shows.
Where are the diamonds? I want diamonds.
The mammoths liked to feed in the periglacial areas. By being right up against the glaciers the were shielded from the north winds, and the face of the glacier reflected sunlight back into the ground. The area near the glacier was much warmer than the surrounding tundra. It was well watered with melt water, and the soil was rich in minerals from the glacial till, and as loose as a well tended garden. Plants that are now exclusively tropical were better adapted to cold and variable day length.
Soooo, a mammoth feeds in the richest local environment, right up next to the glacier, and suddenly there's an avalanche instantly pounding the mammoth into the dirt and packing it in ice...
Thanks for this thread.
It’s cold everywhere. At least in the summer with the sun reflecting off the ice and the north wind blocked it’s a bit like a natural greenhouse near the edge.
What is the concentration of large Herbivores near Glacial Mastiffs, I am going to bed.
I haven’t read anything anywhere that remotely supports your points. Are you stating facts backed up by non cited sources or are you stating opinions?
I’m stating an opinion of mine, based on what I think might have happened. Please read nothing more into it than a layman’s hypothesis.
Perhaps it’s even true, I’d love for someone actually skilled in the art to see if it is plausible and can be tested.
It would certainly explain why one mammoth was found with a mouth full of marigolds and a broken back!
Has anyone encountered additional studies on the “black mat” that Firestone’s group wrote about?
Thank you. I don’t know how much you’ve read concerning the most recent extinction event(End Pleistocene) but there are any number of explanations for many of the anomalies relating to that period. As far as I know the only mammoth/mastodon found with buttercups or whatever in their mouths and/or stomachs were in Siberia which reportedly wasn’t covered with an ice sheet during the last glaciation. Fact is, evidence seems to indicate the climate was much milder then; maybe even sub-tropical. Go figger...
I am a trained anthropologist so you can trust me on this, a hairy a$$ed mammoth would like it a lot colder than a bald a$$ed mammoth would. they are going to be as far away from the equator as they can and still be able to find food.
Soooo, marigolds in the periglacial area or no?
But wait a minute; weren't the woolly mammoths suited to living in a cold climate? They are described as woolly due to their hairy coat, but this is only hair, greaseless hair. To help protect them from the cold, all of today's Arctic mammals have glands that make their hair oily to retain warmth - the mammoths had no such gland. Although thicker, a mammoth's hair is the same as that of elephants, and they live in the tropical regions. Many animals found in equatorial jungles also have thick hair, the tiger being one such example. Anyone still unconvinced could consider this - bones of tigers, rhinoceroses and antelope were found alongside the mammoths, and these are obviously not Arctic creatures.FWIW...
Now to my chores.
Dr. Walt Brown PhD still hass the best explanation for the wooly mammoth extinctions as far as I’m concerned...
Center for Scientific Creation
actually i agree with you, hair will trap moisture and as it evaporates it will cool, i just like to say hairy a$$ed mammoth! but this doesn’t explain the hairy highlander, i dont have a gland that makes my hair oily but my peoples prefer the colder climes!
If I hand’t read the headline before seeing that picture I would have sworn I was looking a colonoscopy photo of Obama after his latest round of golf.
It isn’t confined to North America.
When I was of schoolin’ age, most of the school faculties were human. Not too sure nowadays.
Immanuel Velikovsky to Claude F. A. Schaeffer
[snip] One of the most amazing spectacles that I have observed is this: Those very men who observed and described the great catastrophes fall back and defend the theory of uniformity with even greater jealousy than their colleagues who never wavered and never were even tempted to question the ever harmonious run of centuries. Here is the case of Professor F. Rainey, presently with the University of Pennsylvania; him I quoted on p. I of “Earth in Upheaval” and please look up: “Wide cuts, often several miles in length” are sliced by giant machines in Alaska; “This ‘muck’ contains enormous numbers of frozen bones of extinct animals such as the mammoth, mastodon, super-bison and horse” (Rainey). [/snip]
12,400 years ago? Hydrologic cycle came to a screeching whoa for some reason, hmm, what could it have been? And might it have been 12, 900 years ago?Evolution in Your FaceLake Victoria, Africa's largest lake, is home to more than 300 species of cichlids. These fish, which are popular in aquariums, are deep-bodied and have one nostril, rather than the usual two, on each side of the head. Seismic profiles and cores of the lake taken by a team headed by Thomas C. Johnson of the University of Minnesota, reveal that the lake dried up completely about 12,400 years ago. This means that the rate of speciation of cichlid fishes has been extremely rapid: something on average of one new species every 40 years!
by Patrick Huyghe
Big Rock? Whole lot of stuff happened at the end of the Last Ice Age and no one has a clue. Then there was the Maunder Minimum no one has a clue there either.
Darwin is another example, what he saw and wrote in his private journals, was left out of his The Origin of Species.
Darwin Puzzles Over the Evidence
In his book The Origin of Species Darwin wrote, "The extinction of species has been involved in the most gratuitous mystery.
No one can have marveled more than I have at the extinction of species" (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, New York: Collier, 1962, p. 341).
Darwin was referring to his five-year cruise as amateur naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle. In his notes he revealed WHY he and the paleontologists of today, "are puzzled by the record of catastrophic death found in the rocks."
"What then, has exterminated so many species and whole genera?" Darwin asked in astonishment. "The mind at first is irresistibly hurried into the belief of some great catastrophe; but thus to destroy animals, both large and small, in Southern Patagonia, in Brazil, on the Cordillera of Peru, in North America up to Behring's [Bering's] Straits, WE MUST SHAKE THE ENTIRE FRAMEWORK OF THE GLOBE" (Charles Darwin, Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the Countries Visited During the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle Round the World, citation under date of January 9, 1834).
What he wrote in his notes never reached the book he wrote years later. His patron Lyell, the father of Uniformitarianism, wouldn't have approved...
Think about the time it took Monte Verde in Chili to get a somewhat approval.
I don’t know what section you were sending me to but chances are I’ve most likely read it since I have previously spent some time at the site.
“The idea that the laws that govern geologic processes have not changed during the history of the Earth were articulated by the 18th-century Scottish geologist James Hutton, who in 1785 presented his ideaslater published in two volumes as Theory of the Earth (1795)at meetings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. In this work Hutton showed that the Earth had a long history and that this history could be interpreted in terms of processes observed at the present, of which he gave examples. He showed, for instance, how soils were formed by the weathering of rocks and how layers of sediment accumulated. He stated that there was no need of any preternatural cause to explain the geologic record. Huttons proposal challenged the concept of a biblical Earth (with a history of some 6,000 years) that was created especially to be a home for man; the effect of his ideas on the learned world can be compared only with the earlier revolution in thought brought about by Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo when they displaced the concept of a universe centred on the Earth with the concept of a solar system centred on the Sun. Both advances challenged existing thought and were fiercely resisted for many years. In the publication Principles of Geology, 3 vol. (183033), the Scottish geologist Sir Charles Lyell deciphered the history of the Earth employing Huttonian principles and made available a host of new geologic evidence in support of the view that physical laws were permanent and that any form of supernaturalism can be rejected. Lyells work in turn profoundly influenced Charles Darwin, who recognized Lyell as having produced a revolution in science...”
They were simply working on theories using what information was available to them at the time. Lyell followed Hutton, and Darwin needed the long spans of time to explain his theory of evolution. The catastrophists understood that the earth wasn’t created six thousand years ago...what was created was the landscape, not the globe.
No one deserves to be called a liar imo. It’s a matter of interpretation, and clinging to dogma. In the case of Darwin he had to close his eyes to what he saw.
The Impossible Dinosaurs - Megafauna and Attenuated Gravity
Kronia.com ^ | Ted Holden
Posted on 03/21/2008 2:01:20 AM PDT by Swordmaker
Gee Fred, then you would you prefer to believe there are no liars? I've read all I care to about Darwin and Lyell and have come to the conclusion they consistently and deliberately misrepresented and/or ignored evidence that presented itself. Not just once, but over and over; again and again. Would you prefer to label them discombobulators??? Sugar coating what to me is obvious doesn't change anything. Look at the evidence.
Fred, at least gimme a clue what you’d like me to pull from that thread. It’s an oldie but a goodie I recall reading and scratching my head over at the time.
I can’t call a theory a lie when that theory was arrived at through the limited evidence that was then available to the theorists.
Maybe I would understand better what you mean by lying, if you gave me an example.
Just how did Hutton, Lyell and Darwin lie? I have no argument with their achievements. They all left a body of valuable work, my argument isn’t with them, it’s with the geologists who haven’t moved out of the 18th century.
It simply tells you that conditions were not always the same, so Uniformitarianism as per Hutton and Lyell is not a sound theory.
It also suggests that the timelines required by Darwin for the theory of evolution also has a few problems...if you are looking for answers, I don’t have them. I deal in questions. Why it is so?
He can find many fans of his incredulity at the shaking of the entire globe, particularly among those who profess hatred for his work, without knowing what’s really in it. :’) Thanks Fred Nerks, nice excerpt!
Looks to me like you've actually answered your own question; maybe without knowing it??? See HERE.
What we have are opposing views:
Not everyone agrees on the processes at work upon our planet. The new theory of uniformitarianism currently prevails, but the ancient concept of catastrophism is still alive and kicking.
Uniformitarianism/Gradualism: A theory that says the natural processes that change the Earth in the present have operated in the past at the same gradual rate, and that geological formations and structures can be interpreted by observing present-day actions.
Catastrophism: A theory that says the geological features of the Earth were formed by a series of sudden, violent catastrophes rather than a gradual evolutionary process. Since the 1830s conventional geological theory has revolved around the concept of uniformitarianism (or gradualism) - that the processes of the Earth have always been the same as we can observe today. The originator of these ideas was Scottish geologist James Hutton (1726-1797), although it took the efforts of Charles Lyell (1797-1875) and his Principles of Geology (1830) to enable the theory to become widespread. This new gradualist viewpoint, involving time-spans of millions of years, gave rise to the modern ideas of continental drift, the ice ages and Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
You can always search creationscience.com for anything specific. When I first encountered this site I simply could not stop reading and read it all straight through - and again several times now as there is more information than anyone could digest in only one reading. Also I was in a rush with my prior post - more of a ping until I had more time to return.
Here’s a good summary excerpt that I’m confident is the best explanation for frozen mammoths and the global flood of Noah. [left the footnotes in 109-117 and obviously much better formatted from the original website too]
” Evidence Requiring an Explanation
Summarized below are the hard-to-explain details which any satisfactory theory for the frozen mammoths should explain.
Abundant Food. A typical wild elephant requires about 330 pounds of food per day. Therefore, vast quantities of food were needed to support the estimated 5,000,000 mammoths that lived in just a small portion of northern Siberia. Adams mammoth, discovered in 1799, was so fat ... that its belly hung below its knees.109 How was abundant food available inside the Arctic Circle, especially during winter months when the Sun rarely shines?
Warm Climate. Abundant food requires a temperate climate, much warmer than northern Siberia todayor during the Ice Age. Little of the food found in Berezovkas mouth and stomach grows near the Arctic Circle today. Furthermore, the flower fragments in its stomach show that it died during warm weather. Despite the popular misconception, the mammoth was a temperatenot an Arcticanimal.
Away From Rivers. Although most frozen remains are found along river banks where excavations naturally occur, some frozen remains are found far from rivers.
Yedomas and Loess. Frozen mammoths are frequently found in yedomas and loess. What accounts for this and the strange properties of yedomas and loess? What is the source of so much loess?
Elevated Burials. Mammoth and rhinoceros bodies are often found on the highest levels of generally flat, low plateaus.110 Examples include dense concentrations of mammoth and rhinoceros remains in yedomas and the interior of Arctic islands. Dima was discovered in a mountainous region.
Multi-Continental. Soft parts of large animals have been preserved over a 3,000-mile-wide zone involving three continents (Asia, Europe, and North America). It is unlikely that so many unrelated local events would produce such similar results over such a broad geographical area.
Rock Ice. Strange, granular, Type 3 ice containing clay, sand, and a large volume of air pockets is sometimes found near frozen mammoths. [See Table 10 on page 262.]
Frozen Muck. Mammoth carcasses are almost exclusively encased in frozen muck.111 Also buried in muck are huge deposits of trees and other animal and vegetable matter. The origin of muck is a mystery.
Sudden Freezing. Some frozen mammoths and rhinoceroses had food preserved in their mouths, stomachs, or intestines.112
Suffocation. At least three mammoths and two rhinoceroses suffocated. No other cause of death has been established for the remaining frozen giants.
Dirty Lungs. Dimas respiratory and digestive tract contained silt, clay, and small particles of gravel. Just before he died, Dima breathed air and/or ate food containing such matter.
Peppered Tusks. Why, over wide geographical areas, did millimeter-size particles (rich in iron and nickel) become embedded in one side of some mammoth tusks?
-150°F. Temperatures surrounding some mammoths must have plunged below -150°F.
Large Animals. Most frozen remains are from the larger, stronger animals such as mammoths and rhinoceroses.
Summer-Fall Death. Vegetation in the stomachs and intestines of preserved mammoths implies that they died in late summer or early fall,114 perhaps in August115 or even late July.116
Animal Mixes. Bones of many types of animals, friends and foes, are frequently found near the mammoths.
Upright. Several frozen mammoths, and even mammoth skeletons,117 were found upright. Despite this posture, the Berezovka mammoth had a broken pelvis and shoulder blade, and a crushed leg. Surprisingly, he was not lying on his side in a position of agony.
Vertical Compression. Berezovkas crushed leg bone and horizontally flattened penis show severe vertical compression before or soon after death. Dima was also compressed and flattened.
Eighteen pieces of the problem are now before us. Fitting this centuries-old jigsaw puzzle together will be our final task. As you will see, clever and imaginative proposals have been made, but most address only a few pieces of the puzzle.”
Use ‘Mammoths Table 10’ on this website search engine or refer to pages 260-272 for a much more detailed explanation.
Of course in order to accept the hydroplate theory you must also be willing to examine the evidence for a 6000 year old creation...
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe