New research findings consistent with theory of impact event 12,900 years ago

Sep 25, 2012 by Matt Shipman

(Phys.org)—New research findings published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) are consistent with a controversial theory that an extraterrestrial body – such as a comet – impacted the Earth approximately 12,900 years ago, possibly contributing to the significant climatic and ecological changes that date to that time period.

The paper includes significant findings about the nature of so-called "microspherules" that were found at a number of prehistoric sites, based on work done at NC State. But while the findings are interesting in themselves, the paper is only the latest in a heated scholarly debate focused on whether such an "impact event" took place.

The debate dates back to a 2007 paper, in which researchers reported finding evidence at multiple sites of a significant impact event. The evidence cited in that paper included a large increase in the abundance of magnetic microspherules at the study sites. The microspherules are metallic spheres in the range of 10 to 50 micrometers. For comparison, is 50 to 100 micrometers in diameter.

Specifically, the 2007 team found hundreds to thousands of these microspherules in each kilogram of dirt they sampled at the Boundary (YDB) layer from several sites.  The YDB marks the period when the Earth's climate reverted to conditions similar to the ice age and populations of prehistoric animals, such as mammoths, appear to have dropped off precipitously. It also marks the period when the Clovis culture in North America seems to have experienced a significant or some significant cultural modification. Samples were also taken from layers above and below the YDB.  Microspherules were found in much greater numbers in the dirt samples taken from the YDB, as compared to the samples from the other layers. These microspherules have a variety of natural and artificial sources, including impact events, volcanoes and . Most types of microspherules are easily distinguished from one another.

However, in 2009, another team of researchers published a paper calling the 2007 findings into question. The researchers had examined two of the sites cited in the 2007 paper – the Blackwater Draw site in New Mexico and the Topper site in South Carolina, as well as 5 others – and reported that its researchers were unable to find increased numbers of the relevant microspherules in the YDB at all but one site – and even that site was questionable.

Now the new PNAS paper finds that the 2009 study relied on flawed protocols. Perhaps more importantly, the researchers behind the new study have re-examined the Blackwater Draw and Topper sites – as well as a third site in Maryland common to the 2009 study– and were able to find microspherules in amounts consistent with the 2007 hypothesis at each site.

However, it's important to not get carried away.

"Our study replicates only a small subset of the research reported in 2007 and within those narrow limits, our results are consistent with theirs. Much research remains to be done to prove or disprove the hypothesis," says Dr. Malcolm LeCompte of Elizabeth City State University, who is lead author of the new PNAS paper.

The Role of Materials Research

LeCompte brought some of these microspherules to the Analytical Instrumentation Facility (AIF) at NC State, which provides both analytical instrumentation and expert staff to help researchers analyze and characterize materials and material structures at the micro and nanoscale.

"They wanted to know what's in these spherules and where they came from," says Charles Mooney, the scanning electron microscope (SEM) lab manager at AIF.

"We analyzed the microspherules with an SEM, which allowed us to obtain high-resolution images of the microspherules.  We also collected x-rays generated by electron beam-sample interactions to tell us what elements were in each sample," Mooney explains. "This told us that the microspherules were largely made up of iron, aluminum, silicon, and occasionally titanium, with one spherule containing significant amounts of rare earths, such as cerium."

Dr. Dale Batchelor, director of operations at AIF, also sliced open some of the microspherules using an analytical instrument composed of a both a focused ion beam (FIB) and an SEM to examine their interior structure and composition. Interestingly, some of the microspherules were partially hollow, but exhibited internal crystal structures when cross sectioned with the FIB. "To our knowledge this is the first instance of the FIB technique being used to cross section YBD microspherules – in effect exploratory surgery on the microscale," Batchelor says. "The FIB is the scalpel and the SEM is the eye."

Most of the microspherules were made up of elements in proportions similar to the composition of the Earth's crust and not, as some had proposed, meteorite material. In addition, the surface characteristics of the microspherules indicate that they were heated to a molten temperature and then cooled rapidly.

"This is consistent with the theory of an , but falls short of proof positive," says LeCompte.

The paper, "Independent evaluation of conflicting microspherule results from different investigations of the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis," was published in PNAS Sept. 17. The paper was co-authored by Mooney and Dr. Dale Batchelor of NC State; Dr. Albert Goodyear of the University of South Carolina; Mark Demitroff of the University of Delaware; Dr. Edward Vogel of the University of Oregon; Dr. Barrett Rock of the University of New Hampshire; and Alfred Seidel of Seidel Research.

Explore further: Bridgmanite: World's most abundant mineral finally named

More information: doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208603109

Related Stories

Topper site in middle of comet controversy

Sep 18, 2012

(Phys.org)—Did a massive comet explode over Canada 12,900 years ago, wiping out both beast and man in North America and propelling the earth back into an ice age?

Study supports theory of extraterrestrial impact

Mar 05, 2012

A 16-member international team of researchers that includes James Kennett, professor of earth science at UC Santa Barbara, has identified a nearly 13,000-year-old layer of thin, dark sediment buried in the ...

Recommended for you

Bridgmanite: World's most abundant mineral finally named

10 hours ago

A team of geologists in the U.S. has finally found an analyzable sample of the most abundant mineral in the world allowing them to give it a name: bridgmanite. In their paper published in the journal Science, the te ...

Volcano in south Japan erupts, disrupting flights

17 hours ago

A volcano in southern Japan is blasting out chunks of magma in the first such eruption in 22 years, causing flight cancellations and prompting warnings to stay away from its crater.

User comments : 206

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

verkle
1.4 / 5 (36) Sep 25, 2012
The Bible, as well as many ancient stories from cultures worldwide, have already informed us of a spectacular event that happened to the earth a few thousand years ago. Those tell us that it was a flood. It will be interesting to see how these 2 currently different viewpoints become merged in the future. I am confident it will happen.

mrtea
4.3 / 5 (24) Sep 25, 2012
And the Bible is such a reliable source. Scientists often refer to the Bible when they want to check dates, yeah right.

Locals experience biggest flood in oral history - must cover whole world!!!
Lurker2358
2.6 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Well.

It appears to be exactly the same time period as the Gobekli Tepe civilization. Perhaps this had something to do with their decline, although evidence suggests the site was intentionally filled in, however, in ancient times invading armies were often so thorough that they destroyed their enemies completely, and even covered up the remains of their cities, so it's possible a rival nation/tribe simply wiped them out.

But, the time period matching is still either very significant or an irrelevant coincidence.
Lurker2358
1.4 / 5 (27) Sep 25, 2012
Locals experience biggest flood in oral history - must cover whole world!!!


There is enough water on Earth so that an ice age could in principle cause ever piece of land on Earth to be easily covered in a sheet of ice to a depth of 7 meters, or about 15 cubits.

Note that the bible does not specify the phase of the waters in the "flood."

Because ice "sticks" to a surface, it would take far less water to "flood" the land if it was all in the form of snow and/or freezing rain.

If an object blocked out the sun for 40 days through ejecta, the convection from the oceans would become enormous because the stratosphere and upper troposphere would become super-cooled. This would pump enormous volumes of water out of the oceans and onto the continents in blizzards.

Then suppose the blockage stopped being so bad after 40 days, and remelting in the middle east finished on the time table given in the Bible.

It would explain the loss of habitats in the perhistoric Sahara and Egypt.
Lurker2358
1.2 / 5 (22) Sep 25, 2012
The Bible says the "Rain" lasted for 40 days, and the water "prevailed" for 150 days, implying that it started receding after the 40 days and land was first found(by the dove) at 150 days, which given the text was actually 110 days after the "rain" stopped, but the Earth was "dried" enough for man at about 1 years time.

What you're looking at is an acute volcanic or meteoric winter, which was strong enough to cause a temporary ~1 year total freeze of the land mass. The oceans need not have totally froze over, but the albedo changes caused by the enormous snow packs created during the first 40 days, as I've theorized, would have stuck around in some places for a very long time.

The story was probably handed down for generations orally so that some of it was lost of misinterpreted, but here's the deal, many cultures throughout the world have flood stories with a lot of the same basic details, that it literally covered the whole earth.
Lurker2358
1.4 / 5 (21) Sep 25, 2012
As for some stories that claim the world was covered in some other substance, it could be that the language was changed over time (even English has changed enormously in the past 400 to 800 years,) so that the words no longer mean exactly what they originally meant.

If you are trying to describe "ice" in an oral tradition, but the meaning of the original word is lost to time because you now live in a rainforest where it hasn't snowed for 5000years, then your language no longer contains a word representative of what was being described. So something like "Syrup" or "molasses" may have "sounded right" and it would, like ice, move very slowly, etc.

Oral communication tends to use a LOT of analogies and metaphors as well.

The remains most of the dead animals would have been carried out to sea in the melt water, and eventually consumed by sea life.

Frozen Flood = easier than liquid flood.
Deathclock
4.3 / 5 (34) Sep 25, 2012
There was no global flood, if there was there would be evidence in the rock strata. I have studied stratigraphy, there is evidence for every single major flood in history in the rock record, and there is NO evidence of a global flood. Put your childish stories away, they have zero credibility, they were written by goat herders thousands of years ago, the bible is not a science text book, etc etc etc.
verkle
1.3 / 5 (31) Sep 25, 2012
Death, your arrogance betrays any knowledge or credence you might have. Put your arrogance away, and you will find that the Bible has a lot of archeological credibility.

Deathclock
4.2 / 5 (26) Sep 25, 2012
Death, your arrogance betrays any knowledge or credence you might have. Put your arrogance away, and you will find that the Bible has a lot of archeological credibility.


Blah blah blah... this doesn't change the fact that we fully understand the effect that major floods have on the stratigraphic column via sediment deposit and we can identify hundreds of major floods via the study of stratigraphy and we can use both radiometric and relative dating techniques to accurately date these floods and cross-correlate these dates with historical documents to verify both our dating techniques and our stratigraphic interpretation. With all of this we have NO EVIDENCE of a global flood... none. Do you have any idea how significant such an event would be and how strong a "signal" it would have left as evidence for us to find?

THERE WAS NO GLOBAL FLOOD, IT IS A CHILDRENS FAIRY TALE. It was never meant to be taken literally, not even by it's authors, it is a parable!
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 25, 2012
evidence suggests the site was intentionally filled in, however, in ancient times invading armies were often so thorough that they destroyed their enemies completely, and even covered up the remains of their cities
You mean like how Solomon and davids kingdoms were so completely obliterated that there is absolutely no evidence for them whatsoever? Or how somebody followed the exodus of 2M people out of goshen and thoroughly cleaned up the mess? Perhaps it was the Egyptian troops garrisoned all along their route of travel, including Canaan where there is oddly no evidence WHATSOEVER of a genocidal joshuan rampage.

Is this notion of yours the current religionist flummox-du-jour to explain away biblical creativity? Please post at least one example of remains of cities being covered up by conquerors.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (24) Sep 25, 2012
What - Carthage? Plenty of ruins there and no salt to speak of.
http://archaeolog...hage.htm
As for some stories that claim the world was covered in some other substance
How about religionist bullpucky? That can get very deep and hard to remove.

So you are saying that if all the water froze there would be enough ice to cover my Everest to a depth of 7 meters? (Note - it would be easier and more polite to provide links to the flawed calcs of others rather than to flood this thread with yours.)

As we know snowball earth never occurred. There was at least a few percent of the planet left uncovered.
ka_
3 / 5 (2) Sep 25, 2012
"Much research remains to be done to prove or disprove the hypothesis"

From what I have learned - a hypothesis such as this can neither be proven nor disproved, you can just strengthen or weaken it...
HannesAlfven
3.2 / 5 (17) Sep 25, 2012
It's absolutely vital that scientists realize that MYTHOLOGY PRECEDED RELIGION. The first stories were told by people and verbally passed from generation to generation for thousands of years before they were ever actually written down. The Bible is simply ONE OF NUMEROUS attempts to record this ORAL TRADITION which preceded it, and certain aspects of these stories correlate quite well with one another. For instance, there are passages recorded by the Buddhists which are actually exact replicas of passages within the Bible. If people would simply realize this extraordinarily simple and observable fact, we could skip past all of the nonsense argumentation about the reliability of the Bible which we see on these forums, and get down to figuring out how to have a serious-minded discussion about the complex topic of COMPARATIVE MYTHOLOGY.

Comparative mythology is the process of removing those details which don't correspond, and identifying the key archetypes which span these stories.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
Plasma physicist Anthony Peratt of Los Alamos National Laboratory wrote a peer reviewed paper about the likelihood of visual plasma instabilities in Earth's atmosphere in antiquity.
http://plasmauniv...3clr.pdf

This idea of plasma discharge occurring on a global scale is not only supported by physical data (these microspherules as well as the glassification of cities such as Mohenjo Daro and more) but as well as petroglyphs recorded worldwide.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (30) Sep 25, 2012
Note that the bible does not specify the phase of the waters in the "flood."

Because ice "sticks" to a surface, it would take far less water to "flood" the land if it was all in the form of snow and/or freezing rain.
-And so - why did Noah need an 'ark' and how did this vessel remain 'floating' above the frozen water? Why wasn't it covered like everything else?

As is typical of all holy book apologizms, one must at some point necessarily invoke magic to make it work out. And magic is what gods are best at isn't it?
HannesAlfven
1.8 / 5 (16) Sep 25, 2012
It is possible for a scientist to not agree that a global flood occurred, based upon the evidence, and yet continue to look for clues that it did. Scientists do this sort of thing all of the time, and it is not at all a waste of our taxpayer money because we all have a vested interest in the identification of ANY evidence that a global catastrophe did occur. This issue is far too serious to simply presume that we know the answer at this point, for not only do numerous cultures of the world describe that catastrophe in great detail, but it is extremely possible that these "creation stories" have nothing at all to do with the origin of the universe -- but instead, are simply attempts to relate a global catastrophic event which was formerly observed in the sky. Many cultures talk about the planets (which they call "gods") as if they were able to view them catastrophically interacting with one another.

See Symbols of an Alien Sky on YouTube.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (27) Sep 25, 2012
The remains most of the dead animals would have been carried out to sea in the melt water, and eventually consumed by sea life.
Except for all the crap that would have accumulated at the bottom of lakes and depressions, of which there would be tons of evidence - bones, tree trunks, piles of debris of all sorts from one easily discernible event. There is none.
HannesAlfven
1.6 / 5 (31) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "THERE WAS NO GLOBAL FLOOD, IT IS A CHILDRENS FAIRY TALE."

I'm actually astounded that it is commonplace for modern-day advocates of science to say such things. Anybody who looks at imagery of catastrophic events from our telescopes should realize that if we can see it happening with a telescope, then it can happen here as well. This notion that we can simply assume that global catastrophes never occur at home is a new form of geocentrism designed by the subconscious mind for the purpose of convincing us that we are masters of our own fate. It is the most dangerous form of hubris which people could imagine. The scientific method is a process for investigation, but these supposed advocates for science are advocating against its usage, for the apparent reason that it might lend credence to mythology or religion. You guys need to get your heads out of your *sses long enough to realize that if it happened before, it can happen again. This is about survival -- not religion.
Deathclock
4.4 / 5 (25) Sep 25, 2012
This notion that we can simply assume that global catastrophes never occur at home


Hi, I didn't say that no global catastrophes occurred/occur on Earth, I said there was no global flood as described in the bible and I cited a lack of very specific evidence that is left by all other major floods.

I will thank you for not misrepresenting me or my statements again in the future.
HannesAlfven
1.6 / 5 (21) Sep 25, 2012
"Eighty-four distinct high-energy density z-pinch categories have been identified in petroglyphs, nearly all of which belong to the archaic class. Only a small percentage of these petroglyphs, or parts of petroglyph patterns, do not fall into any of these categories."

- Anthony Peratt, Characteristics for the Occurrence of a High-Current, Z-pinch Aurora as Recorded in Antiquity [2003]

In other words, nobody should pretend to even understand mythology until they know what a z-pinch is, or how high-energy density plasmas tend to behave in the laboratory. Anthony Peratt is a former advisor to the Department of Energy, as a technical expert on the non-proliferation treaty. The DOE investigates plasma physics because that is the physics of highly energetic events (hint: nukes). One of the morphologies of the "Peratt instabilities" is in fact a mushroom cloud. ALL of the transient states of high-intensity plasma instabilities are recorded in petroglyphs.
HannesAlfven
1.5 / 5 (26) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "I said there was no global flood as described in the bible "

I'm not confident that advocates for uniformitarianism even know what sort of evidence they should be looking for. We see the uniformitarianists misidentifying evidence for catastrophe on Mars as evidence for water every single day that goes by.

What caused the Grand Canyon? Since when do rivers punch straight through plateaus? One geologist has suggested that it appears as though the canyon "fell from the sky."

From http://www.thunde...ille.htm

"Other rilles travel both up and down across considerable distances. The most extraordinary example is the Baltis Vallis on Venus, which rises and falls dozens of times, with some two kilometers separating its high and low points along its 6,800 kilometer length."

Those who think that they can look to shifting planetary surfaces to explain these things are living in a fantasy world.
Lurker2358
1.2 / 5 (21) Sep 25, 2012
And so - why did Noah need an 'ark' and how did this vessel remain 'floating' above the frozen water? Why wasn't it covered like everything else?


Let's say it was launched in an inland sea somewhere, ahead of time. As the precipitation fell, the water level rose, not being cold enough to totally freeze over from top to bottom of the body of water. the ship would be buoyed up as it's harder to produce water-ice on an pre-existing body of water than on the surface of a contenent, due to specific heat capacity of water being so high compared to air and most other surfaces.

In most cases, bodies of water would have been the last thing to freeze over.

Finding fossils of these dead organisms would be hard, but not necessarily impossible, because they would have been ground to powder under the ice, or washed out to sea in the melt water, either way being later consumed by aquatic life forms or bacteria.

I admit there are details that are hard to work out, but see below...
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (22) Sep 25, 2012
"In both Siberia and Alaska the signs of destruction are more than apparent. In Alaska, multitudes of trees are found 'twisted and torn' and 'piled in splintered masses.' Mammal remains - mammoth, mastodons, bison, horses - are found DISMEMBERED AND TORN, but with portions of ligaments, skin, hair and even flesh, STILL IN TACT AND FRESH, all mingled with the splintered remains of this mighty forest ... The permafrost in which this destruction is entombed DOES contain 'great quantities of volcanic dust and debris.' In fact, four separate layers of volcanic ash sandwiches the entire mess ...

In Siberia it is exactly the same. Petrified forests in an uprooted condition but with some trees still in situ, bituminous trunks and fossilized charcoal, are everywhere intermingled with petrified ash, and veins of ice, and sand that has turned into sandstone. And among this colossal devastation are found the [shattered] skeletons of mammoths, rhinos, bison and horses ..."
Deathclock
4.2 / 5 (21) Sep 25, 2012
"What caused the grand canyon"

Why don't you sit through a few Geo 101 class sessions and tell me... this is well known stuff that you are so confused about. You are questioning fundamental principles of the major branches of the physical sciences that serve as the basis of hundreds of other more significant discoveries over the last several centuries... you are trying to pull the rug out from under all of modern science... because once you pull on these strings everything we have learned for the past several hundred years would unravel. All of our current knowledge of geology would have to be wrong if we are wrong about what caused the grand canyon, and the likelihood of that is beyond insignificant.
HannesAlfven
1.5 / 5 (17) Sep 25, 2012
... "If this is not a picture of catastrophe, WHAT IS?"

- Dwardu Cardona, "Comments," KRONOS, Vol VII, No. 4 [Summer 1982], pp 88 - 89
Lurker2358
1.2 / 5 (13) Sep 25, 2012
We KNOW that several thousand years ago, between 8000 and 12,000 years or so the Earth's climate changed drastically at least one time, and possibly twice.

The Sahara and surrounding regions used to be filled with life and fresh water lakes around 8,000 years ago, possible remnants from a previous era when rains were much more frequent there.

We KNOW that the northern hemisphere had far, far more sea ice, and it is theorized that explorers from BOTH Europe and the far east traveled to N. America via canoe and simply walking on and pitching camp on the ice at night. This a prevailing theory of populations of the U.S. mainland in prehistoric times.

This would require enormous amounts of sea ice compared to modern values, and it would also logically require continental ice sheets throughout all of the continents to a depth of at least a few meters in many locations.

Consider the Little Ice Age and the "year without a summer," but 10 to 100 times more potent.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (16) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "All of our current knowledge of geology would have to be wrong if we are wrong about what caused the grand canyon, and the likelihood of that is beyond insignificant."

The problem is not mine to own up to. The problem is the refusal of uniformitarians to question their own assumptions. How many geologists are fluent in the cosmic plasma models? The answer is NONE. So, what if there are mistakes in the cosmic plasma models, as was explained during Hannes Alfven's 1970 Nobel acceptance speech? What impact would this have upon geology? ENORMOUS.

We don't have to stab in the dark, wondering how geology went astray. We can actually lay out extremely specific lines of evidence and argumentation, based upon a refusal by astrophysicists to take a hard look at the models they use to deny that interstellar plasmas can conduct massive amounts of electrical currents.

We see rilles which refuse to obey gravity on multiple planets. Critical thinking involves questioning assumptions.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
We don't even have to guess at what these interstellar currents might look like. All we have to do is start paying attention to the papers which have already been published for decades now, by radio astronomer Gerrit Verschuur, in the Astrophysical Journal and IEEE's Transactions on Plasma Sciences (IEEE is the world's largest scientific institution, btw).

Verschuur notes very clearly that the interstellar medium is extremely filamentary. Interstellar "clouds" is a misnomer. It's more like spaghetti. How could this be? According to conventional theory, these are supposedly shock waves. But, the problem is that these filaments have knots which exhibit critical ionization velocity redshifts. The 34 km/s CIV redshift is extremely common in these all-sky surveys at the 21-cm wavelength, which is what one gets when you slam charged particles at enormous velocities into neutral helium gas. These redshifts are NOT the result of velocities. They indicate ELECTRICITY.
cantdrive85
1.4 / 5 (17) Sep 25, 2012
"What caused the grand canyon"

Why don't you sit through a few Geo 101 class sessions and tell me... this is well known stuff that you are so confused about. You are questioning fundamental principles of the major branches of the physical sciences that serve as the basis of hundreds of other more significant discoveries over the last several centuries... you are trying to pull the rug out from under all of modern science... because once you pull on these strings everything we have learned for the past several hundred years would unravel. All of our current knowledge of geology would have to be wrong if we are wrong about what caused the grand canyon, and the likelihood of that is beyond insignificant.


You are correct about ONE thing death, nearly all of our knowledge of geology is wrong. There are many, many anomalies and contradictions to our understanding of geology that could be resolved with an interdisciplinary approach to resolving the many mysteries.
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (12) Sep 25, 2012
The pacific and Atlantic oceans have different Oxygen isotopic ratios in their water, which have not mixed out. If the last large event that was big enough to distill water by isotope on a global scale had to be in the relatively recent past, else it should have mixed back out.

Scientists have even found ground water perfectly distilled by Oxygen isotope.

How could this be?

It implies one of two basic things:

Either a comet hit the Earth, delivering a vastly different type of water with a very different isotopic ratio from native Earth water...

OR an enormous, global scale weather event occurred and distilled the water in the same way hurricanes do.

Obviously, an large impact event causes global scale weather and climate disasters, so ironically the impact potentially implies and creates the second possibility anyway.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (22) Sep 25, 2012
Let's say it was launched in an inland sea somewhere, ahead of time. As the precipitation fell, the water level rose, not being cold enough to totally freeze over from top to bottom of the body of water. the ship would be buoyed up as it's harder to produce water-ice on an pre-existing body of water than on the surface of a contenent, due to specific heat capacity of water being so high compared to air and most other surfaces.
So do ships in lakes and rivers normally do this, or do they tend to be encased in ice and crushed as it grows? Your ad hoc theories are easy to sink. The only question with them or any religionist theory, is when do you invoke god magic? At what point does god wave his wand and suspend logic and the laws of nature to make your theories work?

Bones are not ground into dust under glaciers. Peat bogs survive glaciation with their organic material intact.
HannesAlfven
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
It's time for the geologists of the world to take a break from geology and become fluent in what we know about laboratory plasmas. Those who choose to do so will come to realize that many of the uniformitarian inferences which they have come to take for granted as being the result of lengthy processes can also be explained by highly transient, high-intensity plasma discharges. This is the same reason why we find diamonds beneath impact craters.

If you take a closer look at the Deep Impact mission, you will observe that two separate flashes were observed. The impactor was observed to charge-neutralize with the comet Tempel 1 prior to actual impact. NASA dropped the ball on that inference, and suggested instead that the two separate flashes were the result of different layers of the comet. If you take the time to actually perform the algebra on that inference, you will find that it cannot be made to work. You cannot create two separate flashes, given the impactor's velocity.
HannesAlfven
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
Something else which needs to be carefully considered ...

E.R. Milton describes his examination of a petrified tree trunk in Alberta (Canada) [The Lately Tortured Earth, Ch.26:Fossil Deposits - Part 6 Biospherics]:

"The piece ... was pure clear silica inside, it was coated with a rougher opaque crust of partially fused sand. The tree whose stump was petrified was alive five years ago! After the tree was cut down to accommodate the right of way for a new power transmission line, an accidental break allowed the live high-voltage wire to contact several tree stumps still in the ground. The power was cut off within hours of the break. All of the tree roots which contacted the broken wire were fossilized... Obviously, electricity can metamorphose matter quickly."

This is clearly anecdotal, but it fits perfectly into a larger worldview for a catastrophic universe. This is a completely falsifiable lead here. The question is, if a geologist replicated it, would they become a heretic?
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (14) Sep 25, 2012
So do ships in lakes and rivers normally do this, or do they tend to be encased in ice and crushed as it grows?


Lake and sea ice does not always form in continuous sheets. Some of the inland lakes in the middle east are very deep, and would be difficult to freeze over solid instantanesouly, providing room for water rise to occur.

Bones are not ground into dust under glaciers. Peat bogs survive glaciation with their organic material intact.


"Organic material" is not the same thing as an actual fossil or bone or tissue remains. For that, you'd need to be in specific locations such as permafrost where it could have been deposited in a moiraine or some other location, and covered over and re-frozen.

For ordinary locations, once the material becomes exposed to the air, bacteria can grow and consume it, returning it to the soil like all other dead things.

Why did HORSES go extinct in N. America about 12,000 years ago, only to be returned a few hundred years ago/explorers?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (18) Sep 25, 2012
What research by professionals is telling us about grand canyon formation:
http://www.huffin...549.html
Lurker2358
1.3 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Why does the extinction of the N. American horses coincide with the destruction of the Gobekli Tepe civilization AND the time period of this theoretical comet as given by the strata and the microscopy?

In addition to sulfur dioxide ejecta from the soil and the impactor itself and other dust and debris blocking the Sun, Nano and micro scale iron ejecta would have gone into the ocean, where algae would have processed it and bloomed, removing CO2 from the atmosphere, further cooling the planet.

But everything "unexplained" seems to have happened at 12000 years ago.

Even the ancient stories of "Atlantis" said that there was a disaster "10,000 years ago (but that was given 2000 years ago,) bringing the age of that fabled event to 12000 years as well.

Every oral tradition and every archeological "wow what the hell happened here," find points to "something changed around 12000 years ago".

Jericho appears to have been founded 11,000 years ago, immediately after this event. Why, why, why.
Deathclock
4.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
You are correct about ONE thing death, nearly all of our knowledge of geology is wrong. There are many, many anomalies and contradictions to our understanding of geology that could be resolved with an interdisciplinary approach to resolving the many mysteries.


I'm sure you know... why the hell would I take your word on this when I studied geology for 3 years at a top a university, taught by professors who are experts in their field who have themselves put decades of education and study into their work and published not only papers but books on the subject. It's simply IMPOSSIBLE for all that we know about geology to be wrong because we have used what we know about Geology to do amazing things, we have put our ideas into practice and they work you fucking lunatics.

I'm so sick of the disease that is the anti-science retards, the creationists, and the fringe cranks that post on this science website. It's disgusting.
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
What research by professionals is telling us about grand canyon formation:
http://www.huffin...549.html


A 150 day to one year long frozen flood does not necessarily alter any physics or requirements for the Grand Canyon. If anything, it can actually help explain some aspects of the barrenness of the desert south-west as well as the central plains. Before settlement by American settlers it was actually called the "Great American Desert". The soil was fertile, but little to nothing actually grew in many of the locations, some of which are major farming locations in the present day.

Why do you find it hard to believe in a 7 meter thick ice sheet when conventional theory calls for a miles-thick ice sheet over the Great Lakes, which lasted for thousands of years, on at least one occasion?

I've seen 8 inches of WET SLUSHY snow in Louisiana in one day. In 40 days at that rate it'd snow 8.2 meters of WET snow...
Deathclock
4.4 / 5 (13) Sep 25, 2012
We use our understanding of Geology to find oil, to find diamonds and precious metals... we use our understanding of Geology to find dinosaur fossils. We use our understanding of Geology to cross-correlate stratigraphic columns from disparate locations... all of this WORKS.

If our understanding of Geology was significantly wrong NONE OF THIS WOULD WORK.

The proof is in the motherfucking application, what about that don't you guys understand? The study of stratigraphy is not isolated from the explanation for various geological features, which is not isolated from the ABILITY TO FIND OIL deep within the Earth. The BASIC principles of Geology inform all of these ideas and they allow us to USE Geology as we do.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (19) Sep 25, 2012
Lake and sea ice does not always form in continuous sheets. Some of the inland lakes in the middle east are very deep, and would be difficult to freeze over solid instantanesouly, providing room for water rise to occur.
I'm confused - are you saying that water somehow rises above freezing ice?
"Organic material" is not the same thing as an actual fossil or bone or tissue remains. For that, you'd need to be in specific locations such as permafrost where it could have been deposited in a moiraine or some other location, and covered over and re-frozen.
Bones, tree trunks, and all manner of pre-glacial material are recovered from peat all the time, intact.
http://books.goog...eglacial peat bogs bones&source=bl&ots=7Of9-jIclz&sig=bFKLKENg0pyhmUL6bwhlmWtXGDo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=F-BhUOrpJ4HnyAG5i4GIDA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBQ
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
But back on the Atlantis point, notice that Atlantis was reportedly destroyed in a flood as well, as it allegedly "sank" beneath the sea. When was this allegedly occurring? The same time frame, about 10,000 B.C. or 12,000 before present.

There MUST be some sort of connection between all these events, both the known ones and the "questionable" ones.

There are enough KNOWN events in this time period to show that something was happening, and then combine the oral and written traditions, and it's obvious that all over the planet things went haywire in and around 12,000 years ago.

How many "events," proven and legendary, do you need to be in the exact same time period, before you realize they are all related somehow? Potentially all having the same cause.

There is so much going on in this time period regarding disasters, that it has even become popular in science fiction to associate this time period with an alien invasion or a monster or some other event.

Something baaaaad globally.
Deathclock
4.1 / 5 (14) Sep 25, 2012
Tell you what lurker or hannes alvin or any of you other retards, as soon as your stupid ideas about global floods or plasma catastrophes or whatever else your talking about can be used to pin point oil for private oil companies then I will fucking listen to you, because mainstream Geology CAN and DOES do that and so much more every single day. The ultimate proof of scientific understanding is practical application, and Geology has many practical applications that SIMPLY WOULD NOT WORK if we were wrong in our understanding.

Do you understand that?
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
Deathclock:

You are using a punctuated equilibrium argument.

Normal sedimentary rock strata are supposedly laid down over millions of years of relatively uneventful time.

A gigantic flood of one year is not going to conveniently leave a distinctive continuous layer, especially if it was a frozen flood, because the runoff is much slower as ice melts as compared to a liquid flood.

As I stated, you WILL find fossils in moiraines and permafrost. You almsot certainly won't find them lying around in the middle of the U.S. because bacteria would have consumed them, or their corpses could have been washed down river in normal floods later to be consumed by fish, etc.

Think about this, when Alaska had like 20-something feet of snow in isolated locations last year, it didn't scour or destroy much, because it happened slowly, and in isolated areas.

But if that happened on a continental scale, it could kill all life, but yet not do a lot of scouring, because it melted within 1 year.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (22) Sep 25, 2012
Why do you find it hard to believe in a 7 meter thick ice sheet when conventional theory calls for a miles-thick ice sheet over the Great Lakes, which lasted for thousands of years, on at least one occasion?
Because ice and snow moves. It slides and collapses down mountainsides and collects in depressions. Ice ages take 1000s of years to form. Quantities such as you describe being deposited in only a month would have moved around A LOT. There would have been major disruptions in water currents through straits and down rivers, leaving behind massive piles of evidence. Again no such evidence for this whatsoever.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (19) Sep 25, 2012
But back on the Atlantis point, notice that Atlantis was reportedly destroyed in a flood as well, as it allegedly "sank" beneath the sea. When was this allegedly occurring? The same time frame, about 10,000 B.C. or 12,000 before present.
But Atlantis is a fairytale place like solomons kingdom or Eden. And it is another example of how these stories can arise.
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
SIMPLY WOULD NOT WORK if we were wrong in our understanding.

Do you understand that?


Logical fallacy.

Many technologies in the ancient world "worked" even though the theory behind them was wrong, or even though the people did not have an entirely correct theory or knowledge of what was happening.

Example:

Biblical quarantine laws.

They didn't know anything about bacteria or viruses or fungi, etc, except that it was "something" to be avoided. So their techniques worked even though they had flawed or partial knowledge.

People in the ancient world mastered metallurgy thousands of years before an atomic theory or molecular theory existed, and fire as well. They knew absolutely nothing of chemistry, and in fact had wrong and ridiculous notions of elementals (still seen in modern RPGs,) such as the "4 elements" thing, thinking fire was a fundamental reality, when in fact it is a by-product of exothermic chemistry.

Wrong and ridiculous nevertheless gave successful results.
Deathclock
4.3 / 5 (12) Sep 25, 2012
Deathclock:
You are using a punctuated equilibrium argument.


Nope...

Normal sedimentary rock strata are supposedly laid down over millions of years of relatively uneventful time.


This occurs in normal depositional environments, yes... that does not mean we cannot also find evidence of rapid flooding, and we do, lots of it.

A gigantic flood of one year is not going to conveniently leave a distinctive continuous layer


I see you've never seen the aftermath of a flood... depending on the severity the flooded area could be covered in FEET of sediment... tell me that won't solidify into sandstone/siltstone over time and form a distinctive layer in the rock strata...

Now, you listen to me, a "frozen flood" makes no sense whatsoever. Noah built a BOAT... it is described in your reference text (the bible) as a standard flood. There is not enough water on the planet for this to occur, it would have killed all of the plant life and most of the ocean life...
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.4 / 5 (20) Sep 25, 2012
This is the sort of damage you would see ALL OVER if water flow was disrupted by ice dams:
http://media.calt...es/13357

-Imagine the destruction caused by the amazon or the nile if their flows were interrupted by 7 meters of snow along their entire lengths all moving and accumulating at pinch points?
Deathclock
4.2 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
Logical fallacy.


Your examples or not sufficient... being able to find something that is hidden deep in the Earth due to our understanding of geology is NOT THE SAME THING as figuring out to quarantine sick people. One can be determined simply by trial and error and simple observation of cause and effect, the other cannot. One of them RELIES on our understanding of science, the other did not.

The ability to determine exactly where to drill for oil RELIES on our understanding of geology. Figuring out to keep sick people away from non-sick people did not rely on anything but simple observation of cause and effect.

See the difference?
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
But Atlantis is a fairytale place like solomons kingdom or Eden. And it is another example of how these stories can arise.


Even if the details are not accurate, the story is an "oral memory" of something that must have happened.

Ok, we KNOW these things happened in 12,000 b.c.

Apparent comet/asteroid as per this article(possibly).
Mass extinction (Horse and others) in N. America.
Gobekli Tepe people simply up and left!?!
N. American archeology says paleo cultures changed or vanished.

11,000 years ago Jericho is founded in the middle east, one of the locations likely to dry/thaw first.

Legends:
Biblical flood happened some time in recent pre-history (there are two dating discontinuities making the age somewhat abiguous).
Other flood legends, agreeing that "something like a flood" happened.
A comet legend among Australian Aboriginals, though the date is wrong.
Atlantis legend at exactly the correct date.

It's all a coincidence, eh?! Wow, harder to believe than common cause.
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (13) Sep 25, 2012
I see you've never seen the aftermath of a flood... depending on the severity the flooded area could be covered in FEET of sediment... tell me that won't solidify into sandstone/siltstone over time and form a distinctive layer in the rock strata...


I never said deposition wouldn't occur. YOu have seletive comprehension. I said a CONTINUOUS layer wouldn't exist.

There is not enough water on the planet for this to occur, it would have killed all of the plant life and most of the ocean life...


Water on a lake dosn't immediately freeze over, even with heavy snow, because the water is much warmer than the freezing point, so a boat could be buoyed up before the lake was cooled enough to freeze.

Second, the amount of water on the planet is irrelevant; 7 meters of ice on each continent requires very little water relative to what exists in the global sea water budget.

Yes, it would have killed a lot. The Bible says "every living substance was destroyed from the face of Earth"
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.4 / 5 (7) Sep 25, 2012
Since the findings are _inconclusive_, they are consistent with both theories. And the non-impact theory is simpler and more substantiated, leaving the "heated ... debate" among the small minority that goes against the seeming consensus. [See all the earlier press on this.]

It is funny that the vocal minority threw in a psychologist to cast "doubt" on presumed "flawed protocols". The paper's experimental procedure is peer reviewed at the time of publication.

When and if the Dryas impact group find some test of their own theory, others will sit up and listen. This isn't it.

Btw, creationists shouldn't comment on science. It is hilarious to see. (Upanishads, "Bible", Edda, Brothers Grimm, Harry Potter, ...)
Lurker2358
1.6 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Also, there's all sorts of reasons why the deposition of a flood might not NECESSARILY solidify.

The deposition could be carried away during the following years from normal rains, or wind drive erosion,etc.

In some cases, the deposition may have been in coastal regions, where wave action eroded that deposition and carried it farther into the sea where it was dispersed and any organic compounds dissolved in water and consumed by microbes, etc.

Wow. Anyone who took Geology 101, which I aced, would know that discontinuities exist and can be formed in any number of ways, both locally and globally.

Model a sand and silt deposit from a global catastrophe, throw in some bones, shells, whatever you want. Now when the global catastrophe ends, you still have weather, tides, wave action, wind, rains, heat wedging, etc.

Just because you have a major deposit does not gaurantee it gets preserved, because it needs to be stable and not get eroded by physical or chemical process...cont...
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (14) Sep 25, 2012
Btw, creationists shouldn't comment on science. It is hilarious to see. (Upanishads, "Bible", Edda, Brothers Grimm, Harry Potter, ...)


"Creationism is in every way a scientific theory."-Dawkins.

Newton was profoundly creationist, and it was his belief in God that motivated much of his work.

"God created everything by number, weight and measure." - Newton.

Atheist have no place on a science forum, as almost all great scientists in history have actually been creationists of monotheistic, deistic, or at least pantheistic belief.

Albert Einstein claimed to not believe in a personal God, and yet he famously said, "God does not play dice with the universe," in fact personifying God by default. Apparently he believed in a personal God even though not being aware of believing.

At any rate, hush with the "Creationists shouldn't comment" BS.
Lurker2358
1.6 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
When and if the Dryas impact group find some test of their own theory, others will sit up and listen. This isn't it.


Finding a distinct microscopic ejecta candidate that is present throughout a strata isn't admissible?

Wow. That's how Geologists date, identify, and classify pre-historic volcanic eruptions!

Maybe if you didn't have hypocritical standards people would take you seriously.
lengould100
4.5 / 5 (8) Sep 25, 2012
So these fools claim that some poet 12,000 years ago "observed" a flood event which "covered the entire earth"!! How did (s)he observe this exactly, and how accurate were the systems used for the observation? Satellite technology? Spacecraft? With what system exzactly did they observe that Australia and South America were flooded during exactly the same 40 days as the TINY observable portion of the middle east? Why should we not simply credit the far more credible hypothesis that these legends simply document the opening of the Bosphorus and consequent flooding of the shores of the Black Sea, yes catastrophic to the region's farmers but no worldwide event LOL.
Arik24
5 / 5 (3) Sep 25, 2012
to Lurker2358 and HannesAlfven lets say you a right that a flood or some event did happen around 10,000 B.C or 12,000 B.C if this happen then that means modern humans or something similar must have been around how is that possible does this mean that humans did arise around 40,000 B.C or sooner
cantdrive85
1.4 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
I'm sure you know... why the hell would I take your word on this when I studied geology for 3 years at a top a university, taught by professors who are experts in their field who have themselves put decades of education and study into their work and published not only papers but books on the subject. It's simply IMPOSSIBLE for all that we know about geology to be wrong because we have used what we know about Geology to do amazing things, we have put our ideas into practice and they work you fucking lunatics.


There is nothing more anti-science than claiming " it's simply IMPOSSIBLE for all that we know about geology to be wrong", that is religious doctrine, not science. Just because people are clever in the ability to find the things they want, mostly based on experience of the past and NOT theory, in no way proves everything they assume to be factual. BTW, I've always found to most angry vulgar and loud people to be the smartest in the class, NOT!
Thrasymachus
4 / 5 (8) Sep 25, 2012
Atlantis? Seriously? The oldest historical mention of the place is in an incomplete copy of a set of morality tales written by Plato. In that tale, titled the Timaeus, various old men literally make up creation myths to explain certain features of the world. The fact that they were all "made up" is clear from the text. Unless you think the guy proposing that humans were once 4 legged, 4 armed, two headed monstrosities who were split in half and are now seeking their "other half" was being serious. Ancient Greeks were crazy, but they weren't stupid.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "... as soon as your stupid ideas about global floods or plasma catastrophes or whatever else your talking about can be used to pin point oil for private oil companies then I will fucking listen to you, because mainstream Geology CAN and DOES do that ..."

Please carefully tune into what is being argued here: This notion that there is only one paradigm to problem-solve from is baseless. The larger point which is being made here is that there are two fundamental frameworks for problem-solving in science today: There is the uniformitarianist-gravitational worldview and there is the catastrophist-electrical-plasma worldview. What has been demonstrated, time and time again, is that -- somewhat surprisingly -- it is oftentimes not exactly obvious which is correct.

But, it's almost irrelevant because what really matters is the philosophical APPROACH which one adopts. If you're arguing for an approach which IGNORES the catastrophist inference, then this is NOT actually science.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "Why should we not simply credit the far more credible hypothesis that these legends simply document the opening of the Bosphorus"

Why go with that? Because it was on the History Channel?

The real problem here is that the large bulk of the people here who are arguing against archetypes like Atlantis and global flooding have never set an eyeball onto one of the numerous source texts which discuss these archetypes in great depth. I can understand laypeople choosing not to spend time on this, but professional scientists (especially geologists) really have a duty to at least expose themselves to the consistency and sheer volume of what is known about these archetypes before they can meaningfully claim to reject them. All of these sources have been collected at Catastrophism.com, so all that's needed is the will to read. If a professional geologist doesn't want to have to pay to access those resources, send an email to the site's admin and tell them you a professional geologist.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (11) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "A comet legend among Australian Aboriginals, though the date is wrong. Atlantis legend at exactly the correct date. It's all a coincidence, eh?! Wow, harder to believe than common cause."

Velikovsky specifically pointed to the planet Venus as the comet. Numerous cultures spent an inordinate amount of time describing how beautiful Venus' cometary appearance was, for many, many years. But, if you look at the stories, the descriptions of Venus' cometary appearance tend to transform from beautiful to horrific.

It's critical to realize that 4 probes were sent to descend into Venus' atmosphere in the 1970's. Every single one of those probes reported back that Venus' heat was originating from its surface -- a finding which directly suggests that the planet is cooling down, that it is NOT in thermal equilibrium. However, that was an unacceptable result, and all four probes had their data either disposed of or "normalized". This stuff can be looked up. It's not even debatable.
rubberman
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 25, 2012
Arik. Lot's of reliable info. on the various search engines at your fingertips. Lurker - try to envision a global climatic system that would enable 7m of water in any state, to exist over all of the earths land masses. I have a pretty good imagination...but I keep coming back to the fact it isn't physically doable. The physical atmospheric limits of evapotranspiration do not allow for enough water vapour to cycle through the climate system to cause 7m of global accumulation, let alone what the weather patterns would look like (if satelite photo's were possible). Yes, something major clearly happened at the YDB, a comet or meteor is a good culprit.
@ Plasma guys: Although the cosmology aspect is very intriguing from a galactic/universal structure model, The power required to accomplish the electrical etching of grooves the size of the GC would be unachievable....without destroying the earth. Of course there is also carbon dating which has the oldest parts of the canyon @ 2 billion yrs
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
Carl Sagan predicted that Venus would be a desert and Immanuel Velikovsky's theory demanded that Venus be covered in volcanos. Charles Ginenthal staked his entire belief in catastrophism in the prediction that Venus *must* be covered in volcanos. His take was that it would have to be lights out for catastrophism if it wasn't true. We know how this ended up. For a detailed recap on what happened to the Venus probe data, YouTube "charles ginenthal venus".

It's difficult to reconcile these mythological stories and Venusian probe data, without access to an electrical-plasma-based scientific framework which can provide an alternative explanation for how planets form.

It's also important to realize that planetary theorists have run into extreme difficulties in getting simulations for the conventional model for our solar system's creation to work. These simulations have numerous free variables which usually ensure that they can be made to work in some manner. But, not here.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "Although the cosmology aspect is very intriguing from a galactic/universal structure model, The power required to accomplish the electrical etching of grooves the size of the GC would be unachievable"

If you're problem-solving from a theory which requires that planets lack their own inherent charge and electric fields, then perhaps. But, what is being argued here is not electrostatics. What is being argued with the plasma-based worldview is that the Earth and Sun are part of an electrodynamic system. In other words, the arms of spiral galaxies represent current flows. If it's true, your point is moot.

Keep in mind that Birkeland Currents the width of the Earth are already known to connect the Sun and Earth every 8 minutes! NASA already knows that. Their current mission to study lightning appears set to destroy our conventional theory for lightning's source. Watch closely, as they are about to show that lightning is in fact also part of this larger circuitry ...
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (9) Sep 25, 2012
Also, you might want to take a closer look at what's happening on Io ...

http://www.thunde...es-4.htm

NASA's probe camera saturated while trying to take pictures. People should think very carefully about the claim that a lava flow can saturate a probe camera. Really?! We've been filming lava flows here on Earth for many decades now without any saturation problems.

More likely, those images show what it looks like when one of our probes captures a high-intensity electrical discharge.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
Re: "Of course there is also carbon dating which has the oldest parts of the canyon @ 2 billion yrs"

You might want to check this out ...

http://www.gdr.or...half.htm

As many here probably already know, observations of a sidereal component to decay rates has already been observed. Combined, these two lines of argumentation point to ambiguity on what happens to these dating tools when high-intensity plasma discharges occur.
pauljpease
4.5 / 5 (15) Sep 25, 2012
The Bible, as well as many ancient stories from cultures worldwide, have already informed us of a spectacular event that happened to the earth a few thousand years ago. Those tell us that it was a flood. It will be interesting to see how these 2 currently different viewpoints become merged in the future. I am confident it will happen.


Or, more likely scenario. A young boy and his father are hiking up a mountain. They find fossils of what are obviously sea animals. The young boy asks his father how the fish got to the top of the mountain. The father, knowing nothing of plate tectonics since this is in ancient times, suggests that the seas must have at one time reached the top of the mountain. The boy then asks "but wouldn't that mean all the land is flooded? How did everybody survive?" The father suggests someone must have built a boat and put all the animals on it. Now, be quiet boy and quit pestering dad. Wait a few generations for the story to spread and there you go.
jonnyboy
1 / 5 (6) Sep 25, 2012
... "If this is not a picture of catastrophe, WHAT IS?"

- Dwardu Cardona, "Comments," KRONOS, Vol VII, No. 4 [Summer 1982], pp 88 - 89


just another troll...............are you buddies with scott? i Mean vendatard?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (18) Sep 25, 2012
"Creationism is in every way a scientific theory."-Dawkins.
Dawkins never said this.

"God created everything by number, weight and measure." - Newton.
Well he didnt really know any better did he? And he was also a suckup. You had to be back then to get anywhere didnt you?
Einstein...in fact personifying God by default
You dont think he did this by default do you? Einstein became a political pundit later on, supporting israel. He was playing politics.

He also explored philosophy and, finding nothing of use, abandoned the effort.
Also, there's all sorts of reasons why the deposition of a flood might not NECESSARILY solidify.
Yeah. Magic.

This theory of yours is about as good as the one about dry ice in the antarctic. Do a little research and prove yourself wrong.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (18) Sep 25, 2012
It will be interesting to see how these 2 currently different viewpoints become merged in the future. I am confident it will happen
A stellar example of faith. Faith is belief despite evidence. Evidence tells us the flood never happened and the gods of the holy books never existed but people of faith are nonplussed.

Pray for rain godder. It might just happen.
Lurker2358
1.7 / 5 (12) Sep 25, 2012
Also, there's all sorts of reasons why the deposition of a flood might not NECESSARILY solidify.
Yeah. Magic.


You're a dumbass.

There's floods and catastrophes all the time that don't end up leaving permanent deposition, for just the reasons I cited.

In most cases you actually need instant cementation or carbonization to preserve an entire deposit in tact, such as a volcanic lahar or such.

Even glacial moraines aren't preserved unless they're frozen solid. They erode right away due to weathering. Those are deposits at the base of glaciers.

You're a damned liar, and I rather doubt you did well in geology.

In fact, more often than not, preservation is the EXCEPTION in geology, that's why there are so many discontinuities in both physical geology and paleontology.
Lurker2358
1.4 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
Or, more likely scenario. A young boy and his father are hiking up a mountain. They find fossils of what are obviously sea animals. The young boy asks his father how the fish got to the top of the mountain. The father, knowing nothing of plate tectonics since this is in ancient times, suggests that the seas must have at one time reached the top of the mountain. The boy then asks "but wouldn't that mean all the land is flooded? How did everybody survive?" The father suggests someone must have built a boat and put all the animals on it. Now, be quiet boy and quit pestering dad. Wait a few generations for the story to spread and there you go.


Lie to your kids much, eh?

I came up with the frozen flood theory because it's the easiest explanation that works.

I never said it defiitely happened, but I was using it as an example that something certainly must have happened during that time period, because there are too much information among both facts and legends to deny it.
Lurker2358
1 / 5 (9) Sep 25, 2012
A slight misquote on Dawkins, from memory, but what I said was correct and agreeing with his quote. Let's see.

A universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one. A physics, a biology where there is a God is bound to look different. So the most basic claims of religion are scientific. Religion is a scientific theory.
Richard Dawkins

Read more at http://www.brainy...jGX5q.99

Now, of course, he still misunderstands what a "God" is, or certainly an truly omnipotent Being God.

Nevertheless, that was the quote.

I used the word "creationism" by mistake, because I view "Creationism" as superior to "Religion".

Religion is a set of man made rules and traditions, trying to please God through self-righteousness.

On the other hand, "Creationism" is a natural science which simply acknowledges God's existence and hand in everything.

There's the quote, one you'll find even less tasteful I'm sure.
Caliban
5 / 5 (7) Sep 25, 2012
A much more plausible, and far better documented cause is already known.

At the end of the last ice age --the YDB, more or less-- there were multiple catastrophic releases of tens, to hundreds, to thousands of cubic miles of glacially-impounded meltwaters released in locations all over the northern hemisphere.

Modern humans of the time were certain to have witnessed and survived them in many different places.

These would have been terrifying, awe-inspiring events, almost certain to have lived on in oral traditions from then until now.
It wouldn't be at all surprising for settlements of all sizes, even entire "nations' to have been destroyed outright, or at the least, so decimated as to be unable to recover.

Do a quick search for "channelled scablands" or "the creation of the English Channel" or "glacial flooding of the McKenzie River basin" --just for starters. These events occurred over such huge scales geographically that they weren't even recognized as such until recently.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (20) Sep 25, 2012
There's floods and catastrophes all the time that don't end up leaving permanent deposition, for just the reasons I cited.
Without expecting you to source what you say, I can nevertheless opine that these are small, localized events and abnormal conditions, and not a worldwide, instantaneous event.
I came up with the frozen flood theory because it's the easiest explanation that works.
No, you came up with it because you are of the opinion that every thought that jumps into your head has merit and is worth posting, and also negates the work of scads of scientists over the course of many decades. As we have seen, this is rarely the case.

Is this 'frozen flood' idea really your own? Have you even run it by other creationists to see what they would think? Kent or eric Hovind perhaps?
http://www.youtub...Q-XXTbW0
http://rationalwi...t_Hovind
malapropism
4.2 / 5 (10) Sep 25, 2012
"Creationism is in every way a scientific theory."-Dawkins.


Really? I'm intrigued to find this quote, can you point me to the reference please. Google, Wikipedia and other searches (omitting the minus sign before the "Dawkins" name) finds exactly no results with this quote (as I'd anticipated).

I've read many of Dawkins' works and have never seen him make a statement along these lines. Nor would I expect him to. Or did you perhaps abstract one part of a larger sentence and use it for not-especially-truthful purposes? (Not accusing [yet] just questioning.)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (17) Sep 25, 2012
Now, of course, he still misunderstands what a "God" is, or certainly an truly omnipotent Being God.
No you understand neither god nor quote mining nor honesty in posting. You took what he said out of context and misrepresented its meaning.
http://www.youtub...tNuGt4rw
http://www.youtub...gqSR7WRE
Estevan57
2.2 / 5 (17) Sep 25, 2012
Verkle has trolled you all.
Smashin_Z_1885
1.4 / 5 (11) Sep 26, 2012
The 'deathclock' person is probably a teenager engaging in confrontational behaviour for self-entertainment purposes. I would not give credit to anything he or she conveys here.
The fact of the matter is that there is a great deal of physical evidence supporting a global flooding event, either ice coverage or liquid water coverage, or some combination of both. The facts can not be disputed, that at some point in the not-so-distant past, Earth underwent a cataclysmic climate change, rendering the polar regions permanently frozen, as well as significant shifts in atmospheric gas composition (ice core drillings support these ideas).
Smashin_Z_1885
1 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
If our 'time-travelling' capabilities allowed us to examine conditions exceeding -165 years then we would most certainly pursue such. However, we are strictly limited, as current technology does not allow for expanded-range project parameters. Present pre-sets minus approx. 165~170 [years] may be possible theoretically; however, stability is reduced exponentially; instability within the MV increases very rapidly beyond 150, leading to extreme risk. Currently, we can safely achieve 135 briefly, with durations of no more than 17 minutes (give or take, depending on MV strength and other dependent factors)
Arik24
3 / 5 (2) Sep 26, 2012
to Smashin_Z_1885 "If our 'time-travelling' capabilities" What do you mean by that?
ODesign
not rated yet Sep 26, 2012
Microspherules strike me as a good base element for building micromachines. could they be produced and engineered to better suit the role?

quotes from the article:

This told us that the microspherules were largely made up of iron, aluminum, silicon, and occasionally titanium, with one spherule containing significant amounts of rare earths, such as cerium.

the surface characteristics of the microspherules indicate that they were heated to a molten temperature and then cooled rapidly

Interestingly, some of the microspherules were partially hollow, but exhibited internal crystal structures
defactoseven
3.3 / 5 (7) Sep 26, 2012
What a waste of a reasonably interesting article just to have it vandalized by some adultescent religious spank boys either out for a good spamming or sharing bible lessons from hell. No they're probably just Sunday school kiddies passing on the totality of their brains ability to retain. It's rather redundant after awhile.
peter09
5 / 5 (5) Sep 26, 2012
The trouble with a global flood theory is that it only takes a single point to disprove it and there are plenty of points.Here are a couple.

1. The great barrier reef is much older the 12000 years and certainly would not have survived a global flood.
http://en.wikiped...ier_Reef
2. Varves - are seasonal sedimentary layers laid down in relatively still water (lakes), Varve counts have been extended back to over 2 million years with no disruptions.
http://en.wikiped...ki/Varve

For a global flood you need to explain how these things are still possible.
chromosome2
5 / 5 (4) Sep 26, 2012
... "If this is not a picture of catastrophe, WHAT IS?"

- Dwardu Cardona, "Comments," KRONOS, Vol VII, No. 4 [Summer 1982], pp 88 - 89


I agree. The fact that such a large number of people in the modern world are as ignorant of reality as you are is indeed a terrible catastrophe.
HannesAlfven
1.6 / 5 (8) Sep 26, 2012
Re: "At the end of the last ice age --the YDB, more or less-- there were multiple catastrophic releases of tens, to hundreds, to thousands of cubic miles of glacially-impounded meltwaters released in locations all over the northern hemisphere. Modern humans of the time were certain to have witnessed and survived them in many different places."

You're refusing to address the actual content of the creation stories (which oftentimes specifically discuss the action of planets, balls (the Maya), lights in the sky (some Native Americans), etc). You're also ignoring the incredible likeness in morphologies between high-intensity plasma discharges and petroglyphs. The Greeks drew Zeus with a "thunderbolt" in his hand, but the thunderbolt which he is pictured with lacks any resemblance to a terrestrial lightning bolt. They correctly identified four of the fundamental forms of high-intensity discharge over plasma, which we had to build massive $1bil plasma laboratories to discover.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
Re: "What a waste of a reasonably interesting article just to have it vandalized by some adultescent religious spank boys either out for a good spamming or sharing bible lessons from hell. No they're probably just Sunday school kiddies passing on the totality of their brains ability to retain. It's rather redundant after awhile."

Who's the source of the problem here? You're the one that appears to be confusing mythology with religion. A person could waste an entire lifetime trying to correct all of you on this single point.
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
You're a dumbass.

There's floods and catastrophes all the time that don't end up leaving permanent deposition, for just the reasons I cited.


Hi,

You're right that a small amount of the deposition from a global flood would be eroded away before it could be buried and solidified, but you're wrong that this would happen to enough of it for it to be undetectable by geologists. Continental interiors only erode by any appreciable amount around rivers... there would be strong evidence of the depositions left by a global flood across the interiors of every single continental landmass.

I can't believe that you don't think such a significant event would leave significant evidence in the rock record... you are denying reason in support of your faith.

Stop trying to shoe-horn your beliefs in with science, they will NEVER fit because your beliefs are WRONG.
rubberman
3 / 5 (2) Sep 26, 2012
Hannes - I wasn't disputing the cosmic circuitry, just how it pertains to it's effects on the earths climate. The Birkland currents at 8 minute intervals even had a nice article here on Physorg. Trying to link them to climate and geological formation is where the logic derails for me. Consider that they are indeed the width of the planet and we have yet to correlate them to any earthly phenomena other than those associated with Aurora. The CME would have to be orders of magnitude larger than the Carrington event to effect the earth on a massive geological scale and such an intense electro magnetic disturbance would be evidenced by a host of other means.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
Re: "Trying to link them to climate and geological formation is where the logic derails for me."

It's worth noting that this debate over the importance of space weather is indeed directly pertinent to climate as well. Do a paper search on "electric joule heating", and you'll quickly run into papers which explain that we've not even been taking the proper data to currently understand how space weather affects our climate here on Earth. From "Possible reasons for underestimating Joule heating in global models: E-field variability, spatial resolution and vertical velocity" ...

"It is important to understand Joule heating because it can significantly change the temperature structure, atmosphere composition and electron density, and hence, influences satellite drag. It is thought that many coupled ionosphere-thermosphere models underestimate Joule heating because the spatial and temporal variability of the ionospheric electric field is not totally captured within global models ..."
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
Re: "The CME would have to be orders of magnitude larger than the Carrington event to effect the earth on a massive geological scale and such an intense electro magnetic disturbance would be evidenced by a host of other means."

I've tried to make the case here that NASA doesn't (yet) recognize cosmic electrical discharges when they directly image them, so why would geologists notice evidence for them after they've occurred? They've seen these discharges occurring in real-time for both the Deep Impact mission to comet Tempel 1, and on Io. There have been other instances.

If as a scientist, your starting assumption is uniformitarianism, then this explicitly defines the boundaries for your inferences. Entire lines of investigation will remain unexplored. Scientists who refuse to follow the lines of argumentation for the alternative electrical plasma framework will simply fail to recognize the majority of instances when observations support that competing framework.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
Re: "The fact that such a large number of people in the modern world are as ignorant of reality as you are is indeed a terrible catastrophe."

Not everybody is afraid to question the textbook theory. History of science tells us that the future is largely written by those who have the courage to diverge from the crowd. It has little to do with ignorance. Extremely intelligent people can simply be wrong, through no fault of their own. It could happen simply because they were never exposed to divergent viewpoints. The more important question is: Once they are tipped off to the *possibility* that there might be a problem with consensus, with specific arguments and data points which formulate an internally-consistent alternative worldview which remains unfunded and unexplored, how do these people react? This is the true test of a person's character.
R_R
1.3 / 5 (12) Sep 26, 2012
Herer's what the eyewitnesses report - the north pole was situated at Hudson Bay untill impact right on this pole shifted it 28 degrees to its present position 10500 BC (Earth stopped rotation and started up again on new axis). And its certainly not the survivors that have it wrong, its science! Given this information and the shape and size of the Laurentide ice sheet, and the 500 km bullet hole at hudson bay we can begin to understand what happened. We had a normal sized circular ice cap centered around hudson bay, which upon impact discintigrated and melted sending vast walls of water racing in every direction for the oceans. Every coast line around the world would have experiened perhaps a 100 meter increase in ocean level as well as unspeakable tsunami on top of this. Our memory of a world flood is correct and all core evidence supports this scenario before science makes it fit the ice age lie.
jsdarkdestruction
4.3 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
R_R their were no witnesses to that ficticious event. Get off the acid and visit reality a bit more often.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (17) Sep 26, 2012
Every coast line around the world would have experiened perhaps a 100 meter increase in ocean level as well as unspeakable tsunami on top of this.
But there is absolutely no evidence of this either.
(Earth stopped rotation and started up again on new axis)
Ahaahaahahaha you have absolutely no idea what this sort of thing would do or the amount of energy it would take to do it.

This would not be near enough, but would still peel off the crust and evaporate the oceans:
http://www.youtub...8APEkh-E

-This is the scale of something sufficient to affect the earths rotation:
http://www.youtub...4MdN5wo0

-There would be nothing left to inhabit.
Deathclock
4.2 / 5 (5) Sep 26, 2012
When you try to make sense of the world with a built in assumption that you cannot allow to be incorrect (the inerrancy of the bible) you have already lost the game.
jsdarkdestruction
2 / 5 (4) Sep 26, 2012
ghost of otto, duh, its obvious they just hid out in there secret undergound bunkers that the et's built for them and then the et's came back and re-made earths surface:P. isnt that right R_R?
R_R
1 / 5 (8) Sep 26, 2012
isdark, some smart fellows were there allright and they measured the angle between the old pole star and the new pole star to determine earths axis change. no acid
jsdarkdestruction
3 / 5 (4) Sep 26, 2012
no, they would of all been burnt to a crisp or otherwise killed in the disaster... if their was by some miracle(which is what such a scenario would require) any survivors they would have quickly died off from the lack of any other living creatures on the planet to eat.... and we would not be here to discuss anything. all macroscopic life and almost certainly all microscopic life on the face of the planet would be obliterated with NO chance of survival. how hard is that to understand?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (8) Sep 26, 2012
Two quotes from Deathcock;
"When you try to make sense of the world with a built in assumption that you cannot allow to be incorrect (the inerrancy of the bible) you have already lost the game."

"I'm sure you know... why the hell would I take your word on this when I studied geology for 3 years at a top a university, taught by professors who are experts in their field who have themselves put decades of education and study into their work and published not only papers but books on the subject. It's simply IMPOSSIBLE for all that we know about geology to be wrong because we have used what we know about Geology to do amazing things, we have put our ideas into practice and they work you fucking lunatics."

So according to your own statement, you have already lost. Oh, but wait, there couldn't possibly be any errors in textbooks, textbooks are perfect.
barakn
3.9 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
Also, you might want to take a closer look at what's happening on Io ...

http://www.thunde...es-4.htm

NASA's probe camera saturated while trying to take pictures. People should think very carefully about the claim that a lava flow can saturate a probe camera. Really?! We've been filming lava flows here on Earth for many decades now without any saturation problems. -HannesAlfven
It was a near-infrared imager. Power emitted by an object varies as the 4th power of the temperature. The background rocks in the image at your link are at a temp of about 110 K. To radiate twice as much power, we'd only have to raise the temperature to 110 K * (2^.25) = 131 K. If a sensor was as sensitive to the spectrum of a 110 K blackbody as a 131 K blackbody, an image taken with an exposure time sufficient to bring the 110 K pixels to half saturation (mid-tone gray), would saturate the 131 K pixels.
barakn
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
Now by Wien's displacement law we know a 110 K blackbody's thermal emission will peak at 26,000 nm whereas the 131 K blackbody peaks closer to the near-infrared, at 22,000 nm, so the sensor will actually be more sensitive to the 131 K radiation, meaning it's even more likely to over-saturate.

If I had to hazard a guess, I bet HannesAlfven never bothered to think about any of this nor even bothered to look for terrestrial images of lava taken in infrared. So I've done the work for you. Look - saturated areas!

http://www.scienc...5004189# (note Fig. 3, whose description says "Saturated pixels (perceived maximum DN = 4095) are white.")
http://i1-news.so...ng-2.jpg
http://members.vi...m/610ae/ (note that areas of this image are so saturated they're bleeding into adjacent pixels)
http://www.flickr...tostream
barakn
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
http://www.volcan...mic2.jpg
http://hvo.wr.usg...84_L.jpg

But even someone with no practical knowledge of thermal radiation should still have recognized how egregious Hannes's claim is. Any image of any object could be made to have saturated areas simply by overexposing the image. Any image at all. Even an image of HannesAlfven's mother swinging on the pole. It's a fundamental limit of technology - imagers can only count a finite number of photons but almost any imager can be made to stare at something long enough that more photons come in than can be counted. Seriously, Hannes, have you never taken a single over-exposed photo in your entire life?

You owe everyone an apology.
barakn
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 26, 2012
Oh, and a final note. Since our spacecraft have taken beautiful images of Io volcanoes spouting off like fountains, why in the world did you think it was necessary to come up with a non-volcanic explanation for an Io image? Oh, yeah, that's right, you don't actually do much of your own thinking.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (5) Sep 26, 2012
Excellent analysis.

Re: "Since our spacecraft have taken beautiful images of Io volcanoes spouting off like fountains, why in the world did you think it was necessary to come up with a non-volcanic explanation for an Io image?"

For a number of convincing reasons:

(1) NASA has noted a "surprising rain of charged particles" in the vicinity of the moon.

(2) I didn't come up with the idea. It was proposed all the way back in November, 1979 in the journal Science by Cornell astrophysicist Thomas Gold.

(3) The "lava" shown in the imagery is apparently reaching an elevation of 5,000 feet.

(4) At a different location - Promethius - NASA has yet to observe an actual volcano. See http://www.thunde...s-3.htm. Look carefully at the deepest zoom. The 62-mile high ejecta in this case is sourced by two white dots at the edge of a burned region. These burned areas continuously move as the plume moves.

Wandering volcanoes!

We can do this w/o math ...
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
I'm not oblivious to the complexities of trying to convince talented scientists and thinkers that something they may have invested incredible time in might be wrong.

But, the truth is that we don't actually train students in most science programs today to question the materials we're teaching them. In fact, Jeff Schmidt (author of Disciplined Minds, a harsh critique of the physics PhD program) has commented that the more gung-ho types tend to breeze through while those who stop long enough to be thoughtful about what they are memorizing are left behind.

But, a qualitative review of the evidence suggests strongly that we can elaborate a completely new scientific framework here. Part of the problem with our educational system for science is that students are not being inspired to learn science. If the advocates for conventional theory expressed as much concern for motivating students to learn about science as they do about defending it, we'd be better prepared for science's future.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
It almost doesn't matter one bit who is right on each of these little debates. The very fact that we can disagree about these things, and defend our cases, points the way to a better system of science education which immerses kids into the very process of thinking like a scientist. Students are expected to develop this tacit skill of thinking like a scientist, even though we keep them spectating on the sidelines on some of the most fascinating and longstanding controversies in science (the same thing can be observed in biology, too, btw).

Honestly, it's so much less important that we pretend to know the answer to these big questions. It's far more important that we ask the right questions. When we pretend as though there is no uncertainty in disciplines like cosmology and astrophysics, we associate no value to uncertainty. But, uncertainty guides us towards good questions. Those who place no value to uncertainty will tend to ask the same bad questions over and over.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Sep 26, 2012
There is plenty of uncertainty in all disciplines and only a fool with his head in the clouds would not acknowledge this fact. That is why Science is ongoing and relentlessly (presumably) searching for truth and the puzzle pieces fitting together perfectly.

From the article: "Most of the microspherules were made up of elements in proportions similar to the composition of the Earth's crust and not, as some had proposed, meteorite material. In addition, the surface characteristics of the microspherules indicate that they were heated to a molten temperature and then cooled rapidly."

It seems most plausible that a meteorite did impact the Earth, rendering certain elements that were already in the Earth to melt from the intense heat and congeal together, forming the microspherules. Additionally, the climate of the Earth where the impact occurred would have had to be extremely cold, so that the rapid cooling of the microspherules could occur.
The heat from such an impact would [contd]
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Sep 26, 2012
have caused enormous amounts of ice to melt, causing massive flooding in the regions. This could only have happened in an ice-age. The meteorite material would have been thrown as ejecta.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Sep 27, 2012
The microsphrules are key piece of evidence to confirm the electric discharge POV. Only electrical forces can explain the morphology of the different spherules, impact theory cannot explain these anomalies.

http://www.thunde...ries.htm
R_R
1.7 / 5 (11) Sep 27, 2012
Otto, perhaps this will help you see where I'm coming from. Calculate the odds that you could guess where two specific stars would precisely be on an evening in 10500 BC without the aid of any star charts and such. A billion to one? Trillion to one? Higher? Well short answer is thats what I did, I predicted two specific stars (orions belt star and Draconis pole star) would align with star shafts of queens chamber of Great Pyramid 10500 BC because I thought it possible this monument might be marking pole shift, and when I finally got around to checking I was kinda shocked to find I was right. I had made other predictions as well which also came true.

So forgive me for saying but basically the gig is up. The GP pinpoints the previous pole at Hudson Bay with mathematical certainty. And given science was shown this answer over 60 years ago by Mr Hapgood, I'd like to know what the heck is going on?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (17) Sep 27, 2012
queens chamber of Great Pyramid 10500 BC because I thought it possible this monument might be marking pole shift, and when I finally got around to checking I was kinda shocked to find I was right. I had made other predictions as well which also came true.
-As your impact-and-pole-shift theory is obviously implausible as it would have cinderized the surface of the planet, perhaps you might want to try something else?
http://en.wikiped...n_theory

Additionally, the climate of the Earth where the impact occurred would have had to be extremely cold, so that the rapid cooling of the microspherules could occur.
Or there is a scientific explanation which is very easy to find for anyone but someone like you who enjoys just making incredibly stupid shit up. Because it is even easier.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (14) Sep 27, 2012
Additionally, the climate of the Earth where the impact occurred would have had to be extremely cold, so that the rapid cooling of the microspherules could occur.
-Just to clarify, I am wondering why it is that pussytard thinks that 'extremely cold' climate is necessary to solidify molten rock?

"Impact spherulites: when a large extraterrestrial object striking Earth at cosmic velocity melts and vaporizes, silicate materials can condense into high spheroidal, sand-sized particles deposited around the point of impact. Unaltered impact spherulites consist entirely of glass (microtektites) or a combination of glass and crystals grown in flight (microkrystites)"

-I suppose it is as easy to pretend you are a geophysicist as it is a nurse or a NASA worker who has never seen a document scanner. When you don't care if people think you are an idiot, that is.
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 27, 2012
So according to your own statement, you have already lost. Oh, but wait, there couldn't possibly be any errors in textbooks, textbooks are perfect.


I'm not sure how you think one of those quotes has anything to do with the other... probably crossed wires in that fucked up brain of yours. Real scientists do not start with the assumption that something MUST be true and then ignore all evidence that contradicts that. Mainstream Geology is based on the work of actual Geologists who study this stuff for a living, and they do not assume that some stupid fucking thing like a global flood HAS to be true... so when they find no evidence for it they don't invent any or contort the evidence in favor of it.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (8) Sep 27, 2012
So according to your own statement, you have already lost. Oh, but wait, there couldn't possibly be any errors in textbooks, textbooks are perfect.


I'm not sure how you think one of those quotes has anything to do with the other... probably crossed wires in that fucked up brain of yours. Real scientists do not start with the assumption that something MUST be true and then ignore all evidence that contradicts that. Mainstream Geology is based on the work of actual Geologists who study this stuff for a living, and they do not assume that some stupid fucking thing like a global flood HAS to be true... so when they find no evidence for it they don't invent any or contort the evidence in favor of it.


There are a great number of assumptions included in geologic theory, you vulgar little dolt.
Deathclock
3.9 / 5 (7) Sep 27, 2012
There is plenty of uncertainty in all disciplines and only a fool with his head in the clouds would not acknowledge this fact. That is why Science is ongoing and relentlessly (presumably) searching for truth and the puzzle pieces fitting together perfectly.


No shit...

However, claiming that there was a recent (less than 100ky) global flood or that humans popped into existence 6000 years ago is equivalent, given the evidence, to the claim that the Earth is flat. Well, we have satellites, we can see that it's not flat... likewise we have all kinds of tools to analyze all kinds of evidence and we can just as literally SEE that those other two claims are false as well.

The idea of a global flood in recent geologic history is as likely as the claim that clouds are caused by flatulence.
Deathclock
3.9 / 5 (8) Sep 27, 2012
I'm not sure how you think one of those quotes has anything to do with the other... probably crossed wires in that fucked up brain of yours. Real scientists do not start with the assumption that something MUST be true and then ignore all evidence that contradicts that. Mainstream Geology is based on the work of actual Geologists who study this stuff for a living, and they do not assume that some stupid fucking thing like a global flood HAS to be true... so when they find no evidence for it they don't invent any or contort the evidence in favor of it.


There are a great number of assumptions included in geologic theory, you vulgar little dolt.


What you are no doubt considering to be "assumptions" were themselves arrived at by careful study of the evidence... not from the writings of goat herders thousands of years.

There is a difference between an unfounded assumption and a reasonable assumption based on a study of the evidence.
Deathclock
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 27, 2012
I predicted two specific stars (orions belt star and Draconis pole star) would align with star shafts of queens chamber of Great Pyramid 10500 BC because I thought it possible this monument might be marking pole shift, and when I finally got around to checking I was kinda shocked to find I was right. I had made other predictions as well which also came true.

So forgive me for saying but basically the gig is up. The GP pinpoints the previous pole at Hudson Bay with mathematical certainty. And given science was shown this answer over 60 years ago by Mr Hapgood, I'd like to know what the heck is going on?


You're a certified lunatic.

I hope you realize that when normal (rational, sane) people hear you talk about star alignments with the pyramids and conspiracy theories that sweep across all scientific disciplines they IMMEDIATELY discount you as a nutcase, and rightfully so.
Deathclock
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 27, 2012
-Just to clarify, I am wondering why it is that pussytard thinks that 'extremely cold' climate is necessary to solidify molten rock?


Because he is an idiot...

The temperatures at which minerals and iron melt is so high that the difference between a 100 degree tropical forest and a -100 degree arctic tundra are damn near irrelevant.

(Fahrenheit, sorry I'm American, it's not my fault)
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (1) Sep 27, 2012
Re: "What a waste of a reasonably interesting article just to have it vandalized by some adultescent religious spank boys either out for a good spamming or sharing bible lessons from hell. No they're probably just Sunday school kiddies passing on the totality of their brains ability to retain. It's rather redundant after awhile."

Who's the source of the problem here? You're the one that appears to be confusing mythology with religion. A person could waste an entire lifetime trying to correct all of you on this single point.

Speaking of wasted lifetimes: Why don't you go look in the mirror?
R_R
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 27, 2012
Otto , I vary familiar with bauval, auctually my work finish what he started, I know you wont believe but the three pyramids at giza do represent Orions belt. the builders designed this as a starting point to figure puzzel, the great pyramid also represents earths northern hemishpere , that why pi in dimensions, never say never.

barakn
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 28, 2012
Hannes-
1) Not surprising at all. The volcanoes supply the atoms and the extreme Jovian environment provides the ionization energy.
2) An honest-to-goodness astrophysicist? Wow, he must be right because all astrophysicists are infallible.
3) 5000 feet? In a near vacuum with surface gravity only 18% as strong as Earth's? Kilauea Iki Crater spouted lava to 1,148 feet http://writteninl...uea.html This is 23% as high as the Io lava, remarkably close to the 18% surface gravity ratio and suggesting that they operate using similar mechanisms.
4) Wow, that 404 error is amazing evidence... of a broken link.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (9) Sep 28, 2012
LOL...theghostofblotto is still operating on the neurotic assumption that I and Estevan57 are PussyCatEyes and all Blotto's other adversaries of the past. I have read PussyCatEyes' posts and I must agree with her remote scientific diagnosis that Blotto is certifiably insane, and she is proven right every time Blotto obsesses about her presence in this his Physorg website, which he believes he owns and has the right to limit others from making their comments. All of these professions that Blotto talks about and attributes to me, such as farmer, nurse, geophysicist, scientist, etc., in spite of my repeated denial to his accusations, are indications that Theghostofott1923 (and all his personas such as lite, et al) is suffering from a sick obsession to deny free speech to others whom he failed at controlling. Blotto is a hateful Nazi-lover who wants to boot people out of here.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (8) Sep 28, 2012
@Deathwatch
I said: "It seems most plausible that a meteorite did impact the Earth, rendering certain elements that were already in the Earth to melt from the intense heat and congeal together, forming the microspherules. Additionally, the climate of the Earth where the impact occurred would have had to be extremely cold, so that the rapid cooling of the microspherules could occur. The heat from such an impact would have caused enormous amounts of ice to melt, causing massive flooding in the regions. This could only have happened in an ice-age." -Obama_socks

If you actually read my post, you should've noticed that I did not say that the Earth was a frozen ball of ice, and nowhere did I mention a global flood. The melting ice IN THE REGION OF THE IMPACT indicates the cooling of the microspherules in the presence of water after they formed by heat. It would've had to be a mini-ice age that allowed the American Indians to cross the Bering Strait from Mongolia to Alaska over the solid ice
obama_socks
1 / 5 (9) Sep 28, 2012
The approximate time scale of that crossing was ~10,000 - 13,000 ya, which is reasonably calendrical in line with such a mini ice age.

Since this particular topic is not about religions, I fail to see why religion is even mentioned, unless the head religion provocateur (Blotto) had his usual itch to either introduce religion into a topic (article) that never mentions it, or to react in a violent way to Lurker or someones else's mention of a Biblical flood. Amazing how some people do carry on!!
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (18) Sep 28, 2012
The melting ice IN THE REGION OF THE IMPACT indicates the cooling of the microspherules in the presence of water after they formed by heat.
But water is not required to cool molten rock. As I actually read your post, I see that for some reason you think this is true, and you restate it even after your -lack- is pointed out.

"the researchers behind the new study have re-examined the Blackwater Draw and Topper sites – as well as a third site in Maryland common to the 2009 study..."

-Nope no ice age in these places. Try harder - make something even stupider up. And then try to bullshit your way out of it. Again.

oh i see you already did.
The approximate time scale of that crossing was ~10,000 - 13,000 ya, which is reasonably calendrical in line with such a mini ice age.
WHAT does this have to do with microspherules?? This is like you mentioning 'lost wax' to make people think you know what you are talking about isnt it? Or using words like 'calendrical'.

Its not working.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (17) Sep 28, 2012
OOp I see I missed this little cowpie:
American Indians to cross the Bering Strait from Mongolia to Alaska over the solid ice
"[Beringia] an ancient land bridge roughly 1,000 miles (1,600 km) wide (north to south) at its greatest extent, which connected Asia with North America at various times during the Pleistocene ice ages...The Bering Strait, the Chukchi Sea to the north and the Bering Sea to the south, are all shallow seas (see maps). During cycles of global cooling, such as the most recent ice age, enough sea water became concentrated in the great ice sheets that covered North America and Europe, so that the subsequent drop in eustatic sea levels exposed shallow sea-floors that have subsequently re-flooded."

MAKE MORE STUPID SHIT UP please.
lengould100
4.2 / 5 (5) Sep 28, 2012
Smashin. Have you really never heard of the Ice Age cycle? Even the childrens cartoon mocie knows more about that than you LOL.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
Blotto doesn't believe in "ice age" occurring on Earth anywhere or at any time. He obviously believes that the Earth was always a temperate climate except at the poles, and that the American Indians swam across the Bering Sea to get to Alaska.
Notice how he offers a tidbit from Wikipedia that completely agrees with what I said already about the crossing of the Bering Strait in an ice age, which mentions "During cycles of global cooling, such as the most recent ice age,", and then he goes on to deny that there was an ice age.
And before that, Blotto says something about "lost wax", which I am unfamiliar with and have never said or even heard of such a thing, which increases my feeling that Blotto is under a severe delusion of mistaken identities and personalities.

He thinks that I'm a woman (I'm male), and he has called me a geophysicist, scientist, astronomer, a nurse, a farmer, and a windmill owner, and now something about "lost wax". Blotto needs a long rest at a good rest home.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
Microspherules that form in intense heat from a meteorite impact on land would have a better chance of staying intact after their original formation when cold water is present to cool them down quickly after their genesis.
Since Blotto appears to be extremely allergic to any mention of a flood, whether regional or global, I will now tell the lying, flooding and delusionally insane Blotto varmint that a mini ice age that lasts a short time could, indeed, cause flooding in many parts of the world when the ice begins to melt fast. Since water is absorbed by ground material according to what type of ground material it is, the water could have accumulated on the ground in certain regions, and been absorbed in others. So, while global flooding may not be entirely accurate, the lasting effects of flooding are not always evident for geologists to find. Water seeks the lowest level and doesn't stick to surfaces, so Blotto is all wet...as well as crazy...Crazy Otto has lost wax in his ears? LOL
Sinister1811
1.7 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
A similar collision, early in the Earth's history, could have led to the formation of the moon.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Sep 30, 2012
To add to Blotto's stupidity, he included this: "During cycles of global cooling, such as the most recent ice age, enough sea water became concentrated in the great ice sheets that covered North America and Europe, so that the subsequent drop in eustatic sea levels exposed shallow sea-floors that have subsequently re-flooded." As North America and Europe were locked in an ice age and great ice sheets covered the land, it's not inconceivable that if these great sheets of ice melted fast and caused great floods when river banks overflowed and the seas rose again, that many low-lying areas could have become flooded. The desert sands of the mid-East do not absorb water quickly, so that flash floods could have occurred and the water flooded the land as it does in present times.

http://infrastruc...post-18/
HocusLocus
3 / 5 (2) Sep 30, 2012
The persistence of biblical concordance claims in this discussion is annoying. It is as if someone tossed out a link to some South Park episode (such as the EXCELLENT Walmart one in which several people pooped their pants as they died) and no one could resist expounding. I surely cannot. What about that pants pooping I say. Yea the Bible says there was a flood somewheres and somewhens. Now if the Bible said, "Let's get off our asses and develop a practical asteroid and comet planetary defense mechanism!" I'd head out to be baptised. If we do not do this it will be a baptism of fire and ice.

Those tiny micro spheroids are the Eyeballs of God; they gaze directly into our souls, imploring us to jump-start the space program and develop a working Planetary Defense System before the Next Big One comes and rains molten micro spheres on our hides and we all poop our pants.
Moebius
1.6 / 5 (7) Sep 30, 2012
Don't know why the bible comment got so many low ratings, an impact could explain the flood stories. But then there are a lot of morons here who rate comments low regardless of their content.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (15) Sep 30, 2012
Dr pussytard informs us
Microspherules that form in intense heat from a meteorite impact on land would have a better chance of staying intact after their original formation when cold water is present to cool them down quickly after their genesis.
And how would you possibly know that? You have no idea where they form, how they form, or what causes them to form. You are making shit up as it occurs to you. Can you see the difference between that and scientists with decades of training and experience actually studying the evidence and reaching conclusions?

Others here, including myself, tend to do this sort of thing but will admit it when we are corrected. You continue to make shit up, lie through your ass and insult anybody who takes issue with this.

You are profoundly stupid and appallingly ignorant.
The desert sands of the mid-East do not absorb water quickly
Your link has nothing to do with your post. Tell you what - why dont you go relieve yourself in some other forum?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (15) Sep 30, 2012
Notice how he offers a tidbit from Wikipedia that completely agrees with what I said already about the crossing of the Bering Strait in an ice age
No, you said
American Indians to cross the Bering Strait from Mongolia to Alaska over the solid ice
But the article I sourced which you didnt read states:

"During the ice ages, Beringia, like most of Siberia and all of Manchuria, was not glaciated because snowfall was extremely light."

-Humans crossed over land, not ice. Humans do not migrate over long stretches of ice because there are no resources to sustain them.

See how making shit up only shows people what an imbecile you are? Not owning up only makes it worse.
Estevan57
2.5 / 5 (16) Sep 30, 2012
Water is not needed to cool a molten object into a sphere.

In fact, the smaller it is, the longer it falls, and the hotter it started out, the more round it becomes.

Surface tension, ya know.

http://en.wikiped...ot_tower
johnnyringo
5 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
The Bible, as well as many ancient stories from cultures worldwide,"
Any prehistoric people experiencing a flood of any kind will think that it covers THEIR entire world, since they would have little ability to comprehend just how large planet Earth really is. Therefore, any telling of a "world" flood must be considered from the point of view of primitive cultures. Besides, it is a well-known fact that humans have a chronic tendency to exagerate any kind of phenomena they don't understand,i.e, UFO's, ghost stories, criminal eyewitness accounts, etc.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Sep 30, 2012
Locals experience biggest flood in oral history - must cover whole world!!!


There is enough water on Earth so that an ice age could in principle cause ever piece of land on Earth to be easily covered in a sheet of ice to a depth of 7 meters, or about 15 cubits.

Note that the bible does not specify the phase of the waters in the "flood."

Because ice "sticks" to a surface, it would take far less water to "flood" the land if it was all in the form of snow and/or freezing rain.

If an object blocked out the sun for 40 days through ejecta, the convection from the oceans would become enormous because the stratosphere and upper troposphere would become super-cooled. This would pump enormous volumes of water out of the oceans and onto the continents in blizzards.

Then suppose the blockage stopped being so bad after 40 days, and remelting in the middle east finished on the time table given in the Bible.

It would explain the loss of habitats in the perhistoric Sahara and Egypt.[
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
On page 1, Lurker2358 claims the above comment. It is possible that the "ice age" extended down toward the middle east from Europe. Fast melting, as I've said, would inundate the land mass by overflowing river banks and seas, washing away a lot of artifacts and burying such artifacts under tons of mud. Cities have been built on top of previous cities that were flooded or destroyed by earthquakes, so it's not a stretch to understand that new structures were built atop the old because of the close proximity to rivers, etc. for drinking water after wells were dug.
I'm not too confident about the rain continuing for 40 days and nights, but there would have had to be an excellent source of lumber in the region if an ark was actually built. The lumber from forests would have been amazing as it is, since the middle east is not known for impressive forests. After a massive flood, forests most likely would've been uprooted and washed away, rendering the land as desert. The fact that [contd]
RHood
5 / 5 (6) Sep 30, 2012
What does this potential impact event have to do with biblical mythology? Must you taint everything with this nonsense? I come to a place like PHYS.ORG and have to "listen" to this religious drivel!!! Must you GODBOTS pollute everything that is good and decent on the planet? Shame on you.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (8) Sep 30, 2012
there is massive oil fields in the middle east region indicates that at one time there was tremendous amounts of vegetation growing and dying and being converted into hydrocarbons. A massive flood would have devastated such an ecosystem which would not recover, depending on the extent of the devastation. There are large aquifers beneath the sands of the middle east which could have been the waters that flooded the regions. At the time of heavy vegetation, the rains would have trickled down slower as the vegetation would have absorved the rainwater. A world-wide rainy season that actually lasted for 40 days and nights would have flooded low-lying areas everywhere, and destroyed settlements and drowned people and animals. It may have been a combination of ice melting fast in an ice age and heavy rains due to a change in weather patterns after an impact.
Microspherules have a better chance of holding their shape if cooled quickly. That's a fact, Blotto
LOL
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Sep 30, 2012
What does this potential impact event have to do with biblical mythology? Must you taint everything with this nonsense? I come to a place like PHYS.ORG and have to "listen" to this religious drivel!!! Must you GODBOTS pollute everything that is good and decent on the planet? Shame on you.
-- RHood--

...pollute everything that's good and decent on the planet? I KNOW you can't be talking about MY comments since I haven't even mentioned God. I mentioned an ice age and a meteorite hit that caused the ice sheets to melt, causing flooding possibly in most of low-lying areas of the world. These things are categorized as SCIENCE. Specifically, EARTH science. Whether it was caused by a spiritual entity or by natural forces alone, is irrelevant. The topic itself is only a THEORY due to the discovery of microspherules that could have been caused by a big impact. Such an impact would result in tremendous heat. In an ice age, it would melt the ice, obviously.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Oct 01, 2012
So now Blotto objects to my use of the word "calendrical"…idiot that he is!!
Blotto gives this:
"….enough sea water became concentrated in the great ice sheets that covered North America and Europe, so that the subsequent drop in eustatic sea levels exposed shallow sea-floors that have subsequently re-flooded."

Blotto apparently does NOT comprehend the definition of the word, "SHALLOW". He thinks that the American Indians crossed the Bering Strait on DRY land during an ice age circa 10,000 to 13,000 ya.
Shallow refers to a body of water that is lower in volume, but no way does it mean DRY LAND. Indians and Eskimos bring their resources with them and are proficient in ice-fishing and eating pemican. They crossed over ice and their journey was short. There are islands in between Mongolia and Alaska which meant that they probably had meat also. Blotto doesn't comprehend his own sources, but is quick to remove all doubt that he is a boorish frump who pretends to know-it-all and fails.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Oct 01, 2012
And Blotto also says: "During the ice ages, Beringia, like most of Siberia and all of Manchuria, was not glaciated because snowfall was extremely light."

-Humans crossed over land, not ice. Humans do not migrate over long stretches of ice because there are no resources to sustain them. See how making shit up only shows people what an imbecile you are? Not owning up only makes it worse. --Blotto--

Blotto makes up his own shit, obviously.
During the ICE AGES (plural), snowfall up in that latitude would be heavy in order to create ice sheets. Apparently, Blotto doesn't know that snowfall, when compressed by more snow on top, becomes ice, forming ice sheets, especially in an ice age. His above source is based on lies. Extremely light snowfall results in no ice age. Last winter 2011-2012 saw virtually no snowfall in the northern latitudes of N.America and many lakes did not form ice.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Oct 01, 2012
The ice sheets during the last ice age also extended down past NY state and into the state of Maryland, in which exists the Chesapeake Bay, which was created by an incoming bolide approx 35mya. The impact of the bolide and the resulting intense heat is most likely the reason for the microspherules found in Maryland.

http://www.chesap.../history
[move the slider to the right to see all the pictures and text]

http://en.wikiped...eake_Bay
Urgelt
5 / 5 (4) Oct 01, 2012
Seems to me that the Biblical literalists are floundering. Ice instead of a water flood? Really?

Need I point out that the YDB was laid down around 12,900 years ago? Biblical literalists 'know' that the Earth was created around 6,000 years ago, give or take a few centuries. It's utterly pointless for literalists to point to *any* archeological evidence as 'proof' of their cretinous, inflexible myths.

But it is amusing to watch them flounder, attempting to 'converge' their beliefs with scientific evidence and failing miserably.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Oct 01, 2012
[contd]

http://www.chesap.../history
[move the slider to the right to see all the pictures and text]

http://en.wikiped...eake_Bay

The sixth picture's text in the first link is particularly interesting.
It says: "(10,000 to 7,000 ya), Ice sheets continue to melt, flooding the Susquehanna, Potomac, James and York rivers and submerging river valleys under HUNDREDS OF FEET OF WATER. Sea levels continue to rise as water pours into the Atlantic.
The Chesapeake Bay's outline begins to form. Ice Age creatures, such as mammoths and giant beavers, are now extinct.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (12) Oct 01, 2012
During the ICE AGES (plural), snowfall up in that latitude would be heavy in order to create ice sheets. Apparently, Blotto doesn't know that snowfall, when compressed by more snow on top, becomes ice

"During the ice ages, Beringia, like most of Siberia and all of Manchuria, was not glaciated because snowfall was extremely light."

-My god you're stupid. Look up a map of where there was and was not ice during ice ages. You fucking imbecile. You are drunk when you post aren't you?
So now Blotto objects to my use of the word "calendrica"
No I object to your using this site as a toilet.
there is massive oil fields in the middle east region indicates that at one time there was tremendous amounts of vegetation growing and dying and being converted into hydrocarbons.
Except that when these were formed the ME was not where it is now.
A massive flood would have devastated such an ecosystem which would not recover
Except in all the places where it must have. Imbecile.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (15) Oct 01, 2012
Blotto apparently does NOT comprehend the definition of the word, "SHALLOW". He thinks that the American Indians crossed the Bering Strait on DRY land during an ice age circa 10,000 to 13,000 ya.
Beringia is common knowledge but as you are uncommonly stupid you might fail to grasp this.
There are islands in between Mongolia and Alaska
There are also china and Siberia between Mongolia and alaska.

Tell you what. I will refrain from demonstrating how stupid you are if you stop posting. Deal? Otherwise it is only natural to demonstrate how stupid you are because it is obvious, very easy, and fun. But a little embarrassing I must admit.

Here are some people who might be able to help you out
http://en.wikiped...nonymous
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (13) Oct 01, 2012
-If that doesn't work perhaps this
http://imbecilesa...com/?m=1
HannesAlfven
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 01, 2012
Re: "Hannes- 1) Not surprising at all. The volcanoes supply the atoms and the extreme Jovian environment provides the ionization energy. 2) An honest-to-goodness astrophysicist? Wow, he must be right because all astrophysicists are infallible. 3) 5000 feet? In a near vacuum with surface gravity only 18% as strong as Earth's? Kilauea Iki Crater spouted lava to 1,148 feet http://writteninl...uea.html This is 23% as high as the Io lava, remarkably close to the 18% surface gravity ratio and suggesting that they operate using similar mechanisms. 4) Wow, that 404 error is amazing evidence... of a broken link."

Why did you ignore the most fatal, direct observation for the volcano hypothesis: The imagery which shows no volcano, and instead reveals a burn field with two bright spots located at the very edge of this burn field -- as well as apparent observations that these "volcanoes" have for many years apparently been observed to wander?
HannesAlfven
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 01, 2012
Re: "The persistence of biblical concordance claims in this discussion is annoying."

The argument for "biblical concordance," as you call it, is a SUBSET of the argument for mythological concordance. So, if you are having an issue with the religious nature of biblical concordance, many of us who are advocates for taking a closer look at mythology are right there with you. We can agree on this. There's no need for a discussion of religion here. And to do so is really putting the blinders on for the larger concordances which are happening within the "archetypes" and "creation stories," of which the Bible is simply one single instance.

This single point is incredibly important for those who have an interest in geology, for the creation stories occupy somewhere around 5,000 years of apparent human storytelling. And, they are the first stories which people told, to begin with. The importance of those stories should be self-evident, especially considering that they PRECEDE RELIGION.
HannesAlfven
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 01, 2012
Anybody whose starting point for understanding the history of this planet, life and human origins, as well as the origin of consciousness is to basically ignore the contents of the first 5,000 years of human storytelling -- EVEN THOUGH THOSE STORIES EXHIBIT ANOMALOUS CONCORDANCES -- is pretty much wiping the slate clean for any neo-mythology which they desire to infect peoples' minds with. It is understandable if people look at these concordances and decide after observing the history of peoples' attempts to explain them, in light of modern science (such as plasma physics), that they do not agree with these arguments. However, this should NEVER be confused with the more common approach we see -- which is the refusal to actually look at any source which has something to do with the mythological archetypes, due to some assumption that mythology equates with "untrue." This latter approach is based upon prejudice -- not science.
barakn
4.3 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012

Why did you ignore the most fatal, direct observation for the volcano hypothesis: The imagery which shows no volcano, and instead reveals a burn field with two bright spots located at the very edge of this burn field -- as well as apparent observations that these "volcanoes" have for many years apparently been observed to wander?
It was very easy for me to ignore it. Your link to it was broken, I pointed out the link was broken, and even though you replied, you failed to include a valid link. Imagery of the Yellowstone caldera shows no volcano either, but the geologic evidence of volcanic activity is overwhelming. Yellowstone also kills one of your other points - the hotspot that has created Yellowstone has obviously wandered hundreds of miles.
Deathclock
3 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
Don't know why the bible comment got so many low ratings, an impact could explain the flood stories. But then there are a lot of morons here who rate comments low regardless of their content.


No, it couldn't. There was no global flood, because there is no evidence of one, and there would be TONS of evidence of such a thing if it had occurred.

If the "global flood" was only a local flood then there is no issue, because there have been thousands of those in recent geologic history, but that is not what they claim.
Deathclock
2.6 / 5 (5) Oct 02, 2012
It says: "(10,000 to 7,000 ya), Ice sheets continue to melt, flooding the Susquehanna, Potomac, James and York rivers and submerging river valleys under HUNDREDS OF FEET OF WATER.


So what? a few hundred feet wouldn't even cover the hills around those valleys... and that's a far cry from the TENS OF THOUSANDS of feet described by the bible. Also, that water was flowing, rapidly, into the ocean... it wasn't sticking around, it didn't raise the ocean level by hundreds of feet. The entire glacial melt period may have raised the ocean level by several feet, not tens of thousands.
HannesAlfven
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 02, 2012
Io's wandering volcanoes (not sure why this isn't working ...) ...

http://www.thunde...es-3.htm

Re: "There was no global flood, because there is no evidence of one, and there would be TONS of evidence of such a thing if it had occurred."

To be perfectly clear, there remains debates over the underlying cause of the catastrophe, and even what precisely occurs during such catastrophes. Conventional theory proposes that bodies in space do not acquire or trade electrical charge from their surroundings. However, the Deep Impact mission to Comet Tempel 1 produced two separate flashes at the point of impact. Wal Thornhill was the only theorist who proposed that this would occur -- as it must, given that the comet had spent time far away from the Sun's charge environment -- but when it did, he was chastised for not quantifying the flashes more precisely.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
Those who insist that this assumption that bodies in space cannot acquire or trade electrical charge, in response to their environment, will miss the bigger picture of NASA's current attempt to question the underlying physical cause for lightning. When we see the Van Allen radiation belts blinking in response to lightning discharges, and an electric field associated with the planet's surface, it highlights the need to question this very fundamental assumption. This is a very important question to ask here, because the Sun is also implicated. Don't for a second forget that the Sun's solar wind fails to appreciably decelerate, even as it passes the Earth's orbit. Astrophysicists have largely shelved this anomaly, but the easiest way to resolve it would be to propose that the Sun has it's own charge density, and thus, electric field.

Now, these are very foundational issues here, and it speaks directly to the nature of what happens during large-scale catastrophes.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
Any geologist who thinks that they can simply ignore the debate will then naturally not understand what to look for, in the event that wholesale revisions are needed to update our astrophysical and cosmological theories to reflect plasma's dominance in the universe. How would the world's water respond in the event of a massive *electrical* disturbance? Usually, astrophysicists do not presume that they can simply guess these sorts of things. In fact, we expect that they would perform a wide variety of simulations. But, for some reason, the people here want to imagine that we can simply guess what would happen sufficiently well that we would know what to look for.

In other words, there's just no desire to apply the same principles of science which are deployed for conventional science, to this alternative paradigm. But, if lightning turns out to be a leg of a larger circuit, the geologists need to wake up and reconsider this sloppy approach.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
Some people have already been asking this question for many decades already. By looking at the concordances in "creation stories," David Talbott and Anthony Peratt have tracked down potential eyewitness accounts of what these large-scale phenomena actually look like. When you have many hundreds, if not thousands, of people trying to describe something they are seeing in the sky which doesn't resemble anything they've ever seen before, a researcher can attempt to reverse engineer the original phenomenon, so long as they understand the underlying plasma physics principles which will guide the event. This actually works surprisingly well, but the sticking point has always been that the end result (pre-catastrophe) is a local space environment which vastly differs from what we see today. And this is ultimately where we run into the uniformitarian wall -- which, if permitted to do so, many uniformitarians will hold to until they actually personally witness a global catastrophe.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
So, what we end up with here is a stalemate of sorts: The uniformitarians simply refuse to question the validity of their assumptions, and refuse to revisit the subject of the archetypes and creation stories, in light of the discoveries we've made over the past few decades with regards to plasma physics. The conclusion that the Earth might have experienced dramatic changes during human historical times is essentially rejected before it is ever authentically considered by most, even though that is exactly where the evidence has led some of those who have spent a lifetime looking into it.

Meanwhile, anomalies pop up in geology and other disciplines, and because so much effort has been invested ignoring the alternative electrical plasma view of the universe, the theorists fail to observe that the anomalies can be naturally explained in that competing worldview.

And meanwhile, nobody puts any effort into understanding who the Pagans really were, or why they worshipped other "gods".
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
NASA Finds Lightning Clears Safe Zone in Earth's Radiation Belt
http://www.nasa.g...elt.html

First Global Connection Between Earth And Space Weather Found
http://www.nasa.g...ink.html

Lightning strikes produce free neutrons, and we're not sure how
http://arstechnic...htening/

Lightning sprites are out-of-this-world
http://phys.org/n...rld.html

From http://phys.org/n...deo.html ...

"Typically the weather we experience on the ground is considered to be a separate phenomenon from the weather that goes on higher up in the atmosphere, in the area known as the mesosphere. The sprites show, however, that some fundamental science connects these two regions, opening interesting physics questions about the interchange of energy between them."
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
This is, at its heart, a clash of worldviews. In the gravitational worldview, bodies in space are largely isolated. The intervening plasma is known to be there, but it is modeled as if the magnetic fields are static; and the plasma is treated by these models as though it cannot sustain electric fields, because the plasma is *assumed* to exhibit no resistance (like a superconductor). To be clear, this is a mathematical shortcut which not only simplifies the math, but also essentially models the cosmic plasma as though it's a gas. We know from the laboratory that plasmas exhibit a minute electrical resistance. This tiny resistance is sufficient to permit localized charge densities throughout space, and the reason that the two Deep Impact flashes were so important is that this 2nd flash should have suggested to theorists a completely new line of investigation, based upon the premise that a comet on an elliptical orbit will tend to retain the former charge density as it approaches.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
When geologists talk about these microspherules which are associated with impacts, rigor should demand that they learn what a z-pinch and Marklund convection are. There are important geometries being asserted by the electrical theorists which can explain the formation of spherules using filamentary currents which would result from an electrical interaction between two charged bodies in space. See Chapter 6 of the Essential Guide at thunderbolts.info.

But, perhaps more compelling than that hypothesis is the laboratory work by CJ Ransom, which demonstrated that these spherical structures can be the natural byproducts of electrical discharge ...

http://www.thunde...ries.htm

Theorists need to stop imagining that there is only one way to explain their observations. We can approach these geological observations from two distinct worldviews. Those who opt to not do so themselves should nevertheless encourage willing colleagues to look into it.
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2012
There is something extremely blatant which astronomers and astrophysicists seem to miss: Asteroids have *circular* orbits and comets have *elliptical* orbits. The claim being made here is that there is in fact very little difference between the two -- except that the comet's elliptical orbit causes it to travel through a region of space, far from the Sun, where the charge density dramatically differs. When it returns, the display we observe is an electrical interaction. This notion that a comet outgassing some water can over just a short period of time grow to the same size as the Sun (as Comet Holmes did) is really an astounding claim which demands a critique. If that display was, instead, an electrical plasma structure, then this wouldn't be surprising at all.

Much has been written on the electrical nature of comets ...

http://www.thunde...omet.pdf
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (15) Oct 02, 2012
To be perfectly clear, there remains debates over the underlying cause of the catastrophe
Uh there was no catastrophe because as DC and myself before him and many others have pointed out, there is no evidence for one and a great deal of evidence against it.

Your declaring that there was a catastrophe despite the evidence indicates to me the lack of respect you have for evidence, and so I must conclude that you are a crank. Perhaps if you had enough respect for evidence you would be reaching different conclusions? Perhaps not. No matter.

Flooding does seem to be your forte and so I can understand how you might have an affinity for the phenomenon.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2012
To be perfectly clear, there remains debates over the underlying cause of the catastrophe
Uh there was no catastrophe because as DC and myself before him and many others have pointed out, there is no evidence for one and a great deal of evidence against it.

Your declaring that there was a catastrophe despite the evidence indicates to me the lack of respect you have for evidence, and so I must conclude that you are a crank. Perhaps if you had enough respect for evidence you would be reaching different conclusions? Perhaps not. No matter.

Flooding does seem to be your forte and so I can understand how you might have an affinity for the phenomenon.


It's not just the bible that claims catastrophe, it is EVERY ancient civilization screaming it through mythology and religion. The only ones denying it are those who don't listen or open their eyes. For some reason, I'm picturing three monkeys in my head right now.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Oct 03, 2012
It's not just the bible that claims catastrophe, it is EVERY ancient civilization screaming it through mythology and religion. The only ones denying it are those who don't listen or open their eyes. For some reason, I'm picturing three monkeys in my head right now.
Yeah and I'm picturing another sickpuppet.
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 03, 2012
It's not just the bible that claims catastrophe, it is EVERY ancient civilization screaming it through mythology and religion. The only ones denying it are those who don't listen or open their eyes.


Ever played the telephone game? Humans are FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR less reliable sources of historic geologic information than sedimentary rock layers and other geologic evidence. The "evidence" you rely on is not first-hand, second-hand, or third-hand, it is thousand-hand information... it has passed through thousands of individuals. The credibility of these tall tales is low to begin with, because the telling of tall tales was COMMON among ancient people to attempt to bolster their own standing in society. Stories of great hunters single handedly taking down 600 pound bears with their bare hands and other such acts of incredible heroics are not uncommon from ancient civilizations. The credibility of hear-say information from thousands of years ago is practically zero.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2012
Blotto apparently does NOT comprehend the definition of the word, "SHALLOW". He thinks that the American Indians crossed the Bering Strait on DRY land during an ice age circa 10,000 to 13,000 ya.
Beringia is common knowledge but as you are uncommonly stupid you might fail to grasp this.
There are islands in between Mongolia and Alaska
There are also china and Siberia between Mongolia and alaska.
-Blottotard

Beringia is a fairy tale, and Blotto, being a fairy believes in fairy tales. The phony land bridge between Siberia (Mongolia) and Alaska is STILL only a THEORY. Archaeologists in South America are finding artifacts left by humans in excavations that date back to 33,000 BC, which PREDATES the last ice age.

According to Blotto's faulty mind meanderings on the "Land Bridge THEORY", the Bering Strait became completely dry and exposed the sea bottom through which ancestors of American Indians supposedly crossed over the "Bering Land Bridge" from Siberia.
obama_socks
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2012
Similar to Moses and the Hebrews crossing the Red Sea by foot when it became dry land, isn't it Blotto?
But this link http://en.wikiped...Americas tells us that, "Crossings by foot of the Bering Sea, however, are also possible when the sea is frozen.[66"

An ice age or mini-ice age indicates a great amount of snowfall which results in massive ice sheets being created. IF there had been a "land bridge" it could not have been dry soil with the sea water frozen to the North and South of the "bridge" but no sea water in that region in between the two continents.
http://www.native...yth.html

Blotto is too stupid to admit when he is wrong, and he places such great faith in "long held theories" as though it were gospel truth. Theories are not facts until proven and no longer questionable like Blotto's mental condition.
obama_socks
2 / 5 (4) Oct 04, 2012
Then Blotto says: "Tell you what. I will refrain from demonstrating how stupid you are if you stop posting. Deal? Otherwise it is only natural to demonstrate how stupid you are because it is obvious, very easy, and fun. But a little embarrassing I must admit.

Here are some people who might be able to help you out
http://en.wikiped...nonymous
--Blotto

Poor poor Blotto...he STILL doesn't understand that for all these years, he has been turning Physorg into PISSORG, which is more his style. He pisses on this website on a regular basis, which motivates a lot of people to call it PISSORG, as sad and as tragic as it is.
In my free time, I use my primary name and post along with my fellow scientists and engineers where Blotto doesn't go because he would be way out of his league. Then I come back to this name and see Blotto still mistaking me for his old friends. LOL
I might continue with this name even after the election next month, just to laugh at Crazy Otto. :P
HannesAlfven
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2012
Re: "The credibility of these tall tales is low to begin with, because the telling of tall tales was COMMON among ancient people to attempt to bolster their own standing in society."

This, btw, is called making sh*it up. Comparative mythologists are expected to actually look at the sources. Like scientists, they have to provide their references. They also are expected to justify their translations, with evidence.

Re: "Ever played the telephone game? Humans are FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR less reliable sources of historic geologic information than sedimentary rock layers and other geologic evidence."

Again, you're completely making sh*it up. What you're doing here is (a) assuming that oral tradition, in an era before writing, would be just like oral tradition today; (b) refusing to check in with experts on mythology, who could very easily validate or disprove your belief; and (c) then pretending to others that this is common sense.

In truth, you're creating noise.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (6) Oct 04, 2012
From Dwardu Cardona's God Star (page 14), quoting Alfred de Grazia:

"We know from general anthropology and ancient literature that an exact rendition of a large body of verse and prose (such as Homer's Iliad and other epic works) can be transmitted over generations and centuries ... [I]n the period of oral transmission, trained speakers can memorize and reproduce exactly thousands of lines heard from the lips of a teacher."

Now, if any person just took a second to consider this issue carefully, they'd realize very quickly that we do this today, as well. Physics PhD students, in fact, are required to memorize solutions to stacks of problem sets in order to pass their qualifying exams. So many people have memorized the digits of pi to so many thousands of digits that the feat barely even gets a mention in the newspapers when another person pulls it off.

If you catch yourself making stuff up about mythology, please consider that you are misinforming people on an important subject.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2012
Dwardu goes on...

"It is by rote, which Warlow calls 'THE basic way,' that every child learns the complexities of speech, the chronological order of the alphabet, the days in the month, multiplication tables, spelling aids, and other fundamentals in the early garnering of knowledge. He was nowhere near exaggerating when he referred to rote learning as 'an incredibly powerful technique.'

It has also been hypothesized that the hexameter of Homer's verses was inherited from an earlier oral tradition and that it was this very hexameter that helped preserve the epics (S. Begley, et al, 'Memory,' Newsweek (Sept 29, 1986), p 54). If this was so, verbatim memorization may not even have been necessary. According to Milman Parry, the hexameters of poetic sagas such as the Iliad and Odyssey are not simply constructed of word-units but of formulas. These constitute 'groups of words [co-ordinated precisely] for dealing with traditional materials, each formula shaped to fit a hexameter line.'"
barakn
3.9 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2012
Whatever. Just take a look at the first two chapters of Genesis, wherein the story of the creation of the Earth is told not once but twice. The two stories don't agree with each other. So much for faithful oral tradition. One problem with your argument is that these stories have passed through so many generations that the languages themselves changed dramatically. Try slogging your way through some Chaucer and see how easy it is to rote memorize medieval English. It's almost a foreign language.
obama_socks
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2012
....although there are those who are truly proficient in Chaucerian and understand every little nuance and form of Middle English. It may not have gained in popularity for common usage in modern times, but there is much to it that is missing in modern English. "The Canterbury Tales" is Chaucer's most well known work and may be the most enjoyable, if one has the patience.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2012
Whatever. Just take a look at the first two chapters of Genesis, wherein the story of the creation of the Earth is told not once but twice. The two stories don't agree with each other. So much for faithful oral tradition.
-BarakN

The second chapter on first glance appears to be a reiteration of the first chapter of Genesis, where the second is more descriptive as to the importance of the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life and the process of creating Adam and taking his rib to form woman.
But the FIRST chapter also describes the creation of one man and one woman who were not placed in the garden of Eden. This couple seems to have been created for a different purpose, though told to 'be fruitful and multiply'. The Second chapter doesn't make a suggestion to be fruitful and multiply. It is my belief that the man and woman in the first chapter had been created first to populate the Earth, but Adam was put in the garden of Eden and then given a mate, but NOT to procreate.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Oct 05, 2012
An ice age or mini-ice age indicates a great amount of snowfall which results in massive ice sheets being created. IF there had been a "land bridge" it could not have been dry soil with the sea water frozen to the North and South of the "bridge" but no sea water in that region in between the two continents.
http://www.native...yth.html
Indeed well I too prefer to consult references with concentric text as well. You could also try buzzle, and if there's nothing on Beringia you could at least see what Ashton kutcher is up to.
but Adam was put in the garden of Eden and then given a mate, but NOT to procreate.
I do think pussytard has discovered the origin of same-sex marriage. We can surmise that god realized this arrangement was not going to be able to fill up the earth fruitfully and so opted for the other story.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2012
[contd] After Cain slew his brother Abel and was cursed by God, Cain went to dwell in the land of Nod, where he acquired a wife. His wife would've had to be an offspring of the man and woman whose creation was described in the First chapter but who were not Adam and Eve. Others may refute such a theory because of the twice created issue, but some have given a name to the real FIRST woman in the first chapter of Genesis being Lilith, who some have said was Adam's first wife preceding Eve.

http://en.wikiped...i/Lilith

On a different issue here, it seems that theghostofblotto1923 has returned to again invoke his fascination with same-sex marriage and his hatred of pussy. I would imagine that PussyCatEyes is still on this website operating on another name. Good for her!! Oh, that's right. in one thread, Blotto asked Pussycat about Ashton Kutcher and she said that she likes him. Blotto must have a large following of homosexuals now that they have read he favors same-sex shit. LOL
obama_socks
1 / 5 (4) Oct 05, 2012
The melting ice IN THE REGION OF THE IMPACT indicates the cooling of the microspherules in the presence of water after they formed by heat.
But water is not required to cool molten rock. As I actually read your post, I see that for some reason you think this is true, and you restate it even after your -lack- is pointed out.

"the researchers behind the new study have re-examined the Blackwater Draw and Topper sites – as well as a third site in Maryland common to the 2009 study..."

-Nope no ice age in these places. Try harder - make something even stupider up. And then try to bullshit your way out of it. Again.

oh i see you already did.
The approximate time scale of that crossing was ~10,000 - 13,000 ya, which is reasonably calendrical in line with such a mini ice age.
WHAT does this have to do with microspherules?? This is like you mentioning 'lost wax' to make people think you know what you are talking about isnt it? Or using words like 'calendrical'.-Blotto
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2012
From page 6, the above piece of fluffy is from Blotto's fantasy that an ice age or mini-ice age did not occur 10,000 - 13,000 ya and caused massive flooding in many parts of the world, therefore could not have caused microspherules to cool down quickly after an impact from a meteorite by the meteorite melting the ice sheet that would have made "ice water" which would've cooled the microspherules very quickly.
And yet, among other things, the article says, "In addition, the surface characteristics of the microspherules indicate that they were heated to a molten temperature and then cooled rapidly."

So how would molten material cool rapidly? Blotto would wait for the weather to turn cooler, maybe? He doesn't believe that an ice sheet could've melted from the impact and quickly cooled off the microspherules that had formed from the impact so that they would have kept their shape instead of flowing away into cracks and crevices. Particularly the fact that they're thinner than a human hair
obama_socks
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2012
But to each his own, I always sez. As I said previously, Blotto's fantasy of a Beringia land bridge would've meant that all the seawater North of the Bering Sea and all of the seawater South of the Bering Sea would have been sucked into 2 BIG piles of ice and left the sea bottom in between the North chunk of ice and the South chunk dry as a bone, so that the Indians could cross into Alaska without getting their feet wet or freeze their toes off. I also mentioned the similarity to Moses and the Hebrews crossing the Red Sea when the Red Sea parted. Could be the Red Sea froze into 2 BIG chunks of seawater and left dry land in between, just like Beringia??? Why, if it happened in Beringia, it could have happened to the Red Sea also, right Blotto?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (13) Oct 05, 2012
I would imagine that PussyCatEyes is still on this website operating on another name. Good for her!!
You mean 2 people on the same site who are identically stupid? That would be statistically improbable. You are the lying flooder piro/Ritchie/russkiye/Obie/estevan the phony nurse/NASA worker/sentient being. Why is it every one can see this but you? Are you Sybil?
could not have caused microspherules to cool down quickly after an impact from a meteorite by the meteorite melting the ice sheet that would have made "ice water"
-Because as dr pussytard instructs us, molten rock stays molten at room temperature.

Watching you do science is like watching a dog chase soap bubbles. Go play somewhere else.
[contd] After Cain slew his brother Abel and was cursed by God, Cain went to dwell in the land of Nod
Bublical commentary from the scholar who thinks Jesus and Joshua are were the same person. You freak.
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (16) Oct 05, 2012
Otto, Otto, Otto. You know my posts are completely different from the others. Why do you insist everyone is everyone else?
Insecurity much?
If you would spend less time acting as "guardian of the gate" for Physorg, you would probably have a job and a life.

Regardless of who they are anyway, they have the same right to use the site as you and I.

Obamasocks - When a molten material is propelled through the atmosphere it will cool rapidly. Look up CINDER CONE VOLCANO. Don't fight the science, even if Otto is correct. He can be correct and a twat at the same time. It's his form of multitasking.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (12) Oct 05, 2012
Regardless of who they are anyway, they have the same right to use the site as you and I.
And as long as you all continue to drop cowpies you will be called on it. Only esai thinks this is inappropriate. Only esai has anal-retentive issues regarding this.

Who all posts under the pussytard suckpuppet menagerie? Her, her bf/husband, her ufo aficionados, her inlaws, her offspring? Not just her by her own admission. You her daddy perhaps? Wikka leader? Or just another greasy little troll?

You never had correspondence with mods regarding ottos activity. This is a pussytard-level lie. Indicates shared bloodline.
obama_socks
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 06, 2012
@estevan57
Yes, the red hot microspherules would have cooled off after awhile, but they were not propelled into the atmosphere and were buried under the impactor. I was referring to a mini-ice age where ice sheets can melt and cause massive flooding wherever the water flowed downriver. The fast melting and flooding would have flooded low-lying regions of the world. In Biblical times and in other ancient cultures, such floods would have seemed to be world-wide, the world that they knew.

As usual, Blotto tells big lies about us, and claiming that it isn't just HE that objects to my post, but everyone else, even though nobody else has said a word of objection to my posts. They are entitled to voice their objection if the want.

Oh, And this from Blotto's diseased brain: "Bublical commentary from the scholar who thinks Jesus and Joshua are were the same person. You freak."

Blotto misinterprets again. I have never said that Jesus and Joshua were the same person. [contd]
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 06, 2012
I never said that Jesus was Joshua of the Jericho legend. But for some strange reason, either Blotto never read what I said with more than a glance and did not comprehend my written words, or he makes up shit on demand to build himself up in the eyes of other commenters.

What I said is that the name JESUS is a GREEK translation of the Hebrew name YESHUA, which is also another form of the name JOSHUA.
So what does Blotto do? Blotto once again twists what I actually said and claims what he THINKS that Jesus and Joshua of the Jericho legend were one and the same, which is NOT what I said at all.

For years, I and many others have observed Blotto making a fool of himself, twisting other peoples' words and misquoting them. WE KNOW what he is all about, and we are amused by him. All these other personalities that he chooses to endow you and I with, are all in his imagination. He CANNOT LET THEM GO. He believes that they are all still here and that somehow you and I are manipulating them.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 06, 2012
Then the lying, flooding misquoting Blotto says this:
"You never had correspondence with mods regarding ottos activity. This is a pussytard-level lie. Indicates shared bloodline."

LOL...I have no idea what PussyCateyes did with the mods regarding otto's activity, and I don't really care. And how the hell would Blotto know about PussyCat's correspondence with mods? Maybe Blotto is one of the mods? Or some mods' crazy uncle Blotto?
I notice that Blotto STILL refers to himself in the third person singular, as above. That also indicates that he gets confused and mixes his sockpuppets up while giving each of them a different piece of himself.

I read all of PussyCateyes' posts. Just got done with the last one the other weekend. Blotto certainly was rough on that poor woman, so it's no wonder she got out of this PISS.ORG which Blotto thinks he owns. It was a nice science website when I started posting in it around 8 years ago, but Blotto spoiled it for everyone else. Demented Blotto
obama_socks
1.8 / 5 (10) Oct 06, 2012
@Estevan57
Hmmm...one of Pussycat's posts mentioned Broadmoor in England, and Blotto asked her if that's where she was. She said that as a nurse, she had to study the cases from several mental institutions, and Broadmoor was one of them...or something like that.
So, Blotto may actually be a mental patient at Broadmoor which is in England, since he seemed to know about it from what I read. That might explain his deep obsessions with you and me, and these strangers whom I've never even spoken to. And Phys.org is based in England.
Well well well, there may be something to all that.

In any case, aside from posting with my primary name on major science topics, I will still post on this website, but no longer as Obama_socks. I will choose another new user name, maybe two or three just for posting on topics that I find interesting. I will have to slightly change my delivery, but that's no problem.
Nice meeting you, Estevan57. Have fun.
LOL
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 06, 2012
What is the AGWite plan to stop the next impact event?
How would the equivalent of the Siberian explosion of 1908 impact the world and what are the climate alarmists plans to prevent future events?
That seems like a solvable problem with a lot of bang for the buck.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2012
What is the AGWite plan to stop the next impact event?
How would the equivalent of the Siberian explosion of 1908 impact the world and what are the climate alarmists plans to prevent future events?
That seems like a solvable problem with a lot of bang for the buck.

*Ryg*

I suspect that, if such an event were imminent, the AGWimps would be pleading with NASA and other space agencies to send up guided missiles with nuclear warheads to explode the incoming bolide to smithereens. They would not be so concerned about global warming of any sort at the moment, and they would be even less worried about the impact on the atmosphere that rocket fuel would have on living things. BHObama would be worried about the impact on his plans to raise income taxes on the rich and working middle class, and his plans to turn Americans into Socialists, while squashing any dissenting views with the threat of jail time and the mainstream media will be cheering him on. Martial Law would be declared.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Oct 06, 2012
In such an eventuality, the United Nations would have their excuse to take control of autonomous and independent countries and send armies into all countries to control the population.
They might try it anyway, if a certain "transparent" idealogue is reelected.
Bolide impacts happen on every planet in existence. The worst that can happen is if a really big one hits the Earth without exploding first in outer space, and knocks the Earth out of orbit. That's not science fiction and it is always a possibility.
Chances are that all the atheists would be found on their knees, mumbling prayers...LOL
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (12) Oct 06, 2012
I read all of PussyCateyes' posts.
Was that while you were writing them or after you had sobered up?
Just got done with the last one the other weekend. Blotto certainly was rough on that poor woman
-As you know full well, pussytard was by her own admission at least 2 different people - her and her gay porn-posting bf.
What I said is that the name JESUS is a GREEK translation of the Hebrew name YESHUA, which is also another form of the name JOSHUA.
-So you finally got around to doing some research and learning your 'error'. Jesus has NEVER been referred to as Joshua in any if the literature. This would be like calling estevan 'Stevie'.

But I assumed you thought they were the same person because you appear to be -that dumb-. Please accept my sincere apologies.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (12) Oct 06, 2012
-But let's take stock of your latest cowturd deposits:
but they were not propelled into the atmosphere and were buried under the impactor.
-There's one.
even though nobody else has said a word of objection to my posts.
Ahahahaaaaa check your ratings.
He CANNOT LET THEM GO. He believes that they are all still here
Stop making them and posting ignorance and I will shut up.
I will still post on this website, but no longer as Obama_socks. I will choose another new user name
-Ah crap no such luck. But you do admit to posting under multiple suckpuppets. This is a start.
and Broadmoor was one of them...or something like that.
'...or something like that.' You are relating that from memory you freaking moron.
bolide... hits the Earth without exploding first in outer space, and knocks the Earth out of orbit.
-Whoa that's a big one! Hope nobody steps in that. Maybe we ought to tape it off and light flares. Safety first.
Estevan57
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 06, 2012
Sounding a bit desperate there, Otto.

Many people use Estevan and Steve interchangeably - I do.

And you thought I was Hispanic - you dumbass.

Otto, for a person with at least 10 sockpuppets, you sure get outraged about other people.

Maybe if you weren't such a turd to other people they wouldn't try to get away from you by changing names.

Enjoy your burning rage.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Oct 07, 2012
Many people use Estevan and Steve interchangeably - I do.
So do a little research for your gf pussytard to give some evidence that 'jesus' was ever referred to as Joshua in the ancient literature. And explain why you think that
bolide... hits the Earth without exploding first in outer space, and knocks the Earth out of orbit.
-should not receive the ridicule it deserves. Esai.
Estevan57
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 07, 2012
She said an impact was the worst thing that could happen.
Big "F"ing deal. How provocative. (yawn)
I believe I must rage now. There I did. I'm over it, how about you?

There have been many discussions about objects passing close to Earth and the possibility of them hitting Earth, and what could be done about it.

You have been in at least 2 of them, what's the problem?
Just because you don't like her/him/them/it/they/ doesn't mean it's totally out of the topic. Especially considering the topic. Read the article.

Her politics are more bizarre than an asteroid or other objects hitting Earth.

I don't give a rats ass what she calls Jesus, Joshua, or Aunt Jemima. Go research something yourself.

Take a Midol, get in the tub, and drink a nice glass of wine.

Go Ducks. http://sportsillu...boxscore

http://www.auntjemima.com/
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (9) Oct 07, 2012
Stevie,

This is a science website. Someone who makes such absurd statements about 'bolides' knocking earth out of orbit is going to be ridiculed. Pussytard says these things all the time.

Trolls like yourself will seek to gain purchase by attacking the attackers because obviously they have little else to say.
I don't give a rats ass what she calls Jesus, Joshua, or Aunt Jemima.
But there are many here who do care about facts and hate it when people choose to make them up. Pussytard makes things up all the time and you constantly defend her. You both demean this site.
Estevan57
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 07, 2012
I agree with you totally Otto, you the attacker, have little else to say. Use punctuation, more stupid.

I consistantly do NOT defend her. And I try to correct her.
See previous remarks about her politics etc. HMMM? Idjit.

As a person who uses lite to downvote others hundreds of times a week, you demean everybody here. And going through Google or whatever to uprate yourself is SO masturbatory.

You are the biggest ass I have ever seen on a website.

HEY DUMBASS IT'S NOT YOUR SITE!

If you don't like what I have to say, then you shouldn't have gone after me with all your sockpuppets. That's just your consequence, and you deserve it. Too bad so sad little half-man.

Do you still believe I'm Ritchie or others? Idiot.
Battleship much?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (9) Oct 07, 2012
If you don't like what I have to say, then you shouldn't have gone after me with all your sockpuppets. That's just your consequence, and you deserve it. Too bad so sad little half-man.
Poor baby. It happened to others. Happened to me, VD, jigga, noumenon. You're the only one who whines like a little girl. And I'm not lite. And I will continue to argue against lazy, flooding liars like your gf pussytard which is only natural. And you will continue to troll because it feels good I guess.

Knock yourself out little troll.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 09, 2012
LOL...it's also too bad and so sad that Blotto is going to spend the rest of his unnatural life chasing after PussyCateyes and all his other nemeses while attaching their identities to me and/or Estevan57.

I've noticed that Blotto seems panicked when neither I nor E57 are around. Blotto then attacks other people, especially new people, obviously thinking that any one of them could be one of us. It is funny to see and a great deal of amusement to read how delusional and insane he is, not just with me, but with others too.

Blotto is great for pissing on Phys.org every time he posts, and he only seems to post either to pretend he knows all about the topic and impress those who really do know, or else he posts just to do his usual ad hominem attacks because he really doesn't know or understand the answers and has to look for the answers in Google.

Poor Blotto...he's still looking for pussytard in all the wrong people. He thinks he is the Nazi Otto Skorzeny reincarnated -theghostofotto
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 09, 2012
http://en.wikiped...a_(name)

As I was saying earlier before Blotto decided to piss on Physorg again and ram his disinformation about the name Jesus down everyone's throat----- The name Jesus was translated into Greek as Iesus...and was further translated into Jesus. But the ORIGINAL HEBREW name was YESHUA, also pronounced YAYSHUA, and that originated from the name, JOSHUA, which was pronounced as YEHOSHUA, and the J would be pronounced like a Y.

It is evident that theghostofotto1923 hates it when someone else gives correct information that Blotto didn't know. I knew this stuff since high school, but Blotto felt that he could lie and pretend that I had said that Jesus of Nazareth was the same as Joshua who was with Moses.

But what else can anyone expect from a lying, flooding, imbecilic Nazi-lover like Theghostofotto1923 aka Theghostofotto1932 and many other sock puppets.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (7) Oct 09, 2012
pretend that I had said that Jesus of Nazareth was the same as Joshua who was with Moses.
-Because thats what you said. You said 'Jesus also known as joshua...' And as many learned people will tell you, jesus was never known as joshua.

I called you on this and instead of doing the research, finding out you were wrong, and posting an apology, you instead take the lazy and gutless route and fling invective. Again.

You are some kind of dirt arent you pussytard? You and your bf stevievan57.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.