ALMA captures explosive star birth

April 7, 2017
Composite image of the OMC-1 cloud in Orion showing the sometimes explosive nature of star birth, when several young stars were ejected from the region about 500 years ago. The colors in the ALMA data represent the relative Doppler shifting of the millimeter-wavelength light emitted by carbon monoxide gas. The ALMA image is combined with a near infrared image from the Gemini South telescope showing shock waves produced by the explosion. Credit: ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), J. Bally; B. Saxton (NRAO/AUI/NSF); Gemini Observatory/AURA

Star birth can be a violent and explosive event, as dramatically illustrated in new ALMA images.

Around 500 years ago, a pair of adolescent protostars had a perilously close encounter that blasted their apart.

Astronomers using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) have examined the widely scattered debris from this explosive event, gaining new insights into the sometimes-fierce relationship among sibling .

Shortly after starting to form some 100,000 years ago, several protostars in the Orion Molecular Cloud 1 (OMC-1), a dense and active star factory about 1,500 light-years from Earth just behind the Orion Nebula, latched onto each other gravitationally and gradually drew closer.

Eventually, two of these stars either grazed each other or collided, triggering a powerful eruption that launched other nearby protostars and hundreds of giant streamers of dust and gas into interstellar space at speeds greater than 150 kilometers per second. This cataclysmic interaction released as much energy as our Sun emits over the course of 10 million years.

Today, the remains of this spectacular explosion are visible from Earth.

"What we see in this once calm stellar nursery is a cosmic version of a 4th of July fireworks display, with giant streamers rocketing off in all directions," said John Bally with the University of Colorado and lead author on a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal.

ALMA image of the OMC-1 cloud in Orion showing the explosive nature of star birth, when several young stars were ejected from the region about 500 years ago. The colors in the ALMA data represent the relative Doppler shifting of the millimeter-wavelength light emitted by carbon monoxide gas. Credit: ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), J. Bally; B. Saxton, (NRAO/AUI/NSF)

Groups of stars such as those in OMC-1 are born when a cloud of gas hundreds of times more massive than our Sun begins to collapse under its own gravity. In the densest regions, protostars form and begin to drift about randomly. Over time, this random motion can dampen, which allows some of the stars to fall toward a common center of gravity, usually dominated by a particularly large .

If these stars draw too close to each other before they drift away into the galaxy, violent interactions can occur.

According to the researchers, such explosions are expected to be relatively short lived, with the remnants like those seen by ALMA lasting only centuries.

"Though fleeting, protostellar explosions may be relatively common," said Bally. "By destroying their parent cloud, as we see in OMC-1, such explosions may also help to regulate the pace of star formation in these giant molecular clouds."

Bally and his team observed this feature previously with the Gemini-South telescope in Chile. These earlier images, taken in the near infrared, reveal the remarkable structure of the streamers, which extend nearly a light-year from end to end.

Hints of the explosive nature of this outflow were first uncovered in 2009 with the Submillimeter Array in Hawaii. The new ALMA data, however, provide much greater clarity, unveiling important details about the distribution and high-velocity motion of the carbon monoxide (CO) gas inside the streamers. This helps astronomers understand the underlying force of the blast and the impact such events could have on star formation across the galaxy.

"People most often associate stellar explosions with ancient stars, like a nova eruption on the surface of a decaying star or the even more spectacular supernova death of an extremely massive star," Bally says. "ALMA has given us new insights into explosions on the other end of the stellar life cycle, ."

Explore further: Protostar blazes bright, reshaping its stellar nursery

More information: Research paper: www.eso.org/public/archives/re … eso1711/eso1711a.pdf (Bally et al., in the Astrophysical Journal).

Related Stories

Protostar blazes bright, reshaping its stellar nursery

March 15, 2017

A massive protostar, deeply nestled in its dust-filled stellar nursery, recently roared to life, shining nearly 100 times brighter than before. This outburst, apparently triggered by an avalanche of star-forming gas crashing ...

Ancient stardust sheds light on the first stars

March 8, 2017

A huge mass of glowing stardust in a galaxy seen shortly after the Universe's formation has been detected by a UCL-led team of astronomers, providing new insights into the birth and explosive deaths of the very first stars.

Orphaned protostars

July 25, 2016

Stars form as gravity contracts the gas and dust in an interstellar cloud until clumps develop that are dense enough to coalesce into stars. Precisely how this happens, however, is very uncertain, and the processes are hard ...

Hidden secrets of Orion's clouds

January 4, 2017

This spectacular new image is one of the largest near-infrared high-resolution mosaics of the Orion A molecular cloud, the nearest known massive star factory, lying about 1350 light-years from Earth. It was taken using the ...

'Death stars' in Orion blast planets before they even form

March 10, 2014

(Phys.org) —The Orion Nebula is home to hundreds of young stars and even younger protostars known as proplyds. Many of these nascent systems will go on to develop planets, while others will have their planet-forming dust ...

Recommended for you

Major space mystery solved using data from student satellite

December 13, 2017

A 60-year-old mystery regarding the source of some energetic and potentially damaging particles in Earth's radiation belts is now solved using data from a shoebox-sized satellite built and operated by University of Colorado ...

Spanning disciplines in the search for life beyond Earth

December 13, 2017

The search for life beyond Earth is riding a surge of creativity and innovation. Following a gold rush of exoplanet discovery over the past two decades, it is time to tackle the next step: determining which of the known exoplanets ...

71 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gkam
Apr 07, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
SlartiBartfast
Apr 07, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (7) Apr 07, 2017
I don't really see anything in here that relates to some controversial EU claim.
SlartiBartfast
5 / 5 (9) Apr 07, 2017
I don't really see anything in here that relates to some controversial EU claim.


Since when has that stopped one from proselytizing?
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (10) Apr 07, 2017
What I do is provide the individual with more authority over choosing their own personal worldview.

What science journalists today do -- either knowingly or not -- is hold back information which would permit a person to formulate a personal worldview which might deviate in some fundamental manner from the textbook consensus.

Now, just because that practice has been the norm in that domain for a full hundred years, do not imagine that there aren't ethical dilemmas associated with it.

To give you an example, a recent press release floating around the Internet this week suggests that the Eocene's high temperatures can be explained by enhanced co2 levels. In making the point, the journalist selectively delivered evidence.

They admitted that crocodiles once existed in the sub-arctic, but they failed to mention that crocodiles will drown if the water temperature drops below around 70F.
HannesAlfven
1.4 / 5 (9) Apr 07, 2017
They also failed to make any mention of the fact that the sub-arctic also hosted ridiculously tall trees. That completely misinforms the reader because these regions would be dark for 3-4 months per year. So, how can elevated co2 levels explain how such trees can survive 3-4 months of yearly darkness?

It can't, and we need to keep an eye out for a better inference.

Unfortunately, we see a lot of this sort of behavior today when it comes to controversial and anomalous topics -- and it seems that very few are publicly calling them out on any of it. This is in the long term devastating for science in light of the fact that even specialist scientists today rely very heavily upon science journalism to understand what's going on outside of their own domains.

If you think we can make progress in science without anybody questioning the way that science journalists are handling the information of science, you're missing the bigger picture of this moment in time.
Hat1208
4.6 / 5 (10) Apr 07, 2017
@Hannes
Astronomers using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) have examined the widely scattered debris from this explosive event

I thought that there were no explosive events in the EU since they are created from the inside out. I R confused.
Captain Stumpy
3.8 / 5 (8) Apr 07, 2017
@hannes/reeve eu cult sock puppets
What I do is provide the individual with more authority over choosing their own personal worldview.

What science journalists today do -- either knowingly or not -- is hold back information which would permit a person to formulate a personal worldview which might deviate in some fundamental manner from the textbook consensus
You seem to be copying arguments from people who have an agenda -- perhaps not fully thinking through what you're conveying
and i proved this, and that you were wrong and lying here: https://phys.org/...ter.html

more to the point - i proved that the only people doing what you are claiming above are the pseudoscience cultists like you and the eu, and you validated it

jonesdave
5 / 5 (11) Apr 07, 2017
They also failed to make any mention of the fact that the sub-arctic also hosted ridiculously tall trees. That completely misinforms the reader because these regions would be dark for 3-4 months per year. So, how can elevated co2 levels explain how such trees can survive 3-4 months of yearly darkness?

It can't, and we need to keep an eye out for a better inference.


BS. Yes it can be explained, and has been known about for years. Stop talking crap. The majority of the trees were deciduous, and could easily survive the winter. It was much warmer and wetter.

https://www.resea...Yakutiya

jonesdave
4.7 / 5 (12) Apr 07, 2017
They admitted that crocodiles once existed in the sub-arctic, but they failed to mention that crocodiles will drown if the water temperature drops below around 70F.


Yet more crap. Firstly they weren't crocodiles. Secondly, the waters were pretty warm at high latitudes in parts of the Cretaceous. Try educating yourself.
https://repositor...1998.pdf

SlartiBartfast
4.5 / 5 (15) Apr 07, 2017
What I do is provide the individual with more authority over choosing their own personal worldview.


No, you present misleading/false information to those who already hold a worldview that's antithetical to the scientific method.

For example, you've repeatedly made a claim about a mammoth covered by a radioactive mat, and yet you refuse to provide even a shred of evidence for this claim. There are many others, but this is one that just sticks out in my mind.
jonesdave
4.6 / 5 (10) Apr 07, 2017
What I do is provide the individual with more authority over choosing their own personal worldview.


No, you present misleading/false information to those who already hold a worldview that's antithetical to the scientific method.

For example, you've repeatedly made a claim about a mammoth covered by a radioactive mat, and yet you refuse to provide even a shred of evidence for this claim. There are many others, but this is one that just sticks out in my mind.


Yep, and the one about the micrometeorite impacts into a mammoth tusk, providing some sort of evidence for Velikovsky inspired catastrophism! Never mind that micrometeorites would float to Earth, and never be energetic enough to implant themselves in something as tough as ivory! If they could, we'd all be in deep crap. You really would need a tin foil hat then.
Solon
1.4 / 5 (9) Apr 07, 2017
The image looks like an exploding double layer, prove it isn't.

DOUBLE LAYERS AND CIRCUITS IN ASTROPHYSICS
Hannes Alfvén

https://ntrs.nasa...5703.pdf
Captain Stumpy
3.8 / 5 (10) Apr 07, 2017
The image looks like an exploding double layer, prove it isn't
@solong to logic
you're the one who thinks it looks like an exploding double layer - why can't you prove it *is*?

after all, the study makes it clear what the evidence says
3. RESULTS

https://phys.org/...rth.html

Azrael
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 08, 2017
The image looks like an exploding double layer, prove it isn't.

DOUBLE LAYERS AND CIRCUITS IN ASTROPHYSICS
Hannes Alfvén

https://ntrs.nasa...5703.pdf


You're a catfish. Prove you aren't.

This should be entertaining...
physicsBuff
2 / 5 (5) Apr 08, 2017
Azrael he is not a catfish you are just uneducated
physicsBuff
3.7 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2017
wait whole up thats salons yes kkk I get it yeah most likely he is
HannesAlfven
1.7 / 5 (6) Apr 08, 2017
Re: "I thought that there were no explosive events in the EU since they are created from the inside out. I R confused."

8 people gave this comment a 5. I would ban all 8 of you if this was my site, for creating childish noise.

You guys think that academics are somehow beyond the same petty behaviors. You're wrong about that. You need only look inwards to understand it.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
Re: "For example, you've repeatedly made a claim about a mammoth covered by a radioactive mat, and yet you refuse to provide even a shred of evidence for this claim."

I've repeatedly posted a link to the images, which come from a book dedicated to the subject ...

The Extinction of the Mammoths
https://plus.goog...nTz57wfZ
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
Re: "Yet more crap. Firstly they weren't crocodiles. Secondly, the waters were pretty warm at high latitudes in parts of the Cretaceous. Try educating yourself."

It's a nice article. Note that it ALSO fails to mention the very tall trees in this region which somehow survived months of darkness every year.

I've covered this subject here ...

The Arctic Subtropic
https://plus.goog...rUjCdS5P

"'Tall trees not unlike the towering redwoods of the Pacific Northwest -- and genetically similar to birch, alder and swamp cypress -- grew beside a meandering river delta hundreds of kilometers wide. Some of these giants were 35 m high, with stumps 2.5 m around, and appear to have lived for as long as 1,000 years.' [37] ..."

(cont'd)
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
(cont'd)

"The problem that has been facing paleobotanists is how such forests could have thrived in a latitude which at present would have forced them to 'sleep' through the long polar night. As Art Johnson who, independent of Basinger, have been studying these remains, noted: 'We have no forests on Earth where the trees are so big and have to sit in the dark for three months.' [38]

Axel Heiberg Island is not the only area in Canada's High Arctic where the remains of ancient forests have been found. The coal-bearing sediments of the Eureka Sound Group scattered throughout most of the Arctic Archipelago also contain such remains. Plants dated to the Paleocene from Fosheim Peninsula of Ellesmere Island resemble similar Paleocene flora from Western Canada's interior, indication of a cosmopolitan temperate zone. [39] ..."

(cont'd)
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
(cont'd)

"Some of the plants from these Tertiary forests have been described as being akin to those growing in the present cypress swamps of Florida. [40] Others, like oak, do not grow in swamps. Trees from the middle Eocene in the same area reached up to 50 meters high.

The fossils of animals found buried amid the remains of these forests -- ancestors of the horse and rhinoceros, giant lizards, land tortoises, salamanders, snakes, alligators, crocodiles, flying lemurs [41] -- all testify to the warmth of the climate at that time, as so does the discovery of fossil palm trees and huge exotic ferns by Soviet paleobotanists in the islands of Spitsbergen in the Svalbard archipelago far within the Arctic Circle. [42] Even fossil tapirs, the descendants of which now live in the equatorial Amazon forest, were found on Ellesmere Island. [43] ..."

(cont'd)
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
(cont'd)

"As Ian Johnson ... noted, finding the tropics in such high latitudes raises serious implications for paleontologists:

'This far from the equator means 4 months of polar darkness ... If the night temperature was always 10 degrees Celsius, in conjunction with 4 months of darkness, plants would die. Mammals found to date are likely middle Eocene creatures. Crocodiles, lizards and turtles are well adapted to forest life but some of the discovered species [the crocodilians] cannot tolerate near freezing temperatures for very long. This implies that there had to be considerable warmth in the Eocene High Arctic all throughout the the year.' [44] ...

'Crocodilians are a test of the reconstructed polar forest community because they have changed little since the end of the Triassic ... the crocodilians have been consistent throughout their long evolutionary history in their limited tolerance of the cold."

(cont'd)
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
(cont'd)

"Crocodilia have never occupied ecological niches where near-freezing cold persists continuously for months.' [45] Alligators are more adapted to cold weather than crocodiles. Crocodiles require shallow water, but crocodiles in water that is colder than 65 F tend to sink to the bottom in lassitude and drown as they do in places even like Florida during severe cold weather.

The scientific establishment, meanwhile, has not been entirely silent when it comes to propositions concerning the solution of the puzzle which the one-time existence of these Arctic forests raise. Thus, for instance, writers in New Scientist proposed that the Arctic Eocene's subtropical climate can be explained if the oceans transported far more heat to the poles than they do at present. [46] But evidence of the atmospheric circulation required for this, which depends on temperature differential, is lacking ..."

(cont'd)
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
(cont'd)

"Moreover, the small size of particles retrieved from Eocene deep-sea sidements confirm the lack of wind speeds at that time. [47]

Continental drift must also be ruled out because Axel Heiberg Island is 'only a few hundred kilometers closer to the North Pole than it was when the forests flourished' [48] -- which is definitely not enough for it to have been located outside the Arctic Circle at that time. As Johnson noted: 'Modern geological field work has confirmed that the northern lands of the globe have been located in polar latitudes for at least the last 100 million years, despite ongoing continental drift.' [49]"

--

The reason why this is so important is that it's an unsolvable problem for uniformitarians.

We've got data here which is -- unexpectedly and forcefully -- telling us that there was light at the poles throughout the year.

These tall trees in the sub-arctic are a paradigm-busting observation.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
The Extinction of the Mammoths
https://plus.goog...nTz57wfZ
WARNING - PHISHING PSEUDOSCIENCE SITE

both of these links are to a known phishing pseudoscience site promoting the electric universe cult

use them at your own risk

@hannes/reeve
posting links to your own pseudoscience blog is not a valid reference nor is it considered source material

it is called SPAM
8 people gave this comment a 5
so?
I would ban all 8 of you if this was my site
that is because you can't produce source material or factual science

you would have to ban them because they would drive your acolytes away and you would be stuck proselytizing to yourself in the corner

go to NYC and put out a hat like the rest of the crackpots
SlartiBartfast
4.1 / 5 (9) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "For example, you've repeatedly made a claim about a mammoth covered by a radioactive mat, and yet you refuse to provide even a shred of evidence for this claim."

I've repeatedly posted a link to the images, which come from a book dedicated to the subject ...

The Extinction of the Mammoths
https://plus.goog...nTz57wfZ


You're lying again. There's no image of a radioactive mat. There's no information about a radioactive mat. There's no description of a mat. There's no source which describes a radioactive mat. There's no information about what this mat was made out of, or why anyone thought it was radioactive.

There's no....well...you get the idea.

So yeah, stop lying.
HannesAlfven
2 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "both of these links are to a known phishing pseudoscience"

I'm not sure that you know what phishing means. It's a Google site.
HannesAlfven
1.8 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "You're lying again. There's no image of a radioactive mat. There's no information about a radioactive mat. There's no description of a mat. There's no source which describes a radioactive mat. There's no information about what this mat was made out of, or why anyone thought it was radioactive."

This is an act of desperation. The image is at the link, folks. Scroll down past the text to the image, then click and zoom into it.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
@hannes/reeve the eu pseudoscience cult idiot
I'm not sure that you know what phishing means. It's a Google site
1- it's a blog, not a journal

2- it has the ability to track users via cookies etc (read the google notices you moron)
from googles blooger page
As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies
3- because you're inept at basic interwebz security, you should read this
http://electronic...sly1.htm

4- phishing:
Phishing is the attempt to obtain sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details (and, indirectly, money), often for malicious reasons, by disguising as a trustworthy entity in an electronic communication
considering your site collects information on users allowing you to target people...
Captain Stumpy
2 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
@hannes/reeve the idiot eu pseudoscience cult cont'd
This is an act of desperation. The image is at the link, folks
and again - a blog is not a reputable source

especially if it is spreading pseudoscience as your blog willingly and knowingly does

make a scientific argument with source material that isn't subjective, pseudoscience or off topic and irrelevant

i know that's asking a lot considering your ineptitude, but i will remind you that if you want people to take you seriously then you should present the absolute best evidence possible using the scientific method (as you're claiming you're interested in science)

and pseudoscience from a virus infected malicious site where you can't trust the claims isn't the best evidence if you want to argue against MS science theories

you would think someone claiming to be a researcher would know that one
Chris_Reeve
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "2- it has the ability to track users via cookies etc (read the google notices you moron)
from googles blooger page"

I'm a web developer. There's no need to teach me what a cookie is.

Captain, you might be alarmed to find out that ... (sound of screams in the background) ... Google Analytics can ... (ready?) ... run on ANY site.

It's not just "blogs" run by Google ... "estimates suggest as many as 30–50 million websites use Google Analytics."

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if this is something that concerns you, you need to be more fearful than I think you have so far realized.
Captain Stumpy
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
@reeve/hannes the idiot eu pseudoscience cultist
I'm a web developer. There's no need to teach me what a cookie is
hence my caution to others as you've mentioned this before
you might be alarmed to find out that
not alarmed, moron
i happen to be far, far more knowledgeable and experienced than you
"estimates suggest as many as 30–50 million websites use Google Analytics."
i never said google analytics can't be on any other site, you illiterate delusional cultist... LOL

not even a good attempt at a strawman diversion from your BS

if ya can't read well enough to comprehend basic english to research a rebuttal, how are you going to teach the world your pseudoscience?

PS - https://en.wikipe...ijacking

http://www.rafayh...ion.html
Chris_Reeve
2.3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
Why does it always sound like you are frothing at the mouth when you talk?
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
Why does it always sound like you are frothing at the mouth when you talk?

funny... i was going to ask you the exact same question but i didn't have enough characters at the end of my post

of course, there is ample evidence to support that you really are frothing at the mouth considering the delusional nature of most of your claims

it's not like you've been able to present a factual, evidence based argument based upon reputable sources
gkam
1 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
"@reeve/hannes the idiot eu pseudoscience cultist"
-----------------------------------------

So much for logic.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
So much for logic.
you've just proven that you're following people around just to interject your own hypocritical stupidity

and to defend pseudoscience simply because you can't make a valid evidence based claim in any other thread?

really?

you're just a sad sick delusional narcissistic sociopath

which is why you seem to think it's all about you and claim people follow you around
no
you just like to sh*t all over PO in various threads

per your own request ...
gkam
Apr 09, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
Hilarious that Stumpy is specifically freaked about somebody stealing his cookies. Nevermind the 30-50 million sites which gather info on his web use without any cookie theft at all ...
Captain Stumpy
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
@chris/hannes the eu pseudoscience cult activist
Hilarious that Stumpy is specifically freaked about somebody stealing his cookies. Nevermind the 30-50 million sites which gather info on his web use without any cookie theft at all ...
another distraction?
still can't read well enough eh?

.

yet again - not even a good attempt at a strawman diversion from your BS

if ya can't read well enough to comprehend basic english to research a rebuttal, how are you going to teach the world your pseudoscience?
Chris_Reeve
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
At least we now know that by "phishing" site, Stumpy is basically referring to any website at all.
gkam
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Rumpy, please take your maladjustment and need to attack others elsewhere.

This site is for discussing science, not getting even by screaming at others.

Thanks.
Captain Stumpy
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
@hannes/reeve the eu pseudoscience cult poen
At least we now know that by "phishing" site, Stumpy is basically referring to any website at all.
nope

when i visit a site to read a link that supposedly has references to science and then have a 300-500 fold increase in phishing e-mails, then it stands to reason that the source is a definite infected site

then there is the issue of a report i received from Symantec (and two other Anti-Virus applications)

hence my caution to anyone when you eu pseudoscience cults post your links

.

.

so reeve/alfven et al:

still have no actual reputable science to share to validate your claims?

going to stick to the argument that because you believe it to be true, it must be true?

where are all those journal studies you "researched" to validate your claims?

still nothing?

no wonder liar-kam supports you
Chris_Reeve
3 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "when i visit a site to read a link that supposedly has references to science and then have a 300-500 fold increase in phishing e-mails, then it stands to reason that the source is a definite infected site"

I mean, it's rock-solid logic. Nobody can question this.
Captain Stumpy
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
@chris/hannes the eu cult propagandist
I mean, it's rock-solid logic. Nobody can question this
it has far more logic and evidence than your eu cult

followed by something the eu has never been able to produce: validation from a secondary source (Symantec)

.

.

so reeve/alfven et al:

still have no actual reputable science to share to validate your claims?

going to keep using the argument that because you believe it to be true, it must be true?

where are all those journal studies you "researched" to validate your claims?

still nothing?

at least you know you will get support from liar-kam
cantdrive85
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Why does it always sound like you are frothing at the mouth when you talk?

LOL! He gets all kinds of emotional. This site is much more pleasant when he is on ignore. I tend libertarian and an vehemently opposed to censorship, but Cap'n Stoopid presents a very strong case for the opposing view.
Chris_Reeve
2.3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
Re: "Cap'n Stoopid presents a very strong case for the opposing view."

I am to some extent amused because he seems unaware that he's the worst representative of mainstream theory that a person could put together -- a modern-day "Simplicio".
HannesAlfven
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
BTW: For the record, if anybody here receives a sudden barrage of 300-500 emails, it's more likely a sign that somebody is trying to bury a confirmation email for a fraudulent charge on one of your credit cards. I recommend sorting through those emails.

Not so sure about Captain Stumpy's interpretation of that. Authentically malicious phishing emails would not arrive in a barrage like that. The idea of a phishing attack is to have you click on something while your defenses are down.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (5) Apr 10, 2017
so reeve/alfven et al:

You seem to be copying arguments from people who have an agenda -- perhaps not fully thinking through what you're conveying

AND

you still have no actual reputable science to share to validate your claims?

going to keep using the argument that because you believe it to be true, it must be true?

where are all those journal studies you "researched" to validate your claims?

still nothing?

.

at least you know you will get support from liar-kam
yep
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 11, 2017

you still have no actual reputable science to share to validate your claims?

Laughable that your creationist Inspired Big Bang fantasy of black holes and dark matter magic is reputable. How can you validate shite when your faith does not know what 95% of reality is. You truly are the "King of the sock puppet army" with its minions of dupes high on the Authority of consensus science.
It is obvious that Gkam is twice the man you could ever hope to be.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Apr 11, 2017
@Reeve,

The reason why this is so important is that it's an unsolvable problem for uniformitarians.

We've got data here which is -- unexpectedly and forcefully -- telling us that there was light at the poles throughout the year.

These tall trees in the sub-arctic are a paradigm-busting observation.


Absolute crap, you burke. I actually studied this as part of a degree (you might have heard of them; try getting one). There was NOT light at the poles throughout the year, eejit. There is no mystery here. There is no 'paradigm busting' BS. You are an uneducated troll. Read the gazillions of papers on this subject, instead of continually making an arse of yourself.
In short, fossil trees show that they were mostly deciduous. They grew well when there was sufficient light. Once it disappeared, they 'shut down'. Quickly. Goodbye leaves. Very thin rings of latewood. It is called evolutionary adaptation. Nothing to do with your idiotic Velikovskian woo.

jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Apr 11, 2017
@Reeve,
Try reading this paper, if you have access (unlikely; probably never been near a university)

https://www.cambr...CA8E016E

Although climate was equable, clearly there was seasonality in the High Arctic during the Eocene, as evidenced by deciduousness and pronounced tree rings. Deciduousness or leaf fall, char­acteristic of most plants in the fossil forest, is an adaptation to winter darkness (Basinger, 1991). Fossil wood from the Buchanan Lake Formation has wide annual growth rings with extensive de­velopment of early wood, but very little late wood, indicating uninhibited growth during the growing season and abrupt onset of dormancy (Basinger, 1991).


^^^Science, as opposed to your stance of complete ignorance, and woo belief.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (5) Apr 11, 2017
So, to summarise, for the hard of thinking:
If there was permanent light at the poles during the Cretaceous- early Tertiary, then the fossil trees would show tree rings indicating steady growth over 12 months. They don't. Lots of light, then no light. Bang, shut down time. Even an idiot should be able to grasp this. I'm not holding my breath, though.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (5) Apr 11, 2017
What I do is provide the individual with more authority over choosing their own personal worldview.

I don't think you understand what the word 'worldview' means. People don't get to choose what is real. They can choose what to believe, but if it doesn't align with what is real then they're wrong - plain and simple.

The only thing you get to choose as part of a worldview is an ideology of how people should interact with one another. Nothing more.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Apr 11, 2017
What I do is provide the individual with lies, obfuscations and scientifically illiterate nonsense, in order to promote my own personal worldview.


FTFY.

jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Apr 11, 2017

you still have no actual reputable science to share to validate your claims?

Laughable that your creationist Inspired Big Bang fantasy of black holes and dark matter magic is reputable. How can you validate shite when your faith does not know what 95% of reality is. You truly are the "King of the sock puppet army" with its minions of dupes high on the Authority of consensus science.
It is obvious that Gkam is twice the man you could ever hope to be.


Sorry, were you making a scientific point there? If so, what was it? Or are you just going to regurgitate EU crap? Please, do let us know.
gkam
1 / 5 (3) Apr 11, 2017
"It is obvious that Gkam is twice the man . . "
--------------------------------

Hey, I only weigh 170 pounds.

And jones makes sense.
yep
1 / 5 (2) Apr 12, 2017

No, you present misleading/false information to those who already hold a worldview that's antithetical to the scientific method.
For example, you've repeatedly made a claim about a mammoth covered by a radioactive mat, and yet you refuse to provide even a shred of evidence for this claim. There are many others, but this is one that just sticks out in my mind.
Yep, and the one about the micrometeorite impacts into a mammoth tusk, providing some sort of evidence for Velikovsky inspired catastrophism! Never mind that micrometeorites would float to Earth, and never be energetic enough to implant themselves in something as tough as ivory! If they could, we'd all be in deep crap. You really would need a tin foil hat then.

Jones like Stump is a sanctimonius twat. And as evidenced by this article fronts himself like any righteous zealot blinded by faith.
http://news.natio...eor.html
yep
1 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017

Sorry, were you making a scientific point there? If so, what was it? Or are you just going to regurgitate EU crap? Please, do let us know.

I will write slowly so you can understand. Jones you are so deluded in how right you are you are often wrong.
It took me two seconds to pull up an article that shows you are stuck on stupid. It always amazes how a seemingly intelligent individual can be so rigid in their thinking that they are unwilling to consider that the facts change what was true yesterday is not now. They say you can't fix stupid, but I'm hoping that this verbal slap in your face along with the evidence, this physical proof that you can be wrong, and woefully misinformed, will sink in, and the vitriol you display will lessen because we all can learn.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017
as evidenced by this article fronts himself like any righteous zealot blinded by faith
@@yep there's another eu pseudoscience cultist
You seem to be copying arguments from people who have an agenda -- perhaps not fully thinking through what you're conveying

1-the study doesn't in any way prove that mammoths were wiped out by said claimed meteor

2-it is far more likely "a" mammoth death was due to an airburst like Tunguska
http://adsabs.har...31D1385H

3-none of the evidence in any way is "providing some sort of evidence for Velikovsky inspired catastrophism!" as already noted by jones

4-why would you argue about the idiotic black mats when it's not relevant to the topic?

it keeps getting brought up as "proof" by a pseudoscience cultist that scientists ignore the data and there is "controversy"

all science is controversy until there is validation

They say you can't fix stupid, but I'm hoping that this verbal slap in your face will sink in
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Apr 12, 2017

Sorry, were you making a scientific point there? If so, what was it? Or are you just going to regurgitate EU crap? Please, do let us know.

I will write slowly so you can understand. Jones you are so deluded in how right you are you are often wrong.
It took me two seconds to pull up an article that shows you are stuck on stupid. It always amazes how a seemingly intelligent individual can be so rigid in their thinking that they are unwilling to consider that the facts change what was true yesterday is not now. They say you can't fix stupid, but I'm hoping that this verbal slap in your face along with the evidence, this physical proof that you can be wrong, and woefully misinformed, will sink in, and the vitriol you display will lessen because we all can learn.


So, shit for brains; where is this article?
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Apr 12, 2017
Methinks 'Yep' is yet another EU cretin. It would be nice if said cretin could actually provide some science to back up its cretinous belief system. Do any of us think that that will ever happen? Errrr, no, would be the answer to that. Just regurgitate the tosspot Thornhill;s crap. Consider that science. Yes? Only if one has an IQ of <70.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017
@Yep cretin,
http://news.natio...eor.html


Ohhh dear, couldn't find a scientific paper to back up this BS? No? That is crap, and has been treated as such ever since that idiot came out with it. Grow the f*** up.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017
Let's have a little science lesson for the hard of thinking, yes? Meteorites are generally very small. A lot of them are just dust from comets. Tiny, teeny things. They do not hit the Earth (or mammoth tusks, FFS) at such a velocity as to penetrate such material. Is that clear? They float to Earth. Understood? Dickheads. Jesus wept, these guys are seriously thick, eh?
What does it take to become an EU believer? Apart from a sub-100 IQ? An ability to believe pretty much any old bollocks? Good start, I would say. Please, anybody that believes in this woo, let us know your qualifications, and what attracted you to such shite. I am personally amazed that grown men (and presumably women) can believe such crap.
Let's hear it woo children.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017
So, let's get this back on track; the idiot Reeve thinks that there was permanent daylight in the arctic/ Antarctic at some time in the past. Evidence says he's wrong. Anybody like to stick up for the idiot? With some accompanying science? Lol. Of course not. Why? Because he's a plank. With zero scientific knowledge. Goodnight, Mr. Reeve. Go get an education. Burke.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Apr 12, 2017
@jonesdave, the evidence seems credible for the claim of small meteoric (by composition; nickel-iron, which is far more common in meteorites than on the surface of the Earth) fragments embedded in the tusks of mammoths as well as the skull of an Elasmotherium and some bison skulls. In addition, the sites where these fragments were concentrated were all on one side, or on the sky side.

The guys who found these were actually looking for data to support the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis, which has since been dismissed by most paleontologists and geologists, but these skulls and tusks appear to have been dated more like 35ka then the 13ka that would be consistent with the Younger Dryas.

I did find a scholarly paper: https://www.osti....1023384/

I also found a paper on advsabs of a presentation at the AGU:

http://adsabs.har...31D1385H

[contd]
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Apr 12, 2017
[contd]
Of course I'm not endorsing any weird EU "theories" or anything like that; what we're talking about here most likely is an event much like the Tunguska event that involved a large inbound meteor that exploded or partially exploded during atmospheric entry and rained molten or semi-molten fragments of nickel-iron over a large part of Siberia and Alaska, ca. 35ka. Because some of the authors were involved with the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis, some of this evidence may have been ignored by the paleontology community. The evidence seems at least fair and possibly good to me.

How well it accords with whatever Reeve may be saying I will leave you to judge (and I doubt it will change your opinion, having interacted with Reeve myself in the past). But I would encourage you to keep an open mind about this evidence.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Apr 13, 2017
couldn't find a scientific paper to back up this BS?
@jonesdave
well, there are studies on the topic: http://adsabs.har...23A0865F

however, there is also more than a few papers that give different analysis and conclusions as i linked above - a tunguska type event: http://adsabs.har...31D1385H

the Tunguska event linked above seems far more plausible as it not only answers more questions than the first firestone paper, but includes more evidence that the first paper seems to ignore

regardless of which paper you choose to read, the funniest part is: none of them support the electric looney-verse unicorn woo

i think their confusion really comes from their intentional misinterpretation of the 2005 announcement as cultists like cd jumped to conclusions that weren't there
http://rnc.lbl.go...2_LE.pdf

Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Apr 13, 2017
@Jonesdave
ADDENDUM: i think i may have linked the wrong paper above for the first firestone study

not a problem though
it still doesn't actually support the eu bullsh*t pseudoscience or the claims from hannes/reeve

it also still doesn't say what hannes/reeve wants it to say
nor does it in any way prove his controversy argument let alone how it's relevant to ALMA and it's capture above

meh

apologies for screwing up the link

if you're wanting to find it, it's on google scholar and i think there are some free copies on academia.edu
yep
1 / 5 (3) Apr 13, 2017
Well Jones, you are the proof you can't fix stupid. I wanted to give you that befit of the doubt and I wrote it slow for you and everything, but you just want to ride the I'm a stupid cunt bandwagon with the Capitain making asumtions and putting me in them. Even in the face of your absolute ignorance you are still that "sanctimonious twat" and it seems unlikely that you can learn. For the others around you, I hope both of you are just like this anonymously, because you sure come off as a Grade A pecker heads and I feel for anyone that has to deal with small minded men like you.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Apr 13, 2017
@yep scientifically content-free. Why I generally ignore your comments.

If you have some evidence to provide, do so. Otherwise stop spewing out your pie hole. It's useless, and actually acts more to self-denigrate you than to provide any argument that any logically-minded person will find compelling.

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.