It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New studies adds support for Younger Dryas impact event

page: 2
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Hi punkinworks.

This is very, very interesting. I haven't read through all of your linked papers yet but the thought occurred to me that this might - maybe - explain bull worship, bull sacrifice, Minoan bull leaping etc throughout cultures. Food for thought, S&F.

B x




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 05:41 PM
link   
An independent University of Arizona team has confirmed the presence of magnetic micro sphereuals




in samples from the black water draw archeology site.

These microscopic particles are the solidified product of high temp melting of the surface of an impactor and or the ejecta from an impact.


Introduction
The cold period known as the Younger Dryas (YD)
climate oscillation occurred between c. 12.9 ka
BP and c. 11.7 ka BP (e.g. Berger 1990; Peteet
1995; Bj¨orck 2007; Lowe et al. 2008). This sudden
climate change is generally thought to result from
an abrupt change of atmospheric and oceanic
circulations (e.g. Teller et al. 2002; McManus
et al. 2004; Brauer et al. 2008). The beginning
of the YD in North America can at times be
stratigraphically marked by the so-called black mat,
a thin dark layer of organic-rich material (e.g.
Firestone et al. 2007; Haynes 2007, 2008; Pigati
et al. 2009, 2012). The black mat, however, is a
general term that includes, in addition to the dark
organic-rich deposits, some marls and diatomites
that are light grey in color (e.g. Ballenger et al.
2011). A lot of attention was lately paid to the
black mat because of a widespread discussion on
the possibility of the extraterrestrial impact shortly
before the onset of the YD climate oscillation
(e.g. Firestone et al. 2007; Haynes et al. 2010;
Pigati et al. 2009, 2012; Andronikov et al. 2011,
2014; Fayek et al. 2012; Kennett et al. 2015).
There are reports about findings of unusual objects
such as carbon spherules, nanodiamonds, glasslike
carbon, melt-glass, as well as enhanced
amounts of platinum group elements in sediments
corresponding to the lower YD boundary (LYDB) in
support of the hypothesis (e.g. Firestone et al. 2007;
Kennett et al. 2009; Mahaney et al. 2010, 2013;
Bunch et al. 2012; Petaev et al. 2013; Wu et al.
© 2016 Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography 1
DOI:10.1111/geoa.121222013). One such characteristic object reported is
magnetic microspherules (e.g. Firestone et al. 2007;
Israde-Alc´antara et al. 2012; LeCompte et al. 2012;
Wittke et al. 2013).



The paper is very thorough in its examination of the high temp melt products found at the site, so I'll leave most of the text for y'all to read.

Here is the conclusion,

Conclusions
Strongly elevated concentrations of the magnetic
microspherules in a thin sandy layer corresponding
to the LYDB are revealed for the BWD-1
sedimentary sequence. Sharp increase of the
number of microspherules in sediments located
along the LYDB is in agreement with observations
made by Firestone et al. (2007, 2010) and
LeCompte et al. (2012). Because overall close
chemical, mineralogical, and structural similarity
of the BWD-1 hollow microspherules to those
directly related to known meteorite occurrences
and/or meteoritic events, the cosmic origin of the
former seems to be a credible hypothesis. If we
accept such origin of the BWD-1 microspherules,
then ablation of iron or stony meteorites during their
passage through the Earth’s atmosphere seems to be
the most plausible mechanism for their formation.
However, the exact mechanism of the formation
of the magnetic microspherules is not completely
clear. In addition to the formation during ablation
of the meteoritic body in the Earth’s atmosphere
(as in the case of the microspherules studied), they
could be produced during the airburst of such a
body, or could result from the impact of the ET
body. When meteorite influx increases, it results,
in particular, in elevated concentration of the
hollow magnetic microspherules in discrete layers
of terrestrial sediments. The elevated concentration
of microspherules of the BWD-1 type is a
known phenomenon for multiple LYDB locales
across North America (e.g. Firestone et al. 2007;
LeCompte et al. 2012; Pigati et al. 2012; Wittke
et al. 2013). The presence of the high number of
such microspherules in the sediments can serve
as a local stratigraphic marker in identification
of the LYDB there where dark variety of the
black mat is absent. If one applies methods of
microstratigraphy to paleosols of the suggested
(LYDB) age, the strongly elevated concentrations
of magnetic microspherules would mark precisely
the time of around 12.9 ka BP. The data from
the present study along with observations made
on sediments around the LYDB elsewhere suggest
that some unusual event took place just before the
onset of the YD climate oscillation. However, an
understanding of what happened at c. 12.9 ka BP
and how it is related (if at all) to the onset of the
YD climate oscillation requires further search.


IMPLICATIONS FROM CHEMICAL, STRUCTURAL
AND MINERALOGICAL STUDIES OF MAGNETIC
MICROSPHERULES FROM AROUND THE LOWER
YOUNGER DRYAS BOUNDARY (NEW MEXICO, USA)



I wonder if such melt products will eventually turn up at other period sites( they already have at topper, Santa Rosa Island, Gainey and meadowcroft, just to name a few in NA) and will finally be accepted for what they are and represent.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Wow, that's pretty impressive, P. Is there any way at all that they could have come from something other than meteorites?
I hope you're proven right about this theory.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:37 PM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe
Hi B,
The authors used Ti and Ni ratios to determine whether the parent material had a cosmic or terrestrial origin.
A high Ti (titanium)level is indicative of a terrestrial origin and a high Ni(nickel) content shows a extra terrestrial origin.
One of the things discussed in some of the other papers sited by this one, is that some of these melt products have melt temps in excess of any other natural process, volcanoes are not hot enough nor are any sort of forest fires.
The materials were vaporized and then recondensed from that vapor.



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Looking good then.

I'll read the paper and try very hard to understand it.

Appreciate you keeping us all up to date.

B x



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

Great info, I'm glad to see that some of the results are being published. Thanks for the update on this! In a semi related note... was it you who suggested Elaine Dewar's "Bones"? If so, I just got it, showed up in the mail a couple of days ago.



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar


Hi Peter,
yes i did recommed it, at the subliminal reccomendation of JohnnyC. It is very good. The section on Brazil, I found particularly interesting


edit on p0000002k48212016Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:48:08 -0600k by punkinworks10 because: spelling



posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 11:18 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk
Whats your point Marduk,
That wikki page is one of the last places I would get any info on the subject, its got an editor who has forsaken all science.

One of the most vocal critics of the YDB events C.V. Haynes was an advisor on this paper.

By the way, just for your information, all sites in California have a nearly 600 year hiatus of occupation starting at ~12.9 kya.



No skeletal remains of horse, camel, mammoth, mastodon, dire wolf, American lion, short-faced bear, sloth, tapir, etc:, or Clovis artifacts have ever been found in situ within the YD age black mat,
that is in fact blatantly untrue.

and no post-Clovis Paleoindian artifacts have ever been found in situ stratigraphically below it.
and what bearing does that have on the question.

Both at Blackwater draw and at Topper the black mat has been indentified covering clovis lithics, at topper sampling was done on in situ artifacts, black mat on top and when the artifact was removed from the stratigraphic column no black mat on the underlying surface.
At black water draw the black mat fills in mammoth footprints and covers debitage at the kill site.
At china lake, in the Mojave, clovis reaches California near the end of the hiatus and clovis artifacts are found above the YDB boundry that is well defined on the ancient fluvial lake shore.

The skeptics are cherry picking the data every bit as bad as the stichinites and all their ilk do.
There are dozens papers and hundreds of pages of data that show something extraordinary occurred and continued to occur over the next few millennia.





edit on p0000003k21322016Tue, 01 Mar 2016 11:21:08 -0600k by punkinworks10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10
The skeptics are cherry picking the data every bit as bad as the stichinites and all their ilk do.



I would caution you not to jump onto the bandwagon just yet, the amount of papers which show the evidence for this is cherry picked and wrong far outweigh the ones that claim its right, that's my point, normally you are quite rational, but on this you appear to have become a fundamentalist...



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk
I would hardly say I jumped on a band wagon, I've been following this subject for more than 20 years, since I read an excerpt from Clube & Napiers "Cosmic Serpent", which I currently reading in full.
I've read all of the available literature, that I can get my hands on, both pro and con.
I have based my opinions on that body of work, so to call me a "fundamentalist" is down right ludicrous.
Though I respect your depth of knowledge, especially in your areas of expertise, I will have to argue, that since you haven't engaged me in a discussion on why YOU disagree with the theory, it is.you who is showing fundamentalist tendencies.
So, if you wish to have a discussion on the pros and cons of the theory I am always willing to do such



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join