Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby CharlesChandler » Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:58 am

webolife wrote:...and given what appears to be increasing evidence for mantle blocking...

Can you give some examples? (I never lock down on a model to the exclusion of new evidence -- looking stupid isn't all that difficult for me, so I don't need to seek out new ways, such as suppressing new evidence... :))

BTW, on a related topic, did you ever see any of my musings on the Ceres Impact Hypothesis? The idea is that the continental granites, and the oceans, arrived during the Late Heavy Bombardment, courtesy of the break-up of Ceres by some sort of collision. Granites and water are the stuff of which asteroids in the vicinity of Ceres are made, and are not otherwise abundant in the inner solar system. The late arrival of granites on Earth is suggested by their uneven distribution. Pretty much everybody's model of the Earth has it as completely molten in its youth. As such, the stratification should have been near perfect, and the completely molten granites should have spread out over the entire globe, making one continuous layer, ~15 km deep, instead of clumps of granites covering 29% of the Earth's surface, with an average thickness of 40 km. Of course, the Earth could have been semi-molten, and a batch of high-viscosity granite could have bubbled up to the surface, and cooled too quickly to spread out over the entire globe. But I don't know of anybody who is saying that the young Earth was that cool. Furthermore, many scientists believe that the oceans were donations from asteroids, mainly because the Earth should have been hot enough to boil off all of the liquid water. So I'm saying that the granites and the water both arrived at the same time. The proposed impacter would have had a volume of 8.97 × 109 km3, with 85% granite and 15% water. C-type asteroids can contain up to 22% water, and 75% of all asteroids are this type, including Ceres, which could be as much as 50% water.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll spend the rest of the day sitting in a small boat, drinking beer and telling dirty jokes.

Volcanoes
Astrophysics wants its physics back.
The Electromagnetic Nature of Tornadic Supercell Thunderstorms
User avatar
CharlesChandler
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:25 am
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby GaryN » Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:34 pm

Grey Cloud wrote:Rebuttal of Schoch from the Tusk team:

Comet Research Group responds to Robert Schoch

http://cosmictusk.com/comet-research-gr ... #more-9320


GC, from the linked page:
Although many of those individual proxies, such as charcoal and soot, can be produced by normal terrestrial processes other than impacts, the entire suite of proxies listed above is only known to occur in cosmic impact events, and cannot be produced in any other natural way. That is an important distinction to remember. To repeat, individual proxies may have other sources than impacts, but there is no evidence of any kind that all of those proxies together are produced at one time by anything other than a cosmic impact.


The effects of lightning are not mentioned at all? They don't believe an EM event could occur at such magnitudes?
I don't believe any large objects have ever hit the Earth or any other planet or moon or asteroid, Coulombs laws will not allow it. If not deflected by repulsive forces, they will ablate, (where there is an atmosphere), discharge and explode before they can ever make physical contact.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2661
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby webolife » Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:39 pm

Charles,
Aaiiee! Too many muddy shoulds and coulds for me. I'm aware of data showing Ceres' water budget might be up to 10%; undistributed concentrations of hydrogen in the regolith suggest a mantle high in volatiles, hydroxyls, perhaps water [and that might be an "atmospheric" combination of OH- and H+ ions similar to that modeled for Mars, our Moon and a few others]. Where are the studies showing "near" Ceres asteroids to be of granite? The gravitational field data from Dawn show Ceres is less dense than the Moon and Vesta, so a granite core may be a possibility. I do believe that there will be found a reddish tendency in the overall appearance of the Ceres near-orbital grouping of asteroids, despite the processed greyish images that have been recently published, due possibly to the presence of Fe-oxides. There, I've added a few more "coulds" to the muddy waters :twisted:
I do not have a good idea of how Earth's original continent emerged. I suppose I favor some uneven differentiation during cooling from a melted igneous origin, and that primordial water was released prior to this period... I'm not against the bombardment theory, but there are too many presumptions connected with it for my comfort, time frame being one of them.
Mantle "blocking" is a term I'm using [probably too liberally, since there is so much guesswork] to describe seismically determined interactions between different sections of the upper mantle, ie. slippage of one mantle section over another [some Scandinavian studies are pertinent to this]; which have led me to become interested in the possibility that rapid continental drift could be mechanized by sliding mantle "blocks" rather than, or in addition to, the more frictionable [it seems to me] interaction of crustal plates with the aesthenosphere. I am quite unsure about this, and perhaps your work on the details of the conductivity and consequential plasmic double layering of the Moho could elucidate this.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:24 pm

Gary,
To be fair the Tusk article is specifically a rebuttal of Schoch's. If Schoch didn't mention lightning the Tuskers would have no reason to mention it (no electric Schoch?). If Schoch did and the Tuskers agree then they have no reason to rebuttalise it. Put another way, the disagreement is more about the cause/source than the 'mechanics'.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Lloyd » Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:42 pm

Hey Gordon. Want to help me and Mike Fischer write a paper for NCGT journal, which GC referenced lately? I plan to ask Mike the same soon.

Here's my correspondence about papers.
LK: (To ncgt.org) Hi. Please let me know what requirements you have for article submissions. Thank you.

DC: Please follow the format of NCGT back issues. Best regards

LK: I was wondering if you accept papers that differ with conventional dating. Or would such a paper need to include evidence and arguments for alternative dating? Looking through the titles of articles in your 65 newsletters, I didn't see any that seem to accept alternative dating hypotheses, but I haven't looked through the journal titles yet.

DC: Our journal is a scientific journal. Papers need good evidence and data to support what you say in the paper. Regards

So it sounds like they would consider such a paper, if it provides good enough evidence.

------
And here's my idea for sections of a paper, any part of which could be retitled etc. What do you think?

Recent Planetary Resurfacing:
Sedimentary Strata Must Have Been Deposited in a Short Time Span

This Model Is Not Derived from Religious Beliefs

Conventional Science Has Long Been Corrupt

A Former Supercontinent Is Apparent

Most Strata Cover Very Large Areas

Shallow Seas Could Not Have Produced the Existing Strata

Only Megatsunamis Could Have Eroded & Deposited the Strata

The Late Heavy Bombardment Must Have Occurred during the Megatsunamis

Oceans Must Have Contained a Much Greater Amount of CO2

Disconformities between Megasequences Show Minor Erosion

Continental Drift Must Have Been Rapid & Caused by the Largest Impact

Radiometric Dating Methods Are Based on Flawed Reasoning

Supercontinental Radioactive Elements Were Produced by Fusion

C14 Is the Most Accurate Dating Method

Fossils & Civilization Date to Very Recent

Most Solar System Rocky Bodies Were Affected by the Late Heavy Bombardment
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:17 pm

Lloyd,
Avoid words such as 'must' and phrases such as 'could not'.

Try to change your titles into questions, e.g. 'Could Megatsunamis Have Eroded & Deposited the Strata?'

Don't mention religion in any way, shape or form and don't accuse science of corruption, whichever way you mean that word.

Try to get a feel for the writing style of various articles in the journal and try to imitate the vocabulary and phraseology.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Lloyd » Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:58 pm

GC, the newsletter had several articles about corruption in science, so I can cite those. Considering that this journal favors alternatives over conventional geology etc, I think it might be okay to mention that religion is not the basis for the theory, since religious bias is probably expected from anyone proposing drastic reduction in dating Earth features. But I'll see if GW and Mike have anything to say on that.

Gary, I just replied to your comment about electric forces preventing collisions with Earth at the thread Most Thorough Model at http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=15374&p=117185#p117185 . I'll try to ask CC if he can make a relevant calculation. If your idea were correct, I don't see how meteors would ever fall to Earth. They reach velocities as high as 70 km/s. If they're small, they lose a lot of their exterior to melting then slow by air friction to between 300 and 600 km/hr for a relatively soft landing. If they're big, a smaller proportion of the surface melts, and the atmosphere cannot reduce their velocities very much before impact. In order for large craters to form, they need a lot of momentum. Electric Discharges only move electrons, which are way too low-mass to provide such momentum. The ground waves that get frozen in place around impacts are surely caused by the fluidization of the bedrock by very high pressure and temperature. Electrons can't do that.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby willendure » Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:10 am

Followed a few links from here and foudn this list of 'Vitrified Hill Forts' in Scotland:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitrified_fort

Of interest and relevance here because it is not known how they came to be vitrified. But one possibility is that extremely powerful lightning caused it. Some are not too far from me, so I will head up one weekend and take a look.
willendure
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 8:29 am

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby webolife » Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:31 pm

Lloyd,
I'm with GC on your use of language.
Honest scientific discourse is at best:
1. Questioning
2. Evidence based
3. Tentative
In that order, or any order.

Dishonest scientific discourse [oft the stuff of popular magazines] is subjective, biased, and premise ignorant.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:39 pm

Lloyd,
I would add that you cannot possibly cover all those headings in one essay. Choose one and remain focused on it. It's a geology journal so they are not interested in, e.g., cosmology or ancient history - keep it Earth related.
And it's okay for them to write about corruption in science, they are scientists. You are not a member of the club, old boy.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Lloyd » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:04 pm

I'm thinking the paper could be submitted in 2 or 3 parts, if necessary.
Here's what I whittled it down to this morning.

Title: Recentness of Planetary Resurfacing

Introduction: Scientific Method vs. Religion & Corruption

Claim #1. Sedimentary Strata Deposited in Short Time Span by Megatsunamis

Claim #2. Late Heavy Bombardment Caused Said Megatsunamis

Claim #3. Said Bombardment Also Split Supercontinent into Present Continents Etc

Claim #4. Most Radiometric Dating Methods Inaccurate

Claim #5. Fossils & Civilization Date to Very Recent


I usually edit important drafts several times. I'll see if Thesis or Hypothesis or something should replace Claim.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby webolife » Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:17 am

"Claim" is the new language of scientific writing.
Claim, Evidence, Reasoning, Rebuttal are the recommended parts of a submission for peer review.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Lloyd » Sat Jan 21, 2017 2:10 pm

NCGT Reply
I asked NCGT if the above topics would be acceptable and they said mostly YES as follows.
"Our reviewers will judge based on rigorous scientific evidence. If you think your paper can convince our reviewers with overwhelming hard evidence, please submit. Please avoid reference to religion as NCGT is a scientific journal. Regards, Dong Choi editor@ncgt.org http://www.ncgt.org Canberra, Australia"

So I informed Mike of this and I think he will want to go ahead and start submitting material in collaboration with me and maybe others.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:10 am

Peer-reviewed paper on the Carolina Bays

http://cosmictusk.com/antonio-zamora-ge ... ice-sheet/
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm

Unread postby moses » Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:10 pm

Grey Cloud,
The question is still open whether it was an impact or EDM throwing ice bombs. The Carolina Bays are clearly the result of one or the other. Were the Younger Dryas events at the beginning of the Velikovsky period, or maybe in the middle of such planetary random orbits.

The 1,200 year cool time of the Younger Dryas may represent Earth in a cool orbit. Then an event settled Earth to near it's present orbit. It's a tempting idea. I am not sure that the details are that significant to humanity. Survivors had hard times which changed their epigenetics which resulted in our present epigenetics being affected also. Maybe the details can help us understand but healing from it mostly needs the overall idea of ancient trauma and survival in difficult conditions.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests