New paper accepted: Rejection of Holliday et al.'s Alleged Refutation of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis
Another paper that rejects Holliday et al.'s (2023; HEA) Gish gallop has been accepted for publication in Earth Science Reviews, the journal that published HEA. Because of the word limit imposed by ESR on our rebuttal, we could publish only a summary paper that points out only the major errors in each section of Holliday et al. (2023). This is why the extended details were published elsewhere; we chose Airburst and Cratering Impacts (see the previous blog post ). So the longer paper in ACI should be seen as an extension of the summary paper in ESR. -------------------------------------- Rejection of Holliday et al.'s Alleged Refutation of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis Martin B. Sweatman, James L. Powell, Allen West. Abstract We reject the claim of Holliday et al. (2023; hereafter HEA) that they have “comprehensively refuted” the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis (YDIH). Scores of peer-reviewed articles in dozens of peer-reviewed journals from hundreds of researchers, ma