What has happened since Holiiday et al.'s alleged refutation of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis in mid-2023?
Holliday et al's alleged refutation of the Younger Dryas Impacy Hypothesis (YDIH) in mid-2023 caused real problems for the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis, even though their apparent refutation was mostly a load of old nonsense. Wikipedia's editors loved it (of course - they were always baised against the hypothesis) and their bias has fed through to many AI models that prioritze Wikipedia's articles, despite the wiki's well documented biases.
With their publication, opponents of the hypothesis were able to claim it had been comprehensively refuted, leading editors to retract and block several pro-YDIH papers. To get their data into the public domain, many pro-YDIH scientists have resorted to publication in their own peer-reviewed journal, Airbursts and Cratering Impacts. This is not a healthy situation, but it's better than no publication at all.
Of course, if Holiday are correct and the YDIH is bogus, then the YD boundary layer which was claimed to contain evidence for a widely distributed comet impact around 10,800 - 10,900 BCE is not really there - or maybe it has been misinterpreted. So, what has happened since Holliday et al's claimed refutation in 2023?
A comprehensive source of YDIH research literature is the YDIH bibliography, maintained by Marc Young and posted on the Cosmic Tusk website here. We can see that dozens of new papers supportive of the YDIH have been published since Holliday et al's apparent refutation in 2023. They include papers that,
- rebutt Holliday et al.'s (2023) nonsense
- analyse their poor rhetoric
- further analyse the YDB at Abu Hureyra, Hall's Cave and several new sites
- show the Laacher See volcanic eruption preceded the YDB by around 150-200 years and, moreover, it is far too early to be related to the Younger Dryas climate change
- link extreme fires to megafaunal decline at the same time as the YD climate change
- show how airbusts can create extreme conditions at ground level
- locate a likely YDI airburst depression in Louisiana
- further link the YD impact to Gobekli Tepe
Clearly, the Younger Dryas boundary layer (YDB) is real. It's the only reasonable explanation for why the YDB layer, with all its proxies, continues to be found exactly where it is expected at a multitude of sites.
So the main question is, what does it tell us? Is this evidence for an ancient comet impact? I still consider a comet impact as by far the best explanation for the reported nanodiamonds, exotic microspherules, platinum and high temperature melts discovered, apparently synchronously, within the YDB. And the evidence has become even stronger that the YD climate change, megafaunal extinctions and human adaptations followed directly after it. The hypothesis has become stronger, not weaker, since Holliday et al's apparent refutation.
Isn't that strange.
Comments
Post a Comment