What has happened since Holliday et al.'s alleged refutation of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis in mid-2023?


Holliday et al.'s apparent 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 and problems when dealing with contraversial issues.

With their publication, opponents of the hypothesis were able to claim it had been comprehensively refuted, leading journal 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 et al. 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. (2023) and 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 low-altitude airbusts can create extreme conditions at ground level
  • locate a likely YD 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 impact 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 to be 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 is now 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.

Actually, it shouldn't be. Any reasonanble scientists who reads Holliday et al.'s "refutation" and its rebuttals in detail should soon come to realise which side is doing quality work.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gobekli Tepe's Pillars

Image
Significance: Gobekli Tepe (GT) probably played an important role in the origin of civilisation. Most of us are connected to it in some way, through language and religion (proto-Nostratic?), or genetics at least. The Pillars: GT is famous for its anomalous megalithic pillars, and especially the symbols carved on them. Most people think these symbols are telling an important story - they are not just random pictures of animals. Klauss Schmidt, who discovered GT and led its excavation, until his death in 2014, certainly thought so. It follows that the only way we will ever be able to properly understand Gobekli Tepe, and therefore the origin of civilisation, is through reading its pillars. Deutsche Archaeological Institute : the DAI operates the Gobekli Tepe dig. Despite the immense significance of the site, only around 20 are documented by the DAI. Although many have no symbols, even 25 years after the site's discovery there is no single resource available that describes all its pi...
Read more

The meaning of H-symbols at Gobekli Tepe (updated 7th June)

Image
The H and I-symbols at Gobekli Tepe are some of the hardest to decipher, and their precise meaning remains obscure. But there are some good clues, which allow a preliminary interpretation. Let's have a look at all the instances where H and I-symbols occur. Pillar 33: A pair of H-symbols bracket some snakes (meteors) on the inner face. The upper H-symbol is quite faint. An I-symbol appears at ground level below the snake heads, but it is hardly visible here. Also, there are more I-symbols on the side with the tall bending birds. Of course, Pillar 43 has H and I-symbols near the bird with fish/snake. But Pillar 18 has the most H and I-symbols. First, at the top, forming a kind of necklace, together with likely sun and moon symbols. Then on the belt of Pillar 18 surrounded by loops... And then also on the belt buckle surrounding what might be the head of a comet. Pillar 30 has a single H-symbol, ... while Pillar 28 has an H-symbol over another loop, with an I-symbol at the bottom. The...
Read more

New paper submitted: Origin of some of the ancient Greek constellations via analysis of Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe

Image
Origin of some of the ancient Greek constellations via analysis of Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe  Martin B. Sweatman and Dimitrios Gerogiorgis School of Engineering, The University of Edinburgh, The King's Buildings, Sanderson Building, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JL, United Kingdom. email: martin.sweatman@ed.ac.uk   key words: Greek constellations, Göbekli Tepe, Pillar 43   ABSTRACT We re-evaluate an astronomical interpretation of Pillar 43 at Göbekli Tepe in southern Turkey. Our analysis supports earlier conclusions that at least some of the animal symbols on this pillar almost certainly represent constellations related to those of the ancient Greeks. Presumably, the Greeks, Mesopotamians and other Neolithic, Bronze and Iron-age cultures towards the eastern end of the Mediterranean region were influenced in their choice of constellations and symbols by this pre-existing knowledge.   1.       Introduction This work investig...
Read more