The Younger Dryas - The Fifth Extinction Event
History Drops 84.1K subscribers - with commentary by yours truly and footnotes by ChatGPT 3.5.
Note: Some emerging science, some interesting speculation, from Randall Carlson1. He discusses the Younger Dryas cometary impact hypothesis2.
Some of Carlson’s material (presented elsewhere) is quite esoteric and almost seems to be numerology, but nevertheless, but his views are interesting even there. He does not go into that sort of thing here, but he discusses some lines of research which have lead to many publications in academic journals. The main ideas in the video on cometary impact and megafaunal extinction3 are contentious but they are supported by published evidence from mainstream scientists.
When I grew up, continental drift was regarded with derision4. Such is not the case now. When I was born, the notion that the channeled scablands in Eastern Washington state5 were the result of incredible floods was just becoming accepted by the broader scientific community. There is now a widespread acceptance. That is the nature of scientific paradigm shift6.
Still, Carson is regarded as a fringe figure, a flake, a purveyor of woo, by conventional thinkers. That says to me that scientists can be as fundamentalist, as hidebound, as anyone. Science progresses, if it can be said to progress (ChatGPT is more bullish on this than am I7), via maverick opinions.
I have long stated that there are more ways of being wrong than of being right8, but that can apply to conventional views as much to esoteric opinion. As a holder of many unconventional views, I have a jaundiced take on the corrrectness of the views of mankind. Knowing that I am part of mankind, I try to maintain such a take on my own views. I sometimes succeed.
It seems to me that the science fiction movie from decades ago, The Planet of the Apes, was not too bad in showing how establishment opinion can be maintained despite evidence to the contrary. In the movie, it was maintained through dishonesty9 above all. Yeah, sure, it was just fiction of course.
Randall Carlson explains in great detail the cataclysmic events that happened during the last major extinction event, the Younger Dryas! Randall Carlson is an exciting traveller and maverick researcher. He is an expert manufacturer and structural designer. In addition, he is likewise perceived as an instructor, geometrician, and geomythologist. Randall Carlson has been associated with research for over forty years now. He is now perceived by The National Science Teachers Association. His well-known podcast named “Kosmographia” investigates the horrendous history of the world, and can be found on YouTube. I hope you enjoy watching this very interesting video, as much as i did making it. Cheers. A Massive Thank You goes to @ShawnRyanShow for this interview. The whole interview can be found on his amazing channel on YouTube.
Randall Carlson is a researcher and writer known for his work in the fields of geology, archaeology, and paleontology, particularly in relation to catastrophism and alternative interpretations of geological phenomena. However, he does not hold formal academic credentials in these fields. Carlson's expertise is largely self-taught and comes from years of independent study and fieldwork.
While he doesn't have the traditional academic background typically associated with professional geologists or archaeologists, Carlson has gained recognition within certain circles for his alternative theories and interpretations of geological and archaeological evidence. He has presented his ideas through lectures, podcasts, and writings, often focusing on topics such as the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis and the potential for catastrophic events shaping Earth's history.
It's important to note that while Carlson's perspectives have attracted interest from some enthusiasts and alternative thinkers, they may not always align with mainstream scientific consensus, and his lack of formal academic credentials can be a point of contention among experts in the respective fields.
The Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis proposes that a cometary impact or multiple airburst events occurred around 12,800 years ago during the transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene epoch, leading to abrupt climate cooling and other environmental changes known as the Younger Dryas stadial.
This hypothesis suggests that one or more extraterrestrial objects, possibly comets or asteroids, impacted or exploded in the Earth's atmosphere, releasing tremendous energy and causing widespread effects. Some key elements of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis include:
Impact Event(s): Supporters of the hypothesis propose that one or more large comets or asteroids entered the Earth's atmosphere around 12,800 years ago, causing explosions or impacts. These events are theorized to have occurred over North America, Europe, or possibly other regions.
Environmental Effects: The proposed impacts or airbursts would have released massive amounts of energy, resulting in widespread wildfires, atmospheric dust and debris, and significant environmental disruption. This sudden influx of material into the atmosphere could have blocked sunlight, leading to a rapid cooling of the climate.
Younger Dryas Cooling: The Younger Dryas stadial was a period of abrupt climate cooling that occurred approximately 12,800 to 11,700 years ago, interrupting the warming trend at the end of the last glacial period. Proponents of the impact hypothesis argue that the proposed cometary impacts or airbursts could explain the rapid onset and severity of the Younger Dryas cooling.
Evidence: Evidence cited in support of the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis includes the discovery of impact-related materials such as microspherules, nanodiamonds, and impact proxies like elevated levels of platinum and other elements associated with extraterrestrial objects. Additionally, researchers point to geological and paleoenvironmental records that show abrupt changes consistent with an impact event around 12,800 years ago.
The worldwide megafaunal extinction event that occurred around 12,800 years ago is a significant event in Earth's history, marking the disappearance of numerous large-bodied animal species across various continents. This event coincides with the end of the Pleistocene epoch and the beginning of the Holocene epoch, and it occurred shortly after the Last Glacial Maximum.
Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the cause of this megafaunal extinction event, and while there is ongoing debate and research, no single explanation has been universally accepted. Some of the leading hypotheses include:
Climate Change: The end of the Pleistocene was a period of significant climate change, with warming temperatures and changing environmental conditions as the Earth transitioned out of the last ice age. These environmental changes could have affected the habitats and food sources of megafauna, making them more vulnerable to extinction.
Human Overhunting: The expansion of human populations during this time period coincides with the megafaunal extinction event, leading some researchers to propose that overhunting by early human populations played a significant role in the extinction of large animals. Archaeological evidence suggests that humans were capable hunters and may have contributed to the decline of megafauna populations through hunting pressure.
Impact Events: Some researchers have proposed that one or more extraterrestrial impact events, such as comet impacts or airbursts, may have contributed to the megafaunal extinction event. The Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis, for example, suggests that a comet impact around 12,800 years ago triggered environmental disruption and climate cooling, leading to the extinction of megafauna.
Disease: Another hypothesis is that the introduction of new diseases by humans may have played a role in the extinction of megafauna. As humans migrated into new regions, they may have brought with them pathogens that were capable of infecting and decimating animal populations that lacked immunity to these diseases.
Synergistic Effects: It's possible that a combination of factors, including climate change, human hunting, impact events, and disease, contributed to the megafaunal extinction event. These factors may have interacted in complex ways, leading to the widespread decline and eventual extinction of many large animal species.
Overall, the megafaunal extinction event around 12,800 years ago represents a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that likely involved a combination of environmental, ecological, and anthropogenic factors. Unraveling the specific causes of this extinction event remains an active area of research in paleontology, archaeology, and other related fields.
The concept of continental drift, which proposes that the Earth's continents were once connected as a single landmass and have since drifted apart, was indeed met with derision and skepticism when it was first proposed. The idea challenged established geological theories and was initially considered far-fetched by many in the scientific community.
German meteorologist Alfred Wegener is credited with proposing the theory of continental drift in the early 20th century. In 1912, he published his seminal work, "The Origin of Continents and Oceans," where he presented evidence suggesting that the continents had once been joined together in a supercontinent he called Pangaea. Wegener proposed that Pangaea later broke apart, with the fragments gradually drifting to their current positions.
However, Wegener's theory faced significant opposition for several reasons:
Lack of Mechanism: Wegener struggled to provide a convincing mechanism to explain how the continents could move across the Earth's surface. Without a plausible mechanism, many scientists were skeptical of the idea.
Geological Community Resistance: The geological community at the time was dominated by the theory of uniformitarianism, which held that geological processes operated at a gradual and uniform pace over long periods. Continental drift challenged this paradigm, as it implied sudden and dramatic movements of the Earth's crust.
Wegener's Background: Wegener was a meteorologist by training, not a geologist. Some in the geological community dismissed his ideas due to his lack of formal training in geology.
Lack of Direct Evidence: Although Wegener presented evidence such as the fit of the continents, matching geological formations across continents, and similar fossil assemblages on different continents, critics argued that his evidence was circumstantial and insufficient to support his theory.
As a result of these challenges, Wegener's theory of continental drift was largely rejected by the scientific community during his lifetime. He faced criticism and ridicule from many of his peers, and his ideas were often dismissed as speculative and unscientific.
It wasn't until the mid-20th century, decades after Wegener's death, that advancements in geology and earth sciences provided the necessary evidence and mechanisms to support the theory of continental drift. The discovery of mid-ocean ridges, magnetic striping on the ocean floor, and advances in plate tectonics provided compelling evidence for the movement of continents. Eventually, Wegener's ideas were vindicated, and the theory of plate tectonics, which incorporates continental drift, became widely accepted as a fundamental principle of geology.
J Harlen Bretz was a pioneering geologist whose work revolutionized our understanding of geomorphology, particularly in relation to the Channeled Scablands in eastern Washington state, USA. Bretz's most significant contribution to geology was his development of the theory that the Scablands were formed by catastrophic flooding events.
In the early 20th century, Bretz proposed that the unique landscape of the Channeled Scablands, characterized by deep canyons, giant ripple marks, and massive boulder fields, was the result of catastrophic flooding rather than gradual erosion by the region's rivers. He suggested that massive floods, far larger than any observed in modern times, had occurred during the Pleistocene epoch, carving out the landscape in a relatively short period.
Bretz's hypothesis was met with significant skepticism and resistance from the geological establishment of the time. Many geologists favored the idea of uniformitarianism, which held that geological features were primarily shaped by slow, gradual processes over long periods. Bretz's concept of catastrophic flooding clashed with this prevailing paradigm, and he faced considerable opposition and ridicule for his ideas.
Despite the initial skepticism, Bretz persisted in his research and accumulated further evidence to support his theory. He documented numerous features of the Scablands that were consistent with catastrophic flooding, such as streamlined hills, giant potholes, and vast gravel bars. Additionally, he identified sedimentary deposits and evidence of massive erosion that could not be easily explained by gradual processes.
Eventually, Bretz's ideas began to gain traction as other geologists conducted independent research in the region and corroborated many of his findings. Key support for Bretz's theory came from Joseph T. Pardee, who provided evidence of immense glacial Lake Missoula in western Montana, whose catastrophic draining is thought to have caused the floods that carved the Scablands.
The Kuhnian paradigm shift, named after philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn, refers to a fundamental change in the dominant framework or "paradigm" within a scientific discipline. According to Kuhn, scientific progress does not always proceed in a linear fashion through the gradual accumulation of knowledge; rather, it occurs through periods of normal science, where researchers work within an established paradigm, punctuated by revolutionary shifts in scientific understanding known as paradigm shifts.
Here's a discussion of the key components and implications of the Kuhnian paradigm shift:
Normal Science: Kuhn described "normal science" as the routine, day-to-day activity of scientists working within an established paradigm. During periods of normal science, researchers operate within a shared framework of assumptions, theories, and methodologies that define their field. They work to solve puzzles and anomalies within this framework, gradually refining and extending existing knowledge.
Crisis and Anomalies: Over time, anomalies or unresolved problems may accumulate within the established paradigm. These anomalies may challenge the prevailing theories and assumptions, leading to a sense of crisis within the scientific community. Scientists may attempt to resolve these anomalies through normal scientific means, but if the anomalies persist or multiply, they may signal the need for a more radical shift in scientific understanding.
Paradigm Shift: A paradigm shift occurs when the accumulated anomalies and challenges to the prevailing paradigm reach a critical threshold, leading to a revolutionary reorganization of scientific thought. During a paradigm shift, old theories and assumptions are questioned, and new frameworks emerge to explain previously unexplained phenomena. Paradigm shifts often involve a radical restructuring of the conceptual foundations, methodologies, and guiding principles of a scientific discipline.
Examples: One of the most famous examples of a paradigm shift is the transition from the geocentric to the heliocentric model of the solar system during the Scientific Revolution. Another notable example is the shift from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics in the early 20th century, which revolutionized our understanding of the fundamental nature of matter and energy.
Implications: The concept of paradigm shifts has significant implications for the philosophy and sociology of science. It challenges the notion of scientific progress as a straightforward accumulation of knowledge and highlights the role of social, historical, and cognitive factors in shaping scientific revolutions. Paradigm shifts also raise questions about scientific objectivity, as different paradigms may lead to radically different interpretations of the same evidence.
Overall, the Kuhnian paradigm shift provides a framework for understanding the complex and often nonlinear process of scientific change, emphasizing the importance of revolutionary breakthroughs in advancing our understanding of the natural world.
The concept of paradigm shifts, as proposed by Thomas Kuhn, challenges the traditional view of scientific progress as a linear accumulation of knowledge. Instead, Kuhn argued that scientific progress occurs through revolutionary changes in scientific understanding, where old paradigms are replaced by new ones.
From this perspective, the notion of progress in science is more complex than a straightforward march toward truth. While scientific knowledge does advance over time, it does so through a process of continuous reassessment and revision. Paradigm shifts represent moments of profound transformation in scientific thinking, where new ideas and theories replace old ones, often leading to significant advancements in our understanding of the natural world.
However, the occurrence of paradigm shifts does not negate the idea of progress in science. Instead, it reflects the dynamic and iterative nature of scientific inquiry. Each paradigm shift builds upon the foundations laid by previous generations of scientists, incorporating new evidence, methods, and insights into our understanding of the universe.
Moreover, while individual theories and paradigms may be overturned, the scientific method itself remains a powerful tool for uncovering truths about the world. Through systematic observation, experimentation, and peer review, scientists are able to test hypotheses, refine theories, and converge on more accurate explanations of natural phenomena over time.
In this sense, scientific progress can be seen as a cumulative and self-correcting process, where knowledge evolves through cycles of discovery, critique, and revision. Paradigm shifts represent pivotal moments in this ongoing journey of exploration and discovery, driving scientific inquiry forward and expanding the boundaries of human understanding.
When considering the ratio of incorrect to correct assertions, it's essential to acknowledge that the space of potential incorrect assertions is vastly larger than the space of correct assertions. Here's why:
Infinite Possibilities of Incorrect Assertions: The number of possible incorrect assertions is virtually limitless. For any given topic or statement, there are countless ways for it to be inaccurate, misleading, or false. This abundance of potential incorrect assertions arises from the complexity and diversity of the world, as well as the limitations of human knowledge and understanding.
Finite Scope of Correct Assertions: In contrast, the space of correct assertions is limited by the boundaries of truth and accuracy. While there may be variations within families of correct assertions, they all align with observed evidence, established theories, or empirical facts. However, this space is finite, constrained by the constraints of reality and the available evidence.
Probabilistic Considerations: Even within the space of correct assertions, there may be degrees of certainty or confidence associated with each statement. Some correct assertions may be supported by overwhelming evidence and have high probabilities of being true, while others may be more speculative or uncertain. Nevertheless, they all fall within the realm of correctness, contributing to the overall ratio of correct to incorrect assertions.
Impact of Error: Given the vast disparity between the spaces of incorrect and correct assertions, there is a significant risk of error whenever making assertions about the world. This underscores the importance of skepticism, critical thinking, and rigorous evaluation of evidence to minimize the likelihood of being wrong. While errors are inevitable, striving for accuracy and truth is essential for advancing knowledge and understanding.
In summary, the ratio of incorrect to correct assertions highlights the inherent challenges and complexities of human cognition and knowledge acquisition. While the space of incorrect assertions is vast and infinite, the space of correct assertions is finite and constrained by truth and evidence. Embracing probabilistic thinking and rigorous standards of inquiry can help mitigate the risk of error and guide us towards greater accuracy in our understanding of the world.
In "The Planet of the Apes," there is indeed a depiction of scientific dishonesty, particularly in the actions of Dr. Zaius, the lead orangutan scientist and politician in the ape society.
Dr. Zaius discovers evidence of a previous human civilization, including artifacts such as a doll and a metal human figurine, which suggests that humans were once capable of advanced civilization. However, rather than acknowledging or investigating this evidence openly, Dr. Zaius chooses to suppress it and keep it hidden from the rest of ape society.
His motives for doing so are rooted in maintaining the status quo and preserving the established social order, where apes are seen as superior to humans. By concealing evidence of human intelligence and civilization, Dr. Zaius seeks to prevent any challenge to ape dominance and authority.
This act of scientific dishonesty reflects a broader theme in the film of power and control, where those in positions of authority manipulate knowledge and information to serve their own interests. Dr. Zaius's actions highlight the dangers of intellectual repression and the suppression of dissenting viewpoints, which can hinder scientific progress and perpetuate injustice within society.
In this context, Dr. Zaius's cover-up represents a form of scientific dishonesty, where the pursuit of truth and understanding is sacrificed in favor of maintaining power and control. It serves as a cautionary tale about the ethical responsibilities of scientists and the consequences of using knowledge for selfish or oppressive purposes.
Scientific Fraud by Omission of vast tracts of relevant work is one of my favourite topics.
There was a much earlier extinction of Australian megafauna circus 40,000 years ago, at the same time Neanderthal went extinct coinciding with Leschamps Event when the poles reversed and both cosmic and solar radiation from the Van Allen belt flooded into the planet for 400 years causing mass sterility, which Homo sapiens somehow survived!