Younger Dryas Boundary Team flash mobbed by critics in PNAS: Great response
I have to be quick and dirty to get this up. But here are some links to a flurry of new publications, all of them letters, in PNAS this week concerning the YDB hypothesis: 1.)...
I have to be quick and dirty to get this up. But here are some links to a flurry of new publications, all of them letters, in PNAS this week concerning the YDB hypothesis:
1.) Age models and the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis, Maarten Blaauw, Vance T. Holliday, Jacquelyn L. Gill, and Kathleen Nicoll
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
https://cosmictusk.com/wp-content/uploads/Age-models-and-the-Younger-Dryas-Impact-Hypothesis.pdf
2.) Inconsistent impact hypotheses for the Younger Dryas, Mark Boslough
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
https://cosmictusk.com/wp-content/uploads/Inconsistent-impact-hypotheses-for-the-Younger-Dryas.pdf
3.) Suspect cubic diamond “impact” proxy and a suspect lonsdaleite identifcation, Tyrone L. Daulton
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
4.) Paleoecological changes at Lake Cuitzeo were not consistent with an extraterrestrial impact, Jacquelyn L. Gill, Jessica L. Blois, Simon Goring, Jennifer R. Marlon, Patrick J. Bartlein, Kathleen Nicoll, Andrew C. Scott, and Cathy Whitlock
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
5.) Inconsistent redefining of the carbon spherule “impact” proxy, Mark Hardiman, Andrew C. Scott, Margaret E. Collinson, and R. Scott Anderson
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
And the reply:
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
Boslough ignores the research of William Napier (6), who demonstrated that the Younger Dryas boundary (YDB) hypothesis is consistent with Earth’s collision with the Taurid Complex debris field, which could have produced multiple airbursts capable of continent-wide environmental and biotic degradation )
Napier Paper:
https://cosmictusk.com/wp-content/uploads/Paleolithic-extinctions-and-the-Taurid-complex.pdf
Read the paper · scroll inside the window
