Fireballs set half the planet ablaze, wiping out the mammoth and America's Stone Age hunters
Scientists will outline dramatic evidence this week that suggests a comet exploded over the Earth nearly 13,000 years ago, creating a hail of fireballs that set fire to most of the northern hemisphere.
Primitive Stone Age cultures were destroyed and populations of mammoths and other large land animals, such as the mastodon, were wiped out. The blast also caused a major bout of climatic cooling that lasted 1,000 years and seriously disrupted the development of the early human civilisations that were emerging in Europe and Asia.
'This comet set off a shock wave that changed Earth profoundly,' said Arizona geophysicist Allen West. 'It was about 2km-3km in diameter and broke up just before impact, setting off a series of explosions, each the equivalent of an atomic bomb blast. The result would have been hell on Earth. Most of the northern hemisphere would have been left on fire.'
Article Continues
Full Version: Diamonds tell tale of comet that killed off
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Ancient Mysteries & Alternative History
QUOTE(BrucePrime @ May 21 2007, 09:39 AM) [snapback]1686455[/snapback]
Fireballs set half the planet ablaze, wiping out the mammoth and America's Stone Age hunters
Scientists will outline dramatic evidence this week that suggests a comet exploded over the Earth nearly 13,000 years ago, creating a hail of fireballs that set fire to most of the northern hemisphere.
Primitive Stone Age cultures were destroyed and populations of mammoths and other large land animals, such as the mastodon, were wiped out. The blast also caused a major bout of climatic cooling that lasted 1,000 years and seriously disrupted the development of the early human civilisations that were emerging in Europe and Asia.
'This comet set off a shock wave that changed Earth profoundly,' said Arizona geophysicist Allen West. 'It was about 2km-3km in diameter and broke up just before impact, setting off a series of explosions, each the equivalent of an atomic bomb blast. The result would have been hell on Earth. Most of the northern hemisphere would have been left on fire.'
Article Continues
Scientists will outline dramatic evidence this week that suggests a comet exploded over the Earth nearly 13,000 years ago, creating a hail of fireballs that set fire to most of the northern hemisphere.
Primitive Stone Age cultures were destroyed and populations of mammoths and other large land animals, such as the mastodon, were wiped out. The blast also caused a major bout of climatic cooling that lasted 1,000 years and seriously disrupted the development of the early human civilisations that were emerging in Europe and Asia.
'This comet set off a shock wave that changed Earth profoundly,' said Arizona geophysicist Allen West. 'It was about 2km-3km in diameter and broke up just before impact, setting off a series of explosions, each the equivalent of an atomic bomb blast. The result would have been hell on Earth. Most of the northern hemisphere would have been left on fire.'
Article Continues
Well, if this happened, I wouldn't be surprised, I mean how many things are flying around out in space that could at any time hit Earth at any moment? Look at the surface of the moon, how many times has it been hit? The only reason we can see so many craters is because it doesn't have an atmosphere and a self-fluctuating surface.
Great Article.. I enjoyed that...
It also fits with what I know of prehistoric Europe
It also fits with what I know of prehistoric Europe
If it happened, then the timing must be off, because Native Americans have 16,000+ year old settlements and such, and some still live there today............
this claim has yet to be verified by anyone qualified
there are iirc two papers about it that have yet to be submitted fro peer review
so until they are
all bets are off
the claims made for the collision dont fit the facts very well anyway
the megafauna for instance took thousands of years to become extinct, it didnt happen overnight
there are iirc two papers about it that have yet to be submitted fro peer review
so until they are
all bets are off
the claims made for the collision dont fit the facts very well anyway
the megafauna for instance took thousands of years to become extinct, it didnt happen overnight
QUOTE(apollyon @ Jun 6 2007, 01:25 PM) [snapback]1712194[/snapback]
this claim has yet to be verified by anyone qualified
there are iirc two papers about it that have yet to be submitted fro peer review
so until they are
all bets are off
the claims made for the collision dont fit the facts very well anyway
the megafauna for instance took thousands of years to become extinct, it didnt happen overnight
there are iirc two papers about it that have yet to be submitted fro peer review
so until they are
all bets are off
the claims made for the collision dont fit the facts very well anyway
the megafauna for instance took thousands of years to become extinct, it didnt happen overnight
"'This comet set off a shock wave that changed Earth profoundly,' said Arizona geophysicist Allen West. 'It was about 2km-3km in diameter and broke up just before impact, setting off a series of explosions, each the equivalent of an atomic bomb blast. The result would have been hell on Earth. Most of the northern hemisphere would have been left on fire.'"
So a geophysicist isn't good enough to say that this could have happened?
I don't think anyone is claiming that it happened over night. The article plainly says that "The blast also caused a major bout of climatic cooling that lasted 1,000 years and seriously disrupted the development of the early human civilisations that were emerging in Europe and Asia."
So, the northern hemisphere is on FIRE, and global cooling, which meant, it really sucks to be outside, lasted for 1,000 years. I don't think that's exactly the definition of over night. I think what they are trying to say is that anthropologists make theories and they become accepted as fact. These theories have no reason to be believed. For example, before this evidense, we didn't even know why all the huge mammals went extinct, we basically guessed. At least with this theory they actually have some evidense. I hate how anthropologists just get to make up theories and they somehow turn into facts over time. Its ridiculous.
Dear Douglas
I have read with interest the announcements in the news recently about the clovis comet, can you tell me if there is a paper available and where I might get
it
cheers
M
Subject: Re: clovis comet
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:14:15 -0700
Hi M,
we have two papers under review and we send them once they
are accepted. We should know within the next couple of weeks.
Sincerely,
Doug
From: "Douglas J Kennett" <dkennett@uoregon.edu>
http://www.uoregon.edu/~dkennett/Welcome.html
wait to see what peer review says before worrying too much about it
QUOTE(mystery dude @ Jun 6 2007, 07:56 PM) [snapback]1712163[/snapback]
If it happened, then the timing must be off, because Native Americans have 16,000+ year old settlements and such, and some still live there today............
From the article
QUOTE
'The shock waves and the heat would have been tremendous,' said West. 'It would have set fire to animals' fur and to the clothing worn by men and women. The searing heat would have also set fire to the grasslands of the northern hemisphere. Great grazing animals like the mammoth that had survived the original blast would later have died in their thousands from starvation. Only animals, including humans, that had a wide range of food would have survived the aftermath.'
So have no fear the Native Americans could have toughed it out...long live omnivores.
I am just getting up or I might be a little less groggy and more effective searching but I have been able to find some information concerning Native American beliefs and meteorites. (Side note I have recently been informed that Native American is no longer the PC term for the indigenous peoples of North and South America for some reason we are supposed to be going back to calling them American Indians.) Anyway here is a link to a site I found on the topic, you will have to scroll down quite a bit to get to the information on Native American or American Indian beliefs so here's a quote that seems pertinent.
http://www.crystalinks.com/meteors.html
QUOTE
Why such beliefs came about is almost impossible to guess, but some of the best examples are as follows:
# The Blackfeet of Montana believed a meteor was a sign that sickness would come to the tribe in the coming winter, or that a great chief had just died.
# The Kawaiisu (California) thought a meteor that started high and fell to the horizon was an omen of sickness and death.
# The Cahuilla thought a meteor was the spirit of their first shaman, Takwich, who was disliked by his people. Takwich was said to wander the skies at night looking for people far from their tribe. When someone was found, he stole their spirit, and sometimes even the person, took them back to his home and ate them.
# The Shawnee believed meteors were beings "fleeing from the wrath of some adversary, or from some anticipated danger."
# The Blackfeet of Montana believed a meteor was a sign that sickness would come to the tribe in the coming winter, or that a great chief had just died.
# The Kawaiisu (California) thought a meteor that started high and fell to the horizon was an omen of sickness and death.
# The Cahuilla thought a meteor was the spirit of their first shaman, Takwich, who was disliked by his people. Takwich was said to wander the skies at night looking for people far from their tribe. When someone was found, he stole their spirit, and sometimes even the person, took them back to his home and ate them.
# The Shawnee believed meteors were beings "fleeing from the wrath of some adversary, or from some anticipated danger."
Perhaps these negative feelings toward meteorites are due to group consciousness of the giant meteorite that took out all those other critters and such all those years before as suggested by these scientists.
we're not talking about meteors
this is the rogue comet thread theory
this is the rogue comet thread theory
Maybe it was a piece of Marduk on one of his drive by's. When is he supposed to come round again can anyone remember?
Budhabee
Budhabee
QUOTE(apollyon @ Jun 7 2007, 03:39 PM) [snapback]1713678[/snapback]
we're not talking about meteors
this is the rogue comet thread theory
this is the rogue comet thread theory
I was using the definition of a meteorite being any small extraterrestrial bodies that struck the earth's atmosphere. I know this is a broad definition of the word but as such the fall out of an exploding rogue comet would fit would it not?
I mean since a comet is a frozen body that travels around the sun in some kind of elliptical orbit then the fall out from one whacking into our atmosphere and breaking up into a little rainstorm of sorts would be a bunch of meteorites right? Also I am thinking that during the time period in question there was probably not much differentiation made between comets and meteors among the people of that era.
If not please let me know where I went wrong with my reasoning cause now I am a little confused. Thanks.
QUOTE(laughing tanuki @ Jun 8 2007, 12:45 AM) [snapback]1713981[/snapback]
I was using the definition of a meteorite being any small extraterrestrial bodies that struck the earth's atmosphere. I know this is a broad definition of the word but as such the fall out of an exploding rogue comet would fit would it not?
I mean since a comet is a frozen body that travels around the sun in some kind of elliptical orbit then the fall out from one whacking into our atmosphere and breaking up into a little rainstorm of sorts would be a bunch of meteorites right? Also I am thinking that during the time period in question there was probably not much differentiation made between comets and meteors among the people of that era.
If not please let me know where I went wrong with my reasoning cause now I am a little confused. Thanks.
I mean since a comet is a frozen body that travels around the sun in some kind of elliptical orbit then the fall out from one whacking into our atmosphere and breaking up into a little rainstorm of sorts would be a bunch of meteorites right? Also I am thinking that during the time period in question there was probably not much differentiation made between comets and meteors among the people of that era.
If not please let me know where I went wrong with my reasoning cause now I am a little confused. Thanks.
well so is everyone else
a meteor is a small low velocity object made from rock which most of the time burns up entering our atmosphere and so are regarded as relatively harmless (unless youre really unlucky), any part of a meteor that hits the earths surface is a meteorite
a comet is a large high velocity object made from ice and frozen gas
comets don't break up into meteorites (gas and ice can't turn into rock) and when they do break up there is no individual name for the pieces
this is because no matter how many pieces a comet may break into they will still hit the same target as the majority of the object
now the main claim for this comet is that it left tell tale residual of micro diamonds at impact sites
bearing in mind that comets contain no Carbon I don't see as how this is even a valid theory
so like I said earlier
wait for the peer review because speculating on less than half the facts is a bit pointless
QUOTE(apollyon @ Jun 8 2007, 12:59 AM) [snapback]1714334[/snapback]
well so is everyone else
a meteor is a small low velocity object made from rock which most of the time burns up entering our atmosphere and so are regarded as relatively harmless (unless youre really unlucky), any part of a meteor that hits the earths surface is a meteorite
a comet is a large high velocity object made from ice and frozen gas
comets don't break up into meteorites (gas and ice can't turn into rock) and when they do break up there is no individual name for the pieces
this is because no matter how many pieces a comet may break into they will still hit the same target as the majority of the object
now the main claim for this comet is that it left tell tale residual of micro diamonds at impact sites
bearing in mind that comets contain no Carbon I don't see as how this is even a valid theory
so like I said earlier
wait for the peer review because speculating on less than half the facts is a bit pointless
a meteor is a small low velocity object made from rock which most of the time burns up entering our atmosphere and so are regarded as relatively harmless (unless youre really unlucky), any part of a meteor that hits the earths surface is a meteorite
a comet is a large high velocity object made from ice and frozen gas
comets don't break up into meteorites (gas and ice can't turn into rock) and when they do break up there is no individual name for the pieces
this is because no matter how many pieces a comet may break into they will still hit the same target as the majority of the object
now the main claim for this comet is that it left tell tale residual of micro diamonds at impact sites
bearing in mind that comets contain no Carbon I don't see as how this is even a valid theory
so like I said earlier
wait for the peer review because speculating on less than half the facts is a bit pointless
O.K. so you got multiple impact sites (presumably if what they say is true) with carbon which as you say doesn't come from comets...LOL I am following you so far and agree that it's probably best to wait for the review and all. At this point I am thinking big freakin meteor hits earth should have been the headline since a comet wouldn't contain carbon. Then maybe they were more confused than me lol since they were calling it a comet and would seem that if it did indeed happened that it was probably a chunk of rock and not ice since we know rocks can be carbon. But all this is a mute point without a review. Thanks for the clarification though.
QUOTE(budhabee @ Jun 7 2007, 10:37 PM) [snapback]1713846[/snapback]
Maybe it was a piece of Marduk on one of his drive by's. When is he supposed to come round again can anyone remember?
Budhabee
Budhabee
2003
Whilst a cometary impact is possible, the conclusions drawn fall into the usual trap of trying to use one event to explain everything. It may have contributed to the megafaunal extinction in some areas, but elsehwere - Alaska for example - there was a a gradual decline in populations of some mega fauna, like mammoths and horses - whilst at the same time other megafauna species, like bison and wapiti, were thriving.
If an impact occurred, few if any species became extinct as a result of it. Or, those species were already in serious decline and on the way to extinction before the impact. Simply put there is no evidence whatsoever for any 'sudden' extinction.
QUOTE(apollyon @ Jun 8 2007, 05:59 AM) [snapback]1714334[/snapback]
well so is everyone else
a meteor is a small low velocity object made from rock which most of the time burns up entering our atmosphere and so are regarded as relatively harmless (unless youre really unlucky), any part of a meteor that hits the earths surface is a meteorite
a comet is a large high velocity object made from ice and frozen gas
comets don't break up into meteorites (gas and ice can't turn into rock) and when they do break up there is no individual name for the pieces
this is because no matter how many pieces a comet may break into they will still hit the same target as the majority of the object
now the main claim for this comet is that it left tell tale residual of micro diamonds at impact sites
bearing in mind that comets contain no Carbon I don't see as how this is even a valid theory
so like I said earlier
wait for the peer review because speculating on less than half the facts is a bit pointless
a meteor is a small low velocity object made from rock which most of the time burns up entering our atmosphere and so are regarded as relatively harmless (unless youre really unlucky), any part of a meteor that hits the earths surface is a meteorite
a comet is a large high velocity object made from ice and frozen gas
comets don't break up into meteorites (gas and ice can't turn into rock) and when they do break up there is no individual name for the pieces
this is because no matter how many pieces a comet may break into they will still hit the same target as the majority of the object
now the main claim for this comet is that it left tell tale residual of micro diamonds at impact sites
bearing in mind that comets contain no Carbon I don't see as how this is even a valid theory
so like I said earlier
wait for the peer review because speculating on less than half the facts is a bit pointless
While I agree that waiting for the peer review is useful for verification as to whether this hypothesis should be considered, your statement..."comets contain no Carbon"...is unsubstantiated. Comets contain dust and rocky material as well as ice and frozen gases. Indeed, some of the frozen gases may be CO2.
Such harmless speculation as is taking place on this thread should be encouraged as imagination is the driver to discovery.
Link to Comets
[quote name='Essan' date='Jun 8 2007, 12:49 PM' post='1714536']
2003
According to the original theory put forward by Zacharia Sitchin, the next encounter with Nibiru will be around 3700 AD.
As I have said before, that's not early enough for the present day doomsday prophets, so they moved that date to somewhere this century. You know, you can't be scary when you predict things that won't happen happen for about a couple of millennia... so make them happen closer to the present.
2003
According to the original theory put forward by Zacharia Sitchin, the next encounter with Nibiru will be around 3700 AD.
As I have said before, that's not early enough for the present day doomsday prophets, so they moved that date to somewhere this century. You know, you can't be scary when you predict things that won't happen happen for about a couple of millennia... so make them happen closer to the present.
QUOTE(Essan @ Jun 8 2007, 12:49 PM) [snapback]1714536[/snapback]
2003
According to the original theory put forward by Zacharia Sitchin, the next encounter with Nibiru will be around 3700 AD.
As I have said before, that's not early enough for the present day doomsday prophets, so they moved that date to somewhere this century. You know, you can't be scary when you predict things that won't happen happen for about a couple of millennia... so make them happen closer to the present.
According to the original theory put forward by Zacharia Sitchin, the next encounter with Nibiru will be around 3700 AD.
As I have said before, that's not early enough for the present day doomsday prophets, so they moved that date to somewhere this century. You know, you can't be scary when you predict things that won't happen happen for about a couple of millennia... so make them happen closer to the present.
Essans right it was 2003
when he wrote that he wasn't expected to make his upcoming cardiac surgery
then when he did he realised that he wasn't a qualified mathemetician
thats not his fault as he never claimed to be a qualified mathemetician
QUOTE(apollyon @ Jun 9 2007, 07:55 PM) [snapback]1716387[/snapback]
Essans right it was 2003
when he wrote that he wasn't expected to make his upcoming cardiac surgery
then when he did he realised that he wasn't a qualified mathemetician
thats not his fault as he never claimed to be a qualified mathemetician
when he wrote that he wasn't expected to make his upcoming cardiac surgery
then when he did he realised that he wasn't a qualified mathemetician
thats not his fault as he never claimed to be a qualified mathemetician
No, it's not. Well, not according to Sitchin's theory that is. It IS right according to someone else's version of Sitchin's theory, but I forgot his name.
QUOTE(Abramelin @ Jun 16 2007, 10:22 PM) [snapback]1728269[/snapback]
No, it's not. Well, not according to Sitchin's theory that is. It IS right according to someone else's version of Sitchin's theory, but I forgot his name.
either way it doesnt matter does it
Nibiru isn't even a Sumerian word
and the noun Annunaki doesnt exist
so whichever way you want to look at it its wrong
still from the timelines sitchin clearly claims that the planet Nibiru was around in 3500bce at the height of the Sumerian civilisation
so
3600 year eliptical orbit
2007 now
should be back around 3700 CE
Bet hes kicking himself he didn't think to claim it was a 2756 year orbit then he could link it up with 2012 and make even more money from gullible people
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.