Carnoferox Posted January 24 #1 Share Posted January 24 (edited) This video provides a summary of the ethical and scientific problems behind the Comet Research Group's pseudojournal Airbursts and Cratering Impacts and the papers published in it. It will be a good resource for current and future discussions about the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis and its proponents. @Piney Edited January 24 by Carnoferox 2 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted January 24 #2 Share Posted January 24 12 minutes ago, Carnoferox said: This video provides a summary of the ethical and scientific problems behind the Comet Research Group's pseudojournal Airbursts and Cratering Impacts and the papers published in it. It will be a good resource for current and future discussions about the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis and its proponents. @Piney We both personally buried that theory so many times I'm sick of it. George Howard.....my fellow Friends School bud and environmental restoration specialist. He has no reason to lie. None whatsoever...which is why I'm sooo p***ed off... 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnoferox Posted January 24 Author #3 Share Posted January 24 10 minutes ago, Piney said: We both personally buried that theory so many times I'm sick of it. Same here, that's why I'll point anyone asking about the CRG and ACI to this video instead of writing yet another long-winded reply. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 24 #4 Share Posted January 24 Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted January 24 #5 Share Posted January 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, and-then said: Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please When not to rely on a paper that does not align with your preconceived conclusions Edited January 24 by OverSword 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenemet Posted January 25 #6 Share Posted January 25 5 hours ago, and-then said: Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please Basically they are using a scenario that does NOT happen (physics, chemistry, geology) ...and pretending it does so that they can prove an ancient global civilization which didn't exist. Imagine that someone announces the story of Cinderella was true and they have seeds from the original coach-pumpkin as well as the descendants of the mice turned into horses and this proves the story was real. When skeptics say "can we see and test the pumpkin seeds and a mouse or two" they ignore the requests and put up a paper saying "we also have shards of the glass slipper and the hair of the dog turned into a footman." When people point out that you can't make shoes out of regular glass and that there are many women who have the exact same foot size, the Cinderella fans shout that the skeptics are wrong and rigid in their thinking. That's an analogy. The science can be a bit dense sometimes, but the "evidence" they have isn't a match for any of the known cosmic events (both large and small) that impacted the climate and caused extinction events, and the chemical signatures don't match either. If you prefer videos, here's another one. It goes over some of the bits and pieces in good detail: 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #7 Share Posted January 25 10 hours ago, Piney said: We both personally buried that theory so many times I'm sick of it. George Howard.....my fellow Friends School bud and environmental restoration specialist. He has no reason to lie. None whatsoever...which is why I'm sooo p***ed off... I got to agree with you. Strangely enough. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #8 Share Posted January 25 No comet impact imo has made an impact, bad pun, on mankind….except Kaali in Saaremaa, Estonia. And possibly the one that made dinosaurs extinct. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #9 Share Posted January 25 (edited) 9 hours ago, Kenemet said: Basically they are using a scenario that does NOT happen (physics, chemistry, geology) ...and pretending it does so that they can prove an ancient global civilization which didn't exist. Imagine that someone announces the story of Cinderella was true and they have seeds from the original coach-pumpkin as well as the descendants of the mice turned into horses and this proves the story was real. When skeptics say "can we see and test the pumpkin seeds and a mouse or two" they ignore the requests and put up a paper saying "we also have shards of the glass slipper and the hair of the dog turned into a footman." When people point out that you can't make shoes out of regular glass and that there are many women who have the exact same foot size, the Cinderella fans shout that the skeptics are wrong and rigid in their thinking. That's an analogy. The science can be a bit dense sometimes, but the "evidence" they have isn't a match for any of the known cosmic events (both large and small) that impacted the climate and caused extinction events, and the chemical signatures don't match either. If you prefer videos, here's another one. It goes over some of the bits and pieces in good detail: 9 hours ago, Kenemet said: Basically they are using a scenario that does NOT happen (physics, chemistry, geology) ...and pretending it does so that they can prove an ancient global civilization which didn't exist. Imagine that someone announces the story of Cinderella was true and they have seeds from the original coach-pumpkin as well as the descendants of the mice turned into horses and this proves the story was real. When skeptics say "can we see and test the pumpkin seeds and a mouse or two" they ignore the requests and put up a paper saying "we also have shards of the glass slipper and the hair of the dog turned into a footman." When people point out that you can't make shoes out of regular glass and that there are many women who have the exact same foot size, the Cinderella fans shout that the skeptics are wrong and rigid in their thinking. That's an analogy. The science can be a bit dense sometimes, but the "evidence" they have isn't a match for any of the known cosmic events (both large and small) that impacted the climate and caused extinction events, and the chemical signatures don't match either. If you prefer videos, here's another one. It goes over some of the bits and pieces in good detail: 9 hours ago, Kenemet said: Basically they are using a scenario that does NOT happen (physics, chemistry, geology) ...and pretending it does so that they can prove an ancient global civilization which didn't exist. Imagine that someone announces the story of Cinderella was true and they have seeds from the original coach-pumpkin as well as the descendants of the mice turned into horses and this proves the story was real. When skeptics say "can we see and test the pumpkin seeds and a mouse or two" they ignore the requests and put up a paper saying "we also have shards of the glass slipper and the hair of the dog turned into a footman." When people point out that you can't make shoes out of regular glass and that there are many women who have the exact same foot size, the Cinderella fans shout that the skeptics are wrong and rigid in their thinking. That's an analogy. The science can be a bit dense sometimes, but the "evidence" they have isn't a match for any of the known cosmic events (both large and small) that impacted the climate and caused extinction events, and the chemical signatures don't match either. If you prefer videos, here's another one. It goes over some of the bits and pieces in good detail: Edited January 25 by The Puzzler I dunno…watching video….but I don’t believe it… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted January 25 #10 Share Posted January 25 14 hours ago, and-then said: Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please There is a hypothesis that a comet airburst over Canada wiped out the Clovis and the megafauna. The only "evidence" is fraudulent. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted January 25 #11 Share Posted January 25 15 hours ago, Carnoferox said: Same here, that's why I'll point anyone asking about the CRG and ACI to this video instead of writing yet another long-winded reply. Have you subscribed to 'Retraction Watch' yet? 😂 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #12 Share Posted January 25 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Piney said: There is a hypothesis that a comet airburst over Canada wiped out the Clovis and the megafauna. The only "evidence" is fraudulent. I’m pretty up on the comets…re PHaethon People move, they adapt, they get out of the area, they move south….I do not see any evidence for any wiping out of anything, not humans at least.I don’t know of any evidence where an impact wiped anyone out. I got a theory though where people moved out from the areas of Saaremaa in the Nordic Bronze Age and went south….but as said, this impact is the only one I could scientifically confirm to have impacted people. Ive tried others…but they don’t cut the mustard. Im open to the impact in the Gulf of Mexico wiping out the dinosaurs though…but this did not affect mankind. Dinosaurs are not humans….but it gave rise to the mammals. Edited January 25 by The Puzzler 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #13 Share Posted January 25 26 minutes ago, Piney said: There is a hypothesis that a comet airburst over Canada wiped out the Clovis and the megafauna. The only "evidence" is fraudulent. It’s like saying an air burst might have wiped out the megafauna of Australia….hang on, you might be onto something… 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted January 25 #14 Share Posted January 25 17 minutes ago, The Puzzler said: I’m pretty up on the comets…re PHaethon People move, they adapt, they get out of the area, they move south….I do not see any evidence for any wiping out of anything, not humans at least.I don’t know of any evidence where an impact wiped anyone out. I got a theory though where people moved out from the areas of Saaremaa in the Nordic Bronze Age and went south….but as said, this impact is the only one I could scientifically confirm to have impacted people. Ive tried others…but they don’t cut the mustard. Im open to the impact in the Gulf of Mexico wiping out the dinosaurs though…but this did not affect mankind. Dinosaurs are not humans….but it gave rise to the mammals. From the archaeology. Kaali didn't make much of a "impact". 😄 Nobody moved away or was displaced. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #15 Share Posted January 25 2 minutes ago, Piney said: From the archaeology. Kaali didn't make much of a "impact". 😄 Nobody moved away or was displaced. The real culprit was the tsunami that followed it…around 1171BC…. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=103095 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windowpane Posted January 25 #16 Share Posted January 25 On 20 September 2021, the following paper was published in "Nature": A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea (Bunch et al.) It was supported by the Comet Research Group. A few months later, the January/February 2022 edition of "Skeptical Inquirer" included the following article, which shows how digitally altered images were used in the "Nature" article: Sodom Meteor Strike Claims Should Be Taken with a Pillar of Salt - Mark Boslough (As also discussed here). 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Puzzler Posted January 25 #17 Share Posted January 25 15 minutes ago, Windowpane said: On 20 September 2021, the following paper was published in "Nature": A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea (Bunch et al.) It was supported by the Comet Research Group. A few months later, the January/February 2022 edition of "Skeptical Inquirer" included the following article, which shows how digitally altered images were used in the "Nature" article: Sodom Meteor Strike Claims Should Be Taken with a Pillar of Salt - Mark Boslough (As also discussed here). Also discussed ad nauseum with me. If anyone here will agree with this, I’ll accept your apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thanos5150 Posted January 25 #18 Share Posted January 25 51 minutes ago, Windowpane said: On 20 September 2021, the following paper was published in "Nature": A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea (Bunch et al.) It was supported by the Comet Research Group. A few months later, the January/February 2022 edition of "Skeptical Inquirer" included the following article, which shows how digitally altered images were used in the "Nature" article: Sodom Meteor Strike Claims Should Be Taken with a Pillar of Salt - Mark Boslough (As also discussed here). Also discussed in this forum HERE: As if it couldn't get any worse. You will literally use anyone as a "source" just as long as it has been printed somewhere. Written by one Phillip J. Silvia, PhD from Trinity Southwest University whose "doctrinal position" says: TSU is a trans-denominational institution in the evangelical mainstream of the historic Christian Faith. However, we view “creedal formulations” and “statements of faith” beyond the Bible itself as “grids” that relegate the Word of God to “patient” status, rather than its proper role as “agent” in our lives. Therefore, we humbly submit our minds to the Bible by embracing Scripture (comprised of the ancient Hebrew Tanakh and the New Testament) as the only written, divinely inspired representation of reality given by God to humankind, speaking with absolute and authority in all matters upon which it touches. Gadzooks. Apparently its a race to the bottom of who can be more bat-$$$$ crazy. And where did Silvia get this "PhD" you ask- why Trinity Southwest University of course. And the original paper this comes from was riddled with fraud "corrections": Author Correction: A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el‑Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea All those "open minded" folk here you think you are talking to-they're not stupid. If they are reading along time and again the only thing they are learning is all this nonsense from you is complete sake oil. The consistent and calculated lack of intellectual integrity that is your MO in presenting your ideas is as sad as it is alarming. This is not the way Scott. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Not to mention HERE 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thanos5150 Posted January 25 #19 Share Posted January 25 18 hours ago, and-then said: Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please Are you really this lazy or is this just a passive aggressive way of pointing out the missing synopsis in the OP? 50,000 posts and this is what inpires you to comment in this forum for how many years? Ever? Anyways, surely no one would bother actually responding to y- oh, crap. Of course: #6. And right on cue wrong at that. "Basically they are using a scenario that does NOT happen (physics, chemistry, geology) ...and pretending it does so that they can prove an ancient global civilization which didn't exist." The group promoting the airburst hypothesis as discussed and repeated several times before are not promoting an "AGC" but rather are a group of Evangelic Christians trying to use this idea to prove events in the Bible actually happened, namely Sodom and Gomorrah. Also #826: When Biblically Inspired Pseudoscience and Clickbait Cause Looting. And I think it is safe to say the CRG folks are not arguing for an "AGC": HERE. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windowpane Posted January 25 #20 Share Posted January 25 43 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said: Also discussed in this forum HERE: As if it couldn't get any worse. You will literally use anyone as a "source" just as long as it has been printed somewhere. Written by one Phillip J. Silvia, PhD from Trinity Southwest University whose "doctrinal position" says: TSU is a trans-denominational institution in the evangelical mainstream of the historic Christian Faith. However, we view “creedal formulations” and “statements of faith” beyond the Bible itself as “grids” that relegate the Word of God to “patient” status, rather than its proper role as “agent” in our lives. Therefore, we humbly submit our minds to the Bible by embracing Scripture (comprised of the ancient Hebrew Tanakh and the New Testament) as the only written, divinely inspired representation of reality given by God to humankind, speaking with absolute and authority in all matters upon which it touches. Gadzooks. Apparently its a race to the bottom of who can be more bat-$$$$ crazy. And where did Silvia get this "PhD" you ask- why Trinity Southwest University of course. And the original paper this comes from was riddled with fraud "corrections": Author Correction: A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el‑Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea All those "open minded" folk here you think you are talking to-they're not stupid. If they are reading along time and again the only thing they are learning is all this nonsense from you is complete sake oil. The consistent and calculated lack of intellectual integrity that is your MO in presenting your ideas is as sad as it is alarming. This is not the way Scott. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Not to mention HERE What on ... earth ... are you talking about? By way of explanation only, as there seemed to be at least one person who was slightly puzzled by it all, I posted a link to the original "Nature" article, and then links to subsequent rebuttals of it, explaining how there were protests because the digital images had been fiddled with (and I didn't mention Elizabeth Bik, it's true; but just Google what Elizabeth Bik has to say about it). And of course TSU and the CRG don't emerge well from this: how could they? But what really bewilders me is that you seem to imagine - for reasons utterly beyond my comprehension - that I'm supporting the CRG, etc. How could you? What on earth gave you that idea? And then there's this: Quote This is not the way Scott. Oh, dear. Oh dear dear dear dear dearie me ... For the record, I have no idea what Scott thinks about the CRG, the el-Hammam comet, etc. etc. But on what planet is it possible to confuse the poor man for me? That would probably just about finish him off ... 🤣 Thanos5150: you're always tearing me (and others) off a strip for not having done this, not having done that, misrepresenting this, misrepresenting that, lazy this, disgraceful that ... Well, you know what? You just try putting your own maxims into practice, and, before replying to me next time (if there ever is a next time), try reading what I wrote. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piney Posted January 25 #21 Share Posted January 25 21 minutes ago, Windowpane said: What on ... earth ... are you talking about? By way of explanation only, as there seemed to be at least one person who was slightly puzzled by it all, I posted a link to the original "Nature" article, and then links to subsequent rebuttals of it, explaining how there were protests because the digital images had been fiddled with (and I didn't mention Elizabeth Bik, it's true; but just Google what Elizabeth Bik has to say about it). And of course TSU and the CRG don't emerge well from this: how could they? But what really bewilders me is that you seem to imagine - for reasons utterly beyond my comprehension - that I'm supporting the CRG, etc. How could you? What on earth gave you that idea? And then there's this: Oh, dear. Oh dear dear dear dear dearie me ... For the record, I have no idea what Scott thinks about the CRG, the el-Hammam comet, etc. etc. But on what planet is it possible to confuse the poor man for me? That would probably just about finish him off ... 🤣 Thanos5150: you're always tearing me (and others) off a strip for not having done this, not having done that, misrepresenting this, misrepresenting that, lazy this, disgraceful that ... Well, you know what? You just try putting your own maxims into practice, and, before replying to me next time (if there ever is a next time), try reading what I wrote. I'm confused too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted January 25 #22 Share Posted January 25 3 hours ago, The Puzzler said: The real culprit was the tsunami that followed it…around 1171BC…. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=103095 I thought we all agreed that this Mörner wasn't that trustworthy, and was just trying to prove Ragnarök... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abramelin Posted January 25 #23 Share Posted January 25 20 hours ago, and-then said: Can one of you guys give me a brief summary of what this is about? I know nothing of it and with the little reading of wiki I just did, it seems to be an argument for a comet impact that caused mass destruction/displacement? Give me the Forrest Gump version please __ Time stamps 0:00 Start 00:02 Introduction 03:06 Assessing the journal 04:51 Concerns about the journal's metrics 11:09 Concerns about the journal's review process 20:41 Concerns about the journal's integrity 26:16 Assessing the paper 27:04 Concerns about how the paper was reviewed 31:00 Concerns about individual authors 41:12 Wider scholarly reception 46:41 Why you shouldn't trust pseudo-archaeologists 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnoferox Posted January 25 Author #24 Share Posted January 25 7 hours ago, Piney said: Have you subscribed to 'Retraction Watch' yet? 😂 I'm not subscribed to their newsletter, but I do check their website fairly often in case anything of interest (especially CRG-related) shows up . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wepwawet Posted January 25 #25 Share Posted January 25 3 hours ago, Piney said: I'm confused too. So was I until I realised that the comments were not addressed to @Windowpane, but by @Thanos5150 to Scott Creighton in the thread he linked to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now