European Science Foundation
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem...CultureCode=en

"Around 12,800 years ago the northern hemisphere was hit by a mini ice-
age, known by scientists as the Younger Dryas, and nicknamed the ‘Big
Freeze', which lasted around 1300 years. Geological evidence shows
that the Big Freeze was brought about by a sudden influx of
freshwater, when the glacial Lake Agassiz in North America burst its
banks and poured into the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. This vast
pulse, a greater volume than all of North America's Great Lakes
combined, diluted the North Atlantic conveyor belt and brought it to a
halt.

Without the warming influence of this ocean circulation temperatures
across the Northern hemisphere plummeted, ice sheets grew and human
civilisation fell apart."

-----

Does the reader agree that this is good science?

-----

David Christainsen - Meteorologist

crunch 01/12/2009 17:07 wrote:
European Science Foundation
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem...CultureCode=en

"Around 12,800 years ago the northern hemisphere was hit by a mini ice-
age, known by scientists as the Younger Dryas, and nicknamed the ‘Big
Freeze', which lasted around 1300 years. Geological evidence shows
that the Big Freeze was brought about by a sudden influx of
freshwater, when the glacial Lake Agassiz in North America burst its
banks and poured into the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. This vast
pulse, a greater volume than all of North America's Great Lakes
combined, diluted the North Atlantic conveyor belt and brought it to a
halt.

Without the warming influence of this ocean circulation temperatures
across the Northern hemisphere plummeted, ice sheets grew and human
civilisation fell apart."

-----

Does the reader agree that this is good science?

-----

David Christainsen - Meteorologist


Do you agree that this is not archaeology?
**** off

On Dec 1, 11:11*am, Peter Alaca wrote:
crunch 01/12/2009 17:07 wrote:





European Science Foundation
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem...CultureCode=en

"Around 12,800 years ago the northern hemisphere was hit by a mini ice-
age, known by scientists as the Younger Dryas, and nicknamed the ‘Big
Freeze', which lasted around 1300 years. Geological evidence shows
that the Big Freeze was brought about by a sudden influx of
freshwater, when the glacial Lake Agassiz in North America burst its
banks and poured into the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. This vast
pulse, a greater volume than all of North America's Great Lakes
combined, diluted the North Atlantic conveyor belt and brought it to a
halt.

Without the warming influence of this ocean circulation temperatures
across the Northern hemisphere plummeted, ice sheets grew and human
civilisation fell apart."

-----

Does the reader agree that this is good science?

-----

David Christainsen - Meteorologist

Do you agree that this is not archaeology?
**** off- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are a broken record; take a vacation. Better yet,
get an attitude re-adjustment. You have been
behaving like a jerk for a very long time.

crunch 01/12/2009 17:51 wrote:
On Dec 1, 11:11 am, Peter Alaca wrote:
crunch 01/12/2009 17:07 wrote:





European Science Foundation
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem...CultureCode=en
"Around 12,800 years ago the northern hemisphere was hit by a mini ice-
age, known by scientists as the Younger Dryas, and nicknamed the ‘Big
Freeze', which lasted around 1300 years. Geological evidence shows
that the Big Freeze was brought about by a sudden influx of
freshwater, when the glacial Lake Agassiz in North America burst its
banks and poured into the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. This vast
pulse, a greater volume than all of North America's Great Lakes
combined, diluted the North Atlantic conveyor belt and brought it to a
halt.
Without the warming influence of this ocean circulation temperatures
across the Northern hemisphere plummeted, ice sheets grew and human
civilisation fell apart."
-----
Does the reader agree that this is good science?
-----
David Christainsen - Meteorologist
Do you agree that this is not archaeology?
**** off- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are a broken record; take a vacation. Better yet,
get an attitude re-adjustment. You have been
behaving like a jerk for a very long time.

Do you agree that this is not archaeology?
**** off

crunch wrote:
European Science Foundation
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem...CultureCode=en

"Around 12,800 years ago the northern hemisphere was hit by a mini ice-
age, known by scientists as the Younger Dryas, and nicknamed the ‘Big
Freeze', which lasted around 1300 years. Geological evidence shows
that the Big Freeze was brought about by a sudden influx of
freshwater, when the glacial Lake Agassiz in North America burst its
banks and poured into the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. This vast
pulse, a greater volume than all of North America's Great Lakes
combined, diluted the North Atlantic conveyor belt and brought it to a
halt.

Without the warming influence of this ocean circulation temperatures
across the Northern hemisphere plummeted, ice sheets grew and human
civilisation fell apart."

-----

Does the reader agree that this is good science?

-----

David Christainsen - Meteorologist


Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
no civilisation at the time.

On Dec 1, 12:06*pm, VtSkier wrote:

Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
* * *no civilisation at the time.

Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?

Just asking.

Garry

On Dec 3, 11:28*am, Garry Williams wrote:
On Dec 1, 12:06*pm, VtSkier wrote:

Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
* * *no civilisation at the time.

Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?

Just asking.

Garry

My method is to probe recent Google Scholar articles -
Keywords: archaeology civilization "Younger Dryas" Europe

I got 235 hits. Here's one relevant article. Please note that
the author says "our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history",
not civilization -

The Laacher See-eruption (12,920 BP) and material culture
change at the end of the Allerød in Northern Europe

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...cdfccf 684eb7

"Abstract
A number of recent papers have argued that summed probability
distributions of radiocarbon dates calibrated with the CALPAL software
package can be used to identify population trends in prehistory. For
instance, Gamble et al. (Gamble, C., Davies, W., Pettitt, P.,
Richards, M., 2004. Climate change and evolving human diversity in
Europe during the last glacial. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society of London, Series B 359, 243–254; Gamble, C., Davies,
W., Pettitt, P., Richards, M., 2005. The archaeological and genetic
foundations of the European population during the Late Glacial:
implications for 'agricultural thinking'. Cambridge Archaeological
Journal 15, 193–223.) have demonstrated that during the European Late
Glacial, demography was more variable than hitherto acknowledged.
Building on this work, this paper presents evidence that the large,
but so far largely ignored eruption of the Laacher See-volcano,
located in present-day western Germany and dated to 12,920 BP, had a
dramatic impact on forager demography all along the northern periphery
of Late Glacial settlement and precipitated archaeologically visible
cultural change. In Southern Scandinavia, these changes took the form
of technological simplification, the loss of bow-and-arrow technology,
and coincident with these changes, the emergence of the regionally
distinct Bromme culture. Groups in north-eastern Europe appear to have
responded to the eruption in similar ways, but on the British Isles
and in the Thuringian Basin populations contracted or relocated,
leaving these areas largely depopulated already before the onset of
the Younger Dryas/GS-1 cooling. Demographic models are used to link
these changes to the Laacher See-eruption and this research
demonstrates that we cannot sideline catastrophic environmental change
in our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history."

-----

David Christainsen

crunch wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:28 am, Garry Williams wrote:
On Dec 1, 12:06 pm, VtSkier wrote:

Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
no civilisation at the time.
Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?

Just asking.

Garry

My method is to probe recent Google Scholar articles -
Keywords: archaeology civilization "Younger Dryas" Europe

I got 235 hits.

Big whoop. Oddly, scholarship is not done on the basis of what
gets jammed into GS, nor on the basis of hits on keywords.

But you wouldn't understand, since you think you are a
professional, well, lots of stuff you aren't.

Here's one relevant article. Please note that
the author says "our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history",
not civilization -

But the ****ing article you posted said 'civilization'. You are
too incompetent to understand why that is wrong for the time.

snip


--
Tom

When Tyrants tremble, sick with fear,
And hear their death-knell ringing;
When friends rejoice, both far and near,
How can I keep from singing.

Tom McDonald 03/12/2009 20:47 wrote:
crunch wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:28 am, Garry Williams wrote:
On Dec 1, 12:06 pm, VtSkier wrote:

Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
no civilisation at the time.
Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?

Just asking.

Garry
My method is to probe recent Google Scholar articles -
Keywords: archaeology civilization "Younger Dryas" Europe

I got 235 hits.

Big whoop. Oddly, scholarship is not done on the basis of what
gets jammed into GS, nor on the basis of hits on keywords.

But you wouldn't understand, since you think you are a
professional, well, lots of stuff you aren't.

Here's one relevant article. Please note that
the author says "our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history",
not civilization -

But the ****ing article you posted said 'civilization'.

That is because he searched for 'civilisation'.

You are
too incompetent to understand why that is wrong for the time.


Don't you think that they regarded themselves as civilised people
and the Carls and Crunches as barbarians?


snip

On Dec 3, 2:47*pm, Tom McDonald wrote:
crunch wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:28 am, Garry Williams wrote:
On Dec 1, 12:06 pm, VtSkier wrote:

Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
* * *no civilisation at the time.
Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?

Just asking.

Garry

My method is to probe recent Google Scholar articles -
Keywords: *archaeology civilization "Younger Dryas" Europe

I got 235 hits. *

Big whoop. Oddly, scholarship is not done on the basis of what
gets jammed into GS, nor on the basis of hits on keywords.

Strawman argument.

But you wouldn't understand, since you think you are a
professional, well, lots of stuff you aren't.

Forget your career of maligning me as an egotist.

* *Here's one relevant article. *Please note that

the author says "our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history",
not civilization -

But the ****ing article you posted said 'civilization'. You are
too incompetent to understand why that is wrong for the time.
...

Take your carping off usenet.

David Christainsen - Meteorologist