Slashdot Mirror
More Evidence For a Clovis-Killer Comet
fortapocalypse sends word that a new paper was published today in the journal Science on the hypothesis that a comet impact wiped out the Clovis people 12,900 years ago. (We discussed this hypothesis last year when it was put forth.) The new evidence is a layer of nanodiamonds at locations all across North America, at a depth corresponding to 12,900 years ago, none earlier or later. The researchers hypothesize that the comet that initiated the Younger Dryas, reversing the warming from the previous ice age, fragmented and exploded in a continent-wide conflagration that produced a layer of diamond from carbon on the surface. While disputing the current hypothesis, NASA's David Morrison allows, "They may have discovered something absolutely marvelous and unexplained."
The NYT article mentioned some of the diamond is hexagonal: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/science/02impact.html
This is a type of diamond that seems to form when meteors enter the atmosphere and it a called Lonsdaleite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonsdaleite
This material is of interest as a replacement for structural steel since it can be formed in a simple manner using chemistry. http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2008/01/anaximenes-way.html
It's worth pointing out that the Tunguska event left no crater. Lack of a crater is not a major problem with this hypothesis.
Mark 6:3 "This is the carpenter the son of Mary and the brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon, is it not? "
Goddamnit, not that hypothesis again. The paper in question that proposes the connection was authored by Bradley & Stanford, published in World Archaeology 36(4), and is titled "The north Atlantic ice edge corridor: a possible Palaeolithic route to the new World.". They propose a north Atlantic warm water current that would push solutrean tech users from the spanish peninsula to the new world. They base this on a hypothetical similarity between the clovis and solutrean points. There is no such thing. The best thing to come out of that paper is the monster put-down by Strauss, Meltzer & Goebel, published in the same journal a year later and titled "Ice Age Atlantis? Exploring the Solutrean- Clovis "connection"". Man, that read is amusing, and i heartily recommend it to anyone who wants to see the way to kick ass in academia.
Gilgamesh is older than that. It was handed down from before the pictograms that preceded cuneiform.
First, that 3500 BC date includes the pictogram phase. The characteristic cuneiform wedges didn't come until later.
Second, there's not any evidence that the Gilgamesh epic was handed down from earlier. The earliest versions of the Gilgamesh legend date from the third dynasty of Ur, beginning roughly 2150 BC. There is some historical evidence for an actual Gilgamesh, who is mentioned in the Sumerian king list. There's also some contemporary evidence for some of the other kings mentioned in the epic. If he did exist, he probably dates to around 2700 BC.
To be fair, the epic of Gilgamesh could certainly be based on older legends. There's just no evidence for it.
From the slashdot heading:
>> While disputing the current hypothesis, NASA's David Morrison allows, "They may have discovered something absolutely marvelous and unexplained."
From the article:
>> he said: "They may have discovered something absolutely marvelous and unexplained. But the impact hypothesis just doesn't make sense."
(bolds mine)
The Jihadi. It is nominally defined as the rate at which the zealot can destroy knowledge.
1 Jihadi = 1 Burning Library of Congress (BLoC) per fortnight.
Would that make the Crusade the Imperial unit? And if so, what's the conversion equation?