[meteorite-list] Mammoth Stew: end

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 00:19:04 -0800
Message-ID: <93aaac890712230019o108cbbafm2fc22e5ad6f3e5a0_at_mail.gmail.com>

E.P.,
After reading your last post, I've simply come to decide that this is
no longer worth the time.
Your selective replies, paired with your faulty logic - and failure to
even think or reason in a logical manner has left me with little hope
of ever bringing you to your senses.
I met with a few meteorite enthusiasts today, and those that had
followed along were generally of the same opinion as those who have
sent me emails, all of which generally stated that I wouldn't get
anywhere by trying to use reason on you.

I need only to point out a single question that you asked of me to
destroy your entire argument: "What other possibilities are there for
either set of data?"
The answer: I don't know.
I honestly can't give you one. But the fact of the matter is that you
can't prove that either an airburst or ice-impact occurred without, in
all likelihood, several years, if not decades of intense geological
field studies, and this seems to be the point on which our
methodologies differ.
You say "there's cosmic dust, and no crater - must be an airburst or
ice impact."
I say, "there's cosmic dust and no crater - must be...well, we don't
know for sure quite what yet, but we have some good ideas, and given
time, we'll see."

Your use of questionable evidence such as native american stories and
those mammoth tusks with bits of iron in them (you used them as though
they consisted of reputable evidence for the formation of the 31kBCE
dust layer in your last email, when we've already proven that this
cannot be the case...the same goes for so much more of your
evidence...phew), in the face of your simple lack of any good evidence
supporting either of your impact/airburst theories just isn't
something that I feel need to be addressed further; they say enough on
their own.

I can go on, but I won't. Reply if you will; I know that everyone
else on here is with me and awaits your reply, if not with a smile at
what you'll say, then with a smile for no other reason than that they
won't have to worry their delete button for much longer.

Merry Christmas,
Jason

On Dec 22, 2007 10:37 AM, E.P. Grondine <epgrondine at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi all -
>
> So we have a mammoth leg boiling on the fire. We now
> have to get it off, and its hot.
>
> > The only person in denial here is you, who refuses
> to > accept the fact that he can't possibly know with
> any
> > certainty what sort of cosmic cataclysms caused
> > either dust layer.
>
> There's one dust layer (10,900 BCE) and a rain of
> molten iron (31,000 BCE)
>
> >Ahhh, right. You go believe that. Darren's post
> sums >up just about everyone else's opinion of that as
> well.
> >Legends are not science. They tend to have somewhat
> >historical roots, but we're talking about science
> >here, not a picture book about native american
> >storytelling.
>
> The complete inability of Europeans to realize the
> extent of the oral corpus is remarkable. Historical
> traditions are usually lumped together with
> instructional tales for children, amusing jokes,
> romances, hunting adventures, etc...
>
> Think of it as a library, instead.
>
> >What you have is a lack of proof for any known impact
> > process, and you seem to want to attribute that to
> an
> > airburst.
>
> Sterling brought up airburst as a teaching aid, I
> didn't. Were their also airbursts at the same time as
> the massive impact(s) around 10,900 BCE? In my
> opinion,
> yes.
>
> The only proof Jason will accept is large holes in the
> ground, or burnt bones. The indisputable
> extra-terrestrial markers just don't sink in. That's
> "Denial" with a capital D.
>
> I observed earlier that in science, we don't mistate
> evidence in order to invalidate a hypothesis; we also
> don't mistate hyposthesis in order to invalidate them.
> To which Jason replied:
>
> >You're not saying anything here. The point is that
> >you have no evidence. No evidence =/= airburst.
> >I think you're going to find it hard to get me to
> >believe much of what you say - especially when the
> >sole things that my beliefs are grounded in are
> >logic, the laws of science, and mathematics.
>
> I would suggest that denial plays the main role in
> Jaon's thinking. As far as his "beliefs" go, I don't
> know if he's even gotten to the point of understanding
> English rationalism.
>
> > I have acknowledged multiple times that I see the
> ice > impact as a (an albeit unlikely) possible
> explanation > for the geologic evidence that has been
> found.
> > I repeatedly state that the ice impact is a
> > possibility - you're the one who expected to find a
> > crater given the evidence already discovered.
>
> >You failed to include above the quote that clearly
> > stated that you believed that a crater exists to be
> > found. Maybe you've changed your point of view; I
> > don't know, but you clearly stated that you believed
> > that a crater exists to be found.
>
> After all of this, Jason understands ice cratering,
> though he still thinks boths impacts were "unlikely",
> despite the undeniable extra-terrestrial markers.
> Well, there's some relief.
>
> What I hope for in the case of the 31,000 BCE event is
> the recovery of large irons, maybe a crater. For the
> 10,900 BCE event I think that a market for impactite
> samples may develop.
>
> >Just because we don't have a solid explanation yet
> >doesn't mean that a particular one of the countless
> > possibilities that could explain it(however likely
> it >is to have generated the effects seen) is
> certainly
> >the right one.
>
> Just one question: What other possibilities are there
> for either set of data?
>
> >Now that we've established that I know more about the
> >dynamics of an impact and meteoritics in general, I
> >really don't see how you can honestly persist in your
> >ramblings.
>
> ahem.
>
> >Oh - and I will admit; I'll perpetuate this damn
> >thread as long as you agree to do the same by posting
> >a reply.
>
> good hunting, all
> E.P. Grondine
> Man and Impact in the Americas
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Sun 23 Dec 2007 03:19:04 AM PST