Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis (YDIH) - Prospects for a physics-based model

Examination of some of the objections that have been raised against the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis and whether it is possible to build a physics-based model with the data that has been collected thus far.

[joeampolo]

Insight and diligence. I like your work.

[andrewt]

I always enjoy your videos. Thanks for feeding my intellectual curiosity!

[kevinmalone]

great presentation again. helpful. insightful. believable...

[lynnwood]

My family has had a long line of civil engineers whose work required much field work in the survey of drainage areas and railroad and canal routes.

That is, they had to observe land forms critically and often would be in watercourses observing.

They would find traces of ancient human and animal activity that just stopped. They would speculate as to why European settlers found so much native ore that was not exploited and why no giant beasts of old that had lived in the ice free lands had survived.

These were family conversations mentioned in discussion of genealogy about matters that puzzled them, not subjects discussed in professional works but in private speculation.

Generations of Curiosity.

[cosmicrancher]

I always look forward to your videos. Does the triangulation from the elliptical craters back to the proposed impact site take into account the time the ice is inflight and rotational velocity of the earth at the latitude of the Carolina Bays ? It seems to me, the time inflight might be hard to calculate. Would a longer inflight time place the primary impact sit closer to Greenland ?

[donready]

Thank you for your research and ideas. Science is usually two steps forward and one back as the old ideas are proven inadequate for the new evidence.

[kerrymills]

Thank you for amazing work and explanations!
Did this impact occur when sea levels were much lower? Since Carolina Bays not far from present-day east coast I wonder if remnants of craters or other evidence is in shallow waters. Assuming too N. America was populated at the time there may be some of the largest settlements (even prehistoric 'cities') not far offshore... perhaps a good place to look would be where rivers met the shore 12500 years ago. Are there high resolution sea bottom charts available?

[peterkelly]

Thanks again for an insightful assessment. When I first began trying to understand pre history, I thought that 12.9K years was too recent for a near global extinction event. Thanks to yours & Carlson's work, I have much clearer picture of the Younger Dryas period from an esoteric & a rational, scientific perspective.

[worldbridger]

Very inspiring diligence, love your work! It is a very good question, so just to clarify, WHO are all the main proponents of the YDIH? Say, serious researchers or academics who have dedicated time and given results... I also believe the community is able to put pressure on tackling this issue, ultimately changing the history books, doing what needs to be done. It would be shameful to reject compelling evidence of such a dramatic event due to laziness or malpractice of simple academic methods of deduction.

[garywheeler]

Yes, the Saginaw Impact Event threw huge amounts of ice into space which landed over the land of many states of the future US. It also caused widespread extinctions. Also catastrophic fires as far away as islands off the California coast. The YD was a bad time to be alive, 12, 900 years ago. I hope proponents are willing to take into account the Carolina bays as a way of establishing the physics of the impact but the real difficulty may be in estimating the deformation of the bedrock and lithosphere deep under the Saginaw crater and its contribution to the total.

[Raptorman]

I have two problems with the Carolina Bays hypothesis: first, the angles don't line up with the Saginaw Bay origin and the Coriolis effect doesn't explain that change in angle; second, dating of the bays indicates a much older age perhaps extending to 100K years. Mind you, the bays are fascinating and the explanations made by opponents of the impact hypotheses for there formation seem unreasonable -- formation from secondary ice seems feasible if the angles and ages made sense. So, I would like to see a better explanation for why the angles point to a more southwest origin and how the ages of the bays, as presently described, are wrong and that the correct dates should be 12.8K years ago.

[katherinemcloughlin]

Is it possible that the dating of the Carolina Bays date differently because of the depth the ejected materials that would be in the surface materials surrounding it coming from different layers as it was heated and ejected out?

[marksims]

The impact crater is most likely in lake Michigan, the large arc centered around Holland Michigan is all that remains of the crater rim, there were airbursts and other impacts along the path you suggest but the big boy hit about 50 miles west of holland, splashed out superheated glacier water at near perfect 45 degree angles carving lake Michigan and lake erie, then another impact around Saginaw carved lakes Huron and Ontario. The pattern is obvious, you showed it to me, I just so happen to know that up close the coast of that area looks like a gigantic crater rim that drops hundreds of feet into lake Michigan,

[danothemano]

Amazing stuff! This will surely shake the world to it's very core... Or at least it should! One question: When does the next one come?

[metalman]

A 31-kilometer-wide impact crater found beneath Hiawatha Glacier in northwest Greenland

[wonniewonsyld]

you presented the new facts/opinion; but you did not really weigh in, do you agree or not?

[Sordaz]

Have you made contact with Firestone or any other of the YDIH coauthors? If so, what did they have to say?

[jartsan]

The amount of evidence in favour to an impact seems to be piling up day by day. I agree with this idea. The more I look into it, the more obvious it becomes.

While looking into meteors in general, I found this website with a lengthy explanation on these impact events.

I will drop in the link but before doing that I have to say that once you open it up, there will be a long list of words explained and it might be misleading to think thats it. Scroll down through them and the actual knowledge part begins.

It is a Long text with a lot of scientific stuff in it.

[bobroberts]

Your videos are great - even if all your conclusions may not be accurate (I can't see any problems with them, mind you) it's still important to explore the possibilities you raise and the evidence you present in support, which seems pretty sound to me. It seems that you are running into the same sort of refusal to consider alternatives that are a large part of the durability of the ongoing "humans are a major cause of climate change" fraud.