Timing and duration of North American glacial lake discharges and the Younger Dryas climate reversal, John A. Rayburn, Thomas M. Cronin, David A. Franzi, Peter L.K. Knuepfer and Debra A. Willard, Quaternary Research, 75, 541–551 (2011)

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003358941100024X

Radiocarbon-dated sediment cores from the Champlain Valley (northeastern USA) contain stratigraphic and micropaleontologic evidence for multiple, high-magnitude, freshwater discharges from North American proglacial lakes to the North Atlantic. Of particular interest are two large, closely spaced outflows that entered the North Atlantic Ocean via the St. Lawrence estuary about 13,200–12,900 cal yr BP, near the beginning of the Younger Dryas cold event. We estimate from varve chronology, sedimentation rates and proglacial lake volumes that the duration of the first outflow was less than 1 yr and its discharge was approximately 0.1 Sv (1 Sverdrup=10⁶ m³ s⁻¹). The second outflow lasted about a century with a sustained discharge sufficient to keep the Champlain Sea relatively fresh for its duration. According to climate models, both outflows may have had sufficient discharge, duration and timing to affect meridional ocean circulation and climate. In this report we compare the proglacial lake discharge record in the Champlain and St. Lawrence valleys to paleoclimate records from Greenland Ice cores and Cariaco Basin and discuss the two-step nature of the inception of the Younger Dryas.

Unless that water came through Minnesota, it must have come through the Lake Nipigon drainage channels, because it appears that didn’t come through at Thunder Bay. For it to have come through the Nipigon drainage channels, something catastrophic must have disrupted the ice sheet there, and that is precisely the location of the mysterious geomorphism. Corroborating evidence is the appearance of the nitrogen spike in the ice cores, cubic nanodiamonds at the YD interface, and the collapse of the ozone layer and increased solar radiation and solar protons at the surface from the vaporization plume of the impact injected catastrophically into the stratosphere. Further evidence occurs from the acoustic soundings data of the catastrophic drainage at the bottom of Lake Superior as described in this Masters Thesis, and the existence of an anomalously large field of drainage sands to the West of Lake Nipigon itself. I envision subglacial drainage through the Lake Nipigon basin and down into the disruption of the Laurentide ice sheet in the Black Sturgeon river area, which was subsequently scoured away by the subsequent Lake Nipigon drainage phase several thousand years later at 8200 BP.

CHARACTERIZING THE DISCHARGE FEATURES OF GLACIAL LAKE AGASSIZ DURING THE POST-MARQUETTE PERIOD USING MARINE SEISMIC-REFLECTION METHODS

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY JESSICA LYNN GARY

http://www.d.umn.edu/geology/research/thesis/GARY_MASTERS_THESIS.pdf

I don’t quite follow the rest of your reasoning, as this was a relatively small and localized recent impact that produced mostly water vapor and carbon fragments, and left only a small 10 to 25 kilometer in diameter blast wave remnant there, if it occurred at all, which is highly debatable at this point.

Perhaps the reason we’ve overlooked comet impacts because the differentiated comet cores are the source of crustal rock, like gneiss, granite, schist, quartzite, dolomite and shale. Erosion of primary comet rock results in sediments that form secondary terrestrial sedimentary rock laid down in horizontal strata.

And if endothermic chemical reactions between water ice and carbon ices clamp the impact shock wave below the melting point of rock, obscuring the impact site. And the reaction products may be abiotic oil, the origin of the petroleum on earth.

And extinction events may not be the result of occasional Kuiper Belt carbonaceous chondrite impacts, but entire gravitationally bound comet clusters from the Outer Oort Cloud resulting in a blizzard of simultaneous impacts.

More at:
http://www.hillscloud.wordpress.com

Vostok was the very first theme I ran across and I more or less grabbed it on the fly.

I promised myself I wouldn’t invest any effort in this than was absolutely necessary. The previous Ajax version of this blog used Blackletterhead, which was a macabre Halloween style theme. I’m either going to quit doing this altogether, or switch software out of WordPress. I was just curious to see how WordPress had evolved after three years.

Do you have any comments on the subject of the post? Smoking hole in the ice 12,900 BP?

Real or imagined? Truthiness or falsified?

Only lame and psychotic internet stalkers would think that American scientists exercising their constitutionally protected right to liberty and freedom of speech, by performing and publishing scientific results, freely available in the peer reviewed literature and on the internet, open to any rational criticism and refutation, would be a threat to the nation. Why do you hate freedom, sir?

You could try reason and scientific methods. They work for Hugh Mann. So does satire.

Of course you will, you and your Uncle Ted. Right after the election.

Tea baggers think threatening scientists will solve all of their scientific problems. Good luck with that. While your plotting your crackpot revenge against consensus science, you might want to consider the concept of multiple lines of evidence. Wow. Scientists fighting back.

You think you crackpots can handle that?

Why do psychotic internet namejacking stalkers continue to accuse progressive scientists of hating people they couldn’t give a rat’s ass about? You can’t even spell his name right, and you certainly don’t know enough about basic math and physics to be able to follow the nuances of the statistical mechanics. McIntyre’s work has been soundly analyzed and debunked in the peer reviewed literature, at RealClimate and DeepClimate and elsewhere, by world class statisticians and climate scientists. Science is defined by reality and actual and published results, not by credentials. Go beat your dead horse elsewhere.

Comments are closed, Helmut. But I can suggest that you start from the beginning, since you appear to know little or nothing about which you speak. Knowing a little something about about the subject matter is usually considered a prerequisite to discussion.

Harold Lewis Resignation

I already fixed your link. The bad phrase at the end of the link was ‘linking.htm’. I didn’t add it, you did or your browser did, or perhaps it was something in the way you cut and past it. As I said, it happens all the time. I didn’t notice it, I just glanced at the html and it looked right so I left it as is. Practice makes perfect! Now you can go back to stalking scientists with whom you disagree, for merely exercising their constitutionally protected first amendment right to freedom of speech and expression and publication of scientific results, because you don’t have a clue what science is and how it works. If you want bad science, try this. It may be your cup of tea.

Now that this post is obsolete, and since Harold Lewis got his nice little international stipend from the greenhouse gas industry and is good to go, which was his primary goal anyways, this discussion is over, as I have far better things to do than to engage anti-science demagogues.

Hugh Mann says : any bad links are your own. I corrected it for you. Happy now? I hand assemble HTML like I hand assemble IA-32. Science and technology progresses by making mistakes. Typos are the easiest mistakes to make, greatly exacerbated by cut and paste and xml auto verifications, etc.

We notice that working LINKS were provided by Hugh Mann. It was already stated that my earlier LINK was empty plain text to provide for “falsifiable” activities that Hugh Mann fell head over heels for.

One problem. The link to Harold Lewis Resignation (this is plain text here) was apparently edited by Hugh Mann in such a fashion as to render the link unworkable. It’s a simple HTML syntax error that Hugh himself apparently inserted.

(No, I didn’t, and if I would have tried it by clicking on it I would have caught it. Even people that post hundreds of links a day occasionally post bad links. I once implemented post editing on an older version of this blog, but this isn’t a Ajax blog, it’s a science and technology satire blog.)

For some strange reason (“pseudoscience” antipathies, “warmist” gullibilities,…whatever), Hugh insists on not providing or making available a link to Harold Lewis’ resignation letter, the very point of this blog(b).

Hugh Man say : It’s called free choice. Apparently you are opposed to that, for some reason. Have you considered moving to a more authoritarian environment or country? Or do you simply wish to impose your authoritarian views on me, or … er … US?

So, I’ll try to get thru Hugh Mann’s defense barriers once again: Harold Lewis Resignation.

That too was a bad link too, i.e. – no link at all. I corrected it for you. Practice makes perfect!

[Not bad for my second effort at HTML link writing in almost 10 years. That compares to the hundreds of goof-ups of Hugh Mann since Ajax, which most people know to be merely just part of the name of an obsolete missile system, the defunct Nike-Ajax.]

Now it’s an indispensable part of your everyday internet life. Ajax isn’t a programming language, it’s a server side – browser side communications concept. Most people in the business moved on to smart phones and net tops after Ajax, and now another synthesis is taking place, where no one knows where it will go.

Hugh Mann, being a condensed matter physicist, is more concerned about the fundamentals that drive these industries forward, so that jobs may be created, and science may progress.

Hugh Mann is a king maker and an industry and job creator.

Good luck with the abrupt climate change.

My LINK was there with “nothing” to link to. It was, as you say, “falsifiable” by any jerk who comes along and clicks on obviously clear text. We are still waiting for a LINK from Hugh which takes your readers to Harold Lewis’ original resignation letter.

(Note : the above LINKS were provided by Hugh Mann.)

Hugh Mann replies : No, you are. I’m not, and the readers may have their own opinions. It’s called freedom and liberty, remember? My suggestion is that you study the concept further, because so far here you’ve failed in it epically.

Demonstrating HTML skills has never been a goal to please you. You can pretty much falsify yourself, I see.

Try this: Harold Lewis Resignation (Link Corrected).

Ok, that’s better. After you’ve done a few thousand of them it’ll become second nature. I really don’t have the time or the inclination to do the simple little things with the software, like say, changing the comment verb from ‘say’ to ‘says’. Maybe someday I’ll hack up ‘the blob‘ into a ‘blob‘, but I doubt it. Ajax is so … like … 2005.

You do not have too many cranks to choose from. You do not have a forum here, on this hit-piece blog about Lewis, despite your claims to Lewis et all NOT being a “newbie” blog even though you had no (nada, zero, null) comments posted.

Unless…of course…yes, there is the possibility that you actually deleted all prior comments as being from cranks even before the Harold Lewis story itself broke out and you were guided by “pings from many years ago”.

Are you really off your gird?

No, I’m off the grid. You spelled ‘grid’ wrong.

Try this link for size: LINK.

Lewis is a bought and paid for senile emeritus crank.

You are an incompetent stalker as well. I’ve owned this domain for a decade, and I know how to write simple robot.txt scripts. You’re right about one thing, though, this is not only not a forum, it’s not your forum, and thus I deleted the endless nymjacking diatribes, since they were both link and content, and indeed, satire free. My suggestion to you is that if you want your own forum and blog, then go out and get one. Try Blogspot if you can’t handle WordPress. Canned forums are a dime a dozen as well. And I’ll continue to defend your freedom to be real stupid right here.

Please decipher Dean’s remark (snip complete nonsense) …

Er … no thanks. I’ve got better things to do than give you cranks a forum. From now on, if any of you retards want to post here, unless it contains a minimum of a single link to falsifiable hypotheses or verifiable evidence on the topic at hand, you aren’t going to see it posted here.

I’ve since deleted most of them except for the originals. You, on the other hand, unlike Dean, have offered nothing to the discussion, such as it is. Dean, Gilbert and Hugh Mann speak for themselves only, as do you. Now what were you saying again?

Because I must have missed the content of your post, and this Harold Lewis crap is getting old.

I see he’s purchased himself a seat on the advisory panel of Benny Peiser’s Global Warming Policy Foundation in the UK, where he and the other senile emeritus octogenarian contrarians can live out their final years with a small pension from the obscenely profitable greenhouse gas industry, while making a mockery of science and truth. And all it cost him was his reputation.

And this isn’t a ‘newbie blog’. It started out as an Ajax blog. You know what Ajax is, right? This place still gets pings from stuff posted years ago, and the very first visitor here was the President of the United States of America. So when you visit this blog or search for it using google, you are being watched, and not just by Ol’ Hugh Mann. You’re just gonna have to trust me on that one.

As I read over Kiefer’s post, I get no sense of any suggestion of conspiratorializing in either Kiefer or Mann. Kiefer’s remark was an assertion of a fact observed by him that Hugh Mann’s blog popped up high in a Google search list when it was a “newbie” (i.e. no comments yet posted to it). That was the very reason Kiefer apparently even got to see Mann’s blog. Within I believe it was said by Kiefer a period of about one week, Mann’s post had just a handful of comments posted …and was nowhere (“way, way, way down”) near the top of the search return by Google.

This is an indication of, well, not neccesarily “lack of interest” by the broader Internet community in Mann’s blog (if that makes Mann feel better), but simply a fact that Mann’s blog recorded just a few hits by Google’s counting. Does this help underappreciated Hugh Mann feel better about his hardly noticed blog?

Regardless, since we are not particularly concerned about Hugh Mann’s feelings but in Hugh Mann’s brilliant Internet “scientific” research efforts, in order to maintain a kind of “defogged” clarity in the world, it is asserted by me that the remark by Kiefer regurgitated by Dean was fact based, not conspiratorial at all.

Advancing the Science of Climate Change
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12782

Of course, the conspiracy nuts who are celebrating Lewis’ letter probably think the NAS, the AAAS, the RS, and almost every other scientific academy are in on the trillion-dollar conspiracy (funded no doubt by Soros), since there is no scientific academy in the world that challenges the AGW hypothesis.

As to:

When I did an Internet search on Harold Lewis two days ago, Hugh Mann’s blog popped up near the top of the list of thousands of returns to the search. Mann’s blog was a “newbie” blog and had no comments

Undoubtedly just another part of the same conspiracy. Soldier on, Hugh!

Now let’s talk about energy. You know about agriculture, right? That requires lots of petroleum to till the fields, fertilize them, and then to reap the harvests and then transport them to market right? Now where would civilization be without agriculture on this planet, eh? Ok, so oil and gas is the source of energy for agriculture, right? But how do plants grow, John? Don’t they require, er … light? Have you included that in your calculations? No, wait, I remember now. I’m thinking!

You haven’t actually done any calculations, have you.

Yeah, we know, all that radiation stuff.

Yeah, I know, all that frantic arm wavin n’ stuff.

You get rude.

As rude as the guy whose name I can’t remember telling me “Your deadmeat”, while misspelling ‘your’ after criticizing my spelling of Nekton?

Otherwise…you may be deemed to be a replacement for Ted Kazynsky.

And that’s not rude, nooooooo … Grandma! We need more milk and cookies! Hurry!

I’ve been following the recent comments on this blog and I am torn between rying to favor your own views versus favoring those of Gilbert Kiefer.

Rather than trying to work out who is better in terms of argument skills or in the positions held, since it is your blog page I will just point out the most recent illogic I have seen in your comments made in your replies to the other posters. [In general, you lose badly in debate points, mostly by shear illogic.]

You stated that you “…can see the folly of attempting to heat the water for my hot baths and showers, and boiling the water for my coffee, with nuclear energy, because I’m not so lazy, stupid and apathetic that I can’t take the time to figure out how to physically, chemically and electronically downshift the abundant light bathing the planet Earth….”

Over 50 years of research and engineering to harness nuclear energy can hardly be deemed lazy, apathetic, etc. Otherwise the words mean nothing in any human context including that of doing research and engineering to use solar is deemed “lazy”, etc. Your words are sheer nonsensical verbalization,s like “duh”, “wuzz”, etc.

Usually, the word “folly” is applied to hopeless, likely or proven dismal failures, like a ship powered by perpetual motion engines, etc. But nuclear energy can hardly be described as folly in this sense. It’s not even just attempting but is succesfully (indirectly thru the electric power grid) boiling water for coffee, heating water for hot baths, lighting street lamps, running computer web servers, charging up my “earth friendly” (whatever that means?) battery-powered hybrid car, etc.

The world is successfully being powered by nuclear energy, in the US by about 20% of its national electric power grid, in France by about 75% of its electric power grid. [The hypocritical Germans outlaw nuclear plants intheir country...but still go ahead and purchase much of its electric power needs from France. Thank you France for your (nuclear) rationaility.]

Yeah, we know, all that radiation stuff. But there are multiple order-of-magnitudes more radiation released to the environment by coal mining than by the nuclear power industry and one cross-country flight exposes a passenger more to potentially harmful radiation (yeah, from the sun) than an entire year from the nuclear power industry.

Frankly, Hugh, you seem to go off the deep end. You get rude. You need to calm down, take some valium…and rethink your whole place in our modern technological world. Even yellow submarines work better, dive deeper, and last longer…when they are nuclear powered.

Otherwise…you may be deemed to be a replacement for Ted Kazynsky.

Not at all, I certainly don’t DENY that radiological actinides and nuclides exist, and that they emit radiation in the form of photons and particles with energies roughly ten billion times the energy of the roughly 35 meV that defines ordinary life requires, and I certainly don’t DENY that these quanta and particles are capable of blasting columnar defects straight through human tissues, shredding and ionizing the DNA of millions of your cells in the process. And I certainly don’t DENY that one of the most convenient and pleasurable thing for biological human lives involves at most the boiling of water at roughly 35 meV. I am thrilled that radionuclides exist, because they make excellent historical proxies.

So, being the competent theoretical physicist I am, certainly I am familiar with the concepts of entropy and exergy, and so I can see the folly of attempting to heat the water for my hot baths and showers, and boiling the water for my coffee, with nuclear energy, because I’m not so lazy, stupid and apathetic that I can’t take the time to figure out how to physically, chemically and electronically downshift the abundant light bathing the planet Earth at energies that range from one to three electron volts, into the range that is necessary for my comfort and convenience, which is for the most part 35 meV or less, roughly one hundred times lower than those energies.

The Nekton Gamma experience was decades ago, and after that it sat around for yet another decade rusting away, and is now in the hands of yet another individual that may or may not take the time to rebuild it and recertify it, and since I was only involved with it for the science, you may want to forgive me for not remembering how to spell it. But the aluminum catamaran still moves freight for me and my friends, and to tell you the truth, I can’t even remember what the name of it is. We go through a lot of boats. I’m pretty sure he changed the name after he yanked it off the rocks where it was impaled by a hurricane, and then rebuilt it in his personal boatyard.

I forgot your name already, but grandma will serve you milk and cookies when you come back.

But, inadvertently on your part, you’ve now made it clearer from your last post the source of your animus against Harold Lewis and his career in the nuclear science world. It’s likely (in spirit) that you are actually a technophobe who also thinks that, for example, the nuclear “genie” of knowledge about nuclear physics and the discovery that the natural world includes the possibility of nuclear explosions…that the nuclear genie can be put back into the bottle so to speak, that the knowledge learned can be unlearned and we then return to a former state of innocence. Yes, Hugh, you inadvertenely let us in to all of this political fantasy world you live in.

Back to Lubos. If you think that Lubos’ theories are crackpot then it is Lubos who has them, not me. However, I admitedly enjoy Lubos’ satire (as already indicated) of people (mostly in the scientific world and also pseudoscientists like Al Gore) who deserve his satire. Although I doubt that Lubos would even bother with you, he could make satirical mincemeat of you, a fellow but failing science satirist if you will.

As to your Arxiv (sic) persona, never have I gone to arXiv.org articles to see the pages identified as from Arxiv (sic). Your spelling problems continue to raise suspicion about the bona fide or misrepresentation of yourself on this blog. You surely would not be the first of such disengenuous Internet creatures…who have blogs, websites, Facebooks…whatever.

One final remark. You ask: “Tell me what you know about the Younger Dryas. It interests me.” What this questions means to me is that I now have gotten you to where I want you to be. You want something specifically of me…a thought, a fact, an idea that I hold. Your interest cockles are dendrites are stimulated.

But you won’t get any communication from me anymore. You’re a scientific fraud. Your deadmeat. Your passe.

So long.