tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Unbelievable that such a thing would just be flooded away on purpose.
This has happened many times over thousands of years. More recently in order to create dams in various parts of the worlds valleys (where people lived because the ground was very fertile) needed to be flooded. As the ice from the ice ages melted so many civilizations where probably washed away too. It's too bad not enough efort is made to search the coastline but the cost would be enormous.Unbelievable that such a thing would just be flooded away on purpose.
Might wanna start a few weeks earlier, so you don't miss your approaching doom during a coughing fit.Welp, looks like a good day to start smoking cigarettes.
Might wanna start a few weeks earlier, so you don't miss your approaching doom during a coughing fit.
I don't think that would be an extinction event. I saw a graph where they estimate it would hit along a line reaching from the Philippines across the Pacific, all the way to new york. If it hit the water near Asia it would probably send a massive Tsunami that would hit the west coast of North and South America.Oh, I mean go ahead and start now. No sense planning past the next decade or two.
I don't think that would be an extinction event. I saw a graph where they estimate it would hit along a line reaching from the Philippines across the Pacific, all the way to new york. If it hit the water near Asia it would probably send a massive Tsunami that would hit the west coast of North and South America.
Graham Hancock and Randal Carlson theorize multiple impacts hit the North American Ice Sheet causing a rapid welt as opposed to a gradual one put forth by modern scientists. Had a 90 meter in diameter asteroid hit the ice that could have cause much of the damage they are talking about.
Cool as hell.
Part of the story behind lost civilizations is where did they go. One of the theories is that meteors wiped them out. I post info pertaining to how likely meteor strikes are and the type of damage the can produce. We travel through the taurid meteor stream twice a year. It mostly results in shooting stars but there is a chance that this is where larger meteors came from that caused extreme devastation when they came into our atmosphere,Hmmmmm, we seem to have deviated from the thread topic (he says with no sense of irony ...).
It's "Science Adjacent" ...Shouldn't this thread be in the entertainment sub-forum?
"To err is human, which is really not a very good excuse.Shouldn't this thread be in the entertainment sub-forum?
Seems that long quote should have been attributed to Tom Siegfried. Unless you're him, in which case ... thanks."To err is human, which is really not a very good excuse.
And to err as a scientist is worse, of course, because depending on science is supposed to be the best way for people to make sure they’re right. But since scientists are human (most of them, anyway), even science is never free from error. In fact, mistakes are fairly common in science, and most scientists tell you they wouldn’t have it any other way. That’s because making mistakes is often the best path to progress." ...
"To err is human, which is really not a very good excuse.
And to err as a scientist is worse, of course, because depending on science is supposed to be the best way for people to make sure they’re right. But since scientists are human (most of them, anyway), even science is never free from error. In fact, mistakes are fairly common in science, and most scientists tell you they wouldn’t have it any other way. That’s because making mistakes is often the best path to progress."
and I would say the interpretation/understanding of history falls into the same boat.
The quotation marks made me curious who authored them. At least you weren't quoting some guy who sat next to you on the crosstown bus. Sources are important to credibility as well as context.oh sorry. i thought the " ...... " would have indicated it was a quote.
The comment was directed at me because he is a troll who lacks imagination.This is of course quite true. Our understanding of history is continually being revised in light of new discovery, which is the way it should be. Even just in the past few years, we have come to new understandings about the world's most carefully-studied places like Stonehenge and Pompeii. Let alone the kinds of things people stumble across in the desert or jungle, unknown for centuries. Discovery leads to correction... that's science.
I think the comment about the entertainment subforum was directed more toward the "speculative history" aspects of this thread, and perhaps specifically toward the Allan Savory video above where he basically says peer review is incompatible with scientific advancement. One cannot claim to have a desire to improve science while being contemptuous of the fundamentals of scientific thought.