Talk:Younger Dryas impact hypothesis: Difference between revisions

Geology Stub‑class

Talk:Younger Dryas impact hypothesis is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Though the results section reports multiple issues with irregular extinction patterns, none of the cited articles discuss the YD event directly. Perhaps these should be removed or "softened" until a peer-reviewed publication is available. zaiken 06:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

where's the crater? On a glacier? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.216.155.121 (talk) 13:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't suggest there is a crater and does mention the object may have disintegrated. -- SEWilco (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paleoindians practiced burning. How do you separate burning from fire due to impact? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.251.36.126 (talk) 17:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The latest hypothesis is based on the discovery of nanodiamonds. These are only produced by an earth impact, not an air burst. Thus, the intro needs to be edited. The question remains open as to where the impact was. I'm certain they're looking now. Tmangray (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right now that hypothesis is subject to considerable debate right now. However, the reason why there is not a crater is that it could be multiple small impacts, that were either erased by subsequent glaciation (or glacial lake bursts) or hit the Laurentide ice sheet, which would have left behind little evidence. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 19:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any mechanism that could produce nanodiamonds without a considerable collision with the surface of the earth itself. If it did hit an ice sheet, it must have blasted right through it, and thus ought to have left a trace somewhere. It may be that the crater was quickly filled with glacial sediments and remains hidden for the time being. Tmangray (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of possible relevance: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/805/3 The Younger Dryas initiation apparently occurred over a time span of a single year, about 12,00 years ago.

RE: The crater - The Tunguska event left no crater.

131.81.200.92 (talk) 17:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kennett DJ, Kennett JP, West A; et al. (2009). "Nanodiamonds in the younger dryas boundary sediment layer". Science (journal). 323 (5910): 94. doi:10.1126/science.1162819. PMID 19119227. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link). I'm not sure what it says (I've read a bunch of news articles, but I don't trust those) because I can't access the actual article. Maybe someone can get it and write a summary. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 16:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]