Are there increasingly frequent and powerful storms, or are we just more aware of them in our world of instant global news? Randall has compiled a substantial list of those events recorded prior to significant fossil fuel consumption HERE
- Catastrophism (1)
- Climate Controversy (3)
- Discussion (3)
- Need to Read (1)
- new videos (1)
- News (14)
- Research EXpeditions (5)
- Site Updates (6)
Even around 1900 most of Europe had not weather data kept in a systematic way. Not to mention most sites in the USA. Not to mention the rest of the world. Our actual data goes back only decades in many places, and few go back more much than about 125 years. With this piddlingly short record worldwide. to think we have ascertained anything about the climate is nonsense. And tree rings as climate proxies? Sometime check out the history of the Divergence Problem regarding tree-rings as temperature proxies. Starting in the 1940s, tree rings started to diverge from thermometer records. This continued until basically now. That was what the Climategate Scandal was all about, BTW – faking the graphs, because tree rings didn’t agree anymore, and they couldn’t let the world know about it. And if they don’t have tree rings as a proxy for temperature, anything before the consistent thermometer era is blown out of the water. And all other proxies are directly or indirectly tied to tree rings. Add in that biologists use tree rings as proxie for rainfall. With two major factors as possible causes of tree ring widths and densities, anyone trying to say that either one is THE proxy for temps is blowing it out his ass. No one can separate out rainfall effects on tree rings versus temperature effects. BOTH are true. But neither one is linear with tree rings, not if both underlie tree ring widths. Ergo, the supposed science of dendroclimatology is not a science.
hi Randall. I watched the joe rogan podcasts with yourself and Graham Hancock where in you explained how the fingerlakes in ny were created by scouring. I not sure if you meant from glacial melt waterfalls or the ice itself. Also no one has found a crater for the younger dryas comet. I have always been avidly interested in astronomy and engineering of which the latter being my profession. After watching the podcasts I did go to google earth and studied the fingerlakes region. call me crazy but to me they looked like possibly stress fractures that may have been created by the combination of the emence weight of the ice, and the pressure of the comet hitting the ice (or exploding above it) with the ensuing melt water then immediately carving or scouring the cracks. please consider that I am not challenging you. I cant because all i know about geology is what I’ve heard from yourself and others. I feel though that there wouldn’t be a crater as such due to the mile or so of ice but there might be stress marks. in conclusion i would put the comet epicentre in pretty much the center of the great lakes region. if you believe otherwise i sincerely apologize for wasting your time but thank for reading. i deeply appreciate your common sense attitude. it’s very refreshing. thank you. Dan D.
Randall, are you interested in a discussion with other alternative scientists? I’m interested in discussing catastrophism etc and I can organize a group of scientists for discussion, if you like. We could discuss the crowd-funding effort too, certainly.