Tree rings, supernovas, and 11000 bc

Since the apps i use to do most of my work are currently down, decided to do some light reading at Science Daily. Came across the following article, which is interesting in its own right:

Tree Rings May Hold Clues To Past Supernovas

A summary of this article:

Massive explosions of energy happening thousands of light-years from Earth may have left traces in our planet's biology and geology, according to new research.

But the part that caught my attention was:

He found that of the eight closest supernovas studied, all seemed to be associated with unexplained spikes in the radiocarbon record on Earth. He considers four of these to be especially promising candidates. Take the case of a former star in the Vela constellation. This celestial body, which once sat about 815 lightyears from Earth, went supernova roughly 13,000 years ago. Not long after that, radiocarbon levels jumped up by nearly 3% on Earth -- a staggering increase.

Being a good human, i recognize patterns. And the pattern of things relating to the time of roughly 11000 bc, and the cataclysm in the northern hemisphere, is definitely a recurring theme. From the Carolina Bays, to the extinction of megafauna, Younger Dryas, the drumlin hills throughout north America...even the long standing Clovis theory. It all seems to have a conjuction that is 13k years old.

The mentioned supernova has a dating with an error margin of 1500 years. It is also 800 light years away. So on the shoulder ranges of the error rate, it could be something that has no real bearing. But I figured with this being ATS and all...it was worth a mention.

So often over many years I have read in "non-scientific" sites and magazines that the end of the last ice age was caused by something globally catastrophic and was also the end of a supposed "golden age" of an intelligent human species.

Then now, 20 or so years later "actual" scientific community starts to catch up. It is amazing how much our scientific community poopoo's things that seem quite easy to prove if you just actually look.

It amazes me. 30 years ago I was 9 years old and humanity barely discovered an exoplanet outside of our system. Life on earth was believed to be more biblical than scientific, and most believed earth to be 6,000 years old instead of 4.54 billion. Now we’re finding far off planets and galaxies by the day, hominid skeletons 4.4 million years old, evidence of “advanced”civilizations from 10+ thousand years ago, and we can determine the effect of a friggin supernova that had an affect on Earth 11,000 years ago by studying tree rings.

I hope we can survive the effects of 2020 because I really, really, really want to see what we can discover with another 30 years of scientific discovery.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Check out the Subaru telescope.

"The largest sample ever found of the most distant exploding stars called supernovae have been discovered by a team of Israeli and Japanese astronomers, who used a device called the Subaru Telescope, located at the 4,200 meter-high summit of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii."

m.jpost.com...

The article is 9 years old, but it's still pretty interesting.

a reply to: Assassin82

I was alive and sentient 30 years ago and raised in a very Christian community and I don't remember anyone that took the biblical age of the earth to be correct.

As a matter of fact, I didn't know anyone that believed that.

originally posted by: Fools
So often over many years I have read in "non-scientific" sites and magazines that the end of the last ice age was caused by something globally catastrophic and was also the end of a supposed "golden age" of an intelligent human species.

Then now, 20 or so years later "actual" scientific community starts to catch up. It is amazing how much our scientific community poopoo's things that seem quite easy to prove if you just actually look.

The thing about science is it doesn't consider that which it has no evidence for. Moreover, much of what we call science varies in large degrees with its standards. For example, psychology (which is actually a liberal art posing as science) can hardly hope to prove much of its conjecture. Meanwhile in physics, proof is had via mathematics. In Geology, "proof" is more loosely defined, yet still seems to be pretty easy to see.

The one thing I can say for certain: there is no evidence supporting a "golden age" of humanity that would be recognizable to humans today. Certainly no plastics. But even stone...we just don't find much in relation to stone builds that would make one think that there is an ancient greatness. The best we have today is Gobleki Tepe...and that didn't seem to be actually useful in day to day life.

It could be that humans achieved great things prior to the biblical flood myth, and those great things lie beneath the black sea. Who really knows. But there is no actual evidence of any of it. The evidence seems pretty strong that humans were hunter gatherers, and started ceasing that lifestyle around 8000 bc. Given the lack of communication methods, i certainly can understand how a breakthrough in the Levant would not have been communicated to China or South America before it died out and was long forgotten. Which honestly is the key to modern humanity: communication (which brings about innovation).

originally posted by: Fools
a reply to: Assassin82

I was alive and sentient 30 years ago and raised in a very Christian community and I don't remember anyone that took the biblical age of the earth to be correct.

As a matter of fact, I didn't know anyone that believed that.

I’ve met plenty. Heck, how many people still believe dinosaurs are fake and the earth is flat? They’re out there.

a reply to: Assassin82

I wonder quite a bit how many believers of such things on the internet are just trolling. I know when I was younger and the internet was as well I trolled people constantly.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

S & F The links are there

a reply to: Rekrul

are there photos available of these? Id assume they are just bright flashes of light in a darker field?

The stock photo at the top of that page is interested...they should have used a higher quality image, but its interesting nonetheless.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Fools
So often over many years I have read in "non-scientific" sites and magazines that the end of the last ice age was caused by something globally catastrophic and was also the end of a supposed "golden age" of an intelligent human species.

Then now, 20 or so years later "actual" scientific community starts to catch up. It is amazing how much our scientific community poopoo's things that seem quite easy to prove if you just actually look.

The thing about science is it doesn't consider that which it has no evidence for. Moreover, much of what we call science varies in large degrees with its standards. For example, psychology (which is actually a liberal art posing as science) can hardly hope to prove much of its conjecture. Meanwhile in physics, proof is had via mathematics. In Geology, "proof" is more loosely defined, yet still seems to be pretty easy to see.

The one thing I can say for certain: there is no evidence supporting a "golden age" of humanity that would be recognizable to humans today. Certainly no plastics. But even stone...we just don't find much in relation to stone builds that would make one think that there is an ancient greatness. The best we have today is Gobleki Tepe...and that didn't seem to be actually useful in day to day life.

It could be that humans achieved great things prior to the biblical flood myth, and those great things lie beneath the black sea. Who really knows. But there is no actual evidence of any of it. The evidence seems pretty strong that humans were hunter gatherers, and started ceasing that lifestyle around 8000 bc. Given the lack of communication methods, i certainly can understand how a breakthrough in the Levant would not have been communicated to China or South America before it died out and was long forgotten. Which honestly is the key to modern humanity: communication (which brings about innovation).

This was the door I wanted to open. I personally believe that in South America, particularly in Peru and Bolivia there is plenty of evidence of a ancient human civilization that was destroyed by a great event. I can't look at the "megalithic" artifacts there and think for a second that a bronze age type civ built any of that. Large stone works is not the problem really as there are examples of bronze age making large stone works. The things seen in Bolivia and Peru just don't make sense at all in that regard. ANyway, that is not the subject of this OP, my apologies. However, many advanced civ proponents have long stated that the end of the last ice age was brought about by something cosmological - based on the things they studied and offered alot of proof over the years only to be treated as quacks. The educational system in the west is failing due to many sorts of dogma's and they will continue to fail us if they continue to support and protect dogma's.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

They might, but there might not be any filters on it. So it's just probably dots on a black background.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
If I remember correctly, this was/is Robert Schoch's pet theory. I don't know if he still holds to it considering we now have good evidence of a comet strike around 12,800 years ago. Makes me wonder if earth got a double whammy and nearly a complete reset. There likely weren't many of us left after that.

The whole story is laid out in this book:

www.simonandschuster.com...

a reply to: Assassin82

I'm the same age and I haven't even met a handful of people who thought the earth was only 6000 years old.

Maybe 2 or 3.

a reply to: watchitburn

My mom thinks that the reason the moon is in perfect elliptical orbit on our planet is because God made it that way.

originally posted by: Rekrul
a reply to: watchitburn

My mom thinks that the reason the moon is in perfect elliptical orbit on our planet is because God made it that way.

Not uncommon. My sister believes that all sorts of things are by "Gods design".

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Assassin82

I'm the same age and I haven't even met a handful of people who thought the earth was only 6000 years old.

Maybe 2 or 3.

I once asked a room full of grown adults, in the military, where the sound of Thunder came from. The legit answers I heard from people put my faith in humanity in shambles.

Several people thought it was from clouds bumping together. Another said it was from two lighting bolts crashing into each other.

I met someone from Ocala, FL who thought New England was a state and Boston was its capital.

Several 7th day adventists I know believe in the 6,000 year old idea.

I see what you mean by that 12-13 thousand year cycle.

But if we go through these cycles like clockwork and the last one was brought on by a supernova, then are we out of the woods?

Once a star explodes, boom, it's gone.
There's no chance for it to spring back to life in 13k years to explode again.

If stars are the actual cause of these cycles, then either something out there is sending nova blasts our way like clockwork or it's a mini nova from our own sun.

What's the name of the uppermost part of the atmosphere of the sun? The Corona?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Being a good human, i recognize patterns. And the pattern of things relating to the time of roughly 11000 bc, and the cataclysm in the northern hemisphere, is definitely a recurring theme. From the Carolina Bays, to the extinction of megafauna, Younger Dryas, the drumlin hills throughout north America...even the long standing Clovis theory. It all seems to have a conjuction that is 13k years old.

Something interesting happened back then. There is debate and uncertainty about the reasons for the megafauna extinctions, but the two most commonly cited are climate change and over-hunting by humans (whether some kind of impact contributed to the climate change has also been debated). I read an interesting paper on this saying the contributions of climate and hunting to extinctions depended on location and species; this is the summary from the paper:

Population reconstructions for humans and megafauna suggest mixed causes for North American Pleistocene extinctions

The orange band shows the approximate timing of the growing population of the clovis people around 13000 years BP. After that (to the left on the chart), the red lines show population "busts" eventually leading to extinction. The symbol of spear thrower means they think humans hunting may have been a major factor in extinction, the cloud symbol means it wasn't humans, it was climate change. For mammoths in the southwest there is evidence both were factors in their extinction.

The mentioned supernova has a dating with an error margin of 1500 years. It is also 800 light years away. So on the shoulder ranges of the error rate, it could be something that has no real bearing. But I figured with this being ATS and all...it was worth a mention.

I'm glad you included the statement "it could be something that has no real bearing", since I see no reason to add supernovae to the mix of suspects, not at 815 light years from Earth. Whether or not the supernova was the cause of the C14 increase may even be dubious, though I wouldn't rule it out, it's less than clear it's the cause. Our sun is a lot closer and it's been known to cause much larger variations, instead of only a 3% C14 increase 11000 years ago, the sun is thought to be responsible for a huge 20% C14 increase in 5480 BC, so the sun will always be a suspect for these C14 increases:

Large 14C excursion in 5480 BC indicates an abnormal sun in the mid-Holocene

The other thing to consider is that Betelgeuse may be as close as half the 815 light years distance, and will go supernova soon in astronomical terms, and we don't think it will cause problems for life on Earth, just a light show. In fact any supernova over 100 light years away is thought to be too far to have much effect on Earth's life, though some change in cosmic rays is possible, which could affect C14, but it seems like a bit of a stretch to me at 815 light years.

Will the star Betelgeuse explode someday?

Will the explosion of Betelgeuse destroy earthly life?

When Betelgeuse does blow up, our planet Earth is too far away for this explosion to harm, much less destroy, life on Earth. Astrophysicists say we’d have to be within 50 light-years of a supernova for it to harm us. Betelgeuse is nearly 10 times this distance.

So if Betelgeuse isn't going to threaten life on Earth, something twice as far away is only 1/4 as likely to do so based on the inverse-square law, which would more or less apply to cosmic rays from a supernova.

originally posted by: Psilocyborg
If stars are the actual cause of these cycles, then either something out there is sending nova blasts our way like clockwork or it's a mini nova from our own sun.

What's the name of the uppermost part of the atmosphere of the sun? The Corona?

Our sun is a likely suspect, see the article about the event in 5480 BC, and the sun would be a suspect in other carbon-14 increase events too. The sun is after all, the closest star, by far.