Graham Hancock on younger dryas: what the evidence says · JRE #2136
SUBJECT: YOUNGER DRYAS
Not a true/false call. Every claim is logged with its sources; read the exhibits below.
So the younger dry ice impact hypothesis since 2007, it's been a compelling and thoroughly documented case. It's been put together by more than 60 eminent scientists. Of course, some scientists oppose them as well. It was hit 12,800 years ago by multiple fragments of a disintegrating comet.
What the evidence says 01 / RECORD
The Younger Dryas impact hypothesis was introduced in a 2007 PNAS paper by Richard Firestone and 25 coauthors (26 authors), and a subsequent group of researchers has continued to publish supporting evidence, so the claim that dozens of scientists have contributed since 2007 is roughly accurate. However, framing it as a compelling, thoroughly documented case understates its status: mainstream science treats it as a contested, largely rejected hypothesis, not an established finding. A PNAS critique concluded that within months after disintegration a comet's fragments would be dispersed over an area much greater than Earth, making the multiple nearly simultaneous impacts the hypothesis requires at least 1,000 times less frequent than a single-nucleus impact. No impact crater or universally accepted diagnostic evidence has been found, and researchers describe the idea as an ongoing debate with evidence still accumulating rather than settled science.
Who Benefits
Hancock relies on the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis to support the cataclysm central to his lost-civilization theory, which he promotes commercially through his books and Netflix series Ancient Apocalypse.