1
0

[–] LordHuggington [S] 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

The implications of this are monumental. It validates the catastrophist worldview while dismantling aspects of uniformitarianism. It gives a starting point to the wold-destroying flooding that occurred in North America, evidenced by the geological formations in the Pacific Northwest, Southwestern US, and Mississippi river valley. This impact would have instantly vaporized giant chunks of the ice sheet, raising sea levels over the course of weeks or days, and drowning any coastal civilizations that may have existed pre-Younger Dryas (Atlantis, Plato, Timeaus, Critas, Egyptians anyone?)

I think this discovery will catapult us into a new age of scientific research and discovery. We live in exciting times.

Remember guys, the most virtuous and moral way of defeating the enemy is arming ourselves and the future generations we produce with information that keeps them removed from the Semetic Machine.

0
0

[–] ardvarcus ago 

It gives a starting point to the wold-destroying flooding that occurred in North America, evidenced by the geological formations in the Pacific Northwest, Southwestern US, and Mississippi river valley.

No, it doesn't. There is no obvious connection between this crater and this hypothetical flood, which may well be separated by millions of years -- if the flood ever actually happened at all.

0
0

[–] GoBackToReddit ago  (edited ago)

I forget the name of the guy (I'll try and find it in a bit) but a dude on youtube claims to have pinpointed Atlantis as being the eye of the Sahara. It's an interesting listen at the very least.

E: It's looking like an old theory. Many videos all over about it. I guess I'm late to the party.

0
0

[–] LordHuggington [S] ago  (edited ago)

Yeah, the Richat Structure theory is interesting, fun to think about, and in contention for the origin story. Generally I enjoy Bright Insight's commentary, his most recent videos on the subject included. That said, I currently view now sunken parts of the Azores Archipelago as a more likely location.

A more important point though is we have something of a smoking gun now to justify mainstream research of these things instead of experts brushing the theories off as pseudo-science.

0
0

[–] Justwhiteofcenter ago 

The real interesting thing is that the crater might be only 12000 years old and likely shows up in the climate record.

See Scott manleys vid on it.

https://youtu.be/8injAIJW_dg

0
0

[–] ardvarcus ago 

“It’s likely quite young, geologically speaking,” MacGregor says. “It’s likely less than three million years old and possibly as young as 12,000 to 15,000 years old.”

That's quite the span of time you got there, scientists. No reason to suppose the impact was 12,000 years ago, other than that it would support some theories a few flakes have about ancient civilizations.

0
1

[–] beece 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

We saw that already, where have you been?

2
0

[–] LordHuggington [S] 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

I figured as much, but was busy contributing to society all week.