Re: Vedic Indo-Aryans North of the Black Sea ~2000 BC!

Daryl Krupa wrote:
> 
> "Peter T. Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > hypertech wrote:
> > >
> > > Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > >
> > > > It was quite clear at an international conference at Columbia University
> > > > last month that the world's hydrogeologists don't accept R & P's theory.
> > > > The level of the Black Sea has fluctuated over the past 50,000 years or
> > > > so, and their date for the most recent filling doesn't correspond with
> > > > the evidence.
> 
>   Peter:
>   I assume that you are referring to
> The Black Sea Flood: Archaeological and Geological Evidence
> An International Conference at Columbia University, October 18-19,
> 2003
> 
>   Could you please give me some more info when and where proceedings
> from that conference might be publicly available? I can't seem to find
> that info for myself on the web.

The participants were asked to submit papers within a year.

>   I did find a program at:
> 
> http://www.columbia.edu/cu/seminars/special-event/black-sea-conference/index.html
> 
>   The presenters seemto be a nicely high-powered group.
> 
> > > I remember when 'conferences' all said that plate tectonics was a kook
> > > theory.
> > > Is there any explanation for the C-14 date of 5600 BCE for the land
> > > grasses in the Sapropel?
> >
> > I have no idea what you're referring to, nor why it would be
> > determinative.
> 
>   I thought that I'd been following the relevant discoveries and
> evidence rather closely, but I too have never heard of a date from
> grasses in sapropel.
>   This would seem to be a bit of misinformation: the sapropel in the
> Black Sea was formed thousands of years _after_ the supposed flood,
> and it was formed at depth, so any grasses would have to have been
> transported to it from a terrestrial source above the shoreline at the
> time the sapropel was formed; i.e., from a place that was not flooded.
> 
> <snip>
> > > I have seen some debunking reports, and there certainly are lots of
> > > challenges that need to be looked into. But *none* of them which I saw
> > > took the time to deal with the 5600 BCE C-14 date for the grass.
> 
>   That would probably be because no such C14 date exists.
>   Day Brown has never replied to my requests for a source or a
> reference for this date.
>   He seems to have simply transformed the shell dates below the
> sapropel into a grass date inside the sapropel.
> 
> <snip>
> > > I dunno that the data is all in yet for settled science. I'll be glad to
> > > wait for the topography to come in. I see that satellites from space
> > > have been able to identify the packed earth which results from trade
> > > route travel, and that these routes go back 5000 years or more. So, it
> > > would be nice to see some radar scans of the Black sea bottom, to see if
> > > there are any routes across it. Whenever the bottom was dry, there would
> > > be migration routes of herbivores to & from winter graze in Ukraine.
> >
> > Good grief.
> 
>   Indeed. Radar cannot penetrate seawater. There are no satellites
> that can image seabottom.
>   He may mean sonar, but it is unlikely that sonar studies (from
> ships, not satellites, N.B.) would ever be done at a high enough
> resolution to show such features, never mind that the sapropel, and
> the mud drape ("coccolith ooze") that was laid down over it, _have
> covered them all up_.
> 
> > Do you read Russian? Enormous amounts of research were done over the
> > last 50 years and published in reports that have probably never been
> > opened since. A huge bibliography was presented by one of the
> > participants (I don't remember her name, but I think she's the one who's
> > now at a Newfoundland university.)
> 
>   The only one who might fit your description seems to be
> Valentina Yanko-Hombach,
> of the Avalon Institute for Applied Science, Winnipeg.
>   The Avalon Peninsula is where St. John's Newfoundland is located.
>   Were you referring to her?
> 
> In hopes of getting new pointers, and
> Thanx for your efforts,
> Daryl Krupa

I think so. She was listed as co-presenter of one of the scheduled
papers but didn't participate in it; all of Monday morning was turned
over to her for a summary of 50 years of work by Soviet scholars. All of
which, of course, was published in Russian. Which Seppo perhaps reads
about as well as he writes English.
-- 
Peter T. Daniels                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]