Author Topic: 3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?  (Read 8362 times)

Rick

  • Guest
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« on: May 10, 2006, 01:22:54 AM »
I'm not sure if this is the right forum to post this, but it seems close enough.  Now, I work in a scientific environment among scientists who study climate change. I have co-authored many papers on the subject as well.   I also work with geologists so what this means is that I need to be more rigorous in accepting the idea that there's a 3600 year cycle before I go about confronting scientists with this idea that we suffer cataclysisms at periodic intervals (though I don't deny this is the case).  In fact, I work at a radiocarbon dating facility.  According to current geologic records of the past 13000 years or so here are the known dates of abrupt changes in climate:

RC = Radiocarbon date before present (BP)
BC = Before Common era (calibrated with OxCal v 3.10)

12800 RC = 13000 BC
8200 RC = 7200 BC
5200 RC = 4000 BC
4200 RC = 2850 BC
3800 RC = 2200 BC

These dates come with errors within +/- 200 years at most.

Now, I don't see a 3600 year cycle per se. If you take the average difference you get 2600 years.  My question is where did the 3600 year cycle that the Cassiopaeans state come from and how does it reconcile with these dates?

For a reference, I include a link to Harvey Weiss of Yale U. I'd include a paleoclimate reference but this is the most interesting as it relates to human civilization:
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/cc052301.html

"The earliest Holocene abrupt climate changes occurred at 12,800, 8200, 5200,
and 4200 B.P. The 4200 B.P. abrupt climate change is especially well
documented across West Asia, Central Asia, Africa, and parts of the New
World. Limnological and speleothem radiometric dates situate the beginning
of this event at ca. 3800 radiocarbon years before 1950 (3.8 ka bp) or ca.
2200 B.C. High resolution paleoclimate records, including the Greenland Ice
Sheet Project 2 (GISP2) ice core, Lake Van varve sediments, and U.S.
Southwest dendrochronology now also provide absolute calendar dating for
this event in addition to quantification of its amplitude relative to prior
and succeeding climate states. Social adaptations to this event are recorded
in the contemporary archaeological records of southeastern Europe, North
Africa, and West Asia: habitat-tracking, regional population abandonments,
migrations, and sociopolitical collapse."

-Rick

Offline Mr. Premise

  • SuperModerator
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,908
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2006, 01:43:04 AM »
Just a quick reply off the top of my head:  I believe the C's mentioned a 3600 year cycle of cometary bombardment.  Those can have climatic effect (from the dust kicked up) but those effects can be separate from larger cycles of climate change.

Offline Approaching Infinity

  • SuperModerator
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,146
    • http://minimal-meandering.blogspot.com/
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2006, 03:12:27 AM »
Well, if there is a 3600 cycle (there may be other cycles as well), we would get the following years:

1600 BC
5200 BC
8800 BC
12400 BC
16000 BC
19600 BC

Evidence for the first date is in the form of evidence gathered from dendrochronology, presented in Mike Baillie's book "From Exodus to Arthur" relating to the Santorini eruption.  

Quote from: Laura
Yoshiyuki Fujii and Okitsugu Watanabe's "Microparticle Concentration And Electrical Conductivity of A 700 m Ice Core from Mizuho Station Antarctic" published in Annals of Glaciology (1-, 1988) pp. 38-42, demonstrate that "large scale environmental changed possibly occurred in the Southern Hemisphere in the middle of the Holocene. (Within the last 10,000 years). Their depth profiles of microparticle concentration, electrical conductivity and Oxygen 18 at circa 1600 BC indicates a spike in readings for all of these elements. The evidence shows that this disturbance covered this designated period, but with a "huge spike" at c. 1600 B.C.

Similar evidence from the same source article exists at 5200 BC. This period shows a less severe but similar period. The oxygen 18 profile is close to normal, but there is a visible volcanic dirt band. The dating of this segment is less close because it is clear that nobody is really looking for this cycle, but it appears to correspond to the ash band from the Byrd station core.  [ cf. G. Cope Schellhorn, Ph.D.:Evidence of Cyclical Earth Changes, from When Men are Gods] In an article in Nature, November 1980, C.U. Hammer, H. B. Clausen and Dansgaard date a disturbance from the Camp Century ice core to 5470 BC +/- 120 years. This compares to the proposed Hekla eruption which was radiocarbon dated to 5450 BC +/- 190 years. There is an appreciably high acidity signal at these sections of the core which indicates a high level of volcanic activity - again, right at the 3600 year cycle mark.
Quote
Looking further: Michel R. Legrand and Robert J. Delmas of Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Geophysique de l'Environment published an article "Soluble Impurities in Four Antarctic Ice Cores Over the Last 30,000 Years" [Annals of Glaciology (10, 1988, pp 116-120)]. In which they graphed the Oxygen 18 variations and the ionic components Na,NH 4 and Ca2 and H and Cl and NO3 and SO4. The time scale for each ionic component level as well as the O18 levels stretches back 30,000 years. The graph shows correlations to spikes at 5,200 BC, 8,800 BC, 12,400 BC, c. 16,000 BC, c. 19,600 BC. All of these were times of great geologic stress.
Quote
The evidence for the 5200 BC event is strong in the Dome C core. The 8,800 BC event is well marked - in fact, seems to be the strongest of them all. Keep in mind that this was 10,800 years ago - exactly within the range of dates reported by Herodotus and Plato. The oxygen 18 isotope variation is noticeable, the rise in sea-salt, elevated levels of C1 and C1/Na. There is an extreme spike in SO4 and H readings suggesting widespread volcanic activity - great earth changes were happening at that time, and they registered in the climate, the oceans, and were preserved in ice.

The 12,400 BC event is also extremely pronounced in the cores. The graphs show a quick, vast change including the end of the Wisconsin Ice Age. This reminds us of our evidence of Nuclear Activity in Paleoindian Times presented in a previous chapter. There is a great Oxygen 18 isotope variation as well as peaks of Na and very pronounced spikes in Ca, SO 4 and H.

There is absolutely no question that the Santorini event occurred. The acid signal in the ice core is very strong. Which means that there is very little question about when it occurred. Something very unusual and specific happened then, starting in 1644, and culminating in a major cataclysm, and it seems that it walked all over the Aegean and Anatolian area, leaving tracks that are impossible to miss.
Check out these two links:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sitchin2.htm
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/meteors.htm
http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/adventures258.htm
http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/adventures259.htm
Man's inhumanity to monsters is notorious and shameful. --John Keel

Rick

  • Guest
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2006, 03:16:13 PM »
It looks to me like the 3600 year cycle was taken from very uncertain dates, in fact, from radiocarbon years and not calibrated dates. Thus, I may assume that the 3600 year cycle is just a rough estimate. Could be as little as 2600 or it could be as much as 4600.

Offline anart

  • The Living Force
  • ********
  • Posts: 16,725
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2006, 07:47:00 PM »
Quote from: Rick
It looks to me like the 3600 year cycle was taken from very uncertain dates, in fact, from radiocarbon years and not calibrated dates. Thus, I may assume that the 3600 year cycle is just a rough estimate. Could be as little as 2600 or it could be as much as 4600.
Hi Rick, since I'm ignorant when it comes to calibarated dating - is it possible for you to explain what you mean by this?  I do understand the problems with 'radiocarbon years', I'm just not sure exactly what calibrated dating entails.  It may be that explaining it would be a complicated endeavor, and if so, don't worry about  it; I'm just trying to understand the whole picture.

Thanks

Offline Stargazer

  • Dagobah Resident
  • *******
  • Posts: 876
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2006, 10:49:26 AM »
Quote from: DonaldJHunt
Just a quick reply off the top of my head:  I believe the C's mentioned a 3600 year cycle of cometary bombardment.  Those can have climatic effect (from the dust kicked up) but those effects can be separate from larger cycles of climate change.
Yep. Also, Laura has good section in "Secret History" about why relying on radiocarbon dating might not be the best idea. Dendochronology and ice-core sampling might be more useful. OSIT.
"Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now." - W.H. Murray (usually attributed to Goethe).

Offline Falling Water

  • Jedi
  • ****
  • Posts: 167
3600 Year Cycle: Where's the evidence?
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2006, 02:51:02 AM »
Hi,

Here's an excerpt from the transcripts...
...
Q: Okay. We will. (A) Carbon dating. Is it incorrect by a factor of two prior to 10,000 years as L has suggested? We observe a factor of 2 variation in the scientific dating versus your
dating. This is a repeating phenomenon on nearly all dates you have given.
A: "They" fail to take into effect the influence of magnetic aberrations caused by ancient cataclysms.
Q: (L) How can these magnetic aberrations affect radiocarbon dating?
A: By altering the isotopal imprints of matter.
Q: So, the cataclysm of about 1500 B.C....
A: All of them scramble the radiological data because of magnetic surges.
...