dmwalker

This is kind of interesting,

I was overwhelmed by the number of articles on the subject but, in fairness, here is a link to what looks like the original article proposing the impact theory: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0706977104 All I can say is the topic seems controversial but I hope you are not saying that all those criticizing the impact theory are "arrogant, prideful and selfish". There are probably valid arguments on both sides.

Do you mean there is evidence other than Younger-Dryas? The Science Direct articles says that "There is no obvious evidence of environmental cataclysm at that time in the vast published geomorphic or paleobotanical records. There is no support for the basic premise of the YDIH that human populations were diminished, and individual species of late Pleistocene megafauna became extinct or were diminished due to catastrophe." How large would the asteroid have to be? Here is an excerpt from an article on asteroid impacts on the ocean. It covers asteroids up to 1Gt TNT equivalent. Figure 12 shows the results. Your example must be larger than that: "The simulations also showed that on the order of 1% of the kinetic energy of the impact is converted into the tsunami wave. This is an order of magnitude less than previous semi-empirical estimates of ∼15% based on explosion test data and laboratory scale impacts." "With only ∼1% of the asteroid kinetic energy being converted into tsunami waves and with the stronger decay with distance implies that moderate size asteroids (100–500 m in diameter) striking the deep ocean basins off the continental shelves are not a significant overall hazard except for i) impacts close to shore where travel time is not enough to sufficiently degrade the waves, ii) in the cases of impacts onto the continental shelf, or iii) very large impacts. In the case of moderate size asteroids excluding the ocean basins far from land, the impact areas of concern are a significantly smaller fraction of the Earth's surface than the entire ocean surface." "In the case of a large impact the dominant hazard is likely to be from global climatic change which may dwarf casualties from tsunami around the coastline of the ocean basin where it strikes. The simulations show that most of the impacting asteroid's kinetic energy is consumed by the vaporization of water from the transient crater. Much of this water vapor is buoyantly lofted into the stratosphere, where it may linger for months to years. Together with chlorine from sea salt, OH radicals from water ionization catalytically destroy ozone. Water is also a strong absorber of infrared radiation, and the effects of a large injection high into the atmosphere are not yet well understood" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576517314996

This is the conclusion (Section 17) from one of the more recent articles on the subject. Perhaps there are articles which refute this one. Link to the article to see the "broad array of flaws": "The YDIH evolved directly from pseudoscience. As such, the initial publication in scientific literature was seriously plagued by poorly documented interpretations and baseless assertions. As outlined in this paper and in other publications, a broad array of serious flaws persists in the YDIH:" https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012825223001915?via%3Dihub I would definitely discount stories based on rainfall of biblical proportions. Do you have a specific reference? The one I have found just says it fell off a cliff 44,000 years ago and was preserved in the permafrost: "Its death must have occurred very quickly after its fall, for we found half-chewed food still in its mouth, between the back teeth and on its tongue, which was in good preservation. The food consisted of leaves and grasses, some of the later carrying seeds. We could tell from these that the mammoth must have come to its miserable end in the autumn." https://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mammoths.html

Not enough water on the planet to do that and no geological evidence that it ever happened in the past.

Definitely not Planet 9 (green orbit) , which doesn't come anywhere near even the outer planets:

Yes, but not too hot in case you burn the roof of your mouth. And don't bother with those little marshmallows; they may contain corn syrup and gelatin.

Just keep taking the sirtuin activators and you'll be OK.

I always liked the Handley Page Victor.

"Six turning, four burning."

https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/lufthansa-group/austrian-airlines/airbus-a320neo-severely-damaged-in-ground-collision-at-vienna-airport/

Also, at the bottom of the article, there is a link to another which has a few more details: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airlines-united-pilot/united-pilot-replaced-after-intercom-rant-while-dressed-as-civilian-idUSKBN15R0RC/

When under stress, the protein spontaneously arranges into helical structures which form a gel inside the cells. “Thomas Boothby, an assistant professor of molecular biology, and colleagues have shown that natural and engineered versions of tardigrade proteins can be used to stabilize an important pharmaceutical used to treat people with hemophilia and other conditions without the need for refrigeration. The pharmaceutical known as human blood clotting Factor VIII is an essential therapeutic used to treat genetic disease and instances of extreme bleeding. Despite being critical and effective in treating patients in these circumstances, Factor VIII has a serious shortcoming, in that it is inherently unstable. Without stabilization within a precise temperature range, Factor VIII will break down.”

Maybe it was a rare cubic zirconia ring.

I suppose my main question would be why separate switches for left and right? The A380, for example has two landing lights in each wing root and all four are on a single switch. Well, in my case, it worked.