Randall Carlson Responds To Critics: Chevrons, Megatsunamis And Bolide Impacts.

**Time code 2:45:00, Randall describes to Joe the reality of massive chevron formations around the globe and their likely antecedents. Listen to the entire discussion for the full context..**

Mary K Dunn Tweet

An open letter to a critic on the matter of chevrons, megatsunamis and bolide impacts.

Via Randall Carlson of SacredGeometryInternational.com

Download PDF

Recently I did a podcast with Joe Rogan. In our wide ranging discussion we covered a lot of material. As pleased as I was by the positive response of many in the listeners, I also appreciate and welcome criticism and open minded debate. I do not pretend to have the final truth on anything, I only know that it is fair to question everything and to go where the evidence leads us, in the assumption that science, ultimately, is a search for truth. I am convinced that even in the world of science dogmas and entrenched viewpoints can at times prevail over facts and evidence inconsistent with established beliefs. It is important to constantly be challenging dominant paradigms to keep science moving forward and to approach ever closer to an understanding of reality. I repeat, I do not claim to have the final word on any of the issues discussed on this or any other podcast in which I have participated. I engage in the pursuit of science for the love of learning and out of an irrepressible curiosity about the world we inhabit. No one, at least up to this point, has paid me to engage in this pursuit. I fund my own way and have done so for going on four decades. In reading through the many posted comments in response to the podcast it became apparent that the majority of comments critical of something I said are conspicuous for the absence of any actual learning or knowledge about the subject being commented upon. Quite a few of the negative comments were simply trash talking by fools who couldn’t make a coherent counterfactual argument if their life depended on it. A few of the critical comments contradict this trend and actually represent some learning or at least some rational thought regarding many of the issues I raised during a three hour wide ranging discussion, and for these I am appreciative.

I am addressing this response to one issue raised regarding remarks about possible mega-tsunami deposits that I brought up during the podcast. It is my impression after investing a fair amount of time researching this phenomenon that it warrants serious consideration, especially in light of what we have witnessed during the past decade, two tsunami induced mega-disasters in Japan and the Indian Ocean. Several comments were particularly dismissive, so I am setting down this small exposition, without malice, to demonstrate that the remarks made on The Joe Rogan Experience were preceded by a substantial amount of background research and thought. While the following remarks pertain to this one issue specifically, they are also relevant to the general attitude evinced in many of the other comments critical of something I said that are obviously being made by individuals whose preconceived opinions were incompatible with the information I presented and their objections were nothing more than a knee jerk emotional response rather than a reasoned critique with some actual though behind it.

Here is a comment posted by someone who took issue with my remarks about the possible mega-tsunami deposits in Madagascar. I choose this posting to respond to for two reasons. First of all it allows me the opportunity to elaborate in more detail regarding this important question of the reality of mega-tsunamis, not only to our past but to our future, and the posting also displays one of the most common of logical fallacies in critical thinking, the “appeal to authority.” Disregarding the obvious attitude of cynicism, this is what Mary Kay Dunn had to say:

Mary K. Dunn Comment

First of all let’s dispose of the appeal to authority canard. I have no doubt that Joanne Bourgeois, whose work is the subject of the linked article, is a “real scientist.” In fact, I have a great deal of admiration for her work and have read a number of her papers, including her 2009 paper in Geology taking issue with the mega-tsunami hypothesis of Dallas Abbot and others. The statement is made by the Ms Dunn that “real scientists” have discredited the mega-tsunami hypothesis. My first thought is this: How easy it has become these days to simply link to a website presenting one side of a scientific debate and then presumptuously assume that the matter is settled. Then follows an egregiously over generalized statement about Joe Rogan “fans.” Certainly it is true that some of the world’s scientists are bought off by one of two political sides, a blatant case in point being many of the scientists employed by the IPCC. However, it should be emphasized that there are many scientists who retain their independence and credibility, and it is probably true that some Joe Rogan fans believe in conspiracies of one sort or another but it has become apparent to me that many of them are willing to look without prejudice at the facts, and I would say this goes for Joe himself. Let it also be stated that as far as conspiracies go, there are definitely real ones. History itself is basically a history of conspiracies. Anyone who thinks that those who covet power do not conspire to retain and expand that power, or that they would not subordinate science to that end, is suffering from excessive naivety, however, all this is a total non sequitur anyway in reference to the subject at hand.

So, as to the question of “real scientists” here are just a few of the professionals who first proposed and have continued to endorse the idea of mega-tsunami generated chevrons:

Dieter Kelletat, Ph.D: Retired as head of the Dept. of Physical Geography, University of Cologne, expert in Quaternary Geomorphology, author of the Atlas of coastal geomorphology and zonality and numerous scientific publications and collaborations.

Dallas Abbott, Ph.D: Research scientist at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Ph.D. in Marine Geology, author or co-author of over 120 peer-reviewed scientific papers. Author of Chevron Dunes in Madagascar: The Most Spectacular Tsunami Deposits on Earth published in the proceedings of the Aerospace Conference, 2000 IEEE

Dee Breger: Manager of Lamont Doherty Scanning Electron Microscope Facility, participant in more than 30 land based and oceanographic expeditions. Expert in analysis of microscale evidence of cosmic impact.

Viacheslav Gusiakov Ph.D, : Head of the Tsunami Laboratory, Institute of Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Geophysics, Novosibirsk, Russia, responsible for developing the Historical Tsunami Database for the World Ocean

Anja Scheffers Ph.D,: Southern Cross University, Associate Professor of Geoscience, expert in coastal evolution, sea-level change and marine natural hazards. See Curriculum Vitae here: tsun.sscc.ru/hiwg/SCHEFFERS.htm. Author or co-author of at least 42 peer reviewed scientific papers. Is considered by her colleagues to be a chevron expert.

There are more but I think you get the point.

Read more at SacredGeometryInternational.com


6 Comments on "Randall Carlson Responds To Critics: Chevrons, Megatsunamis And Bolide Impacts."

  1. Rhoid Rager | Jun 11, 2014 at 4:06 am |

    A society suffers a major cultural impediment to epistemological progress when ‘appeal to authority’ is the default argumentative method used to defame curious intellects. The stakes of exploring alternative models and paradigms ought to go without saying at this point in our history, but, my god, is it not abundantly clear that the self-appointed gatekeepers of ‘Science Inc.’ have remorselessly and relentlessly fucked the species with their nuclear technology, genetic engineering, fossil fuel-dependent agricultural and industrial systems, and general mechanistic worldview? If so many of us are still in denial of the betrayal of authority, then there must be more time until the collapse in civilizational complexity than I thought…

    • Gjallarbru | Jun 11, 2014 at 9:27 am |

      The time for an eventual collapse has nothing to do with how many people are in denial about authority’s nature. Authority is comforting, in particular if it espouses our own views. On the other hand, pesky facts don’t bend and don’t comfort you, they just are. And if facts don’t fit your views, they become outright uncomfortable, irritating and even alarming.

      Few will care to look at facts for themselves, and just embrace whatever authority comforts them in their own views. Meanwhile, their beloved authority can just be crashing into a wall, but few will notice.

      It seems there is no end to mistaking authority for truth. Not even eventual collapse can wake lovers of authority.

      • Rhoid Rager | Jun 11, 2014 at 9:41 am |

        On the contrary, civilizational collapse has everything to do with the confidence our species has with the self-anointed core of our societies. Centralized civilization is a con game, because it is utterly reliant on confidence for its survival–there is no external structure hold the edifice of society up other than the people who fill their assumed roles. The energy from fossil fuels has given it a scale never achieved before, but centralization is only correlated with such energy dynamics–it’s not a given. What creates ‘authority’ is the belief in authority.

        Regarding facts, they always come with values embedded in them. There is no looking at facts ‘for themselves’. If few notice that authority is crashing into a wall, it’s not for lack of curiousity about facts, but lack of time and energy to explore the value systems that underpin them.

        Truth and authority are indistinguishable, if you ask me, because neither exist outside of my own belief in them.

        • Gjallarbru | Jun 11, 2014 at 10:48 am |

          I understand your point and agree to some degree. But there are some things you can’t escape, no matter how much you believe what an authority is telling you.

          After reading your response, I do agree that continuous belief can prolong certain situations. Yet, I also sustain that some situations can’t go on for very long (on a historical timescale), because they are fundamentally toxic, no matter how much belief there is nothing wrong.

          I also don’t agree that truth can’t be distinguished from authority, might it be only for the fact the history is rife with authority being wrong. Truth might be difficult to distinguish from authority, that much I’ll agree to, but no further.

          • Rhoid Rager | Jun 11, 2014 at 6:53 pm |

            “because they are fundamentally toxic”–exactly. the era that we are hopefully exiting soon has been a heuristic one; if anything it has taught us how not to treat each other.
            good discussion. thnx.

  2. heinrich6666 | Jun 12, 2014 at 5:55 am |

    Good for Randall Carlson. Most commentards only learned how to think on the Internet. Anytime you see someone refer to a ‘fallacy’ or ‘ad hominem’ in an online comment, you can be sure that person is aping others who themselves aped others who pulled rules of argument out of their asses, that is, by glancing at some Wikipedia entry on argumentation. Regarding his chick critic and other such science groupies: for a society that prides itself on being anti-authority and non-conformist (‘I can wear what I want!’) the slavish worship of authority is alive and well, and stronger than it has been in decades. (E.g. ‘Real’ scientists are never wrong!)

Comments are closed.