The position that many in the mainstream tend to have is a belief that the Missoula Floods were a series of events that occurred over a period of millions of years.

The story goes something like this:

• during an ice-age
• the Northern ice cap on the planet — about a mile or two thick
• part of the glacier melted
• the meltwater was restrained by the same glacier
• sufficient water was released to wear-away basalt
• 150 coulees were washed out of the basalt bedrock
• So the glacier was warmed enough to melt

Actually, from the current incarnation of the wiki article on the topic:

After each ice dam rupture, the waters of the lake would rush down the Clark Fork and the Columbia River, flooding much of eastern Washington and the Willamette Valley in western Oregon. After the rupture, the ice would reform, creating Glacial Lake Missoula again

No argument from me about the very broad time-frame; during the ice age. And, there’s no argument about the concept of ice melting… but that’s very much the limit of plausible.

Because “physics”.

How so?

How does a glacier exist in both a solid and liquid state? …for sufficient time for that much water to accumulate? …without re-freezing? …without the glacier itself simply melting away beneath it?

How would that much water exist in a state of thermal equilibrium for water to exist as both a liquid (in a reservoir) and solid (forming an ice-dam) simultaneously?

How much water would be needed to wear away basalt? That would most certainly need to be liquid. I get that, but it would be surrounded by ice?

The concept of the “Missoula Floods” would also tend to suggest that all of the coulees tended to originate from a single point (okay, an area) in the Northern Rocky Mountain range — through which all of the water passed.

I do wonder, what proxies have we collected that may corroborate the Missoula Floods hypothesis?

Why do I still wear a facemask or shemagh when I go out in public?

This is why:

I’m not going to contribute to the increased risk for the public.

Epidemiologic curve of the infections in Spokane County since about 17 March.

Sharp rise. That was predicted.

Slow decline. Expected.

And just when everybody assumes (quite wrongly) that everything’s fine or that it’s only a hoax, we see another sharp rise in cases within the last week. A number of people firmly in denial about realities of the world have decided to get together and have those early Summer parties and gatherings. I’d wager we’ll see an even sharper ascent.

Somebody can be contagious and asymptomatic for a week or two, so if I’m infected, I’m going to take every reasonable precaution to not put anyone else at risk.

Yep, I’ll be one of those strange people who insists on wearing a mask whenever I’m amongst the public… for months to come.

—

Addendum:

And there it is. 155% higher than the previous peak at the beginning of April. The numbers for the past week aren’t complete yet.

It’s several.

One of the key details that seems to be ignored — much like several other modern concepts of cognitive dissonance, denial, dismissiveness, etc — is that even from the evidence we have collected thus far that we can readily review now, there wasn’t a single impact event marking the end of the Younger Dryas timeframe.

Was there an impact? Information does indeed seem to indicate there was.

Not one impact.

If you examine the GISP2 ice core data, yes, it most clearly indicates a sharp increase in temperature. But consider that data and the trends within a larger context.

Recall that it does point to a time period of cooling that was referred to as “the little ice age”. It’s recent — within the last 700 years or so.

Now look back a bit further.

Here’s the Younger Dryas period:

Now let’s look at the older time frame. In particular, consider the sharp changes in temperature.

There are, quite clearly, several sharp changes. The “Little Ice Age” was identifiable by a very small change that was very close to the current global temperature. But if you consider that the captured data quite clearly indicates extreme, sharp changes. Ignore the typical fluctuations. Look at the exceptional values — I’ve circled them to help identify them.

Those are significant changes between 16,000 and the acknowledged impact at the end of the YD period 11,500 years ago.

Don’t look for the one crater at the end of the YD. You won’t find “the smoking gun”.

Look for several.