Response to Comments by John R. Southon, Lawrence Livermore
        National Laboratory, and R.E. Taylor, University of California,
        Riverside.

William Topping
Principal Investigator,

Since the inception of the investigation, the Principal Investigator has
regarded a "solar flare" as direct cause for the clear pattern at ~
12,500 yrs bp as recorded in ice and marine data, Paleo-Indian
radiocarbon dates/artifacts and associated extinctions and mutations,
and also sediments at depth simply because the overall pattern suggests
an "event" of less than or about 24 hours duration with primary
observable effects consistent with the rotation of the earth in respect
to the sun.
....
Independent testing to confirm depleted 235U
in the micrometeorites had been considered to "rule out" a supernova
since the debris ought to contain "enriched" 235U (assuming uranium
actually is formed in supernovae), but now has been discarded because
the debris itself would have been subjected to neutrons, and hence
depleted "then." Firestone may be correct in hypothesizing a supernova,
and there are other possibilities as well.

Decisively, at the Lewisville, Texas, Paleo-Indian site there is in fact
a perfectly reliable radiocarbon date of ~ 26,600 bp rcy obtained in
1985 (6). It is common knowledge in the archaeological community that
Paleo-Indian artifacts are distinctive, and cultural markers of a
"window in time." Since the Lewisville site is "at least" 26,000 years
old, younger Paleo-Indian radiocarbon dates cannot possibly be correct,
and the construct that maintains Paleo-Indian is confined to ~ 12,000
years therefore also must be incorrect, and should be discarded
immediately. Using common sense, if prehistoric peoples arrived in North
America first and then migrated to Central and South America, 14C dates
at lower latitudes "must be" younger. In fact, South American
radiocarbon dates approach ~ 30,000 bp rcy. Lewisville "fits" while
younger Paleo-Indian dates in North America do not, and therefore all
must be incorrect (for some reason).


Radiocarbon dating works "perfectly well." However, it derives dates
from the amount of 14C present. But, there definitely are anomalies by
latitude/longitude/depth in sediments that authoritative archaeologists
have noted for many years. It is clear that both communities are
correct, and interdisciplinary collaboration in the pursuit of
scientific truth stongly is encouraged. Additionally, this short piece
hopefully will serve as a reminder to all, both avocational and
otherwise, to be more "open-minded" in the pursuit of patterns to
factual scientific data rather than adherence to "dogma," and for
everyone to consider data within the broader framework of a holistic
(rather than "particularist/reductionist") point of view.