Talk:Bond event

message: (For readability as usual. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 14:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: ''(random heading)''

message: So where does
# ≈2400 BC (Bond event 3) — the Middle Neolithic cold epoch
# ≈3900 BC (Bond event 4) — the Early Neolithic cold event
comes from? Neither gets any google hits. Bond in Science mentions none of them William M. Connolley (talk) 21:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You sure you googled it? Try  and  in Google Scholar. —Bender235 (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  No silly, not the event number, which I left, its the bit I removed that you invented, errm, thats why I removed it, I don't think you invented the number 3. Try  or  William M. Connolley (talk) 22:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, you meant those exact names? Yes, I admit, they weren't proposed by Bond, I just added them provisorily. —Bender235 (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Jolly good. Then perhaps you can stop re-adding them, since there is no source for them William M. Connolley (talk) 22:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Okay, I'm fine with that. —Bender235 (talk) 23:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Events? 

message: I've removed the graph , which i've tried to verify. Its not from Alley as claimed, and its not from Bond. Please fix up the reference on the image if its to be reinserted. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 19:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed image - failed verification 

message: I've just made a discovery when using the 1,800 lunar tidal model of arctic environment of Northern Russia during the last 20,000yrs and the assumption of a millennial peak triggering H1 at 17,000 B.P. See 'Radiocarbon Variability in the Western North Atlantic During the Last Deglaciation' (2005) by Laura F. Robinson et al. matched at 10,000 B.P. with the graph in paper 'Holocene Treeline History and Climate Change Across Northern Eurasia' (2000) by Glen M. MacDonald et al.
The Maximum Forest Extension is 2 cycles of 1,800 yrs, showing peaks at 4,400 and 8000 yr B.P. (uncalib) which fits with the lunar tide into the arctic basin cycle and extrapolates to the date of 17,000 yr B.P., the onset of Heinrich 1. The tree data shows dips due to the lunar tidal minimum. The diagram can be seen here [url=http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=249553&hl=]1,800 Yr Lunar Tide Cycle Fits Glacial Data[/url]. 176.24.226.120 (talk) 07:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not the right place for original research. Publish a paper, have it go through peer review process, and then come back here. --bender235 (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1,800 Yr Lunar Tide Cycle Fits Glacial Data 

message: Hello. While describing these as 1500 ± 500 year events is technically correct, perhaps the article should be edited to reduce emphasis on 1500 and 1470 year cycles and periods. The concept of a 1500 year climate cycle, especially in the Holocene, is dated and inconsistent with recently published work (both for ice cores and ice-rafted detritus). Bond Events appear to be real, but the significance of the timing has been greatly over interpreted due to (at the time unknown) deficiencies in the benchmark chronology. 
Scrutiny of a supposed 1,500 cycle increased after the GISP2 ice core chronology was succeeded by the Greenland Ice Core Chronology 2005 (GICC05; e.g., 1). GICC05 does not produce a 1,470 year period, unlike the GISP2 chronology. Also unlike the GISP2 chronology, GICC05 recurrence times of Dansgaard/Oeschger Event are indistinguishable from random (2). Thus discussion on stochastic resonance is no longer really appropriate, unless this article is going to discuss the history of the interpretation of Bond Events.
Reanalysis of the now-available raw data suggests that the ice-rafted detritus records of the last glacial are "an admixture of the ~1000 and ~2000 cycles" and 1500 is the nonexistent mean in a bimodal population (3). For the Holocene ice-rafted detritus data, classical Fourier spectral analysis detects similar 1,000 (Eddy cycle?) and 2,500 year periods (Hallstatt cycle?) (4). Ref 4 also includes wavelet analysis that shows nonstationarity. No statistically significant 1,500 year period is found in the ice-rafted detritus data by Ref 4.
"The North Atlantic ice-rafting events happen to correlate with most weak events of the Asian monsoon for at least the past 9,000 years,[4][5] while also correlating with most aridification events in the Middle East for the past 55,000 years (both Heinrich and Bond events).[6][7] Also, there is widespread evidence that a ≈1,500 yr climate oscillation caused changes in vegetation communities across all of North America.[8]"
The above paragraph from the current version implies that ice-rafting events are coherent with aridification events at a 1500 yr-1 frequency, but this is not reflected in any of the original references. Gupta et al. Fig S3 wavelet has no 1500-year period. Yang et al. Fig S1 shows no coherency at 1500 years. Bartov et al. don't consider Bond Events (only Heinrich Events). Parker et al. perform no spectral analyses.
The current version also cites Viau et al (2002) for "widespread evidence" of a North American terrestrial 1,500-year oscillation, but the same authors in 2006 (5) state that:
"During the Holocene, climate in North America appears to have varied periodically every 􏰄~1100 years rather than the 􏰄~1500 year cycle found during the last glacial period. Coherence at frequencies between ~900 and ~1100 years between land, ice, and ocean records suggests a common forcing associated with widespread surface impacts during the Holocene."
TLDR; Considering more recent work maybe this page overemphasizes 1,500 years.
1. Andersen, KK., et.al, 2006. Quaternary Science Reviews 25(23-24) 3246–3257.
2. Ditlevsen, P.D., et al., 2007. Climates of the Past 3(1) 129–134.
3. Obrochta, S.P., et al., 2012 Quaternary Science Reviews 55 23–33.
4. Debret, M., et al., 2007. Climates of the Past 3(4) 569–575.
5. Viau, A.E., et al. 2006 Journal of Geophysical Research 111 D09102
Father Huxleyi 06:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bond Events probably not "1500 years" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bond event. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227192411/http://rivernet.ncsu.edu/courselocker/PaleoClimate/Bond%20et%20al.%2C%201997%20Millenial%20Scale%20Holocene%20Change.pdf to http://rivernet.ncsu.edu/courselocker/PaleoClimate/Bond%20et%20al.%2C%201997%20Millenial%20Scale%20Holocene%20Change.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I propose to insert this diagram. It is a plot of Bond, Evans, Muscheler (2008): North Atlantic Holocene Drift Ice Proxy Data. IGBP PAGES/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology  Data Contribution Series # 2008-018. (Found at: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/contributions_by_author/bond2001/bond2001.txt, accessed January 8th, 2019.) Labels have been added manually and placed as in :de:Heinz Wanner: Klima und Mensch. Eine 12'000-jährige Geschichte. Haupt, 2016, , Pages 120–124. --DeWikiMan (talk) 07:13, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graph of bond events 

message: Why was the 5.9 kiloyear event page completely deleted and redirected to this page? Any scientific reason to question that event? If so, then why it is still mentioned in this page? --Crazyketchupguy (talk) 02:01, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  5.9 kiloyear event