[Paper Review] The "human" statistics of terrestrial impact cratering rate

L. Jetsu|ArXiv.org|Jan 16, 1997

Astro and Planetary Science3 citations

TL;DR

This paper demonstrates that apparent periodicities in Earth's terrestrial impact cratering record are largely an artifact of human bias in assigning integer ages to craters, not evidence of real astronomical periodicity. Using statistical analysis, the authors show that the 'human-signal'—the rounding of ages to whole numbers—creates spurious periodic patterns that have misled researchers in astronomy, geology, and paleontology.

ABSTRACT

The most significant periodicities in the terrestrial impact crater record are due to the human-signal: the bias of assigning integer values for the crater ages. This bias seems to have eluded the proponents and opponents of real periodicity in the occurrence of these events, as well as the theorists searching for an extraterrestrial explanation for such periodicity. The human-signal should be seriously considered by scientists in astronomy, geology and paleontology when searching for a connection between terrestrial major comet or asteroid impacts and mass extinctions of species.

Motivation & Objective

• To investigate the origin of reported periodicities in the terrestrial impact cratering record.
• To examine whether the observed periodicities are due to real astrophysical phenomena or human data-handling biases.
• To challenge the assumption that periodic patterns in crater ages indicate external causes such as comet showers or planetary alignments.
• To highlight the influence of age-rounding practices on statistical analysis in planetary science.
• To urge researchers in astronomy, geology, and paleontology to reconsider the validity of claimed periodicity in impact events and mass extinctions.

Proposed method

• Analyzing the distribution of crater ages assigned in the literature, focusing on the prevalence of integer values.
• Applying statistical techniques to detect artificial periodicities introduced by rounding ages to whole numbers.
• Comparing the observed frequency spectrum of crater ages with simulated data where ages are rounded to integers.
• Using spectral analysis to identify spurious periodic signals in the data.
• Assessing the impact of age-rounding on the interpretation of long-term cratering trends.
• Evaluating the robustness of previous claims of periodicity in light of this human-induced bias.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 To what extent do integer age assignments distort the apparent periodicity in the terrestrial impact cratering record?
• RQ2 Can the observed periodicities in cratering data be explained by human data-processing biases rather than astrophysical cycles?
• RQ3 How does age-rounding affect the reliability of statistical tests used to detect periodicity in geological records?
• RQ4 Why have previous studies failed to recognize the role of age-rounding in generating spurious periodic signals?
• RQ5 What implications does this human-signal have for the interpretation of impact events in relation to mass extinctions?

Key findings

• The most significant periodicities reported in the terrestrial impact cratering record are primarily due to the human-signal—specifically, the practice of assigning integer ages to craters.
• Rounding of crater ages to whole numbers introduces artificial periodicity into the data, which can be detected through spectral analysis.
• This human-induced bias has likely misled researchers in astronomy, geology, and paleontology who interpret periodic patterns as evidence of external astrophysical causes.
• The study shows that the statistical significance of claimed periodicities is largely an artifact of data presentation rather than a reflection of physical processes.
• The authors conclude that the 'human-signal' must be carefully considered when analyzing long-term impact records and linking them to mass extinctions.
• The findings suggest that previous claims of periodic impact events due to planetary or galactic cycles may be statistically unfounded if not re-evaluated with corrected age distributions.