I’m not attempting to define catastrophe. I am observing that most attempts at describing past events seem to be biased toward gradual changes over time (with an exception for Niagra falls).
A similar bias I observe is attributing ancient pieces of art such as pottery as being created for religious purposes. Our observations of current human behavior (pet rocks is one example) is we humans sometimes create stuff “just because its fun”.
Another bias is the assumption that ancient peoples were ignorant about all things compared to us today. My experience is that based on writings by various sources leads me to believe we are less intellectual than our ancestors. For example, the Hebrew language and biblical stories was originally understood to have multiple meanings and messages even down to each word. For us we are only able to absorb one level of meaning.
We are more 'knowledgeable' in specific areas, but mostly ignorant of anything else. If we had to live 10,000 years ago, few of us could survive more than 3 days. Plus, they passed on knowledge to their children from the start. We let our kids look it up on Google.
For example, the Hebrew language and biblical stories was originally understood to have multiple meanings and messages even down to each word. For us we are only able to absorb one level of meaning.
Hmmmm.... the general public may be that way, but there are some exceptions. I imagine you are one.
The scientific community is as corrupt as the politicians. Too much at stake (grant money, careers) to investigate anything but "established science" and if anyone dares to bring up anomalies, they come up with lame "the horse drowned" scenarios and go out of their way to destroy the heretics.