That hole has definitely been dug up. But it also doesn¹t appear to be a foot deep. Perhaps in a 10 year old¹s imagination it is.
I just ran the numbers, and if we assume a spherical body (which I have to do) moving at its aerodynamically-limited speed then a 48 g iron meteorite would be moving around 70 m/s (~150 mph) when it reached the ground. I can picture it digging itself in a bit on impact. Like Mike, I¹m not going to proclaim this one to be the genuine article but I¹m also not ready to dismiss it completely. I¹m curious to see how it pans out. Would be nice to get some composition data to compare it with SA or other meteorites. Cheers, MDF > > > On 11/19/09 10:38 AM, "Michael Fowler" <mqfow...@mac.com> wrote: > >> Well, they say a picture is worth a thousand words, and I would certainly >> agree! Thanks, Graham. >> >> A small meteorite could never make a big hole like in the picture, but people >> could, while digging around to find the meteorite at the bottom, so my >> hypothesis has not been conclusively falsified, yet. However, this does >> shift the balance of evidence back toward it being a hoax. >> >> Time will tell. >> >> Mike >> >>> Another picture here showing the so called impact place/pit!! >>> >>> http://208.62.60.4/78/printer_1564.shtml >>> >>> Could a small iron like that falling at terminal velocity produce that in >>> what looks like very hard ground?....looks artificial to me. (unless some >>> excavation was done to retrieve it) >>> >>> I would have thought though that Don must have seen many meteorites and >>> respect his thoughts....but as the latest discussion has shown...very few >>> fresh irons have been seen just after they fell and I still think this does >>> not look like it should....unless the photographs are very poor, making it >>> look browner and glossier than it really is? >>> >>> Would be interesting to have it tested to see if it has been cleaned and >>> treated in some way. >>> >>> I could be wrong, but.... >>> >>> Graham UK >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ---- Michael Fowler <mqfowler at mac.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Meteorite Hoax, or meteorite exaggeration? >>> >>>> >>> >>>> As a meteorite hoax, it is missing many of the classic symptoms, no flaming >>>> trail, no red hot iron at the bottom of the hole etc. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Let me propose an alternate explanation: The size of the hole and the >>>> material shooting 5 feet high was an exaggeration, but it actually is a >>>> real fall. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Mike Fowler >>> >>>> Chicago >> ______________________________________________ >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com >> Meteorite-list mailing list >> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list >> ______________________________________________ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list