[meteorite-list] detailed careful fair critique of most cases of purported impact causes of extinctions, Grzegorz Racki, Silesian U., Poland, 64 p: Rich Murray 2012.03.13
detailed careful fair critique of most cases of purported impact causes of extinctions, Grzegorz Racki, Silesian U., Poland, 64 p: Rich Murray 2012.03.13 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2012/03/detailed-careful-fair-critique-of-most.html http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/97 [ I'm grateful to find this posted on http://cosmictusk.com/tree-falls-in-forest-and-one-hand-claps-science-press-picks-the-new-mexican-black-mat-study/comment-page-1/#comments as a link given in a comment by Thomas Lee Elifritz March 8, 2012 at 4:33 pm I was impressed by how difficult it is to gather and mobilize evidence in this very complex research. Really courteous, patient, open-minded, detail oriented collaboration is essential. Grzegorz Racki, like many experts, in this review accepted the recent refutation of the YD impact hypothesis -- I wonder how he will respond to the new wave of confirming evidence. ] http://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app57/app20110058_acc.pdf 64 pages This manuscript is a part of a special issue titled “Thirty odd years after Alvarez’s discovery: Faunal evolution and principal bio-events of the Cretaceous Period – recent progress and future directions” (guest editors: Elena A. Jagt-Yazykowa and John W.M. Jagt). The Alvarez impact theory of mass extinction; limits to its applicability and the ‘great expectations syndrome’ GRZEGORZ RACKI Racki, G. 201X. The Alvarez impact theory of mass extinction; limits to its applicability and the ‘great expectations syndrome’. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 5X (X): xxx–xxx. http://dx.doi.org/10.4202/app.2011.0058 [ abstract ] For the past three decades, the Alvarez impact theory of mass extinction, causally related to catastrophic meteorite impacts, has been recurrently applied to multiple extinction boundaries. However, these multidisciplinary research efforts across the globe have been largely unsuccessful to date, with one outstanding exception: the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary. The unicausal impact scenario as a leading explanation, when applied to the complex fossil record, has resulted in force fitting of data and interpretations (‘great expectations syndrome’ of Tsujita). The misunderstandings can be grouped at three successive levels of the testing process, and involve the unreflective application of the impact paradigm: (i) factual misidentification, i.e., an erroneous or indefinite recognition of the extraterrestrial record in sedimentological, physical and geochemical contexts, (ii) correlative misinterpretation of the adequately documented impact signals due to their incorrect dating, and (iii) causal overestimation when the proved impact characteristics are doubtful as a sufficient trigger of a contemporaneous global cosmic catastrophe. Examples of uncritical belief in the simple cause-effect scenario for the Frasnian–Famennian, Permian–Triassic and Triassic–Jurassic (and the Eifelian–Givetian and Paleocene–Eocene as well) global events include mostly item-1 pitfalls (factual misidentification), with Ir enrichments and shocked minerals frequently misidentified. Therefore, these mass extinctions are still at the first test level, and only the F–F extinction is potentially seen in the context of item-2, the interpretative step, because of the possible causative link with the Siljan Ring crater (53 km in diameter). The erratically recognized cratering signature is often marked by large timing and size uncertainties, and item-3, the advanced causal inference, is in fact limited to clustered impacts that clearly predate major mass extinctions. The multi-impact lag-time pattern is particularly clear in the Late Triassic, when the largest (100-km diameter) Manicouagan crater was possibly concurrent with the end-Carnian extinction (or with the late Norian tetrapod turnover on an alternative time scale). The relatively small crater sizes and cratonic (crystalline rock basement) setting of these two craters further suggest the strongly insufficient extraterrestrial trigger of worldwide environmental traumas. However, to discuss the kill potential of impact events in a more robust fashion, their location and timing, vulnerability factors, especially target geology and palaeogeography in the context of associated climate-active volatile fluxes, should to be rigorously assessed. The current lack of conclusive impact evidence synchronous with most mass extinctions may still be somewhat misleading due to the predicted large set of undiscovered craters, particularly in light of the obscured record of oceanic impact events. K e y w o r d s: Bolide impacts, extraterrestrial markers, impact craters, mass extinctions, Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary, Triassic–Jurassic boundary, Frasnian–Famennian boundary. Grzegorz Racki [ ra...@us.edu.pl ], Department of Earth Sciences, Silesian University, Będzińska Str. 60, PL-41-200 Sosnowiec, Poland. Received 9 July 2011, accepted 18 December 2011, available online 24 February 2012. 10 m br
[meteorite-list] some choice informed creative comments from 202 re wattsupwiththat.com blog article New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas: Rich Murray 2012
some choice informed creative comments from 202 re wattsupwiththat.com blog article New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas: Rich Murray 2012.03.13 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2012/03/some-choice-informed-creative-comments.html http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/96 really nice to see so much friendly, cooperative sharing of ideas and evidence ! http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/12/new-evidence-supporting-extraterrestrial-impact-in-younger-dryas/#comment-921464 New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas Posted on March 12, 2012 by Anthony Watts 202 Responses Lars Silen says: March 12, 2012 at 4:57 am The big problem so far has been where to find some reasonably big crater(s) that are young enough. My feeling is that easily identifiable craters are missing because the impact area was covered by some kilometer of ice. The result would be seemingly very old craters the result of a billion years of weathering because the typical thick layers of ejecta are missing. I think two areas in SW finland should be checked. Mossala fjaerd is a crater like formation where broken edges still are sharp, experts say the crater is of volcanic origin and extremely old. My view is that what we see is the very bottom of an impact in a 1…2 km thick ice layer. No ejecta is found because it melted soon after the impact. The size of the Mossala crater is ca 6 km diameter. In the Aland area some 40 km towards WNW there is another slightly smaller crater 5.5 km in diameter. Again with broken surfaces that still seem fresh. Some 15 km south of Mossala I have found glazed sea bottom fragments similar to material found in the old Swedish Siljan krater (dia 50 km). If there is interest I could create a web page with some pictures. It is easy to see that two impacts like these would have injected tens of km^3 of water into the stratospere probably causing an extended “atomic war” like winter. /Lars Silen, physicist Finland. Mike McMillan says: March 12, 2012 at 6:54 am Lars Silen Interesting region. You guys took some heavy hits. Here are a few Google Earth coords: Mossala 60.299612° 21.382232° Angskars 60.471579° 21.016164° Aland 60.140649° 20.124260° Siljan 61.046054° 14.899703° Might have to unzoom a bit to see the crater, especially Siljan and Aland. Lars Silen says: March 12, 2012 at 1:10 pm Re feet2thefire and George Tetley: I made a new web page in English of the Mossala and Ava craters in archipelago in SW Finland. http://www.kolumbus.fi/larsil/Mossala_and_Ava_craters.html Notice that I don’t know what the origin of these formations are, I think they are fairly recent but obviously I may be wrong. Comments and possible pointers to articles are very welcome. The web page also gives a feeling for what Finnish (Arctic) summer looks like. We live north of 60 deg N!. /Lars Silen, physicist Finland. beng says: March 12, 2012 at 7:10 am The only two major observed impacts in recorded history are the Tunguska, Siberia event & the Shumacher-Levy comet impact on Jupiter. The first was an air-burst of a supposed chondrite meteor, the second a tidally-broken comet-train, producing a “string” of impacts. From this it is hard to imagine that such impact characteristics are unusual -- much more likely they are common. Simple postulate: Approximately 12,900 yrs ago a comet-train impact produced shallowly-angled air-burst(s) with multiple in-line impacts -- in this case stretching from central Mexico north north-east (west Texas has evidence too) to near, say, ~500 miles north of Lake Superior directly above, or on the 10,000 ft thick Laurentide ice-sheet . Terratons of ice were vaporized, or on the edges, physically blasted onto the surrounding land and into sub-orbital trajectories. How that would affect areas when it inevitably came back down is hard to imagine -- but it would be awesome & incredibly destructive. The climate change that would occur after this event would also be hard to imagine, but yet perhaps we have the evidence right in front -- the YD. Dennis Cox says: March 12, 2012 at 9:14 am Regarding the search for a crater: In the original 2007 paper titled Evidence for an extraterrestrial impact 12,900 years ago that contributed to the megafaunal extinctions and the Younger Dryas cooling, R.B. Firestone et al proposed that a 4 mile wide bolide had broken up in the atmosphere and that most of it had hit the Laurentide Ice Sheet. They cited some unpublished data from experiments by Peter Schultz from Brown U. And where he had done hypervelocity impact experiments at the NASA Ames Hypervelocity Vertical Gun Range simulating a low angle hyper velocity impact into ice. Those experiment showed that a half mile wide bolide coming in at an oblique angle can hit a half mile thick sheet of ice and leave no crater in the surface beneath after the ice melts away. Just randomized patterns of surface melting. Those
[meteorite-list] Test
Sent from my iPad __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Test.....please disregard.
Test. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Holbrook AZ strewn field
Hi Jerry, My wife and I each found our first meteorites there last year. I think this map is all you need: http://www.meteoritestudies.com/holstrew.jpg Good luck. Thanks, Peter -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Jerry T Estruth Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:42 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Holbrook AZ strewn field Hello, At age 69, finding a meteorite in the wild is very high on my bucket list. I understand that my best bet in AZ would be in the Holbrook strewn field. Can anybody suggest the whereabouts of a place there where I could start looking? GPS coordinates would be extremely helpful but any directions would be welcome. Thank you very much, Jerry Estruth Tucson, AZ __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Holbrook AZ strewn field
Hello, At age 69, finding a meteorite in the wild is very high on my bucket list. I understand that my best bet in AZ would be in the Holbrook strewn field. Can anybody suggest the whereabouts of a place there where I could start looking? GPS coordinates would be extremely helpful but any directions would be welcome. Thank you very much, Jerry Estruth Tucson, AZ __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] KS MO OK AR meteor video now posted with sighting map 13MAR2012
Dear List, KS MO OK AR meteor video now posted with sighting map 13MAR2012. http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/2012/03/mbiq-meteor-bot-internet-query-bot.html Dirk Ross...Tokyo __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Met Bulletin Update - New Approvals - But where is the 'Paris' meteorite?.
>Greetings Bulletin Watchers, > >17 new meteorites - one from Oklahoma (Magnum) and 16 various OC's from NWA. But what about the one that fell through a roof in Paris during last summer. Why haven't that one been approved at this time? Seems a long time since the fall. Any problems with that meteorite? Bjørn Sørheim __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Met Bulletin Update - New Approvals - One Oklahoma find, and 16 NWA OC's.
Greetings Bulletin Watchers, 17 new meteorites - one from Oklahoma (Magnum) and 16 various OC's from NWA. Linky - http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=1&pnt=Normal%20table&dr=&page=0 Best regards, MikeG -- --- Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 --- On 3/13/12, E.P. Grondine wrote: > Hi Rich - > > Not really. > > While other posters there have some useful information, your friend Dennis > has none, at least not yet. > > Paul has written about Dennis's earlier impact "discoveries", and I leave > Dennis's new Mexican dessert features to Paul's analysis. > > Even if what Dennis is viewing are pyroclastic features, what we're dealing > with is Pleistocene fauna. Simple ordinary firestorms may account for them, > and none of them are dated. > > In other words, even if you find an impact geobleme, that does not mean it > is specifically from 10,900 BCE. > > E.P. > > > > __ > > Visit the Archives at > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Well informed comments on YD impacts?
Hi Rich - Not really. While other posters there have some useful information, your friend Dennis has none, at least not yet. Paul has written about Dennis's earlier impact "discoveries", and I leave Dennis's new Mexican dessert features to Paul's analysis. Even if what Dennis is viewing are pyroclastic features, what we're dealing with is Pleistocene fauna. Simple ordinary firestorms may account for them, and none of them are dated. In other words, even if you find an impact geobleme, that does not mean it is specifically from 10,900 BCE. E.P. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] NWA 5958 Polished Surface
wow!!! thanks for showing! Stefan - Original Message - From: "Greg Hupé" To: Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 3:00 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] NWA 5958 Polished Surface Hello All, At the request of the new owner of the 3.454g specimen, I polished the very flat side for minimal material loss. Here is the image showing what the inside of this new Ungrouped carbonaceous looks like. http://www.lunarrock.com/NWA5958/nwa5958PolishedSurface1.jpg (Surface area measures 25mm x 18mm) Enjoy! Greg Greg Hupé The Hupé Collection gmh...@centurylink.net www.LunarRock.com NaturesVault (eBay) IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] NWA 5958 - Thin Section Images
Greg wrote: "The second is a droplet shaped chondrule 0.6 mm wide. Cross-polarized light." http://www.lunarrock.com/NWA5958/nwa5958ThinSection2.jpg I surely did enjoy that little porphyritic wonder! Thanks for sharing, Greg! Thanks for taking the picture, John! Cheers, Bernd __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] NWA 5958 - Thin Section Images
Dear List, I received two beautifully made thin section images of NWA 5958 from John Kashuba that I would like to share. Thank you, John!! In the first the original chondrule has at least three accreted layers. It is almost 3 mm in diameter. Transmitted light. http://www.lunarrock.com/NWA5958/nwa5958ThinSection1.jpg The second is a droplet shaped chondrule 0.6 mm wide. Cross-polarized light. http://www.lunarrock.com/NWA5958/nwa5958ThinSection2.jpg Enjoy! Greg Greg Hupé The Hupé Collection gmh...@centurylink.net www.LunarRock.com NaturesVault (eBay) IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] KS MO OK Meteor 13MAR2012
Dear List, KS MO OK Meteor 13MAR2012 occurred at ~06:40 am CDT http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/2012/03/mbiq-meteor-bot-internet-query-bot.html Dirk Ross...Tokyo __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day
Today's Meteorite Picture of the Day: Sikhote Alin http://www.tucsonmeteorites.com/mpod.asp __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] some choice informed creative responses from 138 re wattsupwiththat.com blog article New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas: Rich Murray 201
some choice informed creative comments from 138 re wattsupwiththat.com blog article New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas: Rich Murray 2012.03.13 really nice to see so much friendly, cooperative sharing of ideas and evidence ! http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/12/new-evidence-supporting-extraterrestrial-impact-in-younger-dryas/#comment-921464 New evidence supporting extraterrestrial impact at the start of the Younger Dryas Posted on March 12, 2012 by Anthony Watts 138 Responses Lars Silen says: March 12, 2012 at 4:57 am The big problem so far has been where to find some reasonably big crater(s) that are young enough. My feeling is that easily identifiable craters are missing because the impact area was covered by some kilometer of ice. The result would be seemingly very old craters the result of a billion years of weathering because the typical thick layers of ejecta are missing. I think two areas in SW finland should be checked. Mossala fjaerd is a crater like formation where broken edges still are sharp, experts say the crater is of volcanic origin and extremely old. My view is that what we see is the very bottom of an impact in a 1…2 km thick ice layer. No ejecta is found because it melted soon after the impact. The size of the Mossala crater is ca 6 km diameter. In the Aland area some 40 km towards WNW there is another slightly smaller crater 5.5 km in diameter. Again with broken surfaces that still seem fresh. Some 15 km south of Mossala I have found glazed sea bottom fragments similar to material found in the old Swedish Siljan krater (dia 50 km). If there is interest I could create a web page with some pictures. It is easy to see that two impacts like these would have injected tens of km^3 of water into the stratospere probably causing an extended “atomic war” like winter. /Lars Silen, physicist Finland. Mike McMillan says: March 12, 2012 at 6:54 am Lars Silen Interesting region. You guys took some heavy hits. Here are a few Google Earth coords: Mossala 60.299612° 21.382232° Angskars 60.471579° 21.016164° Aland 60.140649° 20.124260° Siljan 61.046054° 14.899703° Might have to unzoom a bit to see the crater, especially Siljan and Aland. Lars Silen says: March 12, 2012 at 1:10 pm Re feet2thefire and George Tetley: I made a new web page in English of the Mossala and Ava craters in archipelago in SW Finland. http://www.kolumbus.fi/larsil/Mossala_and_Ava_craters.html Notice that I don’t know what the origin of these formations are, I think they are fairly recent but obviously I may be wrong. Comments and possible pointers to articles are very welcome. The web page also gives a feeling for what Finnish (Arctic) summer looks like. We live north of 60 deg N!. /Lars Silen, physicist Finland. beng says: March 12, 2012 at 7:10 am The only two major observed impacts in recorded history are the Tunguska, Siberia event & the Shumacher-Levy comet impact on Jupiter. The first was an air-burst of a supposed chondrite meteor, the second a tidally-broken comet-train, producing a “string” of impacts. From this it is hard to imagine that such impact characteristics are unusual -- much more likely they are common. Simple postulate: Approximately 12,900 yrs ago a comet-train impact produced shallowly-angled air-burst(s) with multiple in-line impacts -- in this case stretching from central Mexico north north-east (west Texas has evidence too) to near, say, ~500 miles north of Lake Superior directly above, or on the 10,000 ft thick Laurentide ice-sheet . Terratons of ice were vaporized, or on the edges, physically blasted onto the surrounding land and into sub-orbital trajectories. How that would affect areas when it inevitably came back down is hard to imagine -- but it would be awesome & incredibly destructive. The climate change that would occur after this event would also be hard to imagine, but yet perhaps we have the evidence right in front -- the YD. Dennis Cox says: March 12, 2012 at 9:14 am Regarding the search for a crater: In the original 2007 paper titled Evidence for an extraterrestrial impact 12,900 years ago that contributed to the megafaunal extinctions and the Younger Dryas cooling R.B. Firestone et al proposed that a 4 mile wide bolide had broken up in the atmosphere and that most of it had hit the Laurentide Ice Sheet. They cited some unpublished data from experiments by Peter Schultz from Brown U. And where he had done hypervelocity impact experiments at the NASA Ames Hypervelocity Vertical Gun Range simulating a low angle hyper velocity impact into ice. Those experiment showed that a half mile wide bolide coming in at an oblique angle can hit a half mile thick sheet of ice and leave no crater in the surface beneath after the ice melts away. Just randomized patterns of surface melting. Those experiments imply that if there is relevant planetary scarring from the event anywhere in the Canadian Shield, instead of the shock metam
