[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

re: (meteorobs) Re: Fireballs o' Doom



Lew said:
>Also, Dr. Revelle (who I don't know by the way, but
>others on the list seem to) doesn't give any indication WHY he suspects
>fireball, bolide, and/or meteorite fall rates have increased. 

And I would suggest, considering the spotty nature of these reports in the 
past, such a speculation would be very difficult to prove statistically.
As I previously stated, reports of sightings of bolides in the past were 
local in nature, except for spectacular events.

>Is he just
>saying this based on the fact that two meteorite falls (Greenland and El
>Paso) were reported recently? (I wasn't aware of a meteorite fall from the
>Wisconsin fireball - was there one?)
	To date, the latest report I've seen was that there was NO meteorite 
resulting from the greenland event, and I am aware of none for the El Paso 
event that conclusively shows there was a fall. Again, until somebody has a 
rock in their hand, proven to be meteoric, it is pure speculation. If 
anyone is aware of such evidence, I'd love to see it!  

>By the way, I couldn't find anyplace in the articles you posted where any
>scientists speculated that "these kinds of events usually precede larger
>impacts of the extinction size"... For one thing, how in the world would 
>we
>know that? Fireball reports from the dinosaurs??

>Sorry if my messages may have come out a little harsh, Victor. No offense:
>it just seems there's already plenty of hype on this particular topic.

	On this I wholeheartedly agree. The rumor of an impact crater in 
Greenland has taken on a life of it's own despite the evidence to the 
contrary. When "astronomers" who are not knowledgable about the subject of 
meteors and meteorites spout off their opinions to the popular press, it 
does not help science. I recall the one who proclaimed the Fireball in the 
Northeast of 17 November 1997 a Leonid, again, impossible due to the fact 
that a Leonid would have had to travel through several thousand miles of 
the earth's surface in order to reach the sky during that evening hour. The 
same newscast featured an excited homeowner holding several pieces of 
sandstone and quartz saying they fell from the sky and hit him in the head. 
Well maybe they did, but they sure ain't meteorites!!

>Forums like 'meteorobs' are rare in that we can all sit back quietly and
>try to separate the hype from whatever might actually be going on! :)

And we should feel free to discuss them here. However, we  above all others 
should realize the hype and hysteria that the press gives to these events, 
and be sure to look at the scientific facts, and not be drawn in to 
speculation by those whose expertise lies elsewhere.
	Personally, I wish somebody would change that rule that no experienced 
meteor observer can ever see a fall producing fireball:->> Almost EVERY 
person who sees a bolide insists it crashed just miles away, despite the 
fact that the same fireball is witnessed hundreds of miles away as it 
continues on it's path through the atmosphere. And then "scientists" accept 
these obviously incorrect reports as fact.
	Sorry to rant on, but the inaccuracy of the press, whose purpose after 
all, bottom line, is to get people to watch the news, or buy the newspaper,
is substantially different from those who seek to glean scientific truth 
from this information. We must be vigilant in separating the wheat from the 
chaff. Geez that's enough...I'm drifting off into cliches!!
That's my $1.25 for now :->

>Clear skies, and keep up the posts!

That I definately agree on!!

Wayne