[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) FWD: Fireball Frequency
Phil Bagnall (relayed by Lew) wrote:
> There have been various papers published by organizations like the BAA and IMO.
> Comparing reports since the War clearly shows a slight fall in fireball
> activity, despite the fact that there are more observers now than at any time in
> the past. This lead the BAA Meteor Section Director to conclude that
> Taurid fireballs do not exist(!) even though evidence for Taurid fireballs goes
> back to at least the 11th Century and there are numerous photographs.
Was Neil really claiming that none exist? I thought the argument was
one of frequency as quoted in earlier BAA Handbook Meteor Diaries.
There was a long time where the showers and comments in the Meteor
Diary were left unchanged, and so certain, let's say, half-truths
persisted from year to year, without regard for the latest data.
Despite my major overhaul around 1977, I think I wasn't ruthless
enough. I propagated the comment "rich in fireballs". Rich is
somewhat vague, and I'd concur that this remark might be misleading,
indeed I'd accept that the Taurids aren't rich in fireballs. What I
should have done is indicate that the shower is famed for its bright
(+1 is bright for me), slowing-moving, long-pathed meteors.
David Asher presented evidence for a periodicity in Taurid
activity/fireballs. Unfortunately, my IMC Reports are in transit as
I've recently moved, so I can't look up the details. Anyone got a
copy of the Puimichel IMC Proceedings to relay the main points of
David's paper?
Malcolm
References: