[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: