[meteorite-list] (refute) An alternative origin of tektites

From: Charles O'Dale <codale0806_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed Mar 30 08:23:41 2005
Message-ID: <002701c5352b$b0902630$6e656718_at_mdguo5m3tdnvnv>

Graham and list:

This is the information I refuted his article with. If anyone observes a
mistake in my information, PLEASE speak up!

..................................................................................

I will quote from the article statements with <quote> .... <unquote> and
follow
immediately with my question.

Many of your references are from O'Keefe (1976), much has happened since
1976, see below.

<quote> Evidence suggest, however, that the physical process and conditions
required to remove water (refining) from common soils and rock are not
created in an instantaneous impact event. <unquote> WHAT EVIDENCE? "Impact
Physics Constraints on the Origin of Tektites"; Melosh gives an excellent
hypothesis on how tektites are terrestrially formed by bolide impacts
without invoking a moon source combined with earth rings.

<quote>. since the presence of atmospheric resistance retards the velocity
of ejected material within a short distance. <unquote> The molten tektites
were ejected along the vacuum shaft turbulence in the atmosphere caused by
the passage of the large bolide traveling at >12 km/sec, is the common
explanation as to the method the tektites kept their velocity and traveled
long distances. You did not mention this.

<quote> ... absence of target fragments and projectile contamination in
tektites ....<unquote> The following empirical evidence refutes this
statement. Using Re-Os isotope systematics, found evidence for a small
meteoritic component in the Haitian glasses. C. Koeberl - Other tektites
have nickel-iron spherules (as inclusions) typical of iron-nickel meteorites
and coesite, a high pressure form Of SiO2 (quartz) often associated with
impact craters. Richard Jakiel - Recent findings of shocked quartz within
tektite layers has strengthened even more the conclusion that tektites form
by impact melting of terrestrial sediments. Chemical analysis of the Ivory
Coast tektites has shown that they have many similarities with 2 billion
year old crustal Archean rocks in Africa; these are the kinds of rocks that
Bosumtwi crater formed in. Further study has shown that the tektites and
rocks from Bosumtwi are have similar enough compositions to consider
Bosumtwi to be a source of the tektites, Schnetzler and coworkers (1967). .
with major and trace element analysis, volatile analysis, all showing that
the protolith for tektites was terrestrial continental sediment, Koeberl,
1990 in the journal Tectonophysics.

 <quote> ... the tektites in all four strewn fields belong to a single
family and thus originated from a common source.<unquote> This statement is
contradicted by your statement quoted next:

<quote> The North American, Central European, and Ivory Coast tektites are
chronologically (though not necessarily in chemical composition) linked to
three impact craters, namely Chesapeake Bay for the North American, Ries
Kessl for the Central European, and Bosumtwi for the Ivory Coast <unquote>
Do you disqualify radiometric dating or are you ignoring radiometric dating
methods? What does "though not necessarily in chemical composition" mean?
There is empirical evidence that states that tektites are linked in chemical
composition to their respective bolide impact craters. The area around the
Ries Crater, in Germany, is probably the source for Moldavites -- the age of
the crater, 14.7 million years old, is identical with the age of Moldavites
(tektites). Precision age determinations on the Haitian glasses and impact
melt from the Chicxulub crater have shown that both material are identical
in age to each other and with the K-T boundary, at 65 Ma. Some 1,700
(tektites) have been found in Georgia to date, and potassium-argon
geochronology has dated them to around 35 million years of age (the age of
the Chesapeake Crater). Both the K-Ar and Fission track analyses of Ivory
Coast tektites, Ivory Coast microtektites, and Bosumtwi Glass correspond to
an age of approximately 1.3 million years old (the age of the Bosumtwi
Meteorite crater).



<quote> Australasian strewn field. impact structure.. has not yet been found
<unquote> Four out of five (see previous paragraph) of the tektite strewn
fields have been identified with an associated crater. Are you implying that
there is no crater associated with the Australasian strewn field and are you
basing your ring hypothesis on this one unresolved condition? Also, Glass
and Wu [1993] identified shocked quartz and coesite in many cores from the
Australasian strewn field taken within 2000 km from the supposed source area
located on the Indochina Peninsula. Would you agree that this strongly
implies that the source of these tektites is from a bolide impact?

<quote>. atmospheric heating could produce sufficient heat for complete
degassing of argon and thus reset the K-Ar clock <unquote> Based on your
statement, the atomic clocks in meteorites would be reset, as they would
have had the same amount of "atmospheric heating" as the tektites. They were
not, and neither were the tektites. The reason for this is that it isn't
friction, but ram pressure that heats the meteoroid. When a gas is
compressed it gets hot, like when a bicycle pump is vigorously used to
inflate a tire. A meteoroid, moving at 33,500 mph (15 kilometers a second)
or more compresses the air in front of it violently. The air itself gets
very hot, which is what heats the meteoroid and melts the outer skin. This
molten skin is immediately blown away from the main bolide body, thus the
internal temperature of the meteorite is kept constant (leaving the internal
argon unmolested). And, just my opinion, if an object totally melts (to
reset its atomic clock) while traveling at 12 km/sec through our atmosphere,
I cannot imagine it retaining any mass at impact. Look what happens to
meteors. It has been accepted that the K-Ar clocks of the tektites were
reset upon their respective bolide's impact and within the terrestrial
impact melting process.

Charles O'Dale 08 November 2004





> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 01:02:51 -0700
> From: "Graham Christensen" <voltage_at_telus.net>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] An alternative origin of tektites
> To: <Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Message-ID: <005501c534fe$df4b03a0$c3e13b8e_at_megavolt>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
> Really? I don't know a lot about tektites so I just assumed the guy would
> have done his research. What kind of emperical evidence do you have that
> refutes it?
>
> Interested in learning more,
> Graham
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Graham Christensen
> voltage_at_telus.net
> http://www.geocities.com/aerolitehunter
> msn messenger: majorvoltage_at_hotmail.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles O'Dale" <codale0806_at_rogers.com>
> To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 6:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] An alternative origin of tektites
>
>
>>I had replied to the author of that piece of pseudoscience refuting all of
>>his points. He answered once with more pseudoscience. I refuted his reply
>>and have not heard from him since. The article was full of "it could have
>>happened this way" without the empirical evidence to back it up.
>>
>> I had complained to the editors of the RASC journal regarding the lack of
>> screening of their articles. Got lip service from them. I was shocked
>> that
>> a reputable journal from the RASC would publish an article that could be
>> refuted so easily with empirical evidence. It showed a complete lack of
>> scientific research on articles received.
>>
>> I can forward the word file of my correspondence to anyone who is
>> interested.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Charles O'Dale
>> Meeting Chair
>> Ottawa RASC
>> http://www.ottawa.rasc.ca/astronomy/earth_craters/index.html
>>
>>>
>>> Message: 8
>>> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 04:00:33 -0700
>>> From: "Graham Christensen" <voltage_at_telus.net>
>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] An alternative origin of tektites
>>> To: <Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
>>> Message-ID: <022e01c531f3$08805810$c3e13b8e_at_megavolt>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>>> reply-type=original
>>>
>>> I read an article in the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada journal
>>> that
>>> said that the Earth once had a ring of tektites or a system of rings
>>> around
>>> it and when the supercontinent pangea formed, the earth's gravitational
>>> field became lop-sided and the tektite material in the ring ended up in
>>> an
>>> orbital resonance with pangea and the tektites formed a clump or "ring
>>> arc"
>>> that was directly over pangea at perigee. When pangea broke up, the
>>> resonance dissapeared and the ring arc's orbit began to decay The shape
>>> and
>>> distribution of the australasian tektite strewnfield and the ablasion
>>> characteristics of the tektites is consistent with a ring arc's orbit
>>> decaying and eventually bringing the material crashing to earth at a low
>>> angle.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, the tektites associated with the chesapeake bay crater may
>>> infact have been dragged down by the impactor's gravitational field as
>>> it
>>> passed through or near the rings and this may be the case with other
>>> tektite
>>> fields as well.
>>>
>>> I have the article here on paper but I can't find it on the internet.
>>> I'm
>>> not sure if this has been posted before but if anyone's interested I
>>> could
>>> type up the text and E-mail it to the list.
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> Graham Christensen
>>> voltage_at_telus.net
>>> http://www.geocities.com/aerolitehunter
>>> msn messenger: majorvoltage_at_hotmail.com
Received on Wed 30 Mar 2005 08:23:39 AM PST