[meteorite-list] Re: Comet: Talking Points, #1
From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon Jul 31 17:54:50 2006
In all cases of such events in dispute, we have
a) Is there evidence that there was any such event?
Baillie's tree-rings, the study of chronicles
and records (tip of hat to E. P.), and more.
b) what are the possible causes of the event?
I discussed all the proposed causes at some length,
pro's, con's, problems, virtues, of each:
1. Napier & Clube's Encke protocomet and remnant
2. Baillie's single impact theory, not that different a theory
3. A previous earlier and bigger eruption of Krakatoa
did occur but cannot be dated to within centuries of
530-540 AD with any precision.
4. And, the possibility of a dust event as the cause and
how it could explain the presence of some evidences
and the lack of others, a possibility I raised.
We were discussing The Problem. We were, I thought,
looking for a non-contradictory explanation. The thread sprang
from an inquiry from a List Member, who asked "Could This
Have Happened?" True, Mark had heard about it in the
context of the single impact theory.
I suppose you could insist that the discussion on The List
be narrowly limited to that SOLE aspect of the problem of the
534 AD event, to that aspect only, and that any other aspect
of the problem be banned from the discussion, neither should
the problem in any other, fuller perspective be raised,
discussed nor mentioned by anybody.
However, I doubt anyone would pay any attention.
Frankly, I cannot see why they should. What advantage
would there would be in that approach? It is The Problem
itself, in its entirety, that we are interested in, is it not?
Sterling K. Webb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Langbroek" <marco.langbroek_at_wanadoo.nl>
To: "Sterling K. Webb" <sterling_k_webb_at_sbcglobal.net>; "meteorite list"
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Comet: Talking Points, #1
> Sterling K. Webb wrote:
>> Marco says, "What we are talking about here is
>> a significant flux of large meteoroids entering our
>> atmosphere and creating airbursts (given the lack
>> of impact craters), if this theory is correct."
>> This, of course is exactly what I was NOT
>> talking about, was in fact arguing against, but Marco
>> pays very little (no) attention to what others are
> [and more blah blah]
> I beg your pardon? We were distinctly discussing impact events as the
> cause of an AD 540 tree-ring anomaly and 6th centrury social/ethnic change
> in Britain.
> You then suddenly drag supernovae into it. Which I ignore because that was
> not the point under discussion.
> It is an old, cheap trick to change subject during a discussion.
> - Marco
> Dr Marco Langbroek
> Dutch Meteor Society (DMS)
> e-mail: meteorites_at_dmsweb.org
> private website http://home.wanadoo.nl/marco.langbroek
> DMS website http://www.dmsweb.org
Received on Mon 31 Jul 2006 05:54:40 PM PDT