[meteorite-list] ill need more

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:44:13 -0600
Message-ID: <053101c75897$997053d0$32ea8c46_at_ATARIENGINE>

Hi, Michael, Jeffrey, List

    Michael, as you well know, if the stone is
not preserved, conserved, abducted by a museum,
university, or government agency, examined by
a geologist, mineralogist, scholar, savant, published,
mentioned, noted, or abstracted, and then, in more
scientific times, cut, sectioned, analyzed, poked in
the noble gases and asked to cough --- it does not
exist.

    There is no "meteorite" named ZVEZVAN, no
entries in the Catalogue, no specimens, no slices,
no nothing. Just an article in the NYTimes and one
dead wedding guest. Not much, unless the wedding
guest mattered to you. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.
What? Slow news day in Zvezvan?

    There are innumerable historical accounts of
"fabulous" events for which at the time there was
no "rational" explanation that are perfectly and
consistently what would be expected from
a meteorite that are presently blythely dismissed
as being "without proof."

    There is a well-known case of a Franciscan monk
of Milan being killed by a meteorite striking him in the
leg (17th century). This is a much disputed account
despite a large number of witness and perfectly consistent
details. It was called a "celestial stoning," the notion of
meteorites being unknown at the time, and was widely
reported and well attested, but is widely regarded by the
"experts" of today as the report of the ignorant and
the credulous.

    Then, in 1985, a historian quite accidentally discovered
a lengthy account written by the physician who attempted
to save the monk's life (and failed). The "autopsy report"
is clear: the man's thigh was punctured side-to-side by a
blocky piece of heavy dark stone larger than a bullet; the
wound would have been survivable except that the "stone"
severed the femoral artery and the victim bled out.

    Those 17th century guys just didn't realize that without
a video tape of the whole thing, nobody was ever going to
believe them! No guest shot on Oprah for them... But,
frankly, to dismiss entirely these accounts for which there
is no inherent clause for dismissal as "the report of the
ignorant and the credulous" is... What's the word? Oh,
yes: ignorant and credulous. But I'm just re-iterating in a
minor way the discussion in Chap. 13 of Lewis book.
Go read that, an excellent book on meteorites.

    Jeffrey, if you have archival access to the NYT, you
might try for March 11, 1897 (1:4) account of a meteorite
whose fragments pierced walls, killed one horse, injured
another, and knocked out cold a man named David
Leisure, in New Martinsville, West Virginia, apparently
an explosive air-burst. (That's all I have, and that may
have been all that was in the Times.)

    As for the "glowing hot" references in such accounts,
that is the result of one of the great fallacies of human
perception and need not invalidate an account. Ascribing
heat to meteorites is akin to "seeing" lightening as red.

    Before 1800, in the many hundreds of descriptions
of lightening to be found in the literatures of every culture
on the planet, lightening is described as being red in color.
I accumulated 700 references to the color of lightening
prior to the late 18th century and found only one reference
to "blue" lightening; ALL others were red. Since the early
19th century, lightening is always described as "blue,
blue-white, bluish white." Why? Better eyesight nowadays?

    No. Before 1800, everyone "knew" lightening was "fire"
from heaven, and "fire" is red. Now, everyone "knows"
that lightening is electrical, a gigantic atmospheric spark,
and "electricity" is "blue" (or blue-white). Any (and every)
fool knows that. Human beings DO NOT SEE what's in
front of them; they DO SEE what they "know" to be true.
They "know" meteorites are fiery objects, so they're "hot."
Reality has nothing to do with it.

    A great many genuine in-the-book historical falls come
with witness descriptions of "hot rocks." Whether there
are ever any real "hot rocks" is impossible to determine
because they're going to be reported as hot whether they
were or not.


Sterling K. Webb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael L Blood" <mlblood at cox.net>
To: "Jeffrey Shallit" <elvis at graceland.math.uwaterloo.ca>; "Meteorite List"
<Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>
Cc: <shallit at graceland.math.uwaterloo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] ill need more


Hi Jeffrey,
        Thanks!
        However, I was wondering what the NAME of this meteorite is....
"Zvezvan" is not listed in Meteorites A to Z.
        Michael


on 2/24/07 5:26 PM, Jeffrey Shallit at elvis at graceland.math.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:

> Ask and ye shall receive:
>
> "Little thing like a meteor fails to discourage bride"
> New York Times
> December 8 1929
> p. E1
>
> Special correspondence of the New York Times
>
> Belgrade, Nov. 20. - The heavens "blessed" a bride in unwonted
> and unwelcome form in the village of Zvezvan today. As the wedding
> party was nearing the church a meteor fell into one of the carriages
> immediately in front of that in which the bride was seated.
>
> One of the wedding guests, a man, was killed, the woman sitting
> opposite him was badly injured and the bride fainted. The crowd
> scattered in panic, but after a brief delay the marriage was
> duly solemnized.
>
> The meteor, which was glowing hot, measured forty centimeters in
> diameter.
>

--
You can complain because roses have thorns, or you can rejoice
because thorns have roses.
            - Ziggy - in a comic strip by Tom Wilson
--

Received on Sat 24 Feb 2007 11:44:13 PM PST