[meteorite-list] On Now! - Sodom & Gomorrah on Science Channel
From: Paul H. <oxytropidoceras_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 9:31:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20100331103148.DYTNY.993886.imail_at_eastrmwml47> In http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2010-March/062654.html Darren Garrison quoted GeoZay as stating: ?I just watched this program. It's left me wondering where are all those meteorites from billions of tons of debris that supposedly fell on Sodom and Gomorrah? If that one nearby town was found, then surely nearby there should be a fanny load of meteorites laying about just waiting to be scooped up. David repsonded: ?I haven't seen the show Isounds like National Enquirer quality stuff though) but not only does nobody know where Sodom and Gamorrah were, nobody knows for sure if they even actually existed, or if they did exist-- when. Here's an article from mid-2009 which (along with the comments at the end) show how little agreement there is on the subject: http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/sodom-and-gomorrah.asp Will their next episode be postulating bioluminescent bacteria as the explanation of why Rudolph's nose glows so bright?? The episode of ?Biblical Mysteries Explained? about Sodom and Gomorrah is largely based upon a popular, self-published book that recycles long discredited claims about the large Kofels Landslide near Tyrol, Austria, being of impact origin. The book is: Bond, A., and M. Hempsell, 2008, A Sumerian Observation of the K?fels' Impact Event, Writersprintshop, 2008, ISBN: 1904623646 They argue that the impact of an asteroid over a kilometer in diameter created the Kofels landslide about 5123 BP near Tyrol, Austria. They argue that the ?back plume from the explosion? was hurled back along its entry path / ?bent over the Mediterranean Sea? and re-entered the atmosphere some 1,600 miles away over the Levant, Sinai, and Northern Egypt and destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. There all sorts of problems with their thesis. 1. First, the age of the Kofels landslide is well established by numerous concordant radiocarbon and cosmogenic dates. as having occurred about 9800?100 years BP. This is some 4,600 ? 4,700 older than claimed by Bond and Hemphill in their book. The radiocarbon dates came from AMS 14C dating of wood buried by the landslide. The age of the Kofels landslide is discussed in: Hermanns, R., L. Blikra, M. Naumann, B. Nilsen, K. Panthi, D. Stromeyer, O. Longva, 2006, Examples of multiple rock-slope collapses from K?fels (?tz valley, Austria) and western Norway. Engineering Geology. vol. 83, no. 1-3, pp. 94-108. and Ivy-Ochs, S., H. Heuberger, P. W. Kubik, H. Kerschner, G. Bonani, M. Frank, and C. Schluchter, 1998, The age of the K?fels event. Relative, 14C and cosmogenic isotope dating of an early Holocene landslide in the central Alps (Tyrol, Austria). Zeitschrift fur Gletscherkunde und Glazialgeologie. vol. 34, pp. 57-70. All Bond and Hemphill can do is make unsupported claims that the radiocarbon are ?contaminated? by some unknown process. Also, a person cannot even claim that seemingly imaginary impact-related ?nuclear processes? can create apparent dates that are older than the actual age of the material. 2. Another problem is that the impact origin of the Kofels landslide has been previously discredited in discussions of its origin as the result of a terminal Pleistocene impact as advocated by Austrian geologist Alexander Tollmann as discussed in: Kristan-Tollmann, E. and A. Tollmann, 1994, The youngest big impact on Earth deduced from geological and historical evidence. Terra Nova. v. 6, no. 2, pp. 209-217. and Deutsch, A., C. Koeberl, J.D. Blum, B. M. French, B. P. Glass, R. Grieve, P. Horn, E. K. Jessberger, G. Kurat, W. U. Reimold, J. Smit, D. Stoffler, and S. R. Taylor, 1994, The impact-flood connection: Does it exist? Terra Nova. vol. 6, pp. 644-650. Also, look at ?Tollmann's hypothetical bolide? at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollmann%27s_hypothetical_bolide It appears that the starting point for the hypothesis that the Kofels Landslide was caused by a extraterrestrial impact was the discovery of natural glass within the deposits of the Kofels Landslide. After the discovery of natural glass, the extraterrestrial impact hypothesis was proposed because, at that time, natural glass was only known to be created by either volcanic or extraterrestrial impact processes. Given the absence of associated volcanic deposits, it was argued the natural glass must have been created by an extraterrestrial impact. However, is it now known that similar natural glasses called "frictionite", are associated with other mega landslides and laboratory experiments and computer simulations show that frictional heating during landslides are quite capable of producing the natural glass found associated with the Kofels Landslide. This is discussed in detail in: Erismann, T. H., and G. Abele, 2001, Dynamics of Rockslides and Rockfalls, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 316 p. http://spot.colorado.edu/~jsedr/BookReviews/March2002/Dynamics.pdf Hermanns, R.., L. Blikra, M. Naumann, B. Nilsen, K. Panthi, D. Stromeyer, O. Longva, 2006, Examples of multiple rock-slope collapses from K?fels (?tz valley, Austria) and western Norway. Engineering Geology. vol. 83, no. 1-3, pp. 94-108. and Sorensen, S.-A., and B. Bauer, 2003, On the dynamics of the K?fels sturzstrom. Geomorphology, vol. 54, no. 1-2, pp. 11-19. Cause effect models of large mass movements http://info.tuwien.ac.at/geophysik/research/landslides/1997_pr01/structure/koefels.htm In addition, it is now known that Kofels Landslide is one of several catastrophic landslides that resulted from the collapse of valley walls oversteepened by glacial erosion at the end of the Pleistocene. The valley walls collapsed when the retreat of glaciers removed ice that was supporting the steep valley walls created by glacial erosion. The lack of any identifiable impact debris, shocked quartz, and crater from the impact of an asteroid over a kilometer in diameter presents major problems in arguing that the Kofels Landslide is impact related. Shocked quartz was once reported from the Kofels Landslide. However, when reexamined, the shocked quartz proved to be tectonically deformed quartz that grossly misidentified as ?shocked quartz? as discussed by: Leroux, H., and J.-C. Doukhan, 1993, Dynamic deformation of quartz in the landslide of Koefels, Austria. European Journal of Mineralogy. vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 893-902. 3. yet another problem is the lack of any credible explanation about why the fireball from the impacting asteroid would bend over / be hurled back along its entry path by some 1,600 miles to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Simply plugging some the numbers that Bond and Hemphill provide for their alleged extraterrestrial impact into the ?Earth Impact Effects Program? by Robert Marcus, H. Jay Melosh, and Gareth Collins readily shows that their impact would have no significant effect in the area where Sodom and Gomorrah allegedly existed. ?Earth Impact Effects Program? http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ For example, using Bond?s and Hemphill?s estimates for the size and mass of their hypothetical asteroid, I found: 1. a hypothetical "K?fels impact event" was too small to either create a fireball, for a stony asteroid (3000kg/m3), or the Middle East lay below the Earth's horizon for the fireball created by an iron asteroid (8000 kg/m3). 2. a hypothetical asteroid was too small to either dump any ejecta, for a stony asteroid (3000kg/m3) in the Middle East, or, in case of an iron asteroid (8000 kg/m3) the ejecta blanket was far too thin to have done any damage. 3. the "plume" / fireball created by such an impact would have radiated thermal radiation for only a few seconds to few minutes. Therefore, the "plume" could not have ignited anything as it drifted over the Middle East. 4. the total kinetic energy that would have been released by the impact of the alleged asteroid would have obliterated Mt. Gamskogel if any significant piece of the, by then broken up, asteroid clipped into this mountain. There are all sorts of other problems with this thesis, including their translation of Sumerian, whether Sodom and Gomorrah really existed, and if they existed, where they were actually located. Thus, my opinion of the Sodom and Gomorrah episode of ?Biblical Mysteries Explained? is that it is just one of a number of dull to mildly entertaining fantasy and science fiction programs that can appear on the Science Channel. Yours, Paul H. Received on Wed 31 Mar 2010 10:31:48 AM PDT |
StumbleUpon del.icio.us Yahoo MyWeb |