[meteorite-list] New Iron (Ataxite) SHRAPNEL

From: Steve Schoner <schoner_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:12:42 GMT
Message-ID: <20100623.081242.11473.0_at_webmail12.dca.untd.com>

That would be a great find as a new ataxite (low nickel) with an impact crater. But until the analysis is in I have my doubts as the shrapnel part has me wondering...

This area of the desert was most probably flown over by bombers back in WWII. Could that hole be the product of a bomb that was dropped? Bombers often unloaded hung up bombs in odd locations.

At any rate if I were searching any area close to a WWII battlefield it would be wise to keep that in mind, as any unexploded ammo or even mines might still be active.

Would not want any to be the last casualty of WWII.

Steve Schoner
www.petroslides.com
IMCA #4470

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:04:49 -0400
From: Mexicodoug <mexicodoug at aim.com>
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New Iron (Ataxite) SHRAPNEL
To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Message-ID: <8CCE0441CEA650F-9DC-529B at webmail-m092.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed

Hi Svend, List,

"Zooming out the sat-image, one notes that the general wind direction
in the area
is north by northeast to south to southwest. Thus, any Aeolian
deflation or wind
shaped sedimentation pattern around the crater would have to be
oriented along
this axis. This appears not to be case. Instead we see a radial pattern
with the
crater as its center."

Svend has described poetry in motion; I am going to save his
description for reruns with a cup of coffee and savour the detailed
analysis, perhaps when life is at a kind moment and I am out in the
desert observing the night sky and inventing my own constellations for
family members.

The impact rays are probably already covered quite well, but if it is
not clear, let me try to add this:

We have a central source of material and under Richard's hypothesis,
wind blowing down points on the rim to form these "rays". We look at
the rays and the first thing we notice is that they are as quite well
defined. Svend's comments about the character of the prevailing wind
direction, pavement and bedrock aside, let's try the strategy of proof
by contradiction strictly under Richard's hypothesis:

Suppose this is a sandy or powdery place where the wind can blow out
spokes from the sand source(hole, crater, pit, whatever). Looking at
the rays from all directions we are forced to reason that the wind must
be blowing from all those directions or else we wouldn't have a hub and
spoke design around the crater.

But ... if the wind is blowing sand and powder spokes from all
directions, why would the spokes be linear, nearly as well formed
distally as near the crater? Because wind from all the directions of
the compass would cause a scattering proportional to the distance from
the crater, perhaps curves if it was a windstorm from another
direction, and not a sharp delineation towards the ends of the rays
like a bicycle wheel. The absence of this is a contradiction ... the
backbones of the rays are too straight and well defined to support
Richard's idea. A much simpler explanation is that someone painted them
on a something solid ground - who better than Mother nature responding
to the impact?

Kindest wishes Svend, and Richard, thanks
Doug




____________________________________________________________
Refinance Now 4.0% FIXED!
$160,000 Mortgage for $633/mo. Free. No Obligation. Get 4 Quotes!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3341/4c221695111c213e178st03duc
Received on Wed 23 Jun 2010 10:12:42 AM PDT