A Theory of Cometary Associations with Earthquakes

[Kalopin]

I think it best to "table" any further discussion of rocks, so that you may have the opportunity to answer Tensor's questions.

Please answer those questions now.

But, now I kinda' like describing them. Did I mention the boulder-sized ones, some maybe 3 to 400 pounds or more that seem to have been somewhat molten when impacting, leaving swirl impressions in the rock. I have "slabs" that have been "welded" together under extreme heat and pressures.

[Tensor]

O.k., I'm sorry, I thought I got 'em all. Are you sure? look back, I think I answered, if not, could you give me the one/ones I missed?

I don't see any kind of specific answers, to my specific questions. I removed one of them as Strange provided the proper link, the rest as still open. Post #95 has the open questions.

[Kalopin]

You don't mean the one where you don't understand why so few people saw the lights from the meteor at 2:30 a.m. on what was recorded as one of the coldest winters and two hundred years ago? And why they wouldn't see the lights after the explosions, shaking, and rumblings? Well, it would have been too late for people just waking to see what has already occurred.

[geonuc]

All you geologists know what I'm talking about, don't you!

I have a degree in geology and I looked at your photos. You have some interesting rocks, but none that I would say were formed by meteorite impact. Mind you, photos seldom are definitive, but some of the features you've described can more easily be ascribed to common terrestrial geologic processes.

I also had a chance to look at topographic and terrain maps of the impact area you describe. I'm afraid I don't see what you say is obvious and from your discussion of local rivers diverting and such, you seem to be suggesting an impact crater well over a hundred miles in diameter. As you've described it, this crater would have included within its bounds the Mississippi River. I find it completely incredible that such a impact would have gone unnoticed by scientists of the day, not to mention thousands of other learned people, many of whom were undoubtedly capable of putting observation to paper. Craters don't go away overnight.

Are you aware of the geology of the region as we know it today? Tectonics, failed rift, and all that?

[Shaula]

Well I don't know how exactly to describe many of these rocks. They seemed to have boiled and popped in places. Many appear to have been wrapped around small tree limbs and then the wood has decayed, or maybe burned away within leaving hollow rocks. It appears as if molten iron spherules had fallen on frozen sand, causing rocks to explode on impact leaving cup shapes. It seems as though I have found body parts as well, encased in iron and sandstone. It appears as though the extremities [fingers, toes...] were cold enough to retain a similar shape, as I have what appears to be a large bird talon encased in rock, on the upper end you can look into and still see the bone! I have several that may seem similar to something at Pompeii, only not volcanic, but I believe from a comet.

Wait so the impact was violent enough to melt the rocks and create a big splash zone but somehow not to burn away or flatten the trees? Leaving them still complete enough for molten rock to wrap itself around (without burning them away) and then solidify? And you know how sandstone is formed, right? Give you a clue - impacts are not conducive to its formation. The rocks at Pompeii you are presumably talking about are ash based, not sand or iron.

[Strange]

Maybe you can see it this way: the moon is a Near Earth Object, granted a strong gravitational pull, yet the moon as with all objects is not on a finite orbit. In fact it is common knowledge that the moon is slightly moving away every year.

Despite its large size and proximity, there is no definite evidence that the moon can cause earthquakes.

This comet is almost 1/100th the diameter of the moon (so the mass is nearly a million times less). It was also also 450 times as far away as the moon at its closest approach. So the effect off the comet will have been about 100 billion times less than the moon. If the moon has no detectable effect on earthquakes how do expect this little thing to have any effect?

[Swift]

Yea, you misunderstood and took it wrong. It was in no way my intention to call someone stupid. That is why I said "you/we". I wouldn't consider that questioning someone's intelligence. The only other time that I said anything that could be misconstrued as a personal attack was when I was accused of having "no scientific education". Did you notice?

Are you all sure no scientists have ever considered this to be a theory? Surely, I can't be that much more intelligent, ha, ha.

First you respond to moderation in-thread, which is against our rules, and then you repeat the exact same rude comment. That, and your continuing to not answer questions put to you and your ever changing thread topic now earn you an infraction with points. Next time you get suspended.

You have been warned repeatedly to review our rules; whether you do so or not is your choice, but you will be held to them.

[captain swoop]

It seems to me you are trying to push two ideas together. One the one hand you say the interaction with NEOs causes the earthquakes then you say it was a huge impact.
Which one is it?

[Kalopin]

I have a degree in geology and I looked at your photos. You have some interesting rocks, but none that I would say were formed by meteorite impact. Mind you, photos seldom are definitive, but some of the features you've described can more easily be ascribed to common terrestrial geologic processes.

I also had a chance to look at topographic and terrain maps of the impact area you describe. I'm afraid I don't see what you say is obvious and from your discussion of local rivers diverting and such, you seem to be suggesting an impact crater well over a hundred miles in diameter. As you've described it, this crater would have included within its bounds the Mississippi River. I find it completely incredible that such a impact would have gone unnoticed by scientists of the day, not to mention thousands of other learned people, many of whom were undoubtedly capable of putting observation to paper. Craters don't go away overnight.

Are you aware of the geology of the region as we know it today? Tectonics, failed rift, and all that?

Thank you for your time. Did you get a look at the picture of the girl's chest encased in iron? You can eassily make out her right index and fingernail, as well as a necklace she wore!.

The immediate crater is somewhere between 5 to 10 miles in diameter, but the shockwave from the impact covers more than four states, the entire river valley!

What "scientists of the day"? Lots of people did see the meteor come in but were not listened to [the ones that weren't killed by the impact]. Many accounts report seeing bright lights across the skies. And, no, it could not have been quartz crystals rubbing together or gas pockets exploding, or even ball lightning, although all these may have occurred they would not have been seen from several states over as was reported.

Oh yes, I sure do know their present theory on the river valleys' topography. Currently it is believed that an ice sheet somehow pulled the land upward against gravity and away from the equator as it melted and retreated [The Upper Midland Drift, The Upland Formation?] , NO WAY! That is not even possible! Recently an Illinois Professor stated the ice sheet never made it that far. Look up any interpretation from C.E.R.I. and see if you can find ANY stories of brright lights GOING ACROSS THE SKIES!

The current theories don't even stand up without my evidence. When you add it up there is only one conclusion.

[Kalopin]

Wait so the impact was violent enough to melt the rocks and create a big splash zone but somehow not to burn away or flatten the trees? Leaving them still complete enough for molten rock to wrap itself around (without burning them away) and then solidify? And you know how sandstone is formed, right? Give you a clue - impacts are not conducive to its formation. The rocks at Pompeii you are presumably talking about are ash based, not sand or iron.

I know! Yes, SOMEHOW!

It was a piece of a comet, ice and sand, some small rocks and a few boulder-sized and impacting a frozen lake. I believe it half melted [as it was coming in through the atmosphere it was melting and turning to steam, glass, and molten rock] extreme heat and cold mixed violently, ice turn to steam and back to ice, rocks going molten and solidifying within seconds. I can only suspect the amount of extremes that it must have taken to create such unusual rocks.

Maybe not sandstone but sand turned to stone by molten iron.

Reference to Pompeii is only meaning encased body parts and not the type of rock, as I had stated "not volcanic".

[Kalopin]

Despite its large size and proximity, there is no definite evidence that the moon can cause earthquakes.

This comet is almost 1/100th the diameter of the moon (so the mass is nearly a million times less). It was also also 450 times as far away as the moon at its closest approach. So the effect off the comet will have been about 100 billion times less than the moon. If the moon has no detectable effect on earthquakes how do expect this little thing to have any effect?

So what do you believe the moon is doing when it pulls on the tectonic plates and oceans?

Hello! It was an impact. It was not that far away or it would not have appeared to be 50% larger than the sun!. It wasn't seen from Dec. 14, when it was coming toward Herscel, again until Jan. when it was traveling away from Herscel! As I have stated on numerous occasion, measurements in space could not be taken with any accuracy. Look what occurred with Elenin. No one knew its true path or if it was going to make it around the sun. What makes you believe they would know any better?

[Shaula]

OK, you do know what happens to sand when it is intensely heated? It does not form sandstone. Or anything like it. It forms glassy materials in general.

You seem to be skittering between trying to use these rocks as evidence of an impact and then trying to use the impact to explain these rocks. What other explanations have you ruled out? Where were the rocks found (on the surface, underground)? How have to associated them with the event? Have you mapped their distribution?

[captain swoop]

You do know that the victims at Pompeii that you see in the photographs were killed by fumes and scalding ash and gas not by being buried in molten rock. What you see are plaster castings of the hollow spaces left in the ash after the remains decayed?

Where did the molten iron come from if it was a comet? A blast big enough to leave a crater 5 to 10 miles in diameter would have benn huge, more than a few lights in the sky. How big was your supposed impactor to make a crater that big?

Are you now dropping your claim that a NEO caused the earthquake and instead that an impact caused it?

[Kalopin]

It seems to me you are trying to push two ideas together. One the one hand you say the interaction with NEOs causes the earthquakes then you say it was a huge impact.
Which one is it?

No, I make both arguements. A large enough NEO with enough speed WILL UNDOUBTEDLY cause disturbances to our planet.

Also, I personally have discovered an impact crater from a NEO that, I believe caused a massive earthquake. Whetjher or not the river valley was already a seismic zone is not the issue. So it's both.

[captain swoop]

You have not shown that an NEO will 'UNDOUBTEDLY' cause disturbances, you have just claimed it.

YOu haven't shown you have discovered an impact crater, you have just claimed it.

[Kalopin]

OK, you do know what happens to sand when it is intensely heated? It does not form sandstone. Or anything like it. It forms glassy materials in general.

You seem to be skittering between trying to use these rocks as evidence of an impact and then trying to use the impact to explain these rocks. What other explanations have you ruled out? Where were the rocks found (on the surface, underground)? How have to associated them with the event? Have you mapped their distribution?

Depends on the process. Lots of glass particles are in many of the sandy type stones, but it does appear as if the sand was hardened enough to be considered stone. May just be my opinion.

The rocks and the impact explain each other.

Thanks, I have been investigating this on and off for about fifteen years now, I have considered every scenerio imaginable [I believe]. All these rocks were found at the center of all the stratus lines, that you see on satellite and on the SURFACE of the hills and creeks in the area. NO shovels and very little digging! This was recent!

[Kalopin]

You have not shown that an NEO will 'UNDOUBTEDLY' cause disturbances, you have just claimed it.

YOu haven't shown you have discovered an impact crater, you have just claimed it.

What's your point? Because my intent is to show enough evidence to convince the possibility so that it will be proven. Then maybe we can teach the next generation the truth.

[Kalopin]

I need to know: What do you believe would occur if an object the approximate size of the moon traveling as fast as the fastest comet would do if it were to go between The Moon and Earth? So you say "nothing"? How could any scientist come to that conclusion? [not that I ave any] BUT, Should I ask for credentials?

[Kalopin]

You do know that the victims at Pompeii that you see in the photographs were killed by fumes and scalding ash and gas not by being buried in molten rock. What you see are plaster castings of the hollow spaces left in the ash after the remains decayed?

Where did the molten iron come from if it was a comet? A blast big enough to leave a crater 5 to 10 miles in diameter would have benn huge, more than a few lights in the sky. How big was your supposed impactor to make a crater that big?

Are you now dropping your claim that a NEO caused the earthquake and instead that an impact caused it?

Some confusion.
Pompeii is only similar because of the body parts. It is the only other place that I can compare encased body parts to, not aware of any other instance of body parts solidified [or hollowed out or whatever] from extreme heat

What would make anyone believe that a comet can't also consist of plenty of iron rocks as well? Comets "sweep" through space collecting everything in its path until it comes in contact with some heat source or happens to travel too near another much larger object [Levy-Shoemaker].

No, the impact caused this quake. However, prior to and after the comets visit there were numerous earthquakes, eruptions, severe storms, and even plagues [yellow fever]. I suppose this could be coincidence. Caracus, Venezuala had an earthquake the same time and later in 1812 more than 20,000 people died instantly from an earthquake and I berlieve a tsunami. http://www.globusz.com/ebooks/Equinoctial1/00000027.htm

Although, never considered myself a science teacher, but the obvious is the obvious.

[slang]

Thank you for the first real personal attack. So I can tell you how extremely ignorant you sound!

What personal attack? I asked a question. I'll explain why I asked that question. You made a very specific statement about mainstream science, which you were completely unable to support with any evidence. There are two options that I see: one, you were deliberately lying, or two, you have a very wrong idea of what mainstream science is. I do not think that option one is very likely, why would you lie if you want to convince others of your ideas? That leaves option two, you don't know how to tell what is mainstream science, and what isn't. Simply ignorance. Ironic, isn't it, that that's the same thing you accuse me of, except in your case it was completely unfounded. The other statements you made w.r.t. scientific theories and hypotheses just further the point.

I need to know: What do you believe would occur if an object the approximate size of the moon traveling as fast as the fastest comet would do if it were to go between The Moon and Earth?

Show us a NEO the size of the Moon. Heck, show us one half the Moon's size or mass.

[Kalopin]

What personal attack? I asked a question. I'll explain why I asked that question. You made a very specific statement about mainstream science, which you were completely unable to support with any evidence. There are two options that I see: one, you were deliberately lying, or two, you have a very wrong idea of what mainstream science is. I do not think that option one is very likely, why would you lie if you want to convince others of your ideas? That leaves option two, you don't know how to tell what is mainstream science, and what isn't. Simply ignorance. Ironic, isn't it, that that's the same thing you accuse me of, except in your case it was completely unfounded. The other statements you made w.r.t. scientific theories and hypotheses just further the point.



Show us a NEO the size of the Moon. Heck, show us one half the Moon's size or mass.

So, is it o.k. if I tell you that 'you have no scientific education"? Do you know what a personal attack is?

I would much rather it be MY hypothesis!

As I understand it, you believe that there could not be an object the size of the moon traveling as fast as a comet and in our path? Thank you, oh knowledgable one, you have eased all our minds! Uhohh, what about the theory on how the moon was made. I better not say it, or that might end up all my idea as well!

[captain swoop]

nThere is a man called Ed Conrad thinks he finds petrified 'body parts' including whole organs embedded in coal seams, he offers photographs of rocks as his only evidence. He is wrong, why should we consider your evidence consisting of only photographs to be any more correct?

[captain swoop]

Your claim wasn't about an object the size of the Moon travelling very fast and coming between the Moon and the Earth. You claimed a Comet a considerably larger distance away.

Do you think Astronomers would have missed an object the size of the Moon on an orbit that would take it between the Moon and the Earth?

[Kalopin]

nThere is a man called Ed Conrad thinks he finds petrified 'body parts' including whole organs embedded in coal seams, he offers photographs of rocks as his only evidence. He is wrong, why should we consider your evidence consisting of only photographs to be any more correct?

So, PROVE ME WRONG!

[captain swoop]

No, that isn't how it works. You have been told. It is up to you to support your speculation. You are making the claim, you support it. You cannot shift the burden of proof onto us.

Have you had your 'body parts' sectioned? do you have any micrographs of them? Have you determined their composition?

saying 'It looks like' isn't evidence.

[Kalopin]

Your claim wasn't about an object the size of the Moon travelling very fast and coming between the Moon and the Earth. You claimed a Comet a considerably larger distance away.

Do you think Astronomers would have missed an object the size of the Moon on an orbit that would take it between the Moon and the Earth?

My claim was NEOs can cause earthquakes! Didn't give dimensions, or velocity!

"You claimed a comet a considerably larger distance away"? WHAT?
I think I know what you are trying to say. The comet I refer to was seen as one and a half times the size of the sun. It was close not far. Besides, it really doesn't matter, the comet could have easily sent a meteor toward Earth at a very far distance!

Are you saying that you believe JPL or NASA or any other NEO watchers have mapped out every comet and asteroid? I hate to be the one with the bad news! You must believe someone's at the controls?

[captain swoop]

WHat does 'seen as one and a half times the size of the sun' actualy mean? How far is 'it was close not far'?
How would it send out a 'meteor towards Earth'? Why would a part breaking away from a comet change it's orbit or speed? It would continue along the orbit of the parent body.
An object the size of the moon is hardly the same as a 'Comet or asteroid' DO you have any idea of the sizes and distances involved?

[Kalopin]

No, that isn't how it works. You have been told. It is up to you to support your speculation. You are making the claim, you support it. You cannot shift the burden of proof onto us.

Have you had your 'body parts' sectioned? do you have any micrographs of them? Have you determined their composition?

saying 'It looks like' isn't evidence.

That's right, that's the problem. I can find no one to examine the rocks. Although I have sent off several samples to different meteoritic labs, something always happens and the samples are lost. A couple of times I sent samples certified mail and when contacted one said they were never recieved, the other said they must have been misplaced! I'm thinking of getting some slides made, and have a couple different professors interested that I will send them to but can't afford to buy a spectrometer, and no labs anywhere near mississlipy, sad educational system!

You see C.E.R.I. is located in Memphis and all the professors that work there hate me!

[slang]

DO you have any idea of the sizes and distances involved?

You really shouldn't ask him what he knows. That's a personal attack, ya know!

[captain swoop]

That's right, that's the problem. I can find no one to examine the rocks. Although I have sent off several samples to different meteoritic labs, something always happens and the samples are lost. A couple of times I sent samples certified mail and when contacted one said they were never recieved, the other said they must have been misplaced! I'm thinking of getting some slides made, and have a couple different professors interested that I will send them to but can't afford to buy a spectrometer, and no labs anywhere near mississlipy, sad educational system!

You see C.E.R.I. is located in Memphis and all the professors that work there hate me!

Are you claiming some kind of Conspiracy?