Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
seasmith wrote: FOSSIL DIATOMS IN A NEW CARBONACEOUS METEORITE
Journal of Cosmology, Vol,21, No,37 published, 10 January 2013
We report the discovery for the first time of diatom frustules in a carbonaceous meteorite that fell in the North Central Province of Sri Lanka on 29 December 2012. Contamination is excluded by the circumstance that the elemental abundances within the structures match closely with those of the surrounding matrix. There is also evidence of structures morphologically similar to red rain cells that may have contributed to the episode of red rain that followed within days of the meteorite fall. The new data on "fossil" diatoms provide strong evidence to support the theory of cometary panspermia.
There will be more! This is not surprising to me. Mike Baillie is a dendrochronologist who has studied and compared tree ring data, the passing of comets, and severe environmental downturns. He has discovered that many times they all coincide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Baillie "Comets Causing Plagues, Really", also may want to google: "A Theory of Cometary Associations with Earthquakes" -it was a fun conversation
nick c
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
Kalopin wrote:
D_Archer wrote: Comets are asteroids, in EU there is no difference other then appearance, asteroids are not made of ice and sand. Note that asteroids can trigger CME's from the sun, an asteroid near earth could do the same, but the earth crust is in the way, so an earthquake happens. Highly likeley scenario.
True that comets are asteroids, but must note that comets contain asteroids, meteoroids, gravel, sand, ice, dust, charged particles, plasma,... and travel at much higher rates, they can be loose collections and/or large solid bodies and anything in between. Comets have often been known to trigger mass ejections from the sun, but I wouldn't think a planet could emit a CME. I believe an asteroid would have to make an impact, but that a comet could just make a close encounter.
The issue of distinction between comets and asteroids is one of electrical stress, in the electric comet model. Probes have been sent to a number of comets, and the nuclei are indistinguisable from asteroids. I have to agree with D_Archer here, his analogy of a sun grazing comet initiating a CME, to, a comet passing close to the Earth is valid. It is a scaled down version of the same process complicated by the solid crust of the Earth. That being said, comets certainly are frequently accompanied by a train of dust and debris, the result of electrical excavation of the original asteroid like body. Furthermore the nuclei of comets can fission into smaller bodies due to electrical stress. As far as one of these pieces directly impacting the surface of the Earth, it is probably unlikely. I do not doubt that impacts are possible, just that more often than not electrical factors will rule, and the encroaching asteroid will be destroyed before there can be any lithospheric contact. I think that the Tungaska event was example of that scenario. Furthermore, there are numerous examples of very large meteorites being found on the surface of the Earth with no accompanying crater. These meteorites are often parts of larger bodies which were destroyed as they approached the Earth. It seems reasonable to me, in light of EU, that an "earth grazing" comet could trigger an earthquake through electrical exchanges between the bodies without any significant physical impact of large sized meteorite or asteroid.
Kalopin
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
nick c wrote:
Kalopin wrote:
D_Archer wrote: Comets are asteroids, in EU there is no difference other then appearance, asteroids are not made of ice and sand. Note that asteroids can trigger CME's from the sun, an asteroid near earth could do the same, but the earth crust is in the way, so an earthquake happens. Highly likeley scenario.
True that comets are asteroids, but must note that comets contain asteroids, meteoroids, gravel, sand, ice, dust, charged particles, plasma,... and travel at much higher rates, they can be loose collections and/or large solid bodies and anything in between. Comets have often been known to trigger mass ejections from the sun, but I wouldn't think a planet could emit a CME. I believe an asteroid would have to make an impact, but that a comet could just make a close encounter.
The issue of distinction between comets and asteroids is one of electrical stress, in the electric comet model. Probes have been sent to a number of comets, and the nuclei are indistinguisable from asteroids. I have to agree with D_Archer here, his analogy of a sun grazing comet initiating a CME, to, a comet passing close to the Earth is valid. It is a scaled down version of the same process complicated by the solid crust of the Earth. That being said, comets certainly are frequently accompanied by a train of dust and debris, the result of electrical excavation of the original asteroid like body. Furthermore the nuclei of comets can fission into smaller bodies due to electrical stress. As far as one of these pieces directly impacting the surface of the Earth, it is probably unlikely. I do not doubt that impacts are possible, just that more often than not electrical factors will rule, and the encroaching asteroid will be destroyed before there can be any lithospheric contact. I think that the Tungaska event was example of that scenario. Furthermore, there are numerous examples of very large meteorites being found on the surface of the Earth with no accompanying crater. These meteorites are often parts of larger bodies which were destroyed as they approached the Earth. It seems reasonable to me, in light of EU, that an "earth grazing" comet could trigger an earthquake through electrical exchanges between the bodies without any significant physical impact of large sized meteorite or asteroid.
I am sure that each comet and asteroid should be handled on an individual basis, as there are so many intracacies, variables, trajectories, consistancies, and make up.
In the case of C/1811 F1, it is my belief that most of the orbital elements measured were when the comet was approaching our Sun, then as it was pulled in closer, heated, somewhat broke apart into fragments, slingshots out at much higher rate, and passed in front of our planet, causing the Earth to pass through the dust tail and a taurid meteor storm. This produced a serial impact that lasted from at least November 22, 1811 through December 16, 1811.
It is also my belief that The Geminids meteor shower that occurs in early December may be the remnants of this comet and not an asteroid, as is presently thought. I also believe that this serial impact produced The Carolina Bays, The Kilmichael Structure, Watumpka, Weaubleau, and several smaller craters throughout Arkansas, Tennesseee, Missouri and Mississippi presently considered sinkholes. I believe that this is NOT a "stretch" of imagination and that it IS actually provable.
Sparky
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
I tried your site again..Found that if I clicked on a subject the next page would not be flash and I could adjust the text size!!
I also watched the video. Interesting. I observed what seemed to me to be electrical discharge melting and scarring. I have not tried to see that area with satellite, and will post a link here if I can bring it up on google.
The problem with Earth's scarring is that we are a wet planet and that washes and distorts what we can so clearly see on Mars, the moon and other bodies.
Have a magnifying glass, so will be able to pick out subjects of interest and read contents. The journal of the riverboat was interesting. What a terrible time!
Kalopin
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
Sparky,
Thanks!, I have been working on finding all the complex geological data that will hopefully prove this research, either way. I did have a LiDAR scheduled, but had to be moved on the waiting list? I am trying to get Flight Engineer Chris Hadfield to take some photos of the upper embayment from the ISS. I was quite impressed with the detail: http://www.space.com/19558-chris-hadfie ... hotos.html
After reading several original accounts, it appears that most of the general public were putting full blame on the comet. It is my belief they were correct.
Know any good geologists?
Sparky
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
. .
34* 58' 31.38"N x 89* 24' 17.15"W I get Mexico. Sure would appreciate a link to a close up
As far as kinetic vs electrical discharge impact craters, the usa exhibits evidence of electrical craters, but consensus opinion is that all craters are kinetic. It is possible that none are.
If one's perspective has been contaminated by the standard model and everything that is viewed has that perverted influence, then what is really happening will be missed. Follow the evidence, and that includes ancient myths, which speak of plasma activity around the world. The crater in Ms. could very well be from much more ancient times and a product of electric discharge.
Kalopin
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
Sparky wrote: . .
34* 58' 31.38"N x 89* 24' 17.15"W I get Mexico. Sure would appreciate a link to a close up
As far as kinetic vs electrical discharge impact craters, the usa exhibits evidence of electrical craters, but consensus opinion is that all craters are kinetic. It is possible that none are.
If one's perspective has been contaminated by the standard model and everything that is viewed has that perverted influence, then what is really happening will be missed. Follow the evidence, and that includes ancient myths, which speak of plasma activity around the world. The crater in Ms. could very well be from much more ancient times and a product of electric discharge.
Mmm, I believe you may have put 24* instead of 34* latitude? It's north of Hwy.72, up North Slayden. Look for Concord Rd. and Dio Rd. [Concord Church is on the northwest rim?]. The Google Earth coordinates should take you to a small field near the northwest face on the basin. It is a very complex crater with plenty of erosion and development. You really have to pay attention to the original fractures. Look closely how all the semi-circular mini-fractures surround this structure [I believe that where Mill Pond Rd. meets Early Grove Rd. follows the terrain of the inner basin?]. Once you pan out to view the entire embayment, you should see how all the topography encircles this same central location. You should notice several smaller crater-like structures dotting the landscape near this much larger depression. It is my belief these are either from fallback of the ejecta material or smaller projectiles to follow well behind the initial meteor? The ejecta blanket is understandably almost all north of the structure.
I believe that I have considered any and all other possible dates, but looking at the terrain, it is clear that Reelfoot Lake, The Tiptonville Dome, every river, valley, hill, and every single detail in the topography are surrounding this same structure, right where the strange rocks were found.
There is little doubt that there were electrical attractions and discharges, as well as "naturally occurrring earthquake lights, which, in my opinion also backs the EU Theory. It was also a kinetic impact. Matter impacting matter. How could it not be? It is my belief the majority of impacts include several forces, varieties to different degrees and quite complex. Very few to give this a good study and, I believe, not one to prove such a variety of effects?
The shockwave pattern tells the undeniable story of a major impact in recent times. Add this to the facts of a major 1811 "earthquake", Herschel's observations, the many original accounts, newspaper articles, tree growth data, local topography consisting of rolling hills emanating out from this structure, many canyons and deep creeks on the northwest face and a perfectly round southeastern rim, there really should be little doubt.
It is true that a December 16, 1811 impact explains every detail. "A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma"
Do you [anyone] see the pattern of the shockwave? Any advice on how to make this general public knowledge?
Sparky
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
sand blows across the New Madrid region were found to have formed during earthquakes about 1450 A.D., 900 A.D., 300 A.D., and 2350 B.C.
Paleoseismic studies concluded that the New Madrid seismic zone generated magnitude 7 to 8 earthquakes about every 500 years during the past 1,200 years.
So, there is a lot of previous activity. When can one say when anything happened, + or - 200yrs...
I copied and pasted , 34* 58' 31.38"N x 89* 24' 17.15"W Have trouble seeing google maps...
Kalopin
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
Sparky wrote: New Madrid has a long history of earthquakes....
sand blows across the New Madrid region were found to have formed during earthquakes about 1450 A.D., 900 A.D., 300 A.D., and 2350 B.C.
Paleoseismic studies concluded that the New Madrid seismic zone generated magnitude 7 to 8 earthquakes about every 500 years during the past 1,200 years.
So, there is a lot of previous activity. When can one say when anything happened, + or - 200yrs...
Sometimes people can be mistaken, your pick [all the present science or this hypothesis?] . Although I do not argue whether this was already a seismic region. It is a weak spot. It is a crack in the middle of a plate, not two plates rubbing together, highly unusual "mid-plate tectonics".
If you have the scientific mind, you must consider all the evidence in detail. I have little doubt that the "sand blows" were due to an impact not a seismic shift [or break]. Consider the effects of a massive projectile impaling the surface of a river valley at a low angle and pushing great amounts of land northward. Nothing but sand, gravel, dirt, clay, and water. What do you think will happen? Ask an expert? It would seem that the pressure would exhume matter in any manner available, and it did. Now, consider the possibility of a plate just "snapping" from erosion, pressure, tension, torsion...Would it produce this effect? There are many seismologists that are saying the NMSZ is incapable of such a massive quake, as was reported, and are wanting to disregard what they consider "exaggerations". I say the NMSZ could have never produced the design in the topography that exists directly above it. It appears clear to me that The Mississippi River has been pushed to the northwest.
A note: My father-in-law's grandparents road the riverboats up The Loosahatchie River as children [he says], now it is only capable of the size of a bass boat at most! Massive amounts of land is still resettling from this. Maybe you can imagine huge amounts of water being pushed from these rivers when quickly settling back southward in Feburary 1811, when, again the river flowed backwards...
You know, I bet if we could find some geologists to give this a good "once over" they may find something out, ya' think?
So, you see what these findings are up against? After putting in so much time staring at the satellite views and considering possibilities, it appears, at least to me, that this can be the only conclusion. what say ye? Paradigm shift?
Sparky
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
I think that I finally got a view of crater site, but could not see anything but trees.
If you can figure out which map and it shows something, link me to it please..
Any other topo that you find and wish to comment on, please supply link....
Ditto. I haven't found one that shows all the detail on the north face, and it's difficult to see the southeastern rim on any view. Although all these features are definitely there and I will give anyone who wants a tour. There may be several topos I have not yet seen. If you may find one with good detail, let me know. USGS just had LiDARs made of Southern Missouri, but, so far, have ignored my requests? I invite investigation...
Kalopin
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
[Although correct terminology would say- "Meteor Hits Russian Urals:"]
Could have probably went and pick this one up?!
Maybe impacts will find more attention?
Hello Kalopin,
To read the reports of what transpired in Russia and think it was an impact event implies You have zero interest or knowledge of Electric Universe concepts. I and others have tried to educate You, apparently to no avail. The descriptions from Russia scream electrical, IMHO.
michael steinbacher
kiwi
Re: Comet C/1811 F1 and The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1
"The trajectory of the Russian meteorite was significantly different than the trajectory of the asteroid 2012 DA14, making it a completely unrelated object. Information is still being collected about the Russian meteorite and analysis is preliminary at this point. In videos of the meteor, it is seen to pass from left to right in front of the rising sun, which means it was traveling from north to south. Asteroid DA14's trajectory is in the opposite direction, from south to north."
34* 58' 31.38"N x 89* 24' 17.15"W
.
