Re: A 2350 BC Middle Eastern cosmic blast?

Date: Wed May 15 2002 - 21:04:57 EDT

  • Next message: Stuart d Kirkley: "Re: Catholic Church and Morality"


    You wrote: Cosmic events don't dump tephra in a localized region. Indeed,
    they don't
    dump tephra at all. Tephra is a volcanic ash and has little to do with
    meteors or cosmic phenomenon.

    I'm no geologist. But the person whose article I quoted from is. Do you have
    any idea what may have created the "layer with an uncommon petrographic
    assemblage, dated at ca. 2350 BC" to which she refers?

    Courty says, "It consists of fine send-sized, well sorted spherules of
    various composition (silica, silicates and fibro-radiated calcite),
    millimetric fragments of a black, vesicular, amorphous material made of
    silicates with Mg-Ca carbonate and phosphate inclusions, ovoid
    micro-aggregates made of densely packed crystals (calcite, gypsum or
    feldspars) and exogenous angular fragments of a coarse crystallised igneous
    rock. All these particles are only present in this specific layer and are
    finely mixed with mud-brick debris or with a burnt surface horizon in the
    contemporaneous soils. In occupation sequences, the layer displays an
    uncommon dense packing of sand-sized, very porous aggregates that suggests
    disintegration of the mud-brick construction by an air blast. In the virgin
    soil, the burnt horizon contains black soot and graphite, and appears to have
    been instantaneously fossilised by a rapid and uncommon colluvial wash."

    She says that, "the mysterious layer confirms that the later is
    contemporaneous with the tephra deposit." And she says that, "The restricted
    occurrence of the later [mysterious layer] suggests that the massive tephra
    accumulation can no longer be considered as a typical fallout derived from
    the dispersion of material from a terrestrial volcanic explosion."

    If this layer is nothing more than volcanic ash as you seem to say, why does
    she say that, "Analytical investigations in various directions have been
    unable, so far, to refute ... that a cosmic event would have been the cause
    for production of both the widely distributed mysterious particles and the
    localised thick tephra."? If this layer is nothing more than volcanic ash as
    you seem to believe, why does she say that, the "origin of this mysterious
    phenomena still remains unsolved."?

    If this layer is nothing more than volcanic ash as you seem to suggest, why
    does she say, "Soil specialists, geochemists and archaeologists should join
    their effort to solve this problem, and debate the exact nature of the socio
    cultural echo to this extraordinary event"?

    Of course, it was the 2350 BC date that caught my attention. The same date
    both the recent tree ring studies and Bible chronology suggests for Noah's
    flood. Not to mention that as yet undated crater-like formation in southern
    Iraq, which some say appears to have been caused by a meteor impact at about
    the same time. With such things in mind, it certainly seems to me that we now
    have good reason to believe that Noah's flood may have been caused by some
    "mysterious phenomena," to use Courtny's words, in about 2350 BC.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 15 2002 - 23:10:24 EDT