Whilst travelling through the WA Mallee, occasionally I come across small craters like the one below. They are circular, with ejected fine sand/clay piled equally around. The one below was 2 metres diameter x 0.8 metres in depth. Anyone have any idea as to the meteorite size on impact?
maybe old mallee fowl nests.
ChrispenEvan said:
maybe old mallee fowl nests.
No, I know mallee fowl nests and they are certainly not them.
they are unlikely to be caused by a meteorite, that’s all.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
maybe old mallee fowl nests.
No, I know mallee fowl nests and they are certainly not them.
I would have thought mallee fowl nests too.
How does it look different, PF?
ChrispenEvan said:
they are unlikely to be caused by a meteorite, that’s all.
+1
ChrispenEvan said:
they are unlikely to be caused by a meteorite, that’s all.
Why do you say that?
Speedy said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
maybe old mallee fowl nests.
No, I know mallee fowl nests and they are certainly not them.
I would have thought mallee fowl nests too.
How does it look different, PF?
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
dv said:
ChrispenEvan said:
they are unlikely to be caused by a meteorite, that’s all.
+1
Again why do you say that?
because a meteor that small, to leave that small a crater, would have slowed in the atmosphere to such an extent that it wouldn’t be going fast enough to leave a crater like that. the meteor would have been only a few cm in dia. next time dig one, if it is a meteorite then it won’t be far down.
PermeateFree said:
Speedy said:
PermeateFree said:No, I know mallee fowl nests and they are certainly not them.
I would have thought mallee fowl nests too.
How does it look different, PF?
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
Maybe the fine leaf litter blew away.
I take it that mallefowl exist or existed in the region?
ChrispenEvan said:
because a meteor that small, to leave that small a crater, would have slowed in the atmosphere to such an extent that it wouldn’t be going fast enough to leave a crater like that. the meteor would have been only a few cm in dia. next time dig one, if it is a meteorite then it won’t be far down.
I realise it would be quite small, which is why I don’t bother trying to dig them out, but in areas with a limestone substrate, the limestone is also very broken at impact, so there is some energy involved.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
Speedy said:I would have thought mallee fowl nests too.
How does it look different, PF?
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
Maybe the fine leaf litter blew away.
I have seen old mallee fowl mounds too and they are easily determined as being so.
roughbarked said:
I take it that mallefowl exist or existed in the region?
I have travelling around this country for over 20 years and in one place (200 km further east) there are mallee fowl, with old and new mounds, but there are no sign of them being elsewhere.
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
I’m not sure what caused those holes, but I feel pretty darn happy that we’ve had that royal commission into unions so hopefully we won’t have to deal with more holes in the future.
http://www.spaceacademy.net.au/watch/debris/mdsclass.htm
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:I take it that mallefowl exist or existed in the region?
I have travelling around this country for over 20 years and in one place (200 km further east) there are mallee fowl, with old and new mounds, but there are no sign of them being elsewhere.
and the known history in your locale?
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
Meteorites will fuse some of the sand into a glass like material?
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
roughbarked said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
Meteorites will fuse some of the sand into a glass like material?
only if it is going fast enough. one this size will have slowed considerably.
PermeateFree said:
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
A disused mallee fowl nest I saw in Western Victoria did not appear to contain leaf-litter at all. Looked very similar to your one, except it was build from red dirt rather than the sandy soil pictured.
The mallee fowl nests on Wildlife Spotter also appear to have little leaf litter within them.
It would be unlikely to have a bunch of meteorites of the same size all land in the same area. IMO, it’s much more likely to have had a group of mallee fowl nest in the area so long ago that the leaf litter has decayed and leeched into the sand underneath.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
A fridge magnet would tell you if there are fine bits of iron. Wipe clean and compare to the nearby sands.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
FCOL, just draw line through the middle and step over it… If a whole bunch of rocks jump out and call you a scab then I think we can close the book on it.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
A fridge magnet would tell you if there are fine bits of iron. Wipe clean and compare to the nearby sands.
be alert but not alarmed…
Speedy said:
PermeateFree said:
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
A disused mallee fowl nest I saw in Western Victoria did not appear to contain leaf-litter at all. Looked very similar to your one, except it was build from red dirt rather than the sandy soil pictured.
The mallee fowl nests on Wildlife Spotter also appear to have little leaf litter within them.
It would be unlikely to have a bunch of meteorites of the same size all land in the same area. IMO, it’s much more likely to have had a group of mallee fowl nest in the area so long ago that the leaf litter has decayed and leeched into the sand underneath.
Yes. Old mounds may not have been used for many years or decades.
ChrispenEvan said:
http://www.spaceacademy.net.au/watch/debris/mdsclass.htm
Very interesting. They find many meteorites on the Nullarbor, as the vegetation is sparse in the arid conditions and they contrast with the white limestone. The mallee is also an arid zone often with sparse vegetation, which makes these small craters more obvious.
Speedy said:
PermeateFree said:
Mallee fowl build a mound containing a considerable amount of fine leaf-litter.
A disused mallee fowl nest I saw in Western Victoria did not appear to contain leaf-litter at all. Looked very similar to your one, except it was build from red dirt rather than the sandy soil pictured.
The mallee fowl nests on Wildlife Spotter also appear to have little leaf litter within them.
It would be unlikely to have a bunch of meteorites of the same size all land in the same area. IMO, it’s much more likely to have had a group of mallee fowl nest in the area so long ago that the leaf litter has decayed and leeched into the sand underneath.
Then how do you explain the break into the limestone. This is not a bird doing this, plus they are very rare having been eaten by cats and foxes long ago. Look I am very experienced of this country having studied it in some detail for many years. It is not a mallee fowl nest!
The smallest impact crater ever found in Australia is 24 metres across.
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
FCOL, just draw line through the middle and step over it… If a whole bunch of rocks jump out and call you a scab then I think we can close the book on it.
Labouring the point a bit
Call me a septic, but I see a mound, not a crater
dv said:
The smallest impact crater ever found in Australia is 24 metres across.
They thought they’d found one slightly smaller but it turned out it was where Diddly had dropped his wallet.
dv said:
The smallest impact crater ever found in Australia is 24 metres across.
I would very much doubt if all the small meteorites found in Australia would come anywhere near making a crater of that size.
diddly-squat said:
Call me a septic, but I see a mound, not a crater
Septic!
PermeateFree said:
dv said:
The smallest impact crater ever found in Australia is 24 metres across.I would very much doubt if all the small meteorites found in Australia would come anywhere near making a crater of that size.
No need to thank me for finding that out for you, PF. I live to serve.
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
Put a magnet over the site, I would expect a meteorite to leave fine bits of iron. Compare to the sand nearby.
You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
FCOL, just draw line through the middle and step over it… If a whole bunch of rocks jump out and call you a scab then I think we can close the book on it.
I have no idea what you are talking about, so please explain?
diddly-squat said:
Call me a septic, but I see a mound, not a crater
You may refer to it as a pit or even a hole, but it is certainly not a mound.
PermeateFree said:
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:You would need a large magnet or a metal detector, neither of which I have.
FCOL, just draw line through the middle and step over it… If a whole bunch of rocks jump out and call you a scab then I think we can close the book on it.
I have no idea what you are talking about, so please explain?
He’s making a joke about “Strike”. Ha ha.
Peak Warming Man said:
dv said:
The smallest impact crater ever found in Australia is 24 metres across.They thought they’d found one slightly smaller but it turned out it was where Diddly had dropped his wallet.
BOOM (tish)
PermeateFree said:
diddly-squat said:
Call me a septic, but I see a mound, not a crater
You may refer to it as a pit or even a hole, but it is certainly not a mound.
An excavated mound often looks this way.
furious said:
I don’t know, I’ve jumpred in a lot of holes and started digging.
Just thought I would raise this as general interest but the skeptics are more like cynics, therefore as usual, nobody will learn anything.
roughbarked said:
furious said:
I don’t know, I’ve jumpred in a lot of holes and started digging.
indeed..
Wow…
PermeateFree said:
Just thought I would raise this as general interest but the skeptics are more like cynics, therefore as usual, nobody will learn anything.
fuck off. we have given you reasons. it is you who refuse to learn.
and i knew from the start it would turn out like this. but science…
“You know what? I was wrong.” said PermeateFree, never…
PermeateFree said:
Just thought I would raise this as general interest but the skeptics are more like cynics, therefore as usual, nobody will learn anything.
I thought you were about getting everyone to agree with you. My mistake.
Was reading last week about meteorite craters and strikes in Australia.
There have been two near misses by falling meteorites in Australia. In one, two women on a beach missed being hit be a meteorite by a distance of just four metres. In the other, a meteorite smashed through a roof and landed on a sofa.
Sizes of meteorite craters depend on speed of impact and mass of meteorite. It only takes a ball-bearing size meteorite traveling at supersonic speeds to make a crater that size BUT no meteorite smaller than about a ton is able to punch its way through the atmosphere strongly enough to land at supersonic speeds. So no small meteorite craters exist on Earth.
If I still had access to a scanner … (checks web) OK.
This map shows the best known meteorite craters in Australia. Of recent craters (< 1 million years old), Wolfe Creek is the largest. Of intermediate age craters (Cambrian and more recent), Gosse’s Bluff is the biggest. Of all craters, the largest is Acraman. The total size of Acraman is 85 to 90 km.
A few of the locations on the above map, including Yallalie and Woodleigh, are completely buried under more recent sediments, the shape is only known from seismic reflections, and its identification as an impact crater is only known from the discovery of melted glass in core samples.
The smallest of the meteorite craters on the above map is Dalgaranga, which is 24 metres wide and less than 3000 years old.
PermeateFree said:
Just thought I would raise this as general interest but the skeptics are more like cynics, therefore as usual, nobody will learn anything.
Jesus Christ, man. Just thank us for the information.
dv said:
Jesus Christ, man. Just thank us for the information.
Never go full DV.
Below is a photo of some of the many small meteorites found on the Nullarbor Plain and now residing in the WA Museum. As you can see and if you bothered to look at the many references on Google they are not uncommon. So you are saying the craters I encounter from time to time could NOT be made by any of these. And by the way, I did not say ALL craters were the same size, but do vary in size with the smallest around 2’ diameter.
Like I said earlier, I have been studying this region for over twenty years and been involved in natural history for a great deal longer. I think that gives me a bit of credibility about what exists here, which also applies to these craters, and when any of you have spent as much time in your field of expertise, I would not question you, I would assume with all your study and experience, you would know what you were taking about.
You may have missed the point, however I did not ask you what made the crater, but if with your engineering mathematical skills, could provide some additional information that would make it an interesting topic. But not to worry, as I am passionate about it, so don’t care that much, but thought it might provide some interest.
Boris supplied the best information with his meteor size chart, which if you check the Class 6 Meteoroid is quite possible. However, dv with his usual ‘I know right’ without providing any useful information, other than you are wrong, because I say so; tends for no logical reason to carry the day.
dv said:
PermeateFree said:
Just thought I would raise this as general interest but the skeptics are more like cynics, therefore as usual, nobody will learn anything.Jesus Christ, man. Just thank us for the information.
You did not and rarely ever do supply useful information, although I give you top marks for trivia.
class 6 is way too big. and the crater way too small.
ChrispenEvan said:
class 6 is way too big. and the crater way too small.
Well some apparently just produce the small crater, with the meteorite disintegrating. How do to account for all those small meteorites, do they just fall out of the sky, like an apple from a tree?
I have travelling around this country for over twenty years <<<<<<<<<<
all aussie adventures
With uncle Arthur
most meteorite found on the nullabor are right on the surface. no craters. the one recently found by the Desert Fireball Network was 1.7kg and went into a salt lake 42cm deep.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
class 6 is way too big. and the crater way too small.
Well some apparently just produce the small crater, with the meteorite disintegrating. How do to account for all those small meteorites, do they just fall out of the sky, like an apple from a tree?
well yes, most do just fall out of the sky.
The_observer said:
I have travelling around this country for over twenty years <<<<<<<<<<all aussie adventures
With uncle Arthur
I don’t why you should doubt that fact, as you don’t have any idea about me and what I do or have done. Just your usual silly comment.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
class 6 is way too big. and the crater way too small.
Well some apparently just produce the small crater, with the meteorite disintegrating. How do to account for all those small meteorites, do they just fall out of the sky, like an apple from a tree?
well yes, most do just fall out of the sky.
Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
next time dig one up, they are worth quite a bit of money. the recent one from the nullabor, $4000-$5000
The_observer said:
First time you have made any sense. Well done!
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:Well some apparently just produce the small crater, with the meteorite disintegrating. How do to account for all those small meteorites, do they just fall out of the sky, like an apple from a tree?
well yes, most do just fall out of the sky.
Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
ChrispenEvan said:
next time dig one up, they are worth quite a bit of money. the recent one from the nullabor, $4000-$5000
I think there might be a difference in size, although depending where they originated, some are very valuable due to rarity and composition.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:well yes, most do just fall out of the sky.
Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
no, it was seen on the cameras the network uses and its impact position was triangulated.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
I might add that the clays on the saltlakes are highly compacted and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:Yes, but with some speed. Meteorites on the Nullarbor, could have been lying around for millions of years and eroded out leaving no trace of any crater.
you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
Freshly landed. They have a series of remote cameras that they use to capture images of meteorites in the air, then they triangulate and work out where it landed and try to retrieve it.
And limestone…
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
PermeateFree said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:you picture was from http://museum.wa.gov.au/research/collections/earth-and-planetary-sciences/meteorite-collection/meteorites-nullarbor-region and mentions 35 000 years.
as for speed, that 1.7kg one only went into the lake 42cm, so not fast.
Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
I might add that the clays on the saltlakes are highly compacted and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
he dug it out by hand.
Some kind of carbon based life…
furious said:
- So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
Some kind of carbon based life…
Rabbits, there’s too many rabbits.
furious said:
- and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
And limestone…
There are two types of limestone in the region, one is from lime eroding from the sand, which forms a more crumbly limestone and much softer than the limestone found on the Nullarbor, which is often like concrete.
> So you are saying the craters I encounter from time to time could NOT be made by any of these.
Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. These land at a velocity close to 90 m/s or smaller. For a meteorite that size to form a crater of any size would require a velocity more like 900 m/s. Energy is mass times velocity squared / 2, so these meteorites in your image have too low an energy by a factor of 100 or more to generate even a small crater a metre across or so.
Perhaps you can understand it better this way. A human being falling without a parachute at terminal velocity would not create a crater on crashing to Earth. And even aforesaid unlucky human being has an energy far exceeding that of a small meteorite like that.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
PermeateFree said:Even 35,000 years ago is still a very long time ago. Hadn’t the 42 cm one been eroding out when found?
I might add that the clays on the saltlakes are highly compacted and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
he dug it out by hand.
The clays absorb the energy and even more so when compacted. However you can cut through it with a spade, although it quickly becomes very tiring.
My opinion: eroded remains of a malleefowl nest.
Exhibit B:
mollwollfumble said:
> So you are saying the craters I encounter from time to time could NOT be made by any of these.Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. These land at a velocity close to 90 m/s or smaller. For a meteorite that size to form a crater of any size would require a velocity more like 900 m/s. Energy is mass times velocity squared / 2, so these meteorites in your image have too low an energy by a factor of 100 or more to generate even a small crater a metre across or so.
Perhaps you can understand it better this way. A human being falling without a parachute at terminal velocity would not create a crater on crashing to Earth. And even aforesaid unlucky human being has an energy far exceeding that of a small meteorite like that.
There are hailstones that hit the ground with far more energy than a small meteorite like that, and even hailstones don’t generate significant craters when they hit.
Bubblecar said:
My opinion: eroded remains of a malleefowl nest.Exhibit B:
!http://media.trevorsbirding.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/malleefowl-nest-fmcdonald-cp_20060912_002-1024×768.jpg
Pitcher was from here:
https://www.trevorsbirding.com/tag/malleefowl/
Bubblecar said:
My opinion: eroded remains of a malleefowl nest.Exhibit B:
Well if you observe the height of the mound and the wall thickness, not to mention the leaf-litter in its centre they are very different structures.
PermeateFree said:
Well if you observe the height of the mound and the wall thickness, not to mention the leaf-litter in its centre they are very different structures.
I’d say they’re very similar structures, and the one I posted would probably end up looking like yours, given time.
Here’s another one. Do a Google Image Search, there are plenty there.
Yeah, erosion isn’t a thing…
Bubblecar said:
PermeateFree said:
Well if you observe the height of the mound and the wall thickness, not to mention the leaf-litter in its centre they are very different structures.
I’d say they’re very similar structures, and the one I posted would probably end up looking like yours, given time.
Hollows are not formed from the mallee-fowl nest, but reduce in height and fill in from the eroding wall, and should a fire pass through, also with windblown sand and ash.
PermeateFree said:
Hollows are not formed from the mallee-fowl nest, but reduce in height and fill in from the eroding wall, and should a fire pass through, also with windblown sand and ash.
I’ll leave you to it :)
Bubblecar said:
Here’s another one. Do a Google Image Search, there are plenty there.
But have a look at the surround wall and the relatively small hollow. There is no way that would erode into what I have photographed.
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
I’ve picked up the odd meteorite on the surface with nil crater at all. There is no evidence of any strike point at all. Simply sitting there on top of the cretaceous claystone in opal country.
They cannot be anything else. They may have bounced or have been eroded from older strata but clearly were not of the parent material.
I’ve also photographs somewhere of old malle fowl mounds of indeterminate age which had clearly at some stage been excavated. Whether to lay eggs and abandoned or by a goanna is not able to be ascertained due to the age and compacted material, in the same shape and formation of PF’s photo.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I live in the mallee.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
Hehehehe, and there it is.
I can assure you that it is NOT a meteorite strike…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I’ll concede thta it isn’t a mallefowl’s nest now. I’ll state that if malleefowl were still about, that there would be tended nests nearby or they’d be re-using this nest but otherwise, mallefowl are so rare that any evidence of currently tended nests is hard to find. Most are old and unused for such long periods that only people who have seen them recognise them for what they are.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I live in the mallee.
Cleared mallee, or ex mallee on your own admission.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I live in the mallee.
Cleared mallee, or ex mallee on your own admission.
Some of which is actually malleefowl National Parks reserve dedicated to this very purpose.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
Hehehehe, and there it is.
Yes, you think you know better than someone that has a vast amount of experience spread over many years. I think your comment reflects your attitude very well.
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
furious said:
- I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest.
I can assure you that it is NOT a meteorite strike…
And just how much time have you spent looking for meteorites, anywhere!
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I’ll concede thta it isn’t a mallefowl’s nest now. I’ll state that if malleefowl were still about, that there would be tended nests nearby or they’d be re-using this nest but otherwise, mallefowl are so rare that any evidence of currently tended nests is hard to find. Most are old and unused for such long periods that only people who have seen them recognise them for what they are.
That crater has NEVER been a mallee fowl nest.
Well, you see. The thing is… the truth of the matter is… you’re a fucking idiot…
PermeateFree said:
furious said:
- I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest.
I can assure you that it is NOT a meteorite strike…
And just how much time have you spent looking for meteorites, anywhere!
All you really need to do is dig and come up with evidence and I will concede that you ae correct. However without that, it is still a phenomenon thta is often found, only in mallee.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:I am not certain, but like Bubblecar I googled images and what you appear to have posted is a mallee fowl nest. On the balance of probabilities I am betting on that.
But you are convinced it is a meteorite crater and I have seen enough of your previous gear and realise that once you have made up your mind you are impervious to any other interpretations, so likewise I will bow out and leave you to it.
What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
and you haven’t thought of another possible creator other than mallee fowl or metorites?
There is nothing else in the region that could make such craters.
roughbarked said:
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?
Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
Hehehehe, and there it is.
Yes, you think you know better than someone that has a vast amount of experience spread over many years. I think your comment reflects your attitude very well.
I am open to being convinced, but I need more than your say so that it is a meteorite, especially, when your photo, the one you presented looks like any other number of photos easily available on the net labelled mallee fowl nests.
Hence balance of probabilities. Looks like one, probably is one.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest. Why everyone is so sure it is when probably nobody here has been to the WA Mallee, let alone seen a mallee fowl nest or the crater I described. Lets face it, most people here live in cities or country towns, your knowledge of these areas is virtually zero, yet you are so certain.
I’ll concede thta it isn’t a mallefowl’s nest now. I’ll state that if malleefowl were still about, that there would be tended nests nearby or they’d be re-using this nest but otherwise, mallefowl are so rare that any evidence of currently tended nests is hard to find. Most are old and unused for such long periods that only people who have seen them recognise them for what they are.
That crater has NEVER been a mallee fowl nest.
Nor has the mallee in your part of the world ever been the full extent of the mallee country in southern Australia.
Don’t want to bother with this thread after this post, but I would just ask Permeate: how do you think the walls of the malleefowl nest are built?
Answer: they dig, into the level ground, and kick up the walls in a circle behind the depression.
Thus, when the nest is eroded, the walls will decline and the hollow will remain. Indeed, the hollow may become more pronounced, as a result of wind activity.
How much psychological angst does it really take to say, “Yeah, they’re old mallowfowl nests, I should have realised that. Anyway ta people :)”
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:What is the matter with you people? I have spent years investigating this region, I have seen mallee fowl nests, both new and old. I have also seen a number of these craters, which I might add, most were no where near the mallee fowl. Yet you think my knowledge and experience of this area should count for less than your knowledge that only covers looking at a few pictures. Well if you want to be so dogmatic over something you obvious have no knowledge then so be it. If you want to play the fool, be my guest, but I never cease to be amazed at how much you think know and how much you really do.
and you haven’t thought of another possible creator other than mallee fowl or metorites?
There is nothing else in the region that could make such craters.
No? I’ve got similar here. I see that some are old ants nests.
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
So ignoring meteorites, what do people think would have created this hole?
The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
Moll, this area is many kilometers from anywhere, very few if any people visit these places. I think you are judging this on your own experiences, which are nothing like the situation in WA.
Me… never wrong.,,
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:
mollwollfumble said:I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
literally thousands of them out there.
furious said:
- And just how much time have you spent looking for meteorites, anywhere!
Well, you see. The thing is… the truth of the matter is… you’re a fucking idiot…
You are a fool, not just any fool, but a very big one. Stop taking about things you know absolutely nothing about.
Haha haha ha! Haha haha! Haha haha!
PermeateFree said:
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:The answer was, mallee fowl. Which by the way are way rarer than meteorite landings.
I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
Moll, this area is many kilometers from anywhere, very few if any people visit these places. I think you are judging this on your own experiences, which are nothing like the situation in WA.
Kilometres mean nothing. In the days when men did this stuff, it was in miles chains and furlongs.
Clown…
furious said:
- You are a fool, not just any fool, but a very big one. Stop taking about things you know absolutely nothing about.
Clown…
You two, get a room. Badgering and bullying is no way to do science.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
furious said:
- I can assure you that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest.
I can assure you that it is NOT a meteorite strike…
And just how much time have you spent looking for meteorites, anywhere!
All you really need to do is dig and come up with evidence and I will concede that you ae correct. However without that, it is still a phenomenon thta is often found, only in mallee.
Look I cannot be bothered, I only mentioned this as a topic of interest, but have seen this ‘I am right attitude’ no matter how little you know of the subject. Unfortunately it is so predictable here, so I wont do it again and you can concentrate on your chat posts.
The humble sugar ant leaves such evidence everywhere in the mallee.
Hypocrite…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:And just how much time have you spent looking for meteorites, anywhere!
All you really need to do is dig and come up with evidence and I will concede that you ae correct. However without that, it is still a phenomenon thta is often found, only in mallee.
Look I cannot be bothered, I only mentioned this as a topic of interest, but have seen this ‘I am right attitude’ no matter how little you know of the subject. Unfortunately it is so predictable here, so I wont do it again and you can concentrate on your chat posts.
A topic of interest it is. Of fact, little science other than casual imaginings is also what it is.
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:
mollwollfumble said:I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
I suggest that you dig one or more of them until you discover what made them.
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:
mollwollfumble said:I’m not the right person to ask, all I can say is that it is definitely not a meteorite.
I’ve no reason to think it was anything other than mallee fowl. But from the photo I couldn’t rule out tree stump removal, water damage, someone or something digging for food, ants/termites, kids having fun.
I don’t think it’s a collapsed dunny.
or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
Or maybe mallee fowls only nest where meteorites have struck.
Please stop, the laughter is killing me…
PermeateFree said:
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?
Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
How do you know this? Are you omnipresent?
AwesomeO said:
mollwollfumble said:
roughbarked said:or a collapsed drill hole, mine shaft or ants nest?
Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
Or maybe mallee fowls only nest where meteorites have struck.
Now rarity of probabilities are exceeding the known limits.
Bubblecar said:
Don’t want to bother with this thread after this post, but I would just ask Permeate: how do you think the walls of the malleefowl nest are built?Answer: they dig, into the level ground, and kick up the walls in a circle behind the depression.
Thus, when the nest is eroded, the walls will decline and the hollow will remain. Indeed, the hollow may become more pronounced, as a result of wind activity.
How much psychological angst does it really take to say, “Yeah, they’re old mallowfowl nests, I should have realised that. Anyway ta people :)”
Car you have obviously NEVER seen an abandoned eroded mallee fowl nest, so please restrict your comment to what you know, rather than your imagination.
furious said:
- For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
Please stop, the laughter is killing me…
He tried to tell me that he knew all about opal mining.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:and you haven’t thought of another possible creator other than mallee fowl or metorites?
There is nothing else in the region that could make such craters.
No? I’ve got similar here. I see that some are old ants nests.
BS
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:
Don’t want to bother with this thread after this post, but I would just ask Permeate: how do you think the walls of the malleefowl nest are built?Answer: they dig, into the level ground, and kick up the walls in a circle behind the depression.
Thus, when the nest is eroded, the walls will decline and the hollow will remain. Indeed, the hollow may become more pronounced, as a result of wind activity.
How much psychological angst does it really take to say, “Yeah, they’re old mallowfowl nests, I should have realised that. Anyway ta people :)”
Car you have obviously NEVER seen an abandoned eroded mallee fowl nest, so please restrict your comment to what you know, rather than your imagination.
OK. forget thta others may not have seen them and accept thta I have. Point this particular argument at someone who has put their hands on and in such things.
PermeateFree, you have never seen a meteorite strike…
PermeateFree said:
such statements need evidence.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:There is nothing else in the region that could make such craters.
No? I’ve got similar here. I see that some are old ants nests.
BS
roughbarked said:
furious said:
- You are a fool, not just any fool, but a very big one. Stop taking about things you know absolutely nothing about.
Clown…
You two, get a room. Badgering and bullying is no way to do science.
Unfortunately, science is rarely practiced here, although some might think it is.
roughbarked said:
The humble sugar ant leaves such evidence everywhere in the mallee.
BS
…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
furious said:
- You are a fool, not just any fool, but a very big one. Stop taking about things you know absolutely nothing about.
Clown…
You two, get a room. Badgering and bullying is no way to do science.
Unfortunately, science is rarely practiced here, although some might think it is.
I will take your point thta badgering and bullying predominates here but you should also accept that I’m trying to help you with scientific study of malle country.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
The humble sugar ant leaves such evidence everywhere in the mallee.
BS
Where’s your evidence?
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
The humble sugar ant leaves such evidence everywhere in the mallee.
BS
Where’s your evidence?
I can also take you to mallefowl nests thta look exactly like your photo where I photographed them more than forty years ago. They are still there and look exactly the same.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
mollwollfumble said:Yes, or collapsed drill/auger hole.
For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
How do you know this? Are you omnipresent?
My collections go back to 1989 and if drilling had been there, then signs would have remained for many years. This particular area has had very little activity of any kind. There are not many people in WA outside of the coastal region around Perth and rarely do people wander around out in these remote areas. It is very different to the situation in the Eastern States.
It also strikes me as odd that you mention that mallefowl exist only at the same 200 km radius thta drill auger holes also do.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
How do you know this? Are you omnipresent?
My collections go back to 1989 and if drilling had been there, then signs would have remained for many years. This particular area has had very little activity of any kind. There are not many people in WA outside of the coastal region around Perth and rarely do people wander around out in these remote areas. It is very different to the situation in the Eastern States.
My collections go back further than 1969
Not. Meteorites…
roughbarked said:
furious said:
- For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
Please stop, the laughter is killing me…
He tried to tell me that he knew all about opal mining.
Overall I probably do, as I traveled around ALL the opal fields and studied the formations. Whereas you only have your one hole.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:
Don’t want to bother with this thread after this post, but I would just ask Permeate: how do you think the walls of the malleefowl nest are built?Answer: they dig, into the level ground, and kick up the walls in a circle behind the depression.
Thus, when the nest is eroded, the walls will decline and the hollow will remain. Indeed, the hollow may become more pronounced, as a result of wind activity.
How much psychological angst does it really take to say, “Yeah, they’re old mallowfowl nests, I should have realised that. Anyway ta people :)”
Car you have obviously NEVER seen an abandoned eroded mallee fowl nest, so please restrict your comment to what you know, rather than your imagination.
OK. forget thta others may not have seen them and accept thta I have. Point this particular argument at someone who has put their hands on and in such things.
Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
So do you…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
furious said:
- For a start, there has not been ANY drilling in this area before, although 200 km or so further East there has. But to suggest a collapsed drill or auger hole would be close to 2 metres diameter or even erode to those dimensions is ridiculous in the extreme.
Please stop, the laughter is killing me…
He tried to tell me that he knew all about opal mining.
Overall I probably do, as I traveled around ALL the opal fields and studied the formations. Whereas you only have your one hole.
Hmm, There are more than fifty thousand such holes at the place where you reckon I’ve looked at only on and you are missing the point entirely.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:You two, get a room. Badgering and bullying is no way to do science.
Unfortunately, science is rarely practiced here, although some might think it is.
I will take your point thta badgering and bullying predominates here but you should also accept that I’m trying to help you with scientific study of malle country.
I think in future I shall simply address you as BS.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Car you have obviously NEVER seen an abandoned eroded mallee fowl nest, so please restrict your comment to what you know, rather than your imagination.
OK. forget thta others may not have seen them and accept thta I have. Point this particular argument at someone who has put their hands on and in such things.
Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
Though I would enjoy meeting you and walk the mallee with you. You really should realise thta you have never done that, with me. So how do you substantiate this argument?
Haha haha! Hahaha! Ha ha has a!
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Unfortunately, science is rarely practiced here, although some might think it is.
I will take your point thta badgering and bullying predominates here but you should also accept that I’m trying to help you with scientific study of malle country.
I think in future I shall simply address you as BS.
It is a shame that you feel this way about one who could be your greatest ally.
You know, every bit of fact you add to a conversation is out weighed by every bit of bull shit that you utter?
roughbarked said:
It also strikes me as odd that you mention that mallefowl exist only at the same 200 km radius thta drill auger holes also do.
Augur and drilling holes in this country are very different to those in the Opal Fields and I should know because I have drilled a great many. Even in the Eastern States, Augur holes do not erode to anything like the craters here.
furious said:
- I think in future I shall simply address you as BS.
You know, every bit of fact you add to a conversation is out weighed by every bit of bull shit that you utter?
This in fact be the natural course of any conversation. However a scienctific conversation usually cuts BS by adhering to the facts that one actually knows or assumes. If it is only an assumption then it requires lack of adhesion once realistic facts are presented.
I’ve done everything in the whole universe and therefore I am an expert and you shall bow to me…
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:How do you know this? Are you omnipresent?
My collections go back to 1989 and if drilling had been there, then signs would have remained for many years. This particular area has had very little activity of any kind. There are not many people in WA outside of the coastal region around Perth and rarely do people wander around out in these remote areas. It is very different to the situation in the Eastern States.
My collections go back further than 1969
Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
It also strikes me as odd that you mention that mallefowl exist only at the same 200 km radius thta drill auger holes also do.
Augur and drilling holes in this country are very different to those in the Opal Fields and I should know because I have drilled a great many. Even in the Eastern States, Augur holes do not erode to anything like the craters here.
I’ve done and seen many auger holes on many soil types as well.
They are indeed not all the same. However, you are again missing the point made in the statement you are addressing.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:My collections go back to 1989 and if drilling had been there, then signs would have remained for many years. This particular area has had very little activity of any kind. There are not many people in WA outside of the coastal region around Perth and rarely do people wander around out in these remote areas. It is very different to the situation in the Eastern States.
My collections go back further than 1969
Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality.
So, my life has been a complete and utter waste of my being here at all, according to someone who has never actually witnessed it?
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:He tried to tell me that he knew all about opal mining.
Overall I probably do, as I traveled around ALL the opal fields and studied the formations. Whereas you only have your one hole.
Hmm, There are more than fifty thousand such holes at the place where you reckon I’ve looked at only on and you are missing the point entirely.
Yes and you only might know that particular field. Each field is different.
I still think you are a dickhead…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Overall I probably do, as I traveled around ALL the opal fields and studied the formations. Whereas you only have your one hole.
Hmm, There are more than fifty thousand such holes at the place where you reckon I’ve looked at only on and you are missing the point entirely.
Yes and you only might know that particular field. Each field is different.
like drill holes may also be.
How about metorite craters, abandoned mallefowl nests or sugar ants nests?roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:OK. forget thta others may not have seen them and accept thta I have. Point this particular argument at someone who has put their hands on and in such things.
Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
Though I would enjoy meeting you and walk the mallee with you. You really should realise thta you have never done that, with me. So how do you substantiate this argument?
Which is a good enough reason for you to not be so certain that you know exactly what I have shown you. At least I have both to compare.
furious said:
- Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality
I still think you are a dickhead…
and you haven’t done any prospect drilling or mallefowl research.
furious said:
- Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
Haha haha! Hahaha! Ha ha has a!
Piss off furious, you are being stupid and a crashing bore.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:I will take your point thta badgering and bullying predominates here but you should also accept that I’m trying to help you with scientific study of malle country.
I think in future I shall simply address you as BS.
It is a shame that you feel this way about one who could be your greatest ally.
I only like facts rb. Something you can never be sure about with you.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
Though I would enjoy meeting you and walk the mallee with you. You really should realise thta you have never done that, with me. So how do you substantiate this argument?
Which is a good enough reason for you to not be so certain that you know exactly what I have shown you. At least I have both to compare.
Now you are starting to calm down, can we get down to discussing what research into this meteorite strike/old mallefowl diggings/old prospecting evidence, you have done or are actually doing, in pursuit of presenting a case?
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:I think in future I shall simply address you as BS.
It is a shame that you feel this way about one who could be your greatest ally.
I only like facts rb. Something you can never be sure about with you.
and you are sure that I can’t be?
Better than being a moron like you…
furious said:
- Augur and drilling holes in this country are very different to those in the Opal Fields a
I’ve done everything in the whole universe and therefore I am an expert and you shall bow to me…
You are such an idiot, or do a very good likeness of one.
Ha ya ha ha ha! Ha h Chautauqua ha ha ha! You so funny.??
furious said:
- Piss off furious, you are being stupid and a crashing bore.
Better than being a moron like you…
I don’t think it helps to ridicule and abuse each other. I’d like to know anything that you actually do knoiw about the issue at hand thanks.
You are a knob…
furious said:
- You are such an idiot, or do a very good likeness of one.
You are a knob…
we all have one.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
It also strikes me as odd that you mention that mallefowl exist only at the same 200 km radius thta drill auger holes also do.
Augur and drilling holes in this country are very different to those in the Opal Fields and I should know because I have drilled a great many. Even in the Eastern States, Augur holes do not erode to anything like the craters here.
I’ve done and seen many auger holes on many soil types as well.
They are indeed not all the same. However, you are again missing the point made in the statement you are addressing.
Well if you think a mallee fowl nest looks anything like an auger hole in ANY condition, then you are howling at the moon.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Augur and drilling holes in this country are very different to those in the Opal Fields and I should know because I have drilled a great many. Even in the Eastern States, Augur holes do not erode to anything like the craters here.
I’ve done and seen many auger holes on many soil types as well.
They are indeed not all the same. However, you are again missing the point made in the statement you are addressing.
Well if you think a mallee fowl nest looks anything like an auger hole in ANY condition, then you are howling at the moon.
I usually avoid saying ANY and EXACTLY in the same sentence.
What I have said, are words like excavated, collapsing and hole.
Well, if you think a meteorite hole looks like a…ah, fuck it, you are a knobber..?
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:My collections go back further than 1969
Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality.
So, my life has been a complete and utter waste of my being here at all, according to someone who has never actually witnessed it?
Go and ramble to someone who might understand what you are saying, because you have gone into one of your incoherent stages, where nothing makes sense and does not follow. Anyway I am obviously here only to amuse you, so I shall depart..
furious said:
- Well if you think a mallee fowl nest looks anything like an auger hole in ANY condition, then you are howling at the moon.
Well, if you think a meteorite hole looks like a…ah, fuck it, you are a knobber..?
I doubt he deserves being called a knobber. I’d really like morrie to be here to talk about mound creation and collapse.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality.
So, my life has been a complete and utter waste of my being here at all, according to someone who has never actually witnessed it?
Go and ramble to someone who might understand what you are saying, because you have gone into one of your incoherent stages, where nothing makes sense and does not follow. Anyway I am obviously here only to amuse you, so I shall depart..
If you run, you can always fight another day. There will never be any winners here.
furious said:
- Maybe, but we are in different parts of Australia, which does make a difference. Anyway BS, I think you are just pissing around and not interested in anything like reality
I still think you are a dickhead…
And I think you are still at primary school, fool.
Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out…
furious said:
- Anyway I am obviously here only to amuse you, so I shall depart..
Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out…
Please refrain from Americanisms of incomprehesible intellectual merit..
DICKWAD…
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Sorry, but I don’t think you have and certainly not in a detailed examination that you could compare with what I know.
Though I would enjoy meeting you and walk the mallee with you. You really should realise thta you have never done that, with me. So how do you substantiate this argument?
Which is a good enough reason for you to not be so certain that you know exactly what I have shown you. At least I have both to compare.
Again, you know nothing about me.. or my travels..
Was there anything at all in the above photo, PF, that you can relate to?
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:So, my life has been a complete and utter waste of my being here at all, according to someone who has never actually witnessed it?
Go and ramble to someone who might understand what you are saying, because you have gone into one of your incoherent stages, where nothing makes sense and does not follow. Anyway I am obviously here only to amuse you, so I shall depart..
If you run, you can always fight another day. There will never be any winners here.
bump.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:Though I would enjoy meeting you and walk the mallee with you. You really should realise thta you have never done that, with me. So how do you substantiate this argument?
Which is a good enough reason for you to not be so certain that you know exactly what I have shown you. At least I have both to compare.
Again, you know nothing about me.. or my travels..
bump.
Mallee country local: “Yep, that’s one of those malleefowl nests, long abandoned. See them all round the place here, they gradually blow away.”
PermeateFree: “Well geewilikers, looks like one of them god-fersaken shootin’ stars done slammed right into the earth just about here. Musta been a mighty ol’ lump of space rock to cause that crater. I sure do hope none of them malleefowl was hurt – this hole is just about the exact same shape n’ size of their nests, woulda blown ‘em to kingdom come. I better report this to the sheriff…”
Bubblecar said:
Mallee country local: “Yep, that’s one of those malleefowl nests, long abandoned. See them all round the place here, they gradually blow away.”PermeateFree: “Well geewilikers, looks like one of them god-fersaken shootin’ stars done slammed right into the earth just about here. Musta been a mighty ol’ lump of space rock to cause that crater. I sure do hope none of them malleefowl was hurt – this hole is just about the exact same shape n’ size of their nests, woulda blown ‘em to kingdom come. I better report this to the sheriff…”
roughbarked said:
The shame of it all is that long abandondoned usually means lack of existing inhabitants. The state of weathering indicates the length of the time space since.
They’re not doing too well:
Conservation status
Across its range, the malleefowl is considered to be threatened. Predation from the introduced red fox is a factor, but the critical issues are changed fire regimes and the ongoing destruction and fragmentation of habitat. Like the southern hairy-nose wombat it is particularly vulnerable to the increasing frequency and severity of drought that has resulted from climate change. Before the arrival of Europeans, the malleefowl was found over huge swathes of Australia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleefowl#Conservation_status
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
Mallee country local: “Yep, that’s one of those malleefowl nests, long abandoned. See them all round the place here, they gradually blow away.”PermeateFree: “Well geewilikers, looks like one of them god-fersaken shootin’ stars done slammed right into the earth just about here. Musta been a mighty ol’ lump of space rock to cause that crater. I sure do hope none of them malleefowl was hurt – this hole is just about the exact same shape n’ size of their nests, woulda blown ‘em to kingdom come. I better report this to the sheriff…”
The shame of it all is that long abandondoned usually means lack of existing inhabitants. The state of weathering indicates the length of the time space since.
I’ve mentioned it here before this and in scribbly. I live very near Pulletop Mallefowl reserve. I call all cleverdicks to put its current status up here while I search for which CD I stored that particularly relevant digital image on. I’m not going to the trouble of rescanning the slide again.
Bubblecar said:
roughbarked said:
The shame of it all is that long abandondoned usually means lack of existing inhabitants. The state of weathering indicates the length of the time space since.
They’re not doing too well:
Conservation status
Across its range, the malleefowl is considered to be threatened. Predation from the introduced red fox is a factor, but the critical issues are changed fire regimes and the ongoing destruction and fragmentation of habitat. Like the southern hairy-nose wombat it is particularly vulnerable to the increasing frequency and severity of drought that has resulted from climate change. Before the arrival of Europeans, the malleefowl was found over huge swathes of Australia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleefowl#Conservation_status
From memory, reading an account from a Mr Driver whose name was used in naming a suburb of Griffith, a town built upon the land which was once owned by said Mr Driver. in 1895. “We killed the mallefowl for food and were in turn plagued by locusts”.
roughbarked said:
Bubblecar said:
roughbarked said:
The shame of it all is that long abandondoned usually means lack of existing inhabitants. The state of weathering indicates the length of the time space since.
They’re not doing too well:
Conservation status
Across its range, the malleefowl is considered to be threatened. Predation from the introduced red fox is a factor, but the critical issues are changed fire regimes and the ongoing destruction and fragmentation of habitat. Like the southern hairy-nose wombat it is particularly vulnerable to the increasing frequency and severity of drought that has resulted from climate change. Before the arrival of Europeans, the malleefowl was found over huge swathes of Australia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleefowl#Conservation_status
From memory, reading an account from a Mr Driver whose name was used in naming a suburb of Griffith, a town built upon the land which was once owned by said Mr Driver. in 1895. “We killed the mallefowl for food and were in turn plagued by locusts”.
He also said, “We cut the Belah for it’s useful wood. It didn’t self renew the source”.
“We introduced water and brought the venomous snakes”.
is it worth reading back through the shower of posts that happened last night? or has the topic landed with a thud and it is just insults?
ChrispenEvan said:
is it worth reading back through the shower of posts that happened last night? or has the topic landed with a thud and it is just insults?
not sure.
when I signed out last night, it seemed everyone but PF had decided that meteorites would be the least likely cause…
This…
ChrispenEvan said:
is it worth reading back through the shower of posts that happened last night? or has the topic landed with a thud and it is just insults?
I think the hole might have been dug out by dogs, judging by the hole we just filled in here.
read some, it isn’t a drill hole.
ChrispenEvan said:
is it worth reading back through the shower of posts that happened last night? or has the topic landed with a thud and it is just insults?
some were insults.. you’d be best to only read my posts.
ChrispenEvan said:
read some, it isn’t a drill hole.
No. it isn’t.
Bubblecar said:
Mallee country local: “Yep, that’s one of those malleefowl nests, long abandoned. See them all round the place here, they gradually blow away.”PermeateFree: “Well geewilikers, looks like one of them god-fersaken shootin’ stars done slammed right into the earth just about here. Musta been a mighty ol’ lump of space rock to cause that crater. I sure do hope none of them malleefowl was hurt – this hole is just about the exact same shape n’ size of their nests, woulda blown ‘em to kingdom come. I better report this to the sheriff…”
Good to see the armchair experts have a forum of their own.
The audacity of people here who with no knowledge of the actual situation, can completely disregard all the knowledge gained from investigating this mallee region for more than twenty years. It really buggers belief. I also suspect that some here are misinterpreting the information given to stir up trouble and for their own amusement.
furious said:
- or has the topic landed with a thud and it is just insults?
This…
From the schoolboy that contributed the most.
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
well, it ain’t a meteorite crater either.
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
maybe mallefowl only nest in craters of that size
ChrispenEvan said:
well, it ain’t a meteorite crater either.
Did you know that experiments are/have been conducted to measure the velocity of small particles travelling at high speed. They have a large gun (gas powered, I think) where they fire small ball bearing into a tank full of sand and the resultant craters formed are very similar to the craters I mention here. To say these small craters could not be made from meteorites is simply ridiculous.
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
well, it ain’t a meteorite crater either.
Did you know that experiments are/have been conducted to measure the velocity of small particles travelling at high speed. They have a large gun (gas powered, I think) where they fire small ball bearing into a tank full of sand and the resultant craters formed are very similar to the craters I mention here. To say these small craters could not be made from meteorites is simply ridiculous.
yes i do know about the NASA Ames Vertical Gun, the distance the projectile goes is small so the loss of speed after it leaves the gun is minimal. fire it through 100+km of atmosphere and you would have a different result.
CrazyNeutrino said:
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
maybe mallefowl only nest in craters of that size
Look, if there were mallee fowl there I would know about it. These birds make tracks in the sandy soils, which is where my eyes are mainly whilst searching for various plants, AND I have not seen any at all. There is absolutely no leaf-litter in any of these craters, which is required to keep the nest temperature at the correct temperature for the eggs to mature (aided by the parent bird). These are just simple, regular, craters that have not been made by any animal.
Could an atomic particle make a crater?
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
well, it ain’t a meteorite crater either.
Did you know that experiments are/have been conducted to measure the velocity of small particles travelling at high speed. They have a large gun (gas powered, I think) where they fire small ball bearing into a tank full of sand and the resultant craters formed are very similar to the craters I mention here. To say these small craters could not be made from meteorites is simply ridiculous.
yes i do know about the NASA Ames Vertical Gun, the distance the projectile goes is small so the loss of speed after it leaves the gun is minimal. fire it through 100+km of atmosphere and you would have a different result.
Yes and highly dependent on the material the meteorite is made from, plus the speed and angle it was travelling, also the soil, etc, it ended up impacting.
CrazyNeutrino said:
Could an atomic particle make a crater?
Yes I did think the North Koreans might have been involved, but for some stupid reason of which I cannot remember, dismissed it.
so you are still insisting on it being a meteorite?
ChrispenEvan said:
so you are still insisting on it being a meteorite?
Yes, it is a small meteorite crater.
CrazyNeutrino said:
Could an atomic particle make a crater?
yes, but not a very big one. unless you had lots of particles all together, then it would make a bigger crater. be a bit like a meteorite crater.
sorry, the vert gun container is a partial vacuum of various hardness. so no atmosphere as such to slow the projectile. making it even less like an earth impactor.
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/a-scientist-and-his-gun/
ChrispenEvan said:
sorry, the vert gun container is a partial vacuum of various hardness. so no atmosphere as such to slow the projectile. making it even less like an earth impactor.
So what are you saying? Bits of rock or iron travelling through space at tens of thousands of miles an hour, then are slowed sufficiently by the atmosphere to permit a soft landing?
mallee tree/stump hasn’t been ripped out, way back by dozer
or’s spinifex grew in a circle previous.
dunno
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
sorry, the vert gun container is a partial vacuum of various hardness. so no atmosphere as such to slow the projectile. making it even less like an earth impactor.
So what are you saying? Bits of rock or iron travelling through space at tens of thousands of miles an hour, then are slowed sufficiently by the atmosphere to permit a soft landing?
depending on the size of those bits of rock, yes. entry speeds are from 11-72km/sec. look up aerobraking.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
We all said it looked like an old unused for a long time type nest.
transition said:
mallee tree/stump hasn’t been ripped out, way back by dozeror’s spinifex grew in a circle previous.
dunno
No spinifex in this area and up-rooted trees leave a very uneven hole.
>There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
they’re elusive creatures
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
sorry, the vert gun container is a partial vacuum of various hardness. so no atmosphere as such to slow the projectile. making it even less like an earth impactor.
So what are you saying? Bits of rock or iron travelling through space at tens of thousands of miles an hour, then are slowed sufficiently by the atmosphere to permit a soft landing?
depending on the size of those bits of rock, yes. entry speeds are from 11-72km/sec. look up aerobraking.
So a soft landing is produced?
the space shuttle used aerobraking to land. reentered at ~8km/sec. no engine braking just aerobraking. used parachute and wheel brakes to come to a stop on the runway.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
or maybe, just maybe we apply occams razor to the problem and say, mallee fowl country might be mallee fowl nest or meteorite crater even if the physics are wrong.
There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
We all said it looked like an old unused for a long time type nest.
Just because you say so, from a single two-dimensional photograph, does not mean in your collective ignorance you are correct.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:So what are you saying? Bits of rock or iron travelling through space at tens of thousands of miles an hour, then are slowed sufficiently by the atmosphere to permit a soft landing?
depending on the size of those bits of rock, yes. entry speeds are from 11-72km/sec. look up aerobraking.
So a soft landing is produced?
depends on the size. that one in the salt lake went in 42cm. others, much smaller ones, would basically float down.
transition said:
>There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.they’re elusive creatures
True, but they must still move around and over twenty years you can view a very large area.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
We all said it looked like an old unused for a long time type nest.
Just because you say so, from a single two-dimensional photograph, does not mean in your collective ignorance you are correct.
don’t you be venturing hostile generalizations there now permeate, otherwise i’m going to tickle you :)
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.
We all said it looked like an old unused for a long time type nest.
Just because you say so, from a single two-dimensional photograph, does not mean in your collective ignorance you are correct.
Any meteorite crater has certain definitive structural elements that aren’t difficult to decipher and you should probably look for those and photogaph them.
PermeateFree said:
transition said:
>There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.they’re elusive creatures
True, but they must still move around and over twenty years you can view a very large area.
I hardly ever see them here, but I know there’re a lot more than i’d guess. But elusive’s what I describe them as.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:depending on the size of those bits of rock, yes. entry speeds are from 11-72km/sec. look up aerobraking.
So a soft landing is produced?
depends on the size. that one in the salt lake went in 42cm. others, much smaller ones, would basically float down.
Well of the millions that do fall to the ground, just about in every instance you could think concerning size, weight and impact velocity has happened.
transition said:
PermeateFree said:
transition said:
>There are NO mallee fowl there and have not been so for a very long time.they’re elusive creatures
True, but they must still move around and over twenty years you can view a very large area.
I hardly ever see them here, but I know there’re a lot more than i’d guess. But elusive’s what I describe them as.
Dogs foxes and even cats don’t find them that elusive.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:So a soft landing is produced?
depends on the size. that one in the salt lake went in 42cm. others, much smaller ones, would basically float down.
Well of the millions that do fall to the ground, just about in every instance you could think concerning size, weight and impact velocity has happened.
it doesn’t always scale that easily.
It is too wet today or I would go out to Pulletop and take some photographs. Probably going to be too wet for a while as creeks are flooded.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
so you are still insisting on it being a meteorite?
Yes, it is a small meteorite crater.
Then there should be signs of a meteorite
the other problem is the shape and density of the walls
the impact area should be a bit lower than the surrounding areas
the impact floor should also be of higher density
there should be signs of coloration from the meteorite
there should be indicators of melting from the shockwave etc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
roughbarked said:
transition said:
PermeateFree said:True, but they must still move around and over twenty years you can view a very large area.
I hardly ever see them here, but I know there’re a lot more than i’d guess. But elusive’s what I describe them as.
Dogs foxes and even cats don’t find them that elusive.
Foxes arrived in the Esperance region 100 years ago and since then have done a very good job of eating most animals that called this place home.
Looking for evidence of a meteorite impact
http://www.barringercrater.com/education/evidence/
Rocks in Shock
Extreme temperatures and pressures from a meteorite impact cause extensive heating, melting, and deformation. Deformation occurs under the high pressures experienced as a shockwave passes through the target rocks during an impact (known as shock metamorphism). Because they can only be formed under these special conditions, these target rocks are considered indicators of shock.
Scientists often look for shock indicators to prove that a given terrestrial structure is impact-related. Several shock features that scientists look for include planar deformation features and planar fractures (these two are usually identified using thin sections and microscopes); high-pressure polymorphs (coesite and stishovite); and shatter cones. They can range greatly in size, from microscopic to >10 meters in size.
Scientists have found evidence of shock metamorphism at Barringer Crater in breccia deposits (rock made up of fractured rocks held together by a melted matrix), in the pulverized rock of Coconino sandstone near the crater rim, and in shocked sandstone rocks found on the edges of the ejecta blanket.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:depends on the size. that one in the salt lake went in 42cm. others, much smaller ones, would basically float down.
Well of the millions that do fall to the ground, just about in every instance you could think concerning size, weight and impact velocity has happened.
it doesn’t always scale that easily.
I appreciate it does not fit well with your understanding, but it is the situation.
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
so you are still insisting on it being a meteorite?
Yes, it is a small meteorite crater.
Then there should be signs of a meteorite
the other problem is the shape and density of the walls
the impact area should be a bit lower than the surrounding areas
the impact floor should also be of higher density
there should be signs of coloration from the meteorite
there should be indicators of melting from the shockwave etc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
I think your scaling is vastly different, although the impact area is significantly lower than the surrounding area.
CrazyNeutrino said:
Looking for evidence of a meteorite impacthttp://www.barringercrater.com/education/evidence/
Rocks in Shock
Extreme temperatures and pressures from a meteorite impact cause extensive heating, melting, and deformation. Deformation occurs under the high pressures experienced as a shockwave passes through the target rocks during an impact (known as shock metamorphism). Because they can only be formed under these special conditions, these target rocks are considered indicators of shock.
Scientists often look for shock indicators to prove that a given terrestrial structure is impact-related. Several shock features that scientists look for include planar deformation features and planar fractures (these two are usually identified using thin sections and microscopes); high-pressure polymorphs (coesite and stishovite); and shatter cones. They can range greatly in size, from microscopic to >10 meters in size.
Scientists have found evidence of shock metamorphism at Barringer Crater in breccia deposits (rock made up of fractured rocks held together by a melted matrix), in the pulverized rock of Coconino sandstone near the crater rim, and in shocked sandstone rocks found on the edges of the ejecta blanket.
Jesus Crazy, I am showing you a very small crater of around 2 metres diameter; I am not discussing a massive meteor strike. The object that impacted is probably little more than the size of a marble and possibly even smaller.
not foxed digging chasing something.
it’s fairly likely an old mallee fowl nest from the pictures I just looked at
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
Looking for evidence of a meteorite impacthttp://www.barringercrater.com/education/evidence/
Rocks in Shock
Extreme temperatures and pressures from a meteorite impact cause extensive heating, melting, and deformation. Deformation occurs under the high pressures experienced as a shockwave passes through the target rocks during an impact (known as shock metamorphism). Because they can only be formed under these special conditions, these target rocks are considered indicators of shock.
Scientists often look for shock indicators to prove that a given terrestrial structure is impact-related. Several shock features that scientists look for include planar deformation features and planar fractures (these two are usually identified using thin sections and microscopes); high-pressure polymorphs (coesite and stishovite); and shatter cones. They can range greatly in size, from microscopic to >10 meters in size.
Scientists have found evidence of shock metamorphism at Barringer Crater in breccia deposits (rock made up of fractured rocks held together by a melted matrix), in the pulverized rock of Coconino sandstone near the crater rim, and in shocked sandstone rocks found on the edges of the ejecta blanket.
Jesus Crazy, I am showing you a very small crater of around 2 metres diameter; I am not discussing a massive meteor strike. The object that impacted is probably little more than the size of a marble and possibly even smaller.
definately not something that small..
think of a .22 bullet and the crater that forms, and that’s at around 1000fps
no way something that size formed what you’ve shown in your pic at less than a tenth of that speed..
transition said:
not foxed digging chasing something.
Foxes do not expend that sort of energy, we are taking of a 2 metre diameter x 0.8 metre deep hole.
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:Yes, it is a small meteorite crater.
Then there should be signs of a meteorite
the other problem is the shape and density of the walls
the impact area should be a bit lower than the surrounding areas
the impact floor should also be of higher density
there should be signs of coloration from the meteorite
there should be indicators of melting from the shockwave etc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
I think your scaling is vastly different, although the impact area is significantly lower than the surrounding area.
No Its the scaling of the meteorite and its composition
most small meteorites burn up and never reach the ground
most of them vaporize and winds blow away the dust
as for which sized and composition ones reach the ground and cause impact craters is a question for mollwollfumble
as for the smallest known Australian crater is the Dalgaranga crater at 24 meters across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalgaranga_crater
there might be smaller ones
transition said:
it’s fairly likely an old mallee fowl nest from the pictures I just looked at
An old mallee fowl nest would not be so neat and even all around, plus mallee fowl scratch up the leaf-litter to provide the necessary heat to incubate the eggs. It really is nothing like a mallee fowl nest in ANY condition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleefowl
Pairs occupy a territory but usually roost and feed apart: their social behavior is sufficient to allow regular mating during the season and little else.
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
After rain, he turns and mixes the material to encourage decay and, if conditions allow, digs an egg chamber in August (the last month of the southern winter). The female sometimes assists with the excavation of the egg chamber, and the timing varies with temperature and rainfall. The female usually lays between September and February, provided there has been enough rain to start organic decay of the litter. The male continues to maintain the nest-mound, gradually adding more soil to the mix as the summer approaches (presumably to regulate the temperature).
maybe a shaped charge could create a certain look
the other possibility is visitors there are digging holes for their fires, think the requirement 1 metre deep or something
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
Looking for evidence of a meteorite impacthttp://www.barringercrater.com/education/evidence/
Rocks in Shock
Extreme temperatures and pressures from a meteorite impact cause extensive heating, melting, and deformation. Deformation occurs under the high pressures experienced as a shockwave passes through the target rocks during an impact (known as shock metamorphism). Because they can only be formed under these special conditions, these target rocks are considered indicators of shock.
Scientists often look for shock indicators to prove that a given terrestrial structure is impact-related. Several shock features that scientists look for include planar deformation features and planar fractures (these two are usually identified using thin sections and microscopes); high-pressure polymorphs (coesite and stishovite); and shatter cones. They can range greatly in size, from microscopic to >10 meters in size.
Scientists have found evidence of shock metamorphism at Barringer Crater in breccia deposits (rock made up of fractured rocks held together by a melted matrix), in the pulverized rock of Coconino sandstone near the crater rim, and in shocked sandstone rocks found on the edges of the ejecta blanket.
Jesus Crazy, I am showing you a very small crater of around 2 metres diameter; I am not discussing a massive meteor strike. The object that impacted is probably little more than the size of a marble and possibly even smaller.
definately not something that small..
think of a .22 bullet and the crater that forms, and that’s at around 1000fps
no way something that size formed what you’ve shown in your pic at less than a tenth of that speed..
In your opinion, however tests done on very fast moving objects impacting materials like sand, transfer their energy to the point of impact.
No breeding has been recorded in Pulletop Nature Reserve since the 1989-90 season when one nest was found to contain eight eggs, all of which
were infertile. Pulletop Nature Reserve (145 ha) is all that remains of the mallee where Frith undertook his landmark studies of the bird’s breeding habits in the late 1950s (see Frith, 1956a; 1956b; 1959; 1962a; 1962b).
These local extinctions give considerable cause for concern, as they have occurred within what is regarded as prime habitat in relatively pristine condition. The reserves which no longer support malleefowl have long been protected from all forms of clearing or harvesting of native vegetation and are subjected to little or no grazing by exotic herbivores. Moreover, with the exception of a small part of Pulletop Nature Reserve that was intentionally burnt in 1988, all these reserves are comprised entirely of old-growth mallee — the preferred habitat of the malleefowl. These local extinctions are stark evidence that, without well-focused conservation action to address the
threatening processes which operate, the malleefowl is in imminent danger of extinction across much of its range. Without such action the decline and loss of extant populations will continue unabated. from http://repository.naturalis.nl/document/46268
transition said:
the other possibility is visitors there are digging holes for their fires, think the requirement 1 metre deep or something
keeps the heat in a bit more too I think
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:Then there should be signs of a meteorite
the other problem is the shape and density of the walls
the impact area should be a bit lower than the surrounding areas
the impact floor should also be of higher density
there should be signs of coloration from the meteorite
there should be indicators of melting from the shockwave etc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
I think your scaling is vastly different, although the impact area is significantly lower than the surrounding area.
No Its the scaling of the meteorite and its composition
most small meteorites burn up and never reach the ground
most of them vaporize and winds blow away the dust
as for which sized and composition ones reach the ground and cause impact craters is a question for mollwollfumble
as for the smallest known Australian crater is the Dalgaranga crater at 24 meters across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalgaranga_crater
there might be smaller ones
So nothing below 24 metres in diameter you say Crazy, nothing between the ones that burn up and those that could create a 24 metre diameter crater?
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:Jesus Crazy, I am showing you a very small crater of around 2 metres diameter; I am not discussing a massive meteor strike. The object that impacted is probably little more than the size of a marble and possibly even smaller.
definately not something that small..
think of a .22 bullet and the crater that forms, and that’s at around 1000fps
no way something that size formed what you’ve shown in your pic at less than a tenth of that speed..
In your opinion, however tests done on very fast moving objects impacting materials like sand, transfer their energy to the point of impact.
the key word there is ‘transferring’ their energy.
for something the mass of a marble to transfer enough energy to displace a cone of material 80cm deep and 2m diameter, youo’re looking at .8 cubic metres, at least 3/4 of a tonne…
transition said:
not foxed digging chasing something.
transition said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MalleefowlPairs occupy a territory but usually roost and feed apart: their social behavior is sufficient to allow regular mating during the season and little else.
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
After rain, he turns and mixes the material to encourage decay and, if conditions allow, digs an egg chamber in August (the last month of the southern winter). The female sometimes assists with the excavation of the egg chamber, and the timing varies with temperature and rainfall. The female usually lays between September and February, provided there has been enough rain to start organic decay of the litter. The male continues to maintain the nest-mound, gradually adding more soil to the mix as the summer approaches (presumably to regulate the temperature).
Transition, I know what a mall fowl mound looks like, they do/did build them in an area about 200 km to the east of this meteorite crater. They are not the same and apart from the overall size are quite different.
transition said:
the other possibility is visitors there are digging holes for their fires, think the requirement 1 metre deep or something
This is in a very remote area, people rarely if ever come there.
type pictures of mallee fowl nests into your brower, the more I look at them the more likely it seems
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:definately not something that small..
think of a .22 bullet and the crater that forms, and that’s at around 1000fps
no way something that size formed what you’ve shown in your pic at less than a tenth of that speed..
In your opinion, however tests done on very fast moving objects impacting materials like sand, transfer their energy to the point of impact.
the key word there is ‘transferring’ their energy.
for something the mass of a marble to transfer enough energy to displace a cone of material 80cm deep and 2m diameter, youo’re looking at .8 cubic metres, at least 3/4 of a tonne…
Ok, then what speed would it have been travelling to create a hole of that size?
PermeateFree said:
transition said:
not foxed digging chasing something.
Foxes do not expend that sort of energy, we are taking of a 2 metre diameter x 0.8 metre deep hole.
Mallefowl do though. It does look like it was excavated by a mallefowl but that something stopped the mallefowl from completing the job. Probably a fox.
these two articles are of interest
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
here is a pic of one of the worlds smallest recorded meteorite impacts which hit a roof tile
its a a few cm across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Novato_Meteorite_Impact_Pit.jpg
transition said:
type pictures of mallee fowl nests into your brower, the more I look at them the more likely it seems
Well sorry, trying to photograph a crater and get some sort of detail of its composition and the method it was made is no easy thing to do with any clarity. All I can say, is I have considerable knowledge of this region over a very long time and I can assure you it is NOT a mallee fowl mound.
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:I think your scaling is vastly different, although the impact area is significantly lower than the surrounding area.
No Its the scaling of the meteorite and its composition
most small meteorites burn up and never reach the ground
most of them vaporize and winds blow away the dust
as for which sized and composition ones reach the ground and cause impact craters is a question for mollwollfumble
as for the smallest known Australian crater is the Dalgaranga crater at 24 meters across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalgaranga_crater
there might be smaller ones
So nothing below 24 metres in diameter you say Crazy, nothing between the ones that burn up and those that could create a 24 metre diameter crater?
Im sure there are ones smaller than 24 meters
they just need to be found
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:In your opinion, however tests done on very fast moving objects impacting materials like sand, transfer their energy to the point of impact.
the key word there is ‘transferring’ their energy.
for something the mass of a marble to transfer enough energy to displace a cone of material 80cm deep and 2m diameter, youo’re looking at .8 cubic metres, at least 3/4 of a tonne…
Ok, then what speed would it have been travelling to create a hole of that size?
bote calcs..
1cm diameter @ 1 gram/cm3
1200km/second
90 degree angle
diameter 2.2m
depth 0.55cm
CrazyNeutrino said:
these two articles are of interesthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater
here is a pic of one of the worlds smallest recorded meteorite impacts which hit a roof tile
its a a few cm across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Novato_Meteorite_Impact_Pit.jpg
Well scale the last one up and that is what you have in my case. Just make allowances for a much finer sandy soil instead of gravel.
Speaking of the photograph, I’m looking at it and seeing exposed roots. Now this is not something I’d expect to see in a meteorite crater. Looks more like a chook scratched this hole.
here is a impact crater found on google maps
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:No Its the scaling of the meteorite and its composition
most small meteorites burn up and never reach the ground
most of them vaporize and winds blow away the dust
as for which sized and composition ones reach the ground and cause impact craters is a question for mollwollfumble
as for the smallest known Australian crater is the Dalgaranga crater at 24 meters across
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalgaranga_crater
there might be smaller ones
So nothing below 24 metres in diameter you say Crazy, nothing between the ones that burn up and those that could create a 24 metre diameter crater?
Im sure there are ones smaller than 24 meters
they just need to be found
Yes indeed they do and be appreciated for what they are and not dismissed because they do not agree with the limited amount of available information.
here you are, use something like this to work it out…
http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
roughbarked said:
Speaking of the photograph, I’m looking at it and seeing exposed roots. Now this is not something I’d expect to see in a meteorite crater. Looks more like a chook scratched this hole.
and one would be looking for signs of shock
I cannot see any signs of shock
….at all
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:the key word there is ‘transferring’ their energy.
for something the mass of a marble to transfer enough energy to displace a cone of material 80cm deep and 2m diameter, youo’re looking at .8 cubic metres, at least 3/4 of a tonne…
Ok, then what speed would it have been travelling to create a hole of that size?
bote calcs..
1cm diameter @ 1 gram/cm3
1200km/second
90 degree anglediameter 2.2m
depth 0.55cm
Take your word for it, but are you saying something like that is possible or impossible?
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:Ok, then what speed would it have been travelling to create a hole of that size?
bote calcs..
1cm diameter @ 1 gram/cm3
1200km/second
90 degree anglediameter 2.2m
depth 0.55cm
Take your word for it, but are you saying something like that is possible or impossible?
1200km/second is pretty far fetched..
earth spins at about 30km/sec, escape velocity is about 11km/sec.
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:Ok, then what speed would it have been travelling to create a hole of that size?
bote calcs..
1cm diameter @ 1 gram/cm3
1200km/second
90 degree anglediameter 2.2m
depth 0.55cm
Take your word for it, but are you saying something like that is possible or impossible?
Or is it possible that it’s impossible?
roughbarked said:
Speaking of the photograph, I’m looking at it and seeing exposed roots. Now this is not something I’d expect to see in a meteorite crater. Looks more like a chook scratched this hole.
Think what you like rb, but that is material that has fallen in, probably from nearby trees, they are not roots, but a small branch and some bark.
CrazyNeutrino said:
here is a impact crater found on google maps
One, it is a little larger than mine, and two that is rocky ground, not sand.
https://youtu.be/u-Qa9o9_BCM
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
Speaking of the photograph, I’m looking at it and seeing exposed roots. Now this is not something I’d expect to see in a meteorite crater. Looks more like a chook scratched this hole.
Think what you like rb, but that is material that has fallen in, probably from nearby trees, they are not roots, but a small branch and some bark.
to be plausible, you would be looking at a fairly dense rock about 10cm in diameter.
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
CrazyNeutrino said:
roughbarked said:
Speaking of the photograph, I’m looking at it and seeing exposed roots. Now this is not something I’d expect to see in a meteorite crater. Looks more like a chook scratched this hole.
and one would be looking for signs of shock
I cannot see any signs of shock
….at all
Think what you like Crazy, just use pertinent information and not wild guesses.
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
But there would be other evidence. At least some of which you should have found, being that no other humans travel there.
a metal detector should then find something yes
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
yes, but in sandy soil, you would be left with a 10cm diameter rock about 1kg in the middle of the site
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yes
According to PermeateFree, a meteor should be in it then.
Did you find one?
CrazyNeutrino said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yesAccording to PermeateFree, a meteorite should be in it then.
Did you find one?
Fixed
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
yes, but in sandy soil, you would be left with a 10cm diameter rock about 1kg in the middle of the site
That’s what I meant about evidence.. Particularly since no one goes there apparently, though it does look like a road runs past it.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
But there would be other evidence. At least some of which you should have found, being that no other humans travel there.
Yes we all know you would know what to look for, but without trying to dig the meteorite out, hoping it has not disintegrated, there is nothing to see. However there is a great deal of evidence that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest (new or old).
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yes
If an iron one, but if simply a rock meteorite, then probably not.
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
here you are, use something like this to work it out…http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
yes, but in sandy soil, you would be left with a 10cm diameter rock about 1kg in the middle of the site
Well the next time I see one I will try to dig it out.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
But there would be other evidence. At least some of which you should have found, being that no other humans travel there.
Yes we all know you would know what to look for, but without trying to dig the meteorite out, hoping it has not disintegrated, there is nothing to see. However there is a great deal of evidence that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest (new or old).
No one said it was a mallefowl nest. Only that it looked somewhat like one.
Mallefowl don’t actually dig holes in sand, they make a mound and dig in that.
With the track running past it, it stands to reason that a human dug it though.
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yesIf an iron one, but if simply a rock meteorite, then probably not.
Are there signs of shock in the ground?
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
But there would be other evidence. At least some of which you should have found, being that no other humans travel there.
Yes we all know you would know what to look for, but without trying to dig the meteorite out, hoping it has not disintegrated, there is nothing to see. However there is a great deal of evidence that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest (new or old).
i’d think it would be rather easy to spot a dense rock in sandy soil..
and something that dense that has survived re-entry has little chance of disintegrating if it has the force to cause a crater…
CrazyNeutrino said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yesAccording to PermeateFree, a meteor should be in it then.
Did you find one?
No I did not look, I have tried in the past with a smaller crater, but without success. Small objects unless you have the right equipment are very difficult to find, although if on a larger crater it might one be as large as a kilogram, it would be worth having a look.
PermeateFree said:
Well the next time I see one I will try to dig it out.
You know this country so well that it shouldn’t take you long to find this site again and do some investigation.
roughbarked said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:Thanks, but I don’t have all the information required, but a paragraph had the bottom of the page had this information:-
>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<
That would be quite an impact and places my little crater well within the range of possible damage.
yes, but in sandy soil, you would be left with a 10cm diameter rock about 1kg in the middle of the site
That’s what I meant about evidence.. Particularly since no one goes there apparently, though it does look like a road runs past it.
That road is a very overgrown track, bulldozed years ago, but unless you are game to drive over a large saltlake it goes nowhere.
For example: if it was dug to boil a billy, then that evidence will still remain in part.
If as you say a soft landing, then there will be minimal disintegration of an extremely dense extraterrestrial object.
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
a metal detector should then find something yesIf an iron one, but if simply a rock meteorite, then probably not.
Are there signs of shock in the ground?
For Christ sake Crazy, stop asking these stupid questions. For the last time, it was in sandy soil and was only 2 metres across. I think you should stop reading about how the dinosaurs went extinct.
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:But there would be other evidence. At least some of which you should have found, being that no other humans travel there.
Yes we all know you would know what to look for, but without trying to dig the meteorite out, hoping it has not disintegrated, there is nothing to see. However there is a great deal of evidence that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest (new or old).
i’d think it would be rather easy to spot a dense rock in sandy soil..
and something that dense that has survived re-entry has little chance of disintegrating if it has the force to cause a crater…
Well if you read that link Boris posted yesterday, it says some meteorites disintegrate, but still create a pit (crater)
When you say two metres, is that from outside the fallout zone?
maybe it was rare sandy meteorite
PermeateFree said:
stumpy_seahorse said:
PermeateFree said:Yes we all know you would know what to look for, but without trying to dig the meteorite out, hoping it has not disintegrated, there is nothing to see. However there is a great deal of evidence that it is NOT a mallee fowl nest (new or old).
i’d think it would be rather easy to spot a dense rock in sandy soil..
and something that dense that has survived re-entry has little chance of disintegrating if it has the force to cause a crater…
Well if you read that link Boris posted yesterday, it says some meteorites disintegrate, but still create a pit (crater)
If you put some of the crater through a sieve, you should find some particles that are alien to the surrounding soil.
CrazyNeutrino said:
maybe it was rare sandy meteorite
too much weed.
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:Well the next time I see one I will try to dig it out.
You know this country so well that it shouldn’t take you long to find this site again and do some investigation.
I know exactly where it is, but apart needing a full day to get there and back, plus I have now finished investigating the area and am now looking at burnt areas to the SE. So not going back just for the reason you mention.
roughbarked said:
For example: if it was dug to boil a billy, then that evidence will still remain in part.If as you say a soft landing, then there will be minimal disintegration of an extremely dense extraterrestrial object.
I think you are mixing different posts.
roughbarked said:
When you say two metres, is that from outside the fallout zone?
No, from the highest point around the hole.
How did the weed get into the meteorite?
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
For example: if it was dug to boil a billy, then that evidence will still remain in part.If as you say a soft landing, then there will be minimal disintegration of an extremely dense extraterrestrial object.
I think you are mixing different posts.
Just trying to get to the truth. Not discounting anything that has been said but indeed not enough research was done at the time of the photograph to clearly define it as a definite meteorite crater. In the length of time this has been discussed, you could at least have driven back there and started digging by now.
Anyway, we are just going around in pointless circles with nothing to be gained.
Right, I’ve got floods on the brain at the moment, but is that a very small water course the bush track is about to cross in the photo? Is it possible for such a formation as the one under discussion to have been formed by a water eddy during a large rain event when the stream was running?
My knowledge of fluid dynamics is practically nil…
CrazyNeutrino said:
How did the weed get into the meteorite?
Bill and Ben.
Mr buffy offers his opinion that it is a Sand Circle. Loosely related to a Crop Circle. But he hasn’t bothered to read the thread, just looked at the photo.
buffy said:
Mr buffy offers his opinion that it is a Sand Circle. Loosely related to a Crop Circle. But he hasn’t bothered to read the thread, just looked at the photo.
Possibility exists.
http://www.wedderburn.vic.au/mallee-fowl
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
For example: if it was dug to boil a billy, then that evidence will still remain in part.If as you say a soft landing, then there will be minimal disintegration of an extremely dense extraterrestrial object.
I think you are mixing different posts.
Just trying to get to the truth. Not discounting anything that has been said but indeed not enough research was done at the time of the photograph to clearly define it as a definite meteorite crater. In the length of time this has been discussed, you could at least have driven back there and started digging by now.
The truth is a difficult thing to acquire, especially when people are not looking for it. Look rb and Crazy, I don’t give a damn what you think is right or wrong, or what opinion you might have. I just supplied some information that I thought you might find interesting, yet I must go though all this crap, just to justify what I have said. I shall not bother starting New Topic threads again, as it is just too painful a process to go through.
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
buffy said:
Mr buffy offers his opinion that it is a Sand Circle. Loosely related to a Crop Circle. But he hasn’t bothered to read the thread, just looked at the photo.
I would make a sand crater to put a fire in, for camping, then hang a tinnie over it, then I would have a cup of coffee and wonder if anyone will think about the hole I made.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
PermeateFree said:I think you are mixing different posts.
Just trying to get to the truth. Not discounting anything that has been said but indeed not enough research was done at the time of the photograph to clearly define it as a definite meteorite crater. In the length of time this has been discussed, you could at least have driven back there and started digging by now.
The truth is a difficult thing to acquire, especially when people are not looking for it. Look rb and Crazy, I don’t give a damn what you think is right or wrong, or what opinion you might have. I just supplied some information that I thought you might find interesting, yet I must go though all this crap, just to justify what I have said. I shall not bother starting New Topic threads again, as it is just too painful a process to go through.
As you wish.
It’s an old malleefowl nest, plain as the nose on my face. Plain as the nose on anyone’s face, ‘ceptin’ maybe some poor critter as don’t have no nose.
CrazyNeutrino said:
buffy said:Mr buffy offers his opinion that it is a Sand Circle. Loosely related to a Crop Circle. But he hasn’t bothered to read the thread, just looked at the photo.
I would make a sand crater to put a fire in, for camping, then hang a tinnie over it, then I would have a cup of coffee and wonder if anyone will think about the hole I made for my camp fire.
Then twenty campers came along and made twenty sand craters to make camp fires in.
roughbarked said:
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
fixed.
Bubblecar said:
It’s an old malleefowl nest, plain as the nose on my face. Plain as the nose on anyone’s face, ‘ceptin’ maybe some poor critter as don’t have no nose.
Are you trying to be funny Car, or just stirring? Because it doesn’t suit you.
CrazyNeutrino said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
buffy said:Mr buffy offers his opinion that it is a Sand Circle. Loosely related to a Crop Circle. But he hasn’t bothered to read the thread, just looked at the photo.
I would make a sand crater to put a fire in, for camping, then hang a tinnie over it, then I would have a cup of coffee and wonder if anyone will think about the hole I made for my camp fire.
Then twenty campers came along and made twenty sand craters to make camp fires in.
You would get a surprise beyond belief if you came to WA Crazy, it is obviously so different to anything you can imagine.
PermeateFree said:
furious said:
- and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
And limestone…
There are two types of limestone in the region, one is from lime eroding from the sand, which forms a more crumbly limestone and much softer than the limestone found on the Nullarbor, which is often like concrete.
roffle…
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.
Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
furious said:
- and much harder to penetrate than the more sandy mallee soils.
And limestone…
There are two types of limestone in the region, one is from lime eroding from the sand, which forms a more crumbly limestone and much softer than the limestone found on the Nullarbor, which is often like concrete.
roffle…
Yes, your ignorance knows no bounds.
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
CrazyNeutrino said:I would make a sand crater to put a fire in, for camping, then hang a tinnie over it, then I would have a cup of coffee and wonder if anyone will think about the hole I made for my camp fire.
Then twenty campers came along and made twenty sand craters to make camp fires in.
You would get a surprise beyond belief if you came to WA Crazy, it is obviously so different to anything you can imagine.
I imagination a lot of campers go to WA.
as everywhere else
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
Try looking more closely. Here was me thinking you were an observant person.
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
No, that’s a small volcano.
CrazyNeutrino said:
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
No, that’s a small volcano.
and it wasn’t blowing out rocks
it was blowing out sand
CrazyNeutrino said:
CrazyNeutrino said:
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
No, that’s a small volcano.
and it wasn’t blowing out rocks
it was blowing out sand
and a macropod hopped across it.
PermeateFree said:
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:There are two types of limestone in the region, one is from lime eroding from the sand, which forms a more crumbly limestone and much softer than the limestone found on the Nullarbor, which is often like concrete.
roffle…
Yes, your ignorance knows no bounds.
funny… the limestone I know of forms in a marine sedimentary environment as a result of the deposition of mainly CaCO3 rich marine organisms… but hey, I could be wrong and you could be right…
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
diddly-squat said:roffle…
Yes, your ignorance knows no bounds.
funny… the limestone I know of forms in a marine sedimentary environment as a result of the deposition of mainly CaCO3 rich marine organisms… but hey, I could be wrong and you could be right…
The sand he is speaking of is actually from eroded limestone.
roughbarked said:
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:Yes, your ignorance knows no bounds.
funny… the limestone I know of forms in a marine sedimentary environment as a result of the deposition of mainly CaCO3 rich marine organisms… but hey, I could be wrong and you could be right…
The sand he is speaking of is actually from eroded limestone.
Sand is almost totally SiO2 but it can also contain wide range of other secondary (typically heavy) minerals… anything even reasonably reactive in sand very quickly either dissolves or reacts and either my chemistry is out by a very large wack or CaO totally fits that particular description.
CrazyNeutrino said:
PermeateFree said:
CrazyNeutrino said:Then twenty campers came along and made twenty sand craters to make camp fires in.
You would get a surprise beyond belief if you came to WA Crazy, it is obviously so different to anything you can imagine.
I imagination a lot of campers go to WA.
as everywhere else
WA is not everywhere else, that is why it is beyond your imagination.
diddly-squat said:
roughbarked said:
diddly-squat said:funny… the limestone I know of forms in a marine sedimentary environment as a result of the deposition of mainly CaCO3 rich marine organisms… but hey, I could be wrong and you could be right…
The sand he is speaking of is actually from eroded limestone.
Sand is almost totally SiO2 but it can also contain wide range of other secondary (typically heavy) minerals… anything even reasonably reactive in sand very quickly either dissolves or reacts and either my chemistry is out by a very large wack or CaO totally fits that particular description.
Which is why the lime eroding from the sand is crummy.
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
diddly-squat said:roffle…
Yes, your ignorance knows no bounds.
funny… the limestone I know of forms in a marine sedimentary environment as a result of the deposition of mainly CaCO3 rich marine organisms… but hey, I could be wrong and you could be right…
Well you certainly don’t know it all. Try reading the next page.
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
Try looking more closely. Here was me thinking you were an observant person.
I see it, that shrub in the background, obviously broken when the meteorite came slamming in.
Or are you talking about something else?
roughbarked said:
diddly-squat said:
roughbarked said:The sand he is speaking of is actually from eroded limestone.
Sand is almost totally SiO2 but it can also contain wide range of other secondary (typically heavy) minerals… anything even reasonably reactive in sand very quickly either dissolves or reacts and either my chemistry is out by a very large wack or CaO totally fits that particular description.
Which is why the lime eroding from the sand is crummy.
Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:
I’m just pointing out the obvious. This thread should have ended when I posted this pic, which is exactly the same thang as you posted, only less eroded.Same size, same shape, same form, same region. And it’s an old malleefowl nest.
Try looking more closely. Here was me thinking you were an observant person.
I see it, that shrub in the background, obviously broken when the meteorite came slamming in.
Or are you talking about something else?
Sorry curve, but I don’t hold you in anything like high esteem, so don’t care what you say, because the intent is always the same. You are very predictable.
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:
diddly-squat said:Sand is almost totally SiO2 but it can also contain wide range of other secondary (typically heavy) minerals… anything even reasonably reactive in sand very quickly either dissolves or reacts and either my chemistry is out by a very large wack or CaO totally fits that particular description.
Which is why the lime eroding from the sand is crummy.
Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:Which is why the lime eroding from the sand is crummy.
Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:Try looking more closely. Here was me thinking you were an observant person.
I see it, that shrub in the background, obviously broken when the meteorite came slamming in.
Or are you talking about something else?
Sorry curve, but I don’t hold you in anything like high esteem, so don’t care what you say, because the intent is always the same. You are very predictable.
So are you, why don’t you say what you have observed that a poor dope like me has missed?
You debate like the dance of the seven veils except not anywhere near as revealing. Hints of superior knowledge leavened with intimations. It’s old and it’s boring but very revealing that you are struggling.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
roughbarked said:Which is why the lime eroding from the sand is crummy.
Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
I have had to endue so much time wasting obfuscating here to last me a very long time. Good job I don’t come here for the wise comment.
roughbarked said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
We are only here for his amusement.
I am only here for the roffles as well. Poking holes in thin shields of unwarranted smug.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:I see it, that shrub in the background, obviously broken when the meteorite came slamming in.
Or are you talking about something else?
Sorry curve, but I don’t hold you in anything like high esteem, so don’t care what you say, because the intent is always the same. You are very predictable.
So are you, why don’t you say what you have observed that a poor dope like me has missed?
You debate like the dance of the seven veils except not anywhere near as revealing. Hints of superior knowledge leavened with intimations. It’s old and it’s boring but very revealing that you are struggling.
Why don’t you do a little work yourself and read all the details I have given, but no, you come in and just read the last few posts and think you know what is going on. It is you who is the fraud.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:Try reading about powdered lime in natural environments, plus shell grit and other calcareous material contained within sand and then what happens to these substances..
Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
I have had to endue so much time wasting obfuscating here to last me a very long time. Good job I don’t come here for the wise comment.
Got nuffin eh? As expected.
AwesomeO said:
roughbarked said:
AwesomeO said:Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
We are only here for his amusement.I am only here for the roffles as well. Poking holes in thin shields of unwarranted smug.
You just illustrate the standard for general acceptance to this forum, well sorry, the price is too high.
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:Why don’t you just say what happens to those substances? Cos this hinting that you know something that others ought to learn looks more like time wasting obfuscating.
I have had to endue so much time wasting obfuscating here to last me a very long time. Good job I don’t come here for the wise comment.
Got nuffin eh? As expected.
Having nothing and being nothing are very different things, but to have both is quite extraordinary.
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
PermeateFree said:Sorry curve, but I don’t hold you in anything like high esteem, so don’t care what you say, because the intent is always the same. You are very predictable.
So are you, why don’t you say what you have observed that a poor dope like me has missed?
You debate like the dance of the seven veils except not anywhere near as revealing. Hints of superior knowledge leavened with intimations. It’s old and it’s boring but very revealing that you are struggling.
Why don’t you do a little work yourself and read all the details I have given, but no, you come in and just read the last few posts and think you know what is going on. It is you who is the fraud.
I am responding to your comment on that photo and what had been missed in viewing it. Care to explain what you observed Salome and that you believe is significant or are you going to continue your coy dance of mystery.
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profileData.aspx?id=10459&cmaName=Murrumbidgee#
PermeateFree said:
AwesomeO said:
roughbarked said:We are only here for his amusement.
I am only here for the roffles as well. Poking holes in thin shields of unwarranted smug.
You just illustrate the standard for general acceptance to this forum, well sorry, the price is too high.
Something is being illustrated all right ….
1200km/second is pretty far fetched..
nothing comes in at that speed except maybe charged particles. gravity just doesn’t work that way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor
goes into it pretty well.
In the aftermath of the air burst of the body, a large number of small meteorites fell on areas west of Chelyabinsk, generally at terminal velocity, about the speed of a piece of gravel dropped from a skyscraper. Analysis of the meteor showed that all resulted from the main breakup at 27–34 km altitude. Local residents and schoolchildren located and picked up some of the meteorites, many located in snowdrifts, by following a visible hole that had been left in the outer surface of the snow. Speculators were active in the informal market that emerged for meteorite fragments.
~12000-13000 tonnes. ~19km/s. airburst at ~30km.
Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
buffy said:
Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
It’s very much less likely than it simply being a very eroded malleefowl nest.
i know what you mean but have nothing to add.
wish i’d never mentioned mallee fowl now…pffft who am i kidding.
ChrispenEvan said:
wish i’d never mentioned mallee fowl now…pffft who am i kidding.
Yes you were right, right at the start :)
buffy said:
Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
The suggestion is ok but the image and the suggestion don’t fit together.
roughbarked said:
buffy said:Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
The suggestion is ok but the image and the suggestion don’t fit together.
Why not? Large puddle dries up leaving round hole type thing.
Bubblecar said:
ChrispenEvan said:
wish i’d never mentioned mallee fowl now…pffft who am i kidding.
Yes you were right, right at the start :)
It never actually became a nest mound. Something disturbed the process and it was left at the foundation stage.
buffy said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
The suggestion is ok but the image and the suggestion don’t fit together.
Why not? Large puddle dries up leaving round hole type thing.
Such water eddies are usually going down a hole and as such, don’t leave dam banks.
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
fixed.
bumped.
buffy said:
roughbarked said:
buffy said:Does anyone want to comment on my suggestion of a water eddy effect from a previous rain event? Or is it completely improbable as a cause?
I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar somewhere, but I can’t track it down in my memory banks. I think some of the filing system has been misfiled.
The suggestion is ok but the image and the suggestion don’t fit together.
Why not? Large puddle dries up leaving round hole type thing.
1. It’s a low rainfall area, something like 30 cm a year.
2. It is sandy soil, so water drains quickly.
roughbarked said:
When most of that blows away, you’re going to get a shallow crater with slightly raised rim, as Permeate posted.
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:
roughbarked said:
In winter, the male selects an area of ground, usually a small open space between the stunted trees of the mallee, and scrapes a depression about 3 m (9.8 ft) across and just under 1 m (3.3 ft) deep in the sandy soil by raking backwards with his feet. In late winter and early spring, he begins to collect organic material to fill it with, scraping sticks, leaves and bark into wind-rows for up to 50 m (160 ft) around the hole, and building it into a nest-mound, which usually rises to about 0.6 m (2.0 ft) above ground level. The amount of litter in the mound varies, it may be almost entirely organic material, mostly sand, or anywhere in between.
fixed.
bumped.
That cross-section is nothing like my photo.
ChrispenEvan said:
1200km/second is pretty far fetched..nothing comes in at that speed except maybe charged particles. gravity just doesn’t work that way.
I posted this earlier, which seems to be more realistic.
>>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<<
http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
PermeateFree said:
buffy said:
roughbarked said:The suggestion is ok but the image and the suggestion don’t fit together.
Why not? Large puddle dries up leaving round hole type thing.
1. It’s a low rainfall area, something like 30 cm a year.
2. It is sandy soil, so water drains quickly.
Ta. I was trying to think of an alternative explanation. Is that 30cm spread out or in biggish downpours? I’ve run out of ideas. (OK, I only really had one…)
Ah, hang on, some memory is kicking in…..when I destroyed a Euro wasp nest in the sandy silt, it collapsed and left a hollow similar to that which became smoother after rain. It was amazingly deep. Are there any insects there that build underground? I sincerely hope there are no Euro wasps, but do you have a local native of similar habit?
Your hollow looks to me like a hollow rather than a mound as such. Am I misreading a 2D photo? I’m not seeing a lot of rim build up really.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
1200km/second is pretty far fetched..nothing comes in at that speed except maybe charged particles. gravity just doesn’t work that way.
I posted this earlier, which seems to be more realistic.
>>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<<
http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
yep, i already know that.
Bubblecar said:
roughbarked said:
When most of that blows away, you’re going to get a shallow crater with slightly raised rim, as Permeate posted.
Mallee Fowl, build their mounds near Melaleuca of other small leaf vegetation. These plants commonly grow to 2-5 metres in height and are very bushy shrubs branching low to the ground. Strong winds would have very little affect in these conditions and the likelihood of a mound being eroded to the extent of my photo, just would not happen.
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:
roughbarked said:
When most of that blows away, you’re going to get a shallow crater with slightly raised rim, as Permeate posted.
Mallee Fowl, build their mounds near Melaleuca of other small leaf vegetation. These plants commonly grow to 2-5 metres in height and are very bushy shrubs branching low to the ground. Strong winds would have very little affect in these conditions and the likelihood of a mound being eroded to the extent of my photo, just would not happen.
would that not depend on how old this structure is?
buffy said:
PermeateFree said:
buffy said:Why not? Large puddle dries up leaving round hole type thing.
1. It’s a low rainfall area, something like 30 cm a year.
2. It is sandy soil, so water drains quickly.
Ta. I was trying to think of an alternative explanation. Is that 30cm spread out or in biggish downpours? I’ve run out of ideas. (OK, I only really had one…)
Ah, hang on, some memory is kicking in…..when I destroyed a Euro wasp nest in the sandy silt, it collapsed and left a hollow similar to that which became smoother after rain. It was amazingly deep. Are there any insects there that build underground? I sincerely hope there are no Euro wasps, but do you have a local native of similar habit?
Your hollow looks to me like a hollow rather than a mound as such. Am I misreading a 2D photo? I’m not seeing a lot of rim build up really.
The rainfall is mainly during the cooler months, but passing summer storms do happen, but nothing to form what you describe.
You are quite correct that my photo is of a pit, hole, hollow, crater, etc and NOT a mound. Only the people would think it is a mallee fowl nest, think it is a mound, or an eroded mound.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
1200km/second is pretty far fetched..nothing comes in at that speed except maybe charged particles. gravity just doesn’t work that way.
I posted this earlier, which seems to be more realistic.
>>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<<
http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
yep, i already know that.
And you don’t think that meteorite travelling at those speeds on a steep trajectory would create a small crater in sandy soil, as described?
PermeateFree said:
buffy said:
PermeateFree said:1. It’s a low rainfall area, something like 30 cm a year.
2. It is sandy soil, so water drains quickly.
Ta. I was trying to think of an alternative explanation. Is that 30cm spread out or in biggish downpours? I’ve run out of ideas. (OK, I only really had one…)
Ah, hang on, some memory is kicking in…..when I destroyed a Euro wasp nest in the sandy silt, it collapsed and left a hollow similar to that which became smoother after rain. It was amazingly deep. Are there any insects there that build underground? I sincerely hope there are no Euro wasps, but do you have a local native of similar habit?
Your hollow looks to me like a hollow rather than a mound as such. Am I misreading a 2D photo? I’m not seeing a lot of rim build up really.
The rainfall is mainly during the cooler months, but passing summer storms do happen, but nothing to form what you describe.
You are quite correct that my photo is of a pit, hole, hollow, crater, etc and NOT a mound. Only the people would think it is a mallee fowl nest, think it is a mound, or an eroded mound.
They are circular, with ejected fine sand/clay piled equally around.
from the OP.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:I posted this earlier, which seems to be more realistic.
>>For velocity of an object at impact, consider that the Earth’s escape velocity is 11 km/sec. An object falling toward the Earth from a large distance (well beyond the moon) and starting from rest would be moving at close to this velocity on impact. Also, the Earth is moving at about 30 km/sec in its orbit about the sun; an object moving in the opposite direction might impact at more than twice this velocity.<<
http://convertalot.com/asteroid_impact_calculator.html
yep, i already know that.
And you don’t think that meteorite travelling at those speeds on a steep trajectory would create a small crater in sandy soil, as described?
no. read the wiki on that russian meteor i posted.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
Bubblecar said:When most of that blows away, you’re going to get a shallow crater with slightly raised rim, as Permeate posted.
Mallee Fowl, build their mounds near Melaleuca of other small leaf vegetation. These plants commonly grow to 2-5 metres in height and are very bushy shrubs branching low to the ground. Strong winds would have very little affect in these conditions and the likelihood of a mound being eroded to the extent of my photo, just would not happen.
would that not depend on how old this structure is?
Well the structure in my instance had no leaf matter and was quite cleanly formed. It was not a slowly eroding structure that would spread widely and also fill the hollow.
So you made me go looking. Homalictus bees seem to be the only ground digging bees that might, maybe produce a collapsed hollow. I haven’t looked for wasps.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:yep, i already know that.
And you don’t think that meteorite travelling at those speeds on a steep trajectory would create a small crater in sandy soil, as described?
no. read the wiki on that russian meteor i posted.
But that Russian meteor was much larger and from memory in several pieces that disintegrated before hitting the ground. Plus it came in at a shallow trajectory.
buffy said:
So you made me go looking. Homalictus bees seem to be the only ground digging bees that might, maybe produce a collapsed hollow. I haven’t looked for wasps.
The crater in my photo is just that a small crater, there has been no collapse of any description.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:And you don’t think that meteorite travelling at those speeds on a steep trajectory would create a small crater in sandy soil, as described?
no. read the wiki on that russian meteor i posted.
But that Russian meteor was much larger and from memory in several pieces that disintegrated before hitting the ground. Plus it came in at a shallow trajectory.
and it was 13000 tonnes and broke up and the pieces came down from 30km up like falling from a tall building. and that one found in a lake bed only went in 42cm. and that was the complete object. nothing the size that would produce a crater that small is coming in at any great velocity.
plus you have said that this is not the only one. it is unlikely that this would then be individual meteor rather than an event like the russian one and if so it would have been seen and heard and there would be a pattern to the debris field.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:no. read the wiki on that russian meteor i posted.
But that Russian meteor was much larger and from memory in several pieces that disintegrated before hitting the ground. Plus it came in at a shallow trajectory.
and it was 13000 tonnes and broke up and the pieces came down from 30km up like falling from a tall building. and that one found in a lake bed only went in 42cm. and that was the complete object. nothing the size that would produce a crater that small is coming in at any great velocity.
The video I saw, had it moving across the sky in a shallow trajectory. But I’m not going to argue about this, which I know from my observation is of a factual event and not a mallee fowl nest, whereas everyone one else is double guessing, so I don’t think we are going to resolve this here.
mallee fowls having an impact
ignore me, just teasing
ChrispenEvan said:
plus you have said that this is not the only one. it is unlikely that this would then be individual meteor rather than an event like the russian one and if so it would have been seen and heard and there would be a pattern to the debris field.
No, these are not connected, just different craters from different times and from widely separated places. The mallee here covers a large area, with very few tracks. It would be around 400 km in length by 200 km or more in width.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
plus you have said that this is not the only one. it is unlikely that this would then be individual meteor rather than an event like the russian one and if so it would have been seen and heard and there would be a pattern to the debris field.
No, these are not connected, just different craters from different times and from widely separated places. The mallee here covers a large area, with very few tracks. It would be around 400 km in length by 200 km or more in width.
then it unlikely to be meteors then. otherwise these objects would be more common. around the world.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
plus you have said that this is not the only one. it is unlikely that this would then be individual meteor rather than an event like the russian one and if so it would have been seen and heard and there would be a pattern to the debris field.
No, these are not connected, just different craters from different times and from widely separated places. The mallee here covers a large area, with very few tracks. It would be around 400 km in length by 200 km or more in width.
then it unlikely to be meteors then. otherwise these objects would be more common. around the world.
I don’t think so, as you need these stable but semi-arid conditions in sheltered and large animal free areas. It is why so many have been found on the Nullarbor.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:No, these are not connected, just different craters from different times and from widely separated places. The mallee here covers a large area, with very few tracks. It would be around 400 km in length by 200 km or more in width.
then it unlikely to be meteors then. otherwise these objects would be more common. around the world.
I don’t think so, as you need these stable but semi-arid conditions in sheltered and large animal free areas. It is why so many have been found on the Nullarbor.
and Antarctica. and the ones on the nullabor don’t leave craters. otherwise some would have been found. so the only place is this mallee….Hmmmm. too many coincidences.
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:then it unlikely to be meteors then. otherwise these objects would be more common. around the world.
I don’t think so, as you need these stable but semi-arid conditions in sheltered and large animal free areas. It is why so many have been found on the Nullarbor.
and Antarctica. and the ones on the nullabor don’t leave craters. otherwise some would have been found. so the only place is this mallee….Hmmmm. too many coincidences.
I have been contemplating the Nullarbor and think the limestone is so hard there (like concrete) that any meteor would leave little trace of the impact site.
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:
PermeateFree said:I don’t think so, as you need these stable but semi-arid conditions in sheltered and large animal free areas. It is why so many have been found on the Nullarbor.
and Antarctica. and the ones on the nullabor don’t leave craters. otherwise some would have been found. so the only place is this mallee….Hmmmm. too many coincidences.
I have been contemplating the Nullarbor and think the limestone is so hard there (like concrete) that any meteor would leave little trace of the impact site.
the energy involved in a meteorite strike is significant.. essentially you have an a high density metallic object traveling at about 5,000m/s hitting the ground.. anything that is around will show the signs of a significant high energy event. in any case the structure in question doesn’t even have the profile that is consistent with an impact event.
diddly-squat said:
PermeateFree said:
ChrispenEvan said:and Antarctica. and the ones on the nullabor don’t leave craters. otherwise some would have been found. so the only place is this mallee….Hmmmm. too many coincidences.
I have been contemplating the Nullarbor and think the limestone is so hard there (like concrete) that any meteor would leave little trace of the impact site.
the energy involved in a meteorite strike is significant.. essentially you have an a high density metallic object traveling at about 5,000m/s hitting the ground.. anything that is around will show the signs of a significant high energy event. in any case the structure in question doesn’t even have the profile that is consistent with an impact event.
Sorry, but you wrong. We are talking about small meteorites, not ones that create large craters. The limestone on the Nullarbor has weathered over tens of thousands of years, where the surface has leached the lime from the surface down to a level and concentrated there. It becomes extremely dense and very hard like concrete. In opal producing areas, this material is commonly called calcrete, because of its hardness. However you should chat with Boris as he is saying a crater would not be formed and you are saying these meteorites would, even in calcrete, let alone sand.
give it up
it’s an old nest by all accounts
I was talking to someone maybe at the beginning of the year late evening and saw a huge green fireball track across the sky , you could see billowing clouds of green gas coming off it
wookiemeister said:
give it upit’s an old nest by all accounts
disguised as one. Actually a drone landing pad for the International Rescue crew.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-14/worlds-second-largest-meteorite-discovered-argentina/7843574
Michael V said:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-14/worlds-second-largest-meteorite-discovered-argentina/7843574
mallee fowl egg.
ChrispenEvan said:
Hahahahahahahahaha!
Michael V said:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-14/worlds-second-largest-meteorite-discovered-argentina/7843574
mallee fowl egg.
:)
ChrispenEvan said:
Michael V said:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-14/worlds-second-largest-meteorite-discovered-argentina/7843574
mallee fowl egg.
Hehe :)
Bump.
