Comments on: A Response to Mark Hempsell http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326 Tue, 16 Mar 2010 20:35:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mark Hempsell http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1669 Mark Hempsell Wed, 07 May 2008 15:41:37 +0000 http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1669 Well Jeff you have me on the composition of Aten Asteroids they are indeed almost all spectrally stony and none are C Class. However the tentative conclusion in the book that our asteroid may have had a density between 1200 kg/m3 and 600 kg/m3 (and thus is most likely to have been a C class object) is feasible in light of measured bolide, comet and asteroid densities. But this is not a key part of conclusions and if the object were denser, and hence heavier, the only real change is the bang gets bigger and I can live with that. If anyone is still following this I have added two posts on the FAQ section of the Köfels research website one on the lack of crater and the other on the density/composition question. This is at http://www.bris.ac.uk/aerospace/research/dynamicsandsystems/kofels Well Jeff you have me on the composition of Aten Asteroids they are indeed almost all spectrally stony and none are C Class. However the tentative conclusion in the book that our asteroid may have had a density between 1200 kg/m3 and 600 kg/m3 (and thus is most likely to have been a C class object) is feasible in light of measured bolide, comet and asteroid densities. But this is not a key part of conclusions and if the object were denser, and hence heavier, the only real change is the bang gets bigger and I can live with that.

If anyone is still following this I have added two posts on the FAQ section of the Köfels research website one on the lack of crater and the other on the density/composition question. This is at

http://www.bris.ac.uk/aerospace/research/dynamicsandsystems/kofels

]]> By: Don Ameche http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1095 Don Ameche Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:15:14 +0000 http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1095 You could have utterly crushed this just with your discussion of the the "Aten asteroid" with a density less than water. Such a thing has never been seen in the entire history of astronomy, and there's good reasons from physics why such things don't exist. But no, you had to crush it, then smash it some more, then give it a few solid kicks, then beat it about the head with a club. Nice job. This whole hypothesis is like that famous Norwegian Blue parrot - what I mean is that it's stone dead, it's bleeding demised, it has expired and gone to meet it's maker, it is bereft of life and rests in peace, it has shuffled off its mortal coil, the hypothesis has kicked the bucket, and run down the curtain to join the choir invisible. Two guesses about who the pet store clerk might be. You could have utterly crushed this just with your discussion of the the “Aten asteroid” with a density less than water. Such a thing has never been seen in the entire history of astronomy, and there’s good reasons from physics why such things don’t exist. But no, you had to crush it, then smash it some more, then give it a few solid kicks, then beat it about the head with a club. Nice job.

This whole hypothesis is like that famous Norwegian Blue parrot - what I mean is that it’s stone dead, it’s bleeding demised, it has expired and gone to meet it’s maker, it is bereft of life and rests in peace, it has shuffled off its mortal coil, the hypothesis has kicked the bucket, and run down the curtain to join the choir invisible. Two guesses about who the pet store clerk might be.

]]> By: Blue Collar Scientist » Blog Archive » A Sumerian Observation of the Köfels Impact? Almost Certainly Not…. http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1071 Blue Collar Scientist » Blog Archive » A Sumerian Observation of the Köfels Impact? Almost Certainly Not…. Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:31:13 +0000 http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1071 [...] Update #2: Some very specific claims were raised by Mark Hempsell in the comments below; I’ve responded to them here. [...] [...] Update #2: Some very specific claims were raised by Mark Hempsell in the comments below; I’ve responded to them here. [...]

]]> By: Zach Miller http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1069 Zach Miller Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:35:19 +0000 http://bluecollarscientist.com/?p=326#comment-1069 Wow, sir. Way to layeth down the smack! I greatly enjoyed both posts, and the prior's subsequent comments. Wow, sir. Way to layeth down the smack! I greatly enjoyed both posts, and the prior’s subsequent comments.

]]>