![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
jacob navia wrote:
Is this new? I did a Google search for "Red rain" and I stumbled into this. http://www.strangemag.com/scient.analys.redrain.html The red-rain paper by Louis and Kumar [1] does not mention the historical context for "red rain" outlined in Strange Magazine, [2] which could facilitate inquiry into the nature of red rain. I did a journal search at jstor.org and found two more historic reports. The first report I found (in "Science, New Series," Vol. 10, No. 257, 1899) cites an 1896 report of red rain from the Australian Association for the Advancement of Science. In that case "red rain" reportedly "fell over Melbourne and much of Victoria on December 27, 1896." It notes that while the red content appeared to be volcanic-rock soil, "Under the microscope the presence of diatoms, scales of lepidoptera, quartz and granet were detected." The second report (in "Past and Present," No. 166. Feb 2000) incidentally mentions: "[...] on one occasion in 1914 he comments on a report of a shower of red rain in the Jiangsu town of Songjiang." That's all the second says about it. It seems unwarranted for Louis and Kumar to jump to a hypothesis of extraterrestrial origin. After all, we know that structures similar in appearance (biological cells) are produced on the Earth, but there's no known case from elsewhere. As such, the default hypothesis would be that they came from the place where similar structures are produced (Earth) and should not be abandoned for such a far-fetched hypothesis until it was absolutely falsified, which is hardly the case. Moreover, the fact that the red rain fell periodically in a fixed region of India *over three months* defies the theory of being derived from an interstellar body, the trajectory of which should coincide with the Earth at a discrete time (or discrete times separated by long intervals if Solar orbits come close). If there were a series of interstellar bodies (like Shoemaker Levey [4]), then they would deposit their debris along a path over a steady time interval, not fall in one region over three months. As such, there does not even appear to be prima-facie evidence of extraterrestrial origin, yet there does appear to be prima-facie evidence of local origin. My off-the-cuff hypothesis for the red cell-like structures in rain examined in [1] is that they may originate from the ocean where they collected on or near the surface and were drawn up into the clouds by waterspouts. [3] I believe that might explain several curious features of the distribution of red rain. Supporting such an ocean-origin hypothesis is that many (if not all) historic cases of red rain were close to an ocean. For example, the documented cases in [1] were all next to the Arabian Sea (see Figure 3). Furthermore, in the historic cases I cite above, both Melbourne and Victoria are along the Indian Ocean, while Jiangsu runs right along the Yellow Sea. ~Ian __________________________________________________ ___ [1] http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0601022 [2] http://www.strangemag.com/redrain.html [3] http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/nws/wea00312.htm http://www.cimms.ou.edu/~schultz/c-k/waterspouts/ [4] http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/ http://IanGoddard.net "Without philosophy thoughts are, as it were, cloudy and indistinct; its task is to make them clear and to give them sharp boundaries." Ludwig Wittgenstein |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NOMINATION: digest, volume 2453397 | Ross | Astronomy Misc | 233 | October 23rd 05 04:24 AM |
VOTE! Usenet Kook Awards, March 2005 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 108 | May 16th 05 02:55 AM |
Apollo 16 Captures Photo of UFO near Moon | Mad Scientist | Misc | 61 | August 24th 04 04:17 AM |
Russian Scientists Claim To Have Alien Aritifacts | Mad Scientist | Misc | 4 | August 11th 04 06:14 AM |
Planet_X: Our 10th Planet | Rudolph_X | Astronomy Misc | 841 | May 16th 04 05:00 PM |