The issue with the Kyte object is that no primary meteoritic minerals or
textures survive. There is just chemical evidence. I know that Frank is
sure that this was once a meteorite, but the lack of anything primary
means that it will be a very difficult sell to the NomCom as a fossil
meteorite. In any case, I don't think Frank has pressed very hard to
make the sale... I don't think the nomcom has ever voted on it.
jeff
Mexicodoug wrote:
Dear Bernd, List,
Thanks for the interesting post on this curious case.
So everyone can enjoy this 0.25cm "fossil" "meteorite" which Kyte
classified as a "CV, CO, or CR carbonaceous chondrite", here is an
original image in color:
http://tinyurl.com/qf8u9w
The "meteorite" is also described as an unclassified hematite and clay
fragment from the core sample DSDP Hole 576 in the western North
Pacific (32º 21.4'N, 164º 16.5'E), 1000 miles WNW of Green Island of
the Hawaiian Islands and 1400 miles ESE of Tokyo).
The "meteorite" is not yet an official meteorite, relict or not (if it
is certain it is a meteorite - unknown to me why not :-)). Kyte's
office at UCLA has been between his colleagues Wasson and Rubin's and
he was a co-author with them though the publications appear all prior
to the "meteorite", so the answer to why not is probably easy to get.
The extremely high gold concentration in it (which at one point I
believe it was Koeberl said likely disqualified it as a "meteorite")
has not been explained other than by speculation:
http://tinyurl.com/qn3ssc
Kyte has classified the only meteorite from the Pacific Ocean, a 2.4
million year old mesosiderite officially named Eltanin, found 5km
below sea level in other core samples, which he interprets to be part
of the largest meteorite fall dropped, ever recovered on Earth. (TKW
1.2 Kg mostly in sub centimeter sized weathered fragments).
Here are some very nice thin sections of the alleged relict meteorite
from another picture in that original Nature Letter for list members'
perusal:
http://tinyurl.com/q4r89e
Source: Letters to Nature, Frank T. Kyte sent this in originally on 2
June 1998:
Kyte, F.T., Nature, "A meteorite from the Cretaceous/Tertiary
boundary", 19 November 1998, V. 396, pp. 237-239.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v396/n6708/full/396237a0.html
From what I can gather, most scientists have called the K-T boundary
fragment "meteorite" Kyte's interpretation. It should be noted that
Kyte was co-author on several papers with Jan Smit and the two were
close colleagues during the magical period of the early 1980's after
Luis Alvarez did the then eye-opening K-T boundary work wit his son
and collaborators. While the Alvarez' didn't particularly care much
for the search for the crater, one collaborator, Jan Smit believes he
was instrumental in the discovery of the Chicxulub crater and
vindication of Alvarez' Dino extinction theory and fervently defends
the work. Smit doesn't acknowledge challenger Princeton's Gerta
Keller's group's interpretations which would suggest anything
different on the grounds of Occam's Razor, in that a single impact
explains everything and any mess is because there was turbulence
afterwards shaking up everything, something that Keller doesn't buy as
an argument stopper. Keller believes the extinction event is likely
more complex, and has ap
plied her version of chronostratigraphical study in great detail to
the layers, and supports the possibility of multiple impacts and other
terrestrial explanations. The latter two have become rivals and both
(especially Smit) display emotional disdain for the other's work. They
are both good scientists. What this "meteorite" fragment proves is
questionable in relation to the debate. Kyte also classifies a 3.8
billion year old impact on earth as a CV by looking at the chromium
content of ancient sediments.
Best wishes,
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, 21 May 2009 6:23 am
Subject: [meteorite-list] K-T fossil meteorite picture
Hello Sterling, List, and KT-Extinctionists,
"It's a "fossilized" meteorite, meaning it's seriously been altered
by the terrestrial environment, with replaced minerals and all
the rest. It was found some years ago. I've seen a photo of it,
but can't find that website today, but it is an encapsulated clast
that can only be identified as carbonaceous by the simple fact
that it's so rich in carbon."
You can find color pics of this fossilized, terrestrialized piece plus
some info in an article in the January 2000 issue of the National
Geographic in the department "Geographica" and there's another
article + color photo here:
Sky & Telescope, March 1999,
p. 22: Piece of a Killer Asteroid ?
The pictu
re description says:
"This 2.5-millimeter-wide fossil meteorite, embedded in the light
brown clay
from the Pacific sea floor, may be the first known sample of the
object that
struck the Earth 65 million years ago, driving many species to
extinction.
Courtesy Frank T. Kyte."
I am going to send the pics to your personal email address!
Best from Germany,
Fathers' Day here :-)
Bernd
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
--
Dr. Jeffrey N. Grossman phone: (703) 648-6184
US Geological Survey fax: (703) 648-6383
954 National Center
Reston, VA 20192, USA
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
