|
Home >
Science > |
|
sci.skeptic FAQ: The Frequently Questioned Answers
|
Section 3 of 6 - Prev - Next
All sections - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6
If you want to make a formal registration of your predictions, send
mail to .
There is a book by Prof Robert Morris and Dr Richard Wiseman called
"Guidelines for Testing Psychic Claimants".
University of Hertfordshire Press, 1995, pp 72, stlg7 pbk
2.3: What is "Sensory Leakage"?
-------------------------------
Sensory leakage is something that designers of tests for psi must be
careful to guard against. Tests for psi use powerful statistical
tests to search for faint traces of communication. Unfortunately the
fact that communication has taken place does not prove that it was
done by telepathy. It could have been through some more mundane form
of signal.
For instance one experiment involved a "sender" in one room with a
stack of numbered cards (1-10) and a "receiver" in another room trying
to guess what the next card was. The sender looked at a card and
pressed a button to signal to the receiver. The receiver then tried
to guess the number on the card. There was a definite correlation
between the card numbers and the guesses. However the sender could
signal the receiver by varying the delays between buzzes. When this
channel of communication was removed, the effect disappeared.
2.4: Who are the main psi researchers?
--------------------------------------
Targ and Puthoff spring to mind, but actually, Puthoff is no longer
doing psi research (I don't have any idea what Targ is up to these
days.) Granted, their SRI work is quite famous, but if we want to
review the historical (rather than currently active) figures, you
probably want to go back at least as far as the Rhines.
Helmut Schmidt, a physicist who has been looking at PK, is still
active at the Mind Science Foundation in Texas. (Sorry, I don't know a
more specific address than that.)
The Foundation for Research into the Nature of Man (FRNM), which is
what Rhine's work at Duke eventually developed into, is still active
near Duke. It is currently headed by K. Ramakrishna Rao.
The Koestler Chair of Parapsychology at the University of Edinburgh
is still active. The current incumbent is named Robert Morris; his
main assistant is Deborah Delanoy. He and Dr Richard Wiseman have
written a small book "Guidelines for Testing Psychic Claimants".
[Does anyone have publisher details?]
Roger Nelson is active in the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research
center (PEAR) and occasionally posts to the net.
Active workers in the field that I can think of currently include Dean
Radin, who also posts to sci.skeptic as ,
Jessica Utts, and Ed May. The Parapsychological Association has a much
larger roster than that, of course, but I'm not a member myself and
don't have access to their membership roll.
2.5: Does dowsing work?
-----------------------
Dowsing is the art of finding underground water by extra-sensory
perception. Sometimes tools are used. The traditional one is a
forked hazel stick. When held in the correct way this will twitch in
response to small muscle movements in the back and shoulders. Another
tool that has become popular in recent years is a pair of rods mounted
in tubes that are held in each hand just in front of the user.
Rod bent into tube.
|
V
r-------------------------------
|| ^
|| |
|| <- Tube Rod
||
||
||
When water (or something else) is dowsed, the rods turn towards each
other. Like the forked hazel stick it amplifies small movements of
the arm and shoulder muscles.
Unfortunately careful tests of dowsers have revealed absolutely no
ability to find water or anything else by extra-sensory perception.
Dowsing success stories can be explained by noting that wherever you
dig you will find water. You just have to dig deep enough. It has
also been suggested that dowsers may unconsciously use clues in the
environment.
James Randi has tested more than 100 dowsers (I don't know the actual
count). He tells that only 2 tried to cheat. This suggests that
dowsers are basically honest people.
The Skeptical Inquirer has published a number of articles on dowsing.
James Randi's "A Controlled Test of Dowsing" was in vol. 4, no. 1, pp.
16-20. Michael Martin's "A New Controlled Dowsing Experiment" was in
vol. 8, pp. 138-140. Dick Smith's "Two Tests of Divining in
Australia" was in vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 34-37. Randi's book Flim-Flam!
has a section on dowsing. The main skeptical book about dowsing is
Vogt, E.Z. and Hyman R. (1959, 2nd edition 1979) "Water witching USA".
The University of Chicago Press. 260 pages. Available as a paperback.
2.6: Could psi be inhibited by the presence of skeptics?
--------------------------------------------------------
Psychic researchers have noted something they call the "shyness
effect" (or more grandly "psi-mediated experimenter effects"). This
is invoked to explain the way in which many subjects' psychic powers
seem to fade when exposed to careful scrutiny and proper controls.
Often it is alleged that having a skeptic in the audience can prevent
the delicate operation of psi.
In its most extreme form this hypothesis becomes a "catch-22" that
makes any results consistent with a psi hypothesis. This renders the
hypothesis unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific. Less extreme
forms might be testable.
2.7: Why don't the skeptics test the *real* psychics?
-----------------------------------------------------
A claim is sometimes made that the Skeptics movement only tests those
psychics which it knows to be frauds. The real psychics are supposedly
being ignored by skeptics who are afraid to be proved wrong.
There are three problems with this claim.
Firstly, it assumes that all the skeptics are engaged in a conspiracy
to persuade the world that psychic powers do not exist. This is only
a Petty Conspiracy theory (see section 0), since it only requires the
involvement of a few dozen of the most prominent skeptics, but it is
still difficult to see any motive for such a deception. "Fear of
being proved wrong" implies that they already know they are wrong,
which makes their continued activity rather puzzling.
Secondly, most skeptics are always ready to take part in any
reasonable test. The "real" psychics are perfectly at liberty to
challenge the skeptics.
Thirdly, there are always more alleged psychics. Hence this
argument presents the skeptics with an ever-receding target. The
dialogue goes something like this:
Paranormalist: Yes, I concede that Mr. Adams is a fake, but what about
Mr. Brown. The things that he does could never be
faked.
[Some months later]
Skeptic: Here is how Brown did it....
P: OK, I concede that Adams and Brown are fakes, but Mrs Carver is the
surely the real thing.
[Some months later]
S: Here is how Carver did it...
P: OK, maybe Adams, Brown and Carver were fakes, but what about Digby
and Ender?
S: I give up. There's no convincing some people.
P: [shouting] Digby and Ender are real psychics: the skeptics are
afraid to test them. They only test the fakes!
2.8: What is the ganzfeld?
--------------------------
A state of sensory deprivation which may enhance psychic abilities.
The subject lies on a soft bed, with a "white noise" hissing sound
played through headphones and half of a ping-pong ball placed over
each eye to give an empty field of view. The subject then talks to a
tape recorder, describing any ideas which enter his or her mind.
To test whether psychic communication is occurring, a "sender"
concentrates on some image while the "receiver" is in the ganzfeld.
Then the image is shown to the receiver along with three other images.
The receiver must pick the image that was seen by the sender.
Dean Radin has been conducting some careful
ganzfeld experiments, which he describes as follows:
> ... our unit has recently conducted pilot replications of the
> ganzfeld telepathy studies reported by Bem & Honorton. In 76
> sessions we obtained 25 direct hits, which is quite close to the 33%
> meta-analytic hit rate previously reported by Honorton et al..
> Our methodology was based on Honorton's auto-ganzfeld setup, which
> automated most aspects of the experiment, except we were even more
> obsessive: Our system uses a computer to randomly select the target,
> to automatically present the target clip to the sender, to
> automatically present the judging clips in a random order to the
> receiver, and to store the data. The receiver and sender rooms are
> 25 meters apart, behind 4 doors, and sound-shielded to 100 dB.
> We only use volunteer subjects claiming no special abilities,
> typically for one or two sessions. The methodology and preliminary
> study results will be reported in detail in August at the annual
> Parapsychological Association convention. Some of our other plans
> are reported in the 15 May 93 New Scientist cover article on
> telepathy.
UFOs and Flying Saucers
=======================
3.1 What are UFOs?
-------------------
UFOs are, simply, Unidentified Flying Objects, no more, no less. The
word "object" is used in a very broad way, not to imply a physical
"object" but more an experienced phenomenon, e.g. something seen,
heard, "sensed" etc. This means that if you are out one night and see
a light moving in the sky and cannot immediately identify it as a
certain star, planet or other object, then it is by definition a UFO.
THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE SEEN AN ALIEN SPACESHIP.
A better question would be:
3.1.1 Are UFOs alien spacecraft?
---------------------------------
Probably not. The vast majority of UFO reports, when investigated by
competent researchers (and that is a problem all by itself), can be
easily explained as natural or manmade objects misidentified for one
reason or another. The actual percentage is around 95%. A very few
reports are provable hoaxes. The remaining few percent (some skeptics
argue that there are no remaining reports) are not explained at this
time. Again, this does not mean that they are observations of alien
spaceships. All we can say is that, given the information presently
available, some cases don't appear to be stars, balloons, airplanes,
aurorae. etc. Given a great deal more time and effort, many more
could likely be identified. It's possible that the witness(es) were
in error, or are very good liars. And the remaining few cases? Well,
the best we can say, as true skeptics, is that we don't know what they
were, but there is NO proof that they were alien spacecraft.
3.1.2 Are UFOs natural phenomena?
----------------------------------
Possibly. A number of theories have been proposed, suggesting that
some UFOs are "plasmas" or variations of ball lightning or earthquake
lights. Unfortunately, the theories seem to change to fit observed
data, rather than predict the observations. Also, studies designed to
support the theories have used newspaper articles and raw, unsifted UFO
case lists for data, and therefore the studies do not appear to be
completely unbiased. Perhaps time will tell. Until then it is safe to
say that SOME UFOs are probably ball lightning or other rare natural
phenomena.
3.1.3 But isn't it possible that aliens are visiting Earth?
------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. But it is also possible that there is an invisible snorg reading
this over your shoulder right now.
Basically, some astronomers (e.g. Carl Sagan) are convinced that there
are other habitable planets in our galaxy, and that there may be some
form of life on them. Assuming that parallel evolution occurred on
these other planets, there MIGHT be intelligent life forms there. It
is possible that some of these life forms could have an advanced
civilization, and perhaps have achieved space travel. BUT - there is
no proof that this is so. SETI programs such as the High Resolution
Microwave Search now being conducted by NASA under the direction of
Jill Tartar are "listening" to other stars in the hope of detecting
radio signals that might indicate intelligent life - kind of
listening for the equivalent of "Watson, come here, I need you!", or
"I love Lucy" in the infancy of our early communications. Such
searches have been fruitless, so far.
If there are aliens on distant planets, then it is possible that they
might have found a way to travel between stars in their lifetimes.
According to our present understanding of physics, this is not likely,
given the vast distances between stars. Even travelling at the speed
of light (which cannot be done), a round trip to the nearest star would
take about ten years. This does not rule out interstellar ships, but
it does make it seem unlikely that we are being visited.
If *even one* civilization has found a way to travel between stars in
the entire history of the Milky Way Galaxy (about ten billion years),
it ought to fill the entire Galaxy in only a hundred million years or
so. The question, then, is why don't we observe evidence of alien
civilization everywhere? This question is known as the Fermi Paradox,
and there is no really satisfactory answer. If, however, we postulate
alien visits to Earth, we must also accept a Galaxy-wide civilization
and ask why we see no evidence of it.
3.2: Is it true that the US government has a crashed flying saucer (MJ-12)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MJ-12 documents purportedly established that the U.S. government
had established a secret organization of 12 people called MJ-12 or
Majestic-12 to deal with UFOs. These 12 people were all conveniently
dead at the time the documents were discovered. Klass proved that the
documents are fakes.
The "Roswell Incident" refers to an alleged UFO crash in Roswell, NM.
Philip Klass has also investigated this one and shown the reports to
be bogus. One of the more notable items of "evidence" was a document
"signed by the president". Klass showed that this signature was a
photocopy of an existing presidential signature. See SI 14:2 (Winter
1990) pp 135-140.
All such allegations involve a conspiracy theory. Sometimes these
conspiracy theories get very big indeed. One common one involves a
treaty between the government and the saucer people whereby the
government stays in power and the saucer people get to abduct humans
for various gruesome purposes.
3.3: What is "channeling"?
--------------------------
"Channeling" is remarkably similar to Spiritualism. The main
difference is that the relatives "on the other side" are replaced by a
wide variety of other beings. This means that the channeler does not
have to worry about providing accurate information about people in the
audience. The beings that channelers claim to speak for range from
enlightened aliens to humans who lived thousands of years ago to
discarnate intelligences who have never had bodies.
3.4: How can we test a channeler?
---------------------------------
Some channelled entities are alleged to come from the distant past.
They can be asked about events, climate and language in ways that can
be checked.
Until the start of 1996, I had said the following:
If the entity is from a technically advanced race, try asking for the
complete factorisation of 2^1024+1.
This has now been factorised, so this is no longer a good question.
3.5: I am in telepathic contact with the aliens.
------------------------------------------------
See the earlier section on psychic experiences and then try testing
your aliens to see if you get a specific answer. If you can come up
with new facts that can be tested by scientists then you will be
listened to. Otherwise you would do better on alt.alien.visitors.
3.6: Some bozo has just posted a load of "teachings" from a UFO. What
----------------------------------------------------------------------
should I do?
------------
You have several choices:
* Ignore it.
* Ask for evidence (see question 3.4 above).
* Insult or flame the poster. This is a bad idea.
3.7: Are crop circles made by flying saucers?
---------------------------------------------
There is no convincing evidence that crop circles or any other kind of
UGM (Unusual Ground Markings) were made by aliens. There are some
reports of lights being seen in and around crop circle sites, and a few
videos showing objects flitting over fields. The lights are hardly
proof, and the objects in the videos seem to be pieces of foil or paper
being tossed about by the wind.
In a deliberate attempt to test crop circle "experts", a crop circle
was faked under the watchful eyes of the media. When cerealogists were
called in, they proclaimed it genuine.
3.7.1: Are crop circles made by "vortices"?
---------------------------------------------
Probably not. There are a number of meteorologists who believe that
crop circle formations are created by rare natural forces such as
"ionised plasma vortices". Basically, winds blowing across rolling
hills sometimes form eddies, which in some circumstances (that have
never been quantified) become strong, downward spiralling drafts that
lay down the crop. Cerealogists claim to have over two dozen witnesses
to such events. Unfortunately, many more have said they have seen
flying saucers do the same thing.
Scientific articles arguing for the reality of these vortices have
appeared regularly in the Journal of Meteorology. But its editor is
the leading proponent of the theory, Dr. Terence Meaden.
Winds can lay down crop in patches known as lodging. But geometric
patterns in fields can hardly be attributable to natural phenomena.
Meaden has changed his theory to first accommodate complex circles,
ovals and even triangles (!), but now admits that most circles are
hoaxes and the theory can only explain simpler patterns.
3.7.2: Are crop circles made by hoaxers?
-----------------------------------------
Of course. Although most people have heard only of two, Doug Bower and
Dave Chorley of England, many others have been caught, not only in
Britain but in other countries such as Canada. Their methods range
from inscribed circles with a pole and a length of rope to more complex
systems involving chains, rollers, planks and measuring devices.
And as a further note: just because you can't prove a crop circle was
made by a hoaxer, you should not assume aliens were involved. Remember
Occam's Razor (Section 1.6).
3.7.3: Are crop circles radioactive?
--------------------------------------
This is a claim that has received wide circulation in UFO/cerealogy
circles (pardon the pun). It is also untrue. Examination of the data
from spectral analyses of soil taken from crop circles has shown that
there were no readings above the normal background levels. The
proponents of this claim are debating this, however.
3.7.4: What about cellular changes in plants within crop circles?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, what about the changes? Although this is another claim that is
widely circulated among ufologists and cerealogists, the evidence is
simply not very good. A few photographs of alleged changes in the
"crystalline structure" of wheat stems were published in some
magazines and UFO publications. The method used was spagyrical
analysis. This is a technique involving crystallization of the
residue of organic material after harsh processing, invented three
centuries ago and popularized by Sir Kenelm Digby. Digby is known for
other wonderful inventions like condensation of sunlight and the
development of sword salve (which you had to put on the weapon rather
than on the wound, in order to cure the wound). The fact that this
technique was tried at all casts serious doubts on the "researchers"
involved.
3.8: Have people been abducted by UFOs?
---------------------------------------
While the number of people who believe themselves to have been
abducted by flying saucer aliens must number at least many thousands,
not one of them has produced any physical evidence to establish the
reality of their claim. On the contrary, a number of factors clearly
point to a subjective basis for the "UFO abduction" phenomenon.
Probably the strongest factor is that of the cultural dependence of
such claims. Such claims were virtually unknown until the famous
abduction story of Betty and Barney Hill received widespread publicity
in the late 1960s. Also, the appearance and behavior of supposed UFO
occupants varies greatly with location and year. UFO abduction claims
are made much less frequently outside North America, especially in
non-English-speaking countries, although foreign reports have started
to catch up since the publication of Whitley Strieber's "Communion".
Furthermore, the descriptions of supposed UFO aliens contain clear
cultural dependencies; in North America large-headed grey aliens
predominate, while in Britain abducting aliens are mostly tall, blond,
and Nordic. Aliens that are claimed to steal sperm, eggs, and fetuses,
or make scars or body implants on those supposedly abducted, were
practically unknown before the publication of Budd Hopkins's books.
This particularly alarming type of abduction seems to be quite rare
outside North America.
Clear "borrowings" from popular science fiction stories can be traced
in certain major "UFO abductions." Barney Hill's description of his
supposed abductors' "wraparound eyes" (an extreme rarity in science
fiction films), first described and drawn during a hypnosis session on
Feb. 22, 1964, comes just twelve days after the first broadcast of an
episode of "The Outer Limits" featuring an alien of this quite unique
description. Many other elements of the Hill story can be traced to
the 1953 film "Invaders from Mars," including aliens having "Jimmy
Durante" noses, an alien medical examination, something done to her
eyes to relax her, being probed with a needle, a star map hanging on a
wall, a notebook offered as a remembrance, even the imagery of a
needle in the navel. Other "abductees" borrowed other ideas from
"Invaders From Mars," including brain implants, aliens drilling into a
human skull, and aliens seeking to revitalize a dying world.
Originally, stories of UFO abductions were obtainable solely by
hypnotic regression of the claimant, although in recent years the
subject of "UFO abductions" has become so generally known that some
subjects claim to remember their "abduction" without hypnosis.
Hypnosis is a NOT a reliable method for extracting so- called "hidden
memories", and its use in this manner is likely to lead to fabrication
and error. Moreover, if it is suggested to a hypnotized person that
fictitious events have occurred, the subject himself may come to
believe this (See the article "Hypnosis" in the 1974 "Encyclopaedia
Britannica" by Martin Orne, and section 10.1 on False Memory Syndrome).
3.9: What is causing the strange cattle deaths?
-----------------------------------------------
Cattle and other animals have been found dead with strange
mutilations. Organs, especially genitals, have been removed "with
surgical precision" but no blood appears on the ground. These events
are also sometimes associated with reports of alien encounters and
UFOs.
However:
1) Cattle are very expensive. Each "head" is worth several thousand
dollars.
2) Insurance doesn't cover "range death" due to natural causes (e.g
falling and killing themselves).
3) Insurance does cover vandalism (eg. a vandal shooting a cow).
4) A space alien killing a cow will be covered by the insurance -
provided a cooperating policeman will write up the report that way.
5) Space aliens mutilating cows seem to respect county (police
jurisdiction) lines.
6) Relatively little blood leaks out of a dead animal (compared to a
live animal) when it is cut. The heart just isn't pumping.
The best source of information on cattle mutilations is the
book Mute Evidence by Ian Summers and Daniel Kagan, a couple
of investigative journalists who started out believing that
something mysterious was happening, but ended up skeptics.
SI has published James Stewart's "Cattle Mutilations: An Episode
of Collective Delusion" (way back in vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 55-66).
Stewart is a sociologist who examined the pattern of reports and
found that new reports were inspired by previous media coverage.
It came in "waves" or "flaps".
3.10: What is the face on Mars?
-------------------------------
One of the Mars orbiters took a photograph of a part of Mars (Cydonia)
when the sun was very low on the horizon. The picture shows a "face"
and some nearby pyramids. Both these structures are seen more by
their shadows than their actual shape. The pyramid shadows appear
regular because their size is close to the limit of resolution of the
camera, and the "face" is just a chance arrangement of shadow over a
couple of hills. The human brain is very good at picking out familiar
patterns in random noise, so it is not surprising that a couple of
Martian surface features (out of thousands photographed) vaguely
resemble a face when seen in the right light.
Many people find the "face" more reminiscent of a monkey than a human
being.
Richard Hoagland has championed the idea that the Face is artificial,
intended to resemble a human, and erected by an extraterrestrial
civilization. Most other analysts concede that the resemblance is most
likely accidental. Other Viking images show a smiley-faced crater and
a lava flow resembling Kermit the Frog elsewhere on Mars. There exists
a Mars Anomalies Research Society (sorry, don't know the address) to
study the Face and related features.
The Mars Observer spacecraft had (and for all we know it still has) a
camera that could give 1.5m per pixel resolution. Unfortunately NASA
scientists lost contact with the spacecraft just before it arrived at
Mars. Among the theories proposed to explain this are:
1: The failure of a couple of transistors after spending years in
space.
2: The presence of evil beings on Mars who wish to hide their
existence from humanity (so why did they build the Face and let
Viking see it?).
3: The existence of a conspiracy on the part of NASA and the US
government to hide the existence of aliens from humanity (see
section 0.8 on Conspiracy theories).
Anyone who wants to learn some more about this should look up "Image
Processing", volume 4 issue 3, which includes enhanced images of the
"face". Hoagland has written "The Monuments of Mars: A City on the
Edge of Forever", North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, California, USA,
1987.
[Some of this is from the sci.space FAQs]
3.11: Did Ezekiel See a Flying Saucer?
--------------------------------------
The chapter in question is Ezekiel 1:4-28. This vision is an example
of apocalyptic writing common in the centuries before and after
Christ. (Good examples are chapters 2 and 7-12 of Daniel and the book
of Revelation.) Apocalyptic literature is difficult to interpret
because the language is symbolic and figurative. In some cases the
writer will reveal what is meant by the symbols. Verse 28 identifies
Ezekiel's wheels within wheels vision as, "the appearance of the
likeness of the glory of the LORD." This "glory" is the "Khabod", a
manifestation of brilliant light thought to be present in the temple.
The wheels are described as appearing in a *vision* which is more like
an hallucination than a physical event. The wheels are seen again in
Ezekiel chap 10 leaving the temple in Jerusalem, but Ezekiel sees this
while sitting inside his house which is in Babylon (see Eze. 1:1-2 and
Eze. 8:1). In other words this was a message from God (or a
hallucination) rather than a physical event.
3.12: What happened at Tunguska?
--------------------------------
At 7:17 in the morning of June 30th 1908, close to the Stony Tunguska
River, on the Central Siberian Plateau, a huge air explosion occurred.
The explosion was powerful enough to be heard hundreds of miles away.
The area around the Stony Tunguska River is inaccessible and consists
mostly of bogs and pine forests. The seismic shocks from the
explosion were detected around the Earth. The London Times of July
4th, 1908 reported "The remarkable ruddy glows which have been seen on
many nights lately...seen...as far as Berlin."
When an expedition eventually reached the epicentre of the explosion
they found that the pine trees had been pushed over, pointing away
from the centre. The trees directly under the explosion remained
standing. Some small craters *were* observed at the time but have
disappeared over the years due to the boggy land. The pattern is now
recognised as being similar to that produced by an air-burst nuclear
bomb.
Currently the event is usually explained as a small, unnoticed, comet
hitting the upper atmosphere somewhere over China and finally
exploding a few seconds later above Tunguska. A number of other
explanations have been offered...
* an atomic explosion. Some reports collected some time after the
event describe a typical mushroom cloud. The problem here is
that such clouds are typical of large explosions due to any cause
- they are not peculiar to atomic explosions. There is also the
difficulty in explaining how the Russians first developed and
then forgot the technology when it would have been very useful in
two major wars!
* a small black hole weighing a few million tons passed through the
Earth. The other entry/exit point was unnoticed as it was in the
ocean. Steven Hawking has now shown that black holes of such a
size have very short lives in cosmic terms due to an
`evaporation' effect.
* a small anti-matter meteor. This now seems very unlikely with
the recent discovery of large amounts of inter-stellar matter in
which, although still close to a vacuum, is quite sufficient to
erode any small amount of anti-matter quite rapidly. In addition,
the very existence of anti-matter in any sizable amounts in our
universe is now thought to be very unlikely.
* an alien spaceship, damaged and out of control, exploded during
an emergency landing. There is no supporting evidence for this
apart from eye witness reports of the vapour trail caused during
the objects passage through the atmosphere showing a distinct
`bend', which is supposed to be due to a course change. Such
bends can also be found in the vapour trails of aircraft which
can be seen to be flying straight and are caused by winds in the
upper atmosphere.
The event is not such a mystery as some suppose. In 1969 a Soviet
periodical published a bibliography of more than 1000 entries. Though
these are mostly in Russian it is not difficult to find references in
western scientific publications. `Nature' has published a number of
papers covering most of the above explanations.
References
John Baxter and Thomas Atkins, "The Fire Came By", Futura
Publications Ltd, 1977, ISBN 0 86000 7540 0
Oliver, Charles P. "The Great Siberian Meteorite," Scientific
American, Vol. 139, No. 1(1928), 42-44
Growther, J.G. "More About the Great Siberian Meteorite,"
Scientific American, Vol. 144, No. 5 (1931), 314-317
Zigel, Felix. "Nuclear Explosion over the Taiga: Study of the
Tunguska Meteorite," Znaniye-Sila, No. 12 (1961), 24-27 [English
translation available from Joint Publications Research Service,
Washington, DC., JPRS-13480 (April 1962)
Parry, Albert. "Russia's Rockets and Missiles" Macmillan 1962,
pp 248-267
Cowan,C.,C.R. Atluri and W.F. Libby. "Possible Anti-Matter
Content of the Tunguska Meteor of 1908," Nature, Vol. 206, No.
4987 (1965), 861-865
Jackson, A.A., and M.P. Ryan, "Was the Tungus Event Due to a
Black Hole?", Nature, Vol. 245, No. 5420 (1973), 88-89
3.13: How did the Dogon know about Sirius?
------------------------------------------
Section 3 of 6 - Prev - Next
All sections - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6
© 2005 allanswers.org | Terms of use
