Skeptic: Examining Extraordinary Claims and Promoting Science Skeptic: Examining Extraordinary Claims and Promoting Science

top navigation:

Wednesday, February 4th, 2009 | ISSN 1556-5696

eSkeptic: the email newsletter of the Skeptics Society

Share this eSkeptic with friends online. Subscribe | Donate | Watch Lectures | Shop



The Return of Ben Radford

This week on Skepticality we check in with author and paranormal investigator Benjamin Radford. A regular contributor to LiveScience.com and Managing Editor for Skeptical Inquirer magazine, Ben talks with Derek & Swoopy about his recently completed fourth book and his investigations into weird paranormal mysteries — including UFO sightings in New Jersey, the haunted hotel where President Obama stayed prior to his inauguration, and the claims of police department psychics.

SUBSCRIBE to Skepticality
within iTunes

DOWNLOAD Episode #95
(28MB MP3)

SUBSCRIBE to the Skeptic RSS feed


In this week’s eSkeptic, Jeff Medkeff and Martin Rundkvist review A Sumerian Observation of the Köfels Impact Event by Alan Bond and Mark Hempsell. (WritersPrintshop, 2008, ISBN 978-1904623649)

Jeff Medkeff (1968–2008) was a computer programmer, an astronomer, a science writer and an educator. He discovered a number of asteroids, and in 2003 the International Astronomical Union recognised his contributions by naming asteroid 41450 Medkeff in his honor. In June 2008 Jeff Medkeff was unexpectedly diagnosed with cryptogenic liver cancer and he passed away less than two months later.

Dr. Martin Rundkvist is an archaeologist and journal editor based in Stockholm, Sweden. He is a board member of the Swedish Skeptics society, keeps the Aardvarchaeology weblog at Scienceblogs.com, and is Mr. March in the 2009 Skepdude pinup calendar.


Fire in the Sky

by Jeff Medkeff & Martin Rundkvist

According to A Sumerian Observation of the Köfels Impact Event, an asteroid entered the Earth’s atmosphere in 3123 BC and exploded above the Austrian Alps, triggering a major landslide. The authors also argue that during the final minutes of the object’s approach, it was observed by an astronomer in Mesopotamia who made detailed notes of the event, and by Neolithic people in coastal Croatia, who were inspired to depict it on their pottery.

The landslide is real. The Croatian pottery is real. The asteroid and the Sumerian astronomer, however, are in our opinion very poorly founded speculation. We take it that the authors are quite sincere about their work. But their assumptions are so many, and so outlandish, that this book would no doubt make William of Ockham’s head explode if he even glanced at it.

When considering the argument, we first need to know whether or not any extraterrestrial body did in fact contribute to the giant landslide at Köfels in Austria. If not, then the Sumerian connection is moot.

The Köfels deposit is about half a kilometre thick and measures five kilometres in diameter. It is very young in geological terms, dating from after the end of the last ice age. In 1936, geologist F. Suess published an extraterrestrial impact hypothesis to explain the formation. There is a lot of glass in it: a pumice-like mineral named köfelsite. Most geologists today believe that it formed when rock melted through friction in the landslide, but others still think it is more plausibly from an impact. Such impact events have created glass at other sites. The age of the Köfels deposit has been measured using radiometric methods, indicating that it formed at least 8,000 years ago — not 5,000 years ago as the book suggests.

As the authors readily admit, there is nothing resembling an impact crater at Köfels. Perhaps the strongest evidence for an impact origin of the structure was the reported presence of planar deformation features in quartz. They are microscopic features of silicate (e.g. quartz and feldspar) grains; basically very thin planes of glass arranged in parallel sets that have particular orientations with respect to the containing crystal’s structure. Such deformation is utterly diagnostic of impact events: no other geological event can form it, not even highly energetic volcanic eruptions. However, upon re-examination, Deutsch et al. found that shocked quartz with planar deformation is not present at Köfels. Instead, they saw quartz with lamellar deformation features typical of tectonic processes. Indeed, shocked quartz does not form through meteoritic airbursts: it requires a ground impact. Also, Hermanns et al. have shown that the Köfels features did not form through a single landslide, but are the result of several separate slides at different times. Currently, the consensus of scientific opinion is that Köfels is not an impact site. It is not listed in the Earth Impact Database, not even as a possible site. We need to know no more to discount the main argument of A Sumerian Observation.

Touchingly, the authors suggest that the reason that their asteroid exploded was that it struck a still apparently quite unharmed mountaintop a glancing blow some ways from Köfels. Yet by far the greater part of the book’s text is not about the Köfels deposit, nor about the movements of asteroids. It mainly deals in great detail with a fragmentary cuneiform tablet, most likely hailing from Layard’s mid-19th century excavations at Niniveh, and kept in the British Museum. To give A Sumerian Observation a fair airing, let us assume for a moment (credulously) that there was a meteoritic airburst at Köfels 5,000 years ago, and examine the Sumerian angle.

The first thing to note about the tablet is that it is not 5,000 years old, but dates from the 7th century BC. The authors suggest that it is a copy of a Sumerian astronomer’s observation log from a summer night in 3123 BC. The copier(s) has reproduced all diagrams on the original tablet exactly, but replaced the original’s early Sumerian script with updated 7th century cuneiform. The reason that this uniquely early piece of scientific documentation, and only this particular piece, survives is that according to the authors the asteroid airburst soon acquired great religious significance in Mesopotamia. In fact, they explain (p. 104) that “There are many ancient European and Asian myths that are not only indicative of a NEO [Near-Earth Object] impact, but contain detail very suggestive of this specific event. It was consideration of these myths that was the original focus of this study.”

Only about three fifths of the tablet’s surface survives, but even the well-preserved parts are almost incomprehensible. Though the script is clear, its contents are laconic and repetitive, more poesie concrète than narrative. Professional cuneiform scholars agree that the tablet has something to do with astronomy, but hardly anyone believes that any detailed meaning is recoverable. Again, touchingly, the authors admit in the preface that the tablet is only really comprehensible if one decides beforehand what it is supposed to say. “The third (and key) assumption is that [the tablet] records an observation of an Aten class asteroid that impacted the Austrian Alps at the locality of Köfels at the end of the Fourth Millennium BC.”

Sumerian script is the earliest known form of writing, first appearing some time between 3500 and 3300 BC. All extant inscriptions from c. 3100 BC and earlier are terse lists of goods. Almost a thousand years of writing pass before any sentence with a verb appears. The authors’ argument for ascribing their hypothetical original tablet such an early date is that it shows something they interpret as the celestial equator in something they interpret as the constellation Pisces. With a more cautious attitude, and with a bit more respect for the current state of Sumerian philology, we of course argue the reverse: since an original tablet cannot realistically date from 3100 BC, the tablet cannot be taken to depict the celestial equator in Pisces.

Even assuming against good evidence that an asteroid did explode at Köfels in 3123 BC, there is no reason to believe that the cuneiform tablet in question has anything to do with that event. Any half-crumbled hieroglyphic papyrus or weathered Mayan bas-relief, yes, any graffiti-covered restroom wall, could be pressed into service in the same way. But the tablet is the sole data source for the authors’ interpretive model of the supposed event, and the focus of most of the book. (The Croatian astro-pottery, mercifully, makes only a few brief appearances.)

The authors’ attempts at geology and Sumerian philology are far off the mark. Since this invalidates the astronomical inferences drawn, we shall only make two points on that subject. First, the hypothetical incoming object was, according to the authors, an asteroid of the Aten class with a density below that of water. This is nonsense. Aten class asteroids by definition spend all their time in the inner solar system. But low-density compounds do not survive for long in small bodies there, because volatiles evaporate or sublimate near the sun. This is a process we see with comets: sublimation creates the comet’s coma and tail. What remains after a few centuries of solar heating and mass loss in the inner solar system is rock. And well-observed Aten asteroids are known to have had fairly stable orbits for millions of years.

Second, according to the authors, the mechanism by which the Sumerians learned that the asteroid had hit the Earth and were inspired to re-write their mythology, is this. The non-impact threw up a plume of deadly ejecta directed back along the path the body had arrived on, which at that moment formed a low-pressure tunnel through the atmosphere. They have picked this idea up from what happened when the comet Shoemaker/Levy 9 hit Jupiter in 1994. But that impact was into a dense gaseous atmosphere with no solid surface, and the dynamics were very different from solid-body impacts. The mechanism that created the Jovian plumes does not apply on Earth. A low-pressure region on Earth cannot achieve as large a pressure difference as on Jupiter, and our atmosphere is significantly less dense to begin with. Furthermore, no ejecta form without a crater. The process that forms the crater causes the ejecta: WHAM. Yet there is no crater of a matching date anywhere on Earth. The lack of a Jovian-density atmosphere on Earth means that you cannot have Shoemaker/Levy-9 style plumes from your crater, and the absence of any crater means that you cannot have any ejecta in the first place.

Is this work pseudoscience or simply bad science? Whatever it is, it most certainly is a case of severe amateurism. The authors make radical inferences from philological, archaeological and geological data outside their area of expertise, and happily arrive at something they are not professionally equipped to understand: the movements of a celestial body. In the preface they suggest that their inspired insight has enabled them to interpret the cuneiform tablet in a completely new way. They explain the reason that no academic journal or book series has accepted their work is that academic reviewers are too narrowly specialized (and thus, it is politely hinted, narrow-minded) to appreciate this kind of interdisciplinary research. But good interdisciplinary research is done when specialists in different fields collaborate closely: not when specialists in a single field (here, astronautical engineering) make inspired forays onto the territory of disciplines they know little about.

Another writer who has spun tall tales about the enigmatic cuneiform tablet is Zecharia Sitchin. In his 1976 book The Twelfth Planet, the tablet is an astrogator’s chart from a time when space aliens ruled the Earth. And although A Sumerian Observation contains not one word about aliens, this is the company the book belongs with: the works of Sitchin, von Däniken, and Velikovsky.


Sympathy for the Devil

This week on SkepticBlog, Michael Shermer ventures into the turbulent waters of homosexuality and religion, by (surprisingly) coming to the defense of none other than Ted Haggard, the disgraced pastor who denounced homosexuality as a sin even while he was engaged in homosexual activities himself. Find out what makes Shermer feel sorry for Pastor Ted. READ the post >

While you’re there be sure to read the blog posts of the other Skepticbloggers: Brian Dunning, Kirsten Sanford, Mark Edward, Phil Plait, Ryan Johnson, Steven Novella, and Yau-Man Chan.

4 Comments »

4 Comments

  1. steven says:

    in a news interview from fox news concerning bigfoot in the north east deserts of arizona and the northwest of new mexico
    you stated that there is no way a bigfoot could ever strive in the deserts without plentyful water supply,

    ill say this,…boy you sure dont do your home work very good
    no wounder your a skeptic, its sitting rite under your nose and you dont even see it.

    maybe this will change your mind about the bigfoot not having a good water supply

    http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/underground-lakes-river/2190

    http://www.sahra.arizona.edu/kartchner/wm_med/section3.html

  2. Mike Wazowski says:

    This article is great but a little to much skeptical ; )

    online shopping ireland

  3. Mark A. McConaughy says:

    There is another problem with the hypothesis that an asteroid destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah (allegedly the sites of Bab edh-Dhra and Numeria, Jordan). The asteroid blast supposedly occurred in 3123 B.C. There only were shaft tombs present at Bab edh-Dhra dating the the Early Bronze 1A (EB 1A) period circa 3200-3100 B.C. that were used by nomads in the region. A small village area was found dating to the EB 1B period circa 3100-3000 B.C. However, the actual walled town at Bab edh-Dhra was not started until the EB II period beginning circa 3000 B.C., reached its greatest extent during the EB III period circa 2500 B.C. and lasted through the EB IV period ending circa 2100 B.C. The Numeira walled town was only occupied during the EB III period (ca. 2700-2200 B.C.). Thus, it is hard for these two towns to have been destroyed by an asteroid air burst or whatever in 3123 B.C. when they were not yet built and then lasted long after that date!

    A web site for the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain provides more information at:
    http://www.nd.edu/~mchesson/edsp_beddescription.html

    Also, see the site reports:
    Rast, Walter and R. Thomas Schaub, Eds.
    2003 Bab Edh-Dhra': Excavations at the Town Site (1975-1981) (Reports of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan). Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana.

    Schaub, R. Thomas and Meredith S. Chesson
    2007 Life in the Earliest Walled Towns on the Dead Sea Plain: Numeira and Bab edh-Dhra’. In Crossing Jordan: North American Contributions to the Archaeology of Jordan. Eds. Levy, Thomas E., P.M. Michele Daviau, Randall W. Younker, and May Shaer, pp. 246-252. Equinox Press, London.

    Ortner, Donald and Bruno Frohlich, Eds.
    2008 Early Broze Age Tombs and Burials of Bab edh-Dhra,’ Jordan. Altamira Press, Lanham, Maryland.

    Mark A. McConaughy a member of the Expedition to the Dead Sea Plain project.

  4. dwb1957 says:

    Steve and Mike, learn to spell. Learn grammar. Your credibility is currently Zero.

get eSkeptic
our free newsletter

Science in your inbox every Wednesday!

eSkeptic is our free email newsletter, delivered once a week. In it, you’ll receive: fascinating articles, announcements, podcasts, book reviews, and more…


Popular Articles
on skeptic.com

Here are the articles that people have been sharing over the last few days.

Carbon Comic

Carbon Comic (by Kyle Sanders)

Carbon Comic, which appears in Skeptic magazine, is created by Kyle Sanders: a pilot and founder of Little Rock, Arkansas’ Skeptics in The Pub. He is also a cartoonist who authors Carbon Dating: a skeptical comic strip about science, pseudoscience, and relationships. It can be found at carboncomic.com.

Help the
Skeptics Society
at no cost to you!

Planning on shopping at Amazon? By clicking on our Amazon affiliate link, which will open the Amazon Store in your Internet browser, the Skeptics Society will receive a small commission on your purchase. Your prices for all products remain the same, yet you’ll provide essential financial support for the work of the nonprofit Skeptics Society.

amazon.com

See our affiliate links page for Amazon.ca, Amazon.de, Amazon.co.uk, iTunes, and Barnes & Noble links.

FREE PDF Download

The Science Behind Why People See Ghosts

The Science Behind Why People See Ghosts

Do you know someone who has had a mind altering experience? If so, you know how compelling they can be. They are one of the foundations of widespread belief in the paranormal. But as skeptics are well aware, accepting them as reality can be dangerous…

Reality Check

Reality Check: How Science Deniers Threaten Our Future (paperback cover)

How Science Deniers Threaten Our Future

The battles over evolution, climate change, childhood vaccinations, and the causes of AIDS, alternative medicine, oil shortages, population growth, and the place of science in our country—all are reaching a fevered pitch. Many people and institutions have exerted enormous efforts to misrepresent or flatly deny demonstrable scientific reality to protect their nonscientific ideology, their power, or their bottom line…

FREE PDF Download

Top 10 Myths About Evolution

Top 10 Myths About Evolution (and how we know it really happened)

If humans came from apes, why aren’t apes evolving into humans? Find out in this pamphlet!

FREE PDF Download

Top 10 Things You Should Know About Alternative Medicine

Top 10 Things You Should Know About Alternative Medicine

Topics include: chiropractic, the placebo effect, homeopathy, acupuncture, and the questionable benefits of organic food, detoxification, and ‘natural’ remedies.

FREE PDF Download

Learn to be a Psychic in 10 Easy Lessons

Learn to do Psychic “Cold Reading” in 10
Easy Lessons

Psychic readings and fortunetelling are an ancient art — a combination of acting and psychological manipulation.

Copyright © 1992–2014 Skeptic and its contributors. For general enquiries regarding the Skeptics Society or Skeptic magazine, email skepticssociety@skeptic.com or call 1-626-794-3119. Website-related matters: webmaster@skeptic.com. Enquiries about online store orders: orders@skeptic.com. To update your subscription address: subscriptions@skeptic.com. See our Contact Information page for more details. This website uses Google Analytics, Google AdWords, and AddThis tracking software.