Bronze age Dead Sea meteor strike

[jimbob]

Interesting article:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...ea-communities

Quote:

The most comprehensive evidence of destruction caused by a low-altitude meteor explosion comes from the Bronze Age city of Tall el-Hammam, where a team that includes Silvia has been excavating for the last 13 years. Radiocarbon dating indicates that the mud-brick walls of nearly all structures suddenly disappeared around 3,700 years ago, leaving only stone foundations.

What’s more, the outer layers of many pieces of pottery from same time period show signs of having melted into glass. Zircon crystals in those glassy coats formed within one second at extremely high temperatures, perhaps as hot as the surface of the sun, Silvia said.

High-force winds created tiny, spherical mineral grains that apparently rained down on Tall el-Hammam, he said. The research team has identified these minuscule bits of rock on pottery fragments at the site.

[Venom]

Could this have lead to the Seven Plagues of Egypt?

Maybe this was the reason the Red(reed) Sea recessed then flooded over again?

Perhaps the column of smoke that was followed by the Ancient Israelites by day was the plume of ash shot into the atmosphere by this impact event.

Or maybe this was the basis for the Great Flood of Noah.

[jimbob]

I think the effects would be too localised - like a hydrogen bomb without any radioactive fallout.

Given the location, and sudden destruction of several cities in a fireball, I could easily believe that it was the basis for the story of Soddom and Gomorrah.

Similarly the post-glacial sea level rise is a far better fit for the great flood. In the Persian Gulf it's claimed that after an initial tsunami, the sea advanced about a kilometre a year for a thousand years. That's going to get into an oral culture's stories. We also have oral histories dating back to that time in Australia, where East Coast tribes tell Dreamtime stories that describe the flooding of the coast where the Great Barrier Reef subsequently formed.

Yes, there are oral histories older than the Great Barrier Reef.

[WhatRoughBeast]

It's interesting, but I'm deeply skeptical about some of it. I suspect that the archaeologist who talked to the reporter isn't much of a physicist. The extreme temperature (as hot as the surface of the sun) in particular seems ... peculiar. An impact does provide a great deal of heat, but not as radiant heat. Plus, of course, my intuition tells me that anything close enough to get that hot will be part of the crater.

Speaking of which, where is the crater? A 25-mile "circular plain" doesn't count. At the least, that part of the world doesn't have a lot of weather which will tend to erase the crater walls - plus, such artifacts don't disappear in mere millenia.

[Belz...]

Originally Posted by WhatRoughBeast

It's interesting, but I'm deeply skeptical about some of it. I suspect that the archaeologist who talked to the reporter isn't much of a physicist. The extreme temperature (as hot as the surface of the sun) in particular seems ... peculiar. An impact does provide a great deal of heat, but not as radiant heat. Plus, of course, my intuition tells me that anything close enough to get that hot will be part of the crater.

Speaking of which, where is the crater? A 25-mile "circular plain" doesn't count. At the least, that part of the world doesn't have a lot of weather which will tend to erase the crater walls - plus, such artifacts don't disappear in mere millenia.

Airburst, maybe?

[jimbob]

Indeed, like the 1908 Tunguska event.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

10-15 MT airburst, flattened trees and no crater.


Also, the zircon crystal structure would be very sensitive to cooling rate. Rapid cooling, like a hot blast of air hitting a pot that's hundreds of degrees colder would produce different structures than those created by a slow cooling from a kiln.

[casebro]

Wouldn't there be proof in a sedimentary layer? A hillside eroded onto a flat, leaving a trace of something at the 3,700 year layer?

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Venom

Could this have lead to the Seven Plagues of Egypt?

Sodom and Gomorrah.


(And, much more likely, nothing at all, but if there is any sort of Biblical connection, that would be it.)

ETA:

Originally Posted by wiipedia article on Sodom and Gomorrah

Another candidate for Sodom is the Tall el Hammam dig site which began in 2006 under the direction of Steven Collins. Tall el Hammam is located in the southern Jordan river valley approximately 14 kilometres (9 mi) northeast of the Dead Sea, and according to Collins fits the biblical descriptions of the lands of Sodom.[21][22] The ongoing dig is a result of joint cooperation between Trinity Southwest University and the Department of Antiquities of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.[23][better source needed]

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by casebro

Wouldn't there be proof in a sedimentary layer? A hillside eroded onto a flat, leaving a trace of something at the 3,700 year layer?

Despite eyewitness accounts and photographic evidence of the location, there is still debate as to whether the 1908 Tunguska event even left a crater. Something like that would have been adequately destructive.

The Tunguska event has left mineral traces - elevated amounts of iridium, for example.

[Meadmaker]

I did a little bit more reading on this. The scientists who announced the findings are part of Trinity Southwest University's "College of Archaeology & Biblical History".

Needless to say, I would take the findings of any such university with a pillar of salt. I don't know enough to say that the people doing the dig aren't reputable archeologists or other scientists, but I would want to see the findings confirmed by more, shall we say, mainstream scientists.

So, it is an interesting find. If it could be confirmed, it fits very well with the idea that the site is indeed the origin of the Sodom and Gomorrah myth.



I did a Google News search on "Sodom and Gomorrah" and, needless to say, fundies are already crowing about the findings. My favorite headline was "Scientists Admit that the Biblical Story of Sodom and Gomorrah is Accurate". To my way of thinking, that overstates the case just a tad. One thing is certain. Whether the findings are totally refuted or confirmed by reputable scientists, fundies will forever more cite those findings as proof that the Bible is true.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

I did a little bit more reading on this. The scientists who announced the findings are part of Trinity Southwest University's "College of Archaeology & Biblical History".

Needless to say, I would take the findings of any such university with a pillar of salt. I don't know enough to say that the people doing the dig aren't reputable archeologists or other scientists, but I would want to see the findings confirmed by more, shall we say, mainstream scientists.

So, it is an interesting find. If it could be confirmed, it fits very well with the idea that the site is indeed the origin of the Sodom and Gomorrah myth.



I did a Google News search on "Sodom and Gomorrah" and, needless to say, fundies are already crowing about the findings. My favorite headline was "Scientists Admit that the Biblical Story of Sodom and Gomorrah is Accurate". To my way of thinking, that overstates the case just a tad. One thing is certain. Whether the findings are totally refuted or confirmed by reputable scientists, fundies will forever more cite those findings as proof that the Bible is true.

Thanks for that. I would have expected the myth to have been based on some actual event, just as I believe the flood myth to have been based on oral histories that originated in one or more actual events.

It's ironic to see fundies accepting science when it suits them. Presumably they accept the dating techniques, which could be interesting as thermoluminescence dating is probably what was used and that goes back to 500,000 years or so, and certainly for dating campfires in Australia.