It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Fireballs are generally outside of the "dust" category and moving more into larger objects. But yes, we pass through dusty regions on a predictable basis and the observed intensity of these showers can vary because of a few variables, including the density of that particular dust cloud. While fireballs are not commonly associated with meteor showers there does seem to be some annual variation in rates.
While I do not believe in Planet X as the cause I do think we can move into a more dusty part of our solar system. It is one reason why some years the meteor showers are stronger than others.
If you're talking about the AMS database I'd give it another decade or so before it's much more than anecdotal. But if experienced observers start talking about an increase in activity I'll pay attention.
So at what point would you say we are definitely having an increase in activity, instead of more reporting?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by abeverage
Fireballs are generally outside of the "dust" category and moving more into larger objects. But yes, we pass through dusty regions on a predictable basis and the observed intensity of these showers can vary because of a few variables, including the density of that particular dust cloud. While fireballs are not commonly associated with meteor showers there does seem to be some annual variation in rates.
While I do not believe in Planet X as the cause I do think we can move into a more dusty part of our solar system. It is one reason why some years the meteor showers are stronger than others.
If you're talking about the AMS database I'd give it another decade or so before it's much more than anecdotal. But if experienced observers start talking about an increase in activity I'll pay attention.
So at what point would you say we are definitely having an increase in activity, instead of more reporting?
edit on 2/28/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
I wouldn't say I am inexperienced,
Originally posted by Phage
Tell me, when did you become aware of the AMS website? When did you become aware that you could report fireball sightings there? Now, if you saw a fireball before you knew about the website, how could you report it? But now you know about it so if you do see a fireball you can report it. See how it works? As more people learn about the website, more people are able to report their sightings. Multiply you by a lot more people and what do you get? More fireball reports but no real reason to think there are more fireballs.
Yes, more or less:
Fireball reports increasingly grow year over year grow as the geeks tell their geek friends?
If it occurs to them to do so.
They go online and search for "meteor/fireball reporting".
Never? Really? Are you sure about that? Oh wait. You're talking about the AMS database.
Fireball reports increase as the number of fireballs is actually increasing, especially interesting is the reported with sound or concurrent sound category, as these never used to be reported.
Not at all. But it certainly would easily fall into the category of doom porn.
What is so terrible about the number of fireballs actually increasing? Is it a verboten subject?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by abeverage
I wouldn't say I am inexperienced,
I wouldn't say so either. But I think you would agree that the fact you saw a daylight fireball doesn't really indicate an increase in the overall rate.
I've looked at the IMO site. It's of interest because the observations seem to be from "experienced observers" but the database is hard to use, though I admit I haven't tried too hard to get into it.
Cooke called Sunday's fireball a "big event," based on the amount of energy that was released as the meteor entered the atmosphere.
That is an assumption on your part. Some may. Some may not.
People see a fireball, and if they haven't gone through the process before, could be inclined to report it, and if so are inclined most likely do a google search to find out how to go about that.
You have listed individual reports. Where are the reports of increased incidence?
Many sources are reporting increased incidence of sonic booms with fireball sightings, here are just a few from the last six months:
A very unusual event. Especially since it occurred over a populated area.
What would that make the Russian event then?
Not really. Because they are anecdotal and do not represent a true sample. Compare the media reports with the number of fireball reports on the AMS site this year. But I'm not sure what you mean...
If fireballs weren't on the increase you would think a google search would pull up articles from newspapers, magazines etc from various years over the last decade or so in roughly equal amounts.
Because I haven't seen the evidence which indicates it to be true.
Why is it so hard to accept that fireballs with accompanying sonic booms are increasing?
Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
The numbers speak for themselves.....We are entering a weird part of space, with much more activity on the way....
We can't even blame the numbers on lack of technology because the reports are starting a mere 8 years ago and definitely had good technology to spot these and record them back then also....
Weird times we are in that's for sure! I am not into fear mongering or anything, but it is also scary to see things like this also...IMO
No. You seem to be talking about the harmonic oscillation of the Solar system. There is a (rather old) theory that there is a cyclical component to impact cratering (not really confirmed) which may be related but that is a 32 million year cycle. We passed through the plane of the galaxy several million years ago. It will be a very long time before we do so again.
Apparently, every 12,500 to 13,000 years due to our symmetrical oscillation path through the galaxy,
Originally posted by Phage
Or maybe it's because Planet X is here.
Originally posted by nomnom
Well when you pick just nine years, you can make a trend to match whatever conclusion you like.
How about the previous, oh I don't know... hundred or so years. Do we have data going back that far?edit on 28-2-2013 by nomnom because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
I don't think it is.
Funny, you'd think that with all those effects you're talking about the tides would be affected too.
I look out my front window and see the tides are behaving exactly as they should. Exactly as they have for the 16 years I've been living in this house. No, I guess Planet X isn't here after all.
edit on 3/1/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Urantia1111 That's total speculation.
Yet planetary alignments have been shown to cause tectonic activity.
Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Originally posted by nomnom
Well when you pick just nine years, you can make a trend to match whatever conclusion you like.
How about the previous, oh I don't know... hundred or so years. Do we have data going back that far?edit on 28-2-2013 by nomnom because: (no reason given)
I challenge you to show me one year before 2005 in which fireballs were reported with sound in any kind of number they were reported in 2012 which was 246 reports. Good luck getting even more than ten for one year. I'm waiting.