Talk:Tektite

Geology Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Tektite is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy: Solar System Mid‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Gemology and Jewelry: Gemstones B‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Gemstones subpage.

Glass High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Untitled[edit]

WHAT ARE THE GEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF TEKTITES? WHAT ARE THE GEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF TEKTITES?

from article: Based on still more circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that Apollos 12 and 14 astronauts found several lunar highland and subcrustal rocks with tektite-like chemistry, the space-science community may need to rethink what mechanisms caused these ancient stones to fall to Earth.

Discussion: Some scientists have proposed that tektites are material from deep inside the Moon. Others claim geochemical evidence from the Moon and from tektites themselves clearly shows that this is unlikely. Furthermore, they claim, the clear association of tektites with at least three "young" craters on Earth provides strong evidence that tektites are a product of terrestrial impact. Looking at the problem from another viewpoint, Hal Povenmire said, "If impact events produce tektites, why are tektites not found associated with nearly all of the 250 known impact craters on Earth? We have massive amounts of tektite glass spread over more than 20 percent of the Earth's surface from the Australasian tektite event and yet we cannot find the crater. When Apollo sample 14425 was analyzed under the electron microprobe, it was essentially identical to some Australasian tektites. This led John A. O'Keefe to state, 'If this specimen had been found on the Antarctic ice shelf instead of Fra Mauro on the Moon, it would be declared a tektite.'" [1]

The reference given in the Weblink does not support the different statements given here. I think the scientific claims here should be confirmed by references to reviewed papers or at least to abstracts from a scientific conference. -- Epo 06:49, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This article should be cleaned up to better separate the two sides of the argument, instead of wavering back and forth with "however" statements. --Ruyn 08:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This article is simply AWFUL as it is. It wavers back and forth between arguments that "conclusively" show tektites are terrestrial and arguments that then try to cast doubt on the conclusions. The paragraph on the Australoasian field and Antarctica is particularly bad. --Kiiron 06:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be logical to presume they are similar because they are formed the same way (via meteor strike) but differnt due to having been formed in a different environment? Elcaballooscuro (talk) 15:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antartica impact[edit]

Tektites recently found in antartica, could this be the cause of the Australian field? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4816794.stm Khukri 17:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated theory[edit]

why is so much room given for an outdated theory? serious scientists who believe that the moon is the origin of tektites are extinct like dinosaurs.

Proposed major rewrite Jan07[edit]

As stated by several people above, the present tektite article is in bad shape. I'm intending to soon attempt a major makeover which will mean culling out a lot of unsupported stuff and the yo-yo opinions. I'll also make sure everything is properly supported by good references and clearly states present consensus, with appropriate mention of historical theories and any present disparate views. If anyone is watching this page and particularly in love with any of the old stuff as it is, then please let me know so we can discuss. PeterWH 13:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zelda[edit]

What, no reference to those tektites? —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

This Tektite? --201.14.82.57 18:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a link (no, not a Link) to that article at the top of this article. Something like "If you were looking for the Zelda enemy, see here". Zurqoxn 22:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tektite (Disambiguation)156.34.178.222 (talk) 23:22, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Australian tektites from Lake Bosumtwi impact[edit]

An unsourced statement about the Ivory Coast tektite strewnfield from the Lake Bosumtwi impact, claiming that "tektites from this event have been found as far east as Australia," has been removed. A 1969 hypothesis by Chapman and Scheiber that the Ivory Coast strewnfield and the Australian strewnfield may have originated from the same impact event has since been discredited by more accurate dating techniques, e.g. Koeberl et al, "Geochemistry and age of Ivory Coast tektites and microtektites", Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 61, Issue 8, April 1997, pp 1745-1742. The estimated age of the Ivory Coast impact event is 1.07 Ma, whereas Australasian tektites are about 700,000 years old. The modest size of the Lake Bosumtwi crater (~10.5 km) would also argue rather strongly against dispersion of tektites as far away as Australia. Piperh 11:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm amazed to see that this spurious statement has been there so long. Thanks for removing it. Zamphuor 14:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

travel through space/reentry into atmosphere[edit]

why is there no mention in the article that many tektites could only have gotten to where they are by travelling through space. travel through space explains the lack of water vapor in the tektites and reentry explains the shape of many of the tektites. seems like quite an oversight. just-emery (talk) 23:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that there is no mention is made of the claim "...that many tektites could only have gotten to where they are by travelling through space." is that this claim has been shown to completely false. There are any number of studies that show that the distribution of tektites are readily explained by hypervelocity impacts that are very solidly associated with time, space, and chemical composition with known strewn fields. Tektites found within each strewn field are related to each other and their source impact craters with respect to their petrological, physical, and chemical properties as well as their age. It is impossible to explain these relationships as a result of them "travelling through space" from the Moon at some point in their history. In addition, the lack of water in the tektites is also readily explained by explained hypervelocity impact processes as discussed in a number of published papers. Finally, the reentry of ejecta from a hypervelocity is perfectly capable of explaining the shape of many tektites, including then layered structure of Muong Nong-type tektites. This all discussed in great detail in a number of books, including "Impact Stratigraphy The Italian Record" by Alessandro Montanari Christian Koeberl and "Tektites in the Geological Record: Showers of Glass from the Sky" by G. J. H. McCall. Paul H. (talk) 01:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

maps[edit]

Some maps of the tektite strewn fields would clarify this article.AT Kunene (talk) 18:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know where the tektite maps can be found?--Ljfeliu (talk) 01:26, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tektite/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Inline citations needed, not just at end of article.SauliH 16:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 16:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tektite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120621103744/http://www.gamineral.org/Tektites.htm to http://www.gamineral.org/Tektites.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]