Talk:Managua event

Media hype

• No one has reported seeing a bolide and meteorites have yet to be recovered near the 12-meter crater. They have not confirmed that the seismic events were caused by a meteor much less what the trajectory was. The explosion could have been caused by humans. As usual the press is premature and jumping to conclusions. -- Kheider (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, they have. It's been particularly annoying when the press uncritically repeats nonsensical claims that whatever happened in Managua was somehow related to 2014 RC. That's not possible, since 2014 RC was [1] 40,000 km or so away; [2] did not have anything else associated with it, down to 10-cm size limits; [3] on a trajectory such that anything associated with it could not have entered the atmosphere over Nicaragua. Phil Plait is preparing a piece for Bad Astronomy which should cover the basics of why the press has failed here and why unsupported claims of any bolide should be viewed with great skepticism. Thanks for looking out. Michaelbusch (talk) 17:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• All of the reports seem to quote the same vulcanologist/seismologist, where are the meteor scientists and meteorite hunters? Still seems to be overhyped facts being repeated by every news source. Show me the meteor trajectory and some micro-meteorites before jumping to conclusions. -- Kheider (talk) 15:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Title and categories

If no legitimate sources validate that a meteor actually impacted Managua, I will be removing all space related categories from this "overhyped" article tomorrow. -- Kheider (talk) 00:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Another thing that could be done is to move the article to Managua crater or something like that, and rephrase it. Anonimski (talk) 08:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Nevermind, I saw the change now. But maybe Managua event is to vague, or what do you think? - Anonimski (talk) 08:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

We have article titles such as Tunguska event, 2002 Eastern Mediterranean event, and 2002 Vitim event. We call those events even though they are all known to be meteors. I suspect there is a good chance that an Earthquake caused an unexploded ordnance to go off and that is what triggered a 2nd seismic wave that was detected by the seismologist. I think we should be somewhat vague since the cause has not been proven. I question whether the Nicaraguan Air Force will allow the soil to be tested for explosive residue. -- Kheider (talk) 12:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

It's interesting that sounds more likely than a meteor to you. I agree a bomb is likely but a check of the Nicaraguan military's records should be able to rule that in or out. Bombs that big aren't cheap. Someone would recall dropping it. Someone would want to know why it was a dud. Then there is a lack of any bomb fragments. In craters where American bombs were dropped in Afghanistan and Iraq there were some rather large bits of bomb found. Similar pictures emerged from Gaza. Where are the bomb fragments?

We should wait for evidence and not just learned speculation. --2601:D:2A80:DFF:2989:12E5:7ED9:914A (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

My point is that perhaps someone in the Nicaraguan military does not want to admit that they messed up so they blamed the asteroid flyby. I doubt millions of people missed a bolide that would have been brighter than the full moon. -- Kheider (talk) 13:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Kheider: Despite the initial claims of a seismic signature associated with the event, the Nicaraguan Seismic Network does not index any such event near Managua in the past week (see http://www.ineter.gob.ni/ ). Near Managua, there has been only background seismic activity associated with Momotombo. This suggests that whatever caused the reported blast was not triggered by an earthquake. Meteorite impact is excluded by the lack of a bolide and the lack of a infrasound detection of anything entering the atmosphere above Managua. And, from the evidence I have been able to find, it is not even clear that the crater under discussion is established to have indeed formed on the night of 6 September 2014. Google indexes imagery of Managua from January 2014, but without a precise location for the crater I can't tell if it was there then or not. Michaelbusch (talk) 22:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Press Conference and Scientist Interviews

• To help some of the english-only editors, here are some rough translations below, transcribed from some of the videos:

Baleywik (talk) 07:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)Baleywik (talk) 07:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• There are a number of good youtube videos by several Managua TV stations and other news outlets covering detailed interviews with the local scientists VivaNicaragua TV13 Video: Cae meteorito en Managua (meteorite falls in Managua) at a press conference held on sunday afternoon 7 September 2014. All the videos are in spanish, so if you can speak the language, you will find a lot more very detailed information than has been widely reported in the english-speaking media. The interviews include several Nicaraguan scientists, and a German scientist (seismologist/geologist) who works for Ineter and lives near the airport there, who actually experienced the blast personally. They describe many details about the crater, the small mirror-like particles they found in it, and the fact that they tested it for radioactivity (found none). They talk about the ejecta and the compass angle and likely vertical fall angle. The TV stations interviewed local residents living less than a kilometre from the crater who said that "liquid and red sand rained down" on them after they felt and heard the boom and ran outside to see what it was. Baleywik (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• A TV station in Managua posted information about the scientific panel who were part of the press conference:

" An inter-institutional commission has been formed, made up of the following experts: Colonel Manuel Guevara, head of Army Public Relations; Fidel Moreno; Wilfried Strauch, INETER Advisor; Jose Milan, Seismic Advisor; William Martinez, geologist; Humberto Garcia, UNAN-Managua Astronomical Center; and Humberto Saballos, INETER volcanologist." Baleywik (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• At the first press conference on Sunday 07 September 2014 of the inter-institutional commission formed to study the event, Dr. Wilfried Strauch, a German seismic scientist working at the Nicaraguan Seismic Network (INETER) in Managua , described impulses correlated to the event timing , and referred to heliplot seismograph charts with pulses at 05:04:45 UTC (23:04:45 Local Time) at the Managua airport seismic station (MGAN BLZ NU) , another at a more distant station around 05:05:47 UTC and also indicated that there were records of 18 other stations in the network that were being examined. Baleywik (talk) 07:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• "Our hypothesis is still a meteorite. We are investigating the event with this idea," explained Wilfried Strauch, scientific advisor to the Nicaraguan Institute of Territorial Studies (INETER) on 10 September 2014. Strauch mentioned that there are speculations of "explosions or something, but we have no indication of any. Our analysis will lead us to the solution. Since Sunday we contacted the United States Geological Survey (USGS). We are possibly developing a program of cooperation, and also some contacts with NASA." They sent soil samples from the bottom of the crater to the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). Baleywik (talk) 05:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

References

Crater Origin Hypotheses and Theories

• IMHO, judging by all the video/imagery, it sure looks like it could be a meteorite crater. Baleywik (talk) 07:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't look anything like a sinkhole. Sinkholes don't have ejecta! Baleywik (talk) 23:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

There is no indication at all of a machine-made excavation, or a hole dug manually by people, at the crater site. Those who have proposed such conjecture probably don't have much firsthand information, or they are just doing it to be obtuse, IMHO. Baleywik (talk) 07:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

*However! The location of the crater makes it somewhat suspicious, since it is very near the berms of the old surface-to-air-missile SA-2 site west of the airport. That points to just about the only other possibility, that few have mentioned, of some un-exploded (now exploded) buried ordnance or even some naughty rogue military guys making boom-boom. Baleywik (talk) 07:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

In an area with millions of people, the lack of any witnesses to a bolide is very unusual. The crater may be older than the explosion. I have not seen close-ups of the crater so it is difficult to judge what caused it. -- Kheider (talk) 20:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

There are plenty of close-ups of the crater available and videos shot on the morning of 7 September. If you look at them closely, I think you will agree that it looks like a fresh crater. Also, all the scientists who went to the site, and the media reporters, said it was a fresh crater. Baleywik (talk) 23:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Every one of the scientists who has visited the site as of 9 September still considers the meteorite hypothesis to be the best working hypothesis for the Managua event. This info isn't present in most of the english-speaking media, but you can see it in the transcripts of the interviews here: Transcript of Second INETER Press Conference . We also see the scientists saying that they are not 100% sure, and are open to other hypothesis. Baleywik (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• From the distant perspective of those who have not personally visited the crater site, it is starting to boil down to two most likely hypotheses: 1) Impact from the sky by ice or rock which pulverized upon creating the crater, or 2) Bomb or explosives detonation by either stray ordnance or other military source. Baleywik (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Governmental Information Releases About The Event

• The following is a Spanish-to-English translation of the official letter from Nicaragua to USA dated 8 September 2014 requesting the arrangement of scientific coordination with USGS. See cite for copy of letter published by Channel 19 TV News of Nicaragua. Baleywik (talk) 21:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

" To: Ms. Phyllis M. Powers, Ambassador of the USA (to Nicaragua)

Esteemed Ambassador,

I have the pleasure of writing to you in reference to the events of September 6 at 11:04:50 PM, when it was observed in our country, the fall of a meteorite that impacted near the international airport in Managua, in which the impact caused an explosion that was heard by many people in the capital city and its surroundings, even at distances of over 20 kilometers.

The INETER with other institutions have visited the crater to make a preliminary evaluation of the impact and performed preliminary seismic records processing. Seismic and acoustic waves were recorded by at least 24 seismic stations near the city of Managua. An evaluation was made using the velocity model of the crust normally used by the seismic network INETER and a simple model of constant speed of sound waves. Measurements were conducted with a magnetometer to see if metal fragments could be found in the crater and its surroundings.

Considering the lesser experience and lack of means of investigation, Nicaragua would like to request the support of the good offices of the Embassy to arrange with the Geological Service of the United States, possibly through the visit of a meteor expert that can guide our institutions in coordinating the scientific and technical efforts for the geometric and geologic investigation of the crater, the search for meteorite samples, the chemical analysis and an estimation of the likely trajectory of impact.

Similarly, the USGS could support us with information to answer the questions of our government, of scientists, of the population and the media related to the asteroid that came close to earth, and on that same day, experiences with the falling of meteorites in other countries.

Appreciating your valuable support on this issue, I avail myself of this opportunity to express my highest consideration.

signed, Orlando Gomez Zamora, Vice Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Nicaragua. "

(Translation by wikipedian editor Baleywik (talk) 21:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC) with no guarantee of absolute correctness. )

References

[citation needed]

Are there any references that anyone witnessed a bolide brighter than the full moon near Managua before the explosion? Are there any references that meteorites have been recovered at or near the crater? Debris of an unspecified size is not the same as confirmed meteorite fragments. -- Kheider (talk) 22:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• So far no one has pointed to eyewitness or photographic references of a bolide corresponding to the Managua event. We should probably keep in mind that not all meteoroids produce visible bright events noticed by people. But, as the saying goes, "absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence." That familiar refrain usually doesn't tend to stop wikipedians from: 1) using conjecture-laden opinion blogs as cites, 2) injecting "you can't prove a negative"- style unscientific edits in place of actual evidence, 3) ego-defending misleading edits with unsubstantiated cites in one part of an article even after more accurate edits with good cites have been added in another part of the same article, or 4) deleting whole edits with good cites and then tagging "citation needed" on the remaining fragments. Perhaps it is nobler to bear the slings and arrows of a "citation needed" tag, and just let someone else mop it up later. Such is the life and fun of wiki-editing, and caveat lector! All in good joking fun... :) Baleywik (talk) 23:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

A bolide generated by an asteroid 1-meter in diameter should have been noticed by a few people in a region with millions of residents. It still sounds iffy to those of us with experience in known strewn fields. -- Kheider (talk) 23:16, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

"Should have been noticed", yes that seems so from a distant perspective in this day of instant smartfone videos. But, there have been many instances of no one noticing a good size falling space object slamming into someone's house or car, except for the people in the home awakening to the shock. So, we really can't rule that out just because we don't have any dashcam videos of a bolide yet. Baleywik (talk) 23:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Something smaller than a soccer ball falling at terminal velocity during dark flight is a lot different than something ~1-meter in diameter impacting the ground still going fast enough to carve out a 12 meter crater with no obvious fragments. In recent times it is rare for a bolide to fall in a populated region without there being some witnesses, security camera footage, or satellite imagery. As a result of modern social media, word of these events spread very fast now-a-days, unlike 20 years ago. -- Kheider (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

On the morning of 7 September, reporters went out and interviewed local residents within about 1 kilometer of the crater. Some of the residents who went outside at night immediately after experiencing the blast to see what happened, said that "liquid fell down on them", "red sand fell on them", and the liquid and sand had "the smell of burning felt". Those residents in Barrio Jorge Salazar were not really close enough to smell the crater directly in those first moments, and the wind hadn't had a chance to carry the smell over from the crater yet. The fact that several witnesses reported liquid falling on them, might be a clue to some sort of ice-fall event, as strange or unlikely as that might seem. Precise crater site coordinates and its proximity to homes is best on Google Maps satellite view or better yet with Google Earth with its recent imagery. Crater Location on Google Maps Satellite View Baleywik (talk) 00:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I am also somewhat surprised that the military base does not have any video footage of it. -- Kheider (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Managua event. 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/20141011215227/http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news185.html to http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news185.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 15:18, 31 May 2017 (UTC)