William forwarded the news that the article on the airburst event that destroyed Tall el-Hammam has been pulled by Nature journal. This occurred, it is thought, around 3600 years ago. The article was published in September 2021, in Scientific Reports. Now, in 2025, after a long negative campaign, the article has been retracted. Apparently, the claim is that the effects of an airburst have been exaggerated. Strange reason. As no airburst near the surface has occurred in recent centuries, and we still do not know, for sure, what caused the Tunguska event, or how big the space rock was at Hammam, or Tunguska. How can they claim to be able to calculate the effects of an explosion. Hammam was investigated by archaeologists. Not astronomers. Yet, it has been pulled because a few astronomers object to the idea of catastrophic events caused by space rocks. It is worse than that as the astronomers do not seem to have a clue how archaeology works. The case for an airblast did not come as a feat of fancy inside somebody’s head. It came from stringent and slow, as well as thorough scooping and collection of soil and spoil from the top of the site. Inside this was burnt material – and evidence of high temperatures. It also included lots of tiny fragments of human bone, burnt and shattered. Some of this bone was only visible under a microscope -as far as identification could be verified. This took an enormous amount of time to sift and collect and analyse – quite unlike the astronomers experience in their own discipline. Astronomy is mostly based on ideas that have been dreamed up. The recent space missions have shown how wrong most of this stuff was – and they are still having problems adapting to the new information that has been revealed. Why should anyone take any notice of the opposition to what was hard won by diligent research. Catastrophism is a challenge to the uniformitarian point of view. Instead of coming to terms with reality these people would rather stick to the old belief system they were taught in education establishments. They will not take seriously what was discovered. It is the idea of catastrophism itself that has been detracted. The destruction of Hammam in irrevocable – in the long term. The wagons are being corralled by mainstream. In this instance, it would be worth investigating who is sponsoring, or financing, the opposition. We all know what the Comet Research Group is all about but not a lot about who is behind the opposition.
William sent the link https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/sodom-and-gomorrah-were-not-destroyed-by-the-impact-of-an-extraterrestrial-object/ar-AA1DxGA3 … but I’m sure there are other sites with the same story. One possible reason for so much opposition is that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is a Biblical tale – and a lot of people would object to such a tale been brought to life. A lot of revisionist historians also object to the connection. Rather, those who follow Biblical numbers too closely. They simply refuse to accept the identification. It is obviously not just astronomers. However, the soil and rock at the point of destruction is eerily similar to nuclear blast destruction. It is probably the closest parallel we might have to an air blast. The blast itself, in both scenarios, is what causes the heat and high temperatures. Hammam is not the only site out there where it has been suspected a similar fate occurred. The reason it is not popular, or more common, is that your everyday archaeologist, like the astronomers, have never gone out to look for it. It should be these people that investigate such sites – but they will not do that. The excavation team did seek out more information but the only people doing such the research are the Comet Research Group. The detractors would not have considered putting in their pennyworth prior to publication – only on the basis of averting their eyes as the subject was too unpalatable. One might say.
At some stage in history the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah was attached to a religious opposition to homosexuality. When that occurred we don’t know but it may have been a long time after the event. It was later adopted by Christians, and then by Islamics. Anti homosexuality is still a big thing in the latter religion but has largely been dropped by Jewish and Christian intellectuals. In fact, a lot of homosexuals historically became priests – as they were able to conform with abstinence from sex with females. How much input comes from the highly organised homosexuality lobby groups is an unknown. Possibly, not a great deal. On the other hand, they would be more vitriolic in their opposition if there was an input of some kind.
The authors of the original study have of course realised this might happen. It was perhaps a question of when – rather than maybe. In that time, and the continuing difficulty they have experienced in getting their material published, they have formed their own journal. The original research will now be updated after the final season of excavation in Jordan, and republished. It will be a more nuanced and thorough article as a lot was discarded in the first instance because of objections by reviewers and the editorial team at Scientific Reports. Keep your eyes and ears open as it won’t be long before this happens. The only problem then is that it will be studiously ignored as it won’t be published in a mainstream approved journal – but do we care. Once it is in print and on the internet extraordinary things can happen.