Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DR Congo Ring May Be Giant Impact Crater

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the leaving-a-mark dept.

Earth 96

Phrogman writes "The BBC is reporting that deforestation has 'revealed what could be a giant impact crater in Central Africa, scientists say. The 36-46km-wide feature, identified in DR Congo, may be one of the largest such structures discovered in the last decade.' If you search Google Maps for 'Omeonga Democratic Republic of the Congo,' you will be right in the middle of the suspected crater."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I knew it! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31456272)

This is the landing site for the gay niggers from out of space.

Indiana Jones (1, Insightful)

Mekkah (1651935) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456300)

This isn't breaking news Indiana Jones came out two years ago, wtf.

Google earth (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457388)

here's [k12.ny.us] an interesting KMZ of impact craters

So you're saying that superman... (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456312)

actually landed in the DR Congo some years back?

Re:So you're saying that superman... (1, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456368)

Yeah, he lost control of his wheelchair and made one hell of a crater.

Re:So you're saying that superman... (0, Troll)

Mekkah (1651935) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456398)

or he ran out of aborted fetus's while MID flight.

YES, South Park is real life.

What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (4, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456518)

Christopher Walken.

But seriously, my GF in college worked with Chris Reeves at the Williamstown Theater Festival, and she said he was the nicest, most supportive and hard working actor she's ever met. He would thank the freaking techs! He would run lines with interns fer chrissake!

He got thrown from his horse the summer after that, we were both pretty sad for the man.

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457374)

FYI, it's Christopher Reeve (no 's'). I pay attention to it because I have to deny it when people ask me if I'm related to Superman. FWIW, not related to Keanu, either.

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457554)

Oh God, you're right. I can't believe I put wooden face's last name on Christopher.

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31464244)

What about George?

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31468906)

Yes, his last name is Reeves, same as mine. Interesting isn't it, that both actors who famously portrayed Superman, are named Reeves or Reeve.

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31475860)

I meant: are you related to him?

And I think that Kirk Alynreeves, Bud Collyereeve, Dean Cainreeves, Tom Wellingreeve, and Brandon Reevesouth (among others) would take issue with your "both actors" comment. :)

Re:What's the opposite of Christopher Reeves? (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489124)

No, and you got me there. Either that, or even it's even cooler than I thought!

Re:So you're saying that superman... (3, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456594)

Well, the leading theories right now are that it was either Superman crashing to earth at hypersonic speeds, or your mom playing hopscotch.

Re:So you're saying that superman... (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456724)

Sigh. We've talked to Mom about that, but, well, you know....

Re:So you're saying that superman... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31464492)

Wow, I thought that there would be some "Your mama so fat..." jokes of that post. Guess it is not that kind of crowd.

Re:So you're saying that superman... (1)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31467462)

Yo momma so fat everyone accepts it as common knowledge and thus has no need to draw attention to it, so they make fun of you instead.

na this is where king tut burped (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31457252)

and i hear he wiped his arse in the nile upstream ....

Deforestation (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456326)


Deforestation has revealed what could be a giant impact crater in Central Africa, scientists say.

Well then, we should keep deforesting the entire planet. Who knows what amazing discoveries await?!

Re:Deforestation (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456544)

Scientist: Everyone, listen! I've made an amazing discovery: We're all doomed!

Everyone: Yay!

Re:Deforestation (3, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457158)

Well then, we should keep deforesting the entire planet. Who knows what amazing discoveries await?!

We should not. The amazing discovery could easily be the one that increasing deforestation means more craters. (It seems kind of obvious when you take a look at the Moon.)

Re:Deforestation (2, Funny)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457800)

So... if I deforest my annoying neighbor's property, he'll get hit by a meteor?

COOL!

not really (1)

fireylord (1074571) | more than 4 years ago | (#31458210)

Not so cool for you unless your neighbour is tens of kilometres away

Re:Deforestation (1)

ignavus (213578) | more than 4 years ago | (#31459222)

Well then, we should keep deforesting the entire planet.

Don't worry. We are.

Earth First! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31460034)

Earth First!

We'll Log the other Planets later.

More Of The Same? (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456332)

So the current destruction of that part of the earth has revealed an earlier attempt to destroy that part of the earth ... when will Mother Nature learn she can't get rid of us that easy?

Re:More Of The Same? (3, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456528)

So the current destruction of that part of the earth has revealed an earlier attempt to destroy that part of the earth ... when will Mother Nature learn she can't get rid of us that easy?

She doesn't want to kill us off. We're her eggs. She wants us to leave the nest, and go reproduce her on other planets.

Re:More Of The Same? (1)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456828)

Actually, it's not Mother Nature that is wanting us to leave, it's Father Nature. He's been trying for several millenia to get some "alone time" with Ma Nature.

That's right, humans and animals are all essentially cock-blocking Father Nature from getting some. He's finally pissed off enough to do something about it (earthquakes, global warming, tsunamis, etc), especially since he started taking Viagra.

Re:More Of The Same? (1)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457290)

She doesn't want to kill us off. We're her eggs. She wants us to leave the nest, and go reproduce her on other planets.

I always thought that Mother Nature didn't like to be anthropomorphized. She's tetchy like that.

Re:More Of The Same? (1)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457760)

She told me she liked it! Fickle woman.

Re:More Of The Same? (1)

Evro (18923) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457598)

Good old Manifest Destiny!

Re:More Of The Same? (1)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457864)

More of an offshoot of the Gaia Hypothesis. [wikipedia.org]

But the criticism is still valid. I would have to add 'reproduce her on other planets that do not already harbor life' although, as long as we are anthropomorphizing Mother Nature, I don't think the bitch would care if we offed other biospheres in order to reproduce her.

But we're also her conscience as well as her eggs, so I think we should care. It's also logical, and in our self interest. Who knows when we might meet a superior race? If we have proven that we can play nicely with others, I think they will be more inclined to play nicely with us. If we've proven ourselves to be selfish, hegemonizing bastards, they might see us as a threat. Of course, they might be the hegemonizing bastards, but then we're screwed either way.

Similar feature (4, Funny)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456376)

Circular features are a great way to find impact sites. Heck, this area must have been hit by hundreds of meteors: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=37.701207,-100.71991&spn=0.375406,0.617294&t=h&z=11 [google.com]

Re:Similar feature (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456646)

Well, at least that landscape would be improved by a couple of hundreds of meteor impacts... On a more serious note - such irrigation patterns seriously freaked me out on my first flight to the US. I've never seen anything like that in Europe.

Re:Similar feature (3, Interesting)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456928)

What I never understand is that with a different packing pattern (hexagonal), they could use around 10% more land than they do now. Why don't they do this?

Re:Similar feature (3, Informative)

Burdell (228580) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457060)

It is kind of hard to make a straight-line irrigation beam extend and contract to form a hexagon as it goes around. These plots are irrigated from underground aquifers. There's a well in the middle and then a long irrigation beam that goes in a circle around the well. The pressure is controlled so the sprinkler heads near the middle release less water (since they cover less ground).

Re:Similar feature (1)

AmonRa1979 (797618) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457350)

What he means is that if each section was hexagon in shape, you could still use the same type of watering system, but dramatically reduce the area in the corners that the watering system misses.

In an attempt to answer his question, there are a few possible reasons (of many more, I'm sure) that I can come up with. It might be inconvenient to lay out hexagonal access roads that form the borders of these sections. This also most likely stems from initial property plots being given out in square segments and now if you buy up neighboring plots, it's too expensive to sink new wells so that you can hexagonally segment your sections. It's also possible that those corners that the irrigation system appears to miss may not be as useless as they seem from high altitude photographs.

Re:Similar feature (2, Informative)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457354)

No, you've fundametally misunderstood the problem. If you were to fit the circles inside of hexagons instead of inside of squares you'd find that 10% more area fits inside the circles.

The GP was not saying use hexagons instead of circles, he was saying hexagons instead of the squares AROUND the circles.

You'd have to redraw property lines, move roads (1)

jabberw0k (62554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457362)

GP presumably meant, pack the circles into hexagons instead of squares. Property lines and roads, however, tend to have been drawn in squares and rectangles in the American West, being based on Thomas Jefferson's ideal revival of the Roman Empire who fixated on right angles.

Re:You'd have to redraw property lines, move roads (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457728)

Well, straight lines are much easier to survey and build roads on.

Re:Similar feature (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#31458530)

There's a well in the middle and then a long irrigation beam that goes in a circle around the well.

Not necessarily. Sometimes the pivot is fed by a pipeline from a more remote water source.

Re:Similar feature (1)

Joe Snipe (224958) | more than 4 years ago | (#31458932)

Couldn't they line up another well in the center of where the 4 corners meet to correct for the missed space?

Re:Similar feature (1)

Ipeunipig (934414) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457216)

I believe it is due to how they water the plants. It pivots at a central point and therefore is round.

Re:Similar feature (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457366)

Yes, and that has nothing to do with the GP's comment. Comment was about hexagons vs. squares that the circles are placed inside of.

Re:Similar feature (3, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457674)

Water is the limiting factor, not availability of land.

Re:Similar feature (3, Informative)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#31458344)

Some places [ning.com] do use a hex packing pattern. However most of the time the issue isn't land availability.

Re:Similar feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31457112)

That's because half of Europe isn't functionally savanna, like it is in the central United States.

Re:Similar feature (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484026)

There are circle irrigation fields in Saudi Arabia, of all places. I found them by wandering around in Google Maps -- "what's this dark spot in the middle of the desert??" zoomed in, and lo and behold, it was a big patch of circle irrigators!

I've been told by someone who lived there that the isolated location helps avoid crop destruction by feral goats and other critters, not to mention that there's no need for pest control of any sort.

Streetview, uhh... (1)

twokay (979515) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456900)

What's even more strange, is that Google sent their Street View truck out there. They must have gone though during the meteorite off season, 'cause I sure can't see anything interesting.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&layer=c&cbll=37.577077,-101.661371&panoid=7wISFAVsiS8aFtIM6Xi6fA&cbp=12,6.42,,0,10.21&ll=37.572338,-101.766357&spn=0,359.360046&z=11 [google.com]

Re:Similar feature (1)

edbob (960004) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457500)

Well, we're certainly not in Kansas anymore!

Re:Similar feature (1)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457772)

OMG man ... you've discovered crop circles....

Re:Similar feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31458308)

I've often wondered if this is an old impact crater as well, in northern Ontario.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=49.165318,-94.455643&spn=0.168593,0.525627&z=12

Re:Similar feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31461764)

That is _northern_ Ontario?

Re:Similar feature (1)

neonsignal (890658) | more than 4 years ago | (#31458622)

This place [google.com] too...

Re:Similar feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31461714)

Yay! Kansas is fun!!!

Re:Similar feature (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484090)

Okay, who bubble-wrapped the planet??

Better look at it real soon . . . (2, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456460)

. . . given Africa's leaders' penchant for pilfering natural resources (oil, diamonds, et al) for their own personal profit, I wouldn't be surprised if the crater got stolen.

Although, that would be an interesting challenge for Swiss bankers: you can deposit diamonds at a bank, but how do you fit a crater in a vault?

Re:Better look at it real soon . . . (1)

JeanBaptiste (537955) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456990)

but how do you fit a crater in a vault?

I think thats what happened at vault 87.

Re:Better look at it real soon . . . (1)

thomst (1640045) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457726)

you can deposit diamonds at a bank, but how do you fit a crater in a vault?

Use really, really good compression.

Re:Better look at it real soon . . . (1)

Petaris (771874) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457886)

They will hire Carmen Sandiego to steal it! :D

Re:Better look at it real soon . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31531466)

Considering a crater is the absence of land through an impact, then I'd say it'd be pretty easy. In fact, I have an ebay auction for a shoebox full of craters you can bid on right now.

Oh, those are fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31456462)

Conga rings are fun. A line might be able to wander anywhere, but if you're not careful you get trapped, like in Tron. But a conga ring, that can go on forever!

Reinforcing the already known status (1)

assemblerex (1275164) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456536)

as a smoking hole in the ground.

Link? (4, Informative)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456576)

What is to stop slashdot from linking to the image in Google Maps [google.com] in the original article?

Re:Link? (2, Interesting)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456728)

Something that let you zoom in and out let you feel the proper magnitude of both the impact, and the deforestation around. Probably the scale of deforestation should had made the headlines, not the impact crater, our past is interesting, but is much more our (lack of?) future.

Re:Link? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31457626)

What - no StreetView? Google is losing its grip.

Didn't I see this (1)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456634)

Didn't I see this on History or the Discovery channel some years ago? Why is it being re-reported now? This ring / impact crater is not *new* news.

Whew... (2, Insightful)

Graham J - XVI (1076671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456824)

Good thing for deforestation, that big circular river would never have given it away.

I'm still here (4, Funny)

Bobb Sledd (307434) | more than 4 years ago | (#31456826)

If you search Google Maps for 'Omeonga Democratic Republic of the Congo,' you will be right in the middle of the suspected crater.

I did a google search, but I'm still here in this chair in my cubicle.

Re:I'm still here (1)

travdaddy (527149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457254)

It's a good thing, you really don't want to see the Slashdot effect on a teleportation device.

Re:I'm still here (1)

Reapman (740286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457844)

Telefragging? Suddenly have the urge to fire up Doom...

Google map noobs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31456866)

Nice circle. It really is an interesting aerial photography feature. How's it look on the terrain map? Maybe check that before claiming a new impact site has been found.

Re:Google map noobs (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457126)

Looks like there is a ridge running around the site at the exact same place as the circular feature to me...

Re:Google map noobs (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457228)

I stand corrected... I think I was looking at it backwards. I looks more like it's a depression around that ring...

So it's a reverse crater?

yes, now it is (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 4 years ago | (#31461328)

When a crater forms, there is often a spash up in the middle. Sometimes the whole thing fills with LIQUID MAGMA, just like when you drill to the center of the Earth.

Anyway, stuff that fills the crater can be harder than the rim. Years later, the rim erodes away.

It's like a fossel impression.

Re:yes, now it is (1)

BenihanaX (1405543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31462238)

...just like when you drill to the center of the Earth....

You do that often?

Alternative explanations (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457056)

I would expect a meteor impact to look more like this http://goo.gl/1gcU [goo.gl] but maybe just because it's the only one I've seen in person. According to Google Earth the whole area is pretty flat with exception of the circle of depressed area where there is now a river.

Maybe it's some kind of ancient moat around a giant collapsed culture. The Chinese built a wall - what's to say an ancient culture didn't do the opposite and dig a trench.

Re:Alternative explanations (1)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457218)

Well, if it's old enough it could very well be filled in by dirt and soil and the edges could have been eroded. Given the position of sun in the image there is no distinct elevation change in the image.

They call it DR Congo (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31457100)

It's not a real DR, but it is a real Congo. It's an actual, factual Congo.

Re:They call it DR Congo (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31461024)

It's not a real DR

Damn, I was thinking this Dr Congo could cure my severe case of boogie fever.

Not so fast.... (1, Insightful)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457306)

If you look at the region with more than a passing "gee, neat" glance, you will notice that a stream winds its way around what should be the highest apparent point, the rim. Since when do rivers or creeks follow the rims of craters?

It would be far better to use Google Earth to view it, which should provide elevation data for points under the mouse, unlike Google Maps. I'd also like to see it in NASA's World Wind, which allows viewing the same region with imagery from multiple different (satellite) sources and might provide extra insight. I suspect this will prove to be some sort of plateau or mesa that just happens to have a rather familiar geometric shape, rather than an ancient impact crater.

Re:Not so fast.... (1)

georgewilliamherbert (211790) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457472)

If you read the original science paper ( http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2010/pdf/1601.pdf [usra.edu] ) they looked at topology and geology. The ring is not just a surface feature, it's in the deeper geography.

It had been identified in 2006 by visual circularity only by another researcher ( http://impacts.rajmon.cz/data/Impact_database_2009_2.xls [rajmon.cz] or http://impacts.rajmon.cz/data/Impact_database_2009_2.kmz [rajmon.cz] ). The Italian researchers did some of the geology to support that.

More geology is needed, you want to find impact breccia and shatter cones and so forth. But there's more there than "Dude, it's round!".

Re:Not so fast.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31457488)

Goddamn! It's a good thing you were here to notice that and saved a whole lot of people some pointless field work at the site.
Also good evidence that you didn't RTFA, which directly addressed this point.

A+ for Effort though.

Another meteor crater (1)

Tracer221 (1393417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457484)

Here's another location of a crater in Mexico: do a search for "ciudad de carmen." The caves that exist in this area were formed from a meteor impact, and the caves exist along the edge of the impact. It creates a ring formation in the area, and it was also only recently discovered. Half of the crater is in the water, the other half of the crater is on land. Also, very close to this area, people theorize that the "gulf of mexico" was an impact crater that might've caused the dinosaurs to die. The yucatan peninsula sure has an odd shape, and in the water, it almost forms a circle around the gulf of mexico. The BBC series "earth: the biography" examines meteor impacts and craters that exist on the planet. It was a great natural science series, and it was very fun to watch.

Re:Another meteor crater (1)

Tracer221 (1393417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457572)

Additionally, I noticed another crater site that is near "la trinitaria" in Mexico. This lake is pretty circular looking and either was formed from a caldera or impact crater. Half of it is filled in by volcanic activity

Re:Another meteor crater (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31459820)

It creates a ring formation in the area, and it was also only recently discovered. Half of the crater is in the water, the other half of the crater is on land. Also, very close to this area, people theorize that the "gulf of mexico" was an impact crater that might've caused the dinosaurs to die. The yucatan peninsula sure has an odd shape, and in the water, it almost forms a circle around the gulf of mexico.

Are you talking about Chicxulub, mentioned in the sidebar in TFA and half in the Gulf? That's the one I've heard of as being the mark of the suspected dinosaur killer, which makes sense as TFA mentions it's dated at 65 million years old.

As far as the Yucatan/Gulf itself, I've heard it suggested that it's a crater before but I don't know how well that holds up geologically. But damn that would have been a hell of an impact; a lot bigger than the KT extinction I'd wager.

Re:Another meteor crater (1)

Tracer221 (1393417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31460734)

I believe the ring starts around "el vapor" lake to the east, and it goes SW towards "jesus maria," "Tasejero"...then north towards "frontera." A whole bunch of underwater caves line the area and they believe the edge of the caves exist at the edge of the impact crater.

Takes so long to identify craters? (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 4 years ago | (#31457778)

I always thought this feature looked pretty crater-like, especially along the eastern edges:

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=North+Bethesda,+Montgomery,+Maryland&ll=65.980034,-178.857422&spn=0.870944,2.469177&t=h&z=9 [google.com]

The clouds kinda obscure this one. But if you look it up in other datasets, such as MS Bing Maps, it's a bit more pronounced. And much larger than any of the other verified craters listed.

Re:Takes so long to identify craters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31458136)

Yes, it takes quite a while. There is more than one way to make a generally circular depression in the Earth's surface. The article mentions salt diapir [wikipedia.org] structures ("salt domes"), but volcanic features [wikipedia.org] , updoming or depression of rock layers due to tectonics, differential erosion of various rock types, rounded igneous intrusions, and all sorts of other things can produce circular features. Furthermore, many craters aren't depressions in the first place (they get filled in, and the larger craters have a central uplift). For this reason a circular structure is only a candidate crater and the odds are fairly low that an individual circular structure is an impact crater. It takes geological work on the ground to determine whether it really is a crater, such as finding impact melt, breccia, shatter cones, shocked quartz, and other signatures of an impact. Here is a pretty good site that describes the typical geological features of impacts [psi.edu] . Given that many of these candidate features are in remote locations and only a few people do this kind of work it can take some time before someone investigates a particular feature.

The location you provided the link for (a bay in easternmost Russia) isn't a good candidate. The curved shape of the coastline on the west side of the bay is just an effect of a wave-swept coastline -- it tends to develop a broad curve away from the points of land on either side due to the refraction of the waves and transport of sediment laterally. here are some similar examples on Sakhalin Island [google.com] , and here are some on the Kamchatka Peninsula [google.com] . In the latter image you can see the shoreline-parallel beach ridges that define the coast. In the north end of the bay you mention, there are mountains that seemingly cut across the arc of the rim -- not what you would expect if the rest of the circular area is an excavated impact crater, although I suppose it is remotely possible they were uplifted subsequently.

Re:Takes so long to identify craters? (1)

Prof.PatPending (1603155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31461348)

Russia? You're right though, it does. I wonder why the URL in the link lists Bethesda Maryland? I recall seeing a recent program on the History Channel that pointed out a probable impact crater, I believe around the Chesapeake Bay, and that the after effects of the impact lead to the extinction of the large mammals that used to roam North America (giant sloths, saber-toothed cats, mammoths, etc,).

Re:Takes so long to identify craters? (1)

RockDoctor (15477) | more than 3 years ago | (#31502412)

I always thought this feature looked pretty crater-like, especially along the eastern edges:

http://maps.google.com/?ll=65.980034,-178.857422&spn=0.870944,2.469177&t=h&z=9 [google.com]

Doesn't look particularly craterish to me, on eastern or western margins. There is a known crater in the area (http://maps.google.com/?ll=67.5,172.08&z=9), and the area is hardly unexplored, so I doubt that you've picked up anything remarkably new.
I don't see anything terribly interesting on OneGeology either, structural units clearly continuous across the district.

what ? 36-46km-wide ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31458174)

36-46km-wide ???

From what I see in google :) It's more like ... 15-20km wide ...

Kind of an important difference

Don't Do It! (2, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 4 years ago | (#31459390)

Don't do that Google search!
I did it and then I was right in the middle of that crater.
I'll tell you more when I get back, the Internet link in the middle of this crater is really slow.

Pfft (2, Interesting)

florescent_beige (608235) | more than 4 years ago | (#31460686)

That's not a gigantic ancient impact crater. That's [google.com] a gigantic ancient impact crater.

Re:Pfft (1)

Phrogman (80473) | more than 4 years ago | (#31460956)

That's not a gigantic ancient impact crater. That's [google.com] a gigantic ancient impact crater.

Re:Pfft (1)

BenihanaX (1405543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31462232)

That's not a gigantic ancient impact crater. That's [google.com] a gigantic ancient impact crater.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>