fLRCHAEOPTERYX zy THE IMPACT-FLOOD CONNECTION: DOES IT EXIST?* Alexander Deutschq**,Christian Koeber12**, Joel D. Blurn3, Bevan M. FrenchzA, Billy P. Glasss,Richard Grieve6**, Peter Horn7, Elrnar K. JessbergeP, Gero Kurat9, Wolf Uwe Reirnoldlo, Jan Srnitqq**, Dieter Stofflerl2**, and Stuart Ross Taylorq3 zyxwv 'lnsfifut zyxwvutsrqponm fur Planetologie, Universitut Munster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Str. zyxwvuts 10, 0 4 8 1 4 9 Mun- ster, Germany; 'Institut fur Geochemie, Universitat Wien, Dr-Karl-Lueger-Ring zyxwvu 7, A- 1010 Vienna, Austria; JDepartment of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA; 'Department zyxwvutsrq of Mineral Sciences, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560, USA; 'Department of Geology, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 1971 6, USA; 6Geological Survey of Canada, 1 Observatory Crescent, Ottawa, ON K1A OY3, Canada; 'lnstitut fur Mineralogie und Petrographie, Universitat Munchen, D-80333 Munchen, Germany; 8Max Planck lnstitut fur Kernphysik, Postfach 103980, 0-69029 Heidelberg, Germany; gNaturhistorisches Museum, zyxwvutsrqpo P.O. Box 417, A-1014 Vienna, Austria;'OEconomic Geology Research Unit, Department of Geology, University of the Witwatersrand, loban- nesburg 2050, South Africa; "lnstituut voor Aardwetenschappen, Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1085, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands; lZMuseum fur Naturkunde, Humboldt Universitat, lnvalidenstr. 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germany; I3De- pnrtment ofNuclear Physics, Australian Nafional University, Canberra, ACT 2602, Aus- tralia. ABSTRACT In a recent article in Terra Noun, Kristan-Tollmann and Tollmann (1994) suggested that the Biblical Flood can be explained by seven fragments of a comet that impacted the ocean at seven locations on Earth at 03.00h (C.E.T.) on 23 September, 9545 yr BP. We demonstrate that all the 'geologcal proofs' that allegedly support their conclusions are not supported by the available data on impact cratering. Their hypothesis is based on insufficient and ambiguous data, selective citation, and in- zyxw - complete comprehension of previo Terra Nova, 6, 644-650, 1994. INTRODUCTION We have read the article by Kristan- Tollmann and Tollman (hereafter referred to as KTT, 1994) with interest and with considerable concern. This article proposes that seven fragments of a comet crashed into the Earth at 03.00 h (C.E.T.) on 23 September, 9545 BP producing a worldwide catastro- phe, recognized in many cultural traditions, including that of the *A discussion of The youngest big impact on Earth deducedfrom geological and histori- cal evidence by E. Kristan-Tollmann and A. Tollmann **Members of the Coordination Commit- tee for the European Science Foundation Network on 'Impacts and Evolution of Planet Earth' s research. Biblical Flood. The article recapitulates a more extensive treatment of the same subject (KTT, 1992), which has generated significant media and public attention in Austria and elsewhere. We fully appreciate that the 'Archaeopteryx' column is intended to perform a valuable function by publishing unconventional and unusual ideas. We consider, however, that this article is outside the proce- dures of even speculative science and is within the realm of fantasy. In our opinion, KTT present sweeping conclusions based on inadequate and ambiguous data, selective citation, and incomplete understanding of previous research. They ignore a large body of accumulated scientific evidence that completely contradicts their conclu- sions and they provide no critical tests (or even suggestions for tests) of their extreme ideas. The progress of science depends on the construction of testable hypotheses. Publication of the article by KIT (1994) has done a disservice to the large number of scientists, from many disciplines, who are actively working to understand the character and the implications of impact cratering on Earth. Furthermore, the article by KTT presents a risk of misinforming the scientific community and misleading the general public about the factual evidence in this field of geoscience- and science in general. In this communication, we discuss in detail the 'geological proofs' alleged by KTT to support their conclusions. Their claim that these items represent 'geological evidence' for their hypoth- esis is not supported by the data themselves. BACKGROUND The study of hypervelocity impacts and their effects on the Earth is not a new subject. Extensive theoretical and experimental studies have illuminated the physics and chemistry of impact processes and their geological effects. In addition, numerous geological, geochemical, and geophysical investi- gations of terrestrial impact craters have been performed since the early 1960s. By the late 1970s, these two lines of research had produced a basic understanding of the impact process and its geological consequences (see, for example, French and Short, 1968; Roddy et ol., 1977; Melosh, 1989; Grieve, 1991; and references therein). With the discovery in the 1980s of extensive geological evidence that a 644