The discovery of the infamous dino-killing (66mya) Chicxulub Impact Crater is now 30 years old. Academic research papers from the early '90s, spanning to the most recent of studies have suggested every possible approach/trajectory angle one can imagine. Some still speculate it approached from underneath the earth's surface, via a super-volcano and claim it's not an impact structure at all.
It truly amazes me that after 30 years of steady research into this important subject, nobody has produced enough solid evidence to verify a solid approach/trajectory angle that most scientists can agree upon.
I'm curious what other people's thoughts are on the matter, and what approach angle you believe most-likely occurred. Many studies have suggested shallow-oblique approach angles. And if so, is it possible that the Chicxulub asteroid could have fragmented into multiple pieces, due to crossing through more atmospheric resistance/pressure at such a shallow angle?
What's your best guess and why?
Thanks,
James Tate
It truly amazes me that after 30 years of steady research into this important subject, nobody has produced enough solid evidence to verify a solid approach/trajectory angle that most scientists can agree upon.
I'm curious what other people's thoughts are on the matter, and what approach angle you believe most-likely occurred. Many studies have suggested shallow-oblique approach angles. And if so, is it possible that the Chicxulub asteroid could have fragmented into multiple pieces, due to crossing through more atmospheric resistance/pressure at such a shallow angle?
What's your best guess and why?
Thanks,
James Tate