Crater Chain Theories

A catina / crater chain research and investigations web site. It is our theory that
certain types of catina were made by intelligence. The "signal" we think S.E.T.I. missed

Welcome to the "Crater Chains" Research Site

SUMMARY REPORT FOR 2003
Contents

1. The current accepted theory of what caused these crater chains.
2. The reason we are questioning the accepted theory.
3. Taking a closer look at these kinds of catina.
4. The Conclusion.

1. The current accepted theory of what caused these crater chains.
The commonly accepted theory of how catinas may have formed is simply stated that
a comet broke up and impacted the surfaces of bodies in our solar system. This is
called the Tidally Disrupted Comet theory. It is commonly accepted as a proven theory
since comet SL9 broke up and hit Jupiter in 1994. This theory is put forth by the paper
ICARUS 126, 470-474 (1997), Article No. 1S975685 by William F. Bottke Jr., Derek C.
Richardson and Stanley G. Love, "Can Tidal Disruption of Asteroids Make Crater
Chains on the earth and moon?".

2. The reason we are questioning the accepted theory.
The example used to illustrate the tidal disruption forces has been the comet
Shoemaker Levy 9 (SL9) that broke apart and impacted Jupiter in 1994. An interesting
aspect of SL9, it was observed for 384 days, during which time the comet broke apart
into many varying size fragments "range in size from about 500 meters to almost 4 km"
according to JPL NASA, http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01264. JPL NASA
further explains "The apparent separation of Q1 and Q2 was only about 1100 kilometers
(680 miles) on 1 July 1993 and increased to 28,000 kilometers (17,400 miles) by 20 July
1994" So it seemed the fragments separated 26,900 kilometers (16,720 miles) over 384
observed days until impact. This would mean the fragments separated 70 kilometers
(43.5 miles) per day throughout the 384 observed days. JPL NASA SL9 images, impacts
clearly visible: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/image101.html,
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/image301.html, http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap980801.html
and http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/images.html.
Comparing the behavior and pattern of SL9 from these NASA images to the crater
chains such as http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971209.html and
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/galileo/callisto/02281997_full.jpg clearly demonstrates that tidal
disruption of mud and ice comets or asteroids were not the cause of these remarkable
catinas. SL9 broke up in varying sizes, thousands of kilometers apart and impacted
over many days. Crater chains of the type we are investigating and questioning are not
varied in size, are not thousands of kilometers apart and did not impact over days. The
very complexity of uniform size, trajectory, alignment, and timing isn't coming from a comet
that broke up.

3. Taking a closer look at these specific kinds of catina.
On March 6, 2003, we started notifying scientists of our theory and had been in touch
with NASA since November of 2002 trying to glean help for our research efforts into the
Cunningham/Smart Theorem, that certain types of crater chains / catina are probably
caused by intention, and here is why.
1. Uniform impact spacing. These types of catinas are spaced just touching each other
uniformly rim to rim.
2. Uniform impact width. These catinas demonstrate a uniformity of size showing a
uniformity of potential.
3. Uniform impact magnitude. That each impact in the catina is the same size shows the
uniformity of what impacted.
4. Uniform impact alignment. This anomaly is amazing at just a few impacts in alignment,
let alone so many with over 50 uniformly aligned impacts
5. Uniform impact timing. Scientists agree that in this type of catina the impacts all occurred
uniformly at the same time.
6. Uniform impact age; catinas being the newest event in most given images.

4. The Conclusion.
Picture 50 dice thrown, landing uniformly in line, same numbers in all directions. We
can only do that by hand or with robotics, and only by intent, by purposefully aligning them.
Uniform nonrandom impacts are not likely to occur with the known comet breakup
trajectories. These types of catina are not volcanic, not water holes, not ejected material
from a larger impact, and not from a broken up asteroid or comet.
There are hundreds of this "type" of catina that are far too uniform to be natural. What
other explanation is needed than to simply admit it was caused by intelligence. Often the
simplest explanation is the right one.

Norval L. Cunningham and Gale Smart Coauthored