I would be especially delighted to be quizzed as to why I believe shui jing is by far the most interesting natural glass in the world, and could ONLY have been formed from a giant meteorite impact on desert. I hope I can convince you that the iconography shows it was clearly carved by the Hongshan carvers (their Culture was estimated to span from 5,500 to 4,000 years BP), and that it was carved using lonsdaleite impact diamonds, presumably formed in the same impact.
There is strong evidence that the glass was ejected at a low angle, and much of it formed into spheres of up to 1 metre in diameter. It was therefore an absolutely unique impact, since normally meteoritic impact glass is shot high into the air (see for example the Reis crater’s moldavite.) Libyan desert glass is a possible exception, but did not form spheres, nor is it coloured as shui jing often is. A presumably superficial mine or mines that was accessed in the late Neolithic period, strongly suggests that the offending event was relatively recent.
At least one mine is still being quarried and now wasted and I fear it is a race against time before, as with so much in China’s recent rush to exploit its natural resources, it will be lost. Frustratingly, though the glass is still being quarried, the owners are closely guarding its location, I suspect because they are afraid of losing their business (as happened to the farmer who found the terracotta warriors). On three visits now, my accomplices and I failed to locate the site of the mine, so there is little more I can do without serious main-stream interest and help. This is something Chinese geologists, especially if they can get access to Government records should be able to do. So any suggestions as to people who might interested would be much appreciated. I have had considerable help from Prof Yang Xiaoping of the Institute of Geological Sciences, but meteorite geology is not his main subject.
Something I have mentioned in passing is that the glass (whether carvings or recently excavated) .often contains quite large inclusions of extraneous whitish material, sometimes fully encased, and obviously therefore fired to a high temperature. I believe it must be solidified partially melted soil and rock, picked up as the partially solidified glass bounced across to its final resting place. I have many pieces with such included material, one of which has inadvertently become a sacrificial piece, as the other day it toppled off a fire mantlepiece and shattered into a thousand pieces, releasing some of this encased material. I am still upset about this! Anyway I wonder if it can be dated by thermo-luminescence (TL) testing. I am checking this out with the TL lab in Oxford. It also needs to be chemically analysed.
|Welcome to David Anderson our author of the month for February 2018||2282||Graham Hancock||01-Feb-18 08:48|
|Re: Welcome to David Anderson our author of the month for February 2018||483||drdavidanderson||01-Feb-18 16:11|
|volcanic?||465||brett z||04-Feb-18 13:28|
|Re: volcanic?||940||drdavidanderson||04-Feb-18 19:29|
|Re: Welcome to David Anderson our author of the month for February 2018||503||drdavidanderson||01-Feb-18 17:00|
|Re: Welcome to David Anderson our author of the month for February 2018||459||drdavidanderson||02-Feb-18 21:36|