Talk:Eugene Merle Shoemaker

message: This article is a disgrace. This man, and later his wife, became a voice of truth, ridiculed by geologists and astronomers, about the nature and reality of impacts. If humanity does survive an impact event, it will be because of the preparation he sparked in humanity - and only after the discovery of the Chicxulub Crater, decades after his insights had been ridiculed. I will be doing a research paper on this man and his contributions as soon as I can, but in the mean time, I urge everyone with more free time to do the same and expand this short article.
----  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.88.36 (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I forget the synonyms, but I think another (less controversial) term is "shocked quartz". I'll replace. --- hike395 02:39, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Much better to both answers!  I put coesite back into the article as an alternative to the shocked quartz. Thanks.  (I wasn't sure whether an anon user was pulling our collective leg--)  Elf | Talk 04:25, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: On November 15, 2005, someone inserted some information about Dr, Shoemaker in the article about him conducting ballistics tests in the mid 1960's on human skulls filled with simulated brain tissue by  shooting rifle bullets at the skulls. The purpose of this macabre test was apparantly to determine whether a skull "recoils" towards the person shooting when hit by the bullet.
The passage reads as follows:
Dr. Shoemaker did not restrict his interests to colliding astronomical objects, and he believed in experimentation to prove his beliefs. During a special CBS News investigative report in the mid-1960s about the assassination of President Kennedy hosted by Walter Cronkite, Eugene demonstrated what he had discovered during tests with his own rifle and human skulls. A bullet fired into the back of the skull with simulated brain material inside would cause it to recoil rearward, towards the shooter. This supported the Warren Commission’s findings, and refuted the ideas of conspiracy theorists, who believed that such recoil can only occur due to a shot from the front.
If Dr. Shoemaker did conduct such experiments on human skulls I am interested in reviewing the results. Though, there is a possibility that he did not conduct any such experiments.  While the author writes in a style of great familiarity with Dr. Shoemaker ("Eugene demonstrated ...."), the information was posted anonymously. Also,it was posted at the same time someone posted Dr. Shoemaker's name as the expert who proved the "skull-recoil" theory on Wikipedia's Kennedy Assassination site.  Then the Kennedy site was linked to the  site so the reader could see that the information is purportedly true.
This counter-intuitive result (skulls recoiling towards the shooter) may be true, or not, and Dr. Shoemaker may or not have conducted such experiments. However, the Kennedy site has many true believers who are committed to certain theories. In this situation, it may be a highly committed person supporting the "lone gunman" theory (where Lee Harvey Oswald is the alleged lone gunman) and wants to rationalize why Presient Kennedy went quickly backwards (towards Oswald) after being fatally wounded to the head. The "answer" is that Dr. Shoemaker experimented and proved a human skull recoils towards the shooter when the bullet hits the skull.  
Please point me in the direction of the study, if it exists, by a post on this page. RPJ 08:25, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Pending external reference, I have deleted the paragraph from this page. We can restore if someone supports the result. -- hike395 16:22, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Dr. Shoemaker experiment on human skulls? 

message: This article meets the requirements for Class C. The subject, Eugene Shoemaker, should be rated at least Mid importance because of his impact on planetary geology. Bruin2 (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Article classification

message: "He is the only person whose ashes are buried on a celestial body that we know of (the Moon)." Why is the qualifier necessary? Is it really plausible that someone else's remains are on a celestial body but nobody knows about it? Nate Biggs (talk) 05:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "that we know of" 

message: gg 2409:4052:E8D:C64A:986D:90FB:817D:6425 (talk) 17:06, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  sik.5