Talk:Red rain in Kerala/Archive 3

message: References to the paper as "Louis & Kumar" are fine, but a paper is a singular noun and takes a singular verb.  The team should be called "Louis and Kumar" and take a plural verb. 12.72.69.203 05:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Louis and Kumar" v. "Louis &amp; Kumar" 

message: “Unconventional” wasn't less accurate, but it was less precise.  The article is definitely easier to process with “Extraterrestrial explanation” for the heading. Gamahucheur 23:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  “Extraterrestrial explanation” 

message: High temperature resistibility and precense of metals...Possibly ejected to atmosphere by volcanic activity? - G3, 11:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subterranean bacteria? 

message: I question the factual accuracy of the conventional theories section based on the fact it does not address the known analysis report on the red matter inserted into the rain.  No dust particles were found.  No bat parts (big bloody flock of bats, HUGE, keep dreaming whoever put that one forward) nor animal cells were found.  What was found were odd living cells that are still undergoing analysis.  Perhaps someone would be willing to ammend the conventional theories to prevent them being outlandish suppositions and urban myth based on information that is contrary to the facts that have thusfar been proven? Jachin 20:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The primary case put forwards in the 'conventional theories' section really irritates me with it's lack of scientific reasoning.  Red rain falls, they identify the cells as alleged 'spores' from an algal genus, then support this algal deduction based on the fact similar cells were found in algal cultures of local lichen.  Anyone who has read the Sampath report has probably had the same thought I did when finishing it: of course you'll find the cells on local lichen, it rained the cells for 20 bloody days!  :P Jachin 06:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conventional theories

message: Perhaps the article should also mentioned that it rained fish in different parts of Kerala this year. Sadly this phenomenon can be explained by the scientific explanations, I guess. No extra-terrestrial theories till now. ;-) -- thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK10:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Go <span style="color:red;">bloody</span> rain, come <span style="color:blue;">fishy</span> rain! 

message: I have requested a peer review. This is a very good article for something that I know little about, and neither do very many people in the project. This is a step towards this becoming an FA. CrazyC83 19:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review

message: I am not a scientist, But I feel these points have not been considered as possibilities
1. An activity by some government or organisation? : Biliogical warfare? Secret experiment?
2. In the article it says "rust fungus" and somewehre else it says "aluminium content". Planes are made of Aluminium material. Can we connect the dots?
:We're not here to speculate. There's enough misleading stuff in the article as it stands without adding conspiracy theories. Jefffire 12:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Possibilities 

message: Please correct me if I am wrong, as I understand it, it has been suggested that the red rain consisted of some sort of biological material from a comet. Mainly or wholely biological material, not a mix of inorganic comet fragments and biological material. However, the obvious problem with this theory would seem to be how exactly biological material, which one would expect to make up a small part of the mass of the comet if it existed, became seperated from the inorganic comet debris before falling in the rain. Surely this is as implausible as the theory that the red blood cells of bat blood were somehow seperated from all the other components of the bats. What happened to all the inorganic component of the comet debris? If there was an estimated 50 000 kg of biological material that fell there must surely have been a far larger mass of inorganic debris. Booshank 18:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glaring problems with the comet theory