Kaaba stone, Not a meteorite, probably an agate, by Robert S. Dietz and John McHone, published in Meteoritics by the Meteoritical Society in 1974, is a peer reviewed geological note arguing, on the basis of diffusion banding visible in photographs and descriptions of the Black Stone's structure, that it is most likely an agate rather than a meteorite, the more popularly assumed origin. Its strength is that it is a specialist peer reviewed argument grounded in actual meteoritic science, from scientists whose expertise is identifying meteorite material specifically, rather than a general assumption repeated without geological examination. Its limit is that the stone itself has never been available for direct laboratory sampling by outside scientists, so any geological argument, including this one, works from external observation and photographic evidence rather than the hands-on testing a definitive identification would require, and this remains one contribution to an active, still not fully settled scientific debate over the stone's origin.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Robert S. Dietz and John McHone's 1974 note in Meteoritics, the Meteoritical Society's own journal, is a peer reviewed geological argument from scientists whose expertise is meteorite identification specifically, treated at the top tier as specialist peer reviewed science. NotesPeer-reviewed note arguing on geological grounds (diffusion banding) that the Black Stone is most likely an agate rather than a meteorite; a key voice in the debate over the stones physical origin.
Citation
AuthorRobert S. Dietz and John McHone
PublisherMeteoritics (Meteoritical Society)
Publication Year1974
Source Typepeer-reviewed article
Claims Backed By This Source (17 claims)
This source backs 17 claims across the atlas. As facts: 10 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate. Plus 4 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Artifacts & Relics, 3 claims: 2 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
- Custodians & Museums, 2 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
- Metals, 2 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Sacred Sites, 2 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Articles, 1 claims: 1 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.