Slashdot Mirror
Meteorite Destroys Warehouse In Auckland, NZ
vik writes "According to local media, multiple eye witnesses are reporting that a meteorite crashed into a warehouse in Auckland, New Zealand last night, setting it on fire. The warehouse roof was destroyed but no nearby buildings were damaged and there was only one minor casualty — a man who happened to be inside the building at the time. The fire service have not yet made an official announcement."
While casualty is most often used to mean a death, it also refers to injury.
Keep your eyes to the sky.
An illegal alien struck on Earth by a meteorite! That's what I call a justice!
Ezekiel 23:20
Some people were convinced the fire was caused by what may have been a meteorite, which was seen from various parts of the upper North Island streaking across the sky just after 10 o';clock.
Several callers claim the light in the sky was very bright, and it was described by some as a blinding flash. Others said it was trailing smoke.
One man, Mike, says he saw the object crash with an exploding noise in the Ponsonby area, and reckons it could have started the fire.
To summarize, a meteorite was seen, and may have even crashed in this area. That is all.
Do insurance companies cover stuff like this?
Depends entirely on the meteorite's composition, actually. For example, if you've got a nice nickel-iron ratio, you're probably good, but you're screwed if the thing had a high iron content. Insurance companies are usually very finicky about their falling extraterrestrial object damage coverage.
Workers compensation officer: How exactly did you get hurt?
Man: God smote me down
Boss: Don't mind Bob he's still a little shellshocked. He was struck by a meteorite. Or is that meteor. Was it a meteorite once it hit the roof or was it only a meteorite once it hit Bob?
Workers compensation officer: Well then if he can't even tell what hit him, we can't pay him can we?
Man: God smote me down, I tell you!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
I'm not dead!
'Ere. He says he's not dead.
Yes he is.
He isn't.
I'm not!
He will be soon. He's very ill.
I'm getting better!
You're not. You'll be stone dead in a few minutes.
Have gnu, will travel.
Casualty does NOT refer to deaths. It refers to the number of military members removed from duty due to wounds. This includes fatalities AND injuries.
[citation needed]
What? Do you think this site is part the Wikimeteor Foundation?
Be relentless!
Thank god for the recession, there might have been more people in that warehouse!
now that's some damn eloquent shit right there. give this man his Pulitzer.
Honestly, I'd wait for the New Zealand Fire Service report before taking this seriously. All that the article says is that a warehouse caught fire in Auckland (not too unusual), and that people in Auckland saw a meteor and reckoned it "landed" somewhere near there. One person thinks he heard it crash with an exploding noise.
In short, some spectators are claiming a meteorite was involved in the fire, and the media's jumped on it because it makes the story more interesting. The NZ Herald seems to be the only news agency in New Zealand which I can find that's spinning the meteorite idea (actually the NZ Herald and Slashdot now that I've checked Google News). My guess is that it's just a coincidence that the fire started at roughly the same time.
People frequently see meteors in the sky and assume they can tell where the landed, even though most don't even land. People are nearly always wrong, and get confused by the perspective and brightness and distance which makes it look as if bright meteors are much closer than they are, and are heading much more steeply into the ground than they are.
Until the Fire Service comes out and states outright that it was a meteorite, and perhaps finds fragments, I'm not going to give the claim much credit. For a warehous fire in Auckland, it's more likely arson or an electrical fault.
I was on top of Mt Eden watching the fireworks display. Shortly after it ended was chatting with my friend when the meteor shot overhead - it was larger than anything I've ever seen in my life, the sky flashed as if a band of magnesium had been lit and the trail that it left behind remained illuminated for several minutes. We were goofing off when my friend spotted the blaze to the north, the same direction that the meteor had been going in. It was seriously the biggest fire in a city that I've ever witnessed and it was crazy seeing all of the fire engines racing out to it. We jumped in the car and headed over there. Just had to follow the huge plume of smoke, even in the dark. It was pretty much burnt out by the time we got there, although they were still dousing it with water and smoke/steam continued to pour out. While it seems unlikely it was the meteor, it was INSANE to see that big a fire, just minutes after that incredible meteor. Now I'm just waiting for the next volcano to spawn here. It's gonna happen sooner or later... (This city is SO much better than Toronto). ;)
I'm in Auckland, saw the meteor (which was awesome, BTW), and there's no way it hit anything or caused the fire. It was going totally in the wrong direction and it burned up well before the ground. In fact, it was probably so high that its trajectory would have taken it well out to sea.
This is just a classic case of people finding spurious links between unrelated events.
...they're often frozen on the surface when found right after the fall! It's a common myth that meteorites blazing hot. In reality, the molten surface of a meteorite has plenty of time to cool during the fall through cold atmosphere, and the interior of the meteorite remains very cold.
On behalf of all New Zealanders living outside of Auckland, why couldn't the meteorite have been a little bigger?
A meteor hits a warehouse...setting it on fire. This is the classic hypothetical example used when teaching the law of bailment in first year property class to law students.
What kind of warehouse I wonder? Did they hold on to their own goods only - or those belonging to others?
Every law student learns in first year property that a bailee of goods for hire is absolutely liable for them, even if the proverbial meteor falls from the sky and destroys them. That's the common law - and the over the top example literally used in the texts to make the point, too. And this happened in New Zealand - a common law country.
Problem is, the warehouse, if it is holding goods belonging to others, probably isn't insured for this. The insurer will claim Act of God. (And if "Act of God" is to mean anything in an insurance contract, it probably means a meteor). The warehouse owner will say "these goods not destroyed by a meteor - they were destroyed by fire, and we're insured for that".
The insurer will say "hell no; we're not paying." And off to court this will go.
Were the goods destroyed by a fire - or by a meteor? Because either way, the bailee is on the hook.
The resulting litigation answering that question will go down in the history books - and be subsequently learned by every law student in the common law world in their second month of law school - for the next several centuries.
.Robert
Meteorites cool off way before hitting the ground. They cool off during what is known as "Dark Flight". No meteorite lands hot. Period. Now maybe it struck something which then exploded but I highly doubt this story.
Warning: To those looking to read the comments on this story below, don't bother. 75% of the comments below this line are about their use of the word "casualty" and whether it refers to "deaths" or "deaths and wounded". After a huge discussion on it, we finally get a couple comments, but then a new thread picks right on up and people start talking about it again!
:(
There are very few interesting comments on this story.