Impact controversies: Impact recognition criteria and related issues

A critical analysis of impact recognition criteria reveals that many proposed impact structures lack unambiguous evidence, such as planar deformation features (PDFs) or shatter cones, leading to widespread misinterpretations. The study emphasizes the importance of adhering to established criteria for shock metamorphism and cautions against accepting nonplanar fluid inclusion trails or irregular microstructures as diagnostic proof of impact events. It highlights the need for rigorous peer review and proper documentation to prevent erroneous reports from entering mainstream science, using cases like Maniitsoq (Greenland) and Vredefort Dome (South Africa) to illustrate the distinction between true and false impact evidence.

Reimold, W. U., Ferrière, L., Deutsch, A., & Koeberl, C. (2014). Impact controversies: Impact recognition criteria and related issues. Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 49(5), 723–731. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/maps.12284