Apparently on date Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:24:25 +1300, Eric Stevens
>The story is muddled but the underlying theme is not very surprising.
The story is muddled as per typical journalism, but the facts behind it are
credible enough. Assuming for the moment that there really are finds as
described, they are quite consistent with a supernova going off as described.
One point about this. If they have found evidence of an impactor in the region,
fair enough, and it could have come from anywhere. The supernova seems also to
be established by these other means, and that may make it the most likely
suspect. However, finding a supernova does not in any sense imply there must
have been an impactor.