Curious to hear why you find the air cushion theory preposterous. Get something flat moving fast enough, and it does have a tendency to fly. And how does a look at the environment make clear alternative explanations? (Also let’s remember that plate tectonics — “continental drift” — appeared preposterous for many decades before enough evidence accumulated to confirm it as a working paradigm.)

FWIW, I believe the main work done on the slide is by Ron Shreve, who advocates the air cushion hypothesis, and by others who advocate a theory involving high frequency sound fluidizing fine particles at the base of the slide. From what I can tell with a quick look around the Web and in my only book on the subject, most of the theoretical work was done quite a while ago. (Shreve’s was in the ’60s.) I’m also not sure anybody who has studied the slide is a “high priest.” They’re just geologists trying to make sense of a mountain face that slid in a remarkably coherent form almost five miles across a nearly flat surface.

Bonus links: http://indianapublicmedia.org/amomentofscience/landslides/ http://bit.ly/VG3upV http://bit.ly/UvZbtY http://bit.ly/VG3JBm http://bit.ly/VG3VR8

One only need look at the surrounding environment to see it couldn’t have happened in just that spot in just that way.

Great post. Geology rocks. Ahem.