A really interesting article if your into this kind of stuff. Talks about a blast that occurred a long time ago and that there is almost zero evidence of it. Scientists believe it could have been asteroids or anything. Apparently, there's a museum with photographs of parts of extra-terrestrial craft that was discovered in the area hit. Makes me want to go over there and try to find out lol. http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/07/04/tunguska.anniversary/index.html
Some of the best X-File episodes in my opinion.....that is actually where I started to learn about what really (well supposed/proposed at least) went on from research as I was intrigued by the episodes. Crazy stuff.
One of the interesting aspects is the contention that the object changed direction during the descent. If true that would suggest something other than a random object like a meteor or comet. Very interesting.
Many were puzzled by the apparent complete reversal of direction of celestial bodies until they discovered the retrograde phenomena which has its origins in physics. There are a lot phenenomena that we still dont understand like the theory of the Ion balls which are luminous balls of energy usually associated with lightning which display similar characteristics of UFOs such as sudden change of direction,supersonic speeds etc,hovering etc. Personally I think it was a comet or meteor that exploded in the atmosphere which is why there is no identifiable crater . There is no mention if they found any traces of Irridium which is rare on Earth but is common in comets and meteors. The meteor that resulted in the extinction of the dinosaurs left a layer of irridium particles throughout the world.
Isn't it also possible that an irregularly shaped object coming into contact with the atomosphere would become subject to aerodynamic forces that could "steer" it beyond what would appear to be a simple ballistic trajectory? A comet or meteor with an atmospheric explosion is the most plausable if not particulary "sexy" explanation.
Well the atmosphere does cause meteors to heat up so I suppose its possible that it could be the cause of a change of direction too if its an irregular shape .
The fascinating thing for me about Tunguska is the lack of physical evidence of what happened, other then the physical aspects, people saw the explosion, the trees bending or broken in a circular pattern for miles from a "impact" point that does not seem to exist based on physical evidence.
I've recently read a study that argued that there wasn't a comet or meteor but a gas explosion from within which would explain the lack of a crater and meteor fragments. Also, it would explain the destruction, the fireball and the loud bang. Interesting theory.
Its possible . In 1986, a tremendous explosion of CO2 from the lake Nyos, West of Cameroon, killed more than 1700 people and livestock up to 25 km away. The dissolved CO2 is seeping from springs beneath the lake and is trapped in deep water by the high hydrostatic pressure. If the CO2 saturation level is reached, bubbles appear and draw a rich mixture of gas and water up. An avalanche process is triggered which results in an explosive over-turn of the whole lake. Since 1990 a French team has carried out a series of tests in an attempt to release the gas slowly through vertical pipes http://pagesperso-orange.fr/mhalb/nyos/nyos.htm They think that trapped gas in the ocean bed could be responsible for some of the unexplained ship sinkings too.
If it was a meteor the smoking gun would be traces of Irridium and I havent read if they found any in the area.
I read a study that suggested the core of the comet/meteor may have dug itself a trench at a different location. The problem with the gas theory is that the damage went for miles in all directions and the damage went radially outward from the center in a specific pattern, if it were gas, it would have seeped outward before exploding and actually shredded trees instead of pushing them over.
The reason the gas exploded was because it didnt seep out.Thats why they are bleeding the lake to relieve the pressure. The blast caused the felling of trees in a similar fashion as the radial pattern in Siberia. I still favor the meteor theory because of the magnitude of the explosion
As I recall CT, the Tunguska damage went for 500 miles or some incredibly large diameter, how much gas would it take to radially destroy that much forest? Even if such a gas bubble exploded directly over the small lake, the amount of gas needed would be massive to do that much damage, and as I recall, the witnesses saw the fire falling from the sky. Unless the bubble formed, went upward, reached mass and fell back down exploding near the ground? Actually the blast radius was 800 square miles, or two hundred miles in any direction, how much gas would be needed to create that much destruction?
A lot. Unfortunately, I can't provide a link to this study as it's apparently only available in German but it sounds rather sensible and the scientist responsible for it is well-respected. Kundt's theory is that ten million tons of methane, hydrogen and helium flew through cracks in the taiga soil, expanded and shot in the atmosphere with supersonic speed, about 200 km high. There the gas pressed the air mass to the outsides, merged with oxygen and ignited. This theory would explain why witnesses spoke of "14 roars of guns". As for the magnitude of the whole thing, Kundt states that a similar scenario happened in the Black Ridge near Norway. Don't know about that one though.
the "explosion" was a bunch of gas being released.. the people did not die from any "explosion" they died of asphyxiation.
I stand corrected .The vegetation was left standing.I was working from memory and that is frail and faulty There goes that theory but still it could be other gases such the one Vendigo suggests
The problem with that theory is such a mass of gas would create dead zone in th region, nothing could live in even the preevent region as the gas would seep in larger amounts until such a cloud formed all at once, the ground is not impermeable, the trees were all living, as was the moss etc.
Would it? I'm by no means an experts when it comes to chemistry, but I have never read that before. Got a link or something?
