Crater From 1908 Tunguska Blast Found

MaineCoasts writes "A team of scientists from the Marine Science Institute in Bologna claims to have found the crater left by the aerial blast of a comet or asteroid in 1908 in the Tunguska region of Siberia. The blast flattened 770 square miles (2,000 square kilometers) of forest, but to date no remains or crater have been found. This has left open the question of what kind of object made the impact. The team believes that, contrary to previous studies, nearby Lake Cheko is only one century old and 'If the body was an asteroid, a surviving fragment may be buried beneath the lake. If it was a comet, its chemical signature should be found in the deepest layers of sediments.' The team's findings are based on a 1999 expedition to Tunguska and appeared in the August issue of the journal Terra Nova."

Comments

X-files revisited

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they find any black oil?

Re:X-files revisited

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Screw that! It's the Chimera we should be worried about!

Re:X-files revisited

[Forge]

What's all this talk of an asteroid?

The Tunguska region is one of the largest uninhabited land areas on earth. One of the few places were an explosion could level 2000 square kilometres of forest while killing no people and very few advanced animals.

In other words the perfect place for a being with thought processes similar to ours to drop a dysfunctional engine core (or something similar) before it explodes.

Now what became of that pilot, his ship and possibly his crew? Chances are they made a safe landing in another remote area and were latter picked up by the alien equivalent of "American Automobile Association". The towing charge from within our atmosphere to the nearest repair shop might have ruined their whole day though :).

That scenario would explain the complete lack of debris. Depending on it's construction the jettisoned portion of the engine would all be vaporised in a massive "nuclear like" explosion.

Re:X-files revisited

[Torvaun]

It did kill some nomadic tribes.

A better place for dropping a near-detonation engine core would be the moon, which is even more uninhabited.

It is, however, a moot point, because the Tunguska explosion was caused by Tesla, and he was aiming at the north pole, but overshot a bit.

Re:X-files revisited

[Forge]

The moon wasn't an option since the ship couldn't even break orbit.

There were people there? I never read that before. Darned. Now that towing charge doesn't bother me so much anymore. I mean it doesn't bother our hypothetical pilot anymore. sorry.

I'm just a little shaken by the loss of life. And to think we... I mean that pilot caused it.

How many people died? how big a village? Were there any survivors?

Re:X-files revisited

[razorjack]

This clearly explains the state of world affairs. Anyone notice the black cloud over Bush, Sarkosy, Mussharaff and the other's scleras?

Re:X-files revisited

[Anonymous Coward]

Brings new meaning to the word "Vaporware"!

The expidition members

[ByOhTek]

We must verify they are not swarm, less they bring a hive ship and eat us all.

If five limbed grey monsters with swappable appendages start attacking... I'll be hiding in my basement.

Re:The expidition members

[ByOhTek]

Somemoddy needs to expand their book horizon.

Area51 series by Robert Doherty, trite and overdone subject, yes. However, done extremely well. And you would get how this is (while bad humor, and possibly worth an 'overrated', not 'offtopic'.

Oh, and read the damn series. They are good books.

Re:The expidition members

[Shakrai]

And you would get how this is (while bad humor, and possibly worth an 'overrated', not 'offtopic'.

He probably got the offtopic mod because he said "I'll be hiding in my basement" instead of "I for one welcome our five limbed overlords" ;)

It is /. after all....

Re:The expidition members

[ByOhTek]

but they aren't our overlords, the Arlia are.

I for one welcome our immortal, tall, sun-allergic overlords!

Re:The expidition members

[gardyloo]

We must verify they are not swarm, less they bring a hive ship and eat us all.

If five limbed grey monsters with swappable appendages start attacking... I'll be hiding in my basement. OMG! Ponies!!!

Re:The expidition members

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a fine line between being a nerd and dying a virgin. Luckily, you can't see it over your cheetos encrused belly.

Crater

[bzudo]

Perhaps the crater found us.

Re:Crater

[tomatensaft]

Yes, in Soviet Russia craters find YOU!

I've always wondered

[Dunbal]

I remember reading about this as a kid, probably introduced to it by Carl Sagan in his "Cosmos" series.

At the time I wondered, after seeing all those flattened trees, how they failed to find the crater. Wouldn't it just be a case of going to several spots, drawing a parallel line to the flattened trees, then looking on a map for the point where the lines intersect? Presumably all the trees fell "away" from the blast area.

Re:I've always wondered

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Canventional theory (and TFA) suggest that the explosion was an air-burst about 6 miles above the ground. So the "center" of the blast region is still pretty large.

Re:I've always wondered

[eldavojohn]

At the time I wondered, after seeing all those flattened trees, how they failed to find the crater. Wouldn't it just be a case of going to several spots, drawing a parallel line to the flattened trees, then looking on a map for the point where the lines intersect? Presumably all the trees fell "away" from the blast area. No, the explosion was above ground level, see our prior discussion on this.

Also, my post on this has a link to a PDF with a sketch of the breaking apart and trajectories.

Also, remember how long ago this happened. There was an expedition there but they didn't have the technology we did. I'm not sure if the tree patterns would help you 100 years later.

Re:I've always wondered

[FredDC]

In theory yes, but you have to know that this is a very remote and large area. And they didn't have the technology we have available now.

Right now we'd simply take some pictures with a satelite, and fly some helicopters to the impact spot. Back then they would've had to mount an expedition on foot. And that was simply not feasible.

By the time it became possible to reach the impact site relatively easy, nature had already taken its course and finding the impact spot became impossible/very hard.

Re:I've always wondered

[AikonMGB]

From what I know of the event, and as is stated in the summary, it was an aerial blast; i.e. the asteroid/comet/alien-spaceship exploded before impact. The "crater" where the remains of the $object should be found would not be directly under that explosion, as the $object would have some unknown velocity at some unknown angle.

While the method you propose makes sense, all it really tells you is where the explosion occured, not where the remains can be found.

Aikon-

Re:I've always wondered

[larpon]

This picture was taken over the crater in Siberia with an onboard polaroid during the
Apollo 11 mission...

   \ | /
  -  O  -
   / | \

It reminds me of something...

Re:I've always wondered

[fast turtle]

What do you mean? The expedition was less then a Decade ago IE 1999 not 1899.

Re:I've always wondered

[FredDC]

According to me 1908 is alot closer to 1899 then it is to 1999!

Re:I've always wondered

[FredDC]

And if you meant that the recent expedition could've just followed the path I would have to disappoint you... In about 100 years nature restores itself pretty well!

Re:I've always wondered

[fataugie]

How would an expedition 9 years BEFORE the blast tell you anything about it?

What kills me is that a 1999 expidition is just now being published? WTF have they been doing all these years? How slow are they typing? Did they get a monk to transcribe it for them?

Re:I've always wondered

[mikael]

The trees that were directly below the air explosion were still upright. The trees at some distance were flattened. A large explosion all around Europe was heard on that night, along with a glow in the sky. But it took several months for the expedition to find out what had caused the explosion/light. By that time, the crater would have filled with water and appeared to be a lake to the expedition team.

If it had been a loosely packed asteroid or a comet, it would have disintegrated into lots of small chunks and vaporised before reaching the ground.

The eyewitness reports are interesting:

"Kezhemskoe village. On the 17th an unusual atmospheric event was observed. At 7:43 the noise akin to a strong wind was heard. Immediately afterwards a horrific thump sounded, followed by an earthquake which literally shook the buildings, as if they were hit by a large log or a heavy rock. The first thump was followed by a second, and then a third.

We have friends who own a house next to quarry. Whenever there is a major explosion there always seems to two explosions heard; the first seems to be the shockwave travelling through the ground (a large dull sound thump) while the second is the shockwave through the air which sounds like a shotgun being fired. Then there is the all clear. So maybe the lake is the crater.

Re:I've always wondered

[PixelScuba]

it was an aerial blast; i.e. the asteroid/comet/alien-spaceship exploded before impact.

Well there you have it, Dennis Kucinich must have been there so all we need to do is ask him!

Re:I've always wondered

[iamlucky13]

Also, remember how long ago this happened. There was an expedition there but they didn't have the technology we did. I'm not sure if the tree patterns would help you 100 years later.

Yes. Something that is easy for us to forget is that they didn't have roads, or even much in the way of all terrain vehicles, much less helicopters or satellites when this occurred. Not to mention, it was largely ignored until after the revolution and WWI were both finished up with. The first aerial photographs taken of the site were taken 30 years later and still clearly showed the fall pattern, but no crater was visible.

It's easy to look at the pictures and think you can simply follow the trees all the way to the center. Way easier said than done. First of all, the site is pretty much in the middle of nowhere. There's just a few scattered villages, no doubt with abysmal roads between each and almost nothing traversable with wheels leading anywhere else. They would have walked or ridden pack animals for the entire survey.

It's also a huge area. 80 million trees were felled over 830 square miles. Hunters (I've done my share) and loggers are probably familiar with trying to walk through such an area. The trees may look all neatly arrayed in a photograph, as if you could step easily from one to the next or walk between them like a trail, but the truth is far different. Without the perspective benefit from being atop a hill, the fall pattern is more difficult to discern. The branches will lie tangled, blocking the path at frequent intervals. The trunks will be random distances apart, some managing to overlap nearby trunks. They often sit several feet above the ground, making it easy to fall and twist an ankle or knee, and exhausting to climb over again and again and again. Vegetation will have sprouted up in the 19 years between the fall and Kulik's arrival, leaving a tangled mess of shrubs and briers that sometimes appear deceptively solid from above and forboding from ground level. A mile per hour is a decent speed walking through such an area with several days worth of supplies on your back.

But Kulik actually did push through to the center, and he found several trees standing upright, stripped of their branches, consistent with an airburst from above. He also found a bog he was convinced was a crater, but when he drained it there were old tree stumps at the bottom. For an impact to have formed the bog the blast would have shattered the old trees and tossed the remains out of the muddy crater.

Re:I've always wondered

[davidsyes]

Since we have spaceships brought up, maybe Tunguska crater was the "free end" of a wormhole wagging its tail? Several "annular centers" might exist? Like crater face?

Re:I've always wondered

[pinguwin]

Oh, I went through the same area again last year, 8 years after the first time as well as another avalanche in Fiordlands about ten years old and yes, once the vegetation starts to regrow, it's just as much of a mess...just that you can't see more than ten feet.

Re:I've always wondered

[Anonymous Coward]

Jack Thompson?

Re:I've always wondered

[Anonymous Coward]

I witnessed a blow down event in northern MN. It produced the same pattern of fallen trees. These blow down events happen when the jet stream gets bent out of shape and dives strait to the ground. These events happen in the spring .I think they are caused by gasses that are produced by the boreal forests in the spring .This is pure speculation, I think that when the growing season starts in the boreal forests it produces large amounts of gasses that causes drag on the upper atmosphere and causes the jet stream to act like this. I think that if a blow down event happened during a large forest fire it would produce the same kind of damage as the Tunguska event and would produce the same effects that were described by the eye witnesses.
    Lazy Genes on vacation

Re:I've always wondered

[RockDoctor]

Also, remember how long ago this happened. There was an expedition there but they didn't have the technology we did. I'm not sure if the tree patterns would help you 100 years later.

The first expedition to the area of "ground zero" got there approximately 20 years after the event. They were guided by local memories and reports of the fireball (which they had to triangulate) ; they had reports form some local hunters that "there were flattened trees three valleys over thattaway ...", etc. And, of course, they had only the crudest of reconnaissance maps. So as part of their expedition, they had to make their own maps without even aerial oversight and photography. And this was in the brief taiga summer, so you can imagine what the mosquitoes were like.
Actually, since I've probably got several months more Siberian summer experience than you have, I doubt that you can imagine what the mosquitoes were like. I had the fun of surviving them with modern insect repellents, masks etc, while doing fieldwork and I don't want to think what they're like without the repellents and living in tents.
  This claimed discovery is at least 6 months old as news, may well be a full year. Nice to see Nat.Geo keeping up to date.

Re:I've always wondered

[ablebodiedman]

Speaking of Carl Sagan and his book Cosmos here is what he concluded about the Tunguska Cosmic Body (TCB): "The key point of the Tunguska Event is that there was a tremendous explosion, a great shock wave, an enormous forest fire, and yet no impact crater at the site". Someone in a post in this same thread mentioned conventional theory. Everyone seems to believe that because there is no crater or no immediate evidence of a body they assume that the TCB must have been destroyed in the enormous explosion. The question no one has asked is: Obvious question 1: What if the reason there is no crater might be becasue the TCB was not destroyed in the blast? Some people might now think that question is unconventional or unscientific and perhaps is the reason why no one asks it. Others may not and so lets continue with the next obvious (to some) question: Obvious question 2: If the TCB was not destroyed then might it still be in the vicinity of the earth? Which leads to the next obvious (to some) question. Obvious question 3: Does that mean that some people might have seen the TCB since the initial blast? and the next: Obvious question 4: If they saw the TCB would they know what they were looking at? Finally an answer from the Russian Newspaper Sibir in the town of Irkutsk printed the week of the blast: 'in the village of Nizhne-Karelinsk in the northwest high above the horizon, the peasants saw a body shining very brightly -(too bright for the naked eye) with a bluish white light. It moved vertically down-wards for about ten minutes. The body was in the form of a 'pipe' (i.e. cylindrical). The sky was cloudless, except that low down on the horizon in the direction in which this glowing body was observed; a small dark cloud was noticed. It was hot and dry and when the shining body approached the ground it seemed to be pulverized and in its place a huge cloud of black smoke was formed and a loud crash, not like thunder, but as if from the fall of large stones, or from gunfire, was heard. All the buildings shook and at the same time, a forked tongue of flame broke through the cloud. The old women wept, everyone thought that the end of the world was approaching." which leads to the next obvious question: Obvious question 5: Has anyone seen a cosmic body like this since 1908? Check out this web site and look at the last video number 5: http://www.hbccufo.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1345 Amazing eh! If you are the unconventional sort who is brave enough to find answers to those more obvious (to some) questions then perhaps you might read this: http://ablebodiedman.blogspot.com/ I think Carl Sagan was right when he said: "Somewhere something incredible is waiting to be known." http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/carlsagan101620.html Which leads to the next obious question: Obvious question 5: Am I unconventional or is everyone else? best regards ablebodiedman

I vote for a comet

[SpaceLifeForm]

With the lake being the melted ice of the comet.

Re:I vote for a comet

[MBGMorden]

Imagine how much extra the bottled water industry could charge for THAT.

"This water came from ice that sustained a comet 4.6 billion years. Don't you deserve the same? Buy Samethingastheothers Water. It's out of this world!"

Old news?

[ircmaxell]

Wasn't this on slashdot a few months ago? I remember this being discussed before...

Re:Old news?

[z0idberg]

You mean here? http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/26/1917259

Re:Old news?

[ircmaxell]

Yup... That's the one...

Re:Old news?

[grand_it]

Wasn't this on slashdot a few months ago? I remember this being discussed before...

Isn't this comment on slashdot a few times a month? I remember dupes being discussed before... ;)

Re:Old news?

[NeilTheStupidHead]

Yeah, I remember that myself, but after a quick look, the previous story seems to be preliminary results and this one is the 'official' results.

I'm a bit worried

[Rik Sweeney]

If scientists can't find a crater that's 2,000 square miles across then what chance do they have the day they lose their keys down the back of the sofa?

Re:I'm a bit worried

[MarkGriz]

"If scientists can't find a crater that's 2,000 square miles across then what chance do they have the day they lose their keys down the back of the sofa?"

Considering YOU think that square miles are a measure of distance rather than area, and that kilometers are equivalent to miles, I'd say they have a better chance than you do.

Re:I'm a bit worried

[laejoh]

Pfff, look how many people have trouble finding goatse.sx ...

Snore

[Mr. Underbridge]

Old, dupey, probably hokey news.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/26/1917259

This was discussed in June

[SecuritySimian]

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/26/1917259

more importantly

[circletimessquare]

the impact site is 3.26 km wide. this corresponds to a resonance chamber for the tau muon rays we are all familiar with, with a frequency of 23.44 kHz. please adjust your tin foil hats accordingly

Re:more importantly

[catmistake]

Most of Tesla's patents are still classified secret, so it really comes down to the integrety of these investigators. If Tesla caused the 1908 Explosion, the us government would not want that fact known and widely accepted. So is it likely the US Gov. is secretly funding a scientific team? What is needed is for Nova, or National Geographic or some respected news agency to take on Tesla's claim and not quickly dismiss it because it is too fantastic. Lack of a crater and no evidence of extra-terrestrial stuff are not the only facts supporting Tesla's claim, but includes what I've never seen any documentary explain, the glowing nights after the Explosion... which Tesla predicted.

Re:more importantly

[shawnce]

...but includes what I've never seen any documentary explain, the glowing nights after the Explosion... which Tesla predicted.

...which can also happen as a result of material in the atmosphere which can easily be explained by an air burst of a comet, etc.

Re:more importantly

[catmistake]

A comet airbust causes magnetic fluctuations in the upper atmosphere leading to glowing night skies for a week after the event? Are there eye-witness acounts of this occurring prior to the 1908 Explosion? I know there's many accounts in history of impacts and crud hitting the atmosphere, and I've read a few, but I've never heard of this phenomenon being reported either prior or subsequent to that week after the Explosion. Any that can link to this apparently well known phenomenon... plz do.

Re:more importantly

[simcop2387]

HE'S FEEDING US FALSE INFORMATION!
he's trying to get us to retune our hats to let in the REAL frequency!

the speed of light / (3.26 kilometers) = 91.9608767 kilohertz

Re:more importantly

[hador_nyc]

Why does the glowing night sky have to be caused by "magnetic fluctuations in the upper atmosphere"? That is a very loose description of the Aurora Borealis. Why couldn't the glowing skies be caused by something much more mundane, repeatable, and something witnessed in modern times; say dust. An areal explosion would put tons of dust in the upper atmosphere which would catch the sun long after the ground was plunged into night. That alone could cause the effect, and is triggered by large volcanic eruptions, areal explosions, etc. A explosion like that, in a heavily wooded area as that was, would cause enormous fires, which would also cause glowing night skies; as shown as recently as the California fires a few weeks ago. Anyone around that survived the great firestorms created by WWII bombing raids would be able to attest to that. The fact that you called it magnetic fluctuations alone proves that you don't even understand what they are. Harsh, yes, but honestly, you can't magnetize air. You can ionize it, but the effects of ionization in the atmosphere are short-lived outside of an external stimulus; ie the fluctuating solar wind causing the ever changing Aurora Borealis being a correct and real example of what you are talking about.

Even then, "apparently well known phenomenon," come on man. Are you serious? Yes, we light reflecting off of soot or dust is a well documented, but unfortunately mundane, effect.

Well, thanks for giving me the chance to rant, which I seriously hope was in response to a bit of trolling on your part. I'm having a rough day, and this was a great release.

Airburst

[wiredog]

An airburst wouldn't leave a crater. Drawing lines would lead to the hypocenter, directly under the burst.

Re:Airburst

[Joaz Banbeck]

An airburst should leave multiple craters. After all, the pieces have to go someplace. Whether or not we can find those smaller craters after a century is another issue...

Re:Airburst

[JasterBobaMereel]

Old news ... and wrong

Lake Cheko is in the wrong place (8km from the epicentre), the wrong shape (not an impact crater), and at least 5000 years old (by the layers of mud accumulated on the lake bed, and an air-burst 3-6 miles up would not leave an impact crater ....?

Re:Airburst

[ChrisA90278]

It might have been multiple air bursts if the comet broke up first. Then you would have a fairly complex pattern. Likely not as simple as the ideal case there a point source blast all goes off at once. The chunk of ice was moving fast and exploded over a period of time. So the blast came from not a point but a few short line segments

Re:Airburst

[Khyber]

And just like a grenade exploding in the air above the ground, comet fragments would be driven into the ground below for pickup and discovery. Drawing lines would work out reasonably well, as the center of the blast location would be ideal for finding trace remnants of the comet.

Re:Airburst

[Amouth]

not always.. rememeber that while Metor Crator in the US - it is belived that the metor completely vaporized before impact and that the impact was the force ofthe gass hitting - so if it was at the right angle and the above ground explosion vaporized the material. the whole landscape wouldahve been the crator - whichthe trees would have obsorbed.. meaning no visable crator..

Re:Airburst

[ScrappyLaptop]

Regarding Meteor Crater, I recall seeing good sized chunks of mostly Iron-Nickel displayed in the MC museum that had been recovered from the bottom center of the crater. Not gas samples; mostly-iron-nickel rock. However, your point is well taken: Consider the debris field from the shuttle explosion; now bring it a bit closer to the ground. You are still talking about a massive debris field and as you pointed out, an impact footprint so large and dissipated that perhaps the downed trees *are* the crater...

Re:Airburst

[SETIGuy]

An airburst should leave multiple craters. After all, the pieces have to go someplace. Whether or not we can find those smaller craters after a century is another issue...

It did go somewhere. You're breathing it now.

I think you may have a misconception as to why an airburst occurs. A meteor (or comet) enters the atmosphere and is decelerated by interacting with the air. To first order the rate of deceleration (and therefore the stress on the meteor) is related to the ratio of the surface area of the object to its mass. If the deceleration stress exceeds the tensile strength of the material it will fragment. If you break an object into multiple pieces, you've increased the surface area but left the total mass the same. The net effect that fragmenting increases the stress and results in more fragmentation and more rapid deceleration. Once fragmentation starts it doesn't like to stop. It progresses very rapidly and all of the kinetic energy gets turned into heat in a few microseconds.

Another way of thinking about it is that it would be hard to get solid pieces surviving after a 15 megaton airburst. Pick your favorite 60 meter diameter piece of rock. Put a 15 Mton H-bomb on it and set if off. Tell me home much of your rock is left.

Re:Airburst

[Cadallin]

Depends on what the rock is made of. During research for project Orion, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion), They found that you could coat a specially designed metal plate in graphite based lubricant and it would survive repeated nuclear blasts with occasional reapplication of the lubricant. Also noted in the linked article was that during the Castle Bravo Nuclear test graphite coated steel spheres were placed at a nuclear test site and recovered afterwards intact, so it is certainly possible.

However, I acknowledge that in general, you are correct. Random chunk of silicate rock: not going to survive a nuclear blast. However, objects certainly can. Further evidenced by the existence of meteorite fragments that survive to be found on Earth's surface.

it wasn't

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean it wasn't a Tesla Death Ray? Someone tell Spider so he can stop writing such slander about Nikky.

Re:nova

[Anonymous Coward]

You just had to do that... OK, I just fired up Heather Nova's Walk This World and queued up Verona.

Phooey!

[Dan East]

A team of scientists from the Marine Science Institute in Bologna claims to have found the crater left by the aerial blast of a comet or asteroid in 1908 in the Tunguska region of Siberia.

This is nothing but a bunch of bologna.

Dan East

Re:Phooey!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your comment would have been funnier if you didn't insist on signing it. We can all see your name where it says "by Dan East (318230)". Oh, and an exclamation point after "bologna" would have helped too.

Tesla connection?

[sobolwolf]

I watched a google movie about Nikola Tesla the other night and there was speculation that the blast may have had something to do with the "death ray" that he was fooling around with at the time.

Tesla built his "death ray" at Wardencliffe on Long Island, and it is a possible that he tested it one night in 1908. The story goes something like this. At the time, Robert Peary was trekking to the North Pole and Tesla asked him to look out for unusual activity. On the evening of 30 June 1908, Tesla aimed his death ray towards the Arctic and turned it on. Tesla then watched the newspapers and sent telegrams to Peary, but heard about nothing unusual in the Arctic.

However, he did hear about the unexplainable event in Tunguska, and was thankful no one was killed, as it was clear to him that his death ray had overshot. He then dismantled his machine, as he felt it was too dangerous to keep it. Mad Scientists FTW!!!!!

Re: Tesla connection?

[Black Parrot]

I watched a google movie about Nikola Tesla the other night and there was speculation that the blast may have had something to do with the "death ray" that he was fooling around with at the time. And of course, everything you hear about Tesla is true.

Tesla built his "death ray" at Wardencliffe on Long Island, and it is a possible that he tested it one night in 1908. Who can argue with unsourced speculation like that?

Re:Tesla connection?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the 70's some physicists hypothesized that the Tunguska event might have been caused by a micro black hole passing through the earth.

Re:Tesla connection?

[kamapuaa]

Awesome, very informative post. While we're at it, I heard that the cold summer of 1816 was caused by Benjamin Franklin's nature-tampering experiments with electricity.

Re: Tesla connection?

[drgould]

Who can argue with unsourced speculation like that?

Where's "+1 Sarcasm" when you need it?

Re:Tesla connection?

[StarfishOne]

With all respect for Franklin, but if there's one man who could have really done it, it is Tesla. http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_colspr.html

Re:Tesla connection?

[Fraser]

Thomas Pynchon knows more than he's telling.

F

Re:Tesla connection?

[lahvak]

However, he did hear about the unexplainable event in Tunguska, and was thankful no one was killed, as it was clear to him that his death ray had overshot. He then dismantled his machine, as he felt it was too dangerous to keep it.

It didn't overshoot. Superman happened to be flying by, and he saw that the ray would cause the Arctic ice to melt, thus causing massive flooding, so with one mighty punch, he deflected it to Siberia, where it did relatively minor damage.

Re:Tesla connection?

[Orphaze]

You watched a movie about bologna.

Re:Tesla connection?

[sobolwolf]

STFU poindexters, did you not read the part: "there was speculation". Sheesh I was only trying to post something interesting... try this google link for some other sources.

http://www.google.com/search?q=tesla+Tunguska

Re:Tesla connection?

[davidsyes]

That explosion was a rift in the fabric of the space-time continuum, caused by that one Ken Starling-- a Santa Cruz's beach boardwaklin', pot-smoking, industrialist, con, investor, and wannabe space traveler, trying to shoot down these threads, but he set to the wrong era and instead shot down a temporally displaced crater that intersected the Earth and another Earth.

He was also trying to ensure the installation of that being in the ovulum orifice in DC, that Vidiian, wraped in Kazon skin, cocooned by Talosian reconstructive techniques, and brought here by Gary Seven by mistake, which escaped and avoided the draft to Vietnam and ... well, you get it...

I don't want to get into quantum navigation and such...

Re:Tesla connection?

[davidsyes]

Anyone remember the jingle: "BALL Park FRANKS... They PLUMP when you cook'em.. BOOM-BOOM-BOOM"?

I guess if Franklin dicked around with a Tesla coil (were he around to do so) his franks would have plumped and boomed like shot heard round the whirled. He'd need an alchemist to cures that woe and ail..

Re:Tesla connection?

[dbIII]

That has a few problems - not least the honesty of Robert Peary and where he actually went.

Googlink

[PhilHibbs]

Google map of the point that the National Geographic map link goes to

Re:Googlink

[PhilHibbs]

Whereas this is where the BBC reported it was back in June.

Re:Googlink

[Anonymous Coward]

National "Geographic"? Not only do they serve 6 months old stuff as news, they don't even get their geography right.

National Geographic's coords point to the village of Podkammenaya-Tunguska, completely unrelated except that it lies at the river of the same name, near to which the impact occurred. Note that the river is 1865 km long, and the given coordinates are 630 km away from Lake Cheko. The BBC coords do point to Lake Cheko.

Re:Googlink

[PhilHibbs]

Actually, those coords aren't from the beeb, I got them by looking up "Lake Cheko" on Wikipedia.

Re:Googlink

[Lars T.]

I know people love to see patterns where there are none - so does anybody else see the larger circle with the lake in the north-eastern segment?

Re:Googlink

[nanjundi]

Well, This is the right location. [googlemaps]

Re:Googlink

[Oizoken]

and a google map link to the actual place of the crater

Re:Googlink

[ladoga]

I know people love to see patterns where there are none - so does anybody else see the larger circle with the lake in the north-eastern segment?

Like this? Or maybe these circular patterns in the forest?

I guess the patterns that you noticed were something entirely different. Looking hard enough we begin seeing things. :)

Re:Googlink

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a correct place.

Re:Googlink

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, this is the link that shows lake Cheko, the one that has the river entering and exiting in an odd position.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=kimchu&sll=60.152442,95.449219&sspn=0.742253,2.570801&ie=UTF8&ll=60.960194,101.892185&spn=0.045247,0.160675&t=h&z=13&om=1

Re:nova

[Molochi]

And now I'm listening to LVX Nova, because you said that.

Obligatory from Egon to scientists

[coolhaus]

"We'd like to get a sample of your brain tissue."

The lake already existed

[Joaz Banbeck]

From a 1960 interview with a witness, he refers to the existence of lake Cheko prior to the event:

In that place the seven rich Dzhenkoul brothers in those days pastured a reindeer herd of 600-700 head. The brothers were rich. On that day, [my] father went to meet the reindeer on the Ilimpo [river] (in the north). The herd was pastured between the Kimchu river and the Polnoty (Churgim) river. On the upper reaches of the Polnoty river there was a storehouse. There was a second storehouse at the mouth of the Cheko... More at: http://www.vurdalak.com/tunguska/witness/dzhenkoul_l.htm

Re:The lake already existed

[Anonymous Coward]

Where in that does it mention Lake Cheko? Maybe I'm just missing something...

Re:The lake already existed

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to clarify my above statement: I see the sentence that says "the mouth of the Cheko". "mouth", to me, indicates a river, not a lake.

Re:The lake already existed

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, you are. Lakes sometimes have 'mouths', ie: the point where a stream enters the lake.

Re:The lake already existed

[EnderGT]

Something to remember about that "witness account":

L. V. Dzhenkoul was born in 1904, so his personal memories of the 1908 Tunguska Event are minimal. Here he is recounting what he was told by his father V[asilii?] I[l'ich] Dzhenkoul and uncle I[van] I[l'ich] Dzhenkoul (both long dead by the time of Kolobkova's 1960 interview.

It seems highly likely to me that this individual is using "the mouth of the Cheko" as a landmark that is known to him, and is not necessarily indicating that this feature was present prior to the incident.

Re:The lake already existed

[Blakey Rat]

Two points here:

1) If he's using the lake's location as a reference point, he could very well say something occured "near Lake Chako" in 1960, even if that lake didn't exist in 1908. For instance, I can say that gold mining occurred in the late 19th century near Mill Creek in Washington State, that doesn't imply that the city of Mill Creek existed in the 19th century.

2) Even if the lake did exist, it's not entirely unrealistic to think that the remains of the comet/meteor/whatever could be in the lake, is it? I mean, it's just as likely to hit a lake in the "blast zone" as it is dry land. So even if the lake existed before 1908, I don't see how it would invalidate the results of these researchers.

Oblig Ghostbusters

[Osurak]

Dr Ray Stantz: Are you okay?
Louis: Who are you guys?
Dr Ray Stantz: We're the Ghostbusters.
Louis: Who does your taxes?
Dr Ray Stantz: You know, Mr. Tully, you are a most fortunate individual.
Louis: I know!
Dr Ray Stantz: You have been a participant in the biggest interdimensional cross rip since the Tunguska blast of 1909!
Louis: Felt great.
Dr. Egon Spengler: We'd like to get a sample of your brain tissue.
Louis: Okay.

Uni. Bologna homepage on Tunguska

[Paul Jakma]

Uni of Bologna have a site on Tunguska, including a whole section on this new, possible crater - with pictures.

Re:Uni. Bologna homepage on Tunguska

[kc8jhs]

Google maps view of the area equivalent to this map from the Univeristy site.

Re:Uni. Bologna homepage on Tunguska

[pintpusher]

Thanks for the links, but the horrible multi-color flashing NEW from sometime in the mid '90s just kills the credibility for me. It also makes me want to gouge my eyes out, but that's a different type of crater.

Re:Uni. Bologna homepage on Tunguska

[brjndr]

How much can you trust info from the University of Bologna?

wait...

[circletimessquare]

are you trolling us?

if you are, that's a fantastic bait hook right there, congratulations on crafting that lure

if you are not trolling us, and you are actually and earnestly interested in tesla causing tunguska, then congratulations to me

for reeling in with my conspiracy theorist joke a genuine paranoid schizophrenic

But don't worry about my incredulous attitude friend, I'M AN AGENT OF THE ILLUMINATI

i was sent here to distract you with silly jokes, to interfere with your concentration in the important search for the real truth. and now i am casting aspersions on your good name in desperation, so you do not let more of the truth out

we are watching you

below is the secret scrambled communique on subject "catmistake" for other illuminati agents on slashdot. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DECRYPT WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION OR YOU MAY SUFFER IRREVERSIBLE BRAIN DAMAGE:

dscnd f sxiro 9vnfiol wn ofdsn aj opitrni tgprepe wnf nbwuioqn n

Re:wait...

[catmistake]

No, not a troll but an ask.
The Tesla explanation is always quickly dismissed. My point is that quick dismissal never quashes underdog theories. What is needed is a thoroughly complete study of why it couldn't have been Tesla. I realize its sometimes impossible to disprove anything, but, afaik no one has even tried. "Its ridiculous, that's why," is not a scientific explaination. Many many many sane individuals, either for lack of specific scientific knowledge or real evidence to the contrary, think maybe its possible... so if its not, those that know should stop being so evasive and dismissive, come down from their self-proclaimed iamsmarterthaneveryone towers and just break it down once and for all from all possible angles.

And, yes, you are funny. plz keep it up!

Re:wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

> What is needed is a thoroughly complete study of why it couldn't have been Tesla.

Blahblahblah burden of proof blahblahblah.

Re:wait...

[catmistake]

As compelling as your argument is, I already acknowledged that its near impossible to disprove something. I'm saying "do it anyway," because this isn't criminal court, and nothing is stopping you from doing so. The Tesla Theory has many facts offerred, and I've never seen any argument against it other that "it couldn't have been Tesla because it was something else with equally speculative science." Physicists, or whomever, should try directly contradicting Tesla's "claims." If successful, people like me won't inquire again, as it'll be settled that it was something else.

Re:wait...

[Dachannien]

dscnd f sxiro 9vnfiol wn ofdsn aj opitrni tgprepe wnf nbwuioqn n Thanks, dude, now I have a highly classified form of brain cancer! :P

Re:wait...

[davidsyes]

If Tesla's coil caused the problem, then Russia should sue for damages. And win. In the mean time, Russia should build a new coil, based on what IS known.

A good 350-year setback might do humanity some good, slow things down? Miniature Tesla bombs might make good at-sea weapons. But, trillions of fish will be disoriented (or, as some of the "misedumacated" military personnel prefer to say: "disorientated")...

Re:wait...

[grahamd0]

No, a quick dismissal is entirely appropriate.

Let's look at 9/11 as a great example of this. We all know what happened. We have evidence to piece together the events of that day down to the minute. We all saw those airplanes hit the buildings on TV. There was an exhaustive investigation conducted concluding in a detailed report. It only emboldened the tin-foil hat brigade.

Any evidence contradicting their insane, stupid beliefs will be written off by conspiracy folks as lies and illuminati propaganda. Debating them is an exercise in futility.

Re:wait...

[Chibi Merrow]

dscnd f sxiro 9vnfiol wn ofdsn aj opitrni tgprepe wnf nbwuioqn n

... Be sure to drink your ovaltine?

AHHH THE BRAIN

Re:wait...

[eyrieowl]

you're being just as glib as you accuse others of being. you admit the impossibility of disproving something, and then say "do it anyway"?? there's a cliched phrase that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. in science, the absence of proof is "disproof". bottom line: it's not true until there is proof that it is true. so, if you actually took a scientific viewpoint on this subject (which you seem somewhat disinclined to, though i can't be certain), you would realize that tesla and/or his believers have already done what you request. they have failed to furnish the proof (or the blueprint for the proof), and therefore have, in effect, disproved their own claims.

Re:wait...

[catmistake]

Its not impossible to disprove something! People throw this around like its fact and its hogwash. Its not possible to prove that something doesn't exist, unless it is fundamentally contradictory, but that's not at all the same as disproving a theory.

Re:wait...

[catmistake]

Debate? I'm looking for some scientific flaws, good reasons why it can't be true. All a quick dismissal says is "no, but I don't know why." Someone must know.

Re:wait...

[TapeCutter]

Science is not in the bussiness of proof, that is for mathematicians working within a set of rules based on particular axioms (assumptions).

A good crackpot theory is difficult/impossible to disprove therefore we use a tool known as Occam's razor. Yes, yes, another poster pointed this out and you claimed OR was "philosophy not science". I am sorry to have to break this to you but science IS a (very successfull)philosophy based on the faith that there exists a "real world" independent of the observer and that others percieve this "real world" in the same manner as the holder of said philosophy.

The explosion could have been a lot of things, mini-black hole evaporating, alien sapceship, massive EMP blast set off by Telsa, secret project that developed ICBM's 50yrs earlier than history records, the list is endless.

Occams razor says it was a large dirt ball travelling fast enough to act like a "fuel-air" bomb. This explaination might be "wrong" but if you belive in the philosophy of science and the utility of the scientific method you must agree with the simplest explaination that covers the observations until someone comes up with something better (eg: by performing observations such as those in TFA and finding Telsa hat at the blast site).

Nobody here can refute the theory and I expect few would try (I certainly didn't), this does not in anyway imply the Telsa theroy is any stronger than it was the day somebody dreamt it up, on the contrary it suggest that it is weaker.

If you are still confused about this and think we are a bunch of closed minded old fogies I suggest that you take a deeper look into the nature and practice of scientific skeptcisim. An exellent place to start is with Carl Sagan's excellent book on the subject.

Re:wait...

[catmistake]

hmmm... asumptions abound. I found that book a few times, and Sagan's others as well. I wanted to be a cosmologist when I was 12. But I studied philosophy as my major in university in the early 90's, and finished up with graduate course work specifically in philosophy of science. I know Occam's Razor well (prefer his arrow, however). You and other posters need a little more skepticism yourselves. Occam's says, all things being equal, the simplest explaination is probably correct. Get that straight. But to you specifically, since you are quite obviously not an ass at all, i.e. you seem mature, I recommend Thomas Kuhn and The Structure of Scientific Revolution. The only way Science can really progress is if the current paradigm, whenever current may be, is totally obliterated by someone that ignores the parrots of the established paradigm. Don't be a parrot (unless you teach).

Now... I've carelessly been throwing around words because this is /. , and I realize I don't need proof at all, just some reason's why Tesla's claims are, it is obviously well accepted, to be considered so absurd that its not worth discussing even a little bit intelligently. I'm not a physicist, but I have it on good authority that they sometimes hang out here... and where ever they are, it was really them I was hoping were going to come post. If Tesla's wrong, then if anyone knows why, they do.

Re:wait...

[TapeCutter]

You are obviously not an ass either. What you are asking and the way in which you are asking it is the act of a sane skeptic. It's a pity a real physicist didn't reply, I hope you find an acceptable answer. :)

Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[hot_wasabi]

There's an intersting Sci Fi novel that asks "What if the cataclysmic Tunguska explosion of 1908 was caused, not by a meteor or a comet, but by a microscopic black hole?": Singularity by Bill DeSmedt, 2004. Download the FREE unabridged audio book, read by the author.

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[Boronx]

Didn't David Brin's Earth use the same idea?

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[SatanicPuppy]

Sounds like Earth written by David Brin...in 1991. It was up for a Hugo, same year.

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[hot_wasabi]

Indeed! I'd say that Singularity is more of an action/mystery, whereas Brin's Earth is more speculative/philosophical SF.

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[hot_wasabi]

Apparently Brin is a fan of Singularity, per this back cover blurb: back cover of Singularity: "DeSmedt veers an action-packed thriller into perilous realms of black hole physics. The combination of adrenaline and intellect sizzles." -- David Brin, Hugo and Nebula award-winning author.

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[Bane1998]

I'm a layman about astrophysics, so excuse the question...

But how is a mini black hole any different than a large black hole? Isn't the definition of a black hole that of a singularity with inifinite mass at an infinitely small point? How can you have lesser or greater infinity?

Re:Comet, meteor, or ... microscopic black hole?

[hot_wasabi]

Thus sayeth Wikipedia...

Black holes can have any mass. Since gravity increases in inverse proportion to volume, any quantity of matter that is sufficiently compressed will become a black hole. However, when black holes form naturally, only a few mass ranges are realistic.

Black holes can be divided into several size categories:

Supermassive black holes that contain millions to billions of times the mass of the sun are believed to exist in the center of most galaxies, including our own Milky Way. They are thought to be responsible for active galactic nuclei. Intermediate-mass black holes, whose size is measured in thousands of solar masses, may exist.

Intermediate-mass black holes have been proposed as a possible power source for ultra-luminous X ray sources. Stellar-mass black holes have masses ranging from about 1.5-3.0 solar masses (the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit) to 15 solar masses. These black holes are created by the collapse of individual stars. Stars above about 20 solar masses may collapse to form black holes; the cores of lighter stars form neutron stars or white dwarf stars. In all cases some of the star's material is lost (blown away during the red giant stage for stars that turn into white dwarfs, or lost in a supernova explosion for stars that turn into neutron stars or black holes).

Micro black holes, which have masses at which the effects of quantum mechanics are expected to become very important. This is usually assumed to be near the Planck mass. Alternatively, the term micro black hole or mini black hole may refer to any black hole with mass much less than that of a star. Black holes of this type have been proposed to have formed during the Big Bang (primordial black holes), but no such holes have been detected as of 2007.

Again????

[codeButcher]

Boring. Wake me up when they find Elvis.

Re:Momentary confusion

[bytesex]

Does the monkeyboy throw around asteroids now ?

ObGhostbusters

[Anonymous Coward]

The Tunguska Blast was the biggest interdimensional crostip until the Gozer event of 1984.

In Soviet Russia ...

[Random BedHead Ed]

In Soviet Russia, asteroid finds you.

(Bracing for mod down ...)

Re:In Soviet Russia ...

[Cosmic AC]

In 1908, there was no Soviet Russia, and there isn't today.

Re:In Soviet Russia ...

[Anonymous Coward]

In pre-Soviet, autocratic Czarist Russia...asteroid goes unnoticed!

After all these years!

[ale_ryu]

They finally suspect that the suspicious lake laying right at the center of a suspiciously devastated area might be the crater left by a comet crash.
Nah, seriously speaking, it must have been pretty hard to figure it out after all these years. Tip of the hat to them!


ale

then it would be at the center of the earth now

[Anonymous Coward]

If a microscopic meteor struck the earth then it would be at the center of the earth now, slowly eating away at the center, then the mantle, then the oceans (like mars).

Nothing new, exaggerated story by Nat. Geo.

[InvisblePinkUnicorn]

Gasperini claims this is a new discovery, and yet in 2001 he was publishing papers indicating this belief. I think he's exaggerating when he says "we didn't have a clue that Lake Cheko might fill a crater" before finding this latest evidence.

Either that, or National Geographic is misrepresenting his Gasperini's quotes to make a story where there isn't one.

Re:Nothing new, exaggerated story by Nat. Geo.

[JasterBobaMereel]

The impact was in 1908 - First expedition to investigate was in 1927 - no crater found

The epicentre was marked by a group of trees still standing upright, their branches and bark stripped off, and all the trees around them blown over away from this point, what is now known to be the classic signs of an air-blast

The Lake was known about and recorded before the event, is much older than the event, and is not an impact crater!

Note this study was done by Marine Geologists who are obviously familiar with the lasting effects of air-blasts and terrestrial impact craters?

Re:Nothing new, exaggerated story by Nat. Geo.

[EnderGT]

The Lake was known about and recorded before the event, is much older than the event, and is not an impact crater!

References, please? Also, did you read the article? It addresses the aging study performed by the initial investigators that indicated that the lake was much older than the event...

Re:Nothing new, exaggerated story by Nat. Geo.

[JasterBobaMereel]

References

Vasilyev's "Testimony of Eyewitnesses to the Tunguska Impact" contains three separate accounts (by Kulik's Evenki guide Lyuchetkan, L. V. Dzhenkoul, and V. N. Dmitriev) indicating that Lake Cheko was a well-known landmark on the Strelka-Vanavara trail long before the Tunguska Event (http://olkhov.narod.ru/tungwitn1.htm)

Dr Gareth Collins, a Natural Environment Research Council (Nerc) research fellow at Imperial College London, UK has commented to the BBC that Lake Cheko is the wrong shape, size, depth, and displays none of the normal signs of it being an impact crater, and the a the Italian team have shown no evidence that it is an impact crater (they have however ruled out some other possibilities) also an impact would also have felled trees all around the crater, yet there appear to be trees older than 100 years still standing around Lake Cheko today.(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6239334.stm)

So its almost certainly not a crater, is in the wrong place, and no-one seems to be expecting a crater (from an air-burst)?

Re:Nothing new, exaggerated story by Nat. Geo.

[EnderGT]

From your second link:

Intriguingly, Lake Cheko does not appear on any maps before 1929, though the researchers admit the region was poorly charted before this time.

So its almost certainly not a crater,

You can't make that claim yet, as it is still under debate.

is in the wrong place,

Huh? Who says that, other than yourself? It does seem to be roughly in line with the supposed trajectory...

and no-one seems to be expecting a crater (from an air-burst)?

"No one" is obviously false, as at least one team of Italian researchers is expecting one.... although it is true that there is some doubt as to whether or not there would be any remnants from the object large enough to cause any crater at all.

As far as the other issues, such as the lack of a debris rim, trees still standing, the shape of the crater... In my mind these can be explained by a lower-speed object landing at an oblique angle into soft wet ground.

As to the lake preexisting.... what if the lake was there, but the object (or remnant) landed in the lake, substantially changing it's bottom profile, possibly shoreline, etc. This would satisfy both sides of the argument as to whether the lake preexisted the event.

For the record, I'm not convinced it IS a crater, but I'm also not convinced that it's not.

Re:Momentary confusion

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I checked he was still throwing chairs

Or antimatter, cosmic string, or other buzzword.

[argent]

The speculation that the Tunguska impact might have been a quantum black hole was rife during the brief period between Hawking's conception of the idea and his later demolition of it. Larry Niven used it as part of the background for his 1975 short story "The Borderlands of Sol", starring Beywulf Schaffer and a distant descendant of the physicist and SF writer Robert Forward.

David Brin's 1990 novel Earth is about an artificial super-dense object, a quantum string as massive and much longer lived than a black hole, that has been injected into the Earth to destroy it. The possibility that the injection point was Tunguska is brought up.

Antimatter has been another popular explanation for the Tunguska event.

Re:Momentary confusion

[Anonymous Coward]

Ballmer? I didn't even know her!

i can help you solve your problem

[circletimessquare]

occam's razor

problem solved

actually, occam's razor is useful when you talk about relative probabilities that are roughly the same scale... such as 99% versus 1% probability: the 99% probability explanation should be your answer. occam's razor at work

however, in your particular query, i'd say the probabilities approach quadrillions to 1

so perhaps when the probability of a fanciful creative scenario is considered, such as tesla causing tunguska, perhaps we should talk about "occam's sledgehammer"

occam's sledgehammer: when you are certain the scenario can be explained away simply out of how bizarrely exotic it is

occam's sledgehammer: the magnification of force experienced when using occam's razor against the broken thoughts of conspiracy theorists, crackpots, and paranoid schizophrenics

heh

occam's sledgehammer ;-)

i like it, i made up a funny yet catchy and useful term

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

In this case Occam's Razor is a cop out, philosophy, not science. You're not helping, but others will. I asked for anything other than a quick dismissal, but thanks for that quick dismissal. Please, will anyone else give it a try? I am just sure there is REAL scientific proof that it couldn't be Tesla, and I'd like to be introduced to it.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[MBGMorden]

Much as I DISAGREE with Tesla causing the explosion (the evidence supports the comet/asteroid impact much bette), I must agree on the Occam's Razor being a cop out, and would caution against using Occam's Razor (or whatever more potent version you describe) as if it's fact.

It's just a guideline, much like Moore's "Law". There's nothing specific about it, and it can indeed be wrong. For instance early astronomers look at the sun: clearly it's a big ass ball of fire, and upon study it's made mostly out of one of the most flammable gases known to man. Now, in that time before the age of the Earth was known, what was the simplest explanation? It would be that all that hydrogen is on fire and burning like crazy. Any theory about gravity crushing together atoms to form a different element and expending a portion of that matter as energy would have been dismissed as wildly imaginative, and unnecessary given such a simple explanation sitting right in front of them. But, as we naturally found out after we had more knowledge to look at the problem, the simple explanation here was not the right one.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

Thanks for agreeing about Occum with razor... Doesn't the comet threory have some serious flaws? Like lack of iridium, no radiation, and nothing to explain the subsequent increase in genetic mutation in the area (which, presumably, Tesla theory supporters would say it was from massive amounts of ELFs, like raising kids under power lines)?

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Occam's Razor is a way to determine which, among multiple competing theories, should be tested first. It is not intended to dismiss any scientific hypothesis as untrue. Its use as such is in error.

Another point that must be elucidated here is that scientific inquiry is not intended to explain why something CANNOT be true. In fact, it is tacitly impossible to do so. Instead, the scientific method is used to explain observed phenomena and explain their nature. Asking somebody to explain why Tesla's theory is impossible is like asking somebody to explain why the existence of God is impossible. It's an immaterial question.

Instead, try proving Tesla RIGHT. The only way to see if Tesla's experiment caused Tunguska is to re-do the experiment and measure the results. However, because competing theories for the Tunguska blast exist, Occam's Razor must be applied. The hypothesis that an airburst from an incoming asteroid or comet caused the blast is simpler, and therefore that hypothesis should be tested before considering the Tesla experiment hypothesis. And since almost all scientists who have studied Tunguska agree that an airburst has the most evidence, that hypothesis is still being considered before any other competing hypothesis.

Also, Tesla's claims are complete lunacy.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

Thus you illustrate the problem of paradigms. No one will believe something else until they are proven wrong (consider Newton vs Einstein). This isn't like proving God doesn't exist, that, indeed, is impossible. Its not possible to prove something doesn't exist (God, Sasquatch, aliens) but its merely not often easy, but things can be proven wrong. e.g. My hypothesis that the Sun is actually emitting cold waves. Very easily proven wrong without proving any other theory is right.

In this case, if Tesla didn't cause the explosion, this can be scientifically proven without proving what actually occurred. But I'm not asking for proof positive that he was wrong, just good argument against the claim that isn't dismissive nor involve alternative theories. For example, maybe we can show Tesla actually slept in the day of the explosion, so it couldn't have been him. Or maybe he was out of the state travelling that week, etc., but I'd prefer "Tesla was incorrect about a number of his theories, and here's why... he claims this, but we now know this and this, so we know he was incorrect about..." etc.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[Anonymous Coward]

The other guy said:
"My hypothesis that the Sun is actually emitting cold waves. Very easily proven wrong without proving any other theory is right."

Bad analogy. There is no such thing as "emitting cold waves". There is either heat or lack of heat.

However, let's use a different example. Let's say that there is a theory that the Earth is a flat disk. How does one go about disproving that theory? The only way to do so is by attempting to find evidence for a competing theory that would, by definition, eliminate the possibility that the flat-earth theory could be accurate. In this case, the evidence points to a competing theory that the earth is actually a spheroid shape. The earth cannot be both a flat disc and a spheroid. Therefore, the flat-earth theory is discarded.

Now, the essence of the scientific method is positive inquiry. That means that negative statements rarely have scientific value. Evidence must be collected to support a theory. The tesla theory would need evidence that cannot be explained by other, simpler explanations. So far, such evidence has not presented itself and therefore the tesla theory has no scientific merit. It's as simple as that.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

Mine was a better analogy, chosen because cold waves don't exist, thus making it painfully easy to disprove. Proving the Earth is a sphere is merely one way to disprove that its flat. Another way would be merely to show that, even in just a local sense, that it has curvature (watching ships disappear off the horizon doesn't prove the Earth is a sphere, just that it isn't flat). If Tesla is wrong, its very likely possible to prove this without proving something else is correct. Again, its only impossible to prove that something doesn't exist, but proving something wrong without alternative theories being proven right happens all the time. A better example is Edison and the light bulb... he disproved hundreds of ways to make a lightbulb before ever proving the correct way. Prior to his success, those other ways were still disproven.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Your analogy made no sense, because cold is never measured. There is no case in nature where cold is emanated, and therefore no scientific inquiry into "cold waves" can be made. It is a figment of imagination. Tesla's experiments can be scientifically studied - he wasn't that much of a loon - and his conclusions tested. The statement, "the sun emanates cold waves" already disproves itself because cold waves do not exist - they are not found in nature. It is not necessary to perform any inquiry into the claim.

However, your statements about the flat earth reveal your leaps in logic. You claim that one can disprove the flat earth theory by observing ships disappear over the horizon. Sorry, but that only disproves a flat earth if it is already known that the ships are traveling over a curved surface. If one did not have that knowledge, one could come to the conclusion that the ships had merely fallen over the edge of the earth. Come to think of it, many people did come to that conclusion!

Actually disPROVING the flat earth theory, or any theory, REQUIRES that a competing theory be tested and found to be accurate. Take, say, Eratosthanes and his experiments regarding shadows. I also suggest you read about the Duhem-Quine theorem for a philosophical standpoint on this matter.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[anothy]

occam's razor

problem solved

y'know, i actually liked that movie when it first came out, but in retrospect the damage it's done to an otherwise sound philosophical principle is unforgivable.

one more time, with emphasis: occam's razor neither proves nor solves anything! there. got it? please pass the message along.

the original form isn't even useful for comparing unrelated theories of an event, but rather for simplifying a single theory (eg, if i have a theory of why planets move in orbits involving the force of angel's wings, and the theory works just as well without the angels, eliminate the angels). the more modern (and less accurate) version of comparing unrelated theories based on their comparative complexity is a useful principle for comparing probabilities, but in no way helps you get any closer to proof. it points you at where an answer might be, but does not provide an answer itself.

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

Fine... speaking to the ship's captain beforehand, then watching the ship disappear over the horizon, then seeing it come back over to the horizon and back to port, and speaking again to the captain on what he and all his crew observed (no end of the flat earth), disproves the earth is flat without proving that is a sphere, but is at least curved. You are wrong. Theories are disproved sometimes without alternate theories to replace them. Next thick, tedious, uninformed criticism, please!

Re:i can help you solve your problem

[catmistake]

Dude knows what he's talking about. Listen to this dude.

tau muon rays do not travel at the speed of light

[circletimessquare]

where does your propaganda come from?

people can't even get the speed of tau muon rays right? they come straight from the golden orifice of ga-ur! who in their right mind would not possess this information? it should be memorized by schoolchildren

egads

WE HAVE BEEN INFILTRATED BY THE PULAXI, SPREADING THEIR USUAL LIES

trust no one and nothing

likely natural gas, not comet/asteroid/etc.

[Sara Chan]

The hypothesis that the blast was due to a comet/asteroid/etc. has been around for a long time. The problem with this hypothesis is that it does not fit at all well with the observations (e.g. the strange sounds and lights that preceded the blast for days; and so on). An alternative hypothesis was proposed by Wolfgang Kundt, a researcher at the Institut für Astrophysik der Universität Bonn:

Kundt W. (2001),
“The 1908 Tunguska catastrophe: An alternative explanation”,
Current Science, 81: 399–407.

Kundt's paper explains the various problems with the comet/asteroid hypothesis. It also proposes an alternative hypothesis: that Tunguska was a natural gas leak (from the ground), that went on for days, building up, until ignited by a lightning strike.

This explanation seems to fit the observations well. Perhaps the main reason it has not gotten much attention is that it is not very exotic.

Re:likely natural gas, not comet/asteroid/etc.

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, and it just happened to accumulated in the stoichiometric ratio that would be necessary to produce a forceful explosion, as opposed to a hot but relatively slow fireball which would likely cause widespread forest fires.

Kundt would also do his theory a lot more credence if he could find real evidence of a natural gas leak like that, like high sulfur content, current active leaks, etc. Remember, we're talking about a megaton-class explosion here: a million tons of TNT...it would probably take almost as much natural gas...a dozen LNG tankers worth mysteriously burped out into one area, all mixed perfectly, not dispersed by the wind, all waiting for a lightning strike.

All the witnesses said it was clear that day. So much for the lightning.

Better stick with Erik von Danniken's claim that it was an UFO that had a reactor explode.

Re:likely natural gas, not comet/asteroid/etc.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you, like, read the article? The natural gas rose up to its equilibrium level, then was blown by the wind, forming a wick. There was a lightning strike at the end of the wick, etc.

I do not know if Kundt's hypothesis is right, but I do know that your criticisms are wrong.

Re:likely natural gas, not comet/asteroid/etc.

[Loke the Dog]

Not very exotic? Have you heard of anything like this happening before? If anything, the reason it gets no attention is that something similar has never been recored before, while asteroid impacts are pretty common.

Re:nova

[gujo-odori]

OK, I'm going to take the OT mod risk, too.

The first time I ever heard of Aldo Nova was a long time ago when he was opening for UFO at the San Diego Sports Arena. Not only was he great, not only did he blow UFO away, but a number of people left after his act, having only shown up to see Aldo Nova and not caring at all about UFO.

"And Having Writ" was better

[spun]

It's a story about aliens who's drive malfunctions on final approach to earth. They have no choice but to use their last ditch 'uncertainty machine' which catapults them into a mirror universe where they don't crash at Tunguska. They try to pull the old 'increase he native's tech level so they can fix our spacecraft' routine, so they travel around the planet trying to jump start WWI, but things go hilariously awry. Great story.

Re:"And Having Writ" was better

[hot_wasabi]

I will definitely check this out. Many thanks!

You've got it all wrong

[Kazrath]

Unlike humans alien species have been getting shorter over the years. Back when this occured aliens were many times larger and so where their spaceships. If you factor in the ratio of modern day aliens and circles in corn fields and compair it to tree's and the "Comet blast" you will find that the ratio is almost identical.

More Great Holes...

[pipingguy]

"Looking at photos like these scares and fascinates me in equal doses".

Again?

[glwtta]

So, are they actually claiming this again, or do we just get to read about it again?

Besides, everyone knows Tesla did it, anyway.

That lake sure looks like a crater....

[socalnerd]

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/image07/070705lakecheko.jpg

Re:That lake sure looks like a crater....

[gspawn]

Where's the raised lip? The (sorry, forget the term) small central spike from the rebound? Doesn't look like a crater at all, unless I'm missing something.

Re:That lake sure looks like a crater....

[EnderGT]

Addressed in the article. To summarize, the portion of the projectile that landed had been slowed significantly, and landed in wet and/or soft ground. As such, no raised lip or central spire.

Re:That lake sure looks like a crater....

[EnderGT]

Forgot to include, the projectile impacted at an oblique angle, contributing to the lack of spire and raised lip.

Re:That lake sure looks like a crater....

[EnderGT]

Keep in mind that that is an artificial rendering with a lowered water surface, generated from 3D scans of the area.

... microscopic black hole...or Ponies!

[zippthorne]

What if it was caused, not by meteor or comet, nor by microscopic black hole, but by intergalactic plush bears who can shoot rainbow colored force beams out of their bellies?

The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[pln2bz]

William Hartmann, senior scientist of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona, said the new findings are compelling but do not address all of the lingering questions about the event.

This is certainly an understatement. That event is associated with numerous unusual characteristics ...

The extraordinary power of the high-energy explosion above ground.
Repeated testimony of strange sounds before the event.
The glowing of the sky before the event.
Reports of strange weather before the event.
Reports of strange seismic activity before the event.
Geomagnetic effects before the event.
Global atmospheric pressure pulse.
Instantaneous eruption of fire across hundreds of square kilometers.
Lightning and thunder in the midst of the firestorm.
Presence of microscopic glassy spherules over a large area.

Individually, each one is not unusual. But as a whole, the event is demonstrating that there is an interconnectedness between the various phenomena around us that we are not accustomed to observering normally, and that our knowledge of catastrophic events is limited to speculation at this point.

Here's an example of a single eyewitness testimony ...

In the case of the Tunguska event, some of the most compelling evidence comes from those who experienced the terror first hand. In 1928, I. M. Suslov recorded the following testimony from a member of Shanyagir tribe (this taken from the Wikipedia site)--

"We had a hut by the river with my brother Chekaren. We were sleeping. Suddenly we both woke up at the same time. Somebody shoved us. We heard whistling and felt strong wind. Chekaren said, "can you hear all those birds flying overhead?" We were both in the hut, couldn't see what was going on outside. Suddenly, I got shoved again, this time so hard I fell into the fire. I got scared. Chekaren got scared too. We started crying for out father, mother, brother, but no one answered.

"There was noise beyond the hut, we could hear trees falling down. Me and Chekaren got out of our sleeping bags and wanted to run out, but then the thunder struck. This was the first thunder. The Earth began to move and rock, wind hit our hut and knocked it over. My body was pushed down by sticks, but my head was in the clear. Then I saw a wonder: trees were falling, the branches were on fire, it became mighty bright, how can I say this, as if there was a second sun, my eyes were hurting, I even closed them. It was like what the Russians call lightning. And immediately there was a loud thunderclap. This was the second thunder. The morning was sunny, there were no clouds, our Sun was shining brightly as usual, and suddenly there came a second one!

Me and Chekaren had some difficulty getting under from the remains of our hut. Then we saw that above, but in a different place, there was another flash, and loud thunder came. This was the third thunder strike. Wind came again, knocked us off our feet, struck against the fallen trees.

"We looked at the fallen trees, watched the tree tops get snapped off, watched the fires. Suddenly Chekaren yelled "Look up" and pointed with his hand. I looked there and saw another flash, and it made another thunder. But the noise was less than before. This was the fourth strike, like normal thunder.

"Now I remember well there was also one more thunder strike, but it was small, and somewhere far away, where the Sun goes to sleep".

More info at ...

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060202tunguska.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060203tunguska2.htm

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[Anonymous Coward]

The extraordinary power of the high-energy explosion above ground.
Repeated testimony of strange sounds before the event.
The glowing of the sky before the event.
Reports of strange weather before the event.
Reports of strange seismic activity before the event.
Geomagnetic effects before the event.
Global atmospheric pressure pulse.
Instantaneous eruption of fire across hundreds of square kilometers.
Lightning and thunder in the midst of the firestorm.
Presence of microscopic glassy spherules over a large area.

Gee, it's almost like a rocky asteroid or comet broke apart above the ground, leaving a smoky trail that would have reflected light from the sun and the glowing ablation of the object well before and after the sound of the event was heard, while the high drag of the smaller fragments caused nearly all of the kinetic energy to be converted into heat incredibly quickly, melting smaller particles into glassy beads, causing an intense flash (or multiple if it happened in stages) and a complex shock wave manifested by both dynamic and static overpressure easily felt 100 km away and detectable around the world, with topographical shadowing causing some regions to experience delayed reflected blast waves, which would all be proceeded by a flash hot enough singe nearby exposed objects possibly causing burning or hissing sounds several seconds per mile ahead of the blast wave, which itself is so powerful that it would echo around the countryside for minutes or even hours.

No, no wait...how would a big explosion do all that? How about instead we say it was super-lightning from space. Of course, accredited scientists who have spent their lives studying stuff like this will all tell people we're crazy despite agreeing with us, because they know it's impossible to both make a really major dissenting finding and keep your job. Unfortunately, everyone will believe those sneaky scientists because of their fancy diplomas and the fact that no one has ever seen super lightning from space.

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[teknopurge]

This screams of Tesla:

http://prometheus.al.ru/english/phisik/onichelson/onichelson.htm

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[pln2bz]

Of course, accredited scientists who have spent their lives studying stuff like this will all tell people we're crazy despite agreeing with us, because they know it's impossible to both make a really major dissenting finding and keep your job. Unfortunately, everyone will believe those sneaky scientists because of their fancy diplomas and the fact that no one has ever seen super lightning from space.

The problem with your pseudo-skeptical logic is that neither yourself nor any of your accredited scientists have been following the interesting developments in the discipline of comparative mythology. Your accredited scientists act as if there is no responsible manner in which documents can be analyzed and compared for their contents, as if the entire field of document analysis DOES NOT EVEN EXIST. Now, when you see people attempting to explain the mechanics of the universe, two important things you're going to want to look for are:

1. Are they being selective with their inclusion of evidence?
2. Are they being rigorous in their set of all interpretations of observations?

Your arguments *might* make sense if these two things were true. The problem -- and it's a big one -- is that your accredited scientists, like yourself, do not *believe* that space plasmas can be electrical. And this induces them to IGNORE the possibility that it is so and ignore what the competing theory says. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the entire bunch of you would have no clue that the ancient testimony points directly to a plasma-based cosmology.

But all ancient people were crazy, right? Uh-huh .... :o. If you knew that you were arguing that they were all coincidentally crazy in the same way such that they all say that they saw similar, unmistakable things, then you might not take the stance you feel so confident in right now. I don't know if it's your sort of thing, but can I recommend that you read something that does not just confirm what you already believe? You might want to look into reading "God Star" by Dwardu Cardona, as the field of comparative mythology is rapidly evolving, and your belief that mythology is all nonsense is in the process of becoming an urban myth.

If you were being objective about it, then you would recognize that this is a major problem, and you might look into the issue a bit further. But, it appears that objectivity is not really all that important to you because you were rather quick there in dismissing the *possibility* that Tunguska could have an alternative cause. This is a yawn-inspiring tactic I see all the time on this board: people trying to stack individual pieces of evidence from less popular models up against the entire body of mainstream evidence, as if that is a fair comparison at all. Surely you recognize the silliness of that, right? I mean, if we're going to be fair about it, then you would have to actually *read* what the alternative theory says and then consider the Tunguska characteristics within both models. The real problem is that you've allowed yourself to become so convinced of the mainstream models that you lack the motivation to be rigorous anymore. This is your wake up call: lots of scientists can be wrong, buddy. Take it or leave it, but we are all responsible for our own decisions once we've been introduced to the errors of our ways. If you want to place your bets exclusively on ideas that are popular, in spite of the fact that many things that were not popular now are, then you should expect that your ignorance of the history of science and blind dismissal of heretical views will eventually lead you astray in some way.

Either you ride the wave, wherever it takes you, or you get some oars and start rowing that leaky boat on your neck! Your choice ...

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[pln2bz]

Tesla was quit enigmatic himself, but I've seen him brought up with the Electric Universe Theorists several times only to receive a blank stare in return. It appears that not all electromagnetic heretics actually learn about Tesla. ;)

I'm just here trying to raise awareness that there are multiple explanations for the mechanics of the universe. What is enigmatic within one model -- like dark matter or whatever -- makes total sense in another. It's easy to allow oneself to become consumed by History Channel animations about space, but did we keep our brains turned on? Are we still trying to figure out the truth? Or, have we allowed one idea to unfairly dominate astrophysics and cosmology? Many things that are taught in astrophysics exist on very shaky grounds. Many things have no support outside of somebody's thought experiment. Many things exist just to make other parts of the theories work. We can develop proofs for multiple cosmologies and theories, and if we are not doing as much, then it is our own choice not to do so.

My standards are a bit higher than astrophysicists' standards for themselves. I expect people to be questioning their own thought experiments. I expect scientists to be rigorous in their inclusion of all interpretations of observations. I expect that the dogma that they were taught in school is identified as being nothing more than an *assumption*, and that assumptions should be doubted. I expect that astrophysicists can believe things that perhaps they don't even *like* or that might not be popular, and that they listen to what the heretics in science are saying so that they know if their models are actually better.

I don't really think this is too much to ask, really.

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem -- and it's a big one -- is that your accredited scientists, like yourself, do not *believe* that space plasmas can be electrical.

I've seen several of your posts before, so I know it's been pointed out to you, yet you never face up to the fact that every single scientists worth his high school diploma knows that space plasmas are electrical. A plasma is by definition electrical, which is a fact taught in basic chemistry. The issue is large scale charge differences, which no one has observed, leaving a literally universe-sized hole in the electric universe theory.

But since you're so certain that an electrical discharge is responsible for the Tunguska event, why don't you write a paper and quantify what it would take to achieve such a blast? Calculate the potential difference and the discharge rate. Identify the probable modes of heating (resistance?). Determine how that charge difference would originate and become so localized.

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[pln2bz]

The issue is large scale charge differences, which no one has observed, leaving a literally universe-sized hole in the electric universe theory.

You're not paying attention to what's happening. We have observed MANY things that could indicate large scale charge differences. Are you familiar with "Elephant Trunks"?

(Rotating elephant trunks) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A%26A...454..201G

(Helical structures in a Rosette elephant trunk) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A%26A...332L...5C

(Formation of Twisted Elephant Trunks in the Rosette Nebula) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002Ap%26SS.280..405C

(Theory of twisted trunks) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...403..399C

(Protostars in the Elephant Trunk Nebula) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..385R

(Protostars in the Elephant Trunk Nebula) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007IAUS..237..188R

(Protostars in the Elephant Trunk Nebula) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AAS...204.3309R

(Near-Infrared Study of M16: Star Formation in the Elephant Trunks) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...565L..25S

(The young open cluster Stock 16 - an example of star formation in an elephant trunk?) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985ApJ...292..148T

(The formation of elephant-trunk globules in the Rosette nebula - CO observations) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...240...84S

(Systematic Motions in the Elephant-Trunk Globules of the Rosette) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979BAAS...11..714S

(On Elephant-Trunk Structures in the Region of O Associations.) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1954ApJ...120...18F

(The distance and mass of the large elephant trunk, a CO cloud pointing towards NGC 6231) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976A%26A....48..187S

(Comet-tail structures in emission nebulae.) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1957AJ.....62S..28O

(Comet-Tail Structures in Emission Nebulae.) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1957ApJ...125..622O

(Bright Rims Around Elephant Trunks) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982iue..prop.1281E

(Tales of an Elephant's Trunk) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ASPC..158..370B

Of particular note is the fact that protostars are being found within the "Elephant Trunks". If you have not read what the Electric Universe Theory states, then you will have no idea why this is important. It is the price that you pay for being pseudo-skeptical: you cannot actually judge observations by both paradigms on your own. All you can do is to repeat dogma taught in astrophysics classes and textbooks, completely indifferent to the history and philosophy of science issues associated with that strategy.

I recommend that you keep a very close eye on how these complex nebulae materialize before our eyes as our telescopes become more powerful. You're going to see that these supposed clouds are in fact composed of fine fil

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[Anonymous Coward]

I witnessed a blow down event in northern MN. It produced the same pattern of fallen trees. These blow down events happen when the jet stream gets bent out of shape and dives strait to the ground. These events happen in the spring .I think they are caused by gasses that are produced by the boreal forests in the spring .This is pure speculation, I think that when the growing season starts in the boreal forests it produces large amounts of gasses that causes drag on the upper atmosphere and causes the jet stream to act like this. I think that if a blow down event happened during a large forest fire it would produce the same kind of damage as the Tunguska event and would produce the same effects that were described by the eye witnesses.
    Lazy Genes

Re:The Many Enigmas of Tunguska

[pln2bz]

Possibly, but the Comet Biela event that seems to have caused the Great Chicago Fire adds to our knowledge of what can happen in such scenarios. I'm not sure your experience can explain all of the features of that event too ...

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060206chicagofire.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060207biela.htm

In particular, it is especially interesting that people reported a filament connecting the two parts of Comet Biela. Filaments appear to be a dominant theme within astrophysics these days. They also tend to be a natural result of electrical plasmas. And in instances when we can identify helical magnetic fields around these filaments, it would be very dogmatic of us to *not* consider that the filament is a flow of charged particles.

It's also worth mentioning that there were many enigmas associated with the extinction of the mammoths as well. An entire 300-page book was written on the subject by Charles Ginenthal titled "The Extinction of the Mammoth". The mammoths were preserved in such a way as to suggest rapid freeze-drying. All three events could clearly have different specific causes (and I'm pretty sure they do based upon other evidence), but it's highly likely they all still represent the result of bodies interacting in space.

I realize that there is a great desire amongst people to explain things within the popular paradigms. But, in each of these cases, there is not much progress being made through the popular paradigms. If I may quote the great Sir Fred Hoyle:

Science is unique to human activities in that it possesses vast areas of certain knowledge. The collective opinion of scientists in these areas about any problem covered by them will almost always be correct. It is unlikely that much in these areas will be chaned in the future, even in a thousand years. And because technology rests almost exclusively on these areas the products of technology work as they are intended to.

But for areas of uncertain knowledge the story is very different. Indeed, the story is pretty well the exact opposite, with the collective opinion of scientists almost always incorrect. There is an easy proof of this statement. Because of the large number of scientists nowadays and because of the large financial support which they enjoy, certain problems would mostly have been cleared up already if it were otherwise. So you can be pretty certain that wherever problems resist solution for an appreciable time by an appreciable number of scientists the ideas used for attacking them must be wrong. It is therefore a mistake to have anything to do with popular ideas for solving uncertain issues, and the more respectable the ideas may be the more certain it is that they are wrong.

vurdalak.com article

[tjw]

In that place the seven rich Dzhenkoul brothers in those days pastured a reindeer herd of 600-700 head. The brothers were rich. 1) how is the brothers' wealth relevant to this story in any way?
2) how rich were they?

Re:vurdalak.com article

[tokul]

In that place the seven rich Dzhenkoul brothers in those days pastured a reindeer herd of 600-700 head. The brothers were rich.

1) how is the brothers' wealth relevant to this story in any way?
2) how rich were they?

"a reindeer herd of 600-700 head." Main type of business in pre-Soviet Tunguska

500 - 1700 USD * 600-700 reindeers = 0.3 - 1 mln USD of movable estate in current prices.

Each was worth 10-15 golden rubles in 1905. I think 1 ruble was close to 2/3 USD before World War I.

Title a bit misleading?

[sneakerpimps]

It doesn't say that they've found the crater. They _think_ they've found it, which is quite a different thing. But haven't other expeditions claimed to have found it or debris from it as well?

I don't get it... what is EXPLODING?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand the mechanics of the proposed "air burst comet explosion" thing... 15 megatons of TNT? What is exploding exactly?

When an inert kinetic projectile impacts the ground there is an "explosion" as the energy is suddenly redirected outwards due to inertial resistance by the impacted object (the earth).

Is the air 6 miles up suddenly so much more dense than the air above that that the comet feels essentially like it's impacting something solid? I don't get it, the comet is so much more dense than the air. Wouldn't most of the mass continue on down and still make holes in the ground?

Re:I don't get it... what is EXPLODING?

[Chibi Merrow]

At a high enough velocity/pressure or at the right time scale, everything is a fluid, including the atmosphere. If you fall 100 stories into a lake you'll still die. When you're moving at solar orbital velocities and you slam into a thick atmosphere (like Earth's), you'll explode.

Re:I don't get it... what is EXPLODING?

[EnderGT]

Who said the comet/meteor/spaceship impacted anything? All that is being said is that it exploded. This could have happened for any number of reasons.

For example, suppose there was a pocket of frozen liquid hydrogen (or some other highly explosive liquid) in the interior of the object. As the object travels through the atmosphere, friction causes heat and ablation (material being eroded from the leading edge). The ablation exposes a small amount of the explosive substance, at which point the heat from the friction ignites the substance. BOOM.

Old?

[jcrousedotcom]

Isn't this old news? I remember reading about it a while back?

alien space ship from Venus

[ch-chuck]

according to this movie

Flying death ray

[apankrat]

That's not to mention that Tesla made his death ray fly
through the sky. Which is .. like .. very awesome and stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#Selected_eyewitness_reports

In crater like this-

[X'16435934]

YOU find Soviet Russia!