It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tunguska Impact Mystery Solved-- it was a Meteorite

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Meteoric materials are common parts of comets. Comets have been sweeping this material up for billions of yours




posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
There must be over a dozen different theories on what it was that caused the event with meteor/comet (inanimate object from space) being the best and they've been looking on & off for a long time around 'ground zero' for any pieces of said object to confirm that theory. If it was blown virtually to dust that explains quite nicely why it's taken so long to find evidence of it by sifting through the mud in mosquito infested swamps. It will never be case closed for everyone but this tips the scales heavily on the side of it being a space rock/whatever.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 04:03 AM
link   
It was hardly likely to be anything other than a fragment of an asteroid or comet. The fact that the event occurred on the same day that Earth encounters the Taurid Complex (a trail of debris associated with Comet 2P/Encke) each year is a strong indication that the Tunguska object was part of this debris stream.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Bottom line is, we can never know for sure. It could have been Santa Claus crash landing.



posted on Jun, 30 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   
I have to side with what seems to me to be the most reasonable appeal on this one. I don't know of too many UFO crashes or nuclear detonations which left little bits of meteoric material In the strata in the right depth concurring with the specific events timeline. That's actually a really important piece of data. Where was the meteoric material found and if it is the right depth, then since that really is the only hard scientific data on the subject besides eye witness accounts (which often prove to be the least reliable types of evidence) id have to go with space rock here. It doesn't mean that I am right or that we wont find out something else more accurate down the line about the subject. It just stands to reason best in my mind.



posted on Jun, 30 2013 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Ross 54
 


I like the mini black hole theory better, or the idea that we intersected with another dimension.



posted on Jun, 30 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Happy 105th anniversary of the Tunguska Event!



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   


Nowadays the situation with so called "Tunguska meteorite" resembles a pendulum: one group of scientists turns up new (and old too) strong evidence that Tunguska couldn't have been an asteroid made of stone or iron, thus it had to be a comet. But pretty soon, another group of scientists comes up with new (and old too) strong arguments that Tunguska could not have been a comet, thus the only way-out is that it must have been an asteroid. These swings hint that both groups are right and wrong at the same time: Tunguska 1908 was neither an asteroid, nor a comet. And indeed, now I try to demonstrate that it could not have been any known spacebody-fall.


This information is out of date, as before, people thought comets and asteroids were composed of very different materials. Star dust and tempest 1 and other have shown the infact, comets are very similar in structure and composition to asteroids, this new information has led to the end of the comet/asteroid debate. That along with new observations of the recent large meteor over Russia have shown that indeed a much larger explosion can be generated from an incoming extra solar body than previously believed, making the object that could have potentially caused Tunguska a much more common occurrence.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join