[meteorite-list] Tunguska Questions

From: mafer at imagineopals.com <mafer_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:41:26 +0100
Message-ID: <e116bf5410b36ff76f7bcb03dd200a27_at_>

Good question Eric

But, in such a location that is forested, or was until the forest was
flattened, I'd suspect that activities by creature would be much less than
the yearly fall of needles and leaves, freezing and thawing, rain and wind.
with rain and wind causing the most relocation or covering up of impactites
and their craters or resting spots.


Mark Ferguson

On May 15, 5:16 pm Meteorites USA <eric at meteoritesusa.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In regard to Tunguska and bioturbation.
>
> Paul H's post on bioturbation brings up an interesting question. The
> first expedition led by Leonid Kulik to Tunguska in 1927 to study the
> devastation and search for meteorites happened 19 years AFTER the
> event in 1908, (He had an earlier expedition in 1921 but wasn't
> successful in reaching the epicenter until 1927).
>
> 19 years is a LONG time for meteorites in the forested and swampy
> environment full of little critters, insects, and plants that could
> bury any stones. How deep can meteorites be buried in 19 years of
> snow, rain storms, mudslides, spring melt, critters, ants, termites,
> and other animals?
> Could bioturbation be one cause for the failed attempts to recover
> meteorites at Tunguska?
>
> You also have to take into account Leonid Kulik's mindset at the
> time. He was thinking that meteorites would be directly beneath the
> blast at the epicenter. Which made sense. Would he be looking for
> meteorites 10-40 miles away from the epicenter? He attributed the
> circular swampy bogs to craters formed by the meteorite impacts,
> which unfortunately turned out to be incorrect. Did he search for
> meteorites only under the epicenter? How far from the epicenter did
> his search area expand?
> Were there other expeditions to Tunguska to search in the 10-40 mile
> ring from the epicenter?
>
> Most scientists believe that the sheer force and energy of the blast
> at Tunguska event vaporized every trace of the meteoroid explaining
> that this is why there are no fragments to be recovered. This
> obviously makes sense, but would EVERYTHING be vaporized?
>
> Take a look at the "accepted" theory of Chixulub and the extinction
> of the dinosaurs. This widely accepted theory is now being
> challenged. Perhaps we should look at Tunguska again, in a new light.
>
> I am just wondering something out loud here about the Tunguska event.
> Yesterday I sent a load of links and questions and surprisingly got
> no response. Come on, this is the largest meteorite related blast in
> recent recorded history. So I'll will ask again.
>
> Is it possible that there are in fact meteorites that survived the
> Tunguska event by being blasted away much further from the epicenter
> than previously thought?
>
> Below is a copy of my post about some questions I had on Tunguska in
> yesterday's post.
>
> -----------------------ORIGINAL POST---------------------
>
> Hi Listees,
>
> Recently there's been more interest in the Tunguska event. More
> scientists are trying to explain it, and some are even looking at a
> lake near the blasts epicenter believing that this is the missing
> crater. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6239334.stm
>
> Photo of Lake Cheko:
> http://a52.g.akamaitech.net/f/52/827/1d/www.space.com/images/070626_la
> ke_cheko_02.jpg
>
> A witness in Vanovara (36 Miles SE of the epicenter) said in O.
> Richard Norton's "Rocks From Space"
>
> "The crash was followed by noise like stones falling from the sky, or
> guns firing."
>
> and
>
> "when I lay on the ground I covered my head because I was afraid that
> stones might hit it."
>
> We all know too well that witness reports aren't ideal information but
> useful anyway. But, how would this person know to say that there was a
> "noise like stones falling" unless that were the case? Or did the
> witnesses report become tainted after countless interviews? How many
> times was this witness interviewed?
>
> I know people have searched for meteorites under and around the
> epicenter area. But what if this was a stony meteoroid, and the
> explosion blasted meteorite pieces 30-50 miles away. The devastation
> this explosion caused is evidence that it was one hell of a blast and
> was on par with a nuclear explosion.
>
> YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiXpp-i442s
>
> Donald Yoemans (JPL) states in the History Channel video that this
> blast was 15 megatons of equivalent energy "roughly 1000 times that
> of the Hiroshima blast."
>
> VERY COOL ARTIST RENDERING: http://svidea.us/misha/image/tunguska2.jpg
>
> Photos of Devastation:
> http://astro.wsu.edu/worthey/astro/html/im-meteor/tunguska-photo.jpg
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Tunguska.png
> http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/tunguska3.jpg
> http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_tu3.gif
> Artist Rendering: http://aura.gaia.com/photos/34/338910/large/tunguska
> -1.jpg
> Area Map: http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_tunguska1.gif
> Blast Damage Area: http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_tu2.gif
>
> When you factor in all this information, how come people aren't
> looking 30-40 miles away for debris from this blast. If it was as
> powerful as they say (as evidenced by the downed trees and other
> devastation) wouldn't it make perfect sense that area around the
> blast would be completely void of meteorites as is the case?
>
> Having said that, wouldn't it be prudent to look further away from the
> blasts epicenter for fragments? How far will a blast such as that
> throw debris? If a Navy destroyer can launch a huge shell a hundred
> miles using a few pounds of gunpowder, how far can a meteoroid blast
> such as this launch stone fragments?
>
> Bomb squad techs and investigators will be the first to tell you that
> there's always something left over from a blast no matter how
> powerful. Pieces get thrown sometimes miles from the epicenter of
> powerful blast. In the case of Tunguska this blast was nuclear
> powerful! Yes a lot of the mass would have been melted and
> disintegrated but, how likely is it really that the blast would make
> ALL trace of the meteoroid disappear?
> Could there be meteorite pieces within a 30-50 mile ring around the
> epicenter?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Eric Wichman
> Meteorites USA
> http://www.meteoritesusa.com
> 904-236-5394
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Fri 15 May 2009 12:41:26 PM PDT