[meteorite-list] Tunguska Questions

From: GeoZay at aol.com <GeoZay_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 09:30:33 EDT
Message-ID: <c52.4ecf02f6.374019f9_at_aol.com>

>>I agree... If the Tunguska event was caused by a comet and not a
meteoroid or asteroid there truly may not be any material left from the
blast. However, if I remember correctly, the cometary theory is based
not just on the fact no meteorites were found near the epicenter, but
somewhat on the presence of high levels of carbon in the samples taken
from peat and tree bark drill core samples near the epicenter. A
carbonaceous meteoroid/asteroid could have left those same levels of
carbon.<<

I personally think that Tunguska was an asteroid. For no better reason
that to me it represents a little larger object than what hits our atmosphere
a few times each year. Why not a similar object somewhat bigger with
similar characteristics on occasions? Tunguska was a big wallop and so were two
others in the 1930's over the Amazon basin, though somewhat smaller than
Tunguska, but it still knocked over trees for a few miles with no meteorite
fragments that I know of. A couple small asteroids per year do themselves in
without leaving ground fragments seems natural, why not a somewhat bigger
asteroid once every 50 or 100 years doing the same thing?
GeoZay

**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
Steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222377005x1201454319/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=May
Excfooter51609NO62)
Received on Sat 16 May 2009 09:30:33 AM PDT