# The Mystery of Tunguska



## dwndrgn (Apr 5, 2004)

Which is your favorite theory?

http://www.madladdesigns.co.uk/unexplained/enigmas/tunguska.htm


----------



## littlemissattitude (Apr 6, 2004)

I've always been partial to the comet theory myeslf.

This part of the article you linked to has always seemed to be a bit overstated, though, in my opinion:



> In northern Siberia the night of 30 June to 1 July was known as the 'White night' because of glowing silver clouds reported by many. In fact night skies did not return to normal until August. In London, it was possible to read clearly at midnight and other reports from around the British Isles indicated similar phenomena. Photographs could be taken at midnight in Europe without the aid of a flash.


The time I visited England, I was there during the 30 June/1 July time of year and it seemed to me that the sun didn't even go down until around ten-thirty at night.  With the long twilights at that latitude, it probably wouldn't be stretching much to be able to read at midnight.  Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems to be a bit of overstatement to me.  Those of you from the British Isles?  Care to set me straight on this?  I can't find actual sunset times for that part of the world at that time of the year.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Apr 6, 2004)

Heh, Tungska is one of those events that conspiracy buffs love to add to the "UFO" list, so its nice to see the article clearly reference the explanation as "exitoc" at best.

There was an interesting program a while back that looked into the issue - specifically - of it having been some form of meteorite or comet. I can't remember which they concluded.

It certainly wasn't concluded to have been an ordinary space-rock - I think the suggestion was of it being a "loose-aggragate" as like comets now appear to be. 

Whatever it was, quite an event for sure - and continually enigmatic. After all, it's not as if it's everyday that we encounter a massive aerial explosion, suggestive of extraterrestrial origins.


----------



## Morning Star (Apr 6, 2004)

Can you imagine if this had to occur in a populated area? I always found the blackhole and anti-matter theories interesting...but now I see they've been pretty much ruled out.

Haha on a lighter note, Dan Akroyd mentions this in Ghostbusters, commenting that "...this is the biggest dimensional crossover since the great Tunguska blast of..."


----------



## dwndrgn (Apr 6, 2004)

I said:
			
		

> It certainly wasn't concluded to have been an ordinary space-rock - I think the suggestion was of it being a "loose-aggragate" as like comets now appear to be.


I think you're right on this one Brian.  The main problem with with the space rock theory had been the complete lack of debris and concussion marks.  

However, I'm still up in the air about it.  I found it interesting to see the differing theories all put together.  Spider Robinson, in one of his 'Callahan's Place' novels goes with the theory that Nikola Tesla caused the explosion with his 'death-ray'.


----------



## littlemissattitude (Apr 6, 2004)

dwndrgn said:
			
		

> I think you're right on this one Brian. The main problem with with the space rock theory had been the complete lack of debris and concussion marks.
> 
> However, I'm still up in the air about it. I found it interesting to see the differing theories all put together. Spider Robinson, in one of his 'Callahan's Place' novels goes with the theory that Nikola Tesla caused the explosion with his 'death-ray'.


Actually, I've heard the Tesla theory propounded in all seriousness.

Morning Star wrote:



> Haha on a lighter note, Dan Akroyd mentions this in Ghostbusters, commenting that "...this is the biggest dimensional crossover since the great Tunguska blast of..."


From what I understand, Dan Ackroyd is very much into all of this sort of fringe science.


----------



## mac1 (Jul 16, 2004)

> Actually, I've heard the Tesla theory propounded in all seriousness


Me too, it is based upon the fact that all evidence points to the fact the explosion took place several hundred meters above the earths surface, causing the now well documented "butterfly-shaped blast site".

I go with the comet theorey myself, but the more interesting question, is what caused the comet to explode with such devastation without it impacting the ground?


----------



## Jenkoul (Aug 12, 2004)

littlemissattitude said:
			
		

> The time I visited England, I was there during the 30 June/1 July time of year and it seemed to me that the sun didn't even go down until around ten-thirty at night. With the long twilights at that latitude, it probably wouldn't be stretching much to be able to read at midnight. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems to be a bit of overstatement to me. Those of you from the British Isles? Care to set me straight on this? I can't find actual sunset times for that part of the world at that time of the year.


Well, but this was remarked in the press at the time, by people who presumably had lived there all their lives. For instance:



			
				The Times said:
			
		

> “Curious Sun Effects at Night,”
> July 1st Letter to the Editor, _The Times_ of London,​from Holcombe Ingleby, Dormy House Club, Brancaster
> published Friday July 3, 1908​Sir, — Struck with the unusual brightness of the heavens, the band of golfers staying here strolled toward the links at 11 o’clock last evening in order that they might obtain an uninterrupted view of the phenomenon. Looking northwards across the sea they found that the sky had the appearance of a dying sunset of exquisite beauty. This not only lasted but actually grew both in extent and intensity till 2:30 this morning, when driving clouds from the east obliterated the gorgeous colouring. I myself was aroused from sleep at 1:15, and so strong was the light at this hour, that I could read a book by it in my chamber quite comfortably. At 1:45 the whole sky, N. and N.E., was a delicate salmon pink, and the birds began their matutinal song. No doubt others will have noticed this phenomenon, but as Brancaster holds an almost unique position in facing north to the sea, we who are staying here had the best possible view of it.


You'll find more on the Tunguska Event in the "witnesses" section of http://www.vurdalak.com.

Best,
Jenkoul


----------



## littlemissattitude (Aug 12, 2004)

Thanks for that, Jenkoul, and welcome to the forum.  I'll be sure to check out that link.


----------



## Jenkoul (Aug 12, 2004)

littlemissattitude said:
			
		

> Thanks for that, Jenkoul, and welcome to the forum. I'll be sure to check out that link.


You're most welcome. I must confess I love that particular letter to the editor, redolent as it is of a gentler and (dare I say it) a more eloquent age, when one might write almost offhandedly about birds singing their "matutinal song."

Thanks too for the warm welcome,
Jenkoul


----------



## Jenkoul (Sep 22, 2004)

*More Tunguska testimony*

Hi, again,

Just a note to let the forum know that, here at the Vurdalak Conjecture website, we've been hard at work expanding one of our most popular features -- the eyewitness accounts of the Tunguska Event. We've already got the Web's single largest collection of Russian eyewitness accounts in English, and we've just added three new ones:

* Kokoulin, agronomist from Nizhne-Ilimsk;

* M. R. Romanov, peasant from Nizhne-Ilimsk;

* N. N. Polyuzhinskii, observer at the Ilimsk Meteorological Station.

...with many more coming soon!

Some of the materials in this treasure-trove of testimony have never appeared anywhere in English translation before. To start sifting through the annals, searching for the one elusive clue that just might unriddle the "cosmic mystery of the millennium," point your browser at:

 http://www.vurdalak.com

... and then click on the "target: tunguska/witnesses" link in the side navigation bar.

(And, while you're there, check out "Doctor Jack's" latest Soapbox Seminar. It's called "Where do Baby Black Holes Come From?" And, no, the answer's not "from under a cabbage leaf." 

Best,
Jenkoul


----------



## malfunkshun (Oct 26, 2004)

*Re: More Tunguska testimony*

personally, i like the primordial black hole theory, that a black hole the size of an electron crashed into the earth   far fetched but by far the most interesting


----------



## Jenkoul (Oct 26, 2004)

*Re: More Tunguska testimony*



			
				malfunkshun said:
			
		

> personally, i like the primordial black hole theory, that a black hole the size of an electron crashed into the earth  far fetched but by far the most interesting


...And maybe not even all *that* far-fetched. In any case, Jack Adler is trying to convince you otherwise -- his final "Soapbox Seminar" will post on Hallowe'en, and in it he's promised to reveal how the right kind of primordial black hole might just avoid all the objections raised against the original Jackson-Ryan hypothesis.

Stay tuned,
Jenkoul


----------



## zorcarepublic (Dec 17, 2004)

Well, for the science fiction wargame Hard Vacuum, the Tunguska event was in fact an alien spaceship which the Russians used in WW2 to make inertia-type drives


----------



## Jenkoul (Dec 17, 2004)

zorcarepublic said:
			
		

> Well, for the science fiction wargame Hard Vacuum, the Tunguska event was in fact an alien spaceship which the Russians used in WW2 to make inertia-type drives


True enough, I suppose. But if fiction were admissible as evidence, then Bill DeSmedt's new novel _Singularity_ would prove the case for the Jackson/Ryan black-hole hypothesis hands down!


----------



## zorcarepublic (Dec 17, 2004)

Hehe. I just posted here like one of those people who suddenly, in a conversation, say something barely related to the topic at hand...

I prefer the asteroid or miniature black-hole hypothesis myself. No reason, just that it seems like a safer bet than extraterrestrials at the moment.


----------

