Tunguska at 100

Steyr

Strongest case for UFO's?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7470283.stm

Makes for interesting reading either way.

Karoma

It was an unidentified object that was flying, so yes, quite a strong case for UFO. Not aliens or anything if that's what you meant.
Why do you think that it does?

Sherifu

Case for UFOs, no. Interesting reading, yes.

Thrill

There's an argument over whether or not it was a comet/asteroid/meteorite. I dont see where UFO's come into it.

smellslikeshoes

Very interesting read but I don't get where you get ufo's from.

So nobody has seen those episodes of the X-files with the guys that have the fire sticks?

Eoin

Thrill wrote: »

There's an argument over whether or not it was a comet/asteroid/meteorite. I dont see where UFO's come into it.

Because it's still unidentified?

Thrill

eoin_s wrote: »

Because it's still unidentified?

Because it's no longer flying.

Eoin

Thrill wrote: »

Because it's no longer flying.

Touche!

Kernel

Tunguska has been the object of speculation for years within the conspiracy community. The fact that the object exploded before hittiing the ground is interesting, but it certainly could have been a comet.

The fact that new supercomputer simulations warn of such comet or asteroid strikes is noteworthy as it comes at a time when the US are seeking to develop their missile shield. Werner Von Braun allegedly warned his personal secretary that the US would one day seek to use such an excuse to weaponise space that it should never be allowed to happen.

EDIT: Btw OP, there are FAR stronger cases for the existence of UFO's in the traditional 'flying saucer' sense.

MarkR

I had a read about this yesterday. One theory I liked for why it exploded in air, rather then having an impact was that a methane build up in the air was ignited by the objects passing caused the gas to ignite.

rossie1977

scary thought if that object could flatten trees for 2000 sq km despite exploding 5-10km above the ground what impact would it have had if it had hit the ground :eek:

and it was only a few metres across, there are objects flying through space miles across

Thrill

rossie1977 wrote: »

scary thought if that object could flatten trees for 2000 sq km despite exploding 5-10km above the ground what impact would it have had if it had hit the ground :eek:

and it was only a few metres across, there are objects flying through space miles across

I'm no expert but I think that exploding in the air could have made it all the more powerful. Take nuclear bombs for instance, to get the maximum amount of destruction they are designed to detonate well above ground.

Degsy

As Arthur C Clarke said in the 1970's,the main issue isnt so much what the object was as that it could happen again.Had the object struck a city instead of a largely uninhabited area it would've killed literally millions of people.The earth bears the scars of numerous impacts from meteorites or whatever and there's no reason to think it wont happen again,polishing off mankind for good maybe.