http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=56742

A news story about an conference on the event. Thought it might be interesting to touch base on this again since I have plenty of time on my hands right now.

There's some other eye witness accounts and reports in the archives that the Bolsheviks sealed.

They'll be opened but probably not in our life time.

Same exact blast pattern as the trinity test shot, the scorching on the trees that were downed matched that left by the operation upshot-knothole series of tests.

Initial analysis of the photograhs of the damage indicate an airburst weapon of aproximately 5 Mt. However it the device was nuclear in nature, the halflife of the irradiated soils would have had to be less than five years, otherwise the area would have a difinate abnormality in the background radiation count to this day.

If the airbust was caused by a cometary atmospheric impact, the area would show a layer of soil with an abnormally high count of certain isotopes which are normally created by exposing materials to a large number of high intensity particles, the sort of particles that do not exist on earth outside of supercolliders.

Due to the timeframe, we can rule out a man-made nuclear device.

Oddly enough though, the released eye-witness reports from Tunguska sound remarkably similar to the reports of those who lived near Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It is remotely possible, however that a large enough object composed of a nearly perfect mixture of frozen carbon dioxide and frozen water could generate a strong enough shockwave that when it contacted the shockwave as it (the shockwave) was rebounding off of the surface, the object would be shattered (a monomaterial object would have too much structural integrity and would have impacted the ground), causing the superheated atmosphere around the parent body to immediately vaporize the resulting small particles, neatly avoiding both an impact crater, and leaving a high concentration of isotopic material in the local area. The above hypothesis is incomplet and inadequate however, because although it would explain some faster growth in the local flora (increased availability of CO2 and water) over the next year or two, it does nothing to consider the mutation of trees along the flight path, or the mutation of local species.


Please note that the information in italic is information that I was unable to verify to my satisfaction - consider said items to be anecdotal in nature.