Re: Planet X: TUNGUSKA as Example

In Article <tin791sm5fadc8@corp.supernews.com> J. William Dell wrote:
> This theory is as valid as any other.
> The Tunguska event has been a one off and highly unusual.
> Theories ranging from meteor to anti matter have been
> proposed but all lack certainty.
> Methane gas is a possibility.

This issue was discussed during the 1997 sci.astro debates, when Jim
Scotti engaged the Zetas in debate.  Here's a page from the past ...

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Article: <5grkoa$g9i@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
From: Nancy Lieder
Subject: Re: TUNGUSKA
Date: 20 Mar 1997

In article <5gil52$n00@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> An object entering the atmosphere at a sharp angle soon
>> begins a direct plummet, depending upon its speed at entry
>> and the angle. Any large meteor is dropping straight down
>> before impact, and any large piece of space junk is doing
>> likewise.
>>
>>     ZetaTalk™
>
> Meteors enter at whatever angle they encounter the Earth,
> plus some curvature due to Earth's gravity and will only fall
> vertically after almost all of their cosmic velocity is dissipated.

    That's what we SAID!

        ZetaTalk™

In article <5gil52$n00@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> how did the Yucatan crater hole happen? Did the Earth
>> not have an atmosphere in the past?
>>
>>     ZetaTalk™
>
> The object that caused the Chicxulub crater in the Yucatan
> was more than 10 kilometers in diameter. It barely noticed the
> atmosphere as it passed through before hitting the surface.
> Most objects smaller than about 100 meters do not reach the
> surface of the Earth and will end up exploding

    The really big ones fail to vaporize and the tiny ones
    become shooting stars and there are NO in-between
    meteors that fail to vaporize? Then what are those
    rocks that your scientists are picking up to examine?
    What is this, an intermittent scientific principle that
    only occurs when you need a silly explanation to
    avoid dealing with the fact that the Earth experiences
    violent pole shifts when [Planet X] passes? Cling to
    your Teddy Bear and ask it to save you, this is as
    illogical!

        ZetaTalk™

In article <5gil52$n00@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> You in fact don't KNOW that a meteor entered
>> the atmosphere, much less its speed!
>>
>>     ZetaTalk™
>
> No "fantastic speed" about the meteor - the typical impact
> speed of any meteor in the Earth's atmosphere is between
> about 12 and 60 kilometers per second depending on the
> orbit!

    And do they disintegrate? NEVER! Unless they are
    so tiny as to burn up completely due to friction with
    the air, they plonk onto the surface to be picked up
    by your scientists!

        ZetaTalk™

In article <5gil52$n00@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> To cap it all off, you have this mythical disintegration of a
>> HUGE meteor such that it falls apart into such tiny pieces
>> of dust that NONE can be located! This is dust, barely held
>> together, that managed to streak across the sky and travel
>> through space all those eons? Your argument is absurd!
>>
>>     ZetaTalk™
>
> The meteor is traveling at hypersonic speeds - just before the
> meteor is destroyed, the air in front of the meteor does not
> have time to move out from in front of the object. It creates
> supersonic shock front, but also imparts a huge force on the
> front of the meteor. The meteor cannot withstand the huge
> force and disintegrates.

    This silly explanation flies in the face of everything
    you know about objects entering your atmosphere from
    space, everything you know about the cushioning
    that occurs when an object enters a liquid such as water
    or an atmosphere, and everything you know about
    explosions. Give it up, Jim, you lost the debate!

        ZetaTalk™