link to Home Page

Re: TUNGUSKA


Article: <5fsptf$62l@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: TUNGUSKA
Date: 8 Mar 1997 22:40:47 GMT

In article <5fq9fc$tce@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
> The earthquakes which were reported that day happened
> AFTER the meteor had exploded.
> jscotti@LPL.Arizona.EDU (Jim Scotti)

Oh there was an earthquake! This was the missing piece, in my mind. That makes the Zeta's explaination perfect!

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You have a saying - if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound? Likewise, the remote Tunguska forest area, where the population was close to nil, and where earthquakes were not considered a constant danger as those living on the Pacific Rim do, would NOT have earthquake measuring stations all around! Imagine the permafrost layer, a few feet thick spread out over the tundra, an essentially flat area. What does it take to snap a pane of glass clear through? In fact, when a flat piece is put under stress in that manner, a snap across the face of it is the MOST COMMON FRACTURE. Above the dome of permafrost, air. Below the dome of permafrost, methane gas. This would snap like a pane of glass should torsion stress be put upon it.

In addition, earthquakes do not happen, EVER, singularly. Anyone who deals with them knows that. Everyone who deals with them knows that. You have fore shocks, after shocks, and earthquakes themselves generally occur is clusters. Fore shocks are not as great as the major shock, which happens usually in the middle of the event. Thus, a fore shock might pass notice, where the major shock was registered. However, as certain as the sun rising - if there was a major shock, there WERE fore shocks. Always are.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])