Just because it may have been caused by a "comet" it does not preclude the comet containing a UFO/Mystic Obelisk/Great Old One/Secret Toy Surprise/Chewy Nougat Center/Frozen Alien somewhere within it.
Don't get me wrong, I believe the scientific explanation, but let me just get this straight: the same type of clouds that the space shuttle produces were seen after the Tunguska Blast, and this proves that it wasn't a spacecraft that caused it? I'm failing to see the logic.
@ASquare: Any object passing through the atmosphere will make these clouds. And all the OTHER evidence at Tgska points to a comet, so.... occam's razor.
@Bill Farrar: Well, given that there's no evidence of aliens, and all evidence gathered can point to a comet strike, one naturally assumes that there's a comet strike.
Now, if your life is boring and you need to assume it's aliens, well then go right ahead and assume its aliens. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
@ASquare: I was thinking the same thing, but I think I've got it figured out now. The Space Shuttle, a non-ice spacecraft, leaves tiny noctilucent clouds in its wake upon reentry. A giant icy comet that has begun to break up would leave massive amounts of the same clouds as it enters the atmosphere (being that all the mass it loses to the entry process is ice crystals, either original or reformed, from all the bits and pieces that are scrubbed off the surface by atmospheric friction). The claim sounds like there were significantly more of these clouds after the impact, and the actual claim appears to be more that they've figured out how a comet could have made the glowing clouds than proof that it was _not_ an alien spacecraft (that's just the io9 spin thrown in to confuse the issue). Specifically, they offer it up as proof that it was a comet (ice) and not a meteorite (metal and rock) that caused the devastation, because only the comet would shed the amount of H20 necessary to produce the distinctive clouds.
@Purple Dave: Actually, it does quite handily prove that there's very little chance of it being a spacecraft. The Space Shuttle leaves these clouds when ascending because ice forms on it as it flies upwards, and a comet can be made largely of ice. An alien spacecraft entering the atmosphere, however, should not have any ice on its surface, much as the Shuttle doesn't on its way back into the atmosphere.
@Unprodigy - Unproductive - Unconscionable: Firstly, hmmm, whoops, the io9 article wasn't clear at all on _when_ the Space Shuttle creates the clouds, and since the comet creates them upon entry I guess I just assumed the Shuttle did on reentry (and the linked article is only slightly clear on that issue).
Secondly, all that proves is that the UFO was covered in Siberian ice when it took off! :D
@ManchuCandidate: The truly good conspiracies discredit themselves to draw away attention from themselves. Don't mind the sudden appearance of garden gnomes, by the way.
@Unprodigy: Seriously, we need all our clouds to look like that. That's awesome. Much better than the boring fluffy things we're stuck with for the most part. Someone get on that, quick!
@Unprodigy - Unproductive - Unconscionable: Well, if humanity every ends up spreading different particles in parts of the upper atmosphere to reflect solar radiation away from teh planet, we all gets a free permanent light show!
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09
Chewy nougat center in a sno-cone? Bleargh.
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09
Still doesn't prove anything, just provides secondary evidence to a hypothesis.
06/26/09
Now, if your life is boring and you need to assume it's aliens, well then go right ahead and assume its aliens. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
06/26/09
I was thinking the same thing, but I think I've got it figured out now. The Space Shuttle, a non-ice spacecraft, leaves tiny noctilucent clouds in its wake upon reentry. A giant icy comet that has begun to break up would leave massive amounts of the same clouds as it enters the atmosphere (being that all the mass it loses to the entry process is ice crystals, either original or reformed, from all the bits and pieces that are scrubbed off the surface by atmospheric friction). The claim sounds like there were significantly more of these clouds after the impact, and the actual claim appears to be more that they've figured out how a comet could have made the glowing clouds than proof that it was _not_ an alien spacecraft (that's just the io9 spin thrown in to confuse the issue). Specifically, they offer it up as proof that it was a comet (ice) and not a meteorite (metal and rock) that caused the devastation, because only the comet would shed the amount of H20 necessary to produce the distinctive clouds.
06/26/09
06/27/09
Firstly, hmmm, whoops, the io9 article wasn't clear at all on _when_ the Space Shuttle creates the clouds, and since the comet creates them upon entry I guess I just assumed the Shuttle did on reentry (and the linked article is only slightly clear on that issue).
Secondly, all that proves is that the UFO was covered in Siberian ice when it took off! :D
06/26/09
Do not be fooled, my friends! We must prepare! We must arm ourselves!
06/26/09
06/26/09
-We've finally chosen a king. All hail!
*whoooosh. smash*
-Okay, who wants to be king?
06/26/09
My world torn asunder by science and them alien loving science guys. Why are all the good conspiracies destroyed by "facts"?
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09
06/26/09