The burn was lit by the wick traveling back along the wisp of methane that had been blow up and southwest by the prevailing westerlies over Siberia. What witnesses saw was the burn off of methane that had disbursed into the air and
was not sandwiched between burning masses so that its heat had nowhere to go, the basis of exploding, rather than burning, gas bombs.
The process was:
1. Methane gas hisses out from under frozen permafrost that had been cracked like a sheet of glass due to earth stress, pre-shock to the earthquake that was recorded during the Tunguska explosion.
2. Methane gas mixes with the air as it rises, followed by more hissing air, so that a huge cloud of methane has formed in the atmosphere over Tunguska, equivalent to all the natural gas at any given time in the US.
3. A wick of methane that has drifted upward and
southeast, driven by the prevailing westerlies, is sparked due to the air movement, the same process that causes lighting due to rapid air movement during storms.
4. The lit methane burns rapidly back along the wick, the "meteor" that was seen, lights all the gas that is encountered but before all but the nearest witnesses can see it, those who died in the explosion, an overburn over gasses closer to the surface prevents heat from rising and an explosive situation occurs.
Comets and meteors do not explode when encountering Earth's atmosphere. This is not what your history or science presents to you! If they are monstrous, they plunge to Earth and leave a crater such as the Gulf of Mexico off Yucatan. If they are tiny, they burn up in the atmosphere as shooting stars. If they are midsized, they burn on their periphery but land to be rocks picked up and examined by your scientists. The lack of meteor particles or dust proves that it was not an exploding meteor. Methane, once burned or disbursed into the air, leaves no trace. Meteors leave traces, methane does not.
Space/Science » in reply to Not bloody likely
Very bloody likely.
