Forteana

338 readers

1 users here now

For discussion of everything rum and uncanny, from cryptozoology (mysterious or out-of-place animals), UFOs, high strangeness, etc. Following in the footsteps of Charles Fort and all those inspired by him, like the field of anomalistics.

As this community is on Feddit.uk it takes a British approach to things but it needn't be restricted to the UK - if it's weird and unusual it probably has a home here.

Elsewhere in the Fediverse:

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

175

Scientists Are Baffled by What Created This Enormous Crater in Siberia and Why Trees Grew So Huge Around It (earthlymission.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It was August of 1949. Geologist Vadim Kolpakov had just heard a tale from locals about an eerie place in the woods known as the “Fire Eagle Nest.” Legends warned of illness, disappearances, and even death for those who ventured close (in 2005, the head of a mission to the crater indeed died suddenly nearby). Unfazed by the words of caution, Kolpakov climbed the hill and was shocked by what he saw from a distance.

...

The origin of the peculiar rock formation that rises from the dense taiga forest on the slopes of the Patom Highlands is still unknown 70 years later, despite several scientific expeditions and studies. It has a base diameter of about 160 meters and a height of about 40 meters. In the center of its ring-shaped cone of shattered limestone blocks, there is a smaller mound with a height of about 12 meters. Some have suggested that it was caused by a meteorite impact, a volcanic eruption or a gas pocket breakthrough. However, none of these hypotheses have been proven conclusively. The crater is estimated to be about 300 years old, based on the age of the trees growing nearby. Talking of trees… Some of them are actually unusually large and fast-growing, compared to the surrounding vegetation. In particular, scientists discovered an unusual anomaly in the annual ring formation of trees aged over 200 years. Some trees fell or broke in 1841-42, displaying concurrent narrowing of annual rings leading to their demise. The complexity deepened when analyzing tree rings near the crater. In the same year, 1842, tree rings exhibited a significant increase, maintaining a surprisingly high rate for approximately 40 years before sharply narrowing. ‘I know of only one similar case,” said Viktor Voronin, a doctor of biological sciences and head of the laboratory of the Siberian Institute of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, who also visited the Patomskiy crater and came up with the above findings. “When, after the Chernobyl disaster due to release of radiation, the growth of trees increased dramatically. Maybe we are dealing with something similar here? Yes, now the background radiation in the crater is low. But maybe at some point of time suddenly short-lived radioactive isotopes somehow got here, which had to date, break up, and later the radioactivity decreased to natural? “A radioactive meteorite? Or, terrible to say, artificial space objects with nuclear fuel on board? There are trees that fell, and broken trees are there as well. Trees away from the crater generally grow quite inexplicably. And it happened in the same years. In general, it is a mysterious story.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Based on the Wikipedia article, it sounds like it's been pretty well proven to be geological in origin.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

From the wiki article:

Its origins have been subject of intense scientific interest, with hypotheses including meteorite, volcanic and gaseous origin, but to date no definite proof has been given

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From the further down the wiki:

A study conducted by V. S. Antipin and A. M. Fedorov showed, through morphological, structural and chemical data, that the crater is volcanic in origin. The presence of weathered breccias, the diameter/height ratio typical of volcanic cones, the absence of geochemical anomalies linked to cosmogenic origins, and its zoning of different ages, contradict clearly the meteorite hypothesis.[3] The origin of the cone is therefore volcanic, caused by a rapid outbreak of deep fluids (CO2 and H2O) and gases (CO and H2).

And

In 2010, Saint Petersburg Mining Institute held a scientific conference "Patom Crater 2010". Viktor Sergeyevich Antipin, head of a department at the St. Petersburg Institute of Geochemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IG SB RAS), stated that "Since the 2006 expedition by the Institute of Geochemistry (IGC), RAS came to the conclusion that the Patomskiy crater probably originates from geological processes. An important fact is that no serious argument or evidence of a meteorite crater nature referred to by specialists had been given. There was not any new evidence to support the meteorite hypothesis."[citation needed] Antipin further noted that at the conference, for the first time, all the experts rejected the meteoric hypothesis. "Now it has only historical interest," he added.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s funny how often “mysterious” phenomena that leave scientists “baffled” can be explained reasonably.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I mean, if I understand this correctly, they still don't know wtf happened. They just know it was not a meteor impact.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Patom Crater Conference, 2010

In 2010, Saint Petersburg Mining Institute held a scientific conference "Patom Crater 2010". Viktor Sergeyevich Antipin, head of a department at the St. Petersburg Institute of Geochemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IG SB RAS), stated that "Since the 2006 expedition by the Institute of Geochemistry (IGC), RAS came to the conclusion that the Patomskiy crater probably originates from geological processes. An important fact is that no serious argument or evidence of a meteorite crater nature referred to by specialists had been given. There was not any new evidence to support the meteorite hypothesis."[citation needed] Antipin further noted that at the conference, for the first time, all the experts rejected the meteoric hypothesis. "Now it has only historical interest," he added.[citation needed]

According to studies by Siberian scientists, the crater formed only 300 to 350 years ago.[citation needed] The zoning of the crater was caused by geological processes and intensive introduction of deep gas flows of matter, which led to the transformation of silicate rocks within the crater.[citation needed] "An important confirmation of these ideas were the result of geophysics from Saint Petersburg Mining University and Yekaterinburg [Institute of Geophysics, UB RAS]. Performing gravimetric and geoelectrical investigations, they also came to the firm conviction that Patom crater has an origin of an endogenetic nature," said Antipin.[citation needed] According to geophysicists of St. Petersburg and Yekaterinburg, meteorite impact craters have a very different shape, and Patom crater is not one of them, he added.[citation needed]