That is an incredibally nit-picky reading of the post.

"Object" clearly (to everyone else) meant macroscopic objects such as Comets.

That one or more of those nuclei would be of great density is hardly the issue. Gosh, for that matter, ordinary Comets are made of atoms and they in turn have a nucleus...

Unless the report linked in the OP claims something like a chunk of a neutron star caused the event - it's been an unrequired 20-something post sidetrack of the thread.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

Yes it has. Regardless of how much of a nit pick it was, thoth II acknowledged it and reworded his post. There was no need for some other posters to act as if I were the one promoting this theory. Nor was there a need for antoniseb to make an accusation about me being another member of which I am anxiously awaiting his public apology.

The problem is excessive nit-picking. And maybe your correction would have been better received had you said it jokingly.
Thoth II has less than 200 posts. I don't think that qualifies as "one of the good old boys".
Jealousy? What are the above posters supposed to be jealous of, exactly?

__________________

Typed into google - define: object - First result: A tangible and visible entity; an entity that can cast a shadow; "it was full of rackets, balls and other objects"

Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary definition: A thing presented to sense.

...because you were being unreasonably "nitpicky".

"Objects in the Solar System" (notice the proper use of capitals) are by definition only viewable with the unaided eye, or through a telescope...thereby this excludes atomic nuclei.

See....I can be "nitpicky", too.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Don't know and really don't care. Maybe they wish they noticed it before I said something. Maybe they just don't want to see on of their own corrected by an "outsider".

No actually that is incredibly wrong and a continuation of what a mod already called a derail.

Snarky...boy you guys are overly sensitive.

To be clear, he is quoting a post I deleted with the following reason "didn't notice there was a page 2, my comment adds nothing to the conversation"

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

You're going to have to be more specific...what is "incredibly wrong"?

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Your saying that atomic nuclei are not objects in the solar system. No they are not ASTRONOMICAL objects yet they most certainly are objects. Now can we get back to the topic of this thread or are you going to continue this derail?

Not overly, no. You were rude to a poster, and now you're trying to justify that by making him part of some clique while you're the "outsider". He's only been a member of this board two months longer than you and has less than 200 posts. We're defending somebody that you were rude to for no apparent reason. We do that kind of stuff around here.

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

I'll bet that most of those that have posted in this thread have been reprimanded by the mods and other members for being snarky at one time or another - I know I have been guilty a few times.

...and the other posters took it for granted that he was speaking about ASTRONOMICAL objects...after all this is an ASTRONOMY FORUM...duh...

How would the topic of this thread interest you?

...and just who was "derailing" this thread?

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Yeah...I get called asinine in this thread yet that isn't snarky enough to attack so I get attacked for pointing out an error/imprecise language/unclear term or whatever you want to call it? And you guys really aren't overly sensitive? Can we get back to the topic of the thread now or do you guys just want to throw more tantrums?

So pointing out an error is derailing...ok. Now get back to the topic which isn't me or forget about getting a response from me on anything anymore.

If you don't care, then don't mention it. And again, what's this about "one of their own"? I already told you Thoth II was almost as much of a newbie as you. Scientifically this falsifies your claim.

__________________

It's not so much that you pointed out what you thought was an error, it's the way you did it.

The headline of the article in the OP reads "Russian Scientist: UFO collided with Tunguska Meteorite to save Earth"

So first he has to prove that aliens exist, then he has to prove that they have spacecraft that can make the interstellar flight to our solar system, then he has to prove that they care enough our planet to intercede on our behalf, then he has to prove it was a meteorite, not a comet.

I'm going to go ahead and side with Occam on this one and say "It was a comet that exploded in the air"

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

Since you have no interest in the topic of this thread, this statement makes no sense.

Actually, everyone else but you have comported themselves rather admirabily in my opinion...you are the only one who has continually displayed an "attitude".

Why is that?

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

How did I cause the derail by pointing it out? Derail was caused by those responding and like spoiled children. Now once again I will ask if we can get back to the threads topic?

Another example . . .

Here's a question/request by a different poster:

And here is your response:

Yes? What is your point? Why would I guess?

You could have answered his question.

Why bother posting if you don't want to engage in conversation?

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

You have already stated that you have no interest in the topic of this thread.

You made yourself "the topic" of this thread by your own behavior.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

I could have but it would have been a wrong guess so again I ask why should I guess? Let's see, the density at the center of the sun is approximately 160000 kg/m^3 and 800000 kg/m^3 is 5 times more. So was I supposed to say something like this? Why? Remember I am not the one who posted this theory. So can we please get back to the thread's topic which is not me.

My post was directed to thoth II. He read it and acted on it. Why are you posting?

In "moderator color":

Please, let's all drop this issue now. All stances are clear; nothing more can be gained, but some stuff (like our "cool") can be lost.

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

Also to the OP, I just realized Fraser wrote an article on this exact story.

The OP article says "We also found ferrum silicate that can not be produced anywhere, except in space”

to which Fraser says "While I'm not a chemist, I couldn't find any information on "ferrum silicate." Seemingly, it doesn't exist."

Is Swift reading this thread? Maybe he knows if ferrum silicate exists?

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"