It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
11andrew34
This area was covered by glaciers during the previous ice age, which makes it likely to be a glacial landform of some sort. And obviously, it wasn't there before the previous ice-age, or at least, the rock pile wasn't. Perhaps the depression is an old meteorite crater? But even that wouldn't have been necessary to explain it.
As the glacier melted, streams formed, some of them short lived. A short lived stream may have transported and deposited rocks in this pattern, perhaps off a small waterfall coming off a glacier, say a ~20ft wall of ice just above it. You can see the formation is not perfectly circular; it's oriented with the slope. Larger/heavier rocks piled up in the middle where the water fell. Smaller rocks scattered radially, pushed from that center by the water flow. That's the easy part to guess.
This location is relatively close to the source of the alpine glacier. It would have begun to form at the end of the life of the glacier. So here's my guess at how the cone formed:
The formation began at the base of a waterfall off the ice wall of a glacier. The base level of this formation formed first. The heaviest rocks remained in the center where they fell, and smaller rocks were pushed from the center into a ring. As the glacier melted, the ice wall retreated, and so the place where the water fall hit the ground traveled uphill over time. Also, as the glacier was in its last years, the average flow rate decreased from year to year, and the drop of the falls became shorter. With less water flowing and less far to drop, the energy to scatter rocks is gradually decreasing. Thus the radius of the ring becomes shorter over time, as the center point travels uphill, explaining the cone shape, and smaller rocks can increasingly remain in the center instead of being scattered out to the ring wall. The final central rock pile is the final landing spot for the waterfall that created this formation.
One thing I'd add though is that the rock pile is supposedly all limestone. Limestone is very susceptible to weathering. I'm not sure if it's unusual for a pile of limestone to have lasted so long there. This could have formed maybe a few thousand years ago. But maybe as it's from the last days of the glacier, it's not such an old formation.edit on 12-11-2013 by 11andrew34 because: grammer
What is perhaps important to note, is that along the edges of the crater radioactivity is measured, as well as scientists have no explanation.
rickymouse
AAhh. so that is where they hid that ancient weapon that rises out of the ground and shoots meteorites or other earth threats. I guess it shot that meteor down over Russia in the early nineteen hundreds. When it goes back in the ground it makes a thing like that.
I've been reading too much science fiction on the web.
Since the discovery of the crater, it suggests that the nature pimple is caused by the impact of a spacecraft, some even say two. Obviously this theory scientists write down as legends of the ignorant masses.
Lil Drummerboy
looks like a cinder cone to me,.
ever been on a volcano?
you can see them on most volcanoes, In Hawaii for example they are all over the volcano in odd places
where old vents broke out
en.wikipedia.org...
hmm radioactive volcanoe slink.springer.com...-1
here is more on radio active lava rock www.fukuleaks.org...edit on 12-11-2013 by Lil Drummerboy because: lots of info out there if one looks for it
And another mystery - a semi-circular dome cavity with a diameter of 15 meters in the centre of a crater. In volcanoes, even extinct, such domes cannot exist.'
It was experimentally proved that some cylindrical object lies under the Patomsky crater and the length of this object is about ten meters.
I would say that it must of been a volcano that just didn't grow up because If you look at the picture it looks as though there is one plate pressing against another. Just a thought.
SheopleNation
It's a mini cinder cone. It's a result of past volcanic activity. I climbed one myself many years ago in Northern California up in Lassen National Park. ~$heopleNation
and the area is considered to be fully non-volcanic – there are no volcanoes around for thousands of kilometers, even old and extinct ones.
The geologist Vadim Kolpakov
jammer2012
reply to post by abeverage
you beat me to the punch buy just a few seconds...lol...well at least were thinking on the same wavelength
MarioOnTheFly
Like super growth of the surrounding trees which is mentioned in the article.
Well, I just looked up cinder cone pics...and I'm not so sure about that. The main thing...there is no protruded "egg shape" thingy...whatever it is.
Also...
and the area is considered to be fully non-volcanic – there are no volcanoes around for thousands of kilometers, even old and extinct ones.
I guess him being a geologist, not a UFO hunter, would probably be able to identify a cinder cone. I think it's right up his alley.
Nah, it's more like calling it what it is doesn't get your name mentioned in an article
It's called gravel.
SheopleNation
It's a mini cinder cone. It's a result of past volcanic activity. I climbed one myself many years ago in Northern California up in Lassen National Park. ~$heopleNation
freestonew
hi all.
on englishrussia.com, I found this blog post and the link.
englishrussia.com...
yet another mystery in the deep Siberia lands. Alien artifact, ancient cultures, or soviet recent secret-stuff?!
I present this all to you all....freestone