methane gas explosion vs asteroid

The reading passage presents some arguments that the enormous explosion that happened in Siberia, Russia around 1903 was due to methane gas leakage. However, the speaker in the lecture casts doubts on the claims made in the article. He mentions that an asteroid that exploded above the ground as it entered the Earth's atmosphere is the real reason behind this explosion. First and foremost, the author assumes that expeditions had never found evidence for any extra-terrestrial object, such as the easily detectable rocks that usually contain high amounts of Nickel and Iridium. In contrast to the reading, the lecturer asserts that many eyewitnesses saw a streak of light that appeared as if it was splitting the sky with an explosion and great winds. According to the lecture, this piece of evidence exclusively points out to a celestial body that hit the Earth and was destroyed before reaching the ground. Secondly, The lecturer further elaborates that the absence of impact crater and rock remains is simply because the object never touched the Earth's surface and any remaining debris from the explosion might have been washed away and ended up unrecognizable. Moreover, the listening indicates that when Russian scientists tested the asteroid hypothesis by running a simulation, what was observed in the computer simulation was identical to the pattern of destruction that occurred to the fifty kilometers of nearby forests. These statements refute the writer's implications that it was a methane explosion. Lastly, the excerpt contends that many rivers, swamps and peat bogs in the region had high levels of methane gas, which was trapped underground. When it was released, it detonated above the forests due to the lightning. Nevertheless, the lecturer challenges this idea by declaring that sheer volume of methane would be needed to cause such explosion and the area never held these vast amounts of methane required. Besides, no fires erupted in the forests which makes this aforementioned explanation questionable.