Space rock 'on collision course' with Earth!!!

[Ari Rahikkala]

I, for one, am really worried. With the experience from NT4, 2000 and XP, it can be expected that this one, too, will cause a lot of damage...

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
BTW, I'm getting a real kick out of SD complaining about 'unwarrented scientific expense' in a thread that trumpets why this particular category of expense is indeed warrented...

How is it warranted. The asteroid is almost certainly not going to hit. We've lasted several thousand years of civilization wthout problems, and statistically we are likely to have many millenia more.

Also, it wasn't a complaint, I just wouldn't approve the funding if I was in charge of the public purse.

[Ramo]

How 'bout we throw a massive paintball at it? Good ol' sunlight will get the job done.

[chequita guevara]

On further reseach, Gatekeeper is correct, this rock isn't a planet killer. It wouldn't be good though.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ramo
How 'bout we throw a massive paintball at it? Good ol' sunlight will get the job done.

The problem with that is we don't know whether or not it's going to hit right now. If it isn't, splashing it with paint might make it hit.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ramo
How 'bout we throw a massive paintball at it? Good ol' sunlight will get the job done.

That reminds me of a 'story' where an asteroid was predicted to impact the Earth, but the calculations were slightly skewed - it was in fact going to scrape the atmosphere and go back into space. Anyway the "defence force' deflected the asteroid with white paint and congratualted themselves on a job well done unknowing that their calculations were wrong. Unfortunately they deflected it the wrong way and they only realised it caused a direct hit once it was too late.

Can't remember what the programme was called, but it was Outer Limits-esque.

[Ramo]

The problem with that is we don't know whether or not it's going to hit right now.

Yeah, I was sort of kidding. I don't think it's worth it to do anything, seeing as how the impact is so improbable.

If it isn't, splashing it with paint might make it hit.

I don't see this as very likely (provided NASA doesn't mix up SI and English again ). The paint would probably have to be splashed on the wrong side of the asteroid for this to happen...

That reminds me of a 'story' where an asteroid was predicted to impact the Earth, but the calculations were slightly skewed - it was in fact going to scrape the atmosphere and go back into space. Anyway the "defence force' deflected the asteroid with white paint and congratualted themselves on a job well done unknowing that their calculations were wrong. Unfortunately they deflected it the wrong way and they only realised it caused a direct hit once it was too late.

[Gatekeeper]

On the assumption that this asteroid — which is 1.2 miles/2 km wide — will smash into Earth, where would the best place (as it were) be for it to hit? Serious question, folks. Which impact point would result in the least damage to the planet and its biosphere?

Gatekeeper

[Saint Marcus]

Space rock 'on collision course' with Earth!!!

I hope it crashes

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
On the assumption that this asteroid — which is 1.2 miles/2 km wide — will smash into Earth, where would the best place (as it were) be for it to hit? Serious question, folks. Which impact point would result in the least damage to the planet and its biosphere?

Gatekeeper

Antarctica, Australia or the south central Pacific. In that order.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
On the assumption that this asteroid — which is 1.2 miles/2 km wide — will smash into Earth, where would the best place (as it were) be for it to hit? Serious question, folks. Which impact point would result in the least damage to the planet and its biosphere?

Gatekeeper

I'd think that a massive amount of water in the atmosphere would do less harm that a massive amount of dust, since the water would precipitate out faster. It would also kill less people directly, so I'd suggest either the Pacific or the Antarctic.

[Ethelred]

so I'd suggest either the Pacific or the Antarctic.

Antartic? The ocean maybe but please not the continent. That would melt ALL those glaciers raising water levels, last I heard, about 200 feet. Plus there could be plenty of limestone to vaporize in the right place there. Limestone would dump huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere just as it looks like happened at Chixaluba 65 million years ago.

[Dauphin]

That would melt ALL those glaciers raising water levels, last I heard, about 200 feet.

200 ft? There is not that much ice in Antartica.

[KrazyHorse]

Antartic? The ocean maybe but please not the continent. That would melt ALL those glaciers raising water levels, last I heard, about 200 feet. Plus there could be plenty of limestone to vaporize in the right place there. Limestone would dump huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere just as it looks like happened at Chixaluba 65 million years ago

It wouldn't melt "all the glaciers". Care to compare the energy of a 2 kilometer rock impacting at 28 km/s with the heat required to melt a few million square kilometers of 2-kilometer thick ice?

[KrazyHorse]

And ethelred, this water won't all go into the oceans; a lot will be suspended in the atmosphere for a significan amount of time (weeks? months?) by which point ice will already started to have re-formed in places it was lost...