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.

 

Asteroid 2007 TU24 has NASA concerned.

page: 58
130
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I just sent a letter off to Foxnews and asked them why they are ignoring this event. If they say nothing at all, we have our answer.

As for making a black hole, I hope that never happens. It's way to scary to imagine.




posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by scrapple
 


That is were I am at too scrapple.

I just don't see how the previous numbers from the 19th have changed so little compared to the new solution from Jan. 25th! Only very small differences, yet we are told that their margin of error dropped from 2/3s of an earth radius (6,371km * .66 = 4487km or 4,487,000m) to about 30m with these latest tracks. This means that the accuracy of their new data increased by over 1,495,660%! Yeah that is correct, 1,495,660 percent! Yet the numbers given in the latest ephemeris have not significantly changed? If the data is nearly the same then why is it they had such a large margin of error? Something dosen't add up here.

Interesting to note that NASA never released that information about "margin of error" until after they did this latest observation. Was 4,487km too much uncertainity to be acceptable? Would it make some uncomfortable? Also note that NASA has never given (publicly) odds of an impact, unlike the near Mars astroid on the 30th. Why, maybe because we are talking about the earth here, even a 1 in 10,000 chance is too much infomation for your average human to handle? Instead we are told that it has NO chance of hitting OR even effecting the earth. This is simply untrue, there is always a possibility, no matter how remote it may be!

So given that the previous data included such a larger error rate than they now claim to have, how is it that their older data isn't showing that they were more off, it was nearly identical to what the have now. What are the chances of that? Astronomical? Excuse the bad pun! Thoughts anyone, how do you account for this?

I also wanted to note how the latest posted link to the news story on NewsScientistSpace incorrectly leads people to believe that the radar images they include in the article are the ones obtained from Goldman on the 23rd. Those series of images are from several weeks ago and NOT the latest imagery obtained from Goldman that they purposely mislead you into assuming! Those exact images were linked to previously in this thread, maybe around page 20-30, if I am remembering correctly. Maybe they couldn't get the latest images, but to run these as the new photos is very deceitful in my opinion. I still think something could be up, why would they do this? Misleading the people, yet again.



[edit on 25-1-2008 by percievedreality]

[edit on 25-1-2008 by percievedreality]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I just cant seem to find any information on the current status of what we intend to do about the WD5 16,000 mile pass from Mars? It seems that if we are in the safe zone with TU24, then the big news should be our process of learning about this Extreme event slated for Jan. 30th. I want to know if we will all be able to link to this monumental event and see what the effects are of a really close pass from a asteroid. I am glad that 'we' are not expecting TU24 to pass within 16,000 miles of earth! Listen the divine design here is a incredible phenomena, we will be safe from this asteroid pass but we can also learn so much from WD5, for the next unforeseen asteroids headed our way.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Sorry, double post, my bad.....

[edit on 25-1-2008 by percievedreality]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Antar..

...the mars WD5 16 K pass is going to be observed closely....in view of the 2029 earth pass of apohys of roughly 36 K......


ciaoo



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by scrapple
 


That is rather screwy, isn't it.

In truth, I dropped out of this thread yesterday due to a couple of reasons:

First, I have other interests and demands upon my time that precluded my active participation in this discussion.

Secondly, we're all simply passengers on this ride, even knowing what's going to happen won't change the outcome at this point.

And unless we've got our own exclusive access to an unfiltered, unbiased stream of constantly updated information, we can't really know what's going to take place, now can we?

All we can do is live every day to our best, and always cling to a hope for the future.

As NGC2736 alluded, there's nowhere to run, and by running, you may just put yourself into harms way, rather than avoiding it.

We are at the mercy of the whims of forces beyond our control, accept the fact that the sun will rise on the 29th, as it always has, and everything will happen as it should.

Whatever takes place, one thing is for certain, it will not be an EOLAWKI event.

Life, and love, will go on.





[edit on 25-1-2008 by goosdawg]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Relax guys! That’s going to miss us by 1.4 LD (Lunar distance) on 29 Jan 08.



Check out the NASA/JPL browser here:

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...

See? Cheers!



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Just imagine if it does hit -people dont see or worry enough all they are given is what is shown around them by the governing powers witch is all a complete lie inc nasa-
( don’t forget probable planet x and passing through the centre of the energy of the milky way)
There is probable corroborating data that show it missing ;if though it does hit I will be running with my cat up the tallest mountain I can find to avoid the tidal wave.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


You nailed it antar. Let's hope lots of data is collected. Now that "we" can conceive of methods to warn and perhaps "modify" the situation in the future... "we" as a species might just want to look into that in pragmatic ways.

The Mars opportunity is great. The TU24 event is 50 times not bright enough for the naked eye at closest approach... but those who can look are trying. I had a beat up old Tasco for years... about 9 months or so ago I started to get interested in more "fun stuff" other than looking at the Moon.

Many people still seem to think of Astronomy as something done by propeller-heads. It is... and much more. Public-awareness is at an all time high within that specific interest and enthusiast group.

One can doodle-out the numbers. 0.0012501, 0.00099. One could even plot them. They are still just that until one has a grasp of the theoretical and syntactic framework. Mega-boring, quantum-dry. Not many will spontaneously invest the effort. There is a paradigm shift away from the propeller heads as the tech becomes more accessible. This thread is evidence in some small measure.

Even our friends reporting in Arizona who are more or less "official" run on peanuts with "not the best" hardware. Amateur astronomy has had a long history of "associations" with what some would consider as "links" into the gatekeepers of the problem way back to '47 and perhaps earlier.

All report to someone because to operate without co-operation has been challenging - data must be shared and collated. I'm glad NASA has some budget left for this. No one else “really” does. All the heavy coin's gone into every other project BUT NEOs and the other bits of the universe whirling around in a blizzard. Play pool or billiards? Same stuff but 3D or rather 4D with no table and the balls aren't always round or balanced. Who knows there could be more "Ds" involved. Everything has an effect on everything else. Real time. Stuff happens.

There may come a day when truly independent data can be constructed independent of "official" sources. Not "against" or anything like the internet whizzing-match currently going on… but just a nice second opinion you know? TU24 typifies what can happen. The universe plays hardball and it's for keeps. BOHICA.

There will be more coming our way. I guess this is how it is dealt with currently.

One would hope we might have a snowball’s chance in Hell with 99 an 44/100ths percent uncertainty factor. LOL. Maybe we do.

Vic


[edit on 25-1-2008 by V Kaminski]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
A star for you V.K. I couldn't have said it better. (And that's high praise because I'm not humble by nature.
)

If I could get my wish, this thing would make a good sized crater somewhere in the outback of Oz where the cameras could show the world a need for doing a better job of watching out for solar traffic.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I do not know if anybody has posted this yet or not, but it appears fox news has finally put something up on Tu24 on there website. Just a mild description saying that it's going to come in really close and that anybody with a fairly good telescope should be able to see it on the night of January 29. It also hint's at what would happen if a rock of this size actually did hit the earth.

Here is the link (sorry if I did not post the link right)

TU24

*edited for spelling

[edit on 25-1-2008 by HMR85]

[edit on 25-1-2008 by HMR85]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


Thanks.
A one meter nickel-iron-tungsten making contact at 60 or 70 thousand miles an hour delta V would make a spectacular statement much more than some of the recent Lunar hits which were surreal. It was on the Moon, not Earth. What might "make it stick" to become a priority? The Moon has some spectacular geologic history. Those craters? Like that. Our atmosphere buys us a little protection... not much.

A Tunguska-like event? One would hope not. Like the hole in Arizona? That'd be bad too. Or a big hit like the Caribbean or Hudson's/James Bay. I suppose "we" will find out if we survive ourselves. It would seem we "could" do something about it... it'll take a true crisis I fear to learn.

MRO "could" get some shots of the Mars object. LOL.

Vic

[edit on 25-1-2008 by V Kaminski]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by percievedreality
 


Awesome Post!

1) could you try and give me a clear definition of 'ephemeris ' Is this realted to the start/origin point of tracking for an object and is that related to the Earth/Sun/ or some other Universal?

2)The freakiest thing to me is the seemingly legit letter posted by violet where JPL calls off any further visual observsation. This means IMO that all your smaller observatories who feed info (and may be fed $) to 'offical Nasa, can now stand down (w/ I doubt any serious star watcher would) - but bottom line NASA wont be needin their data/photos, so dont be expecting them either J.Q. Public.

We need some private citizens to get ops on this rock as it passes by.

As for these 'new vs old' actaul distance numbers - (and the still unresolved EMOID - which hasnt changed one decimal after the radar track) - its inconceivable considering the logical assumption that radio/visual tracking of a farther away body would be as tight as a closer by and current radar fix.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by V Kaminski
 


True, even in some place as unpopulated as the outback there might be a fatality or two, though I would hope not. But it would take something like that, where the cameras could circle it while filming the scientists crawling around on the ground, to get the real attention.

Then a few Greenpeace types to round up scared 'roos and an assortment of snakes to generate some sympathy, and so people could grasp the idea that it could have been them instead of a hapless marsupial to have half it's hair burned off.

It would take something like that to make people realize the need for better science, and more funding, concerning what could be somewhere out there with our name on it. Sad, but true.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by goosdawg
reply to post by scrapple
 


And unless we've got our own exclusive access to an unfiltered, unbiased stream of constantly updated information, we can't really know what's going to take place, now can we?

All we can do is live every day to our best, and always cling to a hope for the future.


[edit on 25-1-2008 by goosdawg]


Well said my friend. Well I dont have much left (in time energy or data) to go on other than the apparent discrepancies listed above. I don't empirically know if TU24 will hit or miss and must trust 'others data'.

I also wouldn’t be surprised if the rock didn’t exist at all.

How the world astro community is 'ready' to feed us the Mars / Asteroid pass, when that same asteroid 'surprised' us 'later' than TU25 is also beyond my comprehension. (I assume that its brightness / not obital telemetry is a possible factor in this?) How we can marshal the resources and press for a Jan 30th close call of another planet, but have to wait 5 days before an Earth pass of a PHA to get main stream press and old trajectory info...

You've all done a great job inspiring me to try and understand a new topic and I salute you all for your determination and comments.

scrap


[edit on 25-1-2008 by scrapple]

[edit on 25-1-2008 by scrapple]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
Relax guys! That’s going to miss us by 1.4 LD (Lunar distance) on 29 Jan 08.



Check out the NASA/JPL browser here:

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...

See? Cheers!


You don't suppose a miss by the asteroid will instill a new sense of faith in the scientific method that spills over to the rest of the board topics such as climate change, 2012 and ufos? me neither



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Whoever is clinging to their conspiracy theory can continue to, but I believe this: If it were going to cause damage, NASA wouldn't know about it until it was basically right upon us. There are TONS of amateur peepers out there that continue to say that it will not hit, and if they thought otherwise I haven't heard it. If they even thought it might hit the government would have a hand in it JUST to get people to spend money on supplies. And still you are not considering anything anyone else says, its kinda of like you are having a conversation with yourself. Have you still not thought about how much of this could burn up on its way down to us IF it were to do that?



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by percievedreality
reply to post by scrapple
 


That is were I am at too scrapple.

I just don't see how the previous numbers from the 19th have changed so little compared to the new solution from Jan. 25th! Only very small differences, yet we are told that their margin of error dropped from 2/3s of an earth radius (6,371km * .66 = 4487km or 4,487,000m) to about 30m with these latest tracks. This means that the accuracy of their new data increased by over 1,495,660%! Yeah that is correct, 1,495,660 percent! Yet the numbers given in the latest ephemeris have not significantly changed? If the data is nearly the same then why is it they had such a large margin of error? Something dosen't add up here.

Interesting to note that NASA never released that information about "margin of error" until after they did this latest observation. Was 4,487km too much uncertainity to be acceptable? Would it make some uncomfortable? Also note that NASA has never given (publicly) odds of an impact, unlike the near Mars astroid on the 30th. Why, maybe because we are talking about the earth here, even a 1 in 10,000 chance is too much infomation for your average human to handle? Instead we are told that it has NO chance of hitting OR even effecting the earth. This is simply untrue, there is always a possibility, no matter how remote it may be!

So given that the previous data included such a larger error rate than they now claim to have, how is it that their older data isn't showing that they were more off, it was nearly identical to what the have now. What are the chances of that? Astronomical? Excuse the bad pun! Thoughts anyone, how do you account for this?

I also wanted to note how the latest posted link to the news story on NewsScientistSpace incorrectly leads people to believe that the radar images they include in the article are the ones obtained from Goldman on the 23rd. Those series of images are from several weeks ago and NOT the latest imagery obtained from Goldman that they purposely mislead you into assuming! Those exact images were linked to previously in this thread, maybe around page 20-30, if I am remembering correctly. Maybe they couldn't get the latest images, but to run these as the new photos is very deceitful in my opinion. I still think something could be up, why would they do this? Misleading the people, yet again.



[edit on 25-1-2008 by percievedreality]

[edit on 25-1-2008 by percievedreality]



You've brought up a really good point. I too am wondering why with the Mars asteroid we were given a ratio of risk but with TU24 nothing! They just say no chance. Does anyone know if they came up with a ratio for this one yet. I'm confused with all the numbers that have been posted on here, so sorry if I missed it already.

I will continue to keep a close eye on this situation.



[edit on 25-1-2008 by whoreallyknows]



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I hate to be Chicken Little, but could someone please check out the status of the Global Conciousness site?
I've never seen this color before!!

noosphere.princeton.edu...

90% ????????



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
I hate to be Chicken Little, but could someone please check out the status of the Global Conciousness site?
I've never seen this color before!!

noosphere.princeton.edu...

90% ????????



The color coding represents the level of coherence or correlation among the eggs, which is reflected in the probability of the Chisquare. (((The expected level is about 50%, and big shifts in either direction are notable.))) The GCP's formal testing looks for increased interegg correlation, which is represented here by the warm colors, orange and red.


(((Please note that this display is not intended or expected to be interpreted as if it were a formal analysis using large amounts of data. In particular, it should not be construed as a preliminary indicator of what might be happening with the "global consciousness", and it certainly cannot be used as an early warning system about possible events.)))




top topics



 
130
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join