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.

 

Surprise Asteroid Makes Near-Miss of Earth

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Does anybody know where and when it would've hit, had it hit?




posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


I was just messing with Anonymous who injected his "We never went to the moon" filth which has nothing to do with this thread.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nventual
Does anybody know where and when it would've hit, had it hit?


If it didn't hit, it misses. If it missed, there's no way to know where it "would've hit", because it missed. Unless i'm confused.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I just wasn't sure if maybe there was a way to estimate where it would have hit if it was closer to earth.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 06:46 PM
link   
I'm sorry but you kids are so gullible.

the first couple threads are like "oh gosh and just think of how many must be going by us and our top scientists and military don't even know!! oh dear!"

listen.
they are aware of every freaking piece of space debris...
incoming and outgoing.
they just didn't tell you about this one.

then after the fact. it flies by .. then you're informed. then you're also informed that it was discovered 3 days ago but even then, they didn't tell you.

they're not gonna tell you about nibiru either


-



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Im glad they didnt land. It was no asteroid but a traveling group of alien gypsies that do comedy tours dressed as Richard Simmons!



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


This asteroid was very small compared to the ones that could really do some damage, so small it would be nearly impossible to detect if it weren't for the thousands of amateur astronomers with their scopes to the sky.

Something this small wont be detected until it's close by, and as it nears it is extremely hard to track because of it's size, proximity and speed. You could have the most powerful telescope in the world and never see it if you aren't extremely lucky.

I think you have way to much confidence in the government, they probably find out about these things after the fact the same way you do.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Heres another good link to this story . It passed One fifth the distance of the moon and about twice as far as our satellites . Thats very very very close indeed and we only hear about it AFTER it passes . Not very reassuring. www.newscientist.com...



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemooone2
 


Nope, not much to be reassured about. Missed us again.
It's the one you don't see that you have to look out for.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by salsaking
reply to post by prevenge
 


This asteroid was very small compared to the ones that could really do some damage, so small it would be nearly impossible to detect if it weren't for the thousands of amateur astronomers with their scopes to the sky.

Something this small wont be detected until it's close by, and as it nears it is extremely hard to track because of it's size, proximity and speed. You could have the most powerful telescope in the world and never see it if you aren't extremely lucky.

I think you have way to much confidence in the government, they probably find out about these things after the fact the same way you do.



sooo you're saying.... that we just loftily send out into space and other planet's and the moon.. hundreds of millions of dollars of space equipment and just "hope" they don't get hit by some asteroid like this?
... this asteroid in the article was said that it would have caused an explosion comparable to a nuclear blast.

but we don't take such precautions and jsut merrily send our astronauts to the moon without thinking about such things.. or at least not looking for them.
and send our shuttles and space stations up and military SDI sattelites up just to /sigh// oh well.. lets HOPE some big thing doesn't hit them.. laaa laaa.. even though it took decades of manhours time and energy.. let's just NOT put even one dollar towards being able to see EVERYTHING OF INTEREST THAT MAY INTERVENE IN OUR EFFORTS...

no they don't need that info.. nor do they want it.. they just laaa laaa lets just HOPE it doesn't happen..

oh look .. an amateur astronomer found one that could take out a large city, cause tsunamis, mass wildfires..and set off an environmetal domino effect..

luuucky it missed us.. /phew/ ...

ok lets sen a few more billion $ worth of technology and highly trained scientists back into space without looking for these things so we can alter our orbits to avoid them.. let's just no worry about them...

wow at least the people don't think we CAN .. that would be silly for them to think that we CAN see those things, things that would completely undermine our grand efforts.. laa laaaa

hey where'd I put my budget accounting database file?
ooo well guess it doesn't matter where it went.. laa laa

How'd my Weekly World News get all wet?!
Goddamn fish-sticks burned again!!!
no secrets left in the land of the brave!!


-


[edit on 2-3-2009 by prevenge]



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


There are actually a number of NEO search programs going on in the US and other countries, both governmental and as you point out, amateur. Asteroids are very small and very dim objects, very difficult to locate visually or with radar. The smaller they are, the nearer they will be before they are discovered.

The astronauts who landed on the Moon were at no more risk of being hit by a 100 foot asteroid than any particular spot on Earth is. Our "assets" in space are in no more danger of being hit by such an object than you are.

What are you going to do about the risk you are taking by sitting right where you are, right now?

[edit on 3/2/2009 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


The odds are incredibly small that the few things we have out in space get hit by anything. I'm sure a piece of dust flying at 40,000mph would cause enough damage to a satellite that it might as well have been hit by a 200ft one. But does that happen?

How many thousands of tiny dust particles hit our atmosphere every night, each one a potential threat to a plane or a satellite? Are these monitored? Of course not! There's a limit to what we can track, and although 200ft seems big, I think this is still beyond our technology to know about every single one.

What are the odds of a direct impact? I would assume trillions to one, I haven't a clue. It must be big enough that they spend their time looking for bigger things, and let the little ones slip by.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


I think the idea is not that we're not trying to find anything, its that some asteroids are just too small to track. So, in a sense, yes, we are taking our chances. But I think the odds of something as small as a space shuttle being hit by something as small as an asteroid are remote enough that we don't have to worry about it too much. It would be akin to two people shooting at each other and the bullets hitting (the bullets being the asteroid and the shuttle, and the earth being a person).



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by prevenge
 


There are actually a number of NEO search programs going on in the US and other countries, both governmental and as you point out, amateur. Asteroids are very small and very dim objects, very difficult to locate visually or with radar. The smaller they are, the nearer they will be before they are discovered.

The astronauts who landed on the Moon were at no more risk of being hit by a 100 foot asteroid than any particular spot on Earth is. Our "assets" in space are in no more danger of being hit by such an object than you are.

What are you going to do about the risk you are taking by sitting right where you are, right now?

[edit on 3/2/2009 by Phage]



excuse me, but that's complete bunk.
we have an atmosphere and anything approaching is most likely to burn itself from the friction caused by decent through the matter of the atmospheres.

in space there is no such protection.
on the moon there is no such protection. .. the craters say it themselves.

the probability is much higher that our space assets would be damaged than people or assets on earth.

this is all.. up to a certain size obviously.



Originally posted by LiquidLight
I think the idea is not that we're not trying to find anything, its that some asteroids are just too small to track. So, in a sense, yes, we are taking our chances. But I think the odds of something as small as a space shuttle being hit by something as small as an asteroid are remote enough that we don't have to worry about it too much. It would be akin to two people shooting at each other and the bullets hitting (the bullets being the asteroid and the shuttle, and the earth being a person).


with the literal "cloud" of space junk we have out there.. we improve our chances of something being hit more and more each time we add another.

I'm saying that i think the risk has always been known and security is in place for such threats...

and as far as it being in the public eye... IF NOT NOW.. after that close call.. there isn't effort put into monitoring asteroids at LEAST that size... then deciding not to .. now.. after that close call.. would be foolish.

-



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by prevenge

excuse me, but that's complete bunk.
we have an atmosphere and anything approaching is most likely to burn itself from the friction caused by decent through the matter of the atmospheres.

in space there is no such protection.
on the moon there is no such protection. .. the craters say it themselves.

the probability is much higher that our space assets would be damaged than people or assets on earth.

this is all.. up to a certain size obviously.



Excuse me but I thought we were talking about:


some asteroid like this? ... this asteroid in the article was said that it would have caused an explosion comparable to a nuclear blast.




lets HOPE some big thing doesn't hit them

Changing the rules in the middle of the game is kind of a chicken s* thing to do. So you think we should be able to track fist sized objects? Or is what you are saying is that there aren't any rocks out there. People did used to think that rocks couldn't fall from the sky but we've moved on from there.

BTW, the major craters on the moon are millions, if not billions, of years old.

[edit on 3/2/2009 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



no if anything you changed the game when you talked about percentage of chance of something (any size) hitting us or anything in space as being equal

-



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The astronauts who landed on the Moon were at no more risk of being hit by a 100 foot asteroid than any particular spot on Earth is. Our "assets" in space are in no more danger of being hit by such an object than you are.


Phage is 100% right about this.

Big objects are so rare, they are of little concern. The only time that we get a little nervous is during cometary meteor shower peaks if they are expected to be sizable outbursts or storms, since the chances of getting hit become much higher. Satellite operators maneuver their satellites into less vulnerable positions until the danger passes on these occasions.

There's a possibility some operators may do this later on this year during the Leonids in November. A good peak for us observers = worrisome peak for the satellite operators!

By the way Phage,

I found out that satellites are un-insurable



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by prevenge
 


How's that again?

1) You talked about objects large enough to cause damage on Earth being a danger to astronauts/satellites.

2) I replied that the chance of an impact by a large object is very small.

3) You change your premise to objects small enough to be burned up by Earth's atmosphere.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.
I found out that satellites are un-insurable


kind of like houses in flood-prone areas are uninsureable for fooding.


-



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by prevenge
 


How's that again?

1) You talked about objects large enough to cause damage on Earth being a danger to astronauts/satellites.

2) I replied that the chance of an impact by a large object is very small.


you did.


Originally posted by Phage
The astronauts who landed on the Moon were at no more risk of being hit by a 100 foot asteroid than any particular spot on Earth is. Our "assets" in space are in no more danger of being hit by such an object than you are.


I had taken the impression you were talking about any object any size, got mixed up because i was reading multiple responses..
hadn't thought it through..

as far as being exact here. yea.. you were right there..

i'm saying that something of that size.. would have been tracked.. and not disclosed to the public based on it's trajectory and near hit fly by..

i'm sticking to that conclusion.


-



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join