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.

 

NASA to Make Near-Earth Announcement Regarding YU55 & Other Potential ELE on Sept 29, 2011

page: 7
62
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by AbdulAlhazred
pretty funny how there's been a few posts about what a great spectacle it would be if it hit the moon. Its like some people dont realise the knock on effects if the moons orbit etc was disrupted!
While I agree that the moon being hit is not a good thing, the moon is covered with craters from previous strikes. It would not be the first time for it to be hit, nor would it be the last. It would take a very large body striking the moon to disrupt its orbit to any degree that would affect us on Earth.

edit on 27-9-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ignant
 


Please go to ssd.jpl.nasa.gov... and do a search for 2011so5. You will find it is listed with a condition code 8 which according to NASA Torino Hazard Impact Scale is "collision is certain".



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by BuffaloGal
reply to post by ignant
 


Please go to ssd.jpl.nasa.gov... and do a search for 2011so5. You will find it is listed with a condition code 8 which according to NASA Torino Hazard Impact Scale is "collision is certain".



I'll be damned.

Condition code 8. Collision is guaranteed on the 29-9-2011

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...


Edit: Why does it have a condition code of 8 when it says that it will be 5.6LD from earth????
edit on 27-9-2011 by XplanetX because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2011 by XplanetX because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by XplanetX
 


probably lense flare.

or new uars phy-opp.
-----------------------------------------------
nasa----->we dont know,,,honest.
nasa---->ya we knew,,hahaha.
now thats fearmongering,,
now a 7 on the toledo scale,, sure,,,
-----------
29th ,,,at this point,,,whatever.
edit on 27-9-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)


"5.6LD",,whatever is 5 or 6 lunar dist. away.

edit on 27-9-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)


and "condition code 8 " means how bright it will be,,

see more nasa fearmongering.
edit on 27-9-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Well if its going to pass that close hey it sounds a cheap option to study right? seems like a good idea to me, you could even have a practice run at it to destroy it incase we one day find an actual threat, practice makes perfect

I'm not sure we can class YU55 as an ELE but just a drill /practice run



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
This is what pops up in an info window when you click on "Condition code"


Definition/Description for SBDB Parameter/Field
Title: condition code

Description: MPC "U" parameter: orbit uncertainty estimate 0-9, with 0 being good, and 9 being highly uncertain



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellsmight
 


So.. 0 thru 9?



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Well! Pack your B.O.B.'s boys and girls (just in case) cause this might get heavy. It's about time they come out and say something. For some reason I feel like NASA has been giving very little info, disinforming, or just avoiding this subject all together. In my mind, there are just to many questions and the answers that have been given just dont feel like the whole truth. NASA comes out and says one thing, but if you go and seek the data yourself, you'll find that the info that you find (most of the time) doesn't fit with what NASA is telling us. Could the rise in solar flares and the N.E.O.'s be the real reason behind the announcement that the crew of the I.S.S. might have to leave there posts in early November? I guess we'll find out soon.



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
"CERTAIN IMPACT"
Asteroid 2011S05, page 1
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread757497/pg1
You've visited this page 2 times.
+1 to recommend it on Google search!
10 posts - 8 authors - Last post: 19 hours ago
Asteroid 2011S05, page 1 ... A collision is certain, capable of causing localized destruction for an impact over land or possibly a tsunami if close ...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

^ notice its been deleted from ATS

oh and yea only ~7 NEO's on my op list are Potential ELE, not YU55 nor all (duh)
but then again that remains to be seen as NWO elite are in hiding hoping and planning that we, all but their own, die







in all seriousness, i think NASA/DHS has made the Condition vs Torino discrepancy value Cryptic on purpose, cuz they are our terror state and really don't give a dang about the sheeple/masses:

www.jpdo.gov...
edit on 27-9-2011 by ignant because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ignant
 

What's "Crytic" about it?

Because someone thinks the orbit condition code has something to do with the Torino scale and doesn't bother to find out what it really is, it's NASA's fault? Sorry, it isn't NASA's or anyone else's job to make you think. It's your job to make sure you don't act foolishly.

edit on 9/27/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ignant
 

What's "Crytic" about it?

Because someone thinks the orbit condition code has something to do with the Torino scale and doesn't bother to find out what it really is, it's NASA's fault? Sorry, it isn't NASA's or anyone else's job to make you think. It's your job to make sure you don't act foolishly.

edit on 9/27/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


i believe it means the probability of accuracy of the figures, and isn't related to the Torino. prior to posting the above, i asked on another ATS but was answered that it is the Torino



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ignant
 

And you think "DHS/NASA" did something intentional to make it confusing. Like I said, it's not up to NASA to get you to think.

BTW, the Condition Code runs from 0-7. An 8 means it hasn't been determined but it is apparent that the uncertain about the close approach of 2011SO5 is very low. It is also a very small object which would breakup if it did enter the atmosphere, which it won't.

Correction: Condition Codes run from 0-9.


edit on 9/27/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
This NEO, cat 8 - how big is it supposed to be? From whats in the above video?

Is this what NASA is going to mention?

I'm just a littel interested?



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
thanks Phage.

now look at those guys freaking out and taking the condition code 8 as the torino and telling viewers collision is certain when the real torino (as you pointed out in the other thread) is ZERO.

sheesh, its all NASA/DHS's fault. they're confused and freakin out. really!

imo



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Yeah.

I knew something did not make sense when the distance of the object at it's closest approach to earth would be 5.6 LD.



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by JamesGC
 

It's between 21 and 47 meters in diameter.
It will miss Earth by more than 1 million miles.



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Are you talking about YU55?

www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Actually, this other one is coming in closer than 2011So5. I know it's still pretty far away, but if it hit, might cause a little damage.

ssd.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Cheers.

Even if it was going to hit, 47 metres it nothing really.



posted on Sep, 27 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Minimum distance for 2011.so5 (listed at bottom) was 0.01.... AU. Or roughly one percent the distance to the sun. So that puts it at about +/- 9.3mil miles at it's closest approach. Not exactly what I'd call a "collision certainty"



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join