It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Meteor Is Headed For Earth And Will Hit In 7 Days... What Could Be Done?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:03 AM
Since people are blue-skying about using HAARP (not nearly enough power - plus the frequency range it covers was chosen NOT to penetrate the ionosphere well), should you open the topic to...what might work if you had it?

In the spirit of Ken Edwards, a guy with a wry sense of what constitutes violating NDAs, I'd say you could do that sucker some serious damage by hitting it with a few hundred mA of positrons in as tight a stream as you could manage. Maybe as a highly relativistic stream of positronium, so it's not scattering due to mutual repulsion.
edit on 24-3-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:22 AM
I'll save you peoples.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:29 AM
Q: Meteor Is Headed For Earth And Will Hit In 7 Days... What Could Be Done?

A: Run Around in circles screaming "How do you stop it?!"*

*Or you could do the "Armageddon" thingy.
Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:33 AM
7 days...?

Here my vote:

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:36 AM
Meteors are always heading for and impacting Earth virtually harmlessly. Small and medium asteroids ditto.

Sure a relatively large asteroid might wreak havoc but those are the least of humanity's problems. All probabilities point to the fact that human fate is sealed not by a natural disaster but man-made one, at this rate of modern history in the making.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Foppezao
Why could you not shoot an ICBM into space? they usually have reentry vehicles right? [MIRV's]
As in, re-enter the atmosphere, why not direct the MIRV's further into space, they have already escaped gravity..

Actually, an ICBM's warheads haven't 'escaped gravity' at all...that's why they're called Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. They lack the velocity to even enter orbit...never mind having enough surplus velocity to enter into an interplanetary transfer trajectory. To get the extra velocity, you'd need a lot of additional thrust...more than likely, an extra stage in the missile itself. The design and testing of a new carrier vehicle could easily take seven years, never mind seven days.

If they can send a Voyager in 1977 into [deep] space why couldn't they send an MIRV into [inter] stellar space 35 years later..

It's not really a question of "can we" launch a nuclear device into deep space. It's simply that we can't do it using an existing ICBM as a launcher, and within the OP's seven day time limit, we aren't going to be able to design, build and test a sufficiently powerful launcher.

Also, could they not think of something like a proton collider or a rail gun?
edit on 24-3-2012 by Foppezao because: (no reason given)

Thinking about a proton accelerator or a rail gun is one thing...building and testing them within the given time limit simply isn't happening. Frankly, I don't think a proton beam or a rail gun would be a practical answer, even given sufficient time and money to develop the system. Proton beams are going to be subject to distortion and deflection by the Earth's magnetic field. If ground based, there will also be atmospheric attenuation. The rail gun doesn't really have any advantages over a rocket powered projectile in space, but does have several disadvantages, the most important of which is a lack of guidance.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 12:01 PM
reply to post by kennvideo

AND the real Dr. Cosma is a proctologist in Butte, Montana.

Pics or it didn't happen.
You know the drill.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 12:22 PM
pray it away!

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 12:25 PM
drink my 15 year old glenfiddich and get ratted!

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 12:37 PM
You might as well stick your head between your legs, and kiss your butt goodbye!
Line 2.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 12:38 PM
If you exclude the 7 days time limit, and dream of a world where we took this seriously as a topic, the answer isn't a weapon.

The answer is to develop a spacecraft with a nuclear drive allowing it to travel into the solar system and intercept the object when its still distant. Then you park beside it and maintain the distance using propulsion. You'll pull it out of the way. If you intercept it months distant you don't have to alter its course much to make it miss.

Propulsion technology is the answer.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:39 PM
"Run...Run away"

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:49 PM
reply to post by kennvideo

MISSING BY .6 LUNAR DISTANCES and only 62 meters in diameter PULLLLEEESE

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 01:56 PM
I think that if given enough of a notice we could indeed do something. I would not be surprised if there is already a weapon or device of some kind. We have known about meteor hits on this planet for some time, so it is safe to assume that someone in the right position has thought on this level as well. Maybe some of the satellites orbiting around serve an even greater purpose, they are already in a good position, the sky. Front line defense.....makes you think!!

edit on 24-3-2012 by Minori because: spelling

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 02:06 PM

Originally posted by jazzguy
we calculate where its going to land and put all the movies stars, politicians, bankers, lawyers and zionists under it to soften the blow


posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 02:40 PM
reply to post by Nostalgic

If these facilities were not in place prior to the week then they are mute. To have something ready within a week time frame it has to be already in place and ready to go. It would be fun to see the scramble and feel the adrenaline rush of the event if TPTB would let the underlings know of it.
What would I do sit back in my lawn chair sip a cool coke and watch the fireworks. Then when it gets close enough I would tuck my head between my legs and kiss my butt good by.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 02:43 PM
I would say deflecting it would be the safest way. If we tried blasting it, we could create more problems by creating more chunks of the meteor and creating multiple targets for it to hit the earth. The question is how much time would we have to deflect it and the amount of distance we would need between the earth and the meteor to change its course.

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 02:48 PM
Send every one of our biggest, baddest nukes up and detonate in a specific order such that each subsequent explosion would alter the trajectory by enough at a time (similar to a domino effect), that it could be deflected to a point of skimming off the surface of the atmosphere, or directed to an area that could be calculated to cause the least amount of destruction. Probably an ocean impact or an area with the least number of surrounding populations. Then you try to move as many as you can, but you probably couldn't get everyone out of the way of such a large object's destruction.

That would be our only chance other than using a weapon or technology that we aren't aware of.


posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 03:00 PM
This :

12 Practical Steps for Learning to Go With the Flow

“Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes. Don’t resist them – that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality. Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like.” - Lao-Tzu

Post written by Leo Babauta. Follow me on Twitter.

No matter how much structure we create in our lives, no matter how many good habits we build, there will always be things that we cannot control — and if we let them, these things can be a huge source of anger, frustration and stress.

The simple solution: learn to go with the flow.

“Smile, breathe and go slowly.” - Thich Nhat Hanh

More here :
edit on 24-3-2012 by Trueman because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne

The lantern can do anything, like make a big hand and catch it then throw it at Saturn. Afterall we don't need Saturn.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in