Slashdot Mirror


Earth's Asteroid Risk Downgraded

xanthines-R-yummy writes "Relax, everyone - the risk of a gigantic asteroid colliding with Earth just got smaller! Nature reports: "A new survey revises down the likelihood of a massive asteroid hitting the Earth by 20-30%. We're only due to collide with rocks larger than one kilometre across roughly once every 600,000 years, it concludes." Whew! What a relief!"

231 comments

  1. I feel so safe by Atragon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wow, we're only slated to be hit by a rock bigger than 1km wide every 600,000 years...

    Man, I guess I won't have to worry about any rocks smaller than 1km big, it's not like they'll do any real damage.

    1. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      speaking of something else that's 1 kilometer "big"...

    2. Re:I feel so safe by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 1

      Yeah wasn't that last one that Big the one that wiped out the dinosaurs a few million years ago? That would make us Well overdue! That is not good news :)

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    3. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be dumb. Learn about probability.

    4. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      his stupidness?

    5. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably won't.

    6. Re:I feel so safe by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

      Thank God! Now I can get rid of my aluminum-foil hardhat.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    7. Re:I feel so safe by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      acording to my quick calculations, a 0.8km rock flying at 10km/s would have about 3600megatons worth of kinetic energy (presuming that it was about the density of water -- ymmv).

      Given that it would have about a 2/3 probability of hitting water, I'm exepecting some seriously impressed surfers that day.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    8. Re:I feel so safe by nyseal · · Score: 1

      On a global basis...no, they won't.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    9. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are a whole new way of spelling idiot.

    10. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wouldn't that cause some powerful shockwaves? someone with credible knowledge please comment

    11. Re:I feel so safe by swordboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you haven't seen the End of the World, then have a look at what you are missing.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    12. Re:I feel so safe by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 1

      They'd be really big.

      --
      Needle Nardle Noo
    13. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, I guess I won't have to worry about any rocks smaller than 1km big, it's not like they'll do any real damage.

      Quite right. You'd rather worry about those much smaller metal things moving around outside which are called cars given how many people have been killed by them during the last hundred years alone.

    14. Re:I feel so safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'd flood costal areas with tsunamis about as tall as the largest dinosaurs.

    15. Re:I feel so safe by Jade_Siren · · Score: 1

      Ahhhh, but the question is...When does that 600,000 years start?

    16. Re:I feel so safe by placeclicker · · Score: 1

      that movie made me cry

      best flash movie... EVER

      --

      Browse at -1, because trolls are often the most creative part of /.
    17. Re:I feel so safe by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is that I only learned of the possible threat through a story on Slashdot saying "don't worry about it". So when the big one comes, I won't know about it anyway. Now when is Friends on next... (j/k!!)

    18. Re:I feel so safe by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      No silly. Version 6.6.7 of the Armegeddon ebuild had a compile error for the Mips platform, so they masked it bumping everyone down to 6.6.6.

      Don't you guys read the portage changelog?

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  2. More importantly... by ohad_l · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How likely are we to be able to nuke 'em once we see them? How likely are we to see those anyway? We've had several near-misses that we only detected after the asteroid passed us...

    --
    If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
    1. Re:More importantly... by fname · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Depends on the advance warning. With 30-40 years notice, we'd probably have time to send out a scout team to characterize the asteroid. Then, we could send a follow on team with the proper explosives and nukes. Hit it soon enough (at least a couple years before collision), and we could deflect it.

      Some folks think that painting it is a better solution. You see, if you paint part of it white, it will deflect the asteroid by about 1 earth-radius 20 years ahead of time. (Less than the margin of error in our guess, most likely. Might knock it into us.) And, to paint a 100-meter or 1-kilometer rock takes A LOT of paint.

      Anyways, the short of it is, if it's an asteroid, we can probably have 100 years notice if it's big enough (not today, but our detection ability is improving). If it's a comet, we might only have a few months notice. Then we'd be in trouble.

    2. Re:More importantly... by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 1
      There's the catch. *With* 30-40 years notice. We recently noticed a large asteroid only after it passed between us and the moon. If we are going to protect ourselves (if there's a good chance at 600,000 years, there's still a chance now) we had better get our act together. What would that require?

      Not much. An array of 100 or so 1-meter telescopes spread throughout the northern and southern hemispheres would do the trick. Sure, every patch of sky wouldn't be observed each night, but with the right spread, an asteroid would be hard-pressed to get by without us noticing. Constant observation and reobservation would find blips, software would eliminate the cosmic rays, the supernovae would be handed off to other astronomers, and effectively what you're left with is a bunch of asteroids. Plotting their trajectories is something else, but I think it can be done even on such a large scale.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    3. Re:More importantly... by M$Marketing · · Score: 0

      Nuking them sounds good to me. With all the nukes that we have, how come we would only send 1 of them up? Is it because of the $? I don't know much about rocket science, so I'd really want to know.

      Also, how does painting work? Does it have to do with the sun's heat reflecting & pushing it away? That kind of worries me, because we seem to have a pretty light colored earth. Doesn't that mean something is push it away as well?

      --
      Take care...
    4. Re:More importantly... by Zaak · · Score: 1

      Plotting their trajectories is something else

      Plotting the trajectory of an object is easy once you know it's there. Especially if you have 100 extra telescopes available.

      TTFN

    5. Re:More importantly... by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 3, Funny
      Some folks think that painting it is a better solution. You see, if you paint part of it white, it will deflect the asteroid by about 1 earth-radius 20 years ahead of time. (Less than the margin of error in our guess, most likely. Might knock it into us.) And, to paint a 100-meter or 1-kilometer rock takes A LOT of paint.

      That, and hiring a small army of painters to actually paint the damn thing would cost a fortune! They charge a fortune for coming over here even if they are from the same town, can you imagine what they would charge for going to an object somewhere between Mars and Jupiter?

    6. Re:More importantly... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      That kind of worries me, because we seem to have a pretty light colored earth. Doesn't that mean something is push it away as well?

      Yes, there are a few things pushing on the Earth too - the radiation pressure of the sunlight falling on it and the solar wind, to name two off the top of my head. Also, our centripetal acceleration acts so as to try to make the Earth fly off away from the Sun (on a tangent, of course). Gravity counteracts them all.

      Don't worry though - our little planet has been here for a few billion years, and trust me, short of something cataclysmic happening, it'll still be here in a few billion more. All the forces on it are in balance, or so nearly so as to make no practical difference.

    7. Re:More importantly... by Squareball · · Score: 1

      What if we paint it with a nuclear paint bomb? That way we get the best of both worlds.

    8. Re:More importantly... by Selfbain · · Score: 1

      Earth bound observatories could only do so much since we can't use them to look for something heading at us from the direction of the sun (unless we detect it long before it enters our solar system). What's needed is something like the hubble whose sole purpose is to look out for big rocks.

      --
      Well, it has never been successfully tested.
    9. Re:More importantly... by M$Marketing · · Score: 0
      Gravity counteracts them all.

      Don't worry though - our little planet has been here for...
      Whew! I'm surprised that I forgot about gravity. It's not as if I didn't study science. I had just finished a physics class @ the beginning of 2003. Thanks for the reminder. Shame on me! :^) :^/
      --
      Take care...
    10. Re:More importantly... by wrmrxxx · · Score: 1
      ...but our detection ability is improving...

      Australia deciding to drop its asteroid watching program isn't much of an improvement. As far as I know, it leaves us with a very large blind spot. We could have something nearby approaching us from the south right now and not even know it. Is someone else far enough south of the equator watching?

      If we were able to develop the technologies to defeat a big rock, we all might be on the lookout again. It seems like a bit of a chicken and egg situation though. We probably won't develop the technology until there is imminent danger, but we won't all bother looking for incoming trouble until we know we can do something about it.

    11. Re:More importantly... by RabidStoat · · Score: 5, Funny
      Depends on the advance warning. With 30-40 years notice, we'd probably have time to send out a scout team to characterize the asteroid. Then, we could send a follow on team with the proper explosives and nukes.

      Couldn't we send in a team of negotiators to try reasoning with it ? Maybe offer it a bribe to hit the next planet along ? If all else fails we could try mocking it.

    12. Re:More importantly... by GwabbaWabba · · Score: 1

      "we can't use them to look for something heading at us from the direction of the sun"

      Correct me on this if I'm wrong... ...but isn't the sun's position relative to us constantly changing as we orbit around it? In six months wouldn't we be between the sun and any object that is currently obscured by the sun at the moment? An object couldn't remain hidden by the sun in that way...

      Unless you mean something whose origin is some point nearer the sun than us, in which case it would probably be in a stable orbit, right? Even if it's not in a stable orbit, I think most natural orbits decay inward, don't they?

    13. Re:More importantly... by welsh+git · · Score: 1

      > Australia deciding to drop its asteroid watching program isn't much of an improvement
      > As far as I know, it leaves us with a very large blind spot.

      Ok, I'm probably going to regret posting this, but doesn't the fact we're spinnin' and movin' mean that if Australia stopped watching, we wouldn't get a blind spot - yes, a blind spot at a snapshot in time, but not overall ??

      --
      Sig out of date
    14. Re:More importantly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, they'd be student painters.

    15. Re:More importantly... by dsanfte · · Score: 1
      Depends on the advance warning. With 30-40 years notice


      You'll never have 30-40 years' notice. You won't know for sure if it's even going to hit you until more like the 2yrs timeframe, and even then, there's a chance it will miss. There is just no instrument on earth with enough accuracy to determine 90%+ that an asteriod is on a collision-course given that kind of time frame.
      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
    16. Re:More importantly... by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Some folks think that painting it is a better solution.

      Really? IMHO asymetric painting doesn't bring anything: Asteroids generally rotate around all 3 axes.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    17. Re:More importantly... by cpghost · · Score: 1

      How likely are we to be able to nuke 'em once we see them?

      Nukes are overrated. They may be strong enough to break a small rock apart, and deflect a slightly larger asteroid, but they would be without noticeable effect on larger rocks. It depends on the size (and consitution) of the asteroid.

      Fortunately, really large asteroids are very rare (on Earth's orbit anyway), though not to be ruled out either. Of course, we would have a sufficiently large time frame to try to deflect that one with long-lasting (but low) pressure/acceleration, e.g. emanating from ion accelerators or similar electric propulsion engines.

      To see how small the released effective energy of a thermonuclear device is, compare with the energy released by a mere average volcano, or even a big thunderstorm!

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    18. Re:More importantly... by barakn · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Would you regret learning something? I'll assume you live in the northern hemisphere and you've experimented with a top before. After you sped it up, and as long as it was spinning fast enough, the axis it spun around didn't change much. You never noticed it suddenly flip over and spin on its head, did you? The Earth's rotation acts the same way.

      The north pole of our axis of rotation is pointed at a spot in the universe known as the North Celestial Pole. There happens to be a star near that spot which has acquired the names of the North Star and Polaris. If you watched the stars all night, they'd all appear to rotate around this spot. This spot will always stay at the same altitude due North of you, unless you change latitude.

      There's also a South Celestial Pole, and if you could see through the earth you'd see that the stars below your feet wheel around the South Celestial Pole. No matter how long you watched, though, stars within a certain distance of that pole will never rotate far enough to get above your horizon. For example, most northerners have never seen the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. I hadn't until I made a trip to South America. They're pretty strange looking.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    19. Re:More importantly... by MaxNerd · · Score: 1

      There goes my idea for a new Wagner Power Painter ad campaign.

    20. Re:More importantly... by wrmrxxx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We are spinning and moving, but we are doing so around fixed axes: spinning around an axis from the north to south pole, and moving around an axis through the sun that is nearly parallel to the earth's rotational axis.

      Try drawing yourself a diagram (looking 'side on' to earth) complete with sight lines from a person on the surface of the planet to objects out in space. It will become fairly clear that the further north you go, the less of the universe that is to the south of the earth will be visible, because the earth itself blocks your view. There is effectively a cone of non visible space. The spinning motion gives the most comprehensive view of the universe to people on the equator: they get to see it all, but only over time as the earth spins.

      Many if not most of the names of stars are not Greek or Roman (as we might otherwise expect given the roots of our language), but Arabic. This is because the Arabs were further south and were able to see many more stars than the ancient Greeks or Romans. For example: Altair, Rigel, Betelgeuse, Fomalhaut, Aldebaran, Vega, and Algol are all names with Arabic origins.

    21. Re:More importantly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's only one large light source.. it's called the sun. It doesn't matter where you paint it.

    22. Re:More importantly... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Depends on your frame of reference. Could be just two axes. :-)

      The paint might muck that up, though.

      It'd be a hell of a calculation.

    23. Re:More importantly... by Selfbain · · Score: 1

      Which is why we'd have to detect it long before it enters our solar system as I said. Something could enter the system and hit the earth within the period of a day. My understanding is that we missed all those recent asteroids (the ones we detected after they passed) due to this fact.

      --
      Well, it has never been successfully tested.
    24. Re:More importantly... by Boiling_point_ · · Score: 1
      How does the paint work? I didn't know, so I googled and found this PDF about the Yarkovsky effect.

      Google's HTML transcript

      --
      "If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
    25. Re:More importantly... by Craig3010 · · Score: 1

      No, no, no, NO! What you need is one big assed paint ball!

    26. Re:More importantly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something could enter the system and hit the earth within the period of a day.

      That would have to be one fast-moving rock.
      light takes roughly 5 hours to get from the sun to Pluto... for a rock to make the same trip in under a day, it'd have to be moving around 60,000Km/sec.

      Of course, that depends on where you consider the edge of the solar system to be... since the planets move more or less in a disc, how far "up" or "down" does the solar system extend?

    27. Re:More importantly... by Squiffy · · Score: 1

      The *vast* majority of the rocks we need to worry about are already in our own system.

      Interstellar debris is scarce compared to the debris orbiting the Sun, and the stuff already in our system goes round and round, giving near-Earth objects many chances to collide (and giving Earthlings many chances to detect them beforehand). We missed all those recent asteroids simply because they're faint and we don't have enough people actively looking for them.

  3. Re:tsarkon reports oompa loompah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nice rhythm there

  4. Oh boy.. by mix_master_mike · · Score: 1, Funny

    Thank goodness - I was worried.

    --

    mix_master_mike
    vafrous

  5. Hmm by Bigthecat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will this finally put an end to all those damn asteroid-hitting-the-Earth movies?

    Please?

    1. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, but an asteroid hitting the earth certainly would.

    2. Re:Hmm by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 2, Funny

      Will this finally put an end to all those damn asteroid-hitting-the-Earth movies?

      No, but internet piracy will! Thank you internet piracy.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  6. Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Dimwit · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean, there hasn't been a rock that large hitting us in, like, 599,000 years...

    Aw FUCK!

    --
    ...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
    1. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by cgranade · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That still gives you 100 yrs, right?
      Seriously, tho, that would be one of statistician's largest pet peeves: thinking that because outcome X has not occured at all in a period in which it is predicted to occur, that X is overdue to occur. IIRC, this is the Gambler's Fallacy. Somehow I'm reminded of the joke where three statisticians go duck hunting. First one shoots, and misses- too high. Second one shoots, and misses- too low. Third one yells, "We got 'em!"

      --

      #define DRM chmod 000

    2. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a statistician justifying why he doesn't clean his dirty kitchen floor:

      "This half is sticky, this half is slippery, so on average the floor is ok"

    3. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Statisticians need to get a sense of humor. :)

    4. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by MochaMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      >>I mean, there hasn't been a rock that large hitting us in, like, 599,000 years...

      >That still gives you 100 yrs, right?


      Glad to see the future of science and engineering is in good hands!

    5. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In a truly Random Distribution the probabilities of an event occuring are equal at any point in time. If scientists think Asteriod strikes are really a normal distribution (can't tell from the abstract linked) then things are different, but the strike times are still random just in the long run tend to the mean (600,000 yrs).Just because we are past the mean time does NOT say anything about "lateness". There is the whole other half of the curve to consider, so getting a strike in 100,000 yrs or next Tuesday has a non-zero chance depending on the standard deviation. Looks like a nice example of trying to get more NEO asteroid research funding by raising a scare scenario with statistics even though they admit there was a lot of error in prior observations and that there is more work to be done. I tried to read the actual papere at Science but I'm not going to pay $30 to get it!! Anyone able to grab it and post it?

    6. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      must be metric years.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by fuctape · · Score: 1, Interesting

      We don't have to worry about it from a statistical point of view (case in point: the Doomsday Problem), but if there's a pattern of life-threatening impacts historically, we might want pay attention. IIRC, there's a cycle of 26 million years for extinction level impacts, give or take 10,000 years, and we *are*, in fact, overdue.

      The truth is that we won't be able to predict the one that will hit us -- you can track a fly ball, but the line drive to the face (with a lump of charcoal in the dark of night) becomes a problem.

    8. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you read his comment further you would have understood that he gave the wrong number on purpose.

      But, anything for the karma, right?

    9. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Seriously, tho, that would be one of statistician's largest pet peeves: thinking that because outcome X has not occured at all in a period in which it is predicted to occur, that X is overdue to occur."

      Like it being too long, statistically, since a space-shuttle accident?

  7. bad asteroid movie collisions by SuperBanana · · Score: 0
    We're only due to collide with rocks larger than one kilometre across roughly once every 600,000 years, it concludes

    Ah, yes grasshopper...but what are our chances of colliding with copies of bad asteroid movies in the video rental store?

    1. Re:bad asteroid movie collisions by cgranade · · Score: 1

      Still pretty low, unless you are wearing a blindfold... and walk in to the suckers...

      --

      #define DRM chmod 000

    2. Re:bad asteroid movie collisions by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 1
      One could fall off the shelf and land on your head.

      Wait, then it'd be a bomb...

      --
      Needle Nardle Noo
  8. So much for deep impact by Gyan · · Score: 1

    Now, what can we do about Yellowstone?

    1. Re:So much for deep impact by WhiteBandit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From the same website.

      So what's the big deal?

      There may be none. This region has active hydrothermal features, and possibly some uplift. It's possible that the area could host future hydrothermal explosions, but so could other areas beneath the lake and other areas within the Park.

      Do any of the features beneath the lake relate to possible volcanic eruptions?

      It is very unlikely. All active features are related to faults and hot water (hydrothermal) vents. Identified craters were formed by collapse or as a result of old hydrothermal explosions. Many of the rocks beneath the lake are lava flows more than 100,000 years old.

      I don't think we have too much to worry about :P

    2. Re:So much for deep impact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to George Noory Coast to Coast AM cause he's about to shit his pants over this one.

  9. Irony... by aerojad · · Score: 1

    Bam! We get hit tomorrow...

    --

    SecondPageMedia - Wha
    1. Re:Irony... by justsomebody · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you'd better make a landing area in the backyard, and that should be with all lights even including flashy green ones and those which change color.

      p.s. Do not forget about hot-dog stand, who knows it might even be an attraction and youmight even make profit

      Simple steps of this bussines plan:
      1. Asteroid lands in your backyard
      2. hot-dog stand has being prepared
      3. PROFIT

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  10. Yes, and I have some replacements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Earth is about to enter an ice age.

    The Sun is about to erupt a massive solar flare which will kill everyone on Earth.

    Scientists accidentally turn off the weather.

    Earth's orbit disrupted by nearby blackhole.

    1. Re:Yes, and I have some replacements by freeweed · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean like this?

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    2. Re:Yes, and I have some replacements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2012 A.D. - A popular news site links the web server hosted on NASA's first intrasolar probe. In the ensuing chaos, Mayan historians finally discover the meaning of an enigmatic hieroglyph similar in appearance to "/."

  11. In case you can't sleep at night: by Jesrad · · Score: 1

    You're not going to die from a killer-asteroid fall.

    You can now safely return to previous activity.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
    1. Re:In case you can't sleep at night: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This just in: chances of human race wiping itself out has been elevated by 30% to all time new record of 99.99%.

  12. I can't help but think... by NightWulf · · Score: 5, Funny

    That the dinosaur version of Slashdot released that same story on the Jurassicnet just 48 hours before they left the earth.

    1. Re:I can't help but think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here I was thinking that this wasn't a dupe...

    2. Re:I can't help but think... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      That was the Cretatious net you insensitive clod!

      Or maybe, you insensitve Creton?

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  13. big deal! by tloh · · Score: 0, Troll

    As long as we let Bush and CO run leashless with their energy policies, the likes of Mr. Montgomery Burns (with some help from Homer, of course) will have our cities and towns covered with a nice protective layer of arial pollution that will burn up any meteorid quite nicely.

    --
    Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
  14. i don't trust them by nuckin+futs · · Score: 1, Troll

    "There was a lot of error in our previous estimates," says astronomer Alan Harris of the German space agency, DLR. "It's all because near-Earth asteroids are somewhat brighter than we thought".

    lots of errors is a bad thing. what if their estimates are wrong now, and the previous estimates were right. I hope it's not the same people who made the previous calculations. And who exactly did they survey?

    1. Re: i don't trust them by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > lots of errors is a bad thing. what if their estimates are wrong now, and the previous estimates were right.

      What if we roll a 1 on our d600000 next year?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  15. Re:It's official! Slashdot is popular! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VA's stock jumped 17 cents on the news of trollers declaring war on slashdot and a 150% increase in trolling over the next 18 months.

    So, it's at, what, -0.13 now?

  16. THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Chromodromic · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This must just be an abysmally slow news-for-nerds day or something because, you know, the joke in the post is valid. Did anyone breathe a sigh of genuine relief here? Did anyone go, "Oh, God, well, now I can stop worrying about that!"

    Did anyone see Armageddon and then go home unable to sleep for nights on end?

    I just find it hard to believe that in the vast informational space of the Internet, this is a story that collided with the front page of Slashdot.

    The analysis doesn't change the chance of an asteroid hitting the Earth, points out astronomer Iwan Williams of Queen Mary University of London, UK. "But assuming that there are fewer large asteroids, the damage will be less," he says.

    When news editors say, "Damn it, just print something!", this is what we get.

    --
    Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    1. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      i saw armageddon, then wished i hadn't wasted money on a stupid, excessively emotionally charged fake piece of crap movie with a dumb love story tied in. yeah sure. go chase one of your employees through the ramparts of a fucking oil thingy in the ocean with a shotgun (was it?). oooo yay. if you actually thought that was anything remotely sane you're a fucking moron. your comment makes me incapable of sleeping at night, you fucking jackass piece of shit cocksucker fucking dualksjdf;oaihg80h24b80h

    2. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by monoqlith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What other page would it make? Slashdot, like any news source, is just trying to find content. I can think of more trivial articles than this in the recent past.

    3. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      > Did anyone see Armageddon and then go home unable to sleep for nights on end?

      I sure did. After that two hours of sleeping in the movie theater I was wide awake all night.

    4. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Since this is a science article, maybe replace it with this?

      But of course, taste differs, so I'm sure there are people finding this one interesting as well.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    5. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 1
      Did anyone see Armageddon and then go home unable to sleep for nights on end?

      Yes. Although it didn't have anything to do with a fear of asteroid strikes.

      --
      Why?
  17. Sorry to disillusion you but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The thing that flattend a few thousand square kilometers at Tunguska was a fraction of that size.

  18. But is it a Poisson Process? by mattyp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It makes a big difference. If it's a Poisson Process, no matter how long we wait, every day our probability of being struck remains the same. If not, every day that we don't get struck, increases our probability for getting struck the next day.

    1. Re:But is it a Poisson Process? by mrjah · · Score: 1

      If we assume priciples of random incidence apply, then we are more likely to have been born during a period of time with a longer interval between the previous major asteroid hit and the next one.

      And yet, random incidence says nothing about where we are in that interval. D'oh.

    2. Re:But is it a Poisson Process? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also most likely that about as many people have been born before you as will be born after you. Considering population growth, this means that anyone born recently should expect a disaster relatively soon (based on the doomsday theorem).

      On average if everyone expects this, more people will be right than wrong (since only very few people were among the first few and last few percent born), so you might as well rely on it...

      Maybe.

      It's an interesting thought experiment, anyhow.

  19. Revised Odds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only %20 to %30? Bummer. I'm still less likely to win the $120 million megaball lottery jackpot than I am to burn to death in a fireball caused by a 2-kilometer asteroid tomorrow.

  20. down 20-30%...? by Devil's+BSD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    if we're going to be hit by a massive asteroid approximately every 600,000 years, doesn't that kind of make the probability 100%?

    --
    I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
    1. Re:down 20-30%...? by EulerX07 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not really. Even if statistically one should hit every 600 000 years, it is statistically possible to go 2 million years without any impact.

      Flip a coin. You've got 50% chance of getting heads or tails. But it is possible to get heads 10 times in a row. The odds of this combination happening is 0.5^10*100 (in percentage = 0.09765% chance of happening).

      An event that has 1/600 000 years chance of happening does not have a 100% chance of happening every 600 000 years.

      Been a while since my stats course and I'm still trying to erase the painfull memory, but someone probably has the knowledge fresh enough in his head to calculate the probability of this happening after 1 year or 2 million years if the odds are 1 in 600 000 years. It would probably look like :
      1 year : 1X10^-xx %.
      2 000 000 year : 99%.
      200 000 000 years : 99.9999999%.

      It just never would be 100% except with an infinite time.

    2. Re:down 20-30%...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if it's just not statistics. What if every 600 000 years our galaxy and our solarsystem align in such a way which makes an impact more probable. For yet an unknown reason.

    3. Re:down 20-30%...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe it has so much to do with statistics as it does with cycles. Periodically one of the would-be asteroids from the Oort Cloud will get nudged a bit and will come our way. It will most certainly happen; we just don't know when. Look at the planets and moons in our solar system for evidence that it has happened before. And in less than "infinite time".

  21. LIES! by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Funny
    This is just what they want you to think. They just don't want everybody panicking right up until we do get hit! LIES! ALL LIES!

    (The preceding text is brought to you by the Tin-Foil Society for Public Awareness, have a nice day.)

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:LIES! by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      Well that's nice of them. They usually enjoy a little panic now and then. Good for business. But for once, the Illuminati puts our interests ahead of their own. Kind of sweet, in their own way.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  22. What would our strategy be if ..... by zymano · · Score: 1

    IF we were under a threat ? What would be the strategy ?

    Rockets that use nuclear bombs ? Or use retrorockets to push the asteroid ? Lasers ?

    1. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duck and cover ?

    2. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by zymano · · Score: 1

      yeah. great fireworks !

    3. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by WheatWilton · · Score: 0

      Lasers ?

      How about frickin' sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads.

    4. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do not try to start a serious discussion here.
      Thanks you.

    5. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by Danse · · Score: 3, Funny

      World leaders would retreat to their shelters deep within the earth where they have been hoarding food, fuel, HDTVs, and Playboy Playmates. They'll start a new civilization consisting of moderately attractive people that don't know how to do anything except lie, cheat, steal, and make a fantastic raspberry smoothie.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    6. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A robin reliant.

      Oh, and 20 years of fuel.

  23. Hardly A Relief... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now how the hell am I going to market all the "Death will come from above!" signs and posters I had printed up?

  24. Sods law dicates.. by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

    ... that we now get hit by an asteroid.

  25. Saves you from more than asteroids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. Sorry to break the news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but we die. Plain and simple, it's a fact of life. We die. Why even bother if it's by an asteroid killing you fast, slowly by freezing you to death or whatever? You die. That's the fact.

    Get over it - tomorrow you might be dead.

    1. Re:Sorry to break the news... by Chmcginn · · Score: 1

      True, but if you want to be that fatalistic about it, why not just blindfold yourself and go play in traffic?

      --
      Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
    2. Re:Sorry to break the news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you risk crippling yourself, or having a gnome performe brain-surgery on you with a blunt spoon, whether or not you need brain-surgery?

      Oh, cool... Can I watch?

      Just because you've gained more insight than 99% of the world population - that death *is* inevitable - would anyone but an american say "Now that you've gained insight, why don't you go and intentionally hurt or kill yourself"? I dubt it.

      Have a nice day, go play on the highway.

    3. Re:Sorry to break the news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone who is of French ethnicity would.

  27. Duh by benk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > "Relax, everyone - the risk of a gigantic asteroid colliding with Earth just got smaller!"

    Surely the risk hasn't changed, just our estimate of it...

    --
    -- "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong." -- HL Mencken
    1. Re:Duh by catbutt · · Score: 1

      Surely the risk hasn't changed, just our estimate of it...

      Now think about that a bit...our estimate of it is the only thing we are talking about when we talk about such predictions. If we had all the information there was to have, we wouldn't talk in terms of risk, we could just say exactly when one would hit. (ok, i suppose quantum theory introduces a certain level of true uncertainty, but still....)

      Another of saying it is, if the weatherman was smart enough, there is never really a 60% chance of rain tomorrow ....its either 0% or 100%.

    2. Re:Duh by inburito · · Score: 1

      Another of saying it is, if the weatherman was smart enough, there is never really a 60% chance of rain tomorrow ....its either 0% or 100%

      Reminds me of an old joke about blondes and statistics.
      When asked from a blonde what are the changes of seeing a dinosaurus walking on the street tomorrow? Close to zero? zero? nope, 50/50. Either I see it or I don't.

  28. I wouldn't worry by earthforce_1 · · Score: 2, Interesting


    We have plenty of more probable ways to destroy civilization. Assuming we do absolutely nothing about the problem for another 1000 years, the change of getting clobbered by "the big one" is still miniscule, and the odds are still much less that we won't detect it in enough time to do something. There have been a few near misses that were not detected until the last moment, but many others were found with decades of warning - enough time to devise a mission from scratch to push the sucker into a slightly different trajectory.

    And by that time I predict we will either be i) extinct, ii) living in a second stone age, or iii) have unimaginable technology such as planet wide deflector shields or some super weapon that could take care of the problem in the blink of an eye.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
    1. Re:I wouldn't worry by Saeger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      or iii) have unimaginable technology such as planet wide deflector shields

      With "unimaginable technology" why would you assume the majority of life will still be living in fragile bio-based bodies at the bottom of gravity wells with tons of wasted molecular building material beneath our feet?

      I say we rip the Earth apart to put it to better use - sentimental value be damned! :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:I wouldn't worry by freeweed · · Score: 2, Funny

      For some reason your post reminded me of this:

      Smithers: Oh Mr. Burns, we'll thaw you out the second they discover the cure for... seventeen stab wounds in the back. How are we doing boys?

      Professor Frink: Well, we're up to fifteen!

      It also reminds me of the mentality a lot of people still have re: the environment. Destroy it now, because by the time it really matters we'll either be dead from something else, or we'll have such good technology we can fix the damage.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  29. what about all those recent surprise near misses? by Locutus · · Score: 1

    If these guys are so smart, why were all those recent close calls such a surprise? Someone is playing with numbers here so I wouldn't get all cozy about being prefectly safe from THE BIG ROCK.

    Then again, Mr Bush will probably cause WW III so what's THE BIG ROCK going to do but kill a dead planet. ;-)

    Dr Smith: Doomed, we're all doomed.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  30. lasers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are wimps. An H-bomb might do the trick (but would be more effective if we got it from far away). But then, it's illegal to send them to space... damn beurocrats

  31. Just relax... by DruggedBunny · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, take it easy. Two major asteroids passed within 200,000 miles of us (less than the distance to the moon) in the last year or so... http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/0 7/138256&mode=thread&tid=160 http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/2 0/1916206&mode=thread&tid=160 Fortunately, we didn't know about them until after they had passed...

  32. And of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd have to make sure the asteroid really wasn't an alien spaceship designed to bring that intrepid team of asteroid-destroyers through hyperspace to repair their homeworld!

  33. Earth's asteroid risk reduced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the researchers got their project funding approved. Watch the risk go up again when the funding dries up.

  34. Asteroids Killed the Dinosaurs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought bad movies about asteroids killing everything did...

  35. Hi I'm Cmdr Cocko by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use to be Cmdr Taco, but after raping so many little boys and sucking so much cock, I decided to change my name to Cmdr Cocko. In light of this change, Slashdot will be providing news storied on Gay and Lesbian activities, so in the end not much has changes. Timothy, please come to my house so we can have oral sex.

  36. Re:It's official! Slashdot is popular! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, you trolls really need to get a life.

  37. tom ridge says: by ack154 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    We're now a color level of um... well, we should probable make up an asteroid color warning scheme for national security. SOMEONE GET ON THAT!

  38. Re:It's official! Slashdot is popular! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I notice your article dosn't mention the GNAA. I think the GNAA has been a whole new era of trolling. We (trolls) are finally getting recognized. The other day my grandmother asked me what the GNAA was. I think that is amazing, the GNAA movement is really making its message heard in the main stream.

  39. oh, sure... placate me... by Corporate+Drone · · Score: 1
    bet it's gonna be a whole lot less time until the impact of another "asteroid impact with earth, starring bruce willis" movie...

    --
    mmm... yeah... You see, we're putting the cover sheets on all TPS reports now before they go out...
    1. Re:oh, sure... placate me... by AntiOrganic · · Score: 1

      You can't make a sequel, he died in the last one, remember?

      Then again, him coming back to life would have fewer plot holes than the rest of that forsaken piece of cinematography...

  40. Survey? by happylight · · Score: 1

    A new survey revises down the likelihood of a massive asteroid hitting the Earth by 20-30%.

    A survey? What did they do? Round up all the big and little asteroids and ask "Are you gonna hit us? No? Next!"

    1. Re:Survey? by bsharitt · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with surveys? Unless they forgot the CowboyNeal option, then we're all screwed.

  41. Thanks guys!! by Danse · · Score: 1

    Great. I had already decided to blow off doing my homework and go out instead tonight, since I figured there was at least a decent chance that the world would be obliterated by an asteroid any day now anyway. There goes my plans for tonight...

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  42. Go figure by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    As usual, my latest investment is now proven to be a total lost cause.

    I had just finished completion of my under ground bunker located 100km beneath the surface with lead walls and a built-in optical-network uplinked to a well fortified satelite dish array (so I can get online, watch some Japanese hentai and shop at eBay till the end of the world)
    And am waiting for my shipment of rations to arrive (FedEx said they'd be here Monday, I was too cheap for the express overnight/weekends)

    So hey Mr. Scientist, FUCK YOU!!! You insensitive clod!!!
    I guess we'll just call that 500mil down the shitter thanks to you. I bet you never even got near a project with that much funding, you little wage slave not worthy of flushing my feces!! So tell me, do they actually let you touch the telescope, or do you just stand there and make press releases to FUCK WITH MY LIFE!!?!?!?!?!

    PS: Anyone caring to submit a business proposal on what they would do with a 10k sq ft bunker in central Nevada with state of the air air-filtration/recycling, fibre optic and satelite access with a 10 node Opteron244 beowulf cluster running RH9 AS, please get in touch.

    1. Re:Go figure by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      haha, I wonder if in 100 years, we'd have the technology to build something 62 miles under the surface of the earth, in the outer mantle. I haven't heard of any alloys made by man that could endure 10 minutes under those conditions. You might want to get a long tape measure & do a check, I think your contractors lied and only made it 5 miles deep.

    2. Re:Go figure by Saeger · · Score: 1
      I haven't heard of any alloys made by man that could endure 10 minutes under those conditions.

      We'll be able to synthesize cheap diamond in mass very soon; its the hardest substance known, and it melts at the insanely high temp of 3546 degrees C. The Earth's mantle is ~3km deep and is "only" 2200 degrees C at its hottest.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    3. Re:Go figure by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Correction: The mantle is ~3,000km deep (sitting beneath the paperthin crust). IMNAG.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:Go figure by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you forget diamond BURNS LIKE COAL at temperatures of just over 1500 degrees. as the other replier has pointed out, you're a layer off - the outer mantle goes from 7 miles to about 190 miles (10-300 km), with temperatures of 2520 to 5400 degrees F, more than enough to make diamond burst into flame in the presence of oxygen, and to melt steel.

    5. Re:Go figure by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      ...and Tungten melts at the very high temperature of 3000 degrees F (1650 C). Let's not forget the pressuem, estimated to be 4.5 GPa at 140 km, about 650,000 PSI. I don't think we'll be going down there anytime soon.

  43. meaningless sophistry by iggymanz · · Score: 1, Troll

    What a total crock of steaming bovine fecal matter - we have NO idea how often large asteroids have impacted in the past, there are any number of ways the impact craters can be hidden since most of our planet is under water, and glacials have scrubbed large areas of the land masses. And even if we had a perfect record of our past asteroid hits, that has NO bearing on future encounters. There could be a stream of ten 10-kilometer asteroids bound to hit earth in the next 100 years , put on that trajectory by some random event long ago, or there could be NO chance of a major hit for the remaining lifetime of the earth. One in a million, or 1 in 1, WE DON"T KNOW.

    1. Re:meaningless sophistry by Wintensis · · Score: 1


      Actually - we DO have a way of figuring out how many impacts of significant size. Several techniques at least.

      First - there is the 'ash layer' found at the K-T boundary. The clay at this layer has concentrations of heavy metals that cannot be accounted for by geological distrubution. I believe there is WAY to much Osmium in that layer - the theory being that the impactor had a large amount of this metal in it. I don't know if there are OTHER such layers in the geological record or not - but if there are, then you can date impactors of a sufficiently large size.

      Secondly - if the asteriod in question has a high concentration of iron, or other ferro-magnetic metals, then it will show up as a distortion in the earth's magnetic field. This occurs because the asteriod mass gets 'embedded' in the earth's surface. You are correct that the surface features can (and are) scrubbed away by geological forces - but the mass tends to live on 'under the skin' for billions of years. I would guess (but only guess), that eventually the impactor mass is recycled just like the rest of the earth's surface - but it endures for billions of years.

      Thirdly, even if the mass is NOT ferro-magnetic, it's mass causes GRAVITATIONAL anomolies. Very slight, but they CAN (and have!) been mapped from orbit (see the upcoming NASA GRACE project). Again, this is because the impactor tends to 'stay put' for billenia. This is how the Chicxulub impact crater - the one thought to be THE 'dinosaur killer' - was imaged.

      Now - you're right. All this tells us is HOW MANY impactors OF A CERTAIN SIZE RANGE there have been within the last couple of billion years.

      It can't tell you if an asteriod will smack us tomorrow or not. I don't agree that it has NO bearing - it can allow us to give statisitical probabilities - but you're right if you're thinking that even if there is a 1 in a trillion chance of it happening tomorrow, it still CAN.

    2. Re:meaningless sophistry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't accuse others of what you're clearly guilty of. 1 in 1 it certainly ain't. That WE CLEARLY DO KNOW.

      How many piano tuners are in Chicago? There is a definite number, and you can estimate that number with a bit of common sense.

  44. The big picture by Saeger · · Score: 1
    My viewpoint on this is far from mainstream (for now), but I just wanted to say that it would be extremely unlucky for humankind to be wiped out by an asteroid impact -- of all things -- in the next ~30-50 years that matters most in our technological evolution.

    It is far, far more likely that our exponentionally advancing technology will destroy us before we've had a chance to leave the nest, and transcend to a safer form (non-bio) minus some of our outmoded evolutionary jungle-brain baggage.

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
    1. Re:The big picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just skimmed THe Great Filter paper you linked to but I have a different idea about what it is. The filter is God. God runs this universe and when one of his science experiments stop giving him props and gets out of hand he hits the reset switch as foretold in revelations. Ill be trolling here all week.

    2. Re:The big picture by Wintensis · · Score: 1

      It's everybody's favorite gameshow 'Bait The Transhumanist!' ... *applause*

      If you agree that the Singularity is inevitable, then it really doesn't matter if we get smacked by an asteriod or not. It is the END of humanity.

      Trancendent intelligence - by definition - is not even remotely human. Most 'sunny day transhumanists' seen to have the impression that they'll 'up-load', 'houseclean' out all the NASTY side effects of biological evolution, and presto! ME v2.0.

      If you SERIOUSLY take a stab at a philosophical inquiry into the nature of 'post singularity intelligence', then you run up against the NASTY probability (not inevitability, but probability) that whatever tattered remains of YOU that would survive a Singularity, it's not going to be that cheery.

      If you're PART of the Trancendence, then what makes you think that your ego will survive? The you that is self-aware? You might be 'reprogrammed' to be 'module' in a higher order mind - and the YOU part is simply washed out.

      If you're not part of the Transendence - what makes you think a higher level intelligence will even notice humanity. Or notice that they got wiped out when it reorganized the biosphere so it would be more comfortable?

      Most transhumanists seem to think that a technological singularity is the technological equivelent of 'The Rapture'. It could very well be evolution side stepping YOU entirely.

    3. Re:The big picture by Saeger · · Score: 1
      I've heard your argument before, and it boils down to: "YOU can't really know that YOU are YOU anymore, so nobody should look be looking forward to transhumanism." I don't buy that FUD.

      The computing space/time necessary to simulate a current, naturally-evolved human is nil compared to the resources our advanced selves will use, so there's every reason to believe that there will be "ethically manditory" backups made to compare against. I think we'll be intelligent enough to KNOW what exactly we've lost and to KNOW how different we are than our former unmodified selves. I would also argue that I could be a kind of "we" with my former primitive self running in parallel.

      I'm not the same person I was 7 years ago anyway, or 1 year ago, or 1 second ago. I'm still conscious of "ME" though, and fully aware of those changes.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:The big picture by Wintensis · · Score: 1

      NO. I am NOT saying "YOU can't really know that YOU are YOU anymore, so nobody should look be looking forward to transhumanism." I assume that IF you are in control of what happens to you, you WILL be able to chart a 'connection of self-awareness' from one version to the other. I am just saying that in a 'Singularity', what makes you think that YOU will control what happens to you?

      First of all - I'm not saying you can't look forward to transhumanism. HOWEVER - I might point out that there is a BIG difference between a transition to a transhuman state - and experiencing a technological singularity. You seem to be speaking of the former in your response - while your original statement seemed to be about the later. It is possible to have a transhuman that is NOT post-singularity. This is referred to as 'obtaining the AI advantage'. You get perfect memory, lighting calculation, run your 'program' in a big rack of optical processors, etc. etc. - BUT the basic level and STRUCTURE of your cognitive processes remains more-or-less intact. They may CHANGE over time, due to decisions that YOU make. This is what I refer to as 'soft' transhumanism - and I think it's a GOOD scenerio. In fact, it's the best possible scenerio. Not the most likely - just the best for US.

      You seem to ASSUME this scenerio. In this scenerio, YOU get to choose what happens to you. YOU get to finally upgrade yourself, etc.

      However - in the case of a technological singularity EVERYTHING changes. Asymptotically accelerated chages in technology result in a 'punctuated equalibrium' and PRESTO the entire basis of (technological?) reality 'lurches' and changes. And it changes in ways we CANNOT predict without going through it. What makes you ASSUME that YOU (or any human) gets to control that change - even if it's just the changes to themselves. What if the 'uber network' of peer-to-peer toaster ovens suddenly becomes self-aware, intelligent (but of a KIND of intelligence that is totally alien to human thought processes - this is almost the DEFINITION of a post-singularity intelligence), discovers (or hi-jacks existing) nano-technoloy, and re-writes the macro-atomic structure of the Earth's lithosphere down to the mantle. It might not even be AWARE that there are biological life forms until there aren't any more. Now - for US - this is a WORST case scenerio. Not a reality, not a certainty, just a possibility. I CANNOT assign probability - and I don't think anyone can.

      Even if evolving non-human-based post-singularity intelligence(s) IS/ARE aware of biological intelligences - what makes you think they'll CARE? Yes - you are correct - it would be computationally trivial (in an enviroment that COULD be composed of a large percentage of computronium) to simulate your 'pristine' human state. It's computationally insignificant to simulate a paramecium on your desktop. Yet there is no massive run on 'microbe backup' software. We just don't CARE about the individual live of microbes.

      There is NO reason to think that a transhuman intelligence would be ethically mandated to maintain backups of all previous 'versions' of Earth, including, incidently yourself. You cannot know the mind of a trancendent intelligence - especially as it NEED NOT BE BASED ON YOU. What makes you think that it will be ethically madated to act in ANY way? I CERTAINLY can't say that it will NOT backup everything - and for the same reason - but saying that something is not forbidden is a LONG way from saying it's mandatory.

      I am not saying 'Singularity Bad!' - I am saying 'Singularity Unknowable' - and making rosy, blue-sky predictions on how wonderful it will be to suddenly be a God is naive in the extreme. While this is a possibility, it is by no means the only one.

  45. Good news, so what? by rune.w · · Score: 0

    This will not stop the irresponsible press to release 'breaking news' whenever an asteroid passes 1 billion km. away from Earth just to catch audience.

    R.

  46. welll by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    that doesnt cover planetary collisions, what would happen if the moon were to suddenly start going towards the earth, or mars drifting towards us? ;)

    or those really huge ass asteroids that are big enough to almost be their own planets (like ceres)

    really, they cant put a real estimate on when something's going to destroy the earth.
    not to mention the real threat isnt space, the real threat is ourselves, every day someone's on the verge of launching a war on someone else.
    humans are the planet's worst fear.

    1. Re:welll by freeweed · · Score: 1

      what would happen if the moon were to suddenly start going towards the earth, or mars drifting towards us?

      Kiss your ass goodbye, because the same laws of physics keeping your body on the ground have suddenly gone haywire. Hope you're not in a car when it happens :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    2. Re:welll by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      How much of a braking force would it require on the moon for it to enter a spiral anyway? I guess you'd need one fsck of an asteroid to hit it head on...

      OTOH it's just as likely it could get thrown out of orbit completely and end up around another planet...

      Neither are particulary likely, I know (*much* less then being hit by an asteroid at the same time as becoming a triple lottery winner).

  47. Would you like to meet my friend? by niom · · Score: 1

    Sarcasm, meet AC. AC, Sarcasm.

    --
    -- Repeat with me: "There is no right to profits".
  48. no one knows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for all we know there could be a comet that could consume the earth about like a bug hitting the windshield on a greyhound bus...

    P.S. were the bug, the comet is the bus...

  49. System effects by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can calculate the energy release, overpressure radius, and so on. You can estimate the casualties and property damage from a half-kilometer disaster.

    My nightmare, though, is having the next Tunguska-sized event happen during the next Cuba-like nuclear crisis.

    It only takes a small rock to do a good short-term simulation of a nuclear weapon going off. If that happened at the wrong place and wrong time, it could trigger indescribable horror.

    1. Re:System effects by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Given how carefully governments watch for missile launches, I doubt that would really be an issue. People might assume that the detonation was nuclear, but in the absence of detected launches, it would probably be attributed to a terrorist attack of unknown origin.

    2. Re:System effects by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      an half kilometer asteroid would do much more damage on impact than every nuclear war he could provoke. People messure the energy of such imapct with Gigatons TNT... and mostly hundreds of them...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    3. Re:System effects by rat7307 · · Score: 1

      Just don't live near any monuments like the Eiffel Tower, The White House, Golden Gate Bridge etc..

      On the movies they are the things that get hit first!!!

      --
      Burma?
    4. Re:System effects by bugg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see you're an optimist. The world has come painfully close to nuclear war more than most people would care to know.

      --
      -bugg
    5. Re:System effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A nice asteroid-to-the-white-house could go a long way toward improving the quality of life for the rest of the people on this planet.

    6. Re:System effects by Omerna · · Score: 1

      THAT'S your nightmare? Your nightmare system is way out of wack. The likelihood of this happening is.... basically 0. We'd have to have another nuclear missile standoff, an asteroid hit in exactly the right place to look like a missle hitting our/their country... seem a little unlikely?

      Plus our satellites will be watching their country... no launch signature means we'd know it wasn't a missile. So the thing would have to come down over the other country at just the wrong time... preposterous.

      --


      No sig for you.
  50. These statistics mean very little in reality by Animaether · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to slight the research and the pure theoretical chance calculations and all, but..

    The statistics are only as good as the sampling set.. and suffice to say, we're *not* watching every single asteroid out there - greater than 1km (diameter) or not.
    And any single one asteroid we're not watching has the potential to be that 'killer asteroid'.
    And we already know that we've had 'near misses' only realized until after the asteroid had already passed.

    Which means that for any foreseeable future, the practical chance of us getting hit by an asteroid of size 1km in diameter or larger, tomorrow, is 50%.

    Either we do, or we don't. And we won't know until it either happens, or not.
    That's what the uncertainty of the limited sampling set brings us in practice.

    Which doesn't mean that if it doesn't hit tomorrow, that the chances for it hitting the day after tomorrow is 75%. The chances remain 50%.

    What's more interesting is predicting the chances of a particular asteroid we -are- spotting are of hitting us.

    1. Re:These statistics mean very little in reality by mrjah · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, to hell with history! It's 50%.

      By remarkably similar logic, the chances of Jesus' arrival back on Earth tomorrow is also 50%.

      So don't worry about the asteroid, as chances are that Jesus will arrive before or very soon after it hits. But before the bank closes tonight, you'd better stop by and cleanse yourself of the sin of usury, or you're going to burn in hell forever!

      Oh, and please post here to confirm that you've withdrawn your money from all interest-bearing investments. See you in line at St. Peter's place!

  51. seriously, folks by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    I'm so relieved. I think about this daily. It's much more of a concern to me than going bald prematurely, being impotent, or being intellectually feeble.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:seriously, folks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, because an asteroid *could* happen, whereas the other things you mentioned are already a reality for you.

  52. It scares me, for one by freeweed · · Score: 1

    Actually, I can't think of anything more terrifying than the extinction of the human species. What's even scarier is that unlike most things that threaten a person's existence (beyond just getting too old), there's absolutely nothing you, nor anyone else can do to prevent this.

    Do I lose sleep over it? Not really. But to me it's like contributing to a pension - you may never see it, it won't happen for decades, but you do it anyway. Because when the time comes it will be the single most important thing in your life.

    When I add my life to the other 6 billion on the planet, yes, the thought of all of us dying scares me quite a bit.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:It scares me, for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seriously, it doesn't scare me particularly. especially if it's something we have so little control over.

    2. Re:It scares me, for one by d3faultus3r · · Score: 1

      the thought of Bruce Willis's continued existence after that movie scares me quite a bit.

      --
      read my blog
      musings on politics and technol
  53. creators: planet/population still in crisis mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    actually, pateNTdead eyecon0meter kode readings indicate elevated possibility of overheating the main processor. you may continue to pretend if you must?

    you can bet your .asp the felonious greed/fear/ego based georgewellian fuddite southern baptist freemason corepirate nazi softwar gangster execrable won't quit until many more of the creators' innocents are harmed/dead, or, they become disempowered by yOUR intentions/behaviours.

    as compelled as you may be to do so, DO NOT attempt to disempower unprecedented evile by yourself. you could get some of that awful stuff on you. seek the assisstance/consult of the highly qualified creators' ppr team.

    get ready to see the light.

    J. Public et AL has yet to become involved in open/honest 'net communications/commerce in a meaningful way. that's mostly due to the MiSinformation suppLIEd buy phonIE ?pr? ?firm?/stock markup FraUD execrable, etc...

    truth is, there's no better/more affordable/effective way that we know of, for J. to reach other J.'s &/or their respective markets.

    the recipe is:

    consult with/trust in yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet. more breathing. seek others of non-agressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit.

    use key words/indexing to identify yourself/your products.

    the overbullowned greed/fear based phonIE marketeers are self eliminating by their owned greed/fear/ego based evile MiSintentions. they must deny the existence of the power that is dissolving their ability to continue their self-centered evile behaviours.

    as the lights continue to come up, you'll see what we mean. meanwhile, there are plenty of challenges, not the least of which is the planet/population rescue (from the corepirate nazi/walking dead contingent) initiative.

    EVERYTHING is going to change, despite the lameNT of the evile wons. you CAN bet your .asp on that won. as the lights come up, there'll be no going back, & no where to hide.

    we weren't planted here to facilitate/perpetuate the excesses of a handful of Godless felons. you already know that? yOUR ONLY purpose here is to help one another. any other pretense is totally false.

    pay attention (to yOUR environment, for example). that's quite affordable, & leads to insights on preserving life as it should/could/will be again. everything's ALL about yOUR motives.

  54. Actually same risk, reduced consequences by Evil+Pete · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article points out that rather than there being 20-30% fewer rocks out there which could hit us, they are 20-30% smaller. So the chances of being hit are not less, just the chances of of it being over the magic size 1 kilometre (claimed to be the size required to knockout civilisation or whatever).

    --
    Bitter and proud of it.
    1. Re:Actually same risk, reduced consequences by isorox · · Score: 1

      You miss The point, neither the risk nor the chance of it being a certain size have changed. If you look at the empire state building and say it's 1300' tall, you then measure it with a tape measure, you don't change it's height

    2. Re:Actually same risk, reduced consequences by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      As I recall, the article states that there are a certain number of kilometre sized objects which are known. New more accurate measurements now show that the objects are 20-30% smaller than originally thought. So there are fewer 1 km objects (down from about 1300 to about 1000 ... though I'd have to recheck the article), but none of the original objects have gone away and these objects are Apollo objects ... the ones most likely to hit the Earth.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
  55. For Sale by Illserve · · Score: 1

    One Asteroid proof bunker, with 500,000 years provisions, cable TV and internet.

  56. Margin of error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    plus or minus 600,000 years

  57. We only have to watch out for 'brane' collisions by RenHoek · · Score: 4, Funny

    After watching 'The elegant universe' (<--- torrent links)I can trade in my fear for an continent sized asteroid hitting earth for the more bleeding-edge fear of a new 'Big Bang' occuring. :) No rest for the paranoid.

  58. striking study! by twitter · · Score: 1

    What an impact. Someone hit me before I come up with more bad puns. Rock the hou - ouch.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  59. great, now all we have to worry about is... by mediaisthemassage · · Score: 2, Interesting
    the yellowstone caldera blowing its top....it's already "overdue"...

    see this national geographic article

    if this thing blows in our lifetimes, the midwest will essentially become Mordor...I guess for some hardcore LOTRs fans that would be kind o' cool...

    Then again, LOTR trilogy is hella better than any asteroid hitting the planet movie...

    1. Re:great, now all we have to worry about is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, Mordor is supposed to be in the southeast, not the northwest. Even if you just turned the map upside down, that would put Mirkwood in like Louisiana. I suppose we could rename it Muckwood for the Delta. But it would just be too confusing when doing your live action recreation of the journey of the Fellowship marching across the continent.

  60. eh, more likely by vena · · Score: 3, Insightful

    humans are the planet's worst fear.

    humans are humans' worst fear.

  61. the thing is... by mantera · · Score: 1



    when asteroids used to hit the americas and siberia people made very little of it... for one, humanity's population was tiny, there was hardly any communication between geographically distant places, and people thought weird astronomical events were the signs of god's wrath... nowadays, however, the americas are full of people, vaccinations and medicine have prolonged life and reduced mortality to the extent that the population is booming and filling up the land, people move around a lot and the communication made events that hit places 1000s of miles away seem like they're news we care about, that by the time a next asteroid hits the earth it'll be a major, major catastrophe..

    that said though, we needn't worry, 'cos god's angels in heavens up there will be protecting us!

  62. This is how planet's say: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My cholesterol's down.

  63. Cosmic Cannon: Exploding Star Could Fry Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob -warm.html
    1991 - "Global warming -- ...However, some solar scientists are considering whether the warming exists at all. And, if it does, might it be caused, wholely or in part, by a periodic but small increase in the Sun's energy output. An increase of just 0.2% in the solar output could have the same affect as doubling the carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere."

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/topmysteri es _2003_021226-7.html
    Top 10 Space Mysteries for 2003
    7. The Enigmatic Sun
    If you're looking for a career with a really bright future, become a solar physicist. Amazingly, we still don't fully understand the dynamics of the star we orbit.

    http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20010801solarp ro ton.html
    Stormy Space Weather Takes a Toll on Ozone
    Goddard Space Flight Center, August 1, 2001
    "A new study confirms a long-held theory that large solar storms rain electrically charged particles down on Earth's atmosphere and deplete the upper-level ozone for weeks to months thereafter.

    http://spacescience.com/headlines/y2000/ast22dec _1 .htm
    Watching the Angry Sun - Solar physicists are enjoying their best-ever look at a Solar Maximum thanks to NOAA and NASA satellites, NASA Press Release, December 22, 2000
    "This is a unique solar maximum in history," said Dr. George Withbroe, Science Director for NASA's Sun-Earth Connection Program. "The images and data are beyond the wildest expectations of the astronomers of a generation ago."

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/ ga mmaray_bursts_010522-1.html
    Cosmic Cannon: How an Exploding Star Could Fry Earth
    19 June 2001
    "While scientists have long tried to link supernovae to mass extinctions on Earth, there is no solid evidence. But recent observations of high-energy emissions in space have some scientists suggesting that our planet may in fact get fried every now and then."

    http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20011120sohoga s. html
    SOHO'S LATEST SURPRISE: GAS NEAR THE SUN HEADING THE WRONG WAY
    Goddard Space Flight Center, November 20, 2001
    "We are seeing something opposite to what we expected," says Sheeley. "Normally, when this happens, we initially doubt the observation -- suspecting, for example, that the movie is running backwards."

    http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews /m ars011207.html
    Red Planet Warming, Images Show Mars' Ice Caps Are Melting Fast
    Dec. 7, 2001
    "We weren't expecting to see something nearly this large," said Caplinger.

    http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/2003/0313irrad ia nce.html
    NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE
    March 20, 2003
    Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.
    "This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change," said Richard Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York.

  64. ancient alien missle bases in siberia by mediaisthemassage · · Score: 1
    when you mention siberia, are you referring to the Tunguska event of 1918...uh i mean 1908....?

    Apparently this Russian UFO reseacher claims that the event was caused by an ancient missle installation which shot down some object before it collided with the earth....

    here is an excerpt:

    GB: Earlier, off camera, you alluded to some important developments concerning the Tunguska explosion of 1908. For the record, can you tell us why you now believe you know the cause?

    VU: It is not so much a case of belief; we know what caused it. It was a meteor, but a meteor that was destroyed by ... let's say, a missile. The missile was generated by a material installation. We don't know who constructed it, but it was built long, long ago and is situated in Siberia, several hundred kilometres north of Tunguska. I can tell you that our investigation has revealed more than one explosion at Tunguska. Let me share something with you. The last time that this installation shot down a meteor was on 24/25 September last year. The Americans ... they have three bases ... they, too, noticed this explosion. [Editor's Ref: See New Scientist vol 178 issue 2399 - 14 June 2003]

    GB: Forgive me, but some will say this sounds like science fiction.

    VU: Graham, you know that when we talk about the truths that lie behind this subject, we only do so with those who have an understanding of the responsibility that goes with it. And you know that we are dealing with a technology much further ahead of our own-one capable of doing things that we cannot.

    GB: Can you be more specific about the location of this installation?

    VU: Look for the site of the Tunguska explosion. To the southeast is the very large and famous Lake Baikal. Beyond that, to the north, is a huge and barren territory covering 100,000 kilometres. Hardly anyone lives there. There are no towns or cities. Here is where we located the installation ...

    here's a link to the rest of the article....here

    1. Re:ancient alien missle bases in siberia by KillerBob · · Score: 1

      Not to offend you or others, but... consider the source?

      The following extracts were transcribed from a filmed interview with Valery Uvarov, of Russia's National Security Academy, conducted by Graham W. Birdsall, Editor of the UK-based UFO Magazine. The interview took place at the 12th International UFO Congress Convention and Film Festival, held February 2-8, 2003, in Laughlin, Nevada, USA.

      and another exerpt....

      VU: I cannot speak for astronomers in the West, but astronomers within our Academy tell us we have nothing to fear. I have heard people talk about a rotation figure of 3,600 years for this planet, which is in a similar orbit to that of the Earth but behind the Sun. We know that this planet and the installation in Siberia are closely connected. Let me say that we believe that this installation is keeping that planet in a stable orbit. If that planet were to move, to shift orbit, the entire solar system would become unstable. Those of us in the Academy are sure that this planet is inhabited, and that this installation is designed to protect them and us. We are sure that nothing dangerous will happen. Everything is under control.

      Our investigations have shown that the Earth has a pulse-a finely tuned frequency that affects everything, every living thing. Some 12,500 years ago, this pulse corresponded to 360 days of the year-study the old Egyptian calendar-but then an asteroid struck the Earth. We believe the orbit of the Earth was altered, artificially, to compensate for this. Our planet moved further away from the Sun, to a frequency pulse of 365.

      This has taught us to believe that we have friends-friends who watch over us, silently. They did not allow then, nor will they allow now, any planet, comet or asteroid to strike and destroy the Earth. This, for us, is now absolutely clear.


      and later

      Let me speak frankly. This installation has a power system, an energy source. We have located this. It was during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia that we first noticed an increase in the output of that energy. For us, it was incredible, but we now know that this installation reacts to social upheaval and conflict. Part of our investigation involved searching through ancient records and archives, and then we came across the Echutin Apposs Alanhor [sic] texts. We call them the Alanhor, and they are at least 4,000 years old. They describe the installation, in scientific terms, as to what was taking place there. It's amazing.

      Not that I'm especially a disbeliever, but I am a critic. This sounds a *lot* like science fiction here, and a lot like I should really change dealers because somebody has better shit than the guy I buy my weed from.

      He is extremely light on the details. Much of his answers are along the lines of "we can't tell you exactly where it is, but believe us, it's there." Sounds like Dubya.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
  65. Ultimate Bitch Slap Protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the 300lb Gorilla IBM finally bitch slaps SCO into oblivion a 10k sq ft bunker might just be enough to protect you from the shock wave!!!

    OTH - if SCO wins it will ideal foe defending your RH9 boxes from SCO's lawyers trying to issues with subpeonas for unpaid licenses :)

  66. Keep an Eye on Them Yourself by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

    JPL's calendar at http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/calendar/ lists all known asteroid flybys. Why, just today (Nov. 15) there are two. Asteroid 2003 UO12 Near-Earth Flyby (0.048 AU) and Asteroid 1999 XN141 Near-Earth Flyby (0.082 AU).

    There, THAT should pretty much crush any sense of security you might have been developing after reading the parent article. If it doesn't, keep in mind that they estimate they've located only about 10% of the potential Earth impacters, and lately they've been finding them just AFTER they've passed by. No matter when it happens, we might get no warning at all.

    "God, Root, what is difference?" -- Pitr, User Friendly

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
  67. Just one problem... by jvollmer · · Score: 1

    They neglected to factor-in the influence of irony which increases the risk in inverse proportion
    to the amount by which any sufficiently scholarly study concludes that the risk is reduced.

    Try saying that without spitting

    If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz!

  68. I'm confused... by jimi1283 · · Score: 0
    'The analysis doesn't change the chance of an asteroid hitting the Earth, points out astronomer Iwan Williams of Queen Mary University of London, UK. "But assuming that there are fewer large asteroids, the damage will be less," he says.'

    So based on this paragraph at the bottom, there is no less chance of a hit, just less probability of major damage.

  69. No worries by athlon02 · · Score: 1

    Once every 600,000 years? That sounds almost like they're saying the solar system is stationary or that any rocks >1km that could hit us are in orbit around our solar system. The sun has an orbit too, so unless they've looked at all the >1km rocks within range of the Sun's orbit, I kinda doubt their percentages are too accurate.

  70. Rippin' me off by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Then why am I still paying such high premiums for my asteroid insurance?

  71. All clear, you can all come out now by Laconian · · Score: 1

    ...because the Sprint PCS Wireless Web lets you take your eLife everywhere you go!

  72. And the last one hit Earth when? by mlippert · · Score: 1

    Not that that changes the odds for the next coin toss but still.

  73. Whoo! What a surprise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, you don't read about asteroids collisions with the Earth in the newspapers very often, small collisions happen all the time, and when big collisions happen, they've been recorded events --and there haven't been many. One could make an inference that big collisions are rather improbable. It doesn't help that the Earth is rather dinky as astronomical objects go and the solar system is a helluva lot bigger and mostly empty. When you consider that the planets formed from the sort of junk we fear colliding with us and that these planets have been sweeping out the same area of space (relative to the sun) for a few billion years, it suggests to me that most of the big stuff that was destined to hit us would have already done so by now. Furthermore, if you've ever played with a gravity simulation, you'll see that light objects with a significant amount of velocity don't spiral into much heavier objects, they orbit them or slingshot around them. This happens to the sun a lot (comets, planets, etc.) but not as much with orbiting planetoids.

    But in case an asteroid does hit us, I'm not going to let it ruin my day.

  74. You know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm beginning to hope that the nuclear arms race will heat up again so that we'll have some other cataclysmic event to worry about than this.

  75. So, the humancivilization cycle by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 1

    Does this mean hhe human civilization has a cycle of every 600,000 years?

  76. To paraphrase Steven Wright... by finelinebob · · Score: 1
    Some folks think that painting it is a better solution. You see, if you paint part of it white, it will deflect the asteroid by about 1 earth-radius 20 years ahead of time. (Less than the margin of error in our guess, most likely. Might knock it into us.) And, to paint a 100-meter or 1-kilometer rock takes A LOT of paint.
    It's a small asteroid ... but I wouldn't want to paint it.
  77. Damnit! by ChrisZuma · · Score: 0

    Relief? that's not a relief! That means the astronomical meteor shelter I've been building for the last 20 years is a total waste! What am i going to do with a 15x15' room with 6' thick cement walls, capable of withstanding several nuclear blasts?
    Wait a second! I can sit in it while I post anti-microsoft threads!

    --


    ~Chris Hammond
  78. It's a violent universe out there... by vudufixit · · Score: 1

    Of all the natural catastrophes that could afflict Earth, an impending asteroid ain't so bad. How about these gems: A dark rougue planet or moon - too massive to have any hope of blasting or moving even if detected early. A chunk of a brown dwarf - dense matter that would shatter us with gravity. Cosmic ray blast - unlike particles from a solar storm, this would hit us at the speed of light, and would be undetectable. We wouldn't know it happened until we started dying at more or less the same time of radiation poisoning. Closer to home, if a huge fissure opens up admitting seawater into the earth's lower crust, the sudden burst of steam could create a massive explosion that would blast apart the planet.

    1. Re:It's a violent universe out there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldnt some equally bad shit happen if an asteroid where to hit the moon, or some big mofo smash the sun to pieces? What about some intense pulsar like beam that might be slowly turning our way and zap both sides of the planet at once.

      What about scientists messing with things they shouldn't and imploding the universe...by accident. I think there's lots of ways of getting wiped out without considering a big flying stone hitting our little ball.

    2. Re:It's a violent universe out there... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      And don't forget about thermonuclear war, the Spanish Flu II, grey-goo, and some numbnuts oceanologist cracking the seal of the Elder Gods.

      Everyone else is content by knowing they'd go in a blink. I just know I'd be that one guy who manages to walk away, wandering the Universe like Arther Dent. And I don't mean that in a positive way, there are a lot of people, places, and things in this world a care a lot about.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  79. Downgraded Level by The+Donald · · Score: 1

    So is this why the alert level the government puts out has gone down from yellow to blue?

    --
    You know who I think is crazy? All my ex-girlfriends!
  80. Re:We have us a winner i made more for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oompa loompa doompety doo
    I've got a perfect puzzle for you
    Oompa loompa doompety dee
    If you are wise you'll listen to me

    Oompa Loompa doompadee dum
    CmdrTaco and Hemos like to drink cum
    Oompa Loompa doompadah dee
    If you are a GNU/Faggot you will listen to me

    Who do you blame when you're covered in scat
    Out with transexual hookers, high on smack?
    Blaming the trolls is a lion of shame
    You know exactly who's to blame:
    CmdrTaco, Hemos, and their undeserved fame!

    Oompa Loompa doompadee dah
    If you're not using Linux then you will go far
    You will live in happiness too
    Like the Oompa Loompa doompadee do!

    What do you get when you guzzle down cum
    Eating as much as an elephant eats
    What are you at, getting CowboyNeal fat
    What do you think will come of that?
    I don't like the look of it

    Cock chewing's fine when it's once in a while
    It stops you from masturbating and brightens your smile
    But it's repulsive, revolting and wrong
    Chewing and chewing all day long
    The way that Rob Malda does

    Who do you blame when your kid is a fag
    Pampered and spoiled like a siamese cat
    Blaming the fags is a lie and a shame
    You know exactly who's to blame
    CmdrTaco and Hemos

    What do you get from a glut of Cock?
    A pain in the neck and an IQ of three
    Why don't you try simply fucking a girl
    Or could you just not bear to look
    You'll get no
    You'll get no
    You'll get no
    You'll get no
    You'll get no HIV!

    Oompa loompa doompety da
    If you're not GNU/Faggot, you will go far
    You will live in happiness too
    Like the Oompa Loompa Doompety do
    Doompety do

    and
    Join us now and share the goat sex;
    You'll be free, GNU/Faggots, you'll be free.

    Hoarders may get piles of cum and disease,
    That is true, GNU/Faggots, that is true.
    But they cannot help their HIV infected neighbors;
    That's not good, GNU/Faggots, that's not good.

    When we have enough free goat sex
    At our call, GNU/Faggots, at our call,
    We'll throw out those dirty used condoms,
    Ever more, GNU/Faggots, ever more.

    Join us now and share the gost sex;
    You'll be free, GNU/Faggots, you'll be free.

  81. thanks for the update by falsification · · Score: 1

    This is great news! I think I will take that vacation after all.

  82. Re:We only have to watch out for 'brane' collision by grey3 · · Score: 1

    Either one wouldn't matter because once we were hit by an asteroid or a caught in the middle of another big bang, we'd probably instantly die and have no recollection of ever living.

  83. Asteroids are nothing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm scared shitless that another brane is gonna collide with us.

  84. Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now how am I supposed to entice nubile young things into my fallout shelter? Well, there's always the threat of the Super Volcano lurking under Yosemite N.P..

  85. Yeah. OK. by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

    But what about them there solar flares? If we ain't gonna get pummeled from behind by a big hard rock, how does that keep us from gettin blasted in the face by a big ball o gas? ;)

  86. Re:Armageddon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Did anyone see Armageddon and then go
    >home unable to sleep for nights on end?

    Hey, any movie with Bruce Willis will give me nightmares or havent you seen Hudson Hawk yet?

    Throw in a good 5 years of Aerosmith playing the exact same ballads on different cd's culminating in that nauseating song....

    zeke

  87. Re:creators: planet/population still in crisis mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Learn proper sentence structure. You give trolls and their supporters a bad name with your broken english and retarded use of capitalization. Thank you and have a nice day.

  88. In other news.. by outz · · Score: 1

    our Sun has released another massive solar flare...

    --
    What was your username again? -BOFH
  89. Homeland Security by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 1

    Relax, everyone - the risk of a gigantic asteroid colliding with Earth just got smaller!

    Yay! Finally the Department of Homeland Security protects us from something!

  90. Magic size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Is this how they standardize the length of the kilometer?

  91. Your teacher fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you learned about Poisson Processes without learning how to identify one when you see one, then your teacher failed.

  92. Use retro-rockets by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    Just send a probe to an astroid and have it programmed to attach itself to it. Then, fire it's on-board retro-rocket to "push" the astroid off track.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  93. i just hope by seelet · · Score: 0

    that 20-30% never comes along. thatll really suck.

  94. Re: I didn't like armageddon by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1
    Basically, I watch 'Earth getting blown up' movies for one reason, and one reason only. I love seeing Earth explode with all the nifty special effects Hollywood can muster. Nothing much hit the earth in Armageddon, and that was a big dissappointment.

    In the same way that the destruction wreaked by whatever bad guy really makes the Final Fantasy series games, and many an anime flick ( most of which feature the end of the world as a minor plot point ) I enjoy watching the Earth blow up in major Hollywood films. If 'Howards End' started out with a laser from the moon splitting the Earth in two, then I would probably have watched it.

    The movie Meet Joe Black starts out with Brad Pit being creamed by a couple of trucks. I don't know what Meet Joe Black was about, but I must have watched him get creamed 50 times. It was cool. I will do the same when they have a nice Earth destruction scene in a big budgie Hollywould Flim.

    --

    Eat at Joe's.

  95. One is too many by jswaringen · · Score: 1

    Ok.. is it just me or is once every 600,000 years still once too many. I mean if just one large asteroid hits the planet aren't we pretty much wiped out?

    --
    John Swaringen Geek In The Heart Of Texas...
  96. Quicker than 30 years by LandGator · · Score: 1

    Niven & Pournelle (Pournelle being a rocket scientist and experienced with large aerospace project management) expected in FOOTFALL
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/flex-s ign-in/ref =cm_custrec_f_glance/002-2617440-6432013
    we could build and launch an ORION in a year if regulatory restraints were abandoned. Our treaty with SovUnion about atmospheric detonations is effectively kaput, anyway, and given the circumstances, I'd find it appropriate without regard to treaty.

    ORION would use specially designed, lo-lo fallout nukes surrounded by plastic, designed to make plasma (not fallout) to push a huge mf-ing pusher plate (which also shields the occupants from the small amount of prompt radiation). The ride on the battleship-sized ship above (attached by huge shock absorbers) would be jerky, but if you gotta go, you gotta go.

    BBC Four did a programme on ORION last week, and Dyson's book PROJECT ORION is authoritative, as well as a good read. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0805 072845/qid=1069269558/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/002-261744 0-6432013?v=glance&n=507846

    I could live with one person of our five billion dying of cancer to save civilisation (or our current facsimile theoreof). I'd even volunteer for the honour, were it selectable (it ain't).

    Driving on the I-5 is far more dangerous, yet I manage to accept the risk to go buy milk a couple of days a week.

    --
    There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA