Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UN Plans Asteroid Response Framework

Posted by samzenpus on from the where's-bruce-willis dept.

chrb writes "The Association of Space Explorers, a non-profit group of people who have completed at least one Earth orbit in space, has presented a report to the United Nations titled Asteroid Threats: A Call for Global Response. The UN will now meet in February to discuss the issue and try to define a global political framework for dealing with asteroid-based threats to the Earth."

152 comments

  1. Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Too bad X8345-Y3J (aka BigBetty) will hit earth in January

    1. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [citation needed]

    2. Re:Too bad by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      On the upside though the debris from the impact will cure global warming.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  2. hmmm by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will this be like the original, where if you lose a city then it's gone, or the newer version where you can rebuild a city if you blow up enough asteroids? Also, how are we going to get the east and west to cooperate? Will they only shoot down asteroids that come down on their side of the screen? What if they split up and some come onto our side? Oh, the political decisions...

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:hmmm by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 1

      what happens if we need to shoot through our own defences to destroy the aliens though? Oh wait, this is more like missile command not space invaders, my mistake.

    2. Re:hmmm by siddesu · · Score: 1

      While at that, why not consider throwing in another coupla trillions and develop an extension to enable the defenders to also shoot down the aliens that undoubtedly hide among the asteroids.

    3. Re:hmmm by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Gotta watch for those little saucers with the high pitched warble. These nail you every fscking time.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  3. Re:What timing! by rgo · · Score: 1

    holy shit

  4. !brucewillis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The real heroes are the guys (and gals) with the calculators.

    1. Re:!brucewillis by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Funny

      The real heroes are the guys (and gals) with the calculators.

      Sure, but you'll only see them in the credits just before they run the copyright notices. Hollywood is like real life -- nobody cares what it took for the star character to finish the job, because it's all about looking cool, sipping martinis, and driving aston martins. Q just got a few witty one-liners, but otherwise it was a 12 hour work day and no vacation to keep the james bonds of the world well-stocked in disposable tech.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:!brucewillis by Hal_Porter · · Score: 0, Troll

      You should write a sci fi short story where the Q types are the real heros and the James Bond character is a silly poopy head who's only interested in being popular. You could release it under Creative Commons too, to make sure you win a popularity contest amongst geeks, because that would totally make you a Q who does clever things in the shadows, not douchebag who's good at self publicism.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:!brucewillis by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Heh.. most of the time we can't even get a weather forecast right, except as very rough probabilities, and that's our own atmosphere. Even the objects we know about in LEO have huge margins of error at to where they'll land, with paths hundreds of miles wide, and THOUSANDS of miles long (given that small variances in pitch have large effects at speed). The only chance we really have is to intercept these objects long before they become a definite threat. And that's assuming we even see them. It's incredibly difficult to see asteroids due to their typically low brightness, unless we get lucky with a shiny one with a good angle of reflection, or one that happens to occlude another light source when we're looking. In reality, from tracking to prevention, we're a LONG way away from being able to do anything more than sweep up the mess.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
  5. Re:What timing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Flashblock means you don't need to worry about Youtube rickrolling.

  6. better be careful by ILuvRamen · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope it has less holes in it than the .NET Framework....ohhhhh :P No time to apply patches to that thing hehehe.

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  7. Comet protection? by rigelstar · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope this will protect us against comets that have a chemical composition of less than 1.5% the normal level of cyanogen found in normal comets as well as asteroids.

  8. If it's anything like... by actionbastard · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fifties and Sixties Civil Defense initiatives, 'Duck and Cover' isn't going to cut it.

    --
    Sig this!
    1. Re:If it's anything like... by shadowkiller137 · · Score: 1

      Ya but that's exactly what we will get.

    2. Re:If it's anything like... by GeneralSense · · Score: 1

      But neither will Bruce Willis and a crappy Aerosmith song either!

  9. That's another thing they'd screw up... by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's all well and good to have a bunch of people talking together, but at the end of the day, the UN is utterly useless, and ultimately, the world's going to come looking for the USA for a way out, and then the Americans will quietly ask the British what they think, the French will chime in with their opinion whether anyone likes it or not, and after that brief bit of backchannel talking, the USA will wind up doing something that Europe hailed in private and condemned in public, except for the British, and their people will bitch about the Americans do it, not because its wrong, but they will insist that the British would have done it better had they still had their empire.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by bensafrickingenius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And no doubt the UN will soon impanel a subcommittee which will spend millions of US dollars to generate a report condemning the US for causing this Asteroid crisis...

      --
      I am not left-handed, either!
    2. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Ruvim · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In result, USA solution will be using Russians, hired cheap off the Russian military, using old Soviet technology...

    3. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by khallow · · Score: 1

      Heh, international cooperation at its finest.

    4. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Paua+Fritter · · Score: 0

      Head in the sand much?

    5. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by TapeCutter · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, the jokes on the UN 'cause the US will just print more dollars. /ducks

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the British will bitch about it, because the solution will be based on technology that they gave the Americans in 1950, and the Americans subsequently claim that *they* invented...

    7. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by kubitus · · Score: 1, Insightful
      US or UN?

      if you look closely the US isn't doing too well recently!

      without Russian supply ships the ISS is cut off. deficit spending not only the state but the whole country.

      And -I tell you confidently - there are more ways to skin a cat than the US way.

    8. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Head in the sand much?

      How is his head in the sand? His remark indicates that his head is clearly not in the sand and that he's been paying attention.

      Your head on the other hand...

    9. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "...right, because the unprovoked unilateral invasion of another country... "

      You know....you can keep repeating that as long as you like, but, it still won't make it true.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    10. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > bunch of people talking together, but at the end of the day, the UN is utterly useless

      This is the whole point of the UN - to get people talking instead of fighting which is fine if an alien race comes knocking - but not for asteroids.

      I wouldn't say useless though.

    11. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      "And -I tell you confidently - there are more ways to skin a cat than the US way."

      Yes, but our ways have the biggest boobs!

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    12. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by kubitus · · Score: 1
      you are right - and you like it that way

      because US WASP babies are not fed this way

      and US guys are not allowed to see them!

      If you come to Europe Ladies are allowed on the beach topless

      There you will notice how unfavorable big boobs look!

      I was told: two handful is enough! - right so!

    13. Re:That's another thing they'd screw up... by pseudochaos · · Score: 0

      Surely you have a list of isomorphic instances wherein something like this happened before (I believe the term I'm looking for is "precedent", but I'm not a lawyer). Care to share it with the class, or are you just spouting a baseless opinion?

      --
      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
  10. How will this be funded? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Should funding be broken down by %population of the world, or %landmass occupied? However, I see this as "make the US pay for it". If a non-planet killing asteroid is targeting a nation which has not contributed to the fund/program, should we defend it? The security system on my house doesn't protect my neighbor's, (although my tax dollars which pay for the police, do.).

    1. Re:How will this be funded? by retech · · Score: 1

      We can always offer a refund if you're in the spot that got hit.

    2. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If you think it should be based on percent of GDP, you'll be happy, because it is.

      And yes, that means that the EU (taken as a group) gives more to the UN in dues than the US.

      All of this ignores the question of whether or not the US pays what it owes (which it has been lately, I think)

    3. Re:How will this be funded? by trawg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      However, I see this as "make the US pay for it". If a non-planet killing asteroid is targeting a nation which has not contributed to the fund/program, should we defend it? The security system on my house doesn't protect my neighbor's, (although my tax dollars which pay for the police, do.).

      Heh, I always just assumed the US government will do it under the guise of protecting the world, when really, it's just a space superiority weapons system

    4. Re:How will this be funded? by da+cog · · Score: 5, Funny

      We can always offer a refund if you're in the spot that got hit.

      Better yet, we'll say that if we screw up and you get hit, then the next asteroid defense is free!

      --
      Snarkiness is inversely proportional to wisdom because it emphasizes feeling right rather than being right.
    5. Re:How will this be funded? by isBandGeek() · · Score: 1

      Realistically, we can't ask developing countries to shoulder much of the burden of this cost, if any. However, it is true that the EU (among others, such as Japan and China) should probably also contribute along with the US.

    6. Re:How will this be funded? by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This theoretical asteroid would know no man-made boundaries. It's unlikely that the overall effect that it will produce would be able to be narrowed down to a single nation or even a small group of them. The ripple such an event would cause would touch everyone's life in some fashion.

      Either way, I have zero faith in the UN being able to put together anything bigger or more complex than a boy scout weekend camping trip without massive corruption, waste and/or bad blood being created between member nations.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    7. Re:How will this be funded? by Broken+scope · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those police don't actually protect his house you know... they just take pictures and fill out paperwork you send to the insurance company after some hoodlum ransacked your house while you were at work.

      God, I hope an anti asteroid system isn't like the police, I'd prefer if it was more like the secret service. You know, everyone is pretty focused on that one important dude, and if he gets offed, a whole bunch of people get fired.

      --
      You mad
    8. Re:How will this be funded? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Informative

      If a non-planet killing asteroid is targeting a nation which has not contributed to the fund/program, should we defend it?

      That's much less likely than the asteroid hitting an ocean. After a glance at the globe, it looks to me like most of the world's ocean area has straight shot to at least some portion of the US coastline. So if the goal is to avoid those 1000-foot high tsunamis, the US probably has more interest in ensuring that the program gets implemented than to worry about who's not paying.

    9. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if the US continues to deny the international trade in technology. Helpfully there are tons of people who don't give a fuck what the U.S. says and make competing systems anyway. As to money, well the U.S. won't even be able to pay its share--look at the UN fees it never paid when it had plenty of money. You expect it to do anything in the remote future?

    10. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      so kick us out of the un. we don't give a fuck you stupid bitch.

    11. Re:How will this be funded? by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A theoretical asteroid can be of many different sizes. An Apophis sized impactor does have global implications (though its not extinction class); however, something like what exploded above Tunguska in the early 20th century could potentially be devastating within a single country but not have an effect outside of a limited region, like a bad earthquake.

      And that is an interesting question, because unlike other natural disasters you know its coming and you can do something about it, but its expensive. So if you want to send a mitigation mission, do you make the other country pay for your expenses (assuming they dont have the technology to handle it themeselves), or is it an UN (or American, or Russian) act of charity even though in many ways its the problem of a single country. Or... do you just say hey, you better get people to move out of there, they should have a few years notice at least.

      And... what if you change the trajectory just enough to make it hit somewhere else, whats the liability like for something like that? Of course, this is all presuming you can get the track down to a specific impact zone that far into the future, which believe me (I've been doing a bit of work on estimating Apophis' trajectory), is not an easy thing to do.

    12. Re:How will this be funded? by Z34107 · · Score: 1

      The US kind of donates the building and practically the entirety of the peacekeeping budget, not to mention troops.

      Other countries get paid per soldier per day contributed towards peacekeeping missions, which third world nations with bored armies love.

      --
      DATABASE WOW WOW
    13. Re:How will this be funded? by Reziac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Volunteer fire departments have that same problem -- what to do about people who refuse to contribute? Most have hit on a simple solution: if you don't pay your fair share to support the VFD, they *will* just stand by and let your house burn. Usually it only takes one such example.

      Second, considering that asteroid hits are neither an everyday occurrance, nor something we can realistically defend against anyway, one has to wonder just exactly who benefits from the money this will suck out of the U.S.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    14. Re:How will this be funded? by ThunderThor53 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And how do you propose accounting for the 2/3 of Earth that is water? %landmass + %coastline? The tsunamis from an ocean landing are likely to cause more devastation than a dirt landing - and are more likely to occur.

    15. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rah rah! to you too, you fucking idiot.

    16. Re:How will this be funded? by faffod · · Score: 1

      Since the 1950's the US has never donated troops. The US troops deployed today are not UN trops.

    17. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no expert on this, but I'd guess by the time you know for sure all the member nations are safe, it's too late to stop, so you've already launched.

      Moreover, I'd say it's worth shooting an asteroid headed for even (say) Antartica, if only as an experiment. After all, we've never done this before, and if it doesn't work out as hoped, we'd like to know that for when one does come at us ourselves.

    18. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      however, something like what exploded above Tunguska in the early 20th century could potentially be devastating within a single country

      that was Telsa not an asteroid
      (Captcha is "really")

    19. Re:How will this be funded? by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      ...and if we screw up and you don't get hit, then we can drop a nuke on one of your major cities for effect.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    20. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As far as I'm aware, troops in South Korea are still under UN command and aren't scheduled to be switched over until 2012 or so (according to previous agreements) at the soonest.

    21. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      Moreover, I'd say it's worth shooting an asteroid headed for even (say) Antartica, if only as an experiment. After all, we've never done this before, and if it doesn't work out as hoped, we'd like to know that for when one does come at us ourselves.

      Actually, that's a very interesting idea. I doubt you're the first to come up with it, but I've certainly never heard it before, and I like the research opportunities this would bring!

    22. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      Dave Chappelle: "Black President Bush"
      Okay, United Nations, why don't you sanction us? Sanction is with your army. Oh, that's right! You don't have an army! Well, I guess you'd better shut the fuck up!

    23. Re:How will this be funded? by faffod · · Score: 2, Informative

      The US donated the troops in the 1950s to the UN for Korea. I think that you are correct that the US is still providing troops for that agreement. However, since then, any time the US has deployed troops it has been outside of the UN infrastructure.

    24. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Economic sanctions relate to trading embargoes, not the use of military force. Idiot.

    25. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it sounds misleading to say that the US has never donated troops since the 1950s when it still has a 50+ year agreement going with SK where there are around 30,000 US military personnel stationed there.

      But otherwise, I'm surprised (and therefore a little suspicious of the fact!) that the US hasn't donated troops under a UN command since then.

    26. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      It's a quote from the Chappelle video I linked, not an excerpt from some PhD dissertation. Don't be silly. ;)

    27. Re:How will this be funded? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Either way, I have zero faith in the UN being able to put together anything bigger or more complex than a boy scout weekend camping trip without massive corruption, waste and/or bad blood being created between member nations.

      The effectiveness of international bodies/treaties depends on your metric. In terms of climate change they haven't done a very good job reducing CO2 emissions.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Increase_in_greenhouse_gas_emission_since_1990

      As of year-end 2006, the United Kingdom and Sweden were the only EU countries on pace to meet their Kyoto emissions commitments by 2010. While UN statistics indicate that, as a group, the 36 Kyoto signatory countries can meet the 5% reduction target by 2012, most of the progress in greenhouse gas reduction has come from the stark decline in Eastern European countries' emissions after the fall of communism in the 1990s.

      Most countries have done OK out of it though. The EU managed to get the cut in emissions to be based on 1990s emissions, even though when it was signed emissions here already dropping due to Communist era polluters closing down. Russia did even better, and may have been able to make money selling its surplus emssions allowances. China and India got a commitment that 'developed countries have to pay billions of dollars, and supply technology to other countries for climate-related studies and projects'.

      Sweden and the UK cut emissions, but they were planning to do that anyway. So every one was happy, except the US who every one else blamed for emissions not dropping.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    28. Re:How will this be funded? by faffod · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree I could have phrased it better. Also, a bit of poking around led to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peacekeeping which states that the US and S. Korea took over the DMZ in 1967 I started to check on the various deployments over the years: Both gulf wars were "Coalition troops", not UN. US troops in Kosovo were under NATO. Then I found an error on my part: the US troops in Somalia were part of a UN command. So, yes the US has donated troops, I was wrong. That said, the vast majority of the UN troops are not US. Which the OP claimed. US troops in Lebanon were part of the Multinational Force. Vietnam was not a UN operation, rather is was a war.

      So, going back to the OP comments about the US donating the building, the "defense budget" and the troops. Let me try my reply again.
      Others have pointed out (not to the OP but in a thread above this one) that the US contribution is proportional to GDP. The EU as a block makes a similar contribution. Also note that a country does not contribute to the "defense budget" just like I don't pay the taxes that go into building the Interstate Highways (part of my taxes do, but I also pay for the military, medicare, etc).
      With the rare exception, the US never contributes troops to UN operations. From the wiki link above, "About 4.5% of the troops and civilian police deployed in UN peacekeeping missions come from the European Union and less than one percent from the United States (USA)"

    29. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      massive corruption, waste and/or bad blood being created between member nations

      Quite so. Who needs the UN for that, when the US government can do that far better by itself?

    30. Re:How will this be funded? by Captain+Hook · · Score: 3, Funny

      a whole bunch of people get fired.

      Fired and crushed under a billion tons of rock

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    31. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US kind of donates the building

      You Sir, are extremely ignorant. It is an honor to host the building and most Europeans (and probably many in other countries too) think that it is an honor the US does not deserve considering its behaviour during the last decade. Every single member country would want to host it.

    32. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You see, i don't know if you mean:
      "So kick US out of the UN"
      OR
      "So kick us out of the UN"

      Learn to type, or get back to 4chan.
      Thank you, come again.

    33. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Volunteer fire departments have that same problem -- what to do about people who refuse to contribute? Most have hit on a simple solution: if you don't pay your fair share to support the VFD, they *will* just stand by and let your house burn. Usually it only takes one such example.

      Easy fix for that for that sort of anti-social behavior. Burn down the station house and shoot the volunteer firemen from ambush as they arrive

      Usually it only takes one such example.

    34. Re:How will this be funded? by norite · · Score: 1

      A theoretical asteroid can be of many different sizes. An Apophis sized impactor does have global implications (though its not extinction class); however, something like what exploded above Tunguska in the early 20th century could potentially be devastating within a single country but not have an effect outside of a limited region, like a bad earthquake.

      I guess you're assuming here it's a land impact. Most of the Earth is covered by water, making an oceanic impact event much more likely. If an Apophis size asteroid impacted in the Atlantic, which is a theoretical possibility with 99942 Apophis in April 13th 2036, then you're looking at a massive, mile high tidal wave taking out the entire Eastern seaboard of the US, Canada, the Caribbean, Western Europe, South America and West Africa. All gone, quite literally. Nothing but mud remaining. Or it could hit the Pacific instead. 99942 Apophis's potential collision trajectory on this date starts in Siberia, across the pacific, over Central America and to the Atlantic. These are all potential impact sites.

      --
      -- Fuck Beta
    35. Re:How will this be funded? by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 1


      As to money, well the U.S. won't even be able to pay its share--look at the UN fees it never paid when it had plenty of money.

      Um, the U.S. more than makes up for it's lack of U.N. dues with it's contribution of forces when U.N. sanctions are enforced. The dollar value of their contribution dwarfs that of all other U.N. members combined.

    36. Re:How will this be funded? by seven+of+five · · Score: 2, Insightful

      An asteroid big enough to wipe out a city would also set fires to surrounding area, sending black smoke into the atmosphere. Cutting incoming sunlight for everyone. Not many threats are so small as to be completely ignored on the global scale.

    37. Re:How will this be funded? by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Yes we should defend it for a variety of reasons.

      Firstly, if an asteroid does hit a nation that didn't contribute, inevitably people in America and around the world will cry out about the "Humanity Crisis in $COUNTRY as a result of the asteroid strike" and it will end up costing us many times more money than if we had stopped the damn thing in the first place. The EU and other countries do indeed contribute to the humanitarian crises of the world, but that doesn't mean it won't cost us money.

      Secondly, it would make us look bad. We really don't need to ruin our reputation any further.

      Lastly, it could set a disturbing precedent. What if we "accidentally" let an asteroid slip through to a nation that wasn't agreeing with some policy we mandated? This could very well turn into a weapons platform in that respect alone.

      --
      Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
    38. Re:How will this be funded? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      I enjoyed the info and the reply. Thanks!

    39. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? You didn't know we had a lunar and martian base's staffed with Secret Military types?

      ** For those who don't get the joke you never played Battlezone ***

    40. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sanctions are enforced by each member nation changing policy, the fuck up that is Iraq is not "enforcing" UN sanction, it is solely U.S. warmongering and you can't hide that.

    41. Re:How will this be funded? by ak3ldama · · Score: 1

      Actually I believe that Russia is quite happy that the USA is hosting it. I personally would love to let the abomination go somewhere else.

      --
      "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
    42. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally would love to let the abomination go somewhere else.

      Assuming that you're American, I believe we're starting to reach international consensus at its finest ;)

    43. Re:How will this be funded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, if we develop a space superiority system that we never use unjustly and it saves the world, what's the harm? The concern is if we were to use such a system unjustly.

    44. Re:How will this be funded? by faffod · · Score: 1

      You're welcome, and thank you for keeping me honest and accurate.

    45. Re:How will this be funded? by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      'if you don't pay your fair share to support the VFD, they *will* just stand by and let your house burn. Usually it only takes one such example.' [citation needed]

      --
      snig
    46. Re:How will this be funded? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Hamilton, Montana, grange (rural) volunteer fire department, 1970s. Others that I heard of in the same area when I lived in MT, but don't recall exactly where ... the cite I recall because I knew someone who lived there.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  11. The UN shouldn't be screwing around with Astroids by spike2131 · · Score: 4, Funny

    .... everybody knows that killer robots are the real menace.

    --
    SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
  12. Asteroid 2.0 by Freaky+Spook · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope it has less holes in it than the .NET Framework

    By the time the UN establishes it's framework, the Asteroid will have been upgraded to version 2.0 and then the UN will have to go back and do a whole re-write.

  13. The UN has been working on this in secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, the UN has been working on this in secret.

    The mechanism is to heat the atmosphere to the point where if an asteroid hits it, it will melt before it does any damage.

    The original plan was titled "Global Asteroid Warming", but it got garbled when it leaked to the press.

  14. Re:What timing! by f1vlad · · Score: 1

    That is fantastique! :) luv Ricky.

    --
    o_O
  15. Not if... by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    Not if the federal government bails out the hammer factory manufacturers in time!

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  16. Artist's Rendition of the Framework by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Funny

    http://homepage.mac.com/lyford/4umsf/asteroids.jpg

  17. Dibs by retech · · Score: 1

    I want to be the one selling the insurance for this! 6.7 billion people need a policy!

    1. Re:Dibs by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      ...and you can make me the sole beneficiary.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  18. A framework? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Thats the definition of "scream and run in circles"?

  19. I truly do not by Neuropol · · Score: 0, Troll

    believe we should be messing with the natural occurances of the solar system. Asteroid collisions are how we got here, how we will end, and how a new smarter, more capable species will come again.

    Let it happen naturally. End of story.

    1. Re:I truly do not by Dripdry · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is also a natural occurrence that we are here, able to perceive a threat to our species, and eliminate that threat.

      --
      -
    2. Re:I truly do not by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I say we do away with medicine, and science in general as well :-/

      Although I do wonder: Would this more capable species do anything to stop future asteroid impacts? I say we do our best and if we are incompetent and end up getting wiped out, then it's our own fault. To not try at all makes no sense.

      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
    3. Re:I truly do not by networkzombie · · Score: 1

      Actually natural selection has given us the ability to control our astrological destiny. Trusting our destiny to the UN is, of course, ludicrous. We would have better odds selling Asteroid Survival Kits at Radio Shack. What we should do is give money to universities to have students come up with survival ideas for better grades. Masters applicants need more thesis ideas anyway. How about rather than trying to stop an asteroid that conjures up images of Bruce Willis dying for a cause, create ships that can sustain life to hover the earth until the scorching is complete. Fly back down and repopulate. A temporary moon base perhaps? I always enjoyed a good episode of Space 1999. If you can't afford the space ticket my nephew sells bomb shelters (seriously). Relax, it's just an idea. I never did get that masters degree in Asteroid Manipulation.

    4. Re:I truly do not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're fucking with nature as you sit at your keyboard. put your money where your mouth is and go live in a cave, nature boy.

    5. Re:I truly do not by BlackusDiamondus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      believe we should be messing with the natural occurances of the solar system. Asteroid collisions are how we got here, how we will end, and how a new smarter, more capable species will come again. Let it happen naturally. End of story.

      Tell you what, next time you get critically ill or injured, we should just let you die a natural death so that a new smarter and more capable person can take your place. I say let it happen naturally, End of story.

      --
      Shit happens and it's usually caused by assholes
    6. Re:I truly do not by Zordak · · Score: 1

      a new smarter, more capable species will come again

      What if we are the new smarter, more capable species?

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    7. Re:I truly do not by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      believe we should be messing with the natural occurances of the solar system. Asteroid collisions are how we got here, how we will end, and how a new smarter, more capable species will come again.

      Let it happen naturally. End of story.

      You're trolling, I know but look at it this way. If humanity survives long enough we have essentially Godlike levels of technology. No species before humans was as good at maths or science as we are, and there's no reason to assume that post asteroid impact one would ever evolve. Intelligence at a human level is probably some sort of evolutionary fluke as most organisms could get by perfectly adequately without a sense of self, and without the mental hardware to be able to handle maths or complex languages.

      Humans aren't perfect, but they're good enough and far superior technologically to anything else that has ever existed on this planet, and as far as we can tell, anywhere else either.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    8. Re:I truly do not by Meumeu · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Mankind hes appeared as a "natural occurance of the solar system" too... It would only be normal to kick any ass that could threaten our survival.

    9. Re:I truly do not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asteroid collisions are how we got here, how we will end, and how a new smarter, more capable species will come again.

      Well, I would be okay with that, but some people just don't like raccoons...

    10. Re:I truly do not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting?
      You have to be kidding me, right?
      Are the mods who upped him hypocrites as well?

      As someone else said, get back to the caves, natureboy.

    11. Re:I truly do not by AGMW · · Score: 1
      Actually natural selection has given us the ability to control our astrological destiny.

      Do I detect uncertainty in Uranus?

      Libra: You will find yourself undecided as to whether to die in the initial fireball or in the tsunami deluge that follows.
      Taurus: That unhappy time at home will come to an abrupt end towards the end of the month.
      Capricorn: That tall dark handsome stranger will turn out to just be a handsome stranger in a very large shadow. Briefly.
      Virgo: You can look forward to not having to look forward ever again.
      Sagitarius: You may be promised promotion at work during the next quarter. Don't hold your breath. Or do - it won't actually matter.

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    12. Re:I truly do not by marleyboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What exactly does 'perceive a threat to our species' and 'eliminate that threat' mean? In your context, it means asteroids. However, the greatest threat to our species isn't from space, it's the way we treat each other. So why the hell are we more worried about random rocks from space, when it's exactly that mentality that leads to all the wars and conflict on earth? Perhaps instead of trying to dominate, crush and otherwise cause further separation, we need to be figuring out how to live co-operatively on earth.

      True elimination is digging out the seeds that grow ideas of conflict. Otherwise the weedwhacker of war is just spreading more.

      --
      Neutiquam erro
    13. Re:I truly do not by Dripdry · · Score: 1

      First off, I feel your post veers somewhat from the original intent of the parent. The parent states that we should naturally let things happen, which includes letting an asteroid destroy earth, so that other, smarter species can arise. I simply added to that same part of the Venn diagram the notion that we have also arisen naturally and from that have a natural instinct for survival through perception of dangers (in this case an asteroid that could obliterate earth) and we have naturally evolved the ability to deal with the threats we perceive.

      So, if we're going to talk about letting things happen naturally, all that has arisen from mankind is perfectly natural. Are those actions best for us as a species is another question completely, but the idea that we should somehow let our species be destroyed simply on the pretense that it is natural seems less than helpful, though I could be missing something (I'm not the smartest cookie in teh shed, as the kids say)

      Now, if it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that humanity can only do harm to the universe (another very abstract and difficult concept to get a conversation around) then I will bow to that and conceed that humanity ought to be destroyed.

      Basically, it seems like we ought to look at the survival of our species as good, and the opposite as bad. How we do it can be (is?)a moral question, but any true argument against the survival of mankind over the long term is something that needs much more rigorous argument than simply "we kill each other and we're stupid so we should all die." If you feel that way, back it up with something. Also keep in mind you're on a science and technology site. Science and technology look to the future and dream of a better tomorrow where everyone's lives are better for the things we think of and create. It is a solid form of that endless spring many like to call "hope".

      Of course there's Buddhist idea that neither good or bad exists, and we ought to just let things happen. That colors the argument differently perhaps, but we can leave that for another time.

      --
      -
    14. Re:I truly do not by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      I take it that you are familiar with the Space:1999 episode Collision Course? Due to treaties, there is a dearth of data on the characteristics of REAL nuclear explosions in interplanetary space. It may be possible to extrapolate data from the DEEP IMPACT mission. Hurling a grand piano sized hunk of metal may work for a dirty snowball, however for the city sized cannonballs of nickel-iron will require copious numbers of TellerToys(tm).

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    15. Re:I truly do not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What we should do is give money to universities to have students come up with survival ideas for better grades. Masters applicants need more thesis ideas anyway.

      I disagree. We've got plenty of ideas...nuclear weapons to either destroy or deflect hazards, tungsten lattice penetrators that would cut them up into small pieces, lasers, giant mirrors, and mass drivers to divert them using their own mass, giant rockets and even gravity tractors to push them out of the way directly. What we need is actual hardware. Take a look at all the ideas out there, pick a couple to develop and test, pick the best, and then return to keeping a casual watch for problems, knowing that now we can do something about asteroids and comets if they come too close.

      In the meantime, keep doing what we're doing: increasing our catalog of all these space hazards so the odds of being surprised are minimal.

  20. Alternative energy source by Ruvim · · Score: 1

    How about we put the net ON the asteroids and use their MC^2 to produce clean energy!

  21. Geez... by rascher · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...not another framework. Will it run on Linux??

    1. Re:Geez... by flyingfsck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course. We can use Ruby on Railguns...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:Geez... by powerlord · · Score: 1

      I prefer Python on a Shuttle myself.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  22. Re:What timing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was a really lame rickroll, the action needs to be closer to the beginning so people get the full impact before closing it.
    You fail

  23. Act of god... by Skiron · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No insurance pays out for an 'act of god' (whatever that means), so why bother anyway? - we would lose it all with no pay-back.

  24. That's a relief! by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

    Our most capable politicians in charge of determining how to deflect and asteroid. How reassuring!

            Brett

    1. Re:That's a relief! by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry - the skills of a politician are only two: getting elected, and knowing who to delegate work to.

      This will promptly be handed off to their brightest scientists. Or maybe they'll just throw grant money at the guys who proposed the problem.

  25. Good DAY, Sir! by Star+Particle · · Score: 2, Funny

    At least we can count on the UN sending that asteroid a strongly-worded letter!

  26. Missile defense for meteors... or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would it take for one crazy leader to turn a floating missile battery around to target someplace here on earth?

    I know we like to think of Armaggedon in the bible as being meteors coming down, but what about space based weaponry raining down from the sky?

  27. A nice lawn chair. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    World-burning asteroids of the type we're starting to see are part of a rather large cluster which has been studiously not-discussed since it began its inbound solar trajectory a few years back from where it was unceremoniously nine-pinned from the Kuiper Belt by a brown dwarf. I suspect that even if we had put some kind of defense into place years ago, it might find itself sorely taxed.

    Instead, I believe the response to an impending asteroid pummeling anticipated by our mighty world leaders involves a great deal of tunnel digging and strict population management measures of the sort we are seeing being rushed into place --so that the remaining human debris can be sorted into convenient work groups.

    A grim theory. Me. . , I'll invest in a nice lawn chair.

    -FL

  28. The UN can build consensus. by symbolset · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sure that if an asteroid wiped out the capital of some tinpot dictator that the UN would respond. They would have no trouble building enough consensus to write the Oort cloud a stern letter.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  29. Offsite backups by symbolset · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For true disaster preparedness the only solution is a backup hot site. Mars would be nice.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Offsite backups by icebrain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For true disaster preparedness the only solution is a backup hot site. Mars would be nice.

      You may speak in jest, sir, but your statement holds a lot of truth. Establishing self-sustaining colonies throughout the solar system (and eventually the stars) should be the primary goal of any space program, not watching earthworms in zero-g. Get yourself established on other planets and moons, and that technology will feed directly back into asteroid defense and "green" efforts.

      Plus, it provides jobs and incentive for people to stay in school. It's a win all around. And as John Young said, the dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    2. Re:Offsite backups by maxume · · Score: 1

      This sentiment translates directly into massive funding for esoteric physics research, not the silly firecracker stunts of today's manned NASA.

      Chemical rockets simply won't cut it.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Offsite backups by TobascoKid · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't Venus make for a better hot site?

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    4. Re:Offsite backups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Mars is cold as hell...

  30. Another court! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should start another court to outlaw asteroids hitting Earth.

  31. obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new asteroid throwing Overlords

  32. I wish it said which part of the UN. by Shag · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't think this is going to be the UN General Assembly.

    I doubt it'll even be the UN Security Council.

    I'd half expect it to be the UN Office of Outer Space Affairs, which handles the treaty on the peaceable use of outer space, and does things that are actually useful, like maintaining the registry of what's been launched and is whizzing around up there... but this sort of thing is a bit different than what UNOOSA has been doing.

    My Christmas-vacation homework will thus be:
    1. Ask friend at UNOOSA whether they're involved, and
    2. Ask Dave Tholen (Apophis discoverer) whether he knows anything.
    Optionally:
    3. Report back.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
    1. Re:I wish it said which part of the UN. by Shag · · Score: 4, Informative

      Okay, I poked around a bit... looks like the Working Group on Near-Earth Objects (mentioned in the BBC piece) isn't (as I had initially thought) the IAU WGNEO, but an occasionally-convened body under the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space.

      Evidently UN HQ in NY has hosted a couple lil' conferences on the subject of NEOs in the past decade or so. Dunno whether this next gig in February will be there, or in Vienna, but I'm gonna start asking around. Might be an interesting thing to check out.

      --
      Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
    2. Re:I wish it said which part of the UN. by Shag · · Score: 1

      Well, I asked around and the Scientific and Technical Committee is meeting Februray 9-20 at the UN's Vienna International Center in Austria. I don't know which of those days the NEO working group will meet, but I'm trying to see if I can somehow be in the area (or at least in Europe) around that time (which isn't exactly a trivial thing, since I live on the other side of the planet).

      Actually getting in might also be non-trivial, now that I think of it... but if I make it all the way to Vienna, I'm pretty sure they'll let me in. ;)

      --
      Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  33. Oh, great by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    As if Oil for Food, Commission on Human Rights and United Nations Office for Project Services weren't already proof enough that any money given to the U.N. is money wasted !

    1. Re:Oh, great by HertzaHaeon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, there are many things the UN does well. Also, the Oil For Food Program did accomplish its humanitarian goal, despite the corruption. The UN had no authority or the resources to stop smuggling, although it did warn about it. The nations responsible for it, among them the US and UK, didn't do much about it at the time, however.

      I'm not sure that I'd like men in blue helmets watching the skies, but their incompetence and corrupion is exaggerated.

    2. Re:Oh, great by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      who's the tosser who flagged this as flaimbait ?

    3. Re:Oh, great by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      "Senior U.N. officials said they hope that Volcker's fourth and most complete report will bring an end to a painful 18-month probe of the $64 billion program, which investigators concluded was so poorly managed that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein raked in $1.7 billion in kickbacks from participating companies and $11 billion in oil-smuggling profits. "

      The Oil for Food program was possibly the single most corrupt administrative activity that the U.N. ever enagged in. Aside from NOT accomplishing AT ALL what it was designed to do, it poured money into the hands of the one man who it was intended to circumvent. It also showed just how corrupt senior U.N. administrators were, including the Scty. Gnl.

      It is a classic example of why the U.N. should be shut down.
      Even if you don't agree with these sentiments, you can hardly call my post flamebait. Wanker !

  34. if the asteroid is too big by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    then the only thing you can do is say good bye because it is game over for humans on earth, you cant blow up a Everest sized asteroid, you might knock some chunks off even with a nuke...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:if the asteroid is too big by joke_dst · · Score: 1

      If you detect it in time a small nudge may be all you need. These things travel rather long distances, a small nudge is enough to make it miss earth altogether.

  35. UN response to an asteriod... by EmagGeek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yeah, that'll be great. Their response to an asteroid will be to convene a commission to determine how it will disproportionately affect women and minorities, develop a framework for taking from those not as affected and giving to those who are, and to develop a way for the least productive and least capable members of society survive while those perish who could actually help society recover.

  36. Hit the reset button by Jarno+Hams · · Score: 1

    one of the only reasons that we are not still simple bacteria and stromatolites here on earth is because of the astroid/comet/massive volcano "reset button". every time a large "catastrophe" has taken place, evolution advanced. the strong survived and it spawned, or allowed for, change in our environment to what it is today. the same reason they purposely set forest fires, to allow for new life to seed. Are we advanced as we can possibly be? In the early 1900's the US patent office was almost closed because they thought everything we possibly could ever need was already invented. I think we are a bunch of whiny twats and a reset button might be good for the earth.

  37. Aiming a little high, eh? by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

    [...] Either way, I have zero faith in the UN being able to put together anything bigger or more complex than a boy scout weekend camping trip without massive corruption, waste and/or bad blood being created between member nations.

    You, sir, are an optimist. I'd set the bar at a boy scout picnic, and would be pleasantly surprised if they managed to pull it off.

    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  38. A Little Confused by trongey · · Score: 1

    Does "asteroid-based threats" mean threats issued while the party making the threat is on an asteroid, or threats that indicate the use of an asteroid?

    --
    You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
  39. Nibiru / Planet X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're all doomed. Four years +8 days left.

    Share and enjoy!

  40. More BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.discussglobalwarming.com/blog shows us that another BULLSHIT cause that fruitcake whackos can attach themselves to.

    The arrogance in these groups is astonishing.

  41. Re: UN Plans Asteroid Response Framework by Ensign_Expendable · · Score: 1

    I'm sure the UN will come up with an efficient solution to the problem, which all member nations will immediately ratify. Just like the UN always does.

  42. How do you tell it is a spaceship or not? by kentsin · · Score: 1

    Just like the environment guy, these guy are too clever.

    Do play god. Study more, after you really know what you are planning, until then.

  43. Re:That's another sandwich they'd screw up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jus' give ME some head, girlie.

    And hold the sand. Between your knees, with the tomato.

  44. of Meteors, Turkeys & Terrorists by ImitationEnergy · · Score: 0

    http://www.newpath4.com/mumbai_india_tragedy_pressure_cooker_prelude_to_next_world_war_2014.pdf The incoming meteors are heating like a frozen turkey and exploding prior to ever making impact, a lot like a 33,000 miles per hour shotgun spread if ya just can't read the link. Asteroids and meteors exploding prior to impact may as well be considered an alien attack. Just ask the Canadians last week. Since it sprayed an uninhabited area perhaps we should consider that their warning shot across our bow.

    --
    Industrial Age 2 + How-to Stop Malignant Cancers.