Slashdot Mirror


Large-ish Meteor Hits Earth... But No One Notices (discovery.com)

According to data released by the Fireball and Bolide Reports page of NASA's Near Earth Object Program, a large meteor exploded far off the coast of Brazil on February 6, 2016. The meteor was the largest atmospheric impact recorded since the famous Chelyabinsk bolide that exploded over Russia in 2013. Although the Feb 6 meteor didn't cause any structural damage, the meteor unleashed an energy equivalent of 13,000 tons of TNT exploding instantaneously.

99 comments

  1. Well I'll Be.... What's that? by bobbied · · Score: 3, Funny

    Whoosh!

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by LogisQuebec.com · · Score: 1

      Scary! Do Nasa really knows what is comming upon us?

    2. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      No.

    3. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by quenda · · Score: 5, Funny

      New data has traced the trajectory of the meteor, and it originated from the Klendathu region.
      They were probably aiming for Buenos Aires.

    4. Re: Well I'll Be.... What's that? by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Too bad, I would have joined the military otherwise.

    5. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Humans in general are not worried about existential threats like a giant rock falling from the sky. Wrong species.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    6. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans in general are not worried about existential threats like a giant rock falling from the sky. Wrong species.

      Wasn't that fear eradicated at the time Rome invaded their soon to be Gallic provinces?

    7. Re:Well I'll Be.... What's that? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Wasn't that fear eradicated at the time Rome invaded their soon to be Gallic provinces?

      Well, not all Gallic provinces...

    8. Re: Well I'll Be.... What's that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Want to know more?

    9. Re: Well I'll Be.... What's that? by WarJolt · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't do any good anyway. Bruce Willis is too busy shooting the next Die Hard movie.

  2. This reminds me of something from the Cold War by istartedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in the 80s, I seem to recall wire services carrying reports of a "mushroom cloud" over the ocean. It was reported by commercial pilots, probably reliable witnesses not inclined to make up things for jokes.

    Speculation was undersea volcano, unusual thunderstorm convection, and impact. I don't recall them following up on it, and I think it remained a mystery... let's see if I can track this down in a few minutes before hitting submit....

    Oh wow, it was easier than I thought it would be. Here's the original story.

    It was the 3rd google hit for "pilots spot mushroom cloud". Would that all my searches were that easy.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if it's pay walled, but the actual article was in Nature Vol 314, 25 April 1985, page 676. They ruled out other explanations because of the amount of energy required and there was no sign it was atomic.

    2. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by no1nose · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is interesting seeing the food prices from 1985 on this newspaper page in contrast to today's prices. Also the mushroom cloud reporting is cool.

    3. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mini-article about ads was kind of interesting to see as well

    4. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      wasn't that israel secretly testing their atomic bomb?

    5. Re: This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes you wonder how many planes have been downed by meteor

    6. Re: This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nice try Putin, we know it was your boys.

    7. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by KGIII · · Score: 0

      > Would that all my searches were that easy.

      I'll try to keep this short...

      Not that long ago, I was looking up how much energy is in a lion. It's a long story but, no... I was seriously looking that up - I was on a mission to extinguish the Sun. Anyhow, I typed that into Google hoping for the best and, sure enough, someone had already done the math and cited the sources for their calculations on the energy contained within an adult male lion.

      It was this revelation that made me realize exactly how great the world can be at times. We tend to get pissed about how we don't always get the search results we want. It's really remarkable that it works as often as it does. (I remember the old search engines like AltaVista.)

      No, I haven't found a search quite that remarkable since. I suspect it's gonna be a while before I find another one.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    8. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no expiration date or "only at participating stores" on that coupon...

    9. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Maritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not that long ago, I was looking up how much energy is in a lion.

      Did they just go with mass of lion times speed of light squared? ;)

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    10. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That was awful and you should feel bad. You don't but you should.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Maritz · · Score: 1

      I feel kinda bad about not feeling bad, that's all I can offer though.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    12. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by istartedi · · Score: 1

      This is not as bad as it sounds. First, you cut the lion in half. Then you get another lion and cut in in half. Then you cover one of the half-lions with ants. After a while, you have an anti-lion. Bring the two together, and that releases the energy.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    13. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by dl_sledding · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this one was worse... Shame on you.

    14. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time to stock up on bananas.

    15. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      These have been detected for decades - the nuclear warning network sees them regularly and has to eliminate them as bombs.

      I saw a Bolide in daylight around 1980 - just happened to look up at the right time, but that one didn't explode and probablt landed at sea. About 20 years later one passed over New Zealand and had lots of witnesses, including a dash-8 airliner crew who felt that it was uncomfortably close when it went past their flight deck.

    16. Re: This reminds me of something from the Cold War by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is paywalled.

    17. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Try this link for the de-paywalled version. (Off to RTFP now.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    18. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you too... Get in the corner. There's NO excuse for that kind of behavior. None... *snickers* We've got standards around here!

      I guess, if you time it just right, you can keep cutting the lion into it into half over and over again. Eventually, you'll end up with a very small lion piece. If you get that one piece of lion small enough, and it's just an itty bitty lion piece, you just split that last little bit of lion in half and you should have a very big boom!

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    19. Re:This reminds me of something from the Cold War by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Now you're just fishin' for more bad jokes.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  3. Same as at Krakatoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    East of Java by some 23000 mi. back in the late 1800s. No one noticed that was caused by a falling rock, hurled by the FURRY OF GOD!

    1. Re:Same as at Krakatoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God has a Furry? And it hurls rocks?

    2. Re:Same as at Krakatoa by Falos · · Score: 1

      Normally I'm fairly chill about typos, but that's an awfully niche Chosen One you're pitching.

    3. Re:Same as at Krakatoa by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      Normally I'm fairly chill about typos, but that's an awfully niche Chosen One you're pitching.

      From context I'd say the furry was pitching...
      and I don't want to think about the rest of it...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    4. Re:Same as at Krakatoa by thunderclap · · Score: 1
  4. Someone noticed by Nkwe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone noticed, or we would be reading about it here...

    1. Re:Someone noticed by Nkwe · · Score: 1

      ugh "wouldn't", as in "wouldn't it be nice if we could edit a post within a short period of time after posting".

    2. Re:Someone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it be nice if they had a magical button to assist in proof-reading .. I don't know, maybe call it "Preview".

      You know, the one that's been there since forever.

  5. If a meteor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a meteor falls in the ocean, and nobody is around to hear it, did it really make a noise?

    1. Re:If a meteor... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Wonder what would have happened had it been headed for a major city anywhere in the world - New York, Beijing, Cape Town, Delhi, Vienna, et al?

    2. Re:If a meteor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then the government would blame the terrorists and ask for more power to ignore human rights

    3. Re:If a meteor... by WhiplashII · · Score: 2

      Well, first off, we only know about it after it hits - it is going 30km/s, after all. These are too small to detect all of them.

      For an example of the effects: The Little Boy atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 exploded with an energy of about 15 kilotons of TNT. So this is a tiny bit smaller than that, with no radiation. Direct deaths from the Hiroshima bomb (ignoring radiation deaths), about 80,000 out of 350,000 population. About 70% of the city's buildings were destroyed, and another 7% severely damaged.

      So, to translate that to a direct hit on New York: about 1.8 million dead, all of downtown gone. If you find that hard to believe, consider the effects of 2 buildings collapsing on 9/11 - it destroyed a much larger footprint than just that of the building, and did a very complete job of destruction. We just do not build to withstand asteroids, just don't let them hit you...

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
    4. Re:If a meteor... by tomhath · · Score: 2

      The Chelyabinsk meteor was over 30 times more powerful than this one, and it did hit directly over a big city. But nobody was killed. It takes a much, much bigger rock to make it through the atmosphere.

    5. Re:If a meteor... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      According to quantum theory the answer is both yes and no.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re:If a meteor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Chelyabinsk Meteor made it through the atmosphere. One of its parts for instance hit Lake Chebarkul; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Chebarkul

    7. Re:If a meteor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a man speaks, and no woman is there to hear him, is he still wrong ?

    8. Re:If a meteor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not typically. That would be rather off-putting, don't you think? Almost as much as your anal fixation.

    9. Re: If a meteor... by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      NYC and new yuckers being destroyed? Don't tease me like that.

  6. we only noticed one that crashed by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    out of the entire invasion force.

  7. Furry gods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The furry what of God?! Hand, friend ... ?

  8. 60% of the earth's surface is water... by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

    When the planet's surface is 60% water the meteors are going to hit water 60% of the time. As a practical point of view most of the planet is devoid of human life when you take into account the areas like Siberia, the deserts and all the water, that the odds of an meteor hitting a populated area is staggeringly unlikely.

    1. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by indi0144 · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure if the meteor were to crash in US you'd have systems and radars to at least track it for a bit, and know where it landed. You might even have StA missiles capable of locking in to the heat signature and exploding it (are they fast enough?). Not that I know if thats a good idea honestly but the technology should be there, right? This for your scenario of a rock like this hitting a city like NY where it makes sense to invest in it.

    2. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The meteor would need to be at least the size of a fighter jet to be trackable. Beyond a certain size it won't even register on the radar because if radar tracked everything down to the size of small finch it would be overwhelmed by positive signals. A large meteor would almost certainly hit the tracking radar but the objects are moving so fast that by the time they notified anyone it would be over. But most meteors are of the size that they won't even register. The main point of my post is that most meteors don't hit near populated areas, as a percentage of the earth surface the entire USA doesn't even register beyond a single digit percentage making a rare event even rarer.

    3. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      According to this article 2.7% of the land area is urban, that means ~1% of the total earths surface is urban land. If strikes are completely random then there should be a 1% chance that any given hit is in an urban area. Now I don't believe hits are completely random since the solar system is planer so areas nearer the equator probably have a higher percentage chance, but that may be balanced by more cities being near the equator (there are almost no large cities between 60 degrees north and 90 degrees and in the southern hemisphere it's even more striking with no large cities between 45 degrees south and 90 degrees)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, this was incidentally why ballistic missiles launched from subs off the coast of the US were a huge concern. By the time you knew they were coming, you had about ten minutes or less to react. And there wasn't really anything short of other nuclear missiles that could shoot down an ballistic missile until recently, and nothing that could probably be activated on that sort of a notice even now.

      A meteor would probably come in as fast as a ballistic missile, and we wouldn't even have the advantage of knowing where the launch sites are and monitoring them.

      The big advantage over ICBMs is that they generally come from farther away and so there is more time to see them coming, but that assumes that you get lucky and find it before it enters the atmosphere. If you didn't see it coming, there's going to be zero chance of tracking it long enough to do anything about it, if you even saw it coming. At that point, even if you hit it with something, unless you atomized it the debris are going to impact and do a similar amount of damage.

    5. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      When the planet's surface is 60% water the meteors are going to hit water 60% of the time. As a practical point of view most of the planet is devoid of human life when you take into account the areas like Siberia, the deserts and all the water, that the odds of an meteor hitting a populated area is staggeringly unlikely.

      Less and less staggering all the time... especially on the central Florida peninsula, NorthEast urban corridor, Western Europe, etc.

    6. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      the solar system is planer so areas nearer the equator probably have a higher percentage chance,

      True.

      but that may be balanced by more cities being near the equator

      False.

      (there are almost no large cities between 60 degrees north and 90 degrees and in the southern hemisphere it's even more striking with no large cities between 45 degrees south and 90 degrees)

      True - for a final score of 66.7%.

    7. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by hackertourist · · Score: 2

      Radar primarily distinguishes by speed, not size. Objects below a speed threshold are ignored (*). Radar systems usually don't know much about the target's size, all they have is the strength of the return signal which depends on the radar cross section (i.e. reflectivity) of the target. The same object can have hugely different RCS, depending on the angle at which you're looking at the object.

      *: this was a big problem in the development of the AEW radar system for the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod: the RAF had specified a speed threshold of something like 100 km/h to catch slow-flying helicopters, but the system ended up detecting cars on motorways at that speed, in large enough numbers to overwhelm the tracking software.

    8. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by dcw3 · · Score: 2

      From Wikipedia: some modern systems use shorter wavelengths (a few centimeters or less) that can image objects as small as a loaf of bread.

      And no, they would not be "overwhelmed by positive signals" either.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    9. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2

      > When the planet's surface is 60% water the meteors are going to hit water 60% of the time.

      Not exactly true. There seems to be a relationship between the fall rate and latitude.

      Also, the northern hemisphere has proportionally more land than the southern hemisphere (68% vs 32%), you'd expect about twice as many NH impacts on land than in the SH.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    10. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by TheSync · · Score: 1

      The meteor would need to be at least the size of a fighter jet to be trackable.

      Meteors leave long trails of ionized gas that are reflective to radar. Here is a radar meteor trail.

    11. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by xupere · · Score: 1

      Maybe not now, but just wait until my bread loaf rail gun is operational ...

    12. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Just be sure to use high fiber. It'll keep things regular.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    13. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "this was a big problem in the development of the AEW radar system for the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod"

      It might have been a problem in the early days, but by 1995 the systems onboard were good enough to notice and zoom in on a single bouy in the middle of the irish sea from 100 miles away ("show me everything that doesn't look like water" - which had enormous implications for SAR work) by 2005 they were boasting the Nimrod's systems could track people walking in Afghanistan

      Helicoptors should be relatively easy anyway. They have those big spinny things on top which are moving fast and hard to make stealthy.

    14. Re:60% of the earth's surface is water... by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      I was talking about the Nimrod AEW.3 project which was abandoned in 1986 because they couldn't get the radar to work.
      You're talking about the Searchwater radar (and possibly other sensors like the IRST) on the MR2 version.

  9. You betcha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Has Fox blamed it on Obama yet?

    1. Re:You betcha by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      No, because the Democrats aren't yet whining that it's a vast, rightwing conspiracy.

  10. Now we know by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    If it takes military technology to hear a 13 kiloton meteor go off in the ocean, then we have finally found what we need to hear a tree fall in the forest.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  11. If A Meteor Fell in the Water... by retroworks · · Score: 1

    ..and no one heard it, did it make a noise?

    --
    Gently reply
    1. Re:If A Meteor Fell in the Water... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it went "Woooooooosh"

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  12. Hits earth? Not. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Hits earth means it touches the water or land. Atmospheric burn up is NOT a "hit".

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  13. Re:Hits earth? Not. by fisted · · Score: 2

    Yes it is. Why would only solids and liquids qualify as Earth? And if the atmosphere is not part of Earth, then part of what is it?

  14. Re:Hits earth? Not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey dipshit, if you want to take that argument and run with it. Everything in the solar system is within Sol's (that's the sun you dipshit) atmosphere and so Earth does not have its own distinct atmosphere.

  15. Re:*yawn* by tnk1 · · Score: 1

    The Internet has quite reliable sources of news. You just have to figure out which ones they are. Otherwise, it is sort of a crapshoot.

    Hint: The decent ones usually, but not always, make you pay to look at them, and people will actually pay money to read them.

  16. Re:Hits earth? Not. by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

    That's why it is called a meteor and not a meteorite.

  17. that's scary by hagnat · · Score: 1

    it fell in the Atlantic close to Brazil. Now, imagine if it had exploded on the water and caused a tsunami. Brazil was in the middle of Carnaval, where most people go for the coast to celebrate. That would be devastating.

    --
    "life is a joke, and someone is laughing at me"
    1. Re:that's scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, imagine if it had exploded on the water and caused a tsunami.

      13 kt TNT equivalent is about two orders of magnitude below the energy necessary to cause a proper tsunami.

  18. Bolide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bolide... because you can never have enough rederivations of the same root word for entirely redundant purposes.

  19. Re:Hits earth? Not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you are literally retarded

  20. Re:Hits earth? Not. by KGIII · · Score: 1

    To be honest, this is one of those rare times where the word "literally" appears to have been used correctly.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  21. Too loud a reporting ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from the article:

    "The Feb. 6 meteor most likely burned up the majority of its mass during atmospheric entry, any pieces falling as small meteorites safely into the ocean."

  22. Global Warming! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing to see here. We need to get back to saving the planet from global warming.

  23. Nobody was looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since the Spanish Meteor Network started to work full steam, each month or so there have been reports in the news of large fireballs brigtening the night sky over the Iberian peninsula. And every few years about really big superbolide ones.

    Even when every station is able to detect them only up to 500km away at best. the network reports 500 bolides every year, the lastest one this same week

    The sky is falling, but nobody is looking.

  24. Instantaneously by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    the meteor unleashed an energy equivalent of 13,000 tons of TNT exploding instantaneously.

    As opposed to the other kind of TNT explosion that takes aaaaages.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:Instantaneously by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Well TNT does not explode instantaneously and 13,000 tons of the stuff is sufficiently large (roughly a 20m cube if my maths is correct and we are assuming liquid TNT with density 1.65g/cm^3) that there would be a roughly 0.003 second delay for the shockwave to propagate though (detonation speed for TNT is 6900m/s) it and set it all off if there was only a single detonation point.

    2. Re:Instantaneously by TheHawke · · Score: 1

      Try computing that using Octol. That's the same explosive they used at one point to set off nuclear weapons before they shifted to another composition to reduce cost.

      --
      First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
  25. Exploding: instantaneously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most would equate exploding with instantaneously without the explicit reference. However it is carnival in Brasil, so perhaps that slows things down?

    1. Re:Exploding: instantaneously? by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Most would equate exploding with instantaneously without the explicit reference. However it is carnival in Brasil, so perhaps that slows things down?

      A really large block of explosive does not all actualiy explode at once, so it starts to come apart before it is all consumed. That means that the real explosions would be much less powerful. What they mean is that they used the rough calculation that assumed it was instantanious.

  26. How did they find out about this one? by TheHawke · · Score: 1

    I mean, the one that nearly trashed Chelyabinsk was the most recorded bolide to date, but this one was in the middle of the South Atlantic.

    --
    First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
  27. Re:*yawn* by MakersDirector · · Score: 0

    To you. Most people I know (here in Hollywood) openly mock it.

    Way too many countries manipulating the information on the internet, and with so many countries and individuals with capabilities to hack what once could have been considered otherwise credible sources to their own end, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to instead explore the world around you firsthand and figure out your own truths rather than waiting for *cough cough bs* 'credible' *cough cough* sources to tell you what it is.

  28. Re:*yawn* by MakersDirector · · Score: 0

    Note how I have bad karma and am marked down for suggesting the internet's not credible...

    The mechanics of a system which perpetuates itself more than it does respect the perspectives of an individual, and 'votes' dissenters down to quiet them in a a weird form of peer pressure.

  29. Too bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it hit Rio de Janero, it might have sanitized that scum hole for the olympics; yet a bit too late!

  30. Too busy looking at my phone to notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry. I was too busy looking at my phone to notice anything going on around me. Hold on, I got check my Facebook. *car swerves around me and explodes into a telephone pole*

  31. Re:Hits earth? Not. by fisted · · Score: 1

    To be honest, this is one of the rare times where you are literally correct :).

  32. SEE WHAT I MEAN?!? THIS IS FUCKING RIDICULOUS!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See how quickly I got modded down down based purely because the mod disagreed with my opinion? Insight is not based on how much you agree, or disagree with somebody's, it is based on the relevant facts that you bring to the table.

    I may not like what you said, but if you are bringing facts to the table that may open somebody else's eyes to your point of view, then you have brought insight. But no, the average Slashdotter (who is smarter than average, btw - or at least that is what they like to delude themselves with) abuses the mod system to push opinions and agendas.

    Point proven.

    Now, DO AWAY WITH THE POINTLESS MODERATION SYSTEM!!!!!!

    YES, I AM FUCKING YELLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  33. Re:Hits earth? Not. by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I'm still trying to figure out how to take that remark. ;-) Should I take it literally?

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."