A dangerous game of "cosmic roulette"?

[Skywizard]

I know this was mentioned in a thread of GoodeTXSG's,Oct. 7 but I put together a short video of the program which I think is very interesting. Mods if it needs to be moved then move it.


Scientists say there are more than a million near-Earth objects in space big enough to destroy a city, but they only know where one percent of them are.

The following video is from a part of "Cosmic Roulette" which aired on 60 Minutes, Oct. 6, 2013. The correspondent is Anderson Cooper. Andy Court, producer.


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x15slk0_cosmic-roulette-60-minutes_news

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50156579n


peace...
skywizard

[apokalypse]

[B]
Scientists say there are more than a million near-Earth objects in space big enough to destroy a city, but they only know where one percent of them are.


on behalf of Controllers of the World, i want to say Bring It On...One World Government here we come.

[Sérénité]

Its happened before and will happen again. Its more a case of where and when rather than if isnt it!
Scary thought, but something I try not to dwell on as there ain't no out running a flaming meteor coming your way...

[loveoneanother]

Thanks for this thread Skywizard :) (in my mind i've re-named it 'Cosmic Pinball' :rolleyes: )

I'm currently trying to learn about Comets and Asteroids and such-like and thought i'd share a few bits i came across recently. I know Mr.Ryan and the rest of the Avalon team are not running a school here, where you can put up your hand and start asking lots of questions so i've been doing my best without any real knowledge about 'space' whatsoever to try and find things out for myself. (I realise a lot of this will be 'old news' to many of the regulars on this site with more knowledge of such matters so i apologise for my ignorance. I think this post is mainly aimed at those Avalonians who may be like me and are having their eyes opened for the first time to the greater 'physical' reality surrounding us :eek: )

The first bit i wanted to share comes from a page on the Minor Planet Centre website. One of the challenges i've set myself is trying to find a graphic showing all the orbital paths of all the known Near Earth Objects (NEO) overlaid on to a map of the Solar System just to see what it would look like. (I'm imagining something like a rather large ball of wool only with more gaps between the fibres !) Unfortunately, i haven't been able to find such a thing (anyone?) but what i did find were some 'animations' of the NEO's that blew my socks off. If you've never seen such a thing you gotta take a look. It's pretty awesome :nod:

Please click on the following link to 'The Animations Page' (there's a brief description of that page first) and start opening some of the links in each of the sections. You can also click on the graphics to enlarge them a bit for that little extra something something. Let me know what you think.....i'd love to get into this stuff further with someone, to help with my understanding :confused:


The Animations Page

Here are links to a number of animations prepared by the maintainer of this website. They are not intended as rigorous depictions of the past and future motions of the objects concerned (although at the scales of these diagrams, any difference would probably not be noticeable in most cases), rather they are intended to assist in understanding the state of knowledge about the contents of the solar system ("A picture is worth a thousand words").

http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/Animations/Animations.html

So, having had my socks blown off by that, i then came across an article that literally blew my pants off too !

I truly never knew such a thing existed. A massive asteroid called 'Bamberga' not a million miles away (well it is actually but you know what i mean) slowly plodding it's way round and round the solar system. Almost unbelievable really. My mind still can't quite comprehend it :p

Please click on the following link to the article for a better explanation than i could ever give you about this awesome object :

http://www.sott.net/article/266149-Huge-asteroid-324-Bamberga-makes-a-return-visit-to-Earths-neigh

I've also added a couple of videos i found which i hope will enhance your post-reading and post-viewing pleasure :



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP9pe1-Atiw



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef6qX9LnfS0&list=TLRUr6cznkwU3ZNkKytVyEvVqpSYWOuAxQ


(Submitted by someone who is still looking up with child-like wonder.....WOW..... What more can i say !)

[Bill Ryan]

I know Mr.Ryan and the rest of the Avalon team are not running a school here, where you can put up your hand and start asking lots of questions

Thanks for your great post!

We're not running a school! (Heaven forbid :) ) -- but we are running a kind of 'everyone-is-everyone-else's-teacher' co-operative. There are more than plenty of things that many Avalon members know much more about than I do.

Having said that, I'm always happy to answer questions if I can (and -- importantly -- if I see them! Because I cannot possibly read every post on every thread). Others are too.

It's important, in my view, that we understand basic astonomy well (meaning the basic working of the solar system and our galaxy and why it is the way it is). There is a LOT of nonsense on YouTube about stuff that most bright high school kids could dismiss in 45 seconds, and occasionally some of it finds its way on to Avalon. At that point, it behooves myself and others here to be as patient and generous as possible. But (for instance, and forgive me beating this drum again) it's hard to deal with thread after thread of Ison doom-mongering, especially after one might think and hope that lessons had been learned from Elenin.

Back to topic: yes, cosmic roulette indeed. One only has to look at the surface of the moon through a good pair of binoculars (or Mars, if one has a telescope) to ses that every planet or moon has been battered over the eons with large impacts (some very large indeed). We have no immunity from this at all, and the solar system is, in the long term, a very dangerous place.

With my best wishes to you -- Bill

[araucaria]

One only has to look at the surface of the moon through a good pair of binoculars
Bill, I'd like to know why all those craters are circular. When I hit a tennis ball on a clay court, the mark is always elliptical unless it lands almost vertically. Why do asteroids never make glancing blows? To me, circularity suggests something bubbling up to the surface.

[Limor Wolf]

It makes one wonder if there is a slight of truth in the saying - 'ignorance is a bliss'.
If we are basing ourselves on the statistics then we know that such cosmic hazards on a global scale did happen in the past and if using our very small stub of logic and our eyes to see (Even if through a telescope) it is inevitable to happen again. In the shorter time span of the thousands of years however, the statistics works in our favor (so far). It is true that we have developed to acknowledge space and the cosmic neighborhood so much better, haumanity now has advanced in science and finally has the technology to find out what is going on around us, but, so sorry for this laywoman question (that's me!), Are there any other changes that happened in the last decade or so that may put us in grave danger right now. What I mean is, whether besides our better Scientific understanding of the many comets and asteroids and (non problematic) debris out there are there any major changes in the motion of comets and asteroids towards the orbit of earth? Please be so kind as to understand that some of us simply don't understand that much in Physics and Astronomy but we want to know.. I hope this question is not without ground

One more thing we may want to take into consideration (talk about advancment..) is the capability of other forces to intervene in putting a celestial body in the orbit of the earth, but that is one conversation that goes well beyond the scope of the 3D formal science, however relevant that may be to our time..

[Bill Ryan]

One only has to look at the surface of the moon through a good pair of binoculars
Bill, I'd like to know why all those craters are circular. When I hit a tennis ball on a clay court, the mark is always elliptical unless it lands almost vertically. Why do asteroids never make glancing blows? To me, circularity suggests something bubbling up to the surface.

Ha! Good question. I liked the tennis court analogy.

I believe (but do not have enough time to check) that there's a completely alternative 'Electric Universe' explanation for at least some craters. May well be worth taking a look.

[araucaria]

One only has to look at the surface of the moon through a good pair of binoculars
Bill, I'd like to know why all those craters are circular. When I hit a tennis ball on a clay court, the mark is always elliptical unless it lands almost vertically. Why do asteroids never make glancing blows? To me, circularity suggests something bubbling up to the surface.

Ha! Good question. I liked the tennis court analogy.

I believe (but do not have enough time to check) that there's a completely alternative 'Electric Universe' explanation for at least some craters. May well be worth taking a look.
It certainly would if it helped to make the world look a whole lot safer than we think it is.

[Snowflower]

Good morning, folks. I'd like to join the conversation with direct response to something you said, Bill Ryan. It was this:


it's hard to deal with thread after thread of Ison doom-mongering, especially after one might think and hope that lessons had been learned from Elenin.
I'll start off by saying I have no idea what to think about Ison, and yes, Elenin was a major hyped up nothingness. But, in respect to learning from Elenin and therefore not falling for Ison, I'd like to retell the story of Peter and the Wolf - from a different perspective.

There was this kid named Peter who got so bored with watching the sheep that he decided to play a joke on the villagers and shout "Wolf!" so they would all come running up the hill to save the sheep. He did that a few times, and the villagers got so used to the shout of wolf, that they simply ignored him. Only when he cried wolf and they ignored him, there had really been a wolf up there with the sheep, and it killed every one of them while the boy was frantically yelling for help that never came.

Now, the really serious part of the story comes with the question: what is the moral of the story? As children, we are taught that the moral is, "never cry wolf because if the wolf is ever really there, no one will listen." The moral is focused on the child. The child is never to call for help unless it's real. There is nothing in the story as told to suggest that maybe the adults had to carry any blame.

But, what about the adults in the story? Who had more to lose - Peter or the villagers? Peter lost his reputation. The villagers lost their winter's food supply.

The other moral of the story is, "Never assume there is no wolf."

So - back to Ison versus Elenin. How many websites are out there to hype Ison? When Elenin was at its height of panic, there were more than 3000 websites set up strictly to hype the dangers of Elenin as an incoming object of doom. Who paid for those websites? 3000 people with enough money just hanging around doing nothing to pay for setting up really professional looking, video enhanced, scientific sounding, panic mongering websites? I am not finding the same professional hype for Ison, are you? This makes me highly suspicious, especially since Ison is being virtually ignored by media hypers.

I have no idea whether Ison is a big deal or not. According to James McCanney, it's been a major big deal for Mars, since it did a close flyby and had an electrical discharge big time with that planet. How convenient for anyone trying to keep information away from us that NASA was shut down right as it made that flyby. Our planet is supposed to be traveling through Ison's debris tail as it is heading back out into space. Will the meteors, fireballs, and asteroids potential there be a big deal? I don't know - but I am not going to dismiss it out of hand because Elenin was not a big deal. I'm never going to assume there is no wolf at the door.

[Nick Matkin]

Yup, there are millions on bits floating about in the solar system. Some come relatively close to Earth. But let's keep things in proportion. Space is big, really big (to quote Douglas Adams). If earth were the size of a golf ball, the sun would be about a third of a mile away.

Most meteors on that scale are smaller than viruses, most asteroids just grains of sand, all floating about in a solar system about 30 miles diameter - not exactly a pinball machine or roulette wheel! And yes, although relatively tiny, something hitting us over 70,000 miles per hour would be (and has been) catastrophic. But in the past 2,000 years, how many humans have been wiped out by asteroid impact? Just because we're more aware of yet another 'threat' does not make it more likely.

I know there will be those who don't understand statistics who'll think after at least 2,000 years 'we must be due one any day now', but on the other hand it'll probably not happen in our or our grandchildrens' lifetimes or beyond.

Worry about it if you want, but there is scarier stuff to keep us awake at night.

Nick

[Hervé]

For a brief rundown...

First, there is the cashing in on the propaganda: the threats are made realler than they are (I am not saying that the threats are not real, they are, but a certain clique is cashing in on those to stir opinions in a certain direction -- not necessarily Joe-6-packs -- especially the dudes with lots of $ and power of decision... you know... the Bill Gates of the planet.):


Sm_C-rmtWBM


... listen carefully to what Carol says...

All these threats are still part of the "demoralization" step from another program:


jMWVUoYNezU


Then, there are the evidence from recent past giving credence to the association of such impacts with ensuing dramatic earth changes:


http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?50406-New-research-findings-support-impact-event-12-900-years-ago&p=562206&viewfull=1#post562206


Tunguska, observed as having had an inclined trajectory, left a number of elliptical (oval) impacts on the ground -- similar to the ones visible from the air in the Carolina Bays (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_bays). So, there were volleys of tennis balls trajectories hitting the dirt in those areas... :)

A possible explanation for the observable majority of circular ones on the Moon is that a full head on impact leaves more prominent damages of impact than a grazing one.

As for celestial probabilities, etc., here is a compilation thread one can use as a starting jump board:


http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?57644-Nemesis-Tyche-Nibiru-Planet-X-Brown-Dwarf-Binary-System-Myths-Realities


Now, to loop back to the beginning of this post and to give an idea on how propaganda/psyops are designed and played out on unsuspecting individuals/populations:


http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?54217-Their-Mind-and-the-Emotional-Matrix-that-we-create-with-it.&p=652209&viewfull=1#post652209

[araucaria]

Tunguska, observed as having had an inclined trajectory, left a number of elliptical (oval) impacts on the ground -- similar to the ones visible from the air in the Carolina Bays (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_bays). So, there were volleys of tennis balls trajectories hitting the dirt in those areas... :)

A possible explanation for the observable majority of circular ones on the Moon is that a full head on impact leaves more prominent damages of impact than a grazing one.

As for celestial probabilities, etc., here is a compilation thread one can use as a starting jump board:

[CENTER]http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?57644-Nemesis-Tyche-Nibiru-Planet-X-Brown-Dwarf-Binary-System-Myths-Realities


Right, those Carolina Bays are tennis ball marks. You could probably work out the speed of impact from the shape of the ellipses. They all look the same.

re Tunguska, according to Joseph Farrell, whom I see you quoted on your thread, no impact marks were found (I have seen others say this too); and his theory is that the incident coincided with Tesla's likely demonstration of the weaponization of his global telegraph system. The dates certainly fit (I'm quoting from Babylon's Banksters).

Moon impacts: full head-on seems difficult on the side protected by the Earth. A possible explanation for circular craters is provided here.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-are-impact-craters-al

If this explanation is correct, then it looks like with both the Carolina Bays plus Tunguska we are getting more elliptical craters than expected :)

[Hervé]

Tunguska, observed as having had an inclined trajectory, left a number of elliptical (oval) impacts on the ground -- similar to the ones visible from the air in the Carolina Bays (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_bays). So, there were volleys of tennis balls trajectories hitting the dirt in those areas... :)




...

re Tunguska, according to Joseph Farrell, whom I see you quoted on your thread, no impact marks were found (I have seen others say this too); and his theory is that the incident coincided with Tesla's likely demonstration of the weaponization of his global telegraph system. The dates certainly fit (I'm quoting from Babylon's Banksters).
...

If this explanation is correct, then it looks like with both the Carolina Bays plus Tunguska we are getting more elliptical craters than expected :)

I haven''t found Laura Knight-Jadczyk source for what she wrote here (http://www.sott.net/article/221199-Chemtrails-Contrails-Strange-Skies) but this is what she collected:


The first thing of interest is the main historically known large body which impacted the Earth: the Tunguska object. What is important to us in relation to chemtrails is that this object exploded in the atmosphere in June 1908 and for many nights afterward the sky was unusually luminous over Europe and western Asia, allowing people to read newspapers at night.

When scientists finally made it to the remote site in 1927, no visible fragments of the exploded body were found. Later field work uncovered peculiar black, shiny, metallic spheres in the soil of numerous small, shallow, oval craters - 50 to 200 meters diameter - similar to the craters of the Carolina Bays. These spheres were typical of extraterrestrial bodies having a composition very high in iridium, nickel, cobalt and other metals.
So, my interpretation is that a large meteoritic body got zapped "Electric Universe" fashion, exploded and generated all sorts of fragments trajectories as with a grapeshot or a high-explosive shell.

[Atlas]

One only has to look at the surface of the moon through a good pair of binoculars
Bill, I'd like to know why all those craters are circular. When I hit a tennis ball on a clay court, the mark is always elliptical unless it lands almost vertically. Why do asteroids never make glancing blows? To me, circularity suggests something bubbling up to the surface.
Why are impact craters always round? Most incoming objects must strike at some angle from vertical, so why don't the majority of impact sites have elongated, teardrop shapes?

Gregory A. Lyzenga, associate professor of physics at Harvey Mudd College, replies:

At the moment an asteroid collides with a planet, there is an explosive release of the asteroid's huge kinetic energy. The energy is very abruptly deposited at what amounts to a single point in the planet's crust. This sudden, focused release resembles more than anything else the detonation of an extremely powerful bomb. As in the case of a bomb explosion, the shape of the resulting crater is round: ejecta is thrown equally in all directions regardless of the direction from which the bomb may have arrived.

"This behavior may seem at odds with our daily experience of throwing rocks into a sandbox or mud, because in those cases the shape and size of the 'crater' is dominated by the physical dimensions of the rigid impactor. In the case of astronomical impacts, though, the physical shape and direction of approach of the meteorite is insignificant compared with the tremendous kinetic energy that it carries.

"An exception to this rule occurs only if the impact occurs at an extremely shallow, grazing angle. If the angle of impact is quite close to horizontal, the bottom, middle and top parts of the impacting asteroid will strike the surface at separate points spread out along a line. In this case, instead of the energy being deposited at a point, it will be released in an elongated zone--as if our 'bomb' had the shape of a long rod.

"Hence, a crater will end up having an elongated or elliptical appearance only if the angle of impact is so shallow that different parts of the impactor strike the surface over a range of distances that is appreciable in comparison with the final size of the crater as a whole. Because the final crater may be as much as 100 times greater than the diameter of the impactor, this requires an impact at an angle of no more than a few degrees from horizontal. For this reason, the vast majority of impacts produce round or nearly round craters, just as is observed.

Considering the fact that meteorites impact the Earth at an angle, that is they don't strike the earth vertically down from space, why is it that impact craters are always circular and not elliptical? —Dave

"They're not always circular, says astronomer Fred Watson.

http://sci.esa.int/science-e-media/img/90/Elliptical-Crater-410.jpg
This image, taken by ESA's Mars Express spacecraft, shows a large elliptical impact crater in the Hesperia Planum region of Mars, measuring approximately 24.4 km long, 11.2 km wide and reaching a maximum depth of approximately 650 metres below the surrounding plains.

"Occasionally you see craters that are elongated and sometimes you see canyons that have been excavated by incoming meteorites. You even see lines of multi-ringed craters as if something has bounced over the surface. But most craters are circular," says Watson.

So how can craters be circular given that space objects strike planetary bodies from an angle? It's all down to the amount of explosive energy that vaporises everything at the point of impact in a symmetrical circular pattern, says Watson.

[Atlas]

The largest visible impact crater in the Solar System is Hellas Planitia on Mars, a giant depression with a floor over seven kilometres (4.3 miles) below the Martian surface. Such is its breadth and depth that you could fit every Western European country inside it.

http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Hellas_Planitia_by_the_Viking_orbiters.jpg

Material from the impact that formed Hellas Planitia stretches for up to a further two kilometres (1.2 miles) from the walls of the crater. It is thought to have formed about 3.8 to 4.1 billion years ago when Mars was hit by a number of objects during the Late Heavy Bombardment period in the Solar System.

[araucaria]

http://sci.esa.int/science-e-media/img/90/Elliptical-Crater-410.jpg
This image, taken by ESA's Mars Express spacecraft, shows a large elliptical impact crater in the Hesperia Planum region of Mars, measuring approximately 24.4 km long, 11.2 km wide and reaching a maximum depth of approximately 650 metres below the surrounding plains.

That's not an elliptical crater: it's a succession of 2/3 circular ones. Otherwise, the article agrees with the one I quoted.

@Amzer Zo. Tesla published in the NY Times of April 28 1908 just two months before Tunguska an article including the following:


Even now wireless power plants could be constructed by which any region of the globe might be rendered uninhabitable without subjecting the population of other parts to serious danger or inconvenience.

Regardless of what actually happened back then, over a hundred years later the potential for simulating an asteroid hit with an earth-based weapon is quite obviously one way of making Von Braun's fake asteroid threat seem very real.

[Atlas]

That's not an elliptical crater: it's a succession of 2/3 circular ones.
Oblong craters on Ganymede (Nicholson Regio) :

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpegMod/PIA01612_modest.jpg

The pair of oblong craters to the right was formed by the impact of a gravitationally bound pair of asteroids or a split comet. The oblong shapes of the craters suggest that the impactors struck the surface at a shallow angle.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Messier A and B were photographed by NASA's Lunar Orbiter V in August of 1967. Below is an orbital view of Moon crater Messier from Apollo astronauts, closeup with a telephoto lens :

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Messier_crater_pair.gif

It is theorized that Messier crater was formed by an impact at a very low angle, and that Messier A could have formed following a rebound by the impacting body.

[araucaria]

The largest visible impact crater in the Solar System is Hellas Planitia on Mars, a giant depression with a floor over seven kilometres (4.3 miles) below the Martian surface. Such is its breadth and depth that you could fit every Western European country inside it.

http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Hellas_Planitia_by_the_Viking_orbiters.jpg

Material from the impact that formed Hellas Planitia stretches for up to a further two kilometres (1.2 miles) from the walls of the crater. It is thought to have formed about 3.8 to 4.1 billion years ago when Mars was hit by a number of objects during the Late Heavy Bombardment period in the Solar System.
The inside of the crater is relatively smooth compared to the outside. I think this is taken to mean that the smaller craters in the bottom right corner must be at least as old, because if they were younger, there would be other similar craters inside the large one.

So, while I accept on the evidence so far that circular craters can be caused by incoming asteroids, if most of them are 4 billion years old, they should not be used to scare people in the 21st century.

However, according to van Flandern, Mars was the Moon of a now exploded planet, which would be why one side is cratered and not the other. This was much more recently, but still millions of years ago.

Finally, the article I quoted earlier came from Scientific American. I don't know how serious a magazine it is. It is or was home to the arch-skeptic Michael Shermer, and if memory serves it was also a journal that was denying the possibility of heavier-than-air flight several years after the Wright brothers had done their stuff.