| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 10:08 pm Post subject: What if it wasn't global warming but an asteroid? |
 |
|
I always like to imagine this scenario where a group of preeminent astronomers have determined that a large asteroid has a 99% chance of smacking into earth and killing all human life. Humanity has 20 years. The logical response is to mount a plan to destroy or deflect the asteroid.
However, that will cost several billion dollars... the entire budget of NASA or 1 week of the Iraq war, post "mission accomplished". So instead of the government giving NASA the money, suddenly a whole lobby industry springs up to denounce the findings of these "astrofacist", many of whom are not Americans and have brown skin or slitty eyes.
Math, physics, and astronomy are watered down in public schools with "alternative viewpoints". Since Russell and Whitehead were not able to put math on a necessary logical foundation, 2+2 = 4 becomes 2 + 2 (invisible hand of an intelligent designer which may or may not be god, depending on what the supreme court has to say, causes these two numbers to equal) 4. Congress requires all observatories receiving government funding to post a warning sign on their telescopes that it is only a theory that the evidence we get via our eyes is a true picture of reality. Physics labs receiving government funds are required to sell a children's book that postulates God has caused the speed of light to slow over the years and the universe could then well be only 6,000 years old...
When it becomes obvious to all a year or two before the asteroid is going to hit earth that an asteroid is going to hit earth, the democrats are blamed for the failure to take action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ulsanchris
Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Location: take a wild guess
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| you're comparison is apretty awful and not applicable to the current situation. If you can't see this than you are an obtuse person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There is only one part of your story that makes any sense at all. It IS all the democrats' fault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you suggesting or implying that Bush Administration policies and the Bible Belt's views on religion and science are going to be responsible for an asteroid impacting the Earth?
I already knew Bush was antichrist, but these are clearly the workings of the Dark Lord himself...
Bush's "science" policies are a catastrophe, and the Bible Belt is nothing less than Medieval in its views on the universe. Still, the sky is not yet falling, Chicken Little.
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:44 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papa_geno
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Location: Gangneung
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:44 am Post subject: Re: What if it wasn't global warming but an asteroid? |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
I always like to imagine this scenario where a group of preeminent astronomers have determined that a large asteroid has a 99% chance of smacking into earth and killing all human life. Humanity has 20 years. The logical response is to mount a plan to destroy or deflect the asteroid.
However, that will cost several billion dollars... the entire budget of NASA or 1 week of the Iraq war, post "mission accomplished". So instead of the government giving NASA the money, suddenly a whole lobby industry springs up to denounce the findings of these "astrofacist", many of whom are not Americans and have brown skin or slitty eyes.
Math, physics, and astronomy are watered down in public schools with "alternative viewpoints". Since Russell and Whitehead were not able to put math on a necessary logical foundation, 2+2 = 4 becomes 2 + 2 (invisible hand of an intelligent designer which may or may not be god, depending on what the supreme court has to say, causes these two numbers to equal) 4. Congress requires all observatories receiving government funding to post a warning sign on their telescopes that it is only a theory that the evidence we get via our eyes is a true picture of reality. Physics labs receiving government funds are required to sell a children's book that postulates God has caused the speed of light to slow over the years and the universe could then well be only 6,000 years old...
When it becomes obvious to all a year or two before the asteroid is going to hit earth that an asteroid is going to hit earth, the democrats are blamed for the failure to take action. |
20 years? Well in that case we don't have to worry. It will probably take that long before the Democrats are back in power again so we should be fairly safe from asteroids.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ulsanchris wrote: |
| you're comparison is apretty awful and not applicable to the current situation. If you can't see this than you are an obtuse person. |
Wow! The political insight you have is just breathtaking! I know this because you can cut through the fog, slap out a sentence, and give zero examples to support your assertion! Ohhh! Ohhh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gdimension
Joined: 05 Jul 2005
Location: Jeju
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2005 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
It seemed this article was apropos this conversation...
| Quote: |
Asteroid's path could put Earth in its sights
Astronomers are debating what to do about Earth's close encounter with an asteroid in 2029 and again in 2036 - passages that might be too close for comfort.
Apophis, a 1,059-foot-wide asteroid, has excited astronomers since it was spotted last year. After observing it for a while, scientists concluded that it has only a 1-in-8,000 chance of ever smacking into Earth. But even that slim chance has them talking and NASA pondering how to keep track of it - just in case. |
The rest of the article is here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulsanchris
Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Location: take a wild guess
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2005 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| ulsanchris wrote: |
| you're comparison is apretty awful and not applicable to the current situation. If you can't see this than you are an obtuse person. |
Wow! The political insight you have is just breathtaking! I know this because you can cut through the fog, slap out a sentence, and give zero examples to support your assertion! Ohhh! Ohhh! |
I figured if you actually would sit back and think about this for a few seconds it would become readily apparent why your hypothetical situation doesn't compare to global warming.
First thing you are assuming that the US would be the only country on the planet that would be concerned about an astroid hitting earth and that all the other countries in the world would idlely sit by and watch it happen. I doubt this would be the case. Much like now where many countries are binding together to fight global warming, countries would bind together to face the astroid.
Second while it would be hard to disprove an astroid would hit the earth, global warming is not so easy to prove. While many scientists think that we are the cause of global warming there are still a number who raise valid objections to it. Just because the majority believes something doesn't mean they are right. Personally while I think some of the points the scientist who don't believe we are causing global warming are valid, I'm on the side that believes that humans are the cause of global warming. In any case better safe than sorry.
Third The nature of the two problems are different. One can more easily imagine the negative consequences of an astroid hitting the earth, than global warming. We know astriods have struck earth and caused mass destruction. The effects are immediate. This is not so with global warming where the effects are much more spread out.
I hope this illustrates why your comparison between the two situations are not appropriate. As I have mentioned earlier if you could not have thought for a bit and came up with similar ideas yourself you really are obtuse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 3:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ulsanchris wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| ulsanchris wrote: |
| you're comparison is apretty awful and not applicable to the current situation. If you can't see this than you are an obtuse person. |
Wow! The political insight you have is just breathtaking! I know this because you can cut through the fog, slap out a sentence, and give zero examples to support your assertion! Ohhh! Ohhh! |
I figured if you actually would sit back and think about this for a few seconds it would become readily apparent why your hypothetical situation doesn't compare to global warming. |
Dear Chris,
Please look up the word satire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Its not always so obvious written whether a person is meaning more than they write or less, maybe thats why emoticons exist? Then again, I can still confuse people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| Its not always so obvious written whether a person is meaning more than they write or less, maybe thats why emoticons exist? Then again, I can still confuse people. |
Satire, being a form, doesn't really require emoticons.... and is typically pretty ahrd to miss.... but not always. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, you're right  I missed it.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallacy
Joined: 29 Jun 2015
Location: ex-ROK
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 8:55 pm Post subject: RE: What if it wasn't global warming but an asteroid? |
|
|
| Rethread. What if "global warming" was replaced by "asteroid approaching" instead? Would the arguments be any different? Alarm: do something! vs. False alarm: do nothing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maximmm
Joined: 01 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I doubt that skepticism is what would kill humanity in that instance.
You do have, however, capitalism + political divide as much more potent means of destroying us.
How much would the shuttle cost? Who would build it? Who would sponsor it? Would the shuttle be manned by white/black/hetero or gay astronauts?
How would we profit from this mission?
Then there's the religious angle: The asteroid is a sign from God. Or, perhaps if we all pray together, the asteroid will disappear! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
