ChatterBank1 min ago
Science delusion?
Despite millions (billions?) of pounds spent on funding prestigious institutions and mega-projects, ask what these scientific 'breakthroughs' add up to and clear answers seem elusive.
By the time science has (it hopes) solved the big questions of the origin of the Universe and how the galaxies and our Earth were formed, could what comes after be an anticlimax, and of no relevance whatsoever to the condition of humanity?
By the time science has (it hopes) solved the big questions of the origin of the Universe and how the galaxies and our Earth were formed, could what comes after be an anticlimax, and of no relevance whatsoever to the condition of humanity?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The most recent data found about asteroids indicates there are twice as many in near Earth orbits as had previously been thought.
Even though the odds of one big enough to wipe us out happening in the near future might be as low as one in a million that does not mean it could not happen in our lifetime. The rarity of the event did not help the dinosaurs survive.
If we do find one on a collision orbit we need to know what to do and we need decases of warning.
Even though the odds of one big enough to wipe us out happening in the near future might be as low as one in a million that does not mean it could not happen in our lifetime. The rarity of the event did not help the dinosaurs survive.
If we do find one on a collision orbit we need to know what to do and we need decases of warning.
Martin Rees is certainly not wrong in saying that the risk is no greater now than for Neanderthals.
Your friend was probably also not far from the truth either - but that risk is very very small - we have the orbits of the know "planet killers"
The one to watch out for is the medium level impacts - objects too small to have been mapped but large enough to wreak havoc to our civilisation if they hit somewhere unfortunate.
I'm sure you know about Tunguska an impact estimated from a 50m diameter asteroid. That was just a century ago . Had that struck the Eastern seaboard of the US or western Europe I don't think we'd be having this conversation.
Research in this area helps us to learn what the risk is and gives us vital warning - I don't think we could stop one but if we had 12 hours notice of a similar strike to western Europe I think that might save an awful lot of lives.
Remember all this interest in impacts started after 1989 when a 300m object missed the Earth by 6 hours
We only saw it 9 days after it passed us!
Your friend was probably also not far from the truth either - but that risk is very very small - we have the orbits of the know "planet killers"
The one to watch out for is the medium level impacts - objects too small to have been mapped but large enough to wreak havoc to our civilisation if they hit somewhere unfortunate.
I'm sure you know about Tunguska an impact estimated from a 50m diameter asteroid. That was just a century ago . Had that struck the Eastern seaboard of the US or western Europe I don't think we'd be having this conversation.
Research in this area helps us to learn what the risk is and gives us vital warning - I don't think we could stop one but if we had 12 hours notice of a similar strike to western Europe I think that might save an awful lot of lives.
Remember all this interest in impacts started after 1989 when a 300m object missed the Earth by 6 hours
We only saw it 9 days after it passed us!
It is an absurd stance of yours Khandro. Man is an inquisitive animal, a species that needs a narrative, an understanding of how things work and how that all relates to our species.
And we have come a long way, despite lingering, tenacious,evidence free assertions about how we came to be, how our universe came to be.
Quite apart from the fact that our progress as a species, and our continuing progress and survival as a species can only be improved from knowing more about the facts of the world and the universe. Science. the scientific method and fundamental research is certainly much more useful to us as survival tools than the delusions of the faithful, or the pleadings to an invisible, omniscient, yet strangely impotent supreme being.
And we have come a long way, despite lingering, tenacious,evidence free assertions about how we came to be, how our universe came to be.
Quite apart from the fact that our progress as a species, and our continuing progress and survival as a species can only be improved from knowing more about the facts of the world and the universe. Science. the scientific method and fundamental research is certainly much more useful to us as survival tools than the delusions of the faithful, or the pleadings to an invisible, omniscient, yet strangely impotent supreme being.
jomifl: //how do you imagine Martin Rees acquired the stats. to make his statement re. asteroid strike risk.//, well I would have thought a minimum of O levels, and a maximum of comom sense should do the trick, even Professor Khandro can work out that the risk to all life on the planet being obliterated by a gigantic asteroid is no more of a threat now than it has been at any other time in history, and for someone to make a career out of scaring the feeble-minded shitless by telling them that this is the greatest threat to the planet is risible, if you don't think so, it's time for your sense of humour check. The real problems facing us are right here; exponential population increase, and the daily destruction of the planet's resources for a start. And Jake, if you were to be forewarned of an impending asteroid strike on a cataclysmic scale - perhaps similar to the one that may have destroyed most of life on Earth including the dinosaurs, what would you do with that time, apart from sending up Bruce Willis to intercept it? Well I suppose you could always pray :-)
No - like I said there's not much we can do about "Planet killers" - but you can help minimise the risk if there are smaller - but still deadly ones
These are more common - like Tunguska - like the 1989 near miss
For example if you knew one was hoing to hit in the north Atlantic in 12 hours you could do a lot to get people out of the way of the resulting Tsumami
I'm sure even Professor Khandro would agree with that - or would your Budhism advocate passive acceptance over evacuation to high ground?
I'm sure Budhism doesn't advocate remaining in harms way if there's a choice does it?
These are more common - like Tunguska - like the 1989 near miss
For example if you knew one was hoing to hit in the north Atlantic in 12 hours you could do a lot to get people out of the way of the resulting Tsumami
I'm sure even Professor Khandro would agree with that - or would your Budhism advocate passive acceptance over evacuation to high ground?
I'm sure Budhism doesn't advocate remaining in harms way if there's a choice does it?
Khandro, are you being deliberately obtuse or did you really not understand my post? Neanderthal man did not leave any records of asteroid strike frequency or of the size distribution of asteroids. We won't know what the risks are until some hundreds/thousands of near earth asteroids have been observed and their size estimated and their orbits calculated. Common sense doesn't come into it, based on your observations you would never even have thought of it let alone have the thought it could happen but asteroids strikes are quite common on a geological time scale. Most of the evidence has been erased by weathering and geological processes. New survey techniques are regularly finding asteroid strike sites, they just aren't news. You seem to be arguing from the position that asteroid strikes are an all or nothing phenomenom, obliteration or nothing. What evidence there is indicates otherwise. There is nothing wrong with establishing the truth rather than making assumptions based on ignorance, the biggest form of ignorance is being ignorant of our ignorance.
Do you really think anyone is scared shitless, do you have any figures for the scared shitless percentage of the population?
So prof. Khandro are you going to give us your estimate of the risk of an asteroid strike using common sense and can we see the calculations?
Do you really think anyone is scared shitless, do you have any figures for the scared shitless percentage of the population?
So prof. Khandro are you going to give us your estimate of the risk of an asteroid strike using common sense and can we see the calculations?
This link might help
http://
http://
jomifl; //are you going to give us your estimate of the risk of an asteroid strike using common sense and can we see the calculations? // Both the Astronomer Royal and I (and Jake!) assert that we are in no greater risk today of being hit by a giant 'all life on Earth' threatening asteroid than we have been at any other time throughout history. If you think otherwise, the onus is on you to tell us on what you base your calculations.
Naomi; of course not.
Naomi; of course not.
Naomi; // I don't see the relevance of the question.//
Some years ago, a group of science graduate pot-heads, lounging about on the beaches of California and wondering how they were going to finance their relaxed lifestyle, hit on the brilliant idea of seeking funding for research into 'Man-made global warming' and hit the jackpot. The idea spread like wildfire, and we now have more public fund aided global warming researchers and experts than there are now Greek Euros in Swiss bank accounts.
Meanwhile last night I watched on television the pitiable sight of scores of men, women and children in South America, raking about in the unspeakable filth of mountains of rubbish so that they could eat.
Money for research? - certainly, but let us address first and foremost the problems humanity is suffering here on Earth first.
Some years ago, a group of science graduate pot-heads, lounging about on the beaches of California and wondering how they were going to finance their relaxed lifestyle, hit on the brilliant idea of seeking funding for research into 'Man-made global warming' and hit the jackpot. The idea spread like wildfire, and we now have more public fund aided global warming researchers and experts than there are now Greek Euros in Swiss bank accounts.
Meanwhile last night I watched on television the pitiable sight of scores of men, women and children in South America, raking about in the unspeakable filth of mountains of rubbish so that they could eat.
Money for research? - certainly, but let us address first and foremost the problems humanity is suffering here on Earth first.
stop the asteroid sh1te, under khandro law we'd not be able to detect them because all research would be banned under the "delusion accord". I asked earlier whether you watch TV Khandro, do you? Most of the stuff you use every day is a result of the "science delusion", I'm really struggling not to be rude here, you must be a complete............Stopped myself!
Kahndro, Your "analysis" of Global Warming is extremely trite and demonstrates your profound ignorance of the subject.
Indeed it is an excellent example of the benefits of scientific research. Without that research we would be running headlong into irreversable problems without a clue it was even happening.
The Ozone depletion problem that surfaced in the 1980s is another good example. Stratospheric fluorocarbon lefels are now beginning to drop as the technologies that used the chemical are new in very small numbers.
The annual Ozone Hole is finally getting smaller. Imagine the mess we would be without the research.
Interestingly the ozone depletion followed the same pattern as we are now seeing in Global Warming. Some argued it wasn't caused by fluorocarbons but was natural. In fact some of the exact same scientists have been on the denial side of both issues (and the denial of the link between tobacco and cancer too.)
Indeed it is an excellent example of the benefits of scientific research. Without that research we would be running headlong into irreversable problems without a clue it was even happening.
The Ozone depletion problem that surfaced in the 1980s is another good example. Stratospheric fluorocarbon lefels are now beginning to drop as the technologies that used the chemical are new in very small numbers.
The annual Ozone Hole is finally getting smaller. Imagine the mess we would be without the research.
Interestingly the ozone depletion followed the same pattern as we are now seeing in Global Warming. Some argued it wasn't caused by fluorocarbons but was natural. In fact some of the exact same scientists have been on the denial side of both issues (and the denial of the link between tobacco and cancer too.)
It is a characteristic of AB, that the (how shall I say) -'intellectually unencumbered' can, hidden by the cloak of anonymity, appear and be offensive, not address the question, - which is not about research per se, but about the huge sums of money being spent on things like searching for the origins of the universe and possible asteroid attacks while children starve,- and then give out inaccurate information.
Television was invented by John Logie Baird, and later developed by Marconi-EMI etc. without a penny of public money being spent on it.
Television was invented by John Logie Baird, and later developed by Marconi-EMI etc. without a penny of public money being spent on it.
Where did /the planet being obliterated by a gigantic asteroid/ come from? you are getting ahead of yourself, we were discussing 'greatest threat', not obliteration. I have no reason to believe that the risk of asteroid impact has substantially changed and nowhere have I said that I believe that it has changed. My initial point which appear to have failed to perceive is that any estimates of risk from asteroids are based on scientific research and statstical assessment of risk, not common sense and O level maths. My other point is that unless some effort is put into research into asteroid distribution we will remain ignorant of the risk. It may be that we can not do anything to mitigate the threat from asteroids but if we don't do anything at all we will certainly remain ignorant and impotent. You seem to have a naive grasp of statistics, just because very large asteroids are relatively infrequent there is no reason to believe that one cannot follow soon after another, ie they do not follow a regular timetable, indeed it would be surprising (and informative) if they did. I presume that we are not going to benifit from your estimate of the risk of asteroid impact as your commonsense experience of them is non-existant and even O level maths would struggle getting a result other than zero.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.