Posted on 12/10/2009 10:44:22 AM PST by Edisto Joe
The first thing one must understand about the global warming agenda is that it has nothing to do with saving the earth from destruction and although there is validity in the science of climate change for the study of cyclical patterns in weather and temperature, the theory that the earth is being destroyed by man made greenhouse gases is pure nonsense. The recent "Climategate" scandal in the global warming community has shown that. They have been manipulating data for years in order to advance their theory and ignoring any science that says different. What they have been very successful in doing is linking up with the socialist left on a global scale that includes every green enviro-organization one can think of. Along the way they have enlisted like minded politicians and leaders to help advance their cause. This year their world stage is Copenhagen where they want to reach an agreement on reducing emissions globally and help third world and emerging economies in planning for a green future...
While these climate scientists have been selectively collecting their chump data and feeding it to the public, they have been oblivious to the threats that come from above...
Asteroid 2003 QQ47 is around 1.2 km in width and has been the subject of careful monitoring. What's the worst that could happen? If it hits you can kiss all your green windmill farms and solar collector grids goodbye! When this rock slams into Earth it will hit with the force of 20 million atomic bombs. Over half the world will be destroyed by the heat blast and the rest will be destroyed from the ensuing nuclear winter. Now that is what I call GlobalWarming!
(Excerpt) Read more at edistojoe.com ...
“However a newer asteroid has appeared which could pose a threat, currently scheduled to impact Earth on March 21, 2014 if current calculations hold true.”
Wow! A threat to the survival of the U.S. that’s bigger than Obama!
Something I’ve never understood: Why wouldn’t hitting this with a 100 megaton nuke (the Russians tested one back in the day) turn this to dust? After all, the crater from a 100 megaton nuke is bigger than the asteroid. Or set it or 10 of them off in front of the asteroid’s trajectory. That would at least break it up and deflect the chunks.
Also, lots of small chunks hitting the Earth would do far less damage than one big one. After all, a lot wouldn’t make it through the atmosphere.
And if 100 megatons won’t do it, we could build a 1 gigaton hydrogen bomb. Or use that as a trigger for fusing boron, which could scale to just about any size (up to a true planet cracker).
Seems to me it’s a PC “nukes are bad” thing...
My understanding is that nukes don’t work as well in a vacuum - you need an atmosphere to spread the shock wave and the heat. But, given enough advance notice, there are things we could do to mitigate the threat. Even a small disturbance to the asteroids trajectory could get it to miss the earth, for example
because we have never hit anything in space with a 100 megaton bomb, nor have we ever detonated a 100 mt bomb.
we should just land obama and the dems on it,, or better yet just let it hit so it could kill two birds with one scone!
Actually, the largest nuke ever made was 50 megatons, the Tsar Bomba, and only one was built and subsequently tested. This bomb was so large that it could not have been fired by missile, so 100 megatons, or twice the bomb would be nearly impossible to do currently. It would take awhile to develop a nuke missile that could carry 100 megatons.
The ice sheets are melting, that’s a fact, not theory. The cause, however, is at the core of debate. No harm can come from reducing the impact we make on our environment so why not find solid alternatives to coal and fossil fuels? In light of fossil fuels having a finite lifespan, it only makes sense to stop being dependent on it. However, in looking at the graphs for the ups and downs of the planets temps over the past million years (as core samples from ice has shown), and doing research on the melting going on in Alaska, Greenland, Iceland, etc. .. it occurred to me that the dramatic straight line going up within the last 30 years (the line indicating the rise in overall global temp) may not be due do what is being done to the planet, but what may not be happening. It could be that the planet needs catastrophic events such as asteroid impacts to keep the cycle of cooling/heating to continue in a fashion that, yes, would mean extinction to species but preserve the planets cyclic life healthy and capable of sustaining life. Just a thought. Talk amongst yourselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.