Chicken Little Redux - A Serious Inquiry

When I posted “Chicken Little" yesterday I made light of the concern over the possibility of an catastrophic asteroid strike here on earth in this modern age.  I also heartily condemned calling for tax dollars to fund preventive measures.  Though I recognize the danger of one large metorite possibly wiping out the earth, at least as we know it, I am more interested in the actual risk associated with the possibility, though some would say certainty, of this happening.  Prior to continuing, I must admit my ignorance of physics but reiterate I am inquiring here, seriously.  My thoughts.

The largest meteorite ever discovered intact is in Namibia. It measures, approximately 9.68 feet by 9.32 feet.  Granted, the type of meteorite strike individuals are concerned with are much larger, but the earth shows little evidence of these striking ground.  Reasons postulated include breakup of meteorites in the atmosphere and erosion action on earth.  Is this type of information include in the methodology which calculates the chances of a catastrophic meteorite strike in today’s world?

Another question.  Angle of attack.  My current understanding is that if an object strikes the earth’s atmosphere at too shallow of angle it “could well bounce back into space.” Is this information consider in calculations of possible catastrophic meteorite strikes?

The moon.  Does the moon’s gravity provide any natural protection to the earth?

Is the fact that 70% of the earth is covered by water, the large majority ocean water, considered when considering this issue?  Does that fact offer any natural protection?

The additional reading I linked to in my first “Chicken Little” post does not address these questions.

I ask these questions because I think asking for millions, if not billions, of dollars to prevent something that possibly may happen, and I understand some individuals say certainly will happen is wrong.  There is no possible way to eliminate all risk.  I do not think the risk has even been adequately calculated.  I could very well be wrong though and a metorite may strike my home this evening.

Posted by on 02/27 at 02:02 PM

  1. There’s actually a good deal of evidence of large meteorites hitting the Earth (the big crater in Arizona being the most obviously visible that I’ve seen).  However, much of this evidence is very difficult or impossible to see with the naked eye (as we can see on the surface of the moon) because of the effect that water and vegetation has on the land. 

    Of course, the atmosphere serves as a deterrant to meteorite strikes but a meteor large enough to wreak significant global havoc would not be stopped by the atmosphere.  Even the Tunguska meteor, which never hit the ground, exploded with the energy of 60 Hiroshima-sized A-bombs.  I imagine that would cause some pretty severe problems for modern technology and communications.  And meteors of that size supposedly hit the Earth approximately once every century.  Of course, I’m highly dubious that even a multi-billion dollar asteroid protection program would be able to detect a 50 meter chunk of rock in space with enough leeway time to actually do anything about it.

    Posted by shonk  on  02/27  at  04:21 PM

  2. Shonk - I am aware of the info you’ve related, and I appreciate your dubiousness.  The main thing I am interested in knowing is the methodology, now.  Exactly what factors would be plugged into a formula to assess cost to benefit ratios?  Ditto for how the 20% figure noted in my comments at the first post.
    There has to be a formula, right?

    Posted by  on  02/27  at  08:57 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Unbelievable

Previous entry: The Wolverine State

<< Back to main