• Korkki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    I haven’t had much hope that if there was an major asteroid racing towards earth that there could be much done about it, but I also know that likelyhood of it is very small so there is no need to lose sleep over it.

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    “Sustaining the space mission, disaster preparedness, and communications efforts across a 14-year timeline would be challenging due to budget cycles, changes in political leadership, personnel, and ever-changing world events,” the report says.

    First administration: “We must do something about the asteroid. I’ve started a plan to divert it, but it’ll take several years.”

    Second administration: “The asteroid is a corrupt globalist conspiracy. We never needed to divert asteroids in the past, why do we supposedly need to spend all your hard-earned tax dollars on this all of a sudden? I will prove my anti-elitist attitudes by cancelling the asteroid program as soon as I take office.”

    Third administration: “Yes we recognize that the asteroid is a threat, but as we saw last time there’s just too much political resistance to solving it. Let’s focus on other priorities that we can solve.”

  • mriormro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    We’ve already solved this. We just need to train a team of dysfunctional oil drillers to send up to the asteroid.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    That’s okay, humanity had s good run. I imagine we’ll have extinctified ourselves way before a space rock could do it. A+ for trying though.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s the last three words of the article. The author didn’t miss the connection either.

      I always wonder when people repeat something from the article or ask a question that’s answered in the article: did you not read it or did you just want to start a discussion about this connection and are somehow constrained in the number of words you can write per day?

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        I didn’t read it. The Register has a drier tone than I felt like reading today. I mean seriously, putting the word tabletop in quotes? I am NOT the target audience for that writing style.

    • Jackhammer_Joe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      It was a great movie - sadly, because it was so accurate. Provided that you can call a sci-fi movie accurate. But after the pandemic and shit, “don’t look up” looks like a playbook for a meteor extinction level event

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        What’s funny is that movie released during the pandemic, so it seemed like that was the thing it was commenting on, but actually it was filmed before the pandemic and was originally meant as a commentary on climate change. What it shows is that humanity’s modern tribalism is remarkably predictable. No matter what the problem, we will turn it into an us versus them situation where getting anything meaningful done becomes an uphill battle.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Actually they say that Comet Dibiasky is twice the size of the dinosaur killer, but they also say it’s 6-1 9 kilometres wide. 10 kilometres is the size of Chicxulub. Scientifically it was very inaccurate. But politically it’s flawless.

  • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    We are not at a point where the “global community” is more than a few competing, egoistic and greedy tribes with clashing world views, so that’s no surprise.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yeah, I think that really it wouldn’t be the “global community” that ends up saving the world in an asteroid impact scenario.

      It would likely be an organization that could operate on its own without endless committees. Say, the Chinese space agency, or SpaceX, or the Indian space agency. Someone would decide to just do it, without getting the whole world’s approval for the mission. Then the whole world would complain that the effort was made without any international cooperation or oversight. And the organization that literally saved the world would get chewed out by everyone because inevitably the plan will not have worked perfectly.

      But I’m not worried, because even billionaires don’t want to die. Someone would do something.

        • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          I’d trust them to try to intercept an asteroid… It’ll be harmless when they miss and achieve nothing, but in the off chance that they pull it off, yeah sure Boeing, go for it.

    • uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      If an asteroid were to hit the Earth large enough to cause human extinction, it would save us the embarrassment of killing ourselves from poisoning the climate or microplastic pollution.

      I’m pretty sure we navigated nuclear holocaust, but we haven’t fully ruled it out either.

  • Leg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Real talk, an asteroid wiping us out would only expedite the inevitable. If we could pull together and deflect an asteroid, there’s hope. If not, we failed the test and die with the consequences. But we don’t need the asteroid to fail this test. We’re making great strides towards destroying our home with home field advantage.

      • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        We’re also the best around at improving our environments.

        I know it’s easy to be pessimistic about these things, but humans are evolutionary badasses. We’re capable of amazing things. I wouldn’t count us out just yet.

        Besides we haven’t really ruined anything. We haven’t done any damage to the earth that won’t heal eventually. The earth has seen plenty of mass extinctions before and it will again (with or without humans).

          • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            How many predators can take down prey 50 times their size? How many species can thrive in tundra, jungles, plains, forests, mountains and deserts? How many species can be found on every continent? How many species figured out how to fly despite never developing wings? How many species developed hundreds of distinct methods of communication? How many species have been to the moon?

            Humans are fucking badass…

            • Gloomy@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              How many predators can take down prey 50 times their size?

              Ants and a couple of Insects I guess. Also Bacteria and Viruses.

              How many species can thrive in tundra, jungles, plains, forests, mountains and deserts?

              Well, obviously also most Bacteria. If we are speaking more sentient live then the answer is: mot of them. Birds, Mammals, Insects. It might take a generation or 10 to get them adopted to their new envirment, but almost every species. Is able to adopt to their evolutoany niche.

              How many species can be found on every continent?

              Most of them?

              How many species figured out how to fly despite never developing wings?

              Technology. Yes, that’s a human thing at last, at least at the level we use it.

              How many species developed hundreds of distinct methods of communication

              Various species have methods of communicating, from bees dancing to each other to whales having distinct regional dialects. Yes, humans have added some complexity to it by introducing technology, but that’s realy what it comes down to. Technology.

              How many species have been to the moon?

              Technology, once more.

              So your point is that humans have learned to use technology, therefor they are badass.

              I disagree. We are living in an absolut singularity tight now. Humans have learned to use finate resources (oil for example) to amplify the energy that we have at our hands. A single humans beeing today can use energy that would be equal to thousands of men’s work every day.

              Since we are drawing on finate resources there are two ways how this will go: we will learn to exploit other, less finate sources of energy (say, fusion) and the groth path will continue (to the stars, eventually). Or we will run out of energy or ruin the livable world by doing so and will fall back to an earlier level of development. Since most of the resources needed are used up we will not be able clime back up. At this moment we are on the second of those paths.

              And in our way in getting here we have started the sixt mass extinction, accidentaly started turning the climate into something less sustainable for humans and polluted every single space on this planet, including areas like the deep ocean that we have never even touched physically.

              Humans are not badass, in my opinion. We are fucking cancer.

  • peanuts4life@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Call me an optimist, but I think that if an android was actually going to destroy life as we know it, nations would do everything in their power to advert the disaster.

  • WatDabney@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I’m roundaboutly reminded of one of my favorite novels - Greener Than You Think, by Ward Moore.

    It’s a science fiction story about the end of the world that was written in the late 40s. The proximate cause of the end is all of the landmasses of Earth being smothered by a gigantic and very aggressive strain of Bermuda grass, but the real cause is the utter and complete failure, due to ignorance, greed, selfishness, short-sightedness, incompetence, arrogance and so on, of every attempt to combat it.

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Half the population would believe the asteroid is a hoax spread by the [insert ethnic or religious group here].