Comments on: The sky is falling http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/ Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:33:09 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Ermengarde http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-385 Ermengarde Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:52:57 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-385 CNN commentators are saying that shooting down ther spy satellite is like finding a needle in a haystack. Whenever I'm looking for a needle in a haystiack, I use a magnet! CNN commentators are saying that shooting down ther spy satellite is like finding a needle in a haystack.

Whenever I'm looking for a needle in a haystiack, I use a magnet!

]]> By: steve http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-365 steve Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:26:10 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-365 I maybe wrong but isnt there a mutibillion dollar pickup truck up in space as we speak that could pick up the sattilite and bring it home safely just curious I maybe wrong but isnt there a mutibillion dollar pickup truck up in space as we speak that could pick up the sattilite and bring it home safely
just curious

]]> By: US to shoot down dead spy satellite: Why? « exploring our world http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-345 US to shoot down dead spy satellite: Why? « exploring our world Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:55:11 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-345 [...] CNN has done an interesting analysis here. [...] [...] CNN has done an interesting analysis here. [...]

]]> By: Brandi Hammond http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-341 Brandi Hammond Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:13:04 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-341 I have a theory also. I read a week or so ago that this was coming down and the were NOT going to shoot it down due t all the risks with the gas. So why has that changed now? Or has it. Keep in mind people that this is the goverment that will not let the public in on much as to not caause chaos. I do not believe they intend to shoot it down, i think they are appeaseing the people like me that read it a week ago and spread the word that the S@# T was going to hit the fan. also, on the news earlier this week , it was said (ONLY ONCE) that the sattelite was going to hit a very populated area. So, i say to you all...do not panic...but be prepared ie: survival kit, first aid kit, as we Houstonians know due to huricanes to keep that stuff around. Just keep your eye on things If there is a scientist out ther NOT working for the government, i would love to hear the projected areas that might be hit. I a thinking Cali, Texas, or Florida.. Anyone????? I have a theory also. I read a week or so ago that this was coming down and the were NOT going to shoot it down due t all the risks with the gas. So why has that changed now? Or has it. Keep in mind people that this is the goverment that will not let the public in on much as to not caause chaos. I do not believe they intend to shoot it down, i think they are appeaseing the people like me that read it a week ago and spread the word that the S@# T was going to hit the fan.

also, on the news earlier this week , it was said (ONLY ONCE) that the sattelite was going to hit a very populated area.

So, i say to you all...do not panic...but be prepared
ie: survival kit, first aid kit, as we Houstonians know due to huricanes to keep that stuff around.

Just keep your eye on things

If there is a scientist out ther NOT working for the government, i would love to hear the projected areas that might be hit. I a thinking Cali, Texas, or Florida..

Anyone?????

]]> By: Richard http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-337 Richard Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:26:28 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-337 Several people above have said America wants to shoot this satellite down to test its missile-defense systems - without wanting to be too much of a conspiracy theorist, maybe what they actually want to do is make sure none of the information on board the satellite gets into the wrong hands??? Regardless of that issue, the fact remains that if this was to land in a populated area, it could cause numerous health problems, so I think the only safe thing to do is to shoot it down. I take it we will never know exactly when they are going to shoot it down, what with national security and all that. Richard http://blogearth.wordpress.com/ Several people above have said America wants to shoot this satellite down to test its missile-defense systems – without wanting to be too much of a conspiracy theorist, maybe what they actually want to do is make sure none of the information on board the satellite gets into the wrong hands???

Regardless of that issue, the fact remains that if this was to land in a populated area, it could cause numerous health problems, so I think the only safe thing to do is to shoot it down.

I take it we will never know exactly when they are going to shoot it down, what with national security and all that.

Richard
http://blogearth.wordpress.com/

]]> By: Monique http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-333 Monique Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:56:04 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-333 Is there anyone else here who doesnt feel as if there is a definite issue of Homeland Security??? Really? Is there anyone else here who doesnt feel as if there is a definite issue of Homeland Security??? Really?

]]> By: Justin K http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-331 Justin K Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:19:39 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-331 Paul, A controlled de-orbit is when a satellite is directed towards reentry under human control and towards a specific area, to thus avoid any potential debris collisions. It's actually pretty self-explanatory. If a satellite cannot be boosted into a "graveyard" orbit, it will be brought back to Earth in a controlled manner. Alan, The hydrazine tank is nearly entirely full and frozen. If this came down in a populated area, thousands could be exposed to a very, very toxic substance. The administration has decided it is better to intercept the satellite and ensure that the tank is ruptured, than to risk the hydrazine coming down intact somewhere over North America. The intercept would also ensure that re-entering debris is smaller and much more likely to burn up long before reaching the altitude that commercial aircraft operate at. Paul,

A controlled de-orbit is when a satellite is directed towards reentry under human control and towards a specific area, to thus avoid any potential debris collisions. It's actually pretty self-explanatory. If a satellite cannot be boosted into a "graveyard" orbit, it will be brought back to Earth in a controlled manner.

Alan,
The hydrazine tank is nearly entirely full and frozen. If this came down in a populated area, thousands could be exposed to a very, very toxic substance. The administration has decided it is better to intercept the satellite and ensure that the tank is ruptured, than to risk the hydrazine coming down intact somewhere over North America. The intercept would also ensure that re-entering debris is smaller and much more likely to burn up long before reaching the altitude that commercial aircraft operate at.

]]> By: HT http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-330 HT Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:55:29 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-330 I believe they said if the satellite was to be "shot", the only reason was due to the fuel tanks ability to survive reentry. (fuel is the only concern) If shot, the tank would explode and the fuel would either burn or most likely be left in space. The larger chunks were expected to burn up in the atmosphere. I would assume deorbit is actually a controlled reentry, much like the space shuttle. I think they would be able to position the satellite and use its thrusters to bring it down, at least in an area that they wanted, but I am unsure on whether or not it would be in tact. I believe they said if the satellite was to be "shot", the only reason was due to the fuel tanks ability to survive reentry. (fuel is the only concern) If shot, the tank would explode and the fuel would either burn or most likely be left in space. The larger chunks were expected to burn up in the atmosphere.

I would assume deorbit is actually a controlled reentry, much like the space shuttle. I think they would be able to position the satellite and use its thrusters to bring it down, at least in an area that they wanted, but I am unsure on whether or not it would be in tact.

]]> By: sandy http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-329 sandy Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:53:59 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-329 Just maybe this is no "conspiracy" blah blah blah. It could be that the satellite just totally failed. If you read all the articles, then it makes sense that it has to be shot down. I just heart on CNN that there is a 1 in 1zillion chance of anyone being hit by falling space debris on earth. What irritates me is tht China is responsible for 42% of floating space debris over 4" big in orbit. Why has no one addressed this issue? Just maybe this is no "conspiracy" blah blah blah. It could be
that the satellite just totally failed. If you read all the articles, then
it makes sense that it has to be shot down. I just heart on CNN
that there is a 1 in 1zillion chance of anyone being hit by falling
space debris on earth. What irritates me is tht China is responsible
for 42% of floating space debris over 4" big in orbit. Why has
no one addressed this issue?

]]> By: Incredulous Missourian http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/14/the-sky-is-falling/#comment-328 Incredulous Missourian Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:08:49 +0000 http://cnnscitech.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-328 Excuse me, but the cover story is what? A substance chosen specifically for efficient and effective explosive combustion is likely enough to survive a 5000 degree re-entry fireball? There's a 1% chance of even hitting a populated area, and at that it only affects an area 600 yards in radius, and then only 'sickening' those who breathe it in long enough? Even Forrest Gump would have a little trouble buying this one. Excuse me, but the cover story is what? A substance chosen specifically for efficient and effective explosive combustion is likely enough to survive a 5000 degree re-entry fireball? There's a 1% chance of even hitting a populated area, and at that it only affects an area 600 yards in radius, and then only 'sickening' those who breathe it in long enough? Even Forrest Gump would have a little trouble buying this one.

]]>