kengs333 Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 The first detected asteroid to enter Earth's atmosphere, 2008 TC3, was detected on Oct. 6 and entered the Earth's atmosphere over Northern Africa the next day. Fortunately, it was only a metre or two in size and resulted in little more than a fireball. Objects of this size enter the Earth's atmosphere several times per year, but this serves as a reminder than Earth is always under threat of being impacted by larger objects such as those in Russia in 1908 and 1947. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news159.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 (edited) Except the one in Russia never impacted the earth at all.. Edited October 16, 2008 by Charles Anthony deleted unnecessarily re-copied Opening Post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 (edited) The first detected asteroid to enter Earth's atmosphere, 2008 TC3, was detected on Oct. 6 and entered the Earth's atmosphere over Northern Africa the next day. I don't know if its the first one... as I understand it they are called asteroids while in orbit around the sun but when they enter the earths atmosphere they are called meteors. So these happen fairly often. Although, this one was a bigger one Edited October 8, 2008 by Sir Bandelot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Except the one in Russia never impacted the earth at all.. So how did it cause so much damage?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Except the one in Russia never impacted the earth at all.. Figured as much. I'd say exploding close the the Earth's surface and causing widespread destruction constitutes impacting--probably caused more damage as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 So how did it cause so much damage?? It is thought that it exploded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 I don't know if its the first one... as I understand it they are called asteroids while in orbit around the sun but when they enter the earths atmosphere they are called meteors. So these happen fairly often. Although, this one was a bigger one Objects of this size enter the Earth's atmosphere on a regular basis and create fireballs, however, according to all of the reports, this is the first time that an object was detected and plotted to enter the Earth's atmosphere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 It is thought that it exploded. Causing fr more damage than had it impacted. A lesson learned by engineers when the developed the A bomb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Causing fr more damage than had it impacted. A lesson learned by engineers when the developed the A bomb. Exactly, an air burst is far more devastating than a ground level burst. This applies to other devices as well, for instance a fuel air bomb is air burst detonated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 So how did it cause so much damage?? so you think it DID impact then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Figured as much. I'd say exploding close the the Earth's surface and causing widespread destruction constitutes impacting--probably caused more damage as a result. No, an impact would leave an IMPACT crater, n'est ce pas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Exactly, an air burst is far more devastating than a ground level burst. This applies to other devices as well, for instance a fuel air bomb is air burst detonated. Even small things. When I was a kiddidiot there was a grenade accident. We thought we had dummies but...anyway one of the fellows pulled the pin and when it smoked he held it up asking why was it smoking. Killed 6, injured 42, which is pretty high considering what it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted October 8, 2008 Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 Exactly, an air burst is far more devastating than a ground level burst. This applies to other devices as well, for instance a fuel air bomb is air burst detonated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2008 No, an impact would leave an IMPACT crater, n'est ce pas? The region is littered with smaller impact craters because whatever it was exploded several miles above the surface. But it's really irrelevant given that this is believed to be a very large object and it entered the Earth's atmoshpere causing widespread destruction. Fortunately, it exploded over a largely unpopulated region. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 Causing fr more damage than had it impacted. A lesson learned by engineers when the developed the A bomb. There's a theory that the "meteorite" was actaully an atomic powered vehicle that lost control and accidently entered Earth's atmosphere... The similarity between eyewitness reports of the explosion and the aftermath, and that of atomic bomb detonations has also been noted. Are you implying, then, that there is some credibility to the effect that this could have been an nuclear explosion? It would seem to me that suggesting that the Tunguska event is actually the result of a UFO exploding is really stretching it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 There's a theory that the "meteorite" was actaully an atomic powered vehicle that lost control and accidently entered Earth's atmosphere... The similarity between eyewitness reports of the explosion and the aftermath, and that of atomic bomb detonations has also been noted. Are you implying, then, that there is some credibility to the effect that this could have been an nuclear explosion? It would seem to me that suggesting that the Tunguska event is actually the result of a UFO exploding is really stretching it. Would you like some fries with your tinfoil? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 9, 2008 Report Share Posted October 9, 2008 Objects of this size enter the Earth's atmosphere on a regular basis and create fireballs, however, according to all of the reports, this is the first time that an object was detected and plotted to enter the Earth's atmosphere. Fascinating, thanks for explaining that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 Would you like some fries with your tinfoil? Actually, I think I should be asking you that... Don't worry, lots of people believe in UFOs. It's okay to admit it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moderateamericain Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 Actually, I think I should be asking you that... Don't worry, lots of people believe in UFOs. It's okay to admit it... I dont necessarily believe in UFO's or area 51 and all that jumbo. But Say for an instance god is real. He made this huge massive Universe and stuck all of the living creatures on one planet. Seems like an awful waste of space to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 I dont necessarily believe in UFO's or area 51 and all that jumbo. But Say for an instance god is real. He made this huge massive Universe and stuck all of the living creatures on one planet. Seems like an awful waste of space to me. Theoretically, I think most astronomers would agree now that the chances of there being some sort of lifeforms out there is almost guarenteed, and that there may be (and may have been) some advanced civilizations. Could they visit us, though? Extremely unlikely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 Theoretically, I think most astronomers would agree now that the chances of there being some sort of lifeforms out there is almost guarenteed, and that there may be (and may have been) some advanced civilizations. Could they visit us, though? Extremely unlikely. As I state in my comment section... My best guess... Chance of life on other planets: 99.999% Chance of life within 50 light years: 75% Chance of intelligent life within 50 light years: 0.0000001% Chance of intelligent life within 50 light years AND existing in the same time frame as us: 0.00000000001% ...or something to that effect. -------------------------------- I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road. ---Stephen Hawkings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 This is the generally accepted formula, I believe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 This is the generally accepted formula, I believe:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation Yup. ---------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 Forget asteroids. The real deal is set to visit us on October 14 and they will stay for 3 days. Plenty of time to make their acquaintance. The predictions were channeled by Blossom Goodchild, who desribes herself as a professional ‘direct voice’ channelling medium working with spirit and cosmic energies. As an extract from her blog : Blossom’s most recent book “The Bridge” documents the messages channelled to her by the Cosmic Beings known as The Federation of Light. In her most recent encounters with them they have announced that one of their craft will appear in our skies on October 14th 2008 for a period of three days in such a way as to prove to us the existence of other life forms in the Universe. The Federation of Light stress that they come in LOVE to help us and our planet move to a new Higher Vibration of Love http://www.realufos.net/2008/09/october-14...age-update.html "We come with a message of Love." Yeah, right. Their real mission is probably to come and study our politicians. Who else would attract aliens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengs333 Posted October 14, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 So that's why M.Dancer hasn't been posting... he's probably out in some desert somewhere reclining on a lawn chair with cameras and binoculars at the ready... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.