House of Paine

two more whys john mccarthy is still useable

 why # 1

john's civil right 
               add on:

"new civil right.
 No Government agency, 
educational institution 
or business  corporation
 should  be able to require
 anyone to supply  information 
that is already  publicly available"


  why #2......
================================================


 
" Reactions to the asteroid menace 
                           - 2004  March 13 

This is a reaction to a lecture
 by former astronaut Rusty Schweickart
 


Most of the lecture 
was an excellent description
 of the menace asteroids present
 to humanity. 

Schweickart was proposing
 a project to mount rockets
 on an asteroid 
and experimentally deflect it.....


. It is based on NASA's existing plan 
to develop nuclear reactors
 to power ion rockets - an excellent plan...... 

Here are some points. 

1. I agree that the present NASA survey 
of earth crossing asteroids 
is a good thing.

 

2. I agree 
that his proposed asteroid mission 
and test of deflection by rockets 
    is a good thing. 

3. I do not agree 
that there is an either-or decision
 between deflection by rockets 
and deflection by nuclear explosions


 Both need to be explored.
 

4. Deflection by mounting rockets 
on the asteroid 
will work if there is plenty 
of time before the asteroid's orbit 
would hit the earth. 

The nuclear option will be important 
for asteroids or comets 
for which there is very short warning.


 According to an astronomer I asked
 about 20 percent 
of earth orbit crossing events 
come from objects 
           too far out 
to have predictions 
  of their orbits 
until they are detected 
heading for us.


 For them large deflections
 on a short time scale 
will be necessary. 

5. There are substantial unknowns 
about which asteroids 
can be usefully deflected 
by nuclear explosions 
and how to do it. 

Therefore, testing is necessary. 


I do not regard the test ban 
as a sacred commitment
 binding humanity for all time.


Indeed I'm glad the US Senate 
has not ratified it.


 My opinion is quite independent 
of considerations
 of national defense. 


I have an article on nuclear explosions. 

6. Schweickart (and I believe many scientists)
 and I have a big disagreement
 on the ability of humanity 
to survive catastrophic events
 by action on a large scale. 

First of all panic:

 Predictions 
of destructive mass panics
 are unwarranted and contrary 
to experience
 with previous catastrophes
                 ( wars)

 

Schweickart regards humanity 
         as delicate,

 perhaps because 
of the interdependence 
of aspects of our society.

 
Experience,( wars again)
 shows 

human society 
is readily annoyed, 
but  is very resistant 
      to serious damage

  the advance of technology
 makes it more rugged 
        with every generation.


 I discuss this point at length 
in my web page
                 Menaces to humanity.



 Even one in a million surviving
i.e. 6,000 

would lead to humanity surviving


-------------------------------------------




 Actually, the fraction would be much larger. 

First assume no warning. 

1. At any given time hundreds of thousands
 of people in the world are underground
 and therefore would not be immediately killed
 by the high temperature 
of the sky the calculations suggest.
 However, most places don't have much food.
 The places that probably have enough food 
for quite a time 
are the national command centers 
of the US and Russia 
and some other countries. 

2. Schweickart said that some animals
 survived Chixculub 
be being in refugia.
 Some humans would find themselves 
in such places,
 whatever they may be. 

3. The fires would destroy 
all above ground plants 
in a few days.


 After some time, 
small plants would begin to grow,

 but it would be a long time
 before enough plants for animals 
like us would grow.


 However, we have grain silos,
 large concrete structures.
 Likely some of them would survive
 and give us something eat and to plant. 

Assume some days warning. 

We work on getting food,
 seeds and equipment underground. 

That will do for now, 
but it is only 
what I have been able to think of 
in less than an hour 
as means for survival.
 More and smarter people thinking longer,
 either as advance preparation
 or at the time of the emergency 
would think of much more to do. 

Of course, another Chixculub 
is only one of the disasters 
that may be imagined.
 Another is another ice age, 
or, on a smaller scale,
 a failure of Atlantic circulation 
that would make Western Europe 
as cold as Labrador or Siberia. 

towards each of these disasters, 
the dominant attitude 
in the scientific community 
is one of hopelessness. 

The imagination runs to more things 
that may cause death 
rather than to inventing ways 
of making humanity survive. 

Of course, not everyone thinks this way, 
but we seem to be a minority. 

It might be worthwhile 
to hold a conference entitled
 "Surviving catastrophes" 
or maybe just 
"Surviving another Chixculub".

 The object is not so much as
 to advocate specific preparations 
of distant disasters 
as to influence 
the gloomy state of mind. 

In an email, Scheickart admitted 
he knew of no study of how many humans 
would survive a Chixculub event.
 I infer that he carelessly thought 
we wouldn't survive,
 because it adds importance 
to his project of surveying potentially
 dangerous asteroid


===========================================