Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Man's scientists are destroying the universe

Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 6:24:53 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
We hold great hopes for our scientists, in making the planet a nicer place to live in, but the opposite is the case. Looking at the simple example of, 'every time you turn a rock over you change the environment' we find the man's greed and desires leave many 'rocks' turned and never replaced.

The advantages of satellites have been great for big business, war tools, mapping machines and communication devices. But not only do they get old and stop functioning they also get broken up by meteorites and then they become space junk. and get into the wrecking business themselves.

There are around 500,000 bits of space junk traveling at 17, 500 MPH out there right now. As the small bits of the bigger bits hit other satellites they too break up into thousands of bits, which then hit other satellites that create thousands of bits more.

If the scientists had given thought on this obvious happening, they have not publicized it much, and why would they, the populations of the earth would rebel and the satellites would not be there, and big business would go it alone.

http://www.space.com... Read and worry.

Although the scientists are "saying" that they will "look into it" it is highly unlikely that the world governments will be too concerned about cleaning up if some other country is doing it for them. Just look at the commercial pollution of the earth.

We have this: Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).

However, we have no national agreement on cleaning up the space Junk, and Australia is the country that has any sort of comprehensive mapping of space junk.

You will read that the lawyers for the international treaty on satellites have not been able to come up with a suitable, and obtain full agreement, to suit all satellite distributors. So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org...
Axonly
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 7:04:40 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 6:24:53 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
We hold great hopes for our scientists, in making the planet a nicer place to live in, but the opposite is the case. Looking at the simple example of, 'every time you turn a rock over you change the environment' we find the man's greed and desires leave many 'rocks' turned and never replaced.

The advantages of satellites have been great for big business, war tools, mapping machines and communication devices. But not only do they get old and stop functioning they also get broken up by meteorites and then they become space junk. and get into the wrecking business themselves.

There are around 500,000 bits of space junk traveling at 17, 500 MPH out there right now. As the small bits of the bigger bits hit other satellites they too break up into thousands of bits, which then hit other satellites that create thousands of bits more.

If the scientists had given thought on this obvious happening, they have not publicized it much, and why would they, the populations of the earth would rebel and the satellites would not be there, and big business would go it alone.

http://www.space.com... Read and worry.

Although the scientists are "saying" that they will "look into it" it is highly unlikely that the world governments will be too concerned about cleaning up if some other country is doing it for them. Just look at the commercial pollution of the earth.

We have this: Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).

However, we have no national agreement on cleaning up the space Junk, and Australia is the country that has any sort of comprehensive mapping of space junk.

You will read that the lawyers for the international treaty on satellites have not been able to come up with a suitable, and obtain full agreement, to suit all satellite distributors. So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

The space debri situation currently isn't too bad then.

Pretending for a moment that a LEO has a surface area: 4 pi (6,371+ 160)^2= 536,005,482km^2

(Above is the hypothetical surface area of the minimum LEO)

According to your source, there is millions of space debris smaller than a 1/3 of an inch, this is vague, so I will just assume its 5 million.

Thats 5 million pieces of debris in 536 million km^2. The debris is very small, so based on this, it isn't too concerning yet. Not to mention that the calculations I provided are only if ALL the debris were within the surface area of the minimum LEO, so in reality, it would be spread over an even greater area.

To be fair though, the debris would be in clusters.

However satellites generally orbit in the rotation, reducing speed difference between satellites and debris, further reducing odds of collision.

" So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface." It would require very significant amounts of debris to do that, far more than are currently up there. You made this one up.

Just because it isn't a major issue now however, doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Space debris mapping programs (As you pointed out) and better space debris management would be very beneficial.

(There is probably a ton of grammatical errors, but I am too lazy to fix it all)
Meh!
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 8:55:17 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 7:04:40 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 6/4/2016 6:24:53 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
We hold great hopes for our scientists, in making the planet a nicer place to live in, but the opposite is the case. Looking at the simple example of, 'every time you turn a rock over you change the environment' we find the man's greed and desires leave many 'rocks' turned and never replaced.

The advantages of satellites have been great for big business, war tools, mapping machines and communication devices. But not only do they get old and stop functioning they also get broken up by meteorites and then they become space junk. and get into the wrecking business themselves.

There are around 500,000 bits of space junk traveling at 17, 500 MPH out there right now. As the small bits of the bigger bits hit other satellites they too break up into thousands of bits, which then hit other satellites that create thousands of bits more.

If the scientists had given thought on this obvious happening, they have not publicized it much, and why would they, the populations of the earth would rebel and the satellites would not be there, and big business would go it alone.

http://www.space.com... Read and worry.

Although the scientists are "saying" that they will "look into it" it is highly unlikely that the world governments will be too concerned about cleaning up if some other country is doing it for them. Just look at the commercial pollution of the earth.

We have this: Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).

However, we have no national agreement on cleaning up the space Junk, and Australia is the country that has any sort of comprehensive mapping of space junk.

You will read that the lawyers for the international treaty on satellites have not been able to come up with a suitable, and obtain full agreement, to suit all satellite distributors. So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

The space debri situation currently isn't too bad then.

Pretending for a moment that a LEO has a surface area: 4 pi (6,371+ 160)^2= 536,005,482km^2

(Above is the hypothetical surface area of the minimum LEO)

According to your source, there is millions of space debris smaller than a 1/3 of an inch, this is vague, so I will just assume its 5 million.

Thats 5 million pieces of debris in 536 million km^2. The debris is very small, so based on this, it isn't too concerning yet. Not to mention that the calculations I provided are only if ALL the debris were within the surface area of the minimum LEO, so in reality, it would be spread over an even greater area.

ME: As the source/s say, a bit of junk of 4mm traveling at 17,500mph. A 303 projectile has a muzzle velocity of 477mps, and that causes damage to what ever it hits. AS far as all satellites and junk traveling in the same direction and orbit, thus not being a danger is contradicted by the fact that the ones launching satellites now spend a lot of time devising a not so busy "space Highway" fro their missiles.

To be fair though, the debris would be in clusters.

ME: At different points, and not so much in clusters if it had been broken up by sizable debris and continued to be broken up further. Have a look at the Australian projection of space hardware on the net.

However satellites generally orbit in the rotation, reducing speed difference between satellites and debris, further reducing odds of collision.

ME: Again, the odds of collision are not reduced but increased with every satellite that is no longer in use, has been hit and disintegrated or is sometime moved off the original orbit by a collision.

" So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface." It would require very significant amounts of debris to do that, far more than are currently up there. You made this one up.

ME: You could say I "made it up" but it is my opinion based on the stuff you can read about the situation, but you prefer to sneak in the little jibe, don't you?

Just because it isn't a major issue now however, doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Space debris mapping programs (As you pointed out) and better space debris management would be very beneficial.

ME: In spite of the "Silent" space users, there is a great concern about the continual, and ever increasing problem.

(There is probably a ton of grammatical errors, but I am too lazy to fix it all)

There are far more problems with contaminating the space around our planet than your grammatical errors could cause. But , as usual, there are those that say "Na! I wont happen", and then put the noggin' back in the sand bucket.

The Outer space agencies are fitting protective shields on their manned spacecraft just so it can get through the 'swaddling band' of space junk. Of no concern, you say?

What you have to get into your head is that if one satellite is broken into a thousand bits, then there are a thousand bits ready to hit another thousand satellites, breaking each of those into a thousand bits each. This is a hypothetical scenario, but it is not out of the bounds of reality.
Axonly
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 9:22:04 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 8:55:17 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 6/4/2016 7:04:40 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 6/4/2016 6:24:53 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
We hold great hopes for our scientists, in making the planet a nicer place to live in, but the opposite is the case. Looking at the simple example of, 'every time you turn a rock over you change the environment' we find the man's greed and desires leave many 'rocks' turned and never replaced.

The advantages of satellites have been great for big business, war tools, mapping machines and communication devices. But not only do they get old and stop functioning they also get broken up by meteorites and then they become space junk. and get into the wrecking business themselves.

There are around 500,000 bits of space junk traveling at 17, 500 MPH out there right now. As the small bits of the bigger bits hit other satellites they too break up into thousands of bits, which then hit other satellites that create thousands of bits more.

If the scientists had given thought on this obvious happening, they have not publicized it much, and why would they, the populations of the earth would rebel and the satellites would not be there, and big business would go it alone.

http://www.space.com... Read and worry.

Although the scientists are "saying" that they will "look into it" it is highly unlikely that the world governments will be too concerned about cleaning up if some other country is doing it for them. Just look at the commercial pollution of the earth.

We have this: Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).

However, we have no national agreement on cleaning up the space Junk, and Australia is the country that has any sort of comprehensive mapping of space junk.

You will read that the lawyers for the international treaty on satellites have not been able to come up with a suitable, and obtain full agreement, to suit all satellite distributors. So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

The space debri situation currently isn't too bad then.

Pretending for a moment that a LEO has a surface area: 4 pi (6,371+ 160)^2= 536,005,482km^2

(Above is the hypothetical surface area of the minimum LEO)

According to your source, there is millions of space debris smaller than a 1/3 of an inch, this is vague, so I will just assume its 5 million.

Thats 5 million pieces of debris in 536 million km^2. The debris is very small, so based on this, it isn't too concerning yet. Not to mention that the calculations I provided are only if ALL the debris were within the surface area of the minimum LEO, so in reality, it would be spread over an even greater area.

ME: As the source/s say, a bit of junk of 4mm traveling at 17,500mph. A 303 projectile has a muzzle velocity of 477mps, and that causes damage to what ever it hits. AS far as all satellites and junk traveling in the same direction and orbit, thus not being a danger is contradicted by the fact that the ones launching satellites now spend a lot of time devising a not so busy "space Highway" fro their missiles.

Repeating your own point, so ok.

To be fair though, the debris would be in clusters.

ME: At different points, and not so much in clusters if it had been broken up by sizable debris and continued to be broken up further. Have a look at the Australian projection of space hardware on the net.

Alright, say it has an even distribution then, technically speaking the odds are the same of it randomly hitting a satellite

However satellites generally orbit in the rotation, reducing speed difference between satellites and debris, further reducing odds of collision.

ME: Again, the odds of collision are not reduced but increased with every satellite that is no longer in use, has been hit and disintegrated or is sometime moved off the original orbit by a collision.

True, but irrelevant to the point I made here

" So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface." It would require very significant amounts of debris to do that, far more than are currently up there. You made this one up.

ME: You could say I "made it up" but it is my opinion based on the stuff you can read about the situation, but you prefer to sneak in the little jibe, don't you?

You don't have any factual information to support the claim that satellite debris is going to "block the sun".

Keep in mind that the minimum low earth orbit is 536 million km^2, it would take an enormous amount of mass to cover that to any significant amount.

Just because it isn't a major issue now however, doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Space debris mapping programs (As you pointed out) and better space debris management would be very beneficial.

ME: In spite of the "Silent" space users, there is a great concern about the continual, and ever increasing problem.

Yep.

(There is probably a ton of grammatical errors, but I am too lazy to fix it all)

There are far more problems with contaminating the space around our planet than your grammatical errors could cause. But , as usual, there are those that say "Na! I wont happen", and then put the noggin' back in the sand bucket.

The Outer space agencies are fitting protective shields on their manned spacecraft just so it can get through the 'swaddling band' of space junk. Of no concern, you say?

Because like any good scientist, they take sensible precautions just in case.

What you have to get into your head is that if one satellite is broken into a thousand bits, then there are a thousand bits ready to hit another thousand satellites, breaking each of those into a thousand bits each. This is a hypothetical scenario, but it is not out of the bounds of reality.

You realize im agreeing right? I am just saying that it isn't significant yet.

PS, NASA has a branch called the "Orbital Debris Program Office" who works on this kind of stuff.
Meh!
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 10:12:00 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Yes, ladies and gentlemen. if you're wondering what's destroying the Whole Universe, it's not the Second Law of Thermodynamics as you might've thought [https://en.wikipedia.org...], but Human Scientists!

That's right! Having never left our solar system, nor seen any other species do so, and having no idea how to make that feasible, we're not just trashing the Milky Way in a fashion that will dwarf the impending collision with the Andromeda galaxy in four billion years time [https://en.wikipedia.org...] but we're destroying in principle every other of the hundred billion other galaxies in the known universe, most of which we can barely see!

Now, before there were scientists, man didn't really trash anything. He wasn't extinguishing species, polluting rivers, denuding forests, living with tapeworms, ringworms, headlice, rickets, polio, leprosy, measels, scurvy, tinea, smallpox, malaria, hookworms, tuberculosis and Black Death, and giving himself hepatitis, cholera and dysentery from lack of a microbial theory of medicine. In fact, he was living in holy pristine savagery, keeping all his teeth, and if one baby in three was dying of avoidable causes, or Mommy snuffed it from a childbirth infection and wasn't around to raise Baby, that was all God's doing!

Those naughty scientists though, with their GPS and long-range weather forecasts and space debris and their efficient agriculture and seismology and contraception and plumbing and clean water and vaccine and antibiotics and global communications and buildings that don't fall down... No wonder they can't be trusted with all their empiricism and evidence and honesty and accurate predictions. There's hardly a Jehovah's Witness among them!
Axonly
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 10:40:11 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 10:12:00 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Yes, ladies and gentlemen. if you're wondering what's destroying the Whole Universe, it's not the Second Law of Thermodynamics as you might've thought [https://en.wikipedia.org...], but Human Scientists!

That's right! Having never left our solar system, nor seen any other species do so, and having no idea how to make that feasible, we're not just trashing the Milky Way in a fashion that will dwarf the impending collision with the Andromeda galaxy in four billion years time [https://en.wikipedia.org...] but we're destroying in principle every other of the hundred billion other galaxies in the known universe, most of which we can barely see!

Now, before there were scientists, man didn't really trash anything. He wasn't extinguishing species, polluting rivers, denuding forests, living with tapeworms, ringworms, headlice, rickets, polio, leprosy, measels, scurvy, tinea, smallpox, malaria, hookworms, tuberculosis and Black Death, and giving himself hepatitis, cholera and dysentery from lack of a microbial theory of medicine. In fact, he was living in holy pristine savagery, keeping all his teeth, and if one baby in three was dying of avoidable causes, or Mommy snuffed it from a childbirth infection and wasn't around to raise Baby, that was all God's doing!

Those naughty scientists though, with their GPS and long-range weather forecasts and space debris and their efficient agriculture and seismology and contraception and plumbing and clean water and vaccine and antibiotics and global communications and buildings that don't fall down... No wonder they can't be trusted with all their empiricism and evidence and honesty and accurate predictions. There's hardly a Jehovah's Witness among them!

I know right? Don't get me started on how they managed to harness electricity, electricity kills so many people it's just evil. #BoycottElectricity
Meh!
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 9:35:48 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Can accumulated space junk block the sunlight? That would be great because it would offset global warming. In boring calculations below, I estimate it would take 238 billion tons of space junk to get the coverage needed to offset global warming. The forecast is for a total launch of 2000 tons of satellites over the next ten years, and only a small fraction of that will end up as junk. Most satellites are deliberately burned up over the Pacific. We have a very long time to solve the problem before dimming the sun comes into play.

Calculations: All of the global warming experienced so far could be offset by about a 3% increase in cloud cover. Somebody calculated that. The approximate surface area of a sphere at moderate orbital height, say a thousand miles above the surface, is about 1 billion square miles. So to offset global warming, we'll need a shade area of 30 million square miles. Suppose the particles are about one millimeter (.04 inches) and made of aluminum. We'll need 30 million x 5280^2 = 836 trillion square feet of aluminum 1 mm thick. Stacking 25 x 12 sq ft = 300 sq. ft equals a cubic foot of aluminum. That's 2.78 trillion cubic feet of aluminum, which would weigh 234 billion tons. Currently getting a ton of stuff into space costs about $2 million, so it would take $468 trillion at current prices. The GDP of the Us is about $20 trillion, and of the entire world about $80 trillion. Current forecasts are that a total of about a thousand two ton (average) satellites will be launched in the next ten years. At that rate it will take about a billion years to get 3% coverage.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 9:57:02 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 9:35:48 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
That's 2.78 trillion cubic feet of aluminum, which would weigh 234 billion tons. it will take about a billion years to get 3% coverage.

Disappointing, Roy. And the world has only got 38 billion tonnes of Aluminium reserves to start with. We're going to have to send up all the old seventies disco wear from op-shops too to have any chance of seriously cluttering the sky.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 11:35:56 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 9:22:04 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 6/4/2016 8:55:17 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 6/4/2016 7:04:40 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 6/4/2016 6:24:53 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
We hold great hopes for our scientists, in making the planet a nicer place to live in, but the opposite is the case. Looking at the simple example of, 'every time you turn a rock over you change the environment' we find the man's greed and desires leave many 'rocks' turned and never replaced.

The advantages of satellites have been great for big business, war tools, mapping machines and communication devices. But not only do they get old and stop functioning they also get broken up by meteorites and then they become space junk. and get into the wrecking business themselves.

There are around 500,000 bits of space junk traveling at 17, 500 MPH out there right now. As the small bits of the bigger bits hit other satellites they too break up into thousands of bits, which then hit other satellites that create thousands of bits more.

If the scientists had given thought on this obvious happening, they have not publicized it much, and why would they, the populations of the earth would rebel and the satellites would not be there, and big business would go it alone.

http://www.space.com... Read and worry.

Although the scientists are "saying" that they will "look into it" it is highly unlikely that the world governments will be too concerned about cleaning up if some other country is doing it for them. Just look at the commercial pollution of the earth.

We have this: Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty requires parties to authorize and supervise national space activities, including the activities of non-governmental entities such as commercial and non-profit organizations. The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states).

However, we have no national agreement on cleaning up the space Junk, and Australia is the country that has any sort of comprehensive mapping of space junk.

You will read that the lawyers for the international treaty on satellites have not been able to come up with a suitable, and obtain full agreement, to suit all satellite distributors. So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

The space debri situation currently isn't too bad then.

Pretending for a moment that a LEO has a surface area: 4 pi (6,371+ 160)^2= 536,005,482km^2

(Above is the hypothetical surface area of the minimum LEO)

According to your source, there is millions of space debris smaller than a 1/3 of an inch, this is vague, so I will just assume its 5 million.

Thats 5 million pieces of debris in 536 million km^2. The debris is very small, so based on this, it isn't too concerning yet. Not to mention that the calculations I provided are only if ALL the debris were within the surface area of the minimum LEO, so in reality, it would be spread over an even greater area.

ME: As the source/s say, a bit of junk of 4mm traveling at 17,500mph. A 303 projectile has a muzzle velocity of 477mps, and that causes damage to what ever it hits. AS far as all satellites and junk traveling in the same direction and orbit, thus not being a danger is contradicted by the fact that the ones launching satellites now spend a lot of time devising a not so busy "space Highway" fro their missiles.

Repeating your own point, so ok.

To be fair though, the debris would be in clusters.

ME: At different points, and not so much in clusters if it had been broken up by sizable debris and continued to be broken up further. Have a look at the Australian projection of space hardware on the net.

Alright, say it has an even distribution then, technically speaking the odds are the same of it randomly hitting a satellite

However satellites generally orbit in the rotation, reducing speed difference between satellites and debris, further reducing odds of collision.

ME: Again, the odds of collision are not reduced but increased with every satellite that is no longer in use, has been hit and disintegrated or is sometime moved off the original orbit by a collision.

True, but irrelevant to the point I made here

" So the junk keeps building up until it become dust and stops the sunlight getting to the earth's surface." It would require very significant amounts of debris to do that, far more than are currently up there. You made this one up.

ME: You could say I "made it up" but it is my opinion based on the stuff you can read about the situation, but you prefer to sneak in the little jibe, don't you?

You don't have any factual information to support the claim that satellite debris is going to "block the sun".

Keep in mind that the minimum low earth orbit is 536 million km^2, it would take an enormous amount of mass to cover that to any significant amount.

ME: And at the rate you use for the arrival of mankind( 4.5million years) there is a lot of time for it to happen, but I don't believe it will but that is my creation studies. The point I am making, and you support that thought is that there is not much consideration for having a "what if" department with scientific endeavor.

Because like any good scientist, they take sensible precautions just in case. your support for go for it science. The statement refers to the protection on launch for the rockets and satellites and not for any protection for the jettison of the rockets and the probable disintegration of the satellite in orbit.

It is about money, power fueled by greed with little consideration for the problems that feeding this greed could cause. The dropping of the A bombs on Japan showed this trait long ago, where the scientists could not say if the bombs might cause a chain reaction and destroy the entire planet. The Americans said, "Let em' go anyway".


Just because it isn't a major issue now however, doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Space debris mapping programs (As you pointed out) and better space debris management would be very beneficial.

ME: In spite of the "Silent" space users, there is a great concern about the continual, and ever increasing problem.

Yep.

(There is probably a ton of grammatical errors, but I am too lazy to fix it all)

There are far more problems with contaminating the space around our planet than your grammatical errors could cause. But , as usual, there are those that say "Na! I wont happen", and then put the noggin' back in the sand bucket.

The Outer space agencies are fitting protective shields on their manned spacecraft just so it can get through the 'swaddling band' of space junk. Of no concern, you say?

Because like any good scientist, they take sensible precautions just in case.

What you have to get into your head is that if one satellite is broken into a thousand bits, then there are a thousand bits ready to hit another thousand satellites, breaking each of those into a thousand bits each. This is a hypothetical scenario, but it is not out of the bounds of reality.

You realize im agreeing right? I am just saying that it isn't significant yet.

ME: It was significant before the first satellite was launched

PS, NASA has a branch call
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 11:50:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
The excitement of discovery outweighs the over enthusiasm of testing the discovery without first having any idea what t he over all action will be.

I think that that "We wanna be first" attitude of the Americans when the Russians were about to beat them in the so called "space race" was childish, and it put pressure on both countries to be first, regardless of any scenario such as the atom bomb drop on Japan.

You are good a figures, work out the time+1000 bits hitting more junk and making 100,000 more bits on the equation of the amount of space junk there now since 1957, including the acceleration of the bits multiplying at the above rate. One site says there is between 100 to 150 tonnes of space junk will return to earth in 2015.

They, the scientists, admit that it is difficult to impossible to estimate how much junk is still out there, and considering that a 4cm bit is considered destructive, it could be like walking through a swarm of bees without getting stung. (I just made that up lol)

OF course, each year the re-entry grows.

SO, for your debate proposal, it certainly an issue right now, and not something that we should say, "Well it is not a big problem yet."