Perhaps I should have been more clear. I'm not claiming the press releases on this paper are wrong, or even misrepresentative. I really do not know. However, I am stating that people, especially given the subject of "killer asteroids" with the concomitant hype and hand waving by the Chicken Little crowd, should at least read the peer-reviewed paper first, which is usually written in a more nuanced manner than the (often hyped) press releases. Mind you, I realize that the vast majority of individuals do not have access to science journals, let alone the online content, which requires subscription. That said, however, arguing a particular point of view based only on press accounts (an argument by proxy, as it were) can be fraught with danger. Of course, there is the usual collection of crackpots and kooks who would not refrain from alarmism even if they had access to the paper(s), which I doubt they would understand in any event.

Alex R. Blackwell
University of Hawaii