Ed wrote: Since pointing you to studies which do not agree with your preconcieved notions is useless, as they simply do not register with in your conciousness, it is useless to argue the small impact hazard with you.

Chris writes: Covenant for you. You don't have to do any research. Just say what every you want to because we wouldn't accept the actual proof anyway. Exactly where have we shown the inability to see truth, btw? I would remind you that you have a long and ever growing list of claims that have no evidence ever shown as support. And we can now add that his opponents wont see truth when shown it.

Ed wrote: So let us consider the largest impact which will occur. The "benefit" of CAPS is that it is the best insurance available today that mankind does not go extinct. The "benefit" of CAPS is therefore ultimately the entire national products of all of mankind for the period after such an impact will take place, unless it is prevented by a system such as CAPS, as well as all human lives lived after the prevented impact.

Now you can try and claim that such an impact will not take place. But this is demonstrably false. Or you can try to limit the damages from this impact to those humans alive in the year it takes place - but once again, this is nonsense.

Chris writes: Nobody here has ever claimed that a large impactor will never agian hit the Earth. It's a matter of when not if. And again I point out congress knows the difference even if you don't and they wouldn't buy a Moonbased detection system as the most benefical for the costs any more than anyone who has studied the issue seriously and cares for the protection of the Earth from any impactors would.

Ed wrote: Mr Eby, I leave you now to your canvas "Mars suits", your gasolline powered "Mars rovers", and your "Mars on Earth" in Canada.

Chris writes: You accuse us of the inability to change and see truth and yet keep promoting this BS! If you can't grok the simplests things yourself why should you expect anyone else to learn? Once again please explain to us why a gas engine isn't analog to a RTG, Lithium-ion battery, fuel cell or internal combustion engine designed for Mars use on a rover? I will remind you that your understanding of physics leaves a lot to be desired...MCP suits are real and internal combustion engines have been proposed for Mars use by scientists and engineers who know Mars as Mars and know physics! Mars analogs exist on Earth and if you can figure this out well gees what should we call you? Unbright?