You should know, as most experts in the field know, that I am pretty fully aware of what is being done here. I've interviewed and reported to the Cambrdige Conference on the work and hopes of most of those people whose links you mention. As a result, your condescending tone here does nothing more than reveal your ignorance to them.
My point is about working hours and resources - there are no good reasons for these folks to be doing this work putting in the hours that they are at the wages that they are recieving -
Furthermore, there's still another $40 million required for the construction of the US ground based detection telescope.
And after we've dealt with the asteroids, there's still the question as to the cometary impact hazard, and just getting a handle on that is going to require several million dollars more in expenditures over the next several years.
Given your personal problems, I will forgive you for not knowing of my own recent notes on the problems involved with defining the cometary impact hazard. I hope you will excuse me from not spending any of my time burdening you with them.
ep
Space/Science » in reply to If You Ever Bothered To Study Actual Detection Data
uhhh, Mark, your condescension reveals your ignorance
The whole thread (40 posts)
- 2004 MN4 now Torino scale 4 !!!!
- Rats, Just Fell Off The Torino Scale
- 2.7% today...
- Key NEO Report Links
- Friday 13th...
- You know it's the one we don't see that's going to get us. (n/t)
- re: 2004 MN4
- re: 2004 MN4
- Don't forget that damage and megatons don't scale directly
- 2004 MN4 - Just about the bestest Christmas present a boy ever had
- re: 2004 MN4
