4 ms·
The movie "Don't Look Up" but the asteroid scientists funded by NASA create an artificial black hole to pull asteroids towards Earth with sophisticated "gain of
by themgt 5y ago
The movie "Don't Look Up" but the asteroid scientists funded by NASA create an artificial black hole to pull asteroids towards Earth with sophisticated "gain of destruction" methodology - how better to study the potential civilization-ending power of asteroids?
When an asteroid appears from out of nowhere right near the Wuhan Black Hole and on course to kill us all, head scientist DiCaprio dedicates himself to leading the effort to label anyone questioning the natural origins of the asteroid's planet-killing trajectory a conspiracy theorist, and almost everyone goes along and gets those people banned from the internet. The end.
- perihelions 5y agoCarl Sagan expressed essentially the same idea in 1994 -- that the development of asteroid-deflecting *nuclear weapons* would be more likely to destroy the world than to save it. That the baseline risk of major asteroid impacts is low enough, that the threat of asteroid-deflecting technology being turned into a weapon -- a loose analogy to "gain-of-function" research, I guess -- is more probable than the natural threat it defends against. >"In our view, development of this asteroid-deflection technology would be premature. Given twentieth-century history and present global politics, it is hard to imagine guarantees against eventual misuse of an asteroid deflection system commensurate with the dangers such a system poses. Those who argue that it would be prudent to prevent catastrophic impacts with annual probabilities of 10^-5 would surely recognize the prudence of preventing more probable catastrophes of comparable magnitude from misuse of potentially apocalyptic technology." https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1038/368501a0 https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1038/368501a0 ("Dangers of Asteroid Deflection", Carl Sagan & Steven Ostro)
- retrac 5y ago> Carl Sagan expressed essentially the same idea in 1994 -- that the development of asteroid-deflecting nuclear weapons would be more likely to destroy the world than to save it. He also talked about this in his book Pale Blue Dot around the same time. He found it darkly ironic, I think. Technologies like spaceflight and nuclear power and advanced biology are necessary for the long-term survival of the human species. Yet presently, it seems they are more likely to be misapplied and destroy us.
- andrewflnr 5y agoWe're like children building our own electrical outlets without a parent to stop us from sticking a fork in them.
- cblconfederate 5y agoKnowing the lab origin of the virus wouldn't have saved us from the virus though.
- nlitened 5y agoIt could have saved us (unlikely though) from layers of lies upon lies on handling the pandemic, if we hadn’t started politicizing from the very start.
- telesilla 5y agoWe watched this over the weekend and found it very well written given what we're learning about ourselves as a modern race. Beautiful ending, also.