Posted on 02/06/2016 10:53:52 AM PST by BenLurkin
The NASA NEO uncertainty predictions are made by repeated monte carlo simulations from the best know state of the object, in this case its state on October 9, 2013.
Starting at October 9, 2013, we have an estimate of the state of the object and an estimate of the uncertainty (covariance) of the state.
We make a draw from a process which produces random states with the same mean and covariance as our estimate, and propagate that state forward in time one hundred years into the future and note its closest approaches to earth along the way. We make repeated draws, millions, and use the results of millions of such simulations to characterize the near encounters with earth and the likelihood of a collision with the earth in the next century. (They are only funded to make 100 year predictions, but they publish the state and covariance, so outsiders are welcome to give it a go.)
The technique is thorough, and produces estimates about as good as anything. So they didn’t overlook March 2nd, or 7th or any other day in the next century.
A large asteroid, yes. But not a small one.
I didn't say they overlooked those dates. I said that if you dig through what they said, you can see what they were careful to not say.
But I'm sure you can trust them. After all, they are from the federal government, and the feds would never try to mislead us, would they?
You probably even trust the current pope.
Claim it is part of NASA’s “Muslim outreach.”
Look, this is a simple and straightforward scientific/technical endeavor. One of the things I really admire about the NASA NEO center is their adamant refusal to engage in alarmism to fatten their budgets and influence. If they behaved like global warming fanatics, they’d be trumpeting every fireball and meteor strike as our ONE LAST WARNING that TIME IS RUNNING OUT to save the world!!!!
You piss all over them for tamping down alarmism, which they could easily stir up. I admire their intellectual honesty and openness. There’s no secret sauce, no “correcting” the data. The data is in the public domain, anyone can check their results.
Boy, that is a heck of a spread.
...during the Haj.
It better not mess up my TV.
Oh crap, we’re doomed!
I had put a sawbuck on it landing on a golf course.
I guess we can just be thankful it’s not doing its flyby on Super Bowl weekend.
Go Broncos! :-)
I am confident they are right. But on the other hand, this is the same agency that became confused over metric vs. imperial measurements and launched Hubble with lenses that produced completely out of focus images. They fixed the problem later on by installing what amounted to glasses, corrective lenses. But whenever NASA makes an announcement it’s worth considering the fact that they’re not perfect.
Good attempt at spin, but they are fully onboard with the 'global warming' scam. So much for 'intellectual honesty' and not behaving like 'global warming fanatics'.
Here's their 'Climate Change' website. http://climate.nasa.gov/
Funding based alarmism here: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
You can't really expect them to concentrate on space since they are now a climate change and muslim outreach agency. Not a lot of 'right stuff' left since they got rid of the Germans.
Big difference between climate and space rocks.
Seriously, if you want alarmism related to space, look up bpearthwatch.
He hasn’t been right yet, but some people follow his every flatulent uttering as if it were the word of a god.
Seriously, we aren’t dead from Ison, Elenin, YU55, etc yet.
But he insisted that we would, also insisted that earthquakes were produced by same.
(Lol, plate tectonics fail on his part.)
Nope, there is either integrity or there isn't. And right now, Nasa is lacking in that department.
No, orbits can be calculated by anyone who knows the math behind it.
And many thousands of amatuer astronomers would be all over anyone claiming anything outside of the realm of those calculations.
(Goes back to Newton and Kepler. Back when math, science, and discovery meant doing actual work, not putting out ever increasing politically motivated BS.)
Climate alarmism relies more on people not paying attention and not knowing diddly about history, ice ages, or solar output.
Is that why NASA is having trouble calculating the orbit of this one?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.