Top Nuclear Official: Atomic bomb may be used to blow up large asteroid (VIDEO)

Published: March 13th, 2013 at 8:41 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
60 comments


Guardian, March 12, 2013 (h/t Anonymous tip): Russia is considering proposals to establish nuclear explosives in space to combat meteorites. [...] Oleg Shubin, director of the state nuclear agency Rosatom, claims such an undertaking could take about a year to implement.

AFP: A senior official from Russia’s nuclear agency Rosatom told the same conference that taking out an asteroid with a nuclear weapon would require a bomb with a force of at least one megaton. “Intercepting an asteroid of a span of more than one kilometre would need the use of nuclear material of the power of over a megaton,” said Oleg Shubin, the deputy director of the department of nuclear munitions experiments at Rosatom. “This is a separate scientific task that needs to be solved,” he added.

Wired UK: Oleg Shubin, deputy director of the state nuclear agency’s munitions experiments division, also said: “Intercepting an asteroid of a span of more than one kilometre would need the use of nuclear material of the power of over a megaton. This is a separate scientific task that needs to be solved. In the foreseeable future I cannot see any other danger that would lead — at the very least — to the disintegration of human civilisation.”

Watch the Guardian video here

Published: March 13th, 2013 at 8:41 am ET
By
Email Article Email Article
60 comments

Related Posts

  1. Neil deGrasse Tyson: What do you mean how likely is an asteroid impact in U.S.? We just saw Russia! — CNN: When a scientist says ‘pray’ you know you’re in trouble (VIDEO) March 25, 2013
  2. NASA: Russian meteor was actually a “tiny asteroid” — Believed to be from belt between Mars and Jupiter February 15, 2013
  3. Water with nuclear fuel coming up from ocean floor off Fukushima coast? Tokyo Professor: 156 quadrillion Bq of Cs-137 once in basements — Double Chernobyl; Getting close to total fallout from every atomic bomb test in history — May be outputting from seeps in seafloor, I don’t know (VIDEO) August 26, 2013
  4. Reports: Atomic bomb detonated by North Korea — M4.9 quake one kilometer underground — Country’s third test ever, first since 2009 (VIDEO) February 12, 2013
  5. Radioactive lava hitting pool of underground water at Chernobyl could have caused 2nd explosion like a “gigantic atomic bomb” — Major city 320 km away would have been destroyed (VIDEO) June 15, 2011

60 comments to Top Nuclear Official: Atomic bomb may be used to blow up large asteroid (VIDEO)

  • harengus_acidophilus

    This equation is to simple.

    Meteors are a danger to the world.
    Atomic bombs can destroy them.
    You need NPPs to get "bomb stuff".

    The conclusion of a naked ape:
    We need NPPs to save the world from meteors.

    What a cheap trick …

    h.


    Report comment

    • 16Penny 16Penny

      That was my first thought on this too!So true that that is what they are trying and on top of it, if Russia has ten up there, everyone wants to have 20, 30, 40, 100, . . . of them up there so it is fair.

      Only problem is this:

      http://science.howstuffworks.com/asteroid-nuclear-bomb.htm

      "Technically, a nuclear bomb could obliterate a smaller asteroid, but it's not these smaller entities that pose a threat to Earth's safety. The asteroids that would be really worrisome — those larger than 1,312 feet (400 meters) — wouldn't be easily wiped out by such a bomb. Sure, great hunks of one might break off, but not enough to neutralize the danger. A 2007 NASA report indicated that planting a nuclear bomb on or under the surface of an asteroid would most likely cause it to fracture into several pieces — and large pieces of an even larger asteroid can still be pretty dangerous if they're hurtling toward the Earth [source: NASA].
      So while yes, a nuclear bomb could be used to blow up a small asteroid, it's unlikely that world leaders would waste expensive resources on that endeavor. As for large, Earth-threatening asteroids, a nuke likely wouldn't succeed at blowing it up completely."

      NASA will probably retract and delete that opinion soon.


      Report comment

    • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

      I have mixed feelings about this one!(?) On one hand TPTB have proposed the ONLY instance of the feasibility of using/possessing nuclear weapons to AVOID destruction of our planet & species and thus came up with the only logical explanation for maintaining a nuclear arsenal I've EVER heard??!! But the massive stockpile of EXISTING nuclear weapons would seem to already be more than capable of taking out any NEO's posing the threats of hitting Earth without expanding the supply further because IMO if 20,000 or so nukes are not enough to deal with inbound meteors,asteroids,comets,Klingon warships,etc.-then we're alread FUKuD anyways!!!(?) I doubt that existing nuclear warheads when properly stored & maintained would "go bad" or have a "best use by" date or "shelf life" that sees online nukes that reached or are past their "expiration dates" would render them "trash"(even though they were "trash" the moment they were manufactured!)and both the warheads can be "reprocessed" or salvaged(?)-while obsolete,faulty,and "old' ICBM delivery systems can be replaced or refitted and/or upgraded to the proper specs needed for their newfound logical,humane & "useful" purpose to intercept inbound NEO's WITHOUT using the issue as an excuse to keep the foul,harmful technology & the industry stubbornly clinging to ANY reason to build more reactors!! SHUT THEM ALL DOWN NOW!! :| ~**


      Report comment

    • unincredulous unincredulous

      …yes, I can see a day when all the governments in the world will have these nukes positioned in orbit to "protect" us.. Then, one day when the government needs some cash, they announce that there is a er..problem: The darn thing will crash from orbit without a costly mission to save the people from the thing that is saving us from something out there.

      I fear for the future of this planet. We have had pole flips in the past. In the past life survived. With the description of oceans sloshing all over causing worldwide tsunamis, I can see hundreds of Fukushima-style meltdowns. Noah got off lucky with his flood. When the waters receded he did not need to worry about three headed giraffes


      Report comment

  • m a x l i

    The nucleocrats have already stockpiled enough plutonium to blow the entire asteroid belt to smithereens. We will not come close to that plutonium's use-by date for thousands of years, and we neither have any other good use for it nor can we simply get rid of it.

    Therefore, I would suggest: Let's shut down every nuclear reactor on our beautiful planet very, very soon (best tomorrow) and let's think about how we could best counteract on potentially incoming asteroids – and we have eliminated TWO big threats to life on earth. Win-win.


    Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    Against meteors..I guess if I were a foreign country..I'd be looking to create a defense system…particularly if there was some whispering ..that the"meteor' that recently hit Russia..might have been part of the US Star Wars Weaponry System..
    Call it what you will..


    Report comment

  • redwing redwing

    Mother Nature: Large asteroid may be used to prevent further atomic bombs from blowing things up.


    Report comment

  • dosdos dosdos

    A nuke detonating in a vacuum creates only heat and radioactive particles. There is no explosion as we know it in atmosphere, no shock wave, no compression, since there is nothing to push against. What do they want to do, melt the meteorites? The rock floating out there is cold, and the big ones that are a menace wouldn't melt with just a single nuke. It would take many nukes to melt them.

    Stupid idea.


    Report comment

    • m a x l i

      The idea probably was to send Bruce Willis who will drill a hole into the asteroid, put the bomb in and push the button.


      Report comment

    • gottagetoffthegrid

      in a conventional explosive you do rely in the gasses released to bust things up, however with a nuclear explosion there are shock waves of particles — neutrons, plus all of the fission daughters from the explosion, which have an incredible amount of kinetic energy. However, without it being tamped you would loose at least half of the energy.

      all in all it is a stupid idea, all you need to do is slow the object down enough that its orbit changes to inside that of earth's. then its no problem.

      this is all about putting warheads in space so there is less warning when launched. back to c.1978 arms race folks.


      Report comment

      • unincredulous unincredulous

        we need to investigate if its possible to position a rocket on the moon, with a large tether, maybe graphene string that is fired at the incoming asteroid. When it hits it anchors there into the asteroid. Calculate the amount of string needed to get taught. The tether would need to be mounted with a substance that gives, though, or the moon might be yanked out of orbit. Just kidding, if the object is that big might as well hang it up. Maybe just kind of slingshot it back out by whipping it around the moon. But then be sure to release it so the tether doesn't have to be rebuilt then rewind it to use again next time. Anybody read that book, Ringworld? I can't believe someone invented graphene now. Just like the stuff in Ringworld by Larry Niven. Amazing.


        Report comment

    • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

      "If that's true then maybe they'll get even stupider and send every damned one of their missiles out into space to vainly attempt to destroy objects hurtling through space that have ALWAYS been threats to Earth"??!!~ Even if your opinion of their value towards that end turned out to be correct and some level of asteroid,etc. impacts aren't destroyed or their courses altered enough to avoid collisions-sending all the nukes into space and destroying THEM will still be the "smartest" thing TPTB have EVER done!! Somehow that amount of instantaneous energy released and directed where intended seems to hold the possibility of at least "nudging" Earthbound objects off their collision courses??! Also I'm confused as to how spaceship's primary propulsion systems,thrusters,etc. would allow navigating to their target objectives and then return to Earth if so designed to?? Maybe that's why they say the devices suggested for use against NEO's on a collision course with Earth need to have at least a 1 megaton yield to be effective?! I guess we'll be finding out if it works sooner or later?!! :| One final thought is that perhaps the part they're not telling is that the objects must be very CLOSE to Earth maybe within our atmosphere for the "high-stakes,last-ditch gamble" to work & perhaps the best they (and WE)may achieve is to create a whole bunch of "smaller" impacts as opposed to one,honking BIG,Earth-shattering KA-BOOM(?)!!The "odds" seem against us in any case…


      Report comment

      • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

        Hmm, I'm not in "top form" today and apologize for rambling in the other posts I made on this thread that caught my attention via the mention of a possibly "good" use of & place to detonate nuclear weapons!(?) But I was rewarded for my efforts & time spent reading the follow up responses to this article by all of the ENEWSER's comments added that is even kinda "trippy" that so many of us would be "on the same page" even the words used to describe our reactions & opinions on the subject are nearly identical or very close! Hopefully I'm not the exception though since I'm not feeling very well and disorganized & disorientated and in a "funk" at the moment?!! I'm gonna take a break & try to rest up & sleep it off while my mother in-law is giving me my 1st day off from my cancer- caregiver duties for my wife in a LONG time! Hopefully I'll be back bright-eyed & bushy-tailed with my thoughts & next posts better organized and stated!(?) :) ~** TAKE CARE ALL & GOOD NIGHT!~**


        Report comment

  • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

    if there were any reason for the development of nuclear bombs, this would be the most rational one. Technical issues aside (whether it can be done without further exacerbating the problem), my only reservation is in the weaponization of space and security.

    Know that humanity has long passed the turning point. Just as there are those who (rightfully) concern themselves about a Carrington Event's effect on NPPs, a large enough asteroid could be equally devastating.

    It's time for humans to crawl out of the crib. Regardless whether there's a nuclear time bomb ticking under that crib, we have to cease this attachment to what we know and accept the challenge of moving into space. If such Russian ventures give impetus for doing so, then I support them wholeheartedly! Perhaps 'our' leaders can be nudged into doing something-other than destroying the villages of those whose only crime is resisting the empty promises of consumerism. If we can't go back, then we must invest in that which takes us forward…

    Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/69/militarization-and-weaponization-of-outer-space

    [previous comments on this issue:]

    http://enenews.com/newsweek-cover-asteroid-apocalypse-scientists-worry-about-2036-planet-buster-head-russian-space-agency-takes-threat-collision-seriously-stating-prepare-worst-video/comment-page-1#comment-333016


    Report comment

    • unincredulous unincredulous

      AFTERSHOCK commented, "if there were any reason for the development of nuclear bombs, this would be the most rational one."

      I don't think anyone has ever detonated a nuclear bomb high in the atmosphere. If one was detonated there on purpose, or by accident, I fear the results. May be some adverse effect on the ionosphere, or electrical interaction…. I am not a scientist, but I remember how easy it is to screw something up when you don't know what you are doing….and there really is no way to find out without actually doing it. I remember this movie called "Crack in the Earth" or something like that. Say…If all the atmosphere were to dissipate into space….Not much time to devise a "fix it" scenario.


      Report comment

      • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

        actually, unincredulous, they would be doing so (detonating) far from the planet.

        see below post:

        http://enenews.com/top-nuclear-official-atomic-bomb-be-blow-large-asteroid-video/comment-page-1#comment-337075


        Report comment

        • unincredulous unincredulous

          There is still the possibility of accidental detonation in transit. Also, if a meteor sneaks up on us, someone may try a last minute save with a nearby shot. Scientists usually cannot resist taking the next risk. For example,I remember a few years ago, people were shocked to learn of a cloned sheep. Now, I am reading about all kinds of spooky genetic risk taking such as crossing people with animals and insects, such as spiders. Just human nature to mess with mother nature. (and mess up)


          Report comment

          • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

            must stay on topic, unincredulous, so I'll refrain from exploring what could go wrong and stay with what will be done. They're developing (and deploying) sensor arrays that will work in conjunction with the interceptors. These sensor systems will scan deep into the solar system, thereby allowing the interceptors to be positioned well ahead of incoming threat. By locating these interceptor platforms within the L5 region (solar/earth midpoint), adequate energy for ion-plasma-propulsion drives can be utilized to position the platforms months-to-years before the threats eminent. As things are now, this Russian effort is more a concept test, than anything else. The Russian's are known for doing serious research into the real world issues. Eventually, other (ongoing) projects will be coupled to their efforts. There is no going back now…


            Report comment

            • unincredulous unincredulous

              Yes, thank you for the reminder, I strayed into the off-topic as well. To tell the truth, I read the text, but cannot play the video. I am just a little stressed about what scientists are doing. I think sometimes the Catholic Church was doing us all a favor by denying the earth was round. If that delayed for a century what we are enduring now, I wish we could have been fooled a few hundred years longer. Off topic again! I am signing off, logging off. Most fun I have had on ENENEWS I usually just get my daily read about Fuku and the sink Hole and move on to Gilligans Island before it gets too real. I have friends who don't want to know about this stuff because."It makes it real" Ya'll keep real


              Report comment

          • moonshellblue moonshellblue

            Let's use molecular dissociation or Dustification maybe Dr. Judy Wood could solve this problem http://youtu.be/a0LG83Fc7Us


            Report comment

  • Well, I hesitate to post this, but science requires a very open mind.

    If you slow down the footage of that Russian meteorite – you'll see that it was possibly [?] blown up by an unidentified entity:

    UFO saved Russia? Incredible Details (Russia meteor explasion)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk3h6ni-nZY

    There are quite a few analyses of that video shot from different cameras.


    Report comment

    • Anthony Anthony

      If your mind is open, here is something interesting I am working through….

      http://www.vielewelten.at/pdf_en/the%20day%20after%20roswell.pdf

      On personal note, I think if an outside force wanted to wipe us out, they could do so and we wouldn't even see it coming. If it ever came to blows, I hope humans see the power in a peaceful posture on our side.


      Report comment

      • Anthony Anthony

        And this is definately worth consideration.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rARtZ0cikKo

        There is something about the resonance of the message that I believe would be hard to fake. Keep in mind my perspective is from a place of have no disbelief anymore based on my own experience and knowing.


        Report comment

        • DannieJ DannieJ

          Hello, please don't be offended.

          1.) If an object is in fact hitting the meteorite; it would be profoundly more logical and reasonable to suggest a missile launched by the Russian air defense system.

          2.) I scrolled through 'The Day after Roswell' and there isn't a single source listed and not a footnote to be found throughout. This means there is no evidence to be presented and thus cannot be seriously considered by anyone for any reason except entertainment.

          3.) This video appears to be a yet another retelling of 'Childhood's End' by Arthur C. Clarke.

          And when you hear the word 'pleiadians' (the supposed name of the beings watching over us) you react because it's not a word and your brain informs you of this fact. Not because extra terrestrials are watching over us and you have some weird immeasurably connection to them, for some reason.

          Google suggests 'Pleiades' and this is very interesting because this is the name of a star cluster. It's also the name of the caretaker sisters in Greek mythology; the ones who teach Dionysus, an early precursor for Jesus, the son of prime creator ;)

          It's good to keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out.


          Report comment

          • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

            empirical thinking is what got us here, DannieJ. Putting your admonitions aside for a moment, you'd be equally advised to start thinking outside the box, or risk inheriting the only one that's reserved for all closed minded beings…


            Report comment

            • DannieJ DannieJ

              1.) The love of money is what got us here, AFTERSHOCK.

              2.) Admonitions are sometimes appropriate.

              3.) There is no need to think outside any boxes. My box is the same as yours. We are energy addicts; we have lost our way; it will cost us tremendously; neither Jesus nor space aliens are going to save us.

              ¤.) I have a reservation where?


              Report comment

              • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

                assumptions DannieJ, precede limited perceptions. And if you're limited in vision, you'll find yourself with all those who finish being so…


                Report comment

                • DannieJ DannieJ

                  1.) Which assumption?

                  2.) What vision?

                  3.) Where will I find myself and with whom?

                  4.) You have offered me nothing and you refuse to answer direct questions.


                  Report comment

                  • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

                    in the preceding threaded posts, DannyJ says, "…your brain informs you of this fact. Not because extra terrestrials are watching over us and you have some weird immeasurably connection to them, for some reason." Then, DannyJ posits, "…no need to think outside any boxes. My box is the same as yours. We are energy addicts; we have lost our way; it will cost us tremendously; neither Jesus nor space aliens are going to save us." DannyJ goes on to claim "The love of money is what got us here…" Such statements reveal a host of assumptions. Other than what DannyJ 'gleans' through this medium, DannyJ knows virtually nothing of the parties DannyJ's addressing.

                    Ponder Lao-tzu's words that “Those who know don't say, and those who say don't know.”

                    Discovery is essential to uncovering what others have yet to do so, for themselves. Before asking others for proof to what is unknown, ask if one is ready for the implications. Currently, most human beings are not. Unless one is prepared to accept paradigm shifts in 'awareness', then no amount of evidence will satisfy the inquiry. Dismissing what others may be in the process of uncovering, reveals a lack of vision.

                    In DannyJ's preceding post, the closing statement revealed a dire need for more colorful crayons…


                    Report comment

                    • DannieJ DannieJ

                      I think you're plenty colorful for the both of us. Enjoy your scientology.


                      Report comment

                    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

                      again kids, another assumption from 'inquisitive' DannieJ…


                      Report comment

                    • m a x l i

                      Everyone can see it is an assumption. Your response, AFTERSHOCK is empty and gives me nothing. But you are free to comment if the assumption is true or false.


                      Report comment

                    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

                      actually, m a x l i, my responses within this thread was far-more elaborate than need be.

                      The fact that someone nails strings to wall, doesn't require one to become tangled within. Throwing tangential questions into the mix, is a pretentious move.

                      We should – all – be ready to answer for what we'd ask of others; why I even bothered responding to you…


                      Report comment

    • unincredulous unincredulous

      I hope there is intelligent life visiting the planet. Maybe those internet posts of UFOs exiting from a star gate in the sun are true. Maybe some draw their power by collecting radioactive particles. I am sure we could benefit from a visit from a collecting UFO now. Fukushima, Japan is just throwing radioactive particles like it was candy at a Christmas Parade.


      Report comment

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    I have no hesitation in posting..the project manual.

    Space Weapons-Earth Wars

    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2011/RAND_MR1209.pdf

    Now 'space rocks'..are classified according to the military?
    How telling…


    Report comment

  • lam335 lam335

    My understanding is that if you detonate a nuclear bomb in our upper atmosphere, it can cause a devastating electromagnetic pulse that could wipe out electrical grids over a broad area for a very long time. If they are planning to blow up an asteroid that is coming in too close with a massive nuclear weapon, can they be sure that this will be far enough away from the atmosphere that the explosion won't trigger an EMP?


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Man can't even stop the leaking from a melted reactor. Or, keep storage tanks from leaking. Plus, we're sick of all and any nuclear junk, and will outlaw it. Only a matter of time.


    Report comment

  • weeman

    Poor rational for nuclear proliferation, don't be coned.
    Easier to shift orbit of asteroid, you really don't need that much energy to move.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      you are correct weeman. They're working on such concepts, as well…


      Report comment

    • Johnny Blade Johnny Blade

      @weeman;+311!! ~I'm glad you said it in a short & concise manner since I was already leaning towards your conclusion on the subject and getting coned really sucks & generates pain & discomfort in sensitive areas! (LOL!) Nah seriously though!-spot on as usual and I commend you for your contributions to ENEnews & sane,sensible posts & hold much respect on your moral qualities and views and I follow your posts which rate highly among the best ENEWSER's puttin' in their time here and other venues to get the latest scoop on the radioactive poop and discuss the issues worthy of our concern and set out the truth or reasonable facsimile of it or as another astute ENEWSER sez;"substitute our reality for theirs"(lol),but in reality we actually just happen to be a diverse group who somehow managed to avoid or be immune to whatever "procedure" was/is used to either "fry" or "retard" normal growth of the brain lobe associated with "logic & reasoning" aka "common-sense"(?)! Apparently the method used doesn't prevent scientific geniuses from being born & educated just without common-sense or conscience! Have a great evening & look forward to seeing more from you and the great crowd here doing what we can! :) Take care ALL ;) ~**


      Report comment

      • weeman

        I thank you for your kind words and reassuring to me that my words are not lost, although not always right.
        I have faith that you will overcome your present medical predicament, I think that's the best word, as it was predictable, be well.


        Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Lol, we can't even detect a meteor, or label it correctly …some calling it a small asteroid that hit Russia. The silly notion that we need to launch a missile to hit some object in space is ludicrous, at best. Man can't stop a reactor from leaking, can't cap off the BP oil hole, can't stop the leaking at Hanford, can't do nothin' !!! . . .we need to respect nature and stop being total idiots. Seriously.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      the idea, BigPicture, is to intercept incoming objects. They'll build an array of platforms (L5 region, no doubt) and launch from there.

      There are many things that humans have accomplished with much success. We have a tendency to berate the species for the shortsighted failure of a few. It's not a matter if this will be done…it will be. The greater question is how much input will we have, in these projects. If we decide it's outside our realm of responsibility, then those who brought-about the nightmare we find ourselves in now, will have the final word. Being proactive is far better than reactive…


      Report comment

    • PavewayIII PavewayIII

      "…Lol, we can't even detect a meteor, or label it correctly …some calling it a small asteroid that hit Russia…"

      That's nothing. Some people don't know what a PVB is for and have no idea what a successful S-400 interception might look like.


      Report comment

  • unincredulous unincredulous

    "…In the foreseeable future I cannot see any other danger that would lead — at the very least — to the disintegration of human civilisation.” —-except he forgot about fukushima….and the massive sinkhole in Louisiana and similar environmental disregard….and Hanford, WA…. and the Yellowstone Supervolcano….and…. well, he isn't thinking very hard, is he?


    Report comment

  • ML

    Using nuclear weapons to destroy a meteor might compound our problems. But they didn't worry about that when they built nuclear reactors and knew the reaction couldn't be stopped once it started. So instead of one possibly natural radioactive rock from space hitting earth, you amplify its "possible" radioactivity with plutonium and spread it throughout the atmosphere and allow for the possibility that the smaller pieces, perhaps thousands or more pieces, will fall back to earth. All less than predictable? Sounds like this is what nuclear scientists have been doing all along, just a different threshold.


    Report comment

  • michellemamarn

    Please google Starfish Prime. The fact that we have already damaged our magnetosphere by detonating a nuclear bomb in the upper atmosphere is the very reason we have more to fear from space. We damaged our own protective barrier making it easier for comets to approach. Lucky us- just as we approach the Oort Cloud. This concept is just more madness.


    Report comment

    • AFTERSHOCK AFTERSHOCK

      glad you're still in there, michellemamarn. The fact that they were a few, does not make them all idiots. And this program has nothing to do with detonating devices within or near the planet's atmosphere. These larger asteroids would be intercepted far from the planet. The whole idea is to minimize the threat…

      BTW…thanks for the flag on the Starfish program. They really were a bunch of kids playing with matches…


      Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    Several problems with creating and maintaining nuclear weapons in space….

    First, who launches the first nuclear missile to 'park' it in space, without triggering a global nuclear war in response to a 'launch' of a nuclear missile, that theoretically could just as easily come down on the other side of the world and explode in a capital city of say Moscow or somewhere in China?

    Second, who says that these are DEFENSE weapons? Just turn them around with a small puff of a jet, and now it is an OFFENSIVE weapon, which can more easily and quickly strike a target much closer than a launch from the ground. THe risks of nuclear war would increase, not decrease.

    Third; many nuclear and plutonium powered space items have crashed into the oceans and Earth since they were put up there. Now we are going to multiply the nuclear space junk with a bunch of nuke bombs as well? What happens when one or more of these platforms containing multiple plutonium based nuclear weapons burns up on reentry, and plutonium nano dust is spread all over the globe?

    Fourth; Nuclear missile launch accidents happen too… what happens when a nuclear missile misfires as it goes up? It has to be destroyed.. NOw who cleans up the radioactive mess left behind?


    Report comment

  • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

    Another problem is that we are not at a point to be able to find and destroy all things coming at planet Earth.

    The recent explosion over Russia is a good example. NO ONE saw that one coming.

    Nuclear missiles could not have stopped that one, because no one saw it.

    The calculations to intercept something moving that fast are obscenely difficult.. The chances of a direct hit on a flying meteor are going to be dicey at best.


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.