PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet 37/2001 - 7 March 2001: MIR SCARE SPECIAL
-----------------------------------------------
"Forget the danger of heavy-weight debris raining down from
space
when Russia sends the Mir orbiter to a watery grave this month --
the
real threat could be mutant fungi, a researcher said Tuesday.
Yuri
Karash, an expert on the Russian space programme, said there was
a
possibility that micro-organisms, which have spent the last 15
years
mutating in isolation aboard Mir, could present a threat if they
survived
the fall to Earth."
--Reuters, 6 March 2001
"The bacteria living aboard Russia's space station Mir will
cause no
harm after the station is sunk in the Pacific Ocean, Cosmonaut
Boris
Morukov, Doctor of Sciences in Medicine, said at a Thursday news
conference in Moscow. "The very fact that no cosmonaut was
ill during the
long stays at the station during its fourteen years in space is
sufficient
evidence of that," Morukov said.
--Interfax, 12 October 2000
"One of the designers of the Russian Mir space station says
the
danger from debris as the spacecraft plunges to its destruction
later
this month has been exaggerated. Leonid Gorshkov, told a news
conference that debris from tens of space rockets and hundreds of
meteorites annually reach Earth without anything terrible
happening."
--BBC News Online, 6 March 2001
"With more than 35,000 estimated deaths from earthquakes in
the
first two months of 2001, it may seem like the earth is more
restless
than usual. Not so, according to scientists at the U.S.
Geological Survey's
National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) in Golden, Colo.
"While it's
true that more people have died from earthquakes during the first
two months
of this year than in the last two years put together, the average
number of earthquakes per month has stayed about the same,"
said NEIC
chief scientist, Waverly Person. "Overall, earthquake
activity isn't on
the rise," said Person. "We're simply able to locate
more lower
magnitude earthquakes due to advances in the technology, and when
a deadly
quake occurs, those images of death and destruction come right
into our
living rooms on the evening news."
--National Earthquake Information Center, 5 March 2001
(1) HIGHLY INFECTIOUS DISEASE: MIR SCARE SPREADS AROUND THE GLOBE
Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
(2) ANOTHER MIR SCARE: "MUTANT BACTERIA NEXT THREAT FROM
RUSSIA'S MIR"
The Moscow Times, 6 March 2001
(3) BACTERIA ABOARD MIR SPACE STATION HARMLESS
SpaceDaily, 12 October 2000
(4) DANGER FROM MIR 'EXAGGERATED'
BBC News Online, 6 March 2001
(5) MIR DEMISE CAUSES INTERNATIONAL HIGH ANXIETY
CNN, 6 March 2001
(6) MIR DEORBIT DATES MOVED BACK; EVENT INSURED TO THE TUNE OF
$200 MILLION
Space.com, 6 March 2001
(7) RUSSIA TAKING OUT INSURANCE ON MIR
CNN, 6 March 2001
(8) AUSTRALIA READY FOR MIR DESCENT
CNN 5 March 2001
(9) MIR SPACE STATION DEORBIT
U.S. Department of State, 2 March 2001
(10) AUSSIES, KIWIS TAKE MIR DEORBIT IN STRIDE
Sace.com, 20 February 2001
(11) NEO & IMPACT TALKS AT NATIONAL PHYSICS CONGRESS 2001
Physics Congress 2001
(12) NO MORE EARTHQUAKES THAN USUAL, BUT 2001 SO FAR IS DEADLY
Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
(13) COMETARY IMPACTS AND IRIDIUM ANOMALIES
David W. Hughes <D.Hughes@sheffield.ac.uk>
(14) IMPACT CONNECTION OF THE P-T EXTINCTION - A VIABLE WORKING
HYPOTHESIS
PENDING FURTHER TESTS
Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
(15) OUR COSMIC DATE WITH DESTINY
Worth Crouch <doagain@jps.net>
=============
(1) HIGHLY INFECTIOUS DISEASE: MIR SCARE SPREADS AROUND THE GLOBE
From Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
First Japan was concern, then Australia, then New Zealand. Now
the MIR scare
has even spread to parts of Europe. The closer we get to the
final deorbit
of the MIR station, the bigger the headlines, the weireder the
scares. But
let us not ridicule the media hype. After all, much of the scare
stories are
based on alarmist statements made by space 'experts'. So how
serious is the
risk of space debris hitting populated areas and thus put human
lives and
property in danger?
In the case of MIR, there is, understandably, a general concern
because the
deorbit of previous space stations and satellites often resulted
in space
debris hitting land. In 1991 Mir's predecessor Salyut 7 plunged
into the
Andes Mountains. And in 1978 wreckage from a Soviet military
satellite
crashed into the Canadian Arctic. The United States fared little
better in
1979 when its long abandoned Sky Lab rained debris over western
Australia.
Nevertheless, it is important to stress that all of these
previous deorbits
were largely uncontrolled. This time, however, the deorbit of MIR
will be
controlled, thus reducing the likelyhood of debris hitting land.
So far, so
good.
But yesterday, Yuri Karash, "an expert on the Russian space
programme,"
announced a new and more alarming threat posed by the MIR
deorbit. According
to Mr Karsh there is "a possibility that micro-organisms,
which have spent
the last 15 years mutating in isolation aboard Mir, could present
a threat
if they survived the fall to Earth." Not surprisingly,
Reuters hyped up this
story and stressed: "Forget the danger of heavy-weight
debris raining down
from space when Russia sends the Mir orbiter to a watery grave
this month --
the real threat could be mutant fungi, a researcher said
Tuesday."
Within hours, the latest MIR scare had spread to all corners of
the globe.
But what are the facts behind this scare? During 20 years of
research,
Russian scientists have discovered some 250 species of
microorganisms which
live inside manned spacecraft, including fungi and bacteria. More
than 100
species of fungi alone were found onboard Mir during its 14 years
in space.
And yet, none of Mir crew members has ever got any
infectious disease in
space. The very fact that no MIR cosmonaut ever got an infectious
desease
during their long stays in the MIR station is sufficient evidence
to suggest
that these fungi and bacteria are not a serious risk.
Monitoring and assessing how the MIR deorbit will be handled by
the agencies
and authorities responsible will, perhaps, provide us with some
valuable
lessons for our own concern, the public handling and
communication of the
NEO impact hazard. So stay tuned....
Benny J Peiser
=======
(2) ANOTHER MIR SCARE: "MUTANT BACTERIA NEXT THREAT FROM
RUSSIA'S MIR"
From The Moscow Times, 6 March 2001
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2001/03/06/163.html
Mutant Bacteria Next Threat From Russia's Mir
Reuters. Forget the danger of heavy-weight debris raining down
from space
when Russia sends the Mir orbiter to a watery grave this month --
the real
threat could be mutant fungi, a researcher said Tuesday.
Yuri Karash, an expert on the Russian space programme, said there
was a
possibility that micro-organisms, which have spent the last 15
years
mutating in isolation aboard Mir, could present a threat if they
survived
the fall to Earth.
"I wouldn't overstate it...but a realistic problem
exists," Karash told a
news conference.
Karash, who has undergone cosmonaut training and is an aerospace
advisor,
said his conclusions were based on research carried out by
Russia's
Institute of Medical and Biological Problems.
Researchers have said that the fungi could be especially virulent
if mixed
with earth varieties that attack metal, glass and plastic.
Western health officials have in the past expressed concerns
about
micro-organisms that could be brought back to earth after a
Russian
microbiologist 13 years ago discovered the first of many
aggressive forms of
fungi inhabiting Mir.
Russian space officials have played down the threat, but visitors
to the
orbiter have found numerous types of fungi behind control panels,
in
air-conditioning units and on dozens of other surfaces.
Though surprisingly destructive, they give off corrosive agents
like acetic
acid and release toxins into the air.
Copyright 2001, Reuters
===========
(3) BACTERIA ABOARD MIR SPACE STATION HARMLESS
From SpaceDaily, 12 October 2000
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mir-00zza.html
Moscow (Interfax) Oct. 12, 2000
The bacteria living aboard Russia's space station Mir will cause
no harm
after the station is sunk in the Pacific Ocean, Cosmonaut Boris
Morukov,
Doctor of Sciences in Medicine, said at a Thursday news
conference in
Moscow.
"The very fact that no cosmonaut was ill during the long
stays at the
station during its fourteen years in space is sufficient evidence
of that,"
Morukov said.
In space, bacteria could pose a greater danger to materials than
people,
because they can destroy super-hard metal alloys, electric
contacts and
various polymers, he said.
The experience of battling bacteria on board Mir will be
exceedingly useful
for the International Space Station, Morukov said. No other
country has
gained such a volume of observation of fungi and bacteria in
conditions of
zero gravity and space, he said.
Bacteria similar to that which developed on Mir can already be
observed in
the 'Zarya' cargo unit of the International Space Station, which
has been in
space for nearly two years, Morukov said. He flew to the ISS as a
crew
member of the Atlantis space shuttle from September 8 to 20.
Copyright 2000 Interfax. All
==========
(4) DANGER FROM MIR 'EXAGGERATED'
From BBC News Online, 6 March 2001
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1205000/1205300.stm
One of the designers of the Russian Mir space station says the
danger from
debris as the spacecraft plunges to its destruction later this
month has
been exaggerated.
Leonid Gorshkov, told a news conference that debris from tens of
space
rockets and hundreds of meteorites annually reach Earth without
anything
terrible happening.
When the fifteen-year-old redundant station is guided back to
Earth, most of
it is expected to burn-up in the atmosphere before remaining
fragments --
possibly as many as fifteen-hundred with a combined weight of
about
twenty-five tons -- crash into the South Pacific.
Copyright 2001, BBC
========
(5) MIR DEMISE CAUSES INTERNATIONAL HIGH ANXIETY
From CNN, 6 March 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/03/06/mir.worries/index.html
By Richard Stenger
CNN.com Writer
(CNN) -- An unlikely member has joined the club of nations
voicing concern
that a doomed Russian space station could rain down deadly debris
within
their borders, one in the heart of Europe.
When Moscow sends the space station Mir on a suicidal plunge into
the
atmosphere later this month, the aging orbiting outpost should
break up and
send tons of debris into the southwest Pacific Ocean.
But nations near the flight path like Australia and Japan have
expressed
concern that Mir could slightly stray during its descent, placing
their
populations at risk.
Now Germany is worried about the possibility that Mir could drift
even
further off course. An interior ministry document stated that
errant debris
could land on parts of Germany and neighbor countries in
southwestern
Europe, according to the German newspaper Bild.
If space authorities tracking Mir become aware of any potential
danger,
emergency radio announcements would advise citizens to stay
indoors, the
document said, according to Bild.
The Russian space agency, pushing back Mir's demise by a week or
so, said
Tuesday that the spacecraft would probably meet its fiery end
between March
18 and March 20.
Most of the 130-ton station should burn up in the atmosphere. But
one- third
of it could survive, including pieces as large as a small car,
and smack
into the Earth as fast as 0.6 mile (1 km) a second, authorities
said.
More than 1,000 fragments are expected to splash down into the
watery target
between Chile and Australia. But minor fluctuations in the
atmospheric
conditions could significantly change the course of the falling
pieces, as
could slight mistakes in calculating the debris trail.
Australian authorities will monitor the spacecraft's demise.
Japanese
experts will be present in the Russian control room that brings
down Mir.
The United States will keep an eye on the spacecraft too, but
with no
specific emergency plan designed for Mir.
"We have a direct line to the U.S. Space Command, the people
tracking
satellites. If it looks like a piece is going to fall in the
United States,
either continental or one of our territories, like American
Samoa, we are
the interface between state and local officials. We would use the
emergency
alert system of the United States," said Mark Wolfson,
spokesman for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Russian and U.S. authorities maintain the risks are rather
remote. They
place the odds at somewhere between one in 1,000 to one in 5,000
that a
mishap could occur.
"They've been in space a lot longer than we have. We have a
lot of
confidence that they can do that (deorbit Mir safely)," said
Maj. Perry
Nouis, spokesperson for the U.S. Space Command, which monitors
orbiting
satellites. The military organization will be sharing its data
with Russian
space controllers guiding Mir's descent.
Moscow has experienced trouble retiring space stations or
satellites in the
past. In 1991 Mir's predecessor Salyut 7 plunged into the Andes
Mountains.
And in 1978 wreckage from a Soviet military satellite crashed
into the
Canadian Arctic. The United States fared little better in 1979
when its long
abandoned Sky Lab rained debris over western Australia.
This final flight should be different. "Those were not
controlled. This will
be a controlled deorbit," Nouis said.
© 2001 Cable News Network. All Right
=========
(6) MIR DEORBIT DATES MOVED BACK; EVENT INSURED TO THE TUNE OF
$200 MILLION
From Space.com, 6 March 2001
http://www.space.com/news/spacestation/mir_insurance_010306.html
By Interfax
posted: 11:09 am ET
06 March 2001
MOSCOW. March 6 (Interfax) - The final order for deorbiting the
Mir space
station and sinking it in the planned section of the South
Pacific will be
given between March 17 and 20, one of the station's makers Leonid
Gorshkov
told a Tuesday news conference in Moscow.
Responsibility to third parties for possible damages related to
the
deorbiting of the station will be insured for about $200 million,
spokesman
for the head of the Russian Aerospace Agency Sergei Gorbunov has
told
Interfax.
He said the matter will be settled within the next two days.
Three companies
- Megaruss, AVIKOS and the Industrial Insurance Company - are
regarded as
the general insurers of risks.
In the first half of March Mir will reach the critical altitude
of 250
kilometers, after which Mission Control will start planning the
trajectory
of its descent. The 137-tonne station will enter dense layers of
the
atmosphere above the Pacific north of New Zealand and will start
to crumble.
According to expert estimates, most of the fragments should melt
down and
burn.
The unburned fragments - of which there may be up to 1,500- are
expected to
weigh some 20-25 tonnes. The fragments should fall in the
southern part of
the Pacific between Australia and South America over a 6,000
kilometer long
and 200 kilometer wide area.
Copyright 2001, Interfax
============
(7) RUSSIA TAKING OUT INSURANCE ON MIR
From CNN, 6 March 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/03/06/mir.russia.ap/index.html
MOSCOW, Russia (AP) -- Russia's Mir space station will most
likely be
brought down into the Pacific Ocean around March 18-20, and the
Russian
Aerospace Agency will insure it against any damage the crash
could cause,
officials said Tuesday.
After repeated delays, the agency promised to guide the ailing
15-year-old
station down later this month, but has not named an exact date.
Agency spokesman Sergei Gorbunov said Tuesday that space
officials are now
waiting for the station to naturally drift down to an orbit about
250
kilometers (155 miles) from Earth instead of using up precious
fuel to speed
up the descent.
"We don't want to spend extra fuel to lower its orbit,"
Gorbunov said during
an Internet news conference. He said space officials want to save
as much
fuel as possible to make sure that they can properly control
Mir's de-orbit.
After Mir reaches the 250-kilometer orbit by the end of this
week, space
officials will take a series of steps to prepare for the moment
when a
Progress cargo ship docked with the station will fire its engines
and send
the 130-metric ton (143-ton) station hurtling down to a remote
stretch of
the South Pacific.
The earliest date of Mir's dumping is March 13, but the
"most likely dates
are between March 18 and March 20" or possibly later,
Gorbunov said.
The station is currently circling about 257 kilometers (154
miles) above the
Earth, and the speed of its descent depends on solar activity
that expands
the atmosphere and creates friction between Mir and thin gasses
high above
the Earth.
The long history of Mir's glitches, including a fire, a
near-disastrous
collision with a cargo ship and a long string of computer
breakdowns and
power outages, has fed fears that it could spin out of control
and rain its
debris on populated areas.
Japan has been especially concerned, because Mir is expected to
pass over
its territory on its final, low orbit. "We have grown tired
of repeating
that there was no danger for Japan," Gorbunov said.
One of Mir's designers, Leonid Gorshkov, also sought Tuesday to
play down
public fears. "Debris from dozens of booster rockets and
hundreds of
meteorites annually reach Earth and nothing terrible
happens," Gorshkov said
at a separate news conference.
Most of Mir will burn up when it enters the atmosphere, but some
1,500
fragments with a total weight of up to 25 metric tons (27.5 tons)
are
expected to survive the fiery re-entry and fall over an ocean
area between
Australia and Chile.
Despite all the official optimism, Gorbunov said that the space
agency is
negotiating with three Russian insurance companies to insure
against
possible damage connected with Mir's descent. An agreement to be
signed
shortly would envisage an insurance premium of $200 million.
"The insurance is just another attempt to assuage
fears," Gorbunov said.
Copyright 2001 The Associated Press
============
(8) AUSTRALIA READY FOR MIR DESCENT
From CNN 5 March 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/03/05/mir.australia.reut/index.html
CANBERRA, Australia (Reuters) -- There's really only a tiny
chance Russian
space station Mir will crash into Australia this month instead of
the
designated space-junk graveyard in the South Pacific, Australian
officials
said on Monday.
But Emergency Management Australia (EMA) said it was ready for a
one in a
5,000 chance that something could go wrong with Russia's
operation to dump
Mir into the remote Pacific and wreckage the size of a small car
could hit
Australia.
"Due to the variable nature of the atmosphere and the shape
of Mir, its
performance (on re-entry) is unpredictable," EMA director
general David
Templeman said.
"Some large parts, up to about 700 kg (1,543 pounds) the
size of a small car
-- may survive," he said.
Fifteen-year-old Mir, once the crown jewel of the Soviet space
program, is
being decommissioned and disposed of in a one-hour controlled
splashdown by
Russia between March 10 and 15.
If all goes according to plan, the space station will drop into a
remote
area of the South Pacific some 5,000 km (3,000 miles) east of
Australia
between New Zealand and Chile.
The stretch of ocean has become known as the space-junk
"graveyard," said
Australian officials, as it was frequently used by Russian space
officials
looking for a wide, safe target to dump unwanted satellites.
Two-thirds of the aging and accident prone 130-tonne space
station should
burn up in the controlled descent, but Templeman said debris will
travel as
fast as one km (0.6 mile) a second.
He said Australia's emergency management team has prepared
contingency plans
with state and local governments around the country to deal with
any debris
threat and will issue regular media updates on the Mir situation.
Copyright 2001 Reuters. All rights reserved.
============
(9) MIR SPACE STATION DEORBIT
From the U.S. Department of State, 2 March 2001
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/index.cfm?docid=1035
MEDIA NOTE
Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
March 2, 2001
Mir Space Station Deorbit
The Government of the Russian Federation has announced its plan
to safely
deorbit the Mir space station so it reenters the atmosphere over
an
uninhabited area of the South Pacific Ocean. The United States
Government
has agreed, within its capabilities, to provide Russia with
tracking and
trajectory data, as well as scientific data on atmospheric
conditions,
including solar activity, during the period of the deorbit, now
scheduled
for mid-March. The Government of the Russian Federation, through
its Russian
Aviation and Space Agency (RosAviaKosmos), has also asked the
European Space
Agency to contribute tracking and trajectory data to support the
safe
deorbit of Mir.
The U.S. Government, which constantly monitors thousands of
objects orbiting
earth with its limited worldwide array of radars and optical
telescopes,
will help track Mir's descent. It will share its tracking and
trajectory
data with the Russian Government to complement and expand
Russia's own data.
The United States and Russia have agreed to employ existing lines
of
communications between NASA and RosAviaKosmos to conduct routine
data
exchange during the deorbit period.
The Government of the Russian Federation has stated that it
remains solely
responsible for the deorbit of the Mir Space Station. The Russian
Government
has repeatedly stated its commitment to a controlled and safe
deorbit of the
space station.
RosAviaKosmos and Mission Control Moscow have established a
website to offer
daily updates on Mir's descent: www.mcc.rsa.ru/deorbit/www/MIR/mir_main.htm
[text in Russian]. The official RosAviaKosmos website is:
www.rosaviakosmos.ru
[text in English and Russian]. Also, for questions
about the deorbit plan, RosAviaKosmos' Press Secretary is
available in
Moscow at (7) (095) 975-4586 or (7) (095) 975-4458.
For general questions on the background of the Mir Space Station,
NASA
Public Affairs can be reached at (202) 358-1638. For matters
related to the
observation and tracking of Mir, Department of Defense Public
Affairs may be
reached at (703) 693-6858 and U.S. Space Command Public Affairs
is available
at (719) 554-3525.
Released on March 2, 2001
==========
(10) AUSSIES, KIWIS TAKE MIR DEORBIT IN STRIDE
From Sace.com, 20 February 2001
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/missions/mir_australia_010220.html
By Stewart Taggart
Special to SPACE.com
SYDNEY, Australia -- When Russia's wobbly Mir hits Earth, ideally
it will
crash as a line of fireballs in the south Pacific's "space
junk graveyard,"
sinking with little fanfare to the bottom of the sea.
But if the geriatric station veers off course during its final
atmospheric
cremation, Australia and New Zealand could be two recipients of
Mir's
metallic bones. At this point, both countries are taking the risk
in stride.
"Provided that the Russians maintain some control over the
reentry, the
likelihood of the final orbit being over New Zealand or Australia
is low,"
says Patrick Helm, chairman of New Zealand's ad hoc Satellite
Reentry
Committee.
"Any slippage would have to be several complete orbits to
pose a problem
this far to the west," he said.
In New Zealand, the Satellite Reentry Committee operates at the
prime
ministerial and cabinet level. In Australia, Emergency Management
Australia,
the lead agency for natural disasters, is handling preparations.
There's little either country can do right now but watch and
wait. While
Russian officials put the risk of Mir veering off course and
hitting land at
around 3 percent, it's a risk worth keeping tabs on.
"For the Mir splashdown, the Russians seem well prepared and
are keeping the
international community well informed," Helm said. "Our
diplomatic
representatives in Moscow are being briefed, along with those of
other
countries."
Australia also seems reassured by what it hears.
"From the information provided thus far, the risk of
anything falling on
Australia is very minimal," said Brian Flanagan, spokesman
for Emergency
Management Australia.
Thus far, Mir's return to Earth isn't generating panic. Most
denizens of the
antipodes these days seem more worried about skin damage from the
late
summer sun than space junk from the heavens. Perhaps that's
because both
Australia and New Zealand have been hit before by space junk -
and everybody
survived.
In 1972, New Zealand was hit by the mysterious "Ashburton
Balls," named
after the South Island hamlet where four 30-pound (14-kilogram),
Cyrillic-lettered titanium gas canisters fell onto local
farmland. The
canisters were believed to be Soviet, possibly from some space
probe
intended for Venus.
Space law required that the space junk be returned to its
national owner,
but the Soviets denied knowledge or ownership of the balls. That
left the
farmer upon whose property the balls fell as the lucky owner,
said Graeme
Beere, a retired adviser to New Zealand's Defense Ministry who
helped
conduct the investigation.
In 1979, Australia was hit by America's Skylab, which fell
largely over
parts of remote Western Australia, albeit with a few chunks
hitting suburban
Perth. That event caused a manic rush by souvenir hunters. One
collected
$10,000 from the San Francisco Examiner after becoming the first
person to
deliver a piece of the space station to the newspaper's San
Francisco
newsroom.
While neither the Ashburton Balls nor Skylab caused any injuries
on Earth,
Mir could be a different story. At 135 tons, it's twice as big as
Skylab.
At present, the plan is for Mir to pass over the Pacific Ocean
from
northwest to southeast, beginning to combust from atmospheric
friction as it
passes over the equator somewhere east of New Guinea at roughly
50 miles (80
kilometers) in altitude.
Mir will then break up as it falls, strewing roughly 40 tons of
fire-resistant leftover debris in a line of empty south Pacific
ocean from
northwest to southeast in which the next potential landfall in
its flight
line would be Tierra del Fuego.
The Southern Hemisphere ocean between New Zealand and Chile has
to be among
the loneliest places on Earth. There are few islands, little boat
traffic
and not much aviation. In short, it's an ideal place to drop
something big,
awkward and hard to control - from space.
For its part, New Zealand realizes it's at the end of the world -
making its
neighborhood a logical one to bring down a beast like Mir.
"To a large extent, there isn't a lot we can do about
it," Helm said. "In
the past, we've simply alerted civil defense and police, and then
we issue
instructions on procedures on what to do if something is
found."
Happily, Mir doesn't appear to have any dangerous materials
aboard, Helm
said.
That's unlike in January 1978, when the Russian nuclear-powered
satellite
Cosmos 954 crashed over northern Canada, spraying radioactive
material over
the region and causing an expensive cleanup hindered
significantly by a
mistrustful Soviet Union wary of releasing many details about the
craft.
Copyright 2001, Space.com
===========
(11) NEO & IMPACT TALKS AT NATIONAL PHYSICS CONGRESS 2001
From the National Physics Congress 2001
http://physics.iop.org/IOP/Congress/2001/lecture.html.
Monday, 19 March 2001
Since asteroids were discovered early in the 19th century we have
come to
understand the impact hazard they present. Now, for the first
time the
knowledge and technology have been developed that can prevent
future impact
catastrophes.
Benny Peiser (LJMU): Preventing Armageddon: The Physics of
Spaceguard
Lembit Opik (MP): The Politics of Asteroid Impacts
Tuesday, 20 Match
Lord Sainsbury (Minister for Science): Performance and Challenges
of UK
Physics
Monica Grady (Natural History Museum): Moon Rocks and Meteorites
The Earth is constantly bombarded by extraterrestrial material,
from the
tiniest of dust grains to enormous crater-forming bodies.
Meteorites have
long been objects of wonder and interest. Monica Grady (Natural
History
Museum) will highlight some of the many different types, from
those that are
related to comets and contain stardust, to diamonds produced in
the
out-flowing wind of ancient stars.
============
(12) NO MORE EARTHQUAKES THAN USUAL, BUT 2001 SO FAR IS DEADLY
From Andrew Yee <ayee@nova.astro.utoronto.ca>
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Geological Survey
Mail Stop 150
345 Middlefield Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Contact:
Pat Jorgenson
Phone: 650-329-4011
Release: March 5, 2001
No More Earthquakes Than Usual, But 2001 So Far Is Deadly
With more than 35,000 estimated deaths from earthquakes in the
first two
months of 2001, it may seem like the earth is more restless than
usual. Not
so, according to scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey's
National
Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) in Golden, Colo.
"While it's true that more people have died from earthquakes
during the
first two months of this year than in the last two years put
together, the
average number of earthquakes per month has stayed about the
same," said
NEIC chief scientist, Waverly Person. "Overall, earthquake
activity
isn't on the rise," said Person. "We're simply able to
locate more lower
magnitude earthquakes due to advances in the technology, and when
a deadly
quake occurs, those images of death and destruction come right
into our
living rooms on the evening news."
In January 2000, there were six "significant"
earthquakes that were
responsible for seven deaths. Significant earthquakes are defined
by NEIC as
"earthquakes with a magnitude of 6.5 or larger, or ones that
caused
fatalities, injuries or substantial damage." In January 2001
there were also
six significant earthquakes, but the combined death toll from the
January 13
earthquake in El Salvador and the January 26 quake in southern
India is
estimated at 30,000 to 40,000.
In February 2000 there were five significant earthquakes, with
one death,
whereas in February 2001 there were three significant quakes,
with 325
deaths. The highest magnitude of any quake in February 2001 was
the 6.8
temblor that struck the Seattle area, February 28, but no deaths
were
directly attributed to the earthquake, and damage, though
extensive, was far
less than it would have been in many cities of the world.
"Dense urban populations coupled with weak building
structures near the
epicenters are responsible for most of the fatalities, in any
year," Person
said. "The annual, long-term average is 10,000 deaths
worldwide, but that
figure varies greatly, from year to year. In 2000, for example,
there were
only about 225 people killed in earthquakes, whereas, fatalities
totaled
8,928 in 1998, and 2,907 in 1997. The deadliest year of the 20th
century was
1976, when at least 255,000 people, and perhaps more than
600,000, were
killed after one quake rocked Tianjin (formerly Tangshan),
China."
Person said a typical year for earthquakes consists of 18 major
temblors
(magnitude 7.0 to 7.9) and one great quake (8.0 or higher).
During the first
two months of 2001, there were seven earthquakes with magnitudes
of 7.0 or
higher, and two others with magnitudes of 6.8. The highest
magnitude of any
quake in February 2001 was the magnitude 7.3 in Southern Sumatra.
The greatest number of earthquake-related deaths this year has
been in
India, where at least 30,000 have been confirmed dead, from the
7.7, January
26, earthquake, with the death toll estimated to go as high as
50,000. The
death toll from the January 13, 7.6 quake in El Salvador, plus
several
aftershocks, is estimated at around 1,170. Many of the El
Salvadorans were
killed when earthquake-triggered landslides crushed their homes.
The USGS estimates that several million earthquakes occur in the
world each
year. Many go undetected because they hit remote areas or have
very small
magnitudes. The USGS now locates about 50 earthquakes each day,
or about
20,000 a year, with an average of 20 earthquakes per day in
California.
Real-time information about earthquakes can be found at
http://quake.wr.usgs.gov
Since 1973, the USGS has provided up-to-date earthquake
information to
emergency response and mitigation teams, government agencies,
universities,
private companies, scientists and the general public. This
information
includes determinations of the locations and severity of seismic
events in
the United States and throughout the world, including the rapid
analysis of
significant earthquakes on a 24-hour basis. Seismologists around
the world
use this information to increase their understanding of
earthquakes and to
better evaluate earthquake hazards. As the nation's largest
water, earth and
biological science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS works in
cooperation with more than 2,000 organizations across the country
to provide
reliable, impartial, scientific information to resource managers,
planners,
and other customers. This information is gathered in every state
by USGS
scientists to minimize the loss of life and property from natural
disasters,
contribute to the sound conservation, economic and physical
development of
the nation's natural resources, and enhance the quality of life
by
monitoring water, biological, energy and mineral resources.
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(13) COMETARY IMPACTS AND IRIDIUM ANOMALIES
From David W. Hughes <D.Hughes@sheffield.ac.uk>
Dear Benny,
Andrew Gliksons writes, yesterday, 'nor will cometary impacts
result in
strong iridium anomalies.'
How does he know? What is his evidence? Who told him? What does
he think
cometary dust is made of? How does he think the general
compositions of
cometary dust differs from that of the composition of asteroids?
Typically about 30 % of the mass of a comet is in the form of
dust. I have
no idea how much iridium they contain. But neither has Andrew.
Keep up the good work.
All the best
David
D W HUGHES
UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
================
(14) IMPACT CONNECTION OF THE P-T EXTINCTION - A VIABLE WORKING
HYPOTHESIS
PENDING FURTHER TESTS
From Andrew Glikson <geospec@webone.com.au>
Dear Benny,
Further to the question of the origin of the P-T. mass extinction
(CCNet
05-03-01, 06-03-01), the following observations pertain:
1. Phil Bland (CCNet 06-03-01) states "most estimates of the
rate of
production of craters >40 km on the Earth suggest that we
should see at
least one crater of this size, and possibly more, within the 6-10
million
years that seem to be the error on the age estimates for the
Araguinha
structure ...". This assumes a temporally uniform rate
of large impacts,
which is difficult to reconcile with the episodic clustering of
large impact
structures (Dc>40 km) around periods of mass extinctions.
Examples are the
late Devonian (Woodleigh 120 km; Siljan 53 km; Charlevoix 54 km;
Alamo ~100
km); Late Triassic (Manicouagan 100 km; Puchezh Katunski 80 km;
Saint Martin
40 km); End-Jurassic (Morokweng 200 km; Mjolnir 40 km); K-T
boundary
(Chicxulub 180-300 km); Late Eocene-Oligocene (Popigai 100 km;
Chesapeake 85
km). In fact only few impacts >40 km-large are known that do
not occur
within isotopic age dating error from a mass extinction,
excluding
Precambrian impacts (Sudbury, Vredefort) whose effects on
bacterial habitats
remain unknown. Are these overlaps purely coincidental?
2. Iain Gilmour refers to the debate regarding the coincidence or
otherwise
of shocked quartz at Mt Crean, southern Victoria Land, Antarctica
(Rettalack
et al., 1998) with the P-T boundary extinction. Evidence for the
position of
the latter is furnished by marked negative 12C/13C isotopes
excursions
(Krull et al., 2000, NZ J. Geol. Geophys., 34, 21-32; Krull &
Retallack,
2000, GSA Bull., 112, 1459-1472). Strong C isotopic excursions
accompany
mass extinctions (the so-called "graveyard shift")
along the
Frasnian-Fammenian boundary (late Devonian) (Wang et al., 1994,
GSA sp. pap.
293, 111-120; Wang et al., 1996, Geology 34, 187-191) and other
impact/extinction boundaries - signifying an increase in organic
accumulation and the kill factor.
3. Gilmour (CCNet, 06-03-01) titles his note "evidence for
the P/T
extinction remains unconvincing", stating "However,
this (the K-T) is one
boundary and one mass extinction. The evidence for an impact
having caused a
second mass extinction must be subjected to the same degree
scrutiny and
must be just as convincing." It is not clear who is Gilmour
arguing against,
as far as I am aware no serious scientist has suggested that
"convincing"
evidence exists in this regard. On the other hand, the use of the
K-T
boundary extinction as a strict yardstick for other extinctions
is
unwarranted for the following reasons:
A. The identification of mass extinctions is related to the
nature and
complexity of the effected palaeo-habitats. For example, while
the reality
of the K-T extinction is demonstrated by the spectacular
disappearance of
dinosaurs, ammonites and many plankton and land plant species,
the
definition of the late Devonian extinctions depends to a large
extent on the
study of conodont markers and rugose corals. Due to the
differential
habitability of genera, impacts would have a variable effect on
extinction
rates at different stages of terrestrial history - clearly the
highest ones
being those of continental fauna and flora.
B. The cumulative effects of clustered impacts on bio-habitats -
such as in
the late Devonian - may have resulted in gradual or protracted
extinctions.
An impact connection may be difficult to prove where oceanic
and/or cometary
impacts occurred, due to weak PDF and Ir anomalies associated
with such
events.
Referring to Gilmour's "philosophical note" - little
help is provided by
pontificating as to what is "convincing or
"unconvincing" models. What is
needed are guidelines for further tests, allowing falsification
or
confirmation of current working hypotheses. Every major
scientific
breakthrough has been, at some stage, deemed "unlikely"
or "unproven", and
even today there are those who dispute the evidence for plate
tectonics,
impact origin of astroblemes, or the impact connection of the K-T
extinction
...
Further tests of a P-T impact connection are justified by (1) the
occurrence
of large meteoritic crater (Araguinha - 40 km) and shocked quartz
fragments
in P-T boundary sediments; (2) the short duration of this
extinction; (3)
marked negative isotopic carbon excursions, similar to other
impact/extinction boundaries; (4) the possibility of
impact-triggering of
the Norilsk plateau basalts. In view of the low levels of shocked
quartz in
sediments and weak Ir anomalies, the possibility of an oceanic
cometary
impact remains. The jury is still out.
Sincerely
Andrew Glikson
Research School of Earth Science
Australian National University
Canberra, ACT 0200
07-03-2001
MODERATOR'S NOTE: I should point out that yesterday's title of
Iain
Gilmour's comment was actually written by myself. Contrary to
Andrew's third
complaint, however, it clearly summarises Iain's main objection:
"evidence
for the P/T *impact* remains unconvincing." After assessing
the arguments -
pro and con -, it seems pretty obvious to me that the evidence
presented so
far for a giant impact event at the P/T boundary remains
hypothetical. This
is particularly true for the question as to whether or not
fullerenes should
be considered an unambiguous impact signal. There's nothing wrong
with
speculating about a P/T impact. But as long as more compelling
evidence will
emerge as a result of further research, the theory remains
hypothetical, and
even unconvincing to the rigorous sceptic.
BJP
===============
(15) OUR COSMIC DATE WITH DESTINY
From Worth Crouch <doagain@jps.net>
Dear Dr. Peiser:
I read your 5 March 2001 CLIMATE SCARES & CLIMATE CHANGES
edition with great
interest. However, I projected the thesis of most of the articles
toward the
predictability of collisions between comets/asteroids and the
Earth. Like
predicting cosmic collisions, predicting climate change and even
forecasting
the weather is fraught with greater than expected obstacles.
I was especially intrigued by the article A HIGH-STICKING
100-YEAR FORECAST
from the World Climate Report 5 March 2001. A point of great
interest to me
was, "But let's face reality. No one really knows what
global temperatures
were 1,000 years ago. We can barely agree on what they are now,
when people
are taking thousands of observations across the planet on a daily
basis.
Quite honestly, it's unlikely that we will ever know what the
global
temperature was in the 11th century to any degree of useful
scientific
accuracy."
With respect to comet/asteroid Earth collisions I have always
taken the
position that attempting to predict the frequency or severity of
a collision
using a historical model is not accurate at this time. During the
1950's,
when I was a schoolboy, students were taught that cosmic
collisions were
things of Earth's origin, since there was no current evidence of
them.
Fortunately Dr. Shoemaker taught us otherwise and increasing
evidence is
unfolding indicating many comet/asteroid Earth collisions
occurred before
and after life started evolving on this planet. It has been
determined that
catastrophic collisions have been responsible for mass
extinctions, and
smaller sights of other than catastrophic collisions are being
discovered
almost yearly. Therefore, if someone used the data of the 1950's
it would be
concluded that the Earth would be free of catastrophic collisions
as well as
Tunguska type collisions, because the origin of the Tunguska
event was
undetermined. We now know that the data and scientific
understanding of
collisions between the Earth and cosmic bodies was flawed in the
1950's;
consequently the predictability of a collision is not zero.
However, predictability is little better today. Although the
scientific
community generally understands the catastrophic collision 65
million years
age that extinguished Tyrannosaurs, and now knows that Tunguska
was a
collision not even 100 years ago, people still don't have a clue
as to the
number and severity of collisions since mankind emerged from the
trees.
Without more data let's face reality. No one really knows how
many global
collisions there were in even the last million years. We can
barely agree on
the few that have been discovered now, when people are looking
for evidence
on the planet on a daily basis. Quite honestly, it's unlikely
that we will
ever know what the global number of significant cosmic impacts
were to any
degree of useful scientific accuracy.
I recently had a dialogue through CCNet on this subject of
collision
probability with the noted Professor Vadim A. Simonenko of
Russian's Nuclear
Industry. Initially he felt secure in predicting that the Earth
could expect
an asteroid or comet collision every 100,000 years, but later he
concluded,
"I agree totally that we should regard the possible space
impacts like
probable occasional events now. For global-scale bodies (of 1 km
and more)
we hope to develop deterministic approach ten years later having
accomplished Spacewatch and similar observational program.
However, for
local and regional-scale bodies we should develop the defense
taking into
account the occasional nature of threat discovery (on final stage
of
approach to the Earth)."
The Earth faces a catastrophic fixed date with an asteroid or
comet and the
date is unpredictable. This knowledge is the important message
that must be
made clear to citizens and the political community so a search
and defense
can be mounted against our cosmic date with destiny. When
politicians are
told that the Earth could be bombarded once every 100,000 years
or even
every 1000 years with a Tunguska type asteroid, it is outside
their sphere
of understanding and care. However, if the truth were known and
politicians
and their citizens also understood an asteroid/comet Earth
collision was a
probable occasional event, that could wipe out civilization, or
render a
great portion of the planet to wasteland, then more interest
might be given
to Spacewatch and a space defense.
Statistics and probabilities are important, but they must be
based on
accurate reliable data, proper analysis, and rational
speculation. I
remember being told that one unit of American Army Bomber Crews
during World
War Two were informed that they had a definite probability of
surviving a
mission over Germany. Each time they took off on a new mission
they were
told they had exactly the same probability of surviving the
mission as was
their previous missions probability. Finally during October of
1943, when
striking ball-bearing plants in Schweinfurt, nearly 25 percent of
the
American Bomber crews were killed. Those killed included the
remainder of
the airmen that had survived all the previous missions.
Halito (Good Day),
Worth F. Crouch
(Talako) Choctaw Society of Astrobiologists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational
use only. The attached information may not be copied or
reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders.
The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on,
can be
found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html
DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not
necessarily
reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the moderator of
this
network.