I’ve set the data of the entire field of geology and nuclear isotopic dating in front of you, and you prefer to stick with NASA’s “experts’” impact estimates because there is no one “refereed paper” somewhere.

No, I prefer to stick with the international geo/astrophysics community. I don’t care about your obsession with NASA, I’m not even American remember?

Did you ever ask yourselves why there is no one “refereed paper” somewhere?

Possibility A: No one but E.P. Grondine has ever thought about this.
Possibility B: People have thought about it, but dismissed it
Possibility C: Someone wrote about it but did not pass peer review
Possibility D: It’s a conspiracy!

Unlikely: A. Probably true: B,C. Batshit insane: D

Did you ever ask yourselves how NASA’s experts became “expert”?

Probably by studying a relevant field, doing research and publishing.

In the world of science, there’s theories, and then there’s data.

No, there’s hypotheses, data and theories. A hypothesis is a way to try and explain the data you see. A theory is a hypothesis that has been so thoroughly and exhaustively tested that the possibility of it being wrong is virtually zero. Good examples of this are relativity and evolution.

(For example the “Nemesis” theory, which the data showed did not exist.
And there are plenty of refereed papers on “Nemesis”. Strange how that worked.)

That’s not a theory, it’s a hypothesis, and we know it’s likely false because… wait for it… peer reviewed papers that show that either the object is so small and far away as to be negligible or it doesn’t exist.

Well the fact is that right now there is a cometary debris stream headed out way, arriving in 2022.
That’s the data.

You know “data” needs to be verified, too, don’t you?
Has this debris stream been observed? Its density and composition measured?

Didn’t any of your experts bother to tell you?
Perhaps its “theoretically” impossible, or it was not “refereed”.

Please, E.P., the term is “peer reviewed”. It’s not that hard, is it?
Of course it’s possible. But not everything that’s possible is true, that’s why we want evidence.

Unfortunately, no one at NASA has examined the climatic effects of magic comet dust.

http://scholar.lmgtfy.com

I will state here without a link to one refereed paper that the general consensus among experts is that the next one, either asteroid or comet, will have to hit before impact is taken seriously. I did not think people were that stupid, but perhaps I am wrong.

Yes, that’s political reality, it doesn’t have anything to do with your delusions.Your wacky doomsday scenarios aren’t contributing to more awareness, or better understanding of the threat.

Its a free country, and you can believe in “Ancient Aliens” and that Obama is keeping a flying saucer hidden in the White House pool if you like.

Yes, or in the invisible killer monster comet.
You make no sense.

I’ve set the data of the entire field of geology and nuclear isotopic dating in front of you, and you prefer to stick with NASA’s “experts'” impact estimates because there is no one “refereed paper” somewhere.

Did you ever ask yourselves why there is no one “refereed paper” somewhere?

Did you ever ask yourselves how NASA’s experts became “expert”?

Have you watched the process?

In the world of science, there’s theories, and then there’s data.
(For example the “Nemesis” theory, which the data showed did not exist.
And there are plenty of refereed papers on “Nemesis”. Strange how that worked.)

Well the fact is that right now there is a cometary debris stream headed out way, arriving in 2022. That’s the data.
Didn’t any of your experts bother to tell you?
Perhaps its “theoretically” impossible, or it was not “refereed”.

In any case, NASA’s experts’ current “hope” is that it will all turn into magic comet dust. Unfortunately, no one at NASA has examined the climatic effects of magic comet dust. Killed off the mammoth.

I will state here without a link to one refereed paper that the general consensus among experts is that the next one, either asteroid or comet, will have to hit before impact is taken seriously. I did not think people were that stupid, but perhaps I am wrong.

Denial is a powerful mental defense mechanism, particularly when its tied to utopian beliefs, and/or an established client base.
In this case, stupidity is well entrenched bureaucratically.
In other words, stupidity is an industry.

Its a free country, and you can believe in “Ancient Aliens” and that Obama is keeping a flying saucer hidden in the White House pool if you like.

I wish there was one refereed paper somewhere I could point you to. There isn’t, so here goes:

Unfortunately, in the world of science “but I really swear it’s true!” isn’t good enough. Without independent review of your evidence and conclusions, your opinions have no more worth than those of any other fringe kook. Deal with it.

“I’m just describing business as usual in the world of government contracting.”

Maybe in the small world you perceive, but otherwise your hyperbole is just that – hyperbole.

“But in your good vs. evil world of the holy pilgrims and their cosmic mission…”

And you don’t see that as hyperbole? Weird.

I suggest relearning how to speak normally so people don’t get distracted by your obtuse choice of words.

If that were true you could never go. No non-trivial piece of software, such as navigation or docking software, is ever perfect.

“You realize I’m talking about NASA, an organization of tens of thousands of people funded by political processes. Not the motivation of individual employees.”

Stop the hyperbole. Are you’re talking about the few in NASA that are affected by the political process (true political appointees & NASA employees in certain positions), or you’re talking about every employee being politically sinister in their jobs (i.e. “organization of tens of thousands of people”)? Make up your mind.

And in case you hadn’t noticed, the ENTIRE government is funded by what you call “political processes”, not just NASA. Sheesh.

“When you’re in the astronaut cult…”

Uh huh. Calm down and get a grip on reality. I suppose “astronaut cult” is your euphemism for anyone that says something nice about NASA? I’ve been pretty vocal on this blog about what I see as NASA’s shortcomings, so I won’t repeat them here – suffice it to say that I’m not part of any “astronaut cult”.

And I don’t see high-drama political shenanigans around every cubicle of NASA like you do. Bad decisions, lack of consensus, and even moral failures, sure, but those exist everywhere, not just NASA. I see the real political NASA failings at the Executive and Legislative level – you know, the real, put there by the public for the public good politicians.

Even so, I don’t think Senators Hutchinson or Shelby are somehow personally delaying the launch of the Dragon D2/D3 COTS flight? In this case, Occam’s razor suggests that the most likely reason for the SpaceX launch delay is because of what they stated – they want to do more testing – not because of some nefarious plot by greedy politicians for politically motivated reasons.

name removed to protect the guilty: “I’m a Theory Y type of guy – you appear to be a Theory X. ”

You realize I’m talking about NASA, an organization of tens of thousands of people funded by political processes. Not the motivation of individual employees.

Yet another case where an astronaut fan casually commits an error of four orders of magnitude, and like the Honey Badger, doesn’t give a **** as long as they keep launching their heavenly pilgrims.

And then you go off on a spree of psycho-babble name-calling against me for giving a non-euphemistic account of the politics of government contracting, and describing why those politics apply just about as much with these “commercial” contracts as with other kinds of government contracts.

When you’re in the astronaut cult, the real world does I suppose seem like crazy-talk. Of course the reverse is true as well, as Newt Gingrich recently experienced.

Government employees aren’t paid salaries? Wow, you learn something new every day!