Since 1960, when the Soviets first started aiming their missles at us, we placed COMPLETE trust in the DoD to provide us with impact warning. But it’s different for rocks? Hmmm. So let me get this straight. When the USAF Pan-STARRS telescope, probably the best ground-based detector of asteroids, sees the danger of an impact event, we shouldn’t want to believe it? When the DoD sees the possibility that an incoming rock will produce a blast over even an unfriendly nation that will mimic a nuclear explosion, dramatically upsetting delicate global tensions, we don’t want to believe it?

“As far as your estimate of the impact hazard goes, it is based on 50 year old theoretical work. The field has moved on.”

MY estimate of the impact hazard? Where did you get that? Making stuff up again, I guess. My comments here referred entirely to the non-importance of using astronauts to visit rocks in the interest of impact mitigation. If we’re going to do that mitigation, and as I said, it is vitally important to do, let’s do it right.

“If you look at NASA’s recent performance …”

That’s why I said that NASA doesn’t own asteroid impact mitigation, and it may be just as well, for the preservation of the world, that it doesn’t. Glad to hear you seem to agree.

As to the solar system not working the same way for everyone, and with respect to the thread topic, which was about the communication ability of NASA, I suppose they could just make stuff up like you do. But you’re right. It’s time for the rest of us to move on.

It’s now well understood that, at least for optical, UV and IR detectors, the Moon is a pretty crappy place for telescopes. I assume that’s what you mean by “impactor detection instruments”. Free-space is FAR better for such observations. Power abundance, field-of-view, temperature stability, contaminant avoidance — that’s what you get in free-space compared to the lunar surface. Now, that doesn’t keep humans from working on such telescopes, but does keep them out of the dust.

I felt free to disagree.

As to ARM, human space flight has precious few rationales, so if you need to prop it up by putting footprints on a small rock, then so be it. That sending humans to an asteroid, where they don’t really need to be sent for anything, is the only way to keep things going, says a lot about human space flight.

If people are going to be sent to a small rock because of geopolitical exceptionalism, then I guess it reinforces the spirit of geopolitical exceptionalism that you’ll need for going to bigger rocks.

While what you say about DoD sensors and observation facilities is certainly currently true..

…as no one in the international community trusts or wants to trust the US DoD to provide them with impact warning, that responsibility will have to fall to NASA.

As far as your estimate of the impact hazard goes, it is based on 50 year old theoretical work. The field has moved on.

If you look at NASA’s recent performance, they suspended operation of the two remaining sensors on WISE, and it took a hell of a lot to get them operating again. And where are the Hubble images of 73P’s most recent pass?

I’m sorry that the solar system does not work the way you and your friends imagined it does. The rest of us will move on, with your support or without your support. With the US leading the effort, or not. And whether you or I are here or not.

My “guess” is and has been for a long time now that about the only thing that will keep human space flight going is building impactor detection instruments on the Moon.

Feel free to disagree, but that is the way I see it.

In any case, and also in my opinion, the ARM is only the mission that will keep things going right now. ARM could then lead to the Moon or Mars.

Again, feel free to disagree, but that is the way I see it.

It appears that possibly China’s decision on CAPS has slipped to 2025.
Following 73P’s approach in 2022, I suspect that a decision will be make afterwards, if it can.

I guess if we’re worried about big rocks in space, we’d better send humans back to the Moon and leave more footprints there, because it’s a BIG ROCK IN SPACE, right? Applying that logic to terrestrial national security, we need to defeat Al Qaeda by spending a bundle to capture one of their cooks who wears a gray globe/rifle/Qur’an emblem on their gimme cap.

Rationalizing nonsense has no limits!

I don’t know. What was Apollo 11 worth in dollars and cents? That was a profound accomplishment. How about the Eiffel Tower? How about the Constitution? C’mon. Fess up.

“Can “profounds” be used to cure cancer?
Can a “profound” be used to make anything useful?
Is there any way to make something useful out of a ‘profound’?
Is there a “profound” bomb that no one has told us about yet?”

Yep, yep, and yep. Understanding big things about the universe ALWAYS garners return. As to bombs, dark energy is a profound newly identified energy in the universe, as we’re learning from instruments like Keck. If anyone learns how to harness it, look out.

I don’t believe I ever said that it should. The DoD does many missions in the interest of greater technology development. Identifying and tracking hard-to-see objects is very much a DoD capability need. So such a careful asteroid survey would very much be a win-win proposition for DoD. It will lead to better eyes being put on terrestrial threats. Infrared sensor capability for faint source detection, which would be a key element of this work, has been pioneered by DoD support. The DoD has FAR better IR sensor capabilities than the astronomical community, for example. DoD has made strong investments in space infrared detection technology — e.g. MSX, SPIRIT. As to interest in potential impactors, the SDIO/AFGL program on background characterization gave a lot of support to updating the catalog of asteroids and modelling of comet tail irradiance. Besides, what “terrestrial threat” mitigation was served by Clementine, eh? Doing a responsible celestial survey for threatening asteroids would consume a really really tiny part of the defense budget .

I get tired of people making stuff up about what I say.

As noted repeatedly in this forum, ARM has NOTHING to do with mitigation of asteroid threats. It doesn’t deal with asteroids that are even remotely threatening, and the technologies it develops won’t be useful to mitigate the threat from one that is. The money spent on putting footprints on a rocks would be FAR better spent on real mitigation. It would be something, wouldn’t it, if Earth gets hit by a big one while astronauts are leaving those footprints? You need to do a better job of estimation and stop with the repeated rationalizations.

Disney shows? Ah, the story of Aladar, you mean? Yes, there are good lessons there about how your island can get wiped out by a celestial rock.

Exactly what is “profound” worth in dollars and cents?

How many “profounds” is knowing what exactly next years weather will be like?

How many “profounds” is knowing where the next bit of “stuff” from space headed our way?

Can “profounds” be used to cure cancer?

Can a “profound” be used to make anything useful?

Is there any way to make something useful out of a “profound”?

We already have fission and fusion bombs.
Is there a “profound” bomb that no one has told us about yet?

Because of the rationalizing nonsense you have written here concerning the impact hazard, and how to deal with it.

I’m sorry you never went to Disneyland, and never had a television to watch Disney’s shows.

Why do you want the DoD to take its eyes off of terrestrial threats?

You know, I type with one finger on my left hand, so I get real tired of dealing with repeated rationalizations based on factual mistatement.

While NASA’s current course is not the one I would have chosen myself, given where NASA is and we are, ARM is the best of the options, as near as I can estimate.