Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A HOUSE-SIZED ASTEROID is set to give Earth a near-miss tomorrow, passing harmlessly inside the Moon’s orbit while giving experts a rare chance to rehearse for the threat of a real-life strike.
Dubbed 2012 TC4, the space rock will shave past our planet at an altitude of less than 44,000 kilometres (27,300 miles) – just above the 36,000 km plane at which hundreds of geosynchronous satellites orbit the Earth.
That represents about an eighth of the distance between the Earth and the Moon.
Nasa’s Mike Kelley, who leads the exercise to spot, track and intimately probe the transient visitor, insisted there was “no danger, not even for satellites”.
“We’ve now been observing TC4 for two months, so we have very accurate position information on it, which in turn allows very precise calculations of its orbit,” which will not cross that of Earth nor its satellites, he told AFP.
As its name suggests, the object was first spotted five years ago when it called on Earth at about double tomorrow’s projected distance, before disappearing from view.
It is 15-to-30 metres wide – about the size of the meteoroid that exploded in the atmosphere over Chelyabinsk in central Russia in 2013 with 30 times the kinetic energy of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
The resulting shockwave blew out the windows of nearly 5,000 buildings and injured more than 1,200 people.
While the Chelyabinsk event caught everyone unawares, TC4 is one of thousands of space rocks whose whereabouts are known.
Millions are not.
On its 609-day loop around the Sun, TC4 will return to Earth in 2050 and 2079, according to Ruediger Jehn of the European Space Agency’s Near-Earth Object programme in the Netherlands.
“We know today that it will also not hit the Earth in the year 2050, but the close flyby in 2050 might deflect the asteroid such that it could hit the Earth in the year 2079,” he told AFP by email.
With a one-in-750 chance of hitting the planet then, TC4 is listed at number 13 on the “risk list” of objects posing even the remotest impact risk.
‘We are practicing’
“We need to make very precise observations to be able to better predict the return in the year 2050,” Jehn said.
Flybys like this one are actually quite common – about three objects similar in size to TC4 graze past at a similar distance every year.
What makes TC4 special is that it has been chosen to test the global asteroid pre-warning system, fed by a network of observatories, universities and labs around the world.
The asteroid’s close approach will allow teams to evaluate how accurate they were in predicting its orbit and size, while using telescopes to learn more about its composition.
“For us this is a test case,” said Jehn’s colleague Detlef Koschny. “We are practicing for the real serious case.”
Many scientists believe the Earth will once again be hit by a space rock of the size that wiped out the dinosaurs, though nobody knows when.
And even if they become better at predicting a strike, there is very little to be done about it, for now.
Futuristic projects mooted to deflect or destroy incoming space rocks have come to nought so far, and the only strategy would be to evacuate people in zones at risk.
TC4 will make its closest approach to Earth just before 6.41am Irish time tomorrow, at a point south of Australia, according to ESA and NASA.
It will not be visible to the naked eye nor with regular binoculars, “but it can be seen on the night of 11-12 October until about 4.00am from European observatories,” Jehn said.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The article highlights solid data and real experiences, i do not dispute this. However it’s apparent too that people’s lives can he turned upside down by journalists without consideration.
In 2019 I was subject to being named in international press and mistakenly. It took two years to address and I only ever received an apology after 16 months. To this very day I receive threats by email from strangers.
@Osprey: what a horrible experience for ya, people should never be allowed work in journalism again after doing that
Wonder are some “journalists” trying to prop up the upcoming Hate bill?
@Dave Barrett: Sad state of affairs that such legislation is needed.
How about an article on the persecution of Julian Assange?
@Winston Smith: That’s different apparently, because his feelings weren’t hurt by something somebody said, that he found personally offensive.
He’s also obviously not a real journalist, because he didn’t once regurgitate the press packets of government propaganda and he had some crazy conspiracy theorist idea about delivering the entire truth warts and all for people to draw their own conclusions from it, once again, that’s clearly not real journalism..
/sarcasm
Delete your Twitter account. Problem solved.
@Mr. Cullen: Our slew of ex-CIA directors in leading positions (content moderation, strategy, etc.) within Twitter, Facebook, Google et. al. strongly advise that you do not delete your twitter account.
@Mr. Cullen: It’s hilarious that people aren’t capable of handling the mass of information in front of them, it may be the most enjoyable aspect of the media, seeing how people can underpin reality with complete trash.
@Mr. Cullen: that won’t work as that’s how they research and get ideas, quotes etc. now they can use ChatGPT to write copy …. the good ones know this and get on with it without complaining
@thesaltyurchin: You find it hilarious, I find it horrifying.
Do all genders have representation among DCU’s professors and associate professors of digital media?
Journalist’s definition of “trolling”= anyone online objecting to or criticizing a piece of my writing/reporting and countering it with a different opinion or viewpoint.
Because they attract cowards, keyboard warriors is all they are
Is there any evidence that female journalists are marked out for any more aggressive criticism/hate/abuse than male ones? Should there be a different standard then i.e. female journalists should be treated better because they’re more sensitive to the criticism. Surely that wouldn’t be a very feminist point of view. Surely, there’s a difference between strong criticism and hate and abuse as there clearly is in the examples above.
@Tom D: These new legal regulations that are being recommended in the article will be for everyone irrespective of gender. I didn’t see any suggestion of having different standards. This is about digital ID
@Tom D: there has been evidence gathered time and again, the Irish times made the decision to stop comments on any article on their website written by a woman almost a decade ago after the tone of those comments regularly degenerated into personal attacks. The Guardian in the uk ran the metrics about that time for their comments and found of the 10 journalists who got the most abuse 8 were female and 2 were men of colour. Their white male colleagues never got anything like the same level of abuse. Be clear here this is talking about abuse not arguments or differences of opinion, it is personal attacks based on nothing more than the gender of the journalist. I heard The Irish Times decision directly from their online editor when he gave a talk to journalism students in 2015.
Sadly comes with the job. I worked customer support for years and the abuse colleagues would get male or female was disgusting and uncalled for from customer’s who assumed cos they spwnt money on our service, meant they could say anything, so can only imagine what journos get. Think covid has also helped bring out the anger and crazy in a lot now who think they can say what they like.
@Tom Newell: I’ve been there. People are sometimes worse over the phone. I once got a furious rant from someone who’d bought products from a completely different company & misdialled in his rage. At least when I mentioned that, he had the grace to laugh at himself savaging the wrong number in an effort to impress his boss!
Dreadful that female journalists suffer like that. The elephant in the room is that nobody (including hacks) are held accountable for their online activity and when AI grows up, it’ll get millions of times worse. On the other side some irresponsible ‘journalists’ stir the pot too – the sick frenzy around Turbity or the BBC witchhunt are too good examples. Its chaos in digital and social media. And when the Gov tries to take action, the “freedom of speech” card gets played.
@Chris Curran: We have sufficiently harvested enough data (see recent Google announcements to circumvent GDPR and transfer to US) to fool you into thinking AI is real and generate much of the content on this website (AFP) for example, in line with our overall objectives. We thank you for using our service. Terms and conditions apply.
@Chris Curran: its free content, everyone gets a break from thinking.
Why were journalists targeting men women and children who refused COVID vaccines for online abuse? Why are you deleting this comment?
Yes-but, what about, if you only…..and freedom!
All the usual suspects are here.
Because the people doing this think women are easy targets it’s a form of harassment intimidation bullying but for the the bully’s that doing this will always fall victim when they become the bullied and soon reliaze the mental stress it causes that could lead to health issues.
Sounds reasonable. Who wouldn’t want to protect women from abuse. It looks like the onus for bringing in digital ID(this can then be linked to CBDCs/health certificate/social credit score) will be shifted to companies. Pesky constitutional safeguards on free speech can be easily circumvented on the internet if AI filters off a low threshold.
“Being subject to a barrage of tweets describing you as monstrous, calculating or conniving eats away at your sense of professional and personal worth, as much as you try to tell yourself it’s not true”
“So what do we do? The journalists interviewed for the DCU research expressed a desire for social media platforms to take a pro-active, rather than reactive, approach to online abuse. Instead of having moderators – some of whom are volunteers or AI – responding to flagged tweets and deciding whether they should be taken down, users could simply be prohibited from publishing tweets containing certain words or phrases.
“Bolstering the law around social media platforms’ positions as publishers of content would make it easier to take legal action for defamation. As the report points out, this could force the platforms to clean up their act, “because they’re about money”
So will the AI be filtering comments that accuse someone of being “calculating or
conniving” or other subjective personal opinions? Bit of a slippery slope
@Sean: No more slagging Bertie, lads. The AI will be filtering it because Bertie might sue if you call him “the most cunning” according to the recommendation in this article
Twitter has really taken a dive since musk took it over. People that were banned all back and very little oversight now.
@James King: Our various directors have been parachuted from CIA and Pentagon to director positions within the organisation. Everything is under control. It is for your greater good.
@Corporate Interests: And Fossetts are hiring, you should send a CV.
“I always struggled to understand why apparently ordinary people engage in such hateful, abusive rhetoric online.”
It’s not difficult to understand at all. All people need to do is read random comments from any online forum or social media and it will be very easy to see that a lot of commenters are a bit thick, their bark is bigger than their bite, most of the time they would not say things to you face. It’s far more apparent these days as the internet allows for all sorts of yobos to have their say, but it’s certainly not a new thing. The nature of the job probably makes it an easier target. Male journos also get abused, but as males do, they usually just suck it up and not report it, which is not always the best way.
My comment on this article was deleted and so were others, mainly I assume because they were somewhat critical, but not offensive. I guess you either toe the line or get deleted, I’ll be banned after this watch. Pure nonsense and you guys think you’re paragons of virtue.
A lot of weak cowards out there, with tinfoil hats and living in their moms attic!
@Emmet Murphy:
“Mom” is such an Americanism. It’s Ma!
@Sean: In fairness, and I say this as a Dub who has always slagged people who say anything other than Mam, I’ve been told since by pals in Cork and Kerry that a lot of people in Munster call their Mam ‘Mom’ from the pronunciation of the Irish word.
D4s who say Mom need to give it a rest though
@Sean: Ma is such a Dublinism, it’s Mother. :)
The term “sex” should be used when referring to biological characteristics, while “gender” should be reserved for social and cultural differences.
If journalists are getting repeatedly harassed by the same people, the law should already protect them. Sounds like the process is not being followed or taken seriously.
If this hate speech bill was really trying to deal with harmful discrimination, it would include class – the single most widespread form of discrimination anywhere in the world. It doesn’t because the people bringing in the new law are all from the same segment of society and just want to protect themselves – not anyone else further down the social hierarchy, whatever they claim. The hate speech bill will be used overwhelmingly by middle class people to go after working-class people.
My original comment from 12 hours ago removed because it got 600 upvote. The journal censors comments that don’t break guidelines
@ Megan Ward
Mammy is a classic. Mam also.
Interesting about the west. I can hear my cousins saying mom now that you raise that
Noel Gallagher-if i had a boom boom stick lyrics, i’d shoot a hole into the sun.. Hope ye get the idea
It’s generally the same scared cowards and children who sound off on here all the time about immigrants, LGBTQ issues and anything climate related.
They’re just angry and scared that someone is going to take things from them and a lot of them are to unintelligent to understand that they are being played.
I feel sorry for them really.
@Schrodingers Immigrant: The “I feel sorry for them really” comment is a passive aggressive response and that kind of psychological manipulation should be discouraged as much as physical violence is in men. It’s the kind of passive aggressive comment which makes people angrier because it is difficult to argue with directly. Your own arguments aren’t very intelligent either (no basis) even if you do think you’re morally superior.
If people are reluctant to allow an influx of immigrants then maybe it is because of a fear of losing something and that’s not irrational. It should be discussed openly not ignorantly dismissed. You won’t win anyone over to your opinions that way.
Because the people who do this are cowards.
have your say