Transterrestrial Musings

Defend Free Speech!

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Site designed by

Powered by
Movable Type 4.0
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Tugs And Ferries | Main | An Evolutionary Golden Oldie »

How It Went Down

Gizmodo has a video and the story on the satellite hit.

Oh, and so much for the naysayers who said it wouldn't work. Wishful thinking, one suspects.

They've been poo-pooing this since the eighties, going back to Tsipis and Garwin in SciAm. A good example of Clarke's First Law, about elderly and distinguished scientists.


0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: How It Went Down.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Jethro wrote:

Hell. SciAm is poo-pooing it this month with an article decrying Space War. I noticed this month that two of their articles (including this one0 are written by activists in the field. Seems fishy to me.

K wrote:

You mean "B2" Garwin? The guy who claimed that the B2 couldn't fly?

The fact that SciAm has become just another mouthpiece of the Democratic party is a betrayal of organized science in general. How serious would you take a science magazine that had been taken over by Evangelical Christians and was pushing creationism? SciAm's "political science" is no different.

Norm wrote:

It sure didn't look like a lot of people attended the Pentagon briefing from the video. Hard to tell, since it never showed the entire room, though.

I sure hope more attended than the handful visible clustered together at the front.

Paul F. Dietz wrote:

Wow, that gizmodo link sure has a lot of comments from the retardo-american community.

Congratulations to all the members of the military and civilians involved in this accomplishment. I feel some slight connection, since my late father worked on contracts for the Aegis system, years ago.

Habitat Hermit wrote:

Congratulations to the US! Nice hit ^_^

Of course this success will only increase the whining of most "reality"-based idiotarians but one or two of them might wake up.

As for SciAm somewhere in the nineties they became the new NewScientist and the NewScientist became a toilet rag with "science" gloss. Both can be safely ignored.

Edward Wright wrote:

Check out this video of a speech by Dr. Carol Rosin, one of the leading anti-space weapons "experts."

Von Braun told her that the US government knows about multiple alien civilizations???

Yet, she is taken seriously in Washington and even invited to testify before Congress.

I think I missed her logic somewhere, though. Leaving aside the (slight!) lack of evidence for her claims, what if they were true? If the military knew about about hostile aliens, wouldn't developing space weapons be a good thing? Isn't that what we would want the military to do?

By the way, Dr. Rosin's PhD is honorary, from Nigeria, and in the "Humanities." Shades of Mark Whittington. :-)

Robin Goodfellow wrote:

SciAm isn't much better than Discover magazine anymore, it's gone incredibly down hill.

I believe the real reasons for the shoot-down are three-fold. First, the satellite is large with some substantially sized solid pieces (namely, a very large mirror) which means very large pieces would survive reentry all the way to the ground, which would pose an impact risk to humans and would represent a violation of current treaty, I believe. Naturally, because of the top secret nature of the satellite, revealing this information (especially the size of the mirror) is out of the question, so the mere existence of this reason would never be publicly mentioned. Second, the vehicle contains top-secret electronics and equipment which would be more likely to survive reentry if the vehicle reentered in one piece. Third, this serves as a chance to demonstrate the operational ability of our anti-satellite / anti-ballistic missile system. Also, the Hydrazine issue seems like it could be a real concern, but compared to the other issues it seems comparatively minor.

Phil Fraeirng wrote:

They're complaining about the quality of the video footage of a missile intercept at over a hundred miles' altitude?

PAul Breed wrote:

Here is an article by a "Space & Defense Research Analyst"

He fails to grasp the difference between the USA 193 ASAT test at low altitude with very very low probabilities of long lived space debris and the China ASAT test with 100% probability of very long lived debris. The incompetence of so called experts amazes me.

Monte Davis wrote:

You mean "B2" Garwin? The guy who claimed that the B2 couldn't fly?

Care to back this statement up?

Monte Davis wrote:

I didn't think so.

Leave a comment

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on February 21, 2008 7:23 AM.

Tugs And Ferries was the previous entry in this blog.

An Evolutionary Golden Oldie is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.1