>From the ASF group intro
>(1) explain the asteroid/comet impact problem to the general
public;

I've wondered about this too; There are enough people who are
adamant in working to solve some 'problems' which are of even
smaller interest, that it should be possible to get interest in this
kind of thing -convince enough people that this is in fact a
relevant problem, and not hollywood hype alone.

>(2) detect all asteroids and comets in near Earth spaces that
are big enough to destroy a city;

Probably many millions, by some current estimates.

>(3) divert/destroy asteroids and comets found to be on an
Earth-impacting trajectory;

It's fairly clear that the only way to do this is to get a space
presence, which is pretty much indistinguishable from a space
resources development/utilization/colonization program. You've
got to be able to bring force to bear that is equally suitable to
mining asteroids.

>(4) build space settlements in GEO and space elevators so as
to provide an escape path from a gargantuan asteroid or comet
that is too big or discovered too late to divert or destroy.

from Leon Neihouse, spacesettlers # 1073
> The idea is that developing space in this manner will also
provide an escape path from the worst possible asteroid/comet
impact scenario.

The 'too late to divert/destroy' part should be scrapped. If it's
too late to divert/destroy a threat, it's too late to build space
colonies.
The suitability of the 'too big' part may be debateable. Enough of
a space infrastructure could emplace enough motors to do it,
even with a big one ("the size of Texas", as the line goes). Again,
if it's too late to do this big of a job, you're sunk. If you've
already got a large population in space colonies, they should be
able to bring adequate force to bear even on a big problem.

Your mandate is identical to many other space advocacy groups
out there: get a spacefaring civilization, preferrably ASAP. Aren't
you re-inventing the wheel, by starting a brand new group? Why
not a new chapter of the NSS, not based on geographical area,
but on this specific purpose?
Part of the SpaceGuard Foundation?
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~marsden/SGF/

--- In spacesettlers@y..., "John Frazer" wrote:
> From the ASF group intro

I am happy to see that we are in agreement in many areas. I would,
however, like to rebut some of your comments.

> The 'too late to divert/destroy' part should be scrapped. If it's
> too late to divert/destroy a threat, it's too late to build space
> colonies.

You have missed the point here. The goal is to build space
settlements immediately so they will be available for occupancy if
the 'too late to divert/destroy' scenario should arise. Of course,
when you consider the cosmic frequency at which impacts of this type
are expected, "immediately" can easily be taken to mean 1,000 years.

> The suitability of the 'too big' part may be debateable. Enough of
> a space infrastructure could emplace enough motors to do it,
> even with a big one ("the size of Texas", as the line goes). Again,
> if it's too late to do this big of a job, you're sunk. If you've
> already got a large population in space colonies, they should be
> able to bring adequate force to bear even on a big problem.

I do not believe this is debatable. I have never heard of any
plausible scenario under which a Comet like Hale-Bopp (remember, this
one was 40 kilometers and there can be even bigger ones) could be
diverted or destroyed after it is first discovered with only months
or a few years time for it to complete its journey through the inner
solar system. This would be an especially tricky task when you
consider that outgassing near perihelion could change the comet into
an Earth-impacting trajectory at the last minute. Given the objective
to prepare for the worst case asteroid or comet impact scenario, I
believe it is imperative to have a belt of space settlement "Life
Boats" in orbit in the GEO vicinity.

> Your mandate is identical to many other space advocacy groups
> out there: get a spacefaring civilization, preferrably ASAP. Aren't
> you re-inventing the wheel, by starting a brand new group? Why
> not a new chapter of the NSS, not based on geographical area,
> but on this specific purpose?

I believe the Alpha Space Foundation has a unique mandate. Its
purpose is to initiate a business network that will raise the money
to pursue its projects. Notice that it might, in fact, use the money
so acquired to support the programs of other space advocacy groups
whose programs will arrive at the stated ASF objectives.

> Part of the SpaceGuard Foundation?

I will agree that much of what ASF proposes duplicates the SpaceGuard
program. In fact, I applied for SpaceGuard membership but I never got
a response. But, again, the primary purpose of ASF is to raise money.
I am sure that if ASF is successful in this objective, SpaceGuard
will be happy to accept me into its fold.

Best regards,

Leon Neihouse