Fallacious complacence about Planetary Defense This is not an issue that we should worry about in the near term NASA Administrator Charles Bolden testifying to Congress about the threat of catastrophic impact by an asteroid or a comet ID: 514198
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "It Can’t Happen Now" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
It Can’t Happen Now
Fallacious complacence about Planetary DefenseSlide2
“
This is not an issue that we should worry about in the near term.”
–
NASA
Administrator Charles Bolden,
testifying to Congress about the threat of catastrophic impact by an asteroid or a comet
(
House
Science
Committee, March 19,
2013,
“
Threats
from space: a review of U.S. government efforts to track and mitigate asteroids and
meteors,”
hearing video,
minute
104:50,
http://science.house.gov/hearing/full-committee-hearing-threats-space-meteors-and-comets-part-1
)Slide3
Why Planetary Defense?
D/1770 L1 / Comet
Lexell
– Charles Messier
(6 LD on July
1, 1770)
Tunguska event, Siberia (June 30, 1908)
Barringer
Crater, Arizona (Eugene Shoemaker, 1960
)
Apollo and Mariner missions (1960s-1970s)
KT Boundary – Gubbio, iridium (Walter and Luis Alvarez, 1980)
Chicxulub Crater, Yucatan (Alan Hildebrand, 1991)
D/1993
F2 / Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 (July, 1994)
Chelyabinsk bolide
and
367943
Duende
/2012
DA14
(February 15, 2013)
C/2013 A1 / Comet
Siding
Spring
(1/3 LD from Mars
on Oct. 19,
2014)Slide4
-- Alan
Harris, “NEA populations and impact frequency,” NASA Asteroid Grand Challenge Seminar Series, March 28, 2014, http://sservi.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Harris.pdf
Don’t Panic? The Power
Law for NEOsSlide5
The Power LawSlide6
Panic! The Fallacies
or
What’s a philosopher doing talking about planetary defense?Slide7
Argument from ignorance
(claiming to know -x based on not knowing x)
“We
know everything out there that is that big, and there is just nothing right now that's in an orbit that's any threat toward the
Earth.”
-- Lindley Johnson,
Near-Earth Object Program Executive at NASA, as quoted
in Mike Wall 2012, “End
may be nigh for asteroid disaster
movies,”
Space.com
,
June 21
,
http
://
www.space.com/16251-asteroid-impact-disaster-movie-facts.htmlSlide8
The clockwork fallacy
(interpreting averages as regular occurrences or as predictions)
“We
thought that humanity would not have to face such an attack for another couple of thousand years, but the opposite happened and Russia was hit with a large-scale natural emergency
.”
--
Russian Emergency Minister Vladimir Puchkov regarding the lack of preparedness for what took place in Chelyabinsk
(RT News 2013)Slide9
The p
rocrastination
f
allacy
(T
he small likelihood of a harm makes it OK to put off dealing with it now)
reductio ad absurdum
Suppose it were true that the vanishingly small probability of annihilation by
an impactor in
the near future made it irrational to strive to make adequate preparations to prevent it (since there will always be more pressing priorities).
Then there would never be a good reason to make adequate preparations to prevent annihilation
by an impactor (until one were detected, but that would likely be too late).
But there is certainly a good reason to make adequate preparations to prevent annihilation by
an impactor (since
it will occur someday unless we prevent it).
Ergo:
It
is not true that the vanishingly small probability of annihilation by
an impactor in
the near future makes it irrational to strive to make adequate preparations to prevent it
.Slide10
The l
ow-hanging
fruit fallacy
(dealing with the relatively easy stuff means you can ignore the relatively difficult stuff)
Planetary Defense pertains to both asteroids and comets, but defense against the former has completely eclipsed the latter, as attested by the following:
name of
Congressional
hearings on planetary
defense
: “
Threats
from Space: A Review of Efforts to Track and Mitigate Asteroids and
Meteors”
name
of
UN planetary defense initiative:
“International
Asteroid Warning
Network”
name
of
White
House/NASA planetary
defense
Grand Challenge: “Asteroid Initiative”
logo slogan of
B612, the premier NGO
for
planetary
defense
: “Defending
Earth Against
Asteroids”
l
ogo slogan of the biennial planetary
defense
conference: “
Protecting
Earth from
Asteroids”
n
ame of the new annual planetary
defense
awareness day: “Asteroid Day”Slide11
Equivocation
(trading on the ambiguity of a term)
Treating
risk
as if it were just probability
“The risk of a catastrophic impact is very low.”
vs.
Risk = probability x magnitude of the feared outcome
“Impactors pose a big risk (even though
the likelihood of one hitting us
is low).”
“Although
the annual probability of the Earth being struck by a large asteroid or comet is extremely small, the consequences of such a collision are so catastrophic that it is prudent to assess the nature of the threat and to prepare to deal with it
.”
-- David Morrison (ed
.) 1992,
The Spaceguard survey: report of the NASA International near-Earth-object detection workshop
, NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology.Slide12
Contradiction
“Unless
a large flotilla (100 or more) of massive spacecraft was sent as impactors, nuclear explosions are the only current, practical means for changing the orbit of large NEOs (diameters greater than about 1 km). They also remain as a backup strategy for somewhat smaller objects if other methods have failed. They may be the only method for dealing with smaller objects when warning time is short
….”
--
National Research Council 2010,
Defending planet Earth: near-Earth object surveys and hazard mitigation strategies
, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C
.
,
http://
www.nap.edu/catalog/12842.html
“No
sensible argument has been put forward for using nuclear weapons to solve any of the major 21st century problems we face
….”
--
Global Zero Commission 2012,
Modernizing U.S. nuclear strategy, force structure and posture
,
http
://
dl.dropbox.com/u/6395109/GZ%20US%20Nuclear%20Policy%20Commission%20Report.pdf;
co-signed by former U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel just before he became Secretary of
Defence.Slide13
Improper transposition
(mistaking a necessary condition for a sufficient
condition)
“[
Planetary
scientist Donald
] Yeomans … insists
that the three most important things to do are
‘find
’
em
early, find ’
em
early, and find ’
em
early’.”
-- Andrew Lawler, “What
To Do Before the Asteroid
Strikes,”
Discover
magazine, November 2007, http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/the-asteroidSlide14
False dichotomy
“…
most people continue to drive their automobiles regardless [of there being
“31
million accidents … per year, at an annual cost of almost $100
billion”].
For the same reason, that we can't live our lives paralyzed by the fear that something bad may happen, we shouldn't let the remote possibility of being struck by a meteor or asteroid rule our lives.”
--
NASA
1998,
“Is
Earth in danger of being hit by an asteroid
?”
Ask an Astrophysicist
blog
,
http://
teacherlink.ed.usu.edu/tlnasa/reference/imaginedvd/files/imagine/docs/ask_astro/answers/danger.htmlSlide15
Conclusion and
recommendation:
A principle of planetary defense
Act
on the assumption that the next
large
object targeting Earth will be discovered the day after we have prepared an adequate defense against it were we to begin to prepare
in all earnestness today.
This
further
implies:
A
deflection
infrastructure must be in place
prior to
detection of a threatening object.
The scope of
detection
efforts must be expanded beyond near-Earth ever further into the outer solar system and maintained indefinitely.
Any
less robust planetary
defense
policy strikes me as irrational and potentially fatal to the human race
.Slide16
Joel Marks
Professor Emeritus of Philosophy
University of New Haven
jmarks@newhaven.edu