<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_18_0516246</id>
	<title>The Social Difficulty of Saving Earth From an Asteroid</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261124520000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>mantis2009 writes <i>"When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs. asteroid event, social science and international political leaders have more difficult questions yet unanswered than physicists do, according to report delivered at this week's American Geophysical Union meeting.  <em>Wired</em> has a discussion of an analysis authored by former astronaut Rusty Schweickart, who worries that the international community is nowhere near ready to begin the complex and inevitably controversial task of <a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/12/saving-earth-from-an-asteroid/">deflecting an asteroid on a collision course with Earth</a>.  Among the questions to be answered is whether to modify the Partial Test Ban Treaty to allow nuclear weapons in outer space.  Another possibility to avoid the destruction of civilization would require the international community to choose an area on the globe where an asteroid might be 'aimed.'  Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>mantis2009 writes " When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs. asteroid event , social science and international political leaders have more difficult questions yet unanswered than physicists do , according to report delivered at this week 's American Geophysical Union meeting .
Wired has a discussion of an analysis authored by former astronaut Rusty Schweickart , who worries that the international community is nowhere near ready to begin the complex and inevitably controversial task of deflecting an asteroid on a collision course with Earth .
Among the questions to be answered is whether to modify the Partial Test Ban Treaty to allow nuclear weapons in outer space .
Another possibility to avoid the destruction of civilization would require the international community to choose an area on the globe where an asteroid might be 'aimed .
' Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid 's crosshairs ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mantis2009 writes "When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs. asteroid event, social science and international political leaders have more difficult questions yet unanswered than physicists do, according to report delivered at this week's American Geophysical Union meeting.
Wired has a discussion of an analysis authored by former astronaut Rusty Schweickart, who worries that the international community is nowhere near ready to begin the complex and inevitably controversial task of deflecting an asteroid on a collision course with Earth.
Among the questions to be answered is whether to modify the Partial Test Ban Treaty to allow nuclear weapons in outer space.
Another possibility to avoid the destruction of civilization would require the international community to choose an area on the globe where an asteroid might be 'aimed.
'  Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261130160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>France.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>France .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>France.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485656</id>
	<title>Someone get rid of that Flamebait mod</title>
	<author>Gadget\_Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1261142880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey nmg196, thanks for being the straight man (and to Armakuni for doing the punch line). But what's up with the moderator who gave you a flamebait mod. Shouldn't a knowledge of the Simpsons be a prerequisite for joining Slashdot? (I can forgive not knowing Southpark reference in the subject line).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey nmg196 , thanks for being the straight man ( and to Armakuni for doing the punch line ) .
But what 's up with the moderator who gave you a flamebait mod .
Should n't a knowledge of the Simpsons be a prerequisite for joining Slashdot ?
( I can forgive not knowing Southpark reference in the subject line ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey nmg196, thanks for being the straight man (and to Armakuni for doing the punch line).
But what's up with the moderator who gave you a flamebait mod.
Shouldn't a knowledge of the Simpsons be a prerequisite for joining Slashdot?
(I can forgive not knowing Southpark reference in the subject line).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489380</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1261160520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Time matters in this, for several reasons:<br>- How much time in advance we have to do something effective if an incoming asteroid is detected? If building the technology/weapons/whatever takes a year, and it is detected to come in 3 months, we will be in trouble.<br>- Is pretty unlikely that a big enough asteroid hit us today, but give enough time and will be a sure thing. We already been witness of that happening to i.e. Jupiter<br>- Global warming is a process, something that happens over (hopely) long time. Asteroid happens in a moment, no time to react/adapt after it strikes.<br><br>IF we develop the resources to detect those asteroids for sure with enough time to build defenses, yes, we can focus in more urgent things. Detecting that kind of things with enough margin, more than deploying a fleet of nuclear weapon space ships right  now, should be one of the priorities</htmltext>
<tokenext>Time matters in this , for several reasons : - How much time in advance we have to do something effective if an incoming asteroid is detected ?
If building the technology/weapons/whatever takes a year , and it is detected to come in 3 months , we will be in trouble.- Is pretty unlikely that a big enough asteroid hit us today , but give enough time and will be a sure thing .
We already been witness of that happening to i.e .
Jupiter- Global warming is a process , something that happens over ( hopely ) long time .
Asteroid happens in a moment , no time to react/adapt after it strikes.IF we develop the resources to detect those asteroids for sure with enough time to build defenses , yes , we can focus in more urgent things .
Detecting that kind of things with enough margin , more than deploying a fleet of nuclear weapon space ships right now , should be one of the priorities</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time matters in this, for several reasons:- How much time in advance we have to do something effective if an incoming asteroid is detected?
If building the technology/weapons/whatever takes a year, and it is detected to come in 3 months, we will be in trouble.- Is pretty unlikely that a big enough asteroid hit us today, but give enough time and will be a sure thing.
We already been witness of that happening to i.e.
Jupiter- Global warming is a process, something that happens over (hopely) long time.
Asteroid happens in a moment, no time to react/adapt after it strikes.IF we develop the resources to detect those asteroids for sure with enough time to build defenses, yes, we can focus in more urgent things.
Detecting that kind of things with enough margin, more than deploying a fleet of nuclear weapon space ships right  now, should be one of the priorities</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484938</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Vorghagen</author>
	<datestamp>1261132620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually we have some damn good wine. But I can't argue with your other points.
To be honest it seems reasonable to aim it at the centre of Australia, incredibly sparse population, not-exactly-habitable environment, no major ecosystems. But in exchange for letting the world crash the asteroid here we get ownership of any precious metals that may be included AND exclusive scientific access. Fair?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually we have some damn good wine .
But I ca n't argue with your other points .
To be honest it seems reasonable to aim it at the centre of Australia , incredibly sparse population , not-exactly-habitable environment , no major ecosystems .
But in exchange for letting the world crash the asteroid here we get ownership of any precious metals that may be included AND exclusive scientific access .
Fair ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually we have some damn good wine.
But I can't argue with your other points.
To be honest it seems reasonable to aim it at the centre of Australia, incredibly sparse population, not-exactly-habitable environment, no major ecosystems.
But in exchange for letting the world crash the asteroid here we get ownership of any precious metals that may be included AND exclusive scientific access.
Fair?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485972</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261145640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe Antartica?</p><p>Who modded this Insightful? More like Inciteful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe Antartica ? Who modded this Insightful ?
More like Inciteful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe Antartica?Who modded this Insightful?
More like Inciteful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484836</id>
	<title>Re: who gets placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?</title>
	<author>dirtyhippie</author>
	<datestamp>1261131360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why, the nearest available ocean of course, most likely the Pacific. Don't forget the earth's surface is mostly uninhabited, especially since 70\% of it is covered in water. Sorry Polynesia...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why , the nearest available ocean of course , most likely the Pacific .
Do n't forget the earth 's surface is mostly uninhabited , especially since 70 \ % of it is covered in water .
Sorry Polynesia.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why, the nearest available ocean of course, most likely the Pacific.
Don't forget the earth's surface is mostly uninhabited, especially since 70\% of it is covered in water.
Sorry Polynesia...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488460</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261156860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is there such a focus on asteroids? Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation? (yes, "Armageddon", I'm looking at you).<br>Asteroids are not rare, Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are. It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.<br>I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.<br>We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming. Unlike asteroids, it wont happen by chance, it is happening and will continue to happen, even if we cease to pollute right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming). This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids.</p></div><p>Global warming is getting a extremely high amount of attention relatively to asteroids.  It also is not a threat to "all" human life.  Instead it would wipe out a significant amount of coastal infrastructure from rising oceans and agricultural infrastructure from changing weather patterns.  This would lead to the death of a significant portion of the population and a drastically reduced quality of life, but the species would continue.  Carbon emissions would be cut handily too.  Of course the suspected Ice Age after that may be the one-two punch that takes us out, but it isn't as certain as an asteroid of significant size.</p><p>Just because something is unlikely, does not mean it is unworthy of attention.  This is part of the problem responsible for the financial crisis.  Certain factors were unlikely to occur, but when they did they had disproportionate effects compared to other scenarios.  In short, they weren't weighted properly in risk management analysis.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is there such a focus on asteroids ?
Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation ?
( yes , " Armageddon " , I 'm looking at you ) .Asteroids are not rare , Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are .
It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years , and after that , we 'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I 'm not saying that research in this area is wrong , but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human ( and animal ) existence on earth , it 's called global warming .
Unlike asteroids , it wont happen by chance , it is happening and will continue to happen , even if we cease to pollute right now ( which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming ) .
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids.Global warming is getting a extremely high amount of attention relatively to asteroids .
It also is not a threat to " all " human life .
Instead it would wipe out a significant amount of coastal infrastructure from rising oceans and agricultural infrastructure from changing weather patterns .
This would lead to the death of a significant portion of the population and a drastically reduced quality of life , but the species would continue .
Carbon emissions would be cut handily too .
Of course the suspected Ice Age after that may be the one-two punch that takes us out , but it is n't as certain as an asteroid of significant size.Just because something is unlikely , does not mean it is unworthy of attention .
This is part of the problem responsible for the financial crisis .
Certain factors were unlikely to occur , but when they did they had disproportionate effects compared to other scenarios .
In short , they were n't weighted properly in risk management analysis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is there such a focus on asteroids?
Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation?
(yes, "Armageddon", I'm looking at you).Asteroids are not rare, Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are.
It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming.
Unlike asteroids, it wont happen by chance, it is happening and will continue to happen, even if we cease to pollute right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming).
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids.Global warming is getting a extremely high amount of attention relatively to asteroids.
It also is not a threat to "all" human life.
Instead it would wipe out a significant amount of coastal infrastructure from rising oceans and agricultural infrastructure from changing weather patterns.
This would lead to the death of a significant portion of the population and a drastically reduced quality of life, but the species would continue.
Carbon emissions would be cut handily too.
Of course the suspected Ice Age after that may be the one-two punch that takes us out, but it isn't as certain as an asteroid of significant size.Just because something is unlikely, does not mean it is unworthy of attention.
This is part of the problem responsible for the financial crisis.
Certain factors were unlikely to occur, but when they did they had disproportionate effects compared to other scenarios.
In short, they weren't weighted properly in risk management analysis.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489310</id>
	<title>Treaties</title>
	<author>Impy the Impiuos Imp</author>
	<datestamp>1261160220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Treaties will be flat-out ignored if they get in the way.  So Sayeth The Scared Voters.</p><p>Indeed, no politician would <i>dream</i> of even quickly officially undoing or altering said treaties for fear of looking like they view paperwork as more important than lives.</p><p>Secondly, as for where to aim it, any asteroid big enough to worry about, but small enough it could hit somewhere on Earth and not kill everyone, is a teeny, tiny size window.  It should be trivially easy to turn it into rubble that mostly burns up, or effortlessly deflect it.</p><p>Remember that 1 mile per hour sideways (or slowed, or sped up) adds up to thousands of miles deviation over 6 months or several years.  Even less is really all that's needed with enough time.  And smallish asteroids, i.e. "less than a mountain" we are well within the technology to easily smash it to bits and send the pieces flying at much higher speed than that.</p><p>So whoever's doing this "social analysis" sounds himself like a physical scientist, and not a politician who knows how easily it would be to make this happen to "save the lives of <b>millions</b> of registered voters", to borrow from Ghostbusters.</p><p>For christ's sake, people, this year's US deficit for one year is $1.4 <b> <i>trillion</i> </b>, just based on hot air about scary the economy is, and you know those politicians have to be dragged kicking and screaming to spend money to get votes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Treaties will be flat-out ignored if they get in the way .
So Sayeth The Scared Voters.Indeed , no politician would dream of even quickly officially undoing or altering said treaties for fear of looking like they view paperwork as more important than lives.Secondly , as for where to aim it , any asteroid big enough to worry about , but small enough it could hit somewhere on Earth and not kill everyone , is a teeny , tiny size window .
It should be trivially easy to turn it into rubble that mostly burns up , or effortlessly deflect it.Remember that 1 mile per hour sideways ( or slowed , or sped up ) adds up to thousands of miles deviation over 6 months or several years .
Even less is really all that 's needed with enough time .
And smallish asteroids , i.e .
" less than a mountain " we are well within the technology to easily smash it to bits and send the pieces flying at much higher speed than that.So whoever 's doing this " social analysis " sounds himself like a physical scientist , and not a politician who knows how easily it would be to make this happen to " save the lives of millions of registered voters " , to borrow from Ghostbusters.For christ 's sake , people , this year 's US deficit for one year is $ 1.4 trillion , just based on hot air about scary the economy is , and you know those politicians have to be dragged kicking and screaming to spend money to get votes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Treaties will be flat-out ignored if they get in the way.
So Sayeth The Scared Voters.Indeed, no politician would dream of even quickly officially undoing or altering said treaties for fear of looking like they view paperwork as more important than lives.Secondly, as for where to aim it, any asteroid big enough to worry about, but small enough it could hit somewhere on Earth and not kill everyone, is a teeny, tiny size window.
It should be trivially easy to turn it into rubble that mostly burns up, or effortlessly deflect it.Remember that 1 mile per hour sideways (or slowed, or sped up) adds up to thousands of miles deviation over 6 months or several years.
Even less is really all that's needed with enough time.
And smallish asteroids, i.e.
"less than a mountain" we are well within the technology to easily smash it to bits and send the pieces flying at much higher speed than that.So whoever's doing this "social analysis" sounds himself like a physical scientist, and not a politician who knows how easily it would be to make this happen to "save the lives of millions of registered voters", to borrow from Ghostbusters.For christ's sake, people, this year's US deficit for one year is $1.4  trillion , just based on hot air about scary the economy is, and you know those politicians have to be dragged kicking and screaming to spend money to get votes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488546</id>
	<title>Obvious Solution</title>
	<author>some old guy</author>
	<datestamp>1261157220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering the AoE of a large impact, any target located in the central Middle East would be an enormous boon to world peace and stability. No more "holy" cities and shrines to fight over. Imagine, world religion wiped out by an act of "God"!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the AoE of a large impact , any target located in the central Middle East would be an enormous boon to world peace and stability .
No more " holy " cities and shrines to fight over .
Imagine , world religion wiped out by an act of " God " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the AoE of a large impact, any target located in the central Middle East would be an enormous boon to world peace and stability.
No more "holy" cities and shrines to fight over.
Imagine, world religion wiped out by an act of "God"!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485076</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>IBBoard</author>
	<datestamp>1261134600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Antarctica? That'd be one hell of a curve shot to whip it underneath the Earth and up! Don't you know from all of those SciFi shows that asteroids come in perfectly horizontal and that the whole universe is like a plate. That's why ships can't avoid each other by flying higher or on a different plane - because there is only one plane that everything flies along!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Antarctica ?
That 'd be one hell of a curve shot to whip it underneath the Earth and up !
Do n't you know from all of those SciFi shows that asteroids come in perfectly horizontal and that the whole universe is like a plate .
That 's why ships ca n't avoid each other by flying higher or on a different plane - because there is only one plane that everything flies along !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Antarctica?
That'd be one hell of a curve shot to whip it underneath the Earth and up!
Don't you know from all of those SciFi shows that asteroids come in perfectly horizontal and that the whole universe is like a plate.
That's why ships can't avoid each other by flying higher or on a different plane - because there is only one plane that everything flies along!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487950</id>
	<title>An Asteroid is the Least of Our Problems</title>
	<author>DeanFox</author>
	<datestamp>1261154820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
"When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs." {anything}... We can't agree.
<br> <br>
We're coming up on a perfect storm -
<br>
Used up more than half of all the oil in less than one generation.
<br>
With modern farming this planet can only support about 6.5 - 7 billion (where we are at now) and that's going to double.
<br>
Using all that oil has released all the primordial CO2 gases back in the atmosphere that took billions years to remove back in the atmosphere which will change the growing seasons and locations affecting both farming and likely negating the possibility of supporting a doubling of the population.
<br>
Pollution and over development has already destroyed fresh water resources for hundreds of millions - Spain is already shipping in fresh water from other countries. And half the population (current numbers) will not have access to fresh water in 50 years - but by that time the population will have almost doubled so those numbers are probably moot.
<br> <br>
And this is only the "cold front" of the perfect storm that's coming - And they're worried about a friggin asteroid?!  Frankly, IMHO, an asteroid is exactly what this planet needs right about now.
<br> <br>
-[d]-</htmltext>
<tokenext>" When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs. " { anything } ... We ca n't agree .
We 're coming up on a perfect storm - Used up more than half of all the oil in less than one generation .
With modern farming this planet can only support about 6.5 - 7 billion ( where we are at now ) and that 's going to double .
Using all that oil has released all the primordial CO2 gases back in the atmosphere that took billions years to remove back in the atmosphere which will change the growing seasons and locations affecting both farming and likely negating the possibility of supporting a doubling of the population .
Pollution and over development has already destroyed fresh water resources for hundreds of millions - Spain is already shipping in fresh water from other countries .
And half the population ( current numbers ) will not have access to fresh water in 50 years - but by that time the population will have almost doubled so those numbers are probably moot .
And this is only the " cold front " of the perfect storm that 's coming - And they 're worried about a friggin asteroid ? !
Frankly , IMHO , an asteroid is exactly what this planet needs right about now .
- [ d ] -</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
"When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs." {anything}... We can't agree.
We're coming up on a perfect storm -

Used up more than half of all the oil in less than one generation.
With modern farming this planet can only support about 6.5 - 7 billion (where we are at now) and that's going to double.
Using all that oil has released all the primordial CO2 gases back in the atmosphere that took billions years to remove back in the atmosphere which will change the growing seasons and locations affecting both farming and likely negating the possibility of supporting a doubling of the population.
Pollution and over development has already destroyed fresh water resources for hundreds of millions - Spain is already shipping in fresh water from other countries.
And half the population (current numbers) will not have access to fresh water in 50 years - but by that time the population will have almost doubled so those numbers are probably moot.
And this is only the "cold front" of the perfect storm that's coming - And they're worried about a friggin asteroid?!
Frankly, IMHO, an asteroid is exactly what this planet needs right about now.
-[d]-</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486388</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1261147800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A simple GIS for "hot Australian chicks" will quickly dispel the notion that there is nothing of value in Australia. Though I suppose we could move all of the hot Aussie babes out first. I'm sure I could make room for a few in my house. Out of charity, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A simple GIS for " hot Australian chicks " will quickly dispel the notion that there is nothing of value in Australia .
Though I suppose we could move all of the hot Aussie babes out first .
I 'm sure I could make room for a few in my house .
Out of charity , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A simple GIS for "hot Australian chicks" will quickly dispel the notion that there is nothing of value in Australia.
Though I suppose we could move all of the hot Aussie babes out first.
I'm sure I could make room for a few in my house.
Out of charity, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485458</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>PeterBrett</author>
	<datestamp>1261140840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous wines</p></div><p>Well there's Wolf Blass and Jacob's Creek for starters.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, in my experience all of the actually decent wines from Australia aren't famous. Jacob's Creek is overpriced piss, in my not-very-humble opinion. There are some really amazing Shiraz vineyards in Australia, for example, but you have to hunt them down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , unlike Italy and France , they do n't have famous winesWell there 's Wolf Blass and Jacob 's Creek for starters.Unfortunately , in my experience all of the actually decent wines from Australia are n't famous .
Jacob 's Creek is overpriced piss , in my not-very-humble opinion .
There are some really amazing Shiraz vineyards in Australia , for example , but you have to hunt them down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous winesWell there's Wolf Blass and Jacob's Creek for starters.Unfortunately, in my experience all of the actually decent wines from Australia aren't famous.
Jacob's Creek is overpriced piss, in my not-very-humble opinion.
There are some really amazing Shiraz vineyards in Australia, for example, but you have to hunt them down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484802</id>
	<title>Re:A few years notice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261130880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Try a few seconds. The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us, there's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.</p></div></blockquote><p>I believe Isaac Newton worked out the laws of motion and gravity three hundred years ago, and his equations have served astronomers well enough to correctly work out the orbits of every object in space that they could observe. Celestial mechanics is a mature branch of science, and it will doubtless work for determining whether an asteroid or comet that astronomers have observed will hit the earth.  It worked well enough for predicting that Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 was going to hit Jupiter in 1994.  The real problem here is that one has to detect the object first, of course.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try a few seconds .
The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us , there 's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.I believe Isaac Newton worked out the laws of motion and gravity three hundred years ago , and his equations have served astronomers well enough to correctly work out the orbits of every object in space that they could observe .
Celestial mechanics is a mature branch of science , and it will doubtless work for determining whether an asteroid or comet that astronomers have observed will hit the earth .
It worked well enough for predicting that Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 was going to hit Jupiter in 1994 .
The real problem here is that one has to detect the object first , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try a few seconds.
The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us, there's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.I believe Isaac Newton worked out the laws of motion and gravity three hundred years ago, and his equations have served astronomers well enough to correctly work out the orbits of every object in space that they could observe.
Celestial mechanics is a mature branch of science, and it will doubtless work for determining whether an asteroid or comet that astronomers have observed will hit the earth.
It worked well enough for predicting that Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 was going to hit Jupiter in 1994.
The real problem here is that one has to detect the object first, of course.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485102</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>arethuza</author>
	<datestamp>1261135140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't you dare aim an asteroid at the location of my favourite skiing areas!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you dare aim an asteroid at the location of my favourite skiing areas !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you dare aim an asteroid at the location of my favourite skiing areas!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484614</id>
	<title>Obvious...</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1261129260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?</i><br>The ones doing the job of deflection, naturally.</p><p>And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts, with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever. Especially if the impact site seems to target their "enemies", though probably also when it targets them..."punishment from allowing the world to fall"/etc.</p><p>Quite a bit of unrest generally, on top of what's already there. Escalation of conflicts. All while trying to launch something very sophisticated, quite delicate operation...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid 's crosshairs ? The ones doing the job of deflection , naturally.And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts , with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever .
Especially if the impact site seems to target their " enemies " , though probably also when it targets them... " punishment from allowing the world to fall " /etc.Quite a bit of unrest generally , on top of what 's already there .
Escalation of conflicts .
All while trying to launch something very sophisticated , quite delicate operation.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?The ones doing the job of deflection, naturally.And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts, with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever.
Especially if the impact site seems to target their "enemies", though probably also when it targets them..."punishment from allowing the world to fall"/etc.Quite a bit of unrest generally, on top of what's already there.
Escalation of conflicts.
All while trying to launch something very sophisticated, quite delicate operation...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488950</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261158900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Africa- a lot is desert, and it's just (over-) filled with useless people anyway. A nice deep crater in the middle of the Sahara might let in ocean water, drastically changing the climate inthe center of the continent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Africa- a lot is desert , and it 's just ( over- ) filled with useless people anyway .
A nice deep crater in the middle of the Sahara might let in ocean water , drastically changing the climate inthe center of the continent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Africa- a lot is desert, and it's just (over-) filled with useless people anyway.
A nice deep crater in the middle of the Sahara might let in ocean water, drastically changing the climate inthe center of the continent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485200</id>
	<title>The real question is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261136340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is Bruce Willis up to the task?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is Bruce Willis up to the task ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is Bruce Willis up to the task?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485864</id>
	<title>deadlock</title>
	<author>jecowa</author>
	<datestamp>1261144860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All this talk makes me want to play a Deadlock.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All this talk makes me want to play a Deadlock .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this talk makes me want to play a Deadlock.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487986</id>
	<title>I'm not sure politicians get to play that much</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1261155000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the event of the detection of a death asteroid, I rather expect it immediately becomes a top military secret. It may be the USA, Russia, Europe, China, whomever working together or apart to stop the thing, but I don't imagine for a second this is going to be spending years of debate in Congress. And in fact, it would be in the public interest to not start shouting about the end of life as we know it on earth in ten years BEFORE the problem is actively being addressed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the event of the detection of a death asteroid , I rather expect it immediately becomes a top military secret .
It may be the USA , Russia , Europe , China , whomever working together or apart to stop the thing , but I do n't imagine for a second this is going to be spending years of debate in Congress .
And in fact , it would be in the public interest to not start shouting about the end of life as we know it on earth in ten years BEFORE the problem is actively being addressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the event of the detection of a death asteroid, I rather expect it immediately becomes a top military secret.
It may be the USA, Russia, Europe, China, whomever working together or apart to stop the thing, but I don't imagine for a second this is going to be spending years of debate in Congress.
And in fact, it would be in the public interest to not start shouting about the end of life as we know it on earth in ten years BEFORE the problem is actively being addressed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486232</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261147140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not the Sahara?<br>Wouldn't you want to see an awesome glass structure formed from the immense energy?</p><p>Also, sand would probably take a larger amount of the energy away from the impact as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not the Sahara ? Would n't you want to see an awesome glass structure formed from the immense energy ? Also , sand would probably take a larger amount of the energy away from the impact as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not the Sahara?Wouldn't you want to see an awesome glass structure formed from the immense energy?Also, sand would probably take a larger amount of the energy away from the impact as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485214</id>
	<title>The answer!</title>
	<author>Datamonstar</author>
	<datestamp>1261136700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>PARRY! - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT9vBMhSn5U" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT9vBMhSn5U</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>PARRY !
- http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = IT9vBMhSn5U [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PARRY!
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT9vBMhSn5U [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488512</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is.... my keyboard</title>
	<author>Wardish</author>
	<datestamp>1261157100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't do that!!!</p><p>I darn near had to buy another keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't do that ! !
! I darn near had to buy another keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't do that!!
!I darn near had to buy another keyboard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486504</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>spidr\_mnky</author>
	<datestamp>1261148340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I clicked on the asteroid conversation link as sort of a break from more serious issues.  (sarcastically):  "Asteroids<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... sounds important."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  Now I'll keep skimming for that discussion about whether to blow it up or gently move it aside, or some other novel idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I clicked on the asteroid conversation link as sort of a break from more serious issues .
( sarcastically ) : " Asteroids ... sounds important .
" : ) Now I 'll keep skimming for that discussion about whether to blow it up or gently move it aside , or some other novel idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I clicked on the asteroid conversation link as sort of a break from more serious issues.
(sarcastically):  "Asteroids ... sounds important.
" :)  Now I'll keep skimming for that discussion about whether to blow it up or gently move it aside, or some other novel idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487708</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261153920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a Canadian I THOROUGHLY approve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Canadian I THOROUGHLY approve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Canadian I THOROUGHLY approve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484992</id>
	<title>Saving Earth From An Asteroid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're sitting on an asteroid, trying to save Earth, you'd have more than just social difficulties to consider... difficulties closer to the realm of the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're sitting on an asteroid , trying to save Earth , you 'd have more than just social difficulties to consider... difficulties closer to the realm of the / .
community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're sitting on an asteroid, trying to save Earth, you'd have more than just social difficulties to consider... difficulties closer to the realm of the /.
community.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485830</id>
	<title>Sales Job</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1261144560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rusty Schweickart is not, in this instance, an ex-astronaut, he is the CEO of B612 Foundation, dedicated to promoting their gravity tractor design for asteroid deflection. This design solves the 'problems' which are here hung around the necks of politicians. B612 has been 'solving' these same problems in the same way for over 20 years now. The situations where this design fails are still the same also, most notably short notice. This is no objective analysis of solutions to social and other problems that might arise --- this is a sales job for one of several designs that would need to be developed in order to meet the many possible problems. Yet this and the other designs with potential business backing, do not present themselves are inadequate alone, a social problem itself, in that these 'experts' are not pounding home the truth that no one an tell ahead of time which of these would be needed and/or would work if tried, so several different esigns would be required to be available. Also, these are large scale interplanetary programs, with a good chance of technical failure preventing successful completion, thus making it necessary to have more than one of each design available. Figure the odds of getting funding for more than one copy of one design. Yeah, until the impact table comes out with our names on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rusty Schweickart is not , in this instance , an ex-astronaut , he is the CEO of B612 Foundation , dedicated to promoting their gravity tractor design for asteroid deflection .
This design solves the 'problems ' which are here hung around the necks of politicians .
B612 has been 'solving ' these same problems in the same way for over 20 years now .
The situations where this design fails are still the same also , most notably short notice .
This is no objective analysis of solutions to social and other problems that might arise --- this is a sales job for one of several designs that would need to be developed in order to meet the many possible problems .
Yet this and the other designs with potential business backing , do not present themselves are inadequate alone , a social problem itself , in that these 'experts ' are not pounding home the truth that no one an tell ahead of time which of these would be needed and/or would work if tried , so several different esigns would be required to be available .
Also , these are large scale interplanetary programs , with a good chance of technical failure preventing successful completion , thus making it necessary to have more than one of each design available .
Figure the odds of getting funding for more than one copy of one design .
Yeah , until the impact table comes out with our names on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rusty Schweickart is not, in this instance, an ex-astronaut, he is the CEO of B612 Foundation, dedicated to promoting their gravity tractor design for asteroid deflection.
This design solves the 'problems' which are here hung around the necks of politicians.
B612 has been 'solving' these same problems in the same way for over 20 years now.
The situations where this design fails are still the same also, most notably short notice.
This is no objective analysis of solutions to social and other problems that might arise --- this is a sales job for one of several designs that would need to be developed in order to meet the many possible problems.
Yet this and the other designs with potential business backing, do not present themselves are inadequate alone, a social problem itself, in that these 'experts' are not pounding home the truth that no one an tell ahead of time which of these would be needed and/or would work if tried, so several different esigns would be required to be available.
Also, these are large scale interplanetary programs, with a good chance of technical failure preventing successful completion, thus making it necessary to have more than one of each design available.
Figure the odds of getting funding for more than one copy of one design.
Yeah, until the impact table comes out with our names on it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486698</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Coren22</author>
	<datestamp>1261149300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aim it at the US, we wouldn't miss our country anyways<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aim it at the US , we would n't miss our country anyways : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aim it at the US, we wouldn't miss our country anyways :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485608</id>
	<title>Re:Who gets to decide where it's targeted?</title>
	<author>angel'o'sphere</author>
	<datestamp>1261142340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>It'll be an international, outerspace game of hot potato. I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US, we'll find a way to knock it off course. Then, say if it's headed towards Russia,<br></i></p><p>When an asteroid hits earth, it does not matter where it hits, we are all dead. Everything small enough to survive it, is called a meteor. Well, strictly speaking it is not correct.</p><p>However this whole article and discussion is not about a rock that is a few hundred yards in diameter but about something that is 10 miles or 50 miles big. If we get hit by such a monstrum nothing besides insects some mice and bacteria, some fish perhaps will survive it.</p><p>angel'o'sphere</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll be an international , outerspace game of hot potato .
I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US , we 'll find a way to knock it off course .
Then , say if it 's headed towards Russia,When an asteroid hits earth , it does not matter where it hits , we are all dead .
Everything small enough to survive it , is called a meteor .
Well , strictly speaking it is not correct.However this whole article and discussion is not about a rock that is a few hundred yards in diameter but about something that is 10 miles or 50 miles big .
If we get hit by such a monstrum nothing besides insects some mice and bacteria , some fish perhaps will survive it.angel'o'sphere</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll be an international, outerspace game of hot potato.
I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US, we'll find a way to knock it off course.
Then, say if it's headed towards Russia,When an asteroid hits earth, it does not matter where it hits, we are all dead.
Everything small enough to survive it, is called a meteor.
Well, strictly speaking it is not correct.However this whole article and discussion is not about a rock that is a few hundred yards in diameter but about something that is 10 miles or 50 miles big.
If we get hit by such a monstrum nothing besides insects some mice and bacteria, some fish perhaps will survive it.angel'o'sphere</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484794</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261130820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>How could you be so callous towards the massive loss of penguin life?! On Slashdot, no less!! You must be a Mac or *BSD fanboi. Or a Microsoft shill. Any truly free-thinking individual would obviously recommend <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&amp;source=s\_q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=Redmond,+WA&amp;sll=37.0625,-95.677068&amp;sspn=53.167773,114.169922&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Redmond,+King,+Washington&amp;z=13" title="google.com">somewhere else</a> [google.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>How could you be so callous towards the massive loss of penguin life ? !
On Slashdot , no less ! !
You must be a Mac or * BSD fanboi .
Or a Microsoft shill .
Any truly free-thinking individual would obviously recommend somewhere else [ google.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How could you be so callous towards the massive loss of penguin life?!
On Slashdot, no less!!
You must be a Mac or *BSD fanboi.
Or a Microsoft shill.
Any truly free-thinking individual would obviously recommend somewhere else [google.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487256</id>
	<title>Nuclear may not be the best idea</title>
	<author>cjjjer</author>
	<datestamp>1261152000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Based on the little information on Wikipedia about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">High-Altitude Nuclear Explosion</a> [wikipedia.org] or HANE it would seem that the eventual blast of the devices would make their back to Earth and cause other issues.  It's not as easy as just launch, sit back and relax.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Based on the little information on Wikipedia about High-Altitude Nuclear Explosion [ wikipedia.org ] or HANE it would seem that the eventual blast of the devices would make their back to Earth and cause other issues .
It 's not as easy as just launch , sit back and relax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Based on the little information on Wikipedia about High-Altitude Nuclear Explosion [wikipedia.org] or HANE it would seem that the eventual blast of the devices would make their back to Earth and cause other issues.
It's not as easy as just launch, sit back and relax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486862</id>
	<title>Space Lasers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261149960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you could mount a huge chemical based laser in space(or the moon) and zap the roid enough to move it off target</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you could mount a huge chemical based laser in space ( or the moon ) and zap the roid enough to move it off target</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you could mount a huge chemical based laser in space(or the moon) and zap the roid enough to move it off target</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496430</id>
	<title>Change treaty, hit Africa</title>
	<author>ebvwfbw</author>
	<datestamp>1261156260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We are no where near ready to do something about an asteroid about to hit us. First off, we would get possibly less than a day's notice.  Some that have nearly hit us recently we didn't even know about until it had passed us.  Then lots of thought would have to be put on how to properly address the threat.  Do nothing, if do something, what do we do?  Who would do it?  If it had to hit a continent, that would be Africa.  Nothing significant is down there anyhow, it's almost all desert.  In fact Saharan sand would probably be the best thing it could hit..  We may also get rid of a pirate problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are no where near ready to do something about an asteroid about to hit us .
First off , we would get possibly less than a day 's notice .
Some that have nearly hit us recently we did n't even know about until it had passed us .
Then lots of thought would have to be put on how to properly address the threat .
Do nothing , if do something , what do we do ?
Who would do it ?
If it had to hit a continent , that would be Africa .
Nothing significant is down there anyhow , it 's almost all desert .
In fact Saharan sand would probably be the best thing it could hit.. We may also get rid of a pirate problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are no where near ready to do something about an asteroid about to hit us.
First off, we would get possibly less than a day's notice.
Some that have nearly hit us recently we didn't even know about until it had passed us.
Then lots of thought would have to be put on how to properly address the threat.
Do nothing, if do something, what do we do?
Who would do it?
If it had to hit a continent, that would be Africa.
Nothing significant is down there anyhow, it's almost all desert.
In fact Saharan sand would probably be the best thing it could hit..  We may also get rid of a pirate problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488100</id>
	<title>Help me out here...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1261155480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, the issues with using a nuclear weapon are political, not social.  Then again I'm more concerned about the physics of that solution.</p><p>As for dragging the asteroid so it will miss... the supposed social concern is that there will be times between when you start changing the path and when you've got it fully deflected, where it would (if you stop pushing) hit a place on Earth that it would not have hit before.  Two things:</p><p>1) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact.  You wouldn't know for sure that it would impact yet.  Much less would you know <i>where</i> the impact would occur.  Hence, you wouldn't <i>know</i> where the "corridor of risk" would be.  Nobody would have to choose which countries to "put at risk", because nobody would be able to make such a choice if they wanted to.</p><p>2) If the asteroid's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth, then there's a 70\% chance (roughly) that it will hit water.  Even the people in any given country are probably at equal or less risk if the asteroid is momentarily pointed at their country's land mass, than if it is left to hit the ocean in their hemisphere.  In other words, the "corridor of risk" wouldn't be at elevated risk - it would be at <i>slightly less decreased</i> risk than other locations on Earth.</p><p>It seems to me that if you want to drag the asteroid, picking the direction should be easy.  Estimate its current trajectory as best you can.  On the very unlikley chance that trajectory hits the center of the Earth, I guess you have to choose randomly; but in the vastly more likely case that it passes <i>relatively near</i> the center of the Earth (such that it would hit the Earth), wouldn't you drag it in the opposite direction (i.e. draw an arrow from the center of the earth to the line of the trajectory where it passes the center; push it the direction the arrow points)?  Minimum energy and maximum chance of success...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , the issues with using a nuclear weapon are political , not social .
Then again I 'm more concerned about the physics of that solution.As for dragging the asteroid so it will miss... the supposed social concern is that there will be times between when you start changing the path and when you 've got it fully deflected , where it would ( if you stop pushing ) hit a place on Earth that it would not have hit before .
Two things : 1 ) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact .
You would n't know for sure that it would impact yet .
Much less would you know where the impact would occur .
Hence , you would n't know where the " corridor of risk " would be .
Nobody would have to choose which countries to " put at risk " , because nobody would be able to make such a choice if they wanted to.2 ) If the asteroid 's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth , then there 's a 70 \ % chance ( roughly ) that it will hit water .
Even the people in any given country are probably at equal or less risk if the asteroid is momentarily pointed at their country 's land mass , than if it is left to hit the ocean in their hemisphere .
In other words , the " corridor of risk " would n't be at elevated risk - it would be at slightly less decreased risk than other locations on Earth.It seems to me that if you want to drag the asteroid , picking the direction should be easy .
Estimate its current trajectory as best you can .
On the very unlikley chance that trajectory hits the center of the Earth , I guess you have to choose randomly ; but in the vastly more likely case that it passes relatively near the center of the Earth ( such that it would hit the Earth ) , would n't you drag it in the opposite direction ( i.e .
draw an arrow from the center of the earth to the line of the trajectory where it passes the center ; push it the direction the arrow points ) ?
Minimum energy and maximum chance of success.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, the issues with using a nuclear weapon are political, not social.
Then again I'm more concerned about the physics of that solution.As for dragging the asteroid so it will miss... the supposed social concern is that there will be times between when you start changing the path and when you've got it fully deflected, where it would (if you stop pushing) hit a place on Earth that it would not have hit before.
Two things:1) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact.
You wouldn't know for sure that it would impact yet.
Much less would you know where the impact would occur.
Hence, you wouldn't know where the "corridor of risk" would be.
Nobody would have to choose which countries to "put at risk", because nobody would be able to make such a choice if they wanted to.2) If the asteroid's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth, then there's a 70\% chance (roughly) that it will hit water.
Even the people in any given country are probably at equal or less risk if the asteroid is momentarily pointed at their country's land mass, than if it is left to hit the ocean in their hemisphere.
In other words, the "corridor of risk" wouldn't be at elevated risk - it would be at slightly less decreased risk than other locations on Earth.It seems to me that if you want to drag the asteroid, picking the direction should be easy.
Estimate its current trajectory as best you can.
On the very unlikley chance that trajectory hits the center of the Earth, I guess you have to choose randomly; but in the vastly more likely case that it passes relatively near the center of the Earth (such that it would hit the Earth), wouldn't you drag it in the opposite direction (i.e.
draw an arrow from the center of the earth to the line of the trajectory where it passes the center; push it the direction the arrow points)?
Minimum energy and maximum chance of success...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487214</id>
	<title>Nuclear?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261151820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nuclear weapons in space are even more pointless than conventional explosives.</p><p>At best, a nuclear weapon fired at a ship would cause EM issues, wut a rock could care less.  Nuclear is only devastating on earth due to chain reaction, and radiation damage to life.  The actual explosive force is not impressive given the size and weight of the munition.</p><p>Conventional explosives could only be useful is 1) they work in a vacuum and 2) it could penetrate far enough to crack the roid before explosion.</p><p>No, we're looking at 2 scenarios: most likely, extreme kenetic impact (very fast moving bullet) or powered diversion (land a rocket on it and push).</p><p>Since we can't exaclty get 200 ton bullets in orbit, (and we'd need a lot of them to take care of fragments that might still be headed our way), we need lighter munitions that can self accelerate to very high speeds.  These would be essentially useless to fire from orbit to the planet, but at ranges of a few light seconds they could be devastatingly effective.  Mounting a rocket on an incoming roid is something FAR more difficult, and we're probably 100-150 years from the tech necessary (and we'd have the have a LONG warning, likely months or years).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nuclear weapons in space are even more pointless than conventional explosives.At best , a nuclear weapon fired at a ship would cause EM issues , wut a rock could care less .
Nuclear is only devastating on earth due to chain reaction , and radiation damage to life .
The actual explosive force is not impressive given the size and weight of the munition.Conventional explosives could only be useful is 1 ) they work in a vacuum and 2 ) it could penetrate far enough to crack the roid before explosion.No , we 're looking at 2 scenarios : most likely , extreme kenetic impact ( very fast moving bullet ) or powered diversion ( land a rocket on it and push ) .Since we ca n't exaclty get 200 ton bullets in orbit , ( and we 'd need a lot of them to take care of fragments that might still be headed our way ) , we need lighter munitions that can self accelerate to very high speeds .
These would be essentially useless to fire from orbit to the planet , but at ranges of a few light seconds they could be devastatingly effective .
Mounting a rocket on an incoming roid is something FAR more difficult , and we 're probably 100-150 years from the tech necessary ( and we 'd have the have a LONG warning , likely months or years ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nuclear weapons in space are even more pointless than conventional explosives.At best, a nuclear weapon fired at a ship would cause EM issues, wut a rock could care less.
Nuclear is only devastating on earth due to chain reaction, and radiation damage to life.
The actual explosive force is not impressive given the size and weight of the munition.Conventional explosives could only be useful is 1) they work in a vacuum and 2) it could penetrate far enough to crack the roid before explosion.No, we're looking at 2 scenarios: most likely, extreme kenetic impact (very fast moving bullet) or powered diversion (land a rocket on it and push).Since we can't exaclty get 200 ton bullets in orbit, (and we'd need a lot of them to take care of fragments that might still be headed our way), we need lighter munitions that can self accelerate to very high speeds.
These would be essentially useless to fire from orbit to the planet, but at ranges of a few light seconds they could be devastatingly effective.
Mounting a rocket on an incoming roid is something FAR more difficult, and we're probably 100-150 years from the tech necessary (and we'd have the have a LONG warning, likely months or years).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485434</id>
	<title>US?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261140480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would say, for reasonable majority of Earth population today, it is of course US, no offense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say , for reasonable majority of Earth population today , it is of course US , no offense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say, for reasonable majority of Earth population today, it is of course US, no offense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486188</id>
	<title>Why is this marked funny?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261146900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why the hell would you aim an asteroid at either country, which have contributed so much to art and science?  Everyone knows that the planet would be best-served by aiming the asteroid at the enemies of civilization in the Middle East.</p><p>P.S. - The public gives Obama an 'F' on his first-year performance.  He's going to bow, apologize, and spend his way into a decisive loss in 2012.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the hell would you aim an asteroid at either country , which have contributed so much to art and science ?
Everyone knows that the planet would be best-served by aiming the asteroid at the enemies of civilization in the Middle East.P.S .
- The public gives Obama an 'F ' on his first-year performance .
He 's going to bow , apologize , and spend his way into a decisive loss in 2012 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the hell would you aim an asteroid at either country, which have contributed so much to art and science?
Everyone knows that the planet would be best-served by aiming the asteroid at the enemies of civilization in the Middle East.P.S.
- The public gives Obama an 'F' on his first-year performance.
He's going to bow, apologize, and spend his way into a decisive loss in 2012.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484636</id>
	<title>A few years notice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261129560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try a few seconds. The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us, there's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.</p><p>And sending a nuclear missile at it sounds all well and good, but if it fails we'll be hit by the same asteroid, except now it will be intensely radioactive. And just because something works in the movies doesn't mean it'd work in real life...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try a few seconds .
The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us , there 's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.And sending a nuclear missile at it sounds all well and good , but if it fails we 'll be hit by the same asteroid , except now it will be intensely radioactive .
And just because something works in the movies does n't mean it 'd work in real life.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try a few seconds.
The only sure-fire way to find out if an asteroid is going to hit us is to let it hit us, there's no foolproof way to predict the way orbits are going to meet.And sending a nuclear missile at it sounds all well and good, but if it fails we'll be hit by the same asteroid, except now it will be intensely radioactive.
And just because something works in the movies doesn't mean it'd work in real life...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484672</id>
	<title>Pick Alaska!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261129800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pick Alaska for the collision target.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pick Alaska for the collision target .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pick Alaska for the collision target.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486468</id>
	<title>Wikipedia:Ignore All Rules</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1261148160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the cardinal <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ignore\_all\_rules" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">rules</a> [wikipedia.org] of Wikipedia is "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, <b>ignore it</b>."</p><p>If a nuclear test-ban treaty prevents you from saving the planet, <b>ignore it</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the cardinal rules [ wikipedia.org ] of Wikipedia is " If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia , ignore it .
" If a nuclear test-ban treaty prevents you from saving the planet , ignore it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the cardinal rules [wikipedia.org] of Wikipedia is "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.
"If a nuclear test-ban treaty prevents you from saving the planet, ignore it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491508</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>riT-k0MA</author>
	<datestamp>1261167840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Send it to North Africa. <br>
Not much there besides a big sandy desert that would benifit from being glassed over. <br>
Besides, the dust that would be launched into the air would be the perfect countermeasure against global warming.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Send it to North Africa .
Not much there besides a big sandy desert that would benifit from being glassed over .
Besides , the dust that would be launched into the air would be the perfect countermeasure against global warming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send it to North Africa.
Not much there besides a big sandy desert that would benifit from being glassed over.
Besides, the dust that would be launched into the air would be the perfect countermeasure against global warming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486132</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261146600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well.. just let us escape ! So we can bother english-speaking Canadian elsewhere... like Ontario or Alberta<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well.. just let us escape !
So we can bother english-speaking Canadian elsewhere... like Ontario or Alberta : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well.. just let us escape !
So we can bother english-speaking Canadian elsewhere... like Ontario or Alberta :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484882</id>
	<title>We're all doomed if a "Disasteroid" happens...</title>
	<author>King InuYasha</author>
	<datestamp>1261132020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it were something like "Disasteroid", I doubt that the world would come together to save the planet like they did there. What is more likely to happen is that the Big Powers That Be(TM) will just go ahead and launch their own independent planet-saving operations. And then something really bad would eventually happen. Like each of the pieces of the shattered asteroid would impact the Earth and shatter the planet anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it were something like " Disasteroid " , I doubt that the world would come together to save the planet like they did there .
What is more likely to happen is that the Big Powers That Be ( TM ) will just go ahead and launch their own independent planet-saving operations .
And then something really bad would eventually happen .
Like each of the pieces of the shattered asteroid would impact the Earth and shatter the planet anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it were something like "Disasteroid", I doubt that the world would come together to save the planet like they did there.
What is more likely to happen is that the Big Powers That Be(TM) will just go ahead and launch their own independent planet-saving operations.
And then something really bad would eventually happen.
Like each of the pieces of the shattered asteroid would impact the Earth and shatter the planet anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485018</id>
	<title>Look at it this way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People are arguing about the source of global warming. Everyone for the most part agrees there's global warming now so the argument has shifted to it's just a natural cycle. Everyone agrees that it's caused by CO2 in the atmosphere but one side says a natural source and the other says it's the billions of tons of waste CO2 we pump into the atmosphere. Oddly enough the levels of CO2 are 50\% higher than they have been in over a million years so the last time it peaked like this naturally was millions of years ago and it took tens of thousands of years to reach that level naturally. It's done it in 200 years this time. There's shouldn't be much of a debate but both sides are entrenched and we won't do anything until it's far too late.</p><p>Why does this apply? Well one side seems to not want to do anything about global warming because at first they deny it's happening, then we aren't the cause and finally it'll be too late to do anything about it. Say an Asteroid has a 1 in a 100 chance of hitting us in 10 years. In five years it's 1 in 10, then in 8 years it's 50/50. Well 1 in a 100 is still a long shot. 1 in 10 is still unlikely and even if it happens it's God's will so we can't stop it anyway. It hits 50/50 and it's too late to do anything about it so maybe if we ignore it it'll go away.</p><p>It seems to be human nature and it forms a pattern each time. I remember these same arguments about pollution years ago. It wasn't a sudden event so people did change somewhat but there's still denial even on that. Sea food can poison you from the mercury but few want to change the causes. An asteroid is big enough to see with the naked eye and people will stand there as it closes in still swearing it will either miss us or bounce harmlessly off the atmosphere. It's easier to deny than deal with the hard decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People are arguing about the source of global warming .
Everyone for the most part agrees there 's global warming now so the argument has shifted to it 's just a natural cycle .
Everyone agrees that it 's caused by CO2 in the atmosphere but one side says a natural source and the other says it 's the billions of tons of waste CO2 we pump into the atmosphere .
Oddly enough the levels of CO2 are 50 \ % higher than they have been in over a million years so the last time it peaked like this naturally was millions of years ago and it took tens of thousands of years to reach that level naturally .
It 's done it in 200 years this time .
There 's should n't be much of a debate but both sides are entrenched and we wo n't do anything until it 's far too late.Why does this apply ?
Well one side seems to not want to do anything about global warming because at first they deny it 's happening , then we are n't the cause and finally it 'll be too late to do anything about it .
Say an Asteroid has a 1 in a 100 chance of hitting us in 10 years .
In five years it 's 1 in 10 , then in 8 years it 's 50/50 .
Well 1 in a 100 is still a long shot .
1 in 10 is still unlikely and even if it happens it 's God 's will so we ca n't stop it anyway .
It hits 50/50 and it 's too late to do anything about it so maybe if we ignore it it 'll go away.It seems to be human nature and it forms a pattern each time .
I remember these same arguments about pollution years ago .
It was n't a sudden event so people did change somewhat but there 's still denial even on that .
Sea food can poison you from the mercury but few want to change the causes .
An asteroid is big enough to see with the naked eye and people will stand there as it closes in still swearing it will either miss us or bounce harmlessly off the atmosphere .
It 's easier to deny than deal with the hard decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are arguing about the source of global warming.
Everyone for the most part agrees there's global warming now so the argument has shifted to it's just a natural cycle.
Everyone agrees that it's caused by CO2 in the atmosphere but one side says a natural source and the other says it's the billions of tons of waste CO2 we pump into the atmosphere.
Oddly enough the levels of CO2 are 50\% higher than they have been in over a million years so the last time it peaked like this naturally was millions of years ago and it took tens of thousands of years to reach that level naturally.
It's done it in 200 years this time.
There's shouldn't be much of a debate but both sides are entrenched and we won't do anything until it's far too late.Why does this apply?
Well one side seems to not want to do anything about global warming because at first they deny it's happening, then we aren't the cause and finally it'll be too late to do anything about it.
Say an Asteroid has a 1 in a 100 chance of hitting us in 10 years.
In five years it's 1 in 10, then in 8 years it's 50/50.
Well 1 in a 100 is still a long shot.
1 in 10 is still unlikely and even if it happens it's God's will so we can't stop it anyway.
It hits 50/50 and it's too late to do anything about it so maybe if we ignore it it'll go away.It seems to be human nature and it forms a pattern each time.
I remember these same arguments about pollution years ago.
It wasn't a sudden event so people did change somewhat but there's still denial even on that.
Sea food can poison you from the mercury but few want to change the causes.
An asteroid is big enough to see with the naked eye and people will stand there as it closes in still swearing it will either miss us or bounce harmlessly off the atmosphere.
It's easier to deny than deal with the hard decisions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490288</id>
	<title>That's easy</title>
	<author>formfeed</author>
	<datestamp>1261163340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To get a nuke into space you just have to make it a joint project of NATO, Russia, and China. <p>
As for the question, where the deflected asteroid's gonna hit: not the US, Europe, Russia, or China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To get a nuke into space you just have to make it a joint project of NATO , Russia , and China .
As for the question , where the deflected asteroid 's gon na hit : not the US , Europe , Russia , or China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To get a nuke into space you just have to make it a joint project of NATO, Russia, and China.
As for the question, where the deflected asteroid's gonna hit: not the US, Europe, Russia, or China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720</id>
	<title>Asteroid != Climate Change</title>
	<author>ocop</author>
	<datestamp>1261130220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>A conspicuous "global killer" hurtling towards us overcomes the basic psychological barriers which inhibit the acceptance of global warming as a genuine, urgent threat (and which currently our hobble cooperative efforts). It's a good deal harder to "deny" that a giant rock is going to strike the Earth than it is to disingenuously claim "the science isn't there" about the highly complex, scientifically abstract climate system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A conspicuous " global killer " hurtling towards us overcomes the basic psychological barriers which inhibit the acceptance of global warming as a genuine , urgent threat ( and which currently our hobble cooperative efforts ) .
It 's a good deal harder to " deny " that a giant rock is going to strike the Earth than it is to disingenuously claim " the science is n't there " about the highly complex , scientifically abstract climate system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A conspicuous "global killer" hurtling towards us overcomes the basic psychological barriers which inhibit the acceptance of global warming as a genuine, urgent threat (and which currently our hobble cooperative efforts).
It's a good deal harder to "deny" that a giant rock is going to strike the Earth than it is to disingenuously claim "the science isn't there" about the highly complex, scientifically abstract climate system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485934</id>
	<title>Not like global warming, more like CFCs</title>
	<author>Brian\_Ellenberger</author>
	<datestamp>1261145460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with Global Warming is that the science has been mixed far too much with anti-capitalist politicians.  From Copenhagen:
<p>
President Chavez
"socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that&rsquo;s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let&rsquo;s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.&rdquo; He won a standing ovation.</p><p>
<a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/putting\_our\_economy\_in\_the\_hands\_of\_chavez\_fans" title="news.com.au">http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/putting\_our\_economy\_in\_the\_hands\_of\_chavez\_fans</a> [news.com.au]

What does that have to do with the technical problem of global warming?  Absolutely nothing.

For a better example of how everyone can cooperate see the battle against CFC emissions.  That was a much more scientifically proven problem and thanks to the Montreal Protocol <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal\_Protocol" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal\_Protocol</a> [wikipedia.org] is now a problem under control.  It didn't devolve into "evil capitalists destroying the environment" and "lets destroy all air conditions and refrigerators".  There was a problem, then a technical fix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Global Warming is that the science has been mixed far too much with anti-capitalist politicians .
From Copenhagen : President Chavez " socialism , the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room , that    s the way to save the planet , capitalism is the road to hell....let    s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.    He won a standing ovation .
http : //blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/putting \ _our \ _economy \ _in \ _the \ _hands \ _of \ _chavez \ _fans [ news.com.au ] What does that have to do with the technical problem of global warming ?
Absolutely nothing .
For a better example of how everyone can cooperate see the battle against CFC emissions .
That was a much more scientifically proven problem and thanks to the Montreal Protocol http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal \ _Protocol [ wikipedia.org ] is now a problem under control .
It did n't devolve into " evil capitalists destroying the environment " and " lets destroy all air conditions and refrigerators " .
There was a problem , then a technical fix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Global Warming is that the science has been mixed far too much with anti-capitalist politicians.
From Copenhagen:

President Chavez
"socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” He won a standing ovation.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/putting\_our\_economy\_in\_the\_hands\_of\_chavez\_fans [news.com.au]

What does that have to do with the technical problem of global warming?
Absolutely nothing.
For a better example of how everyone can cooperate see the battle against CFC emissions.
That was a much more scientifically proven problem and thanks to the Montreal Protocol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal\_Protocol [wikipedia.org] is now a problem under control.
It didn't devolve into "evil capitalists destroying the environment" and "lets destroy all air conditions and refrigerators".
There was a problem, then a technical fix.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488422</id>
	<title>Re:Religious Armaggedon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261156740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat. As recent history has demonstrated, people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary.</p></div><p>Slashdot cynicism is unparalleled. Back up your claims that those who would think it act of god are the biggest threat in the event of an asteroid threat (how do you know this, just by inferring? That's not enough). Otherwise, this statement is just base propaganda and fearmongering.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat .
As recent history has demonstrated , people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god 's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary.Slashdot cynicism is unparalleled .
Back up your claims that those who would think it act of god are the biggest threat in the event of an asteroid threat ( how do you know this , just by inferring ?
That 's not enough ) .
Otherwise , this statement is just base propaganda and fearmongering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat.
As recent history has demonstrated, people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary.Slashdot cynicism is unparalleled.
Back up your claims that those who would think it act of god are the biggest threat in the event of an asteroid threat (how do you know this, just by inferring?
That's not enough).
Otherwise, this statement is just base propaganda and fearmongering.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>ZeRu</author>
	<datestamp>1261130340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I had the power to decide where to aim the asteroid, I would choose Australia. They're formal penal colony, have low density of population, lots of dangerous animal species, and their government wants to censor the Internet. Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous wines and cheeses. I say go for Australia, asteroid!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I had the power to decide where to aim the asteroid , I would choose Australia .
They 're formal penal colony , have low density of population , lots of dangerous animal species , and their government wants to censor the Internet .
Also , unlike Italy and France , they do n't have famous wines and cheeses .
I say go for Australia , asteroid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I had the power to decide where to aim the asteroid, I would choose Australia.
They're formal penal colony, have low density of population, lots of dangerous animal species, and their government wants to censor the Internet.
Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous wines and cheeses.
I say go for Australia, asteroid!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487840</id>
	<title>If we could pick a place.. What about</title>
	<author>doctorjay</author>
	<datestamp>1261154400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Shahara Desert? The assuming we could force it to anyhwere we want on earth with a reasonable degree of accuracy AND the incoming projectile was coming perpendicular to the equator. If it were coming somwhere from the top or bottom, (that maynot matter..)

I dont have anything in Africa but I dont believe that a greater area exists in all the world with such a low population density. 3.5 million square miles (9 million square kilometers) of desert. Ganted its inhabited by some, but it would be a lot easier to evac them then anywhere else on earth right?

And who knows whith all the  heat of the impact the sand would glaze over and we would ahve a massive glass quarry afterwards hehe</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Shahara Desert ?
The assuming we could force it to anyhwere we want on earth with a reasonable degree of accuracy AND the incoming projectile was coming perpendicular to the equator .
If it were coming somwhere from the top or bottom , ( that maynot matter.. ) I dont have anything in Africa but I dont believe that a greater area exists in all the world with such a low population density .
3.5 million square miles ( 9 million square kilometers ) of desert .
Ganted its inhabited by some , but it would be a lot easier to evac them then anywhere else on earth right ?
And who knows whith all the heat of the impact the sand would glaze over and we would ahve a massive glass quarry afterwards hehe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Shahara Desert?
The assuming we could force it to anyhwere we want on earth with a reasonable degree of accuracy AND the incoming projectile was coming perpendicular to the equator.
If it were coming somwhere from the top or bottom, (that maynot matter..)

I dont have anything in Africa but I dont believe that a greater area exists in all the world with such a low population density.
3.5 million square miles (9 million square kilometers) of desert.
Ganted its inhabited by some, but it would be a lot easier to evac them then anywhere else on earth right?
And who knows whith all the  heat of the impact the sand would glaze over and we would ahve a massive glass quarry afterwards hehe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486234</id>
	<title>"Dear world we violated the treaty...</title>
	<author>NevarMore</author>
	<datestamp>1261147140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...to save all of you ungrateful fucks from a planet killing asteroid. Would you like to thank us or try and penalize us. Remember we only sent ONE of our nukes up."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...to save all of you ungrateful fucks from a planet killing asteroid .
Would you like to thank us or try and penalize us .
Remember we only sent ONE of our nukes up .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...to save all of you ungrateful fucks from a planet killing asteroid.
Would you like to thank us or try and penalize us.
Remember we only sent ONE of our nukes up.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487638</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261153680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Qu&#233;bec does have a long tradition of comedy.  Ever heard of Just For Laughs?</p><p>Plus Cirque du Soleil!  And even C&#233;line Dion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Qu   bec does have a long tradition of comedy .
Ever heard of Just For Laughs ? Plus Cirque du Soleil !
And even C   line Dion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Québec does have a long tradition of comedy.
Ever heard of Just For Laughs?Plus Cirque du Soleil!
And even Céline Dion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497134</id>
	<title>Re:Who gets to decide where it's targeted?</title>
	<author>KingAlanI</author>
	<datestamp>1261253700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it would be too hard to *initially* aim it the middle of the Pacific or something, assuming you could aim the asteroid at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it would be too hard to * initially * aim it the middle of the Pacific or something , assuming you could aim the asteroid at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it would be too hard to *initially* aim it the middle of the Pacific or something, assuming you could aim the asteroid at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487232</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1261151880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming.</p> </div><p>Oh really? When did they ever find the evidence for the assertion that global warming threatens somebody's existence on Earth? My view is that asteroids are more of a real threat to human existence because well, a big asteroid really can wipe out human civilization. No one has proposed a mechanism by which global warming could do that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We already have something threatening human ( and animal ) existence on earth , it 's called global warming .
Oh really ?
When did they ever find the evidence for the assertion that global warming threatens somebody 's existence on Earth ?
My view is that asteroids are more of a real threat to human existence because well , a big asteroid really can wipe out human civilization .
No one has proposed a mechanism by which global warming could do that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming.
Oh really?
When did they ever find the evidence for the assertion that global warming threatens somebody's existence on Earth?
My view is that asteroids are more of a real threat to human existence because well, a big asteroid really can wipe out human civilization.
No one has proposed a mechanism by which global warming could do that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486056</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1261146180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are aware that local space IS pretty two dimensional, at least where it counts?  Nearly all of the objects in the near solar system are on the ecliptic, so they generally WOULD come "straight in".</p><p>That being said, the earth IS tilted, and for about half the year the Antarctic is pointing "out".</p><p>Besides which, those penguin movies were starting to get pretty damned irritating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are aware that local space IS pretty two dimensional , at least where it counts ?
Nearly all of the objects in the near solar system are on the ecliptic , so they generally WOULD come " straight in " .That being said , the earth IS tilted , and for about half the year the Antarctic is pointing " out " .Besides which , those penguin movies were starting to get pretty damned irritating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are aware that local space IS pretty two dimensional, at least where it counts?
Nearly all of the objects in the near solar system are on the ecliptic, so they generally WOULD come "straight in".That being said, the earth IS tilted, and for about half the year the Antarctic is pointing "out".Besides which, those penguin movies were starting to get pretty damned irritating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493776</id>
	<title>Martians may throw rocks at us</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not the green colored Martians, but the Chinese immigrant sort.  This is fairly likely to happen in the next 200 years when they get sick of Terrestrials trying to run their business.
</p><p>Since the likelihood of an Asteroid striking Earth goes up quite a bit when it's got a rocket guiding it in, yes, I'd say there's cause for prudent preparation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not the green colored Martians , but the Chinese immigrant sort .
This is fairly likely to happen in the next 200 years when they get sick of Terrestrials trying to run their business .
Since the likelihood of an Asteroid striking Earth goes up quite a bit when it 's got a rocket guiding it in , yes , I 'd say there 's cause for prudent preparation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not the green colored Martians, but the Chinese immigrant sort.
This is fairly likely to happen in the next 200 years when they get sick of Terrestrials trying to run their business.
Since the likelihood of an Asteroid striking Earth goes up quite a bit when it's got a rocket guiding it in, yes, I'd say there's cause for prudent preparation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489462</id>
	<title>Let's Solve the Population Problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261160760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Global warming is not a problem.  It is a symptom of the global overpopulation problem.  Global warming is like energy, fresh water, land use, habitat loss, fish in the sea, air polution, overcrowding, wars yada yada yada.</p><p>Don't believe that?  Suppose the world had only 5 million people rather than 5 billion; how many of those problems would we have?</p><p>Drastic and immediate population reduction is the only way out. But how do we do that in a politically acceptable way?   Allowing an asteroid hit without interference sounds like a made-to-order solution.</p><p>Just kidding<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  (or am I?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Global warming is not a problem .
It is a symptom of the global overpopulation problem .
Global warming is like energy , fresh water , land use , habitat loss , fish in the sea , air polution , overcrowding , wars yada yada yada.Do n't believe that ?
Suppose the world had only 5 million people rather than 5 billion ; how many of those problems would we have ? Drastic and immediate population reduction is the only way out .
But how do we do that in a politically acceptable way ?
Allowing an asteroid hit without interference sounds like a made-to-order solution.Just kidding : ) ( or am I ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Global warming is not a problem.
It is a symptom of the global overpopulation problem.
Global warming is like energy, fresh water, land use, habitat loss, fish in the sea, air polution, overcrowding, wars yada yada yada.Don't believe that?
Suppose the world had only 5 million people rather than 5 billion; how many of those problems would we have?Drastic and immediate population reduction is the only way out.
But how do we do that in a politically acceptable way?
Allowing an asteroid hit without interference sounds like a made-to-order solution.Just kidding :)  (or am I?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497306</id>
	<title>water</title>
	<author>GregNorc</author>
	<datestamp>1261215540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Waiter covers 70\% of the Earth's surface. Now, if we exclude areas that would cause catastrophic flooding the number gets smaller, but I'll bet we could find someplace out in the middle of the ocean to deflect it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Waiter covers 70 \ % of the Earth 's surface .
Now , if we exclude areas that would cause catastrophic flooding the number gets smaller , but I 'll bet we could find someplace out in the middle of the ocean to deflect it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Waiter covers 70\% of the Earth's surface.
Now, if we exclude areas that would cause catastrophic flooding the number gets smaller, but I'll bet we could find someplace out in the middle of the ocean to deflect it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490146</id>
	<title>Re:Who gets to decide where it's targeted?</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1261162860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, no.  The *asteroid* 99942 Apophis is 200-300 meters in diameter and is well understood to be a threat of regional destruction, not world-wide devastation.</p><p>The real problem I see with this analysis is simply that our ability to track doesn't tell you where its going to hit, it will simply tell you theres a 25\% of it hitting the Earth at all, and that one spot might be at the peak of the probability distribution (bell curve).  To be sure it wouldn't hit you have to move it by many Earth-radii anyway, so you probably would never know that you just had it aimed at Russia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , no .
The * asteroid * 99942 Apophis is 200-300 meters in diameter and is well understood to be a threat of regional destruction , not world-wide devastation.The real problem I see with this analysis is simply that our ability to track does n't tell you where its going to hit , it will simply tell you theres a 25 \ % of it hitting the Earth at all , and that one spot might be at the peak of the probability distribution ( bell curve ) .
To be sure it would n't hit you have to move it by many Earth-radii anyway , so you probably would never know that you just had it aimed at Russia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, no.
The *asteroid* 99942 Apophis is 200-300 meters in diameter and is well understood to be a threat of regional destruction, not world-wide devastation.The real problem I see with this analysis is simply that our ability to track doesn't tell you where its going to hit, it will simply tell you theres a 25\% of it hitting the Earth at all, and that one spot might be at the peak of the probability distribution (bell curve).
To be sure it wouldn't hit you have to move it by many Earth-radii anyway, so you probably would never know that you just had it aimed at Russia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488944</id>
	<title>Africa</title>
	<author>scorp1us</author>
	<datestamp>1261158840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot Africa, which on the NASA Apophis simulation is facing the asteroid as it comes at us. However if it misses Africa, it'll end up in the Atlantic and doom the US East coast and Caribbean.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot Africa , which on the NASA Apophis simulation is facing the asteroid as it comes at us .
However if it misses Africa , it 'll end up in the Atlantic and doom the US East coast and Caribbean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot Africa, which on the NASA Apophis simulation is facing the asteroid as it comes at us.
However if it misses Africa, it'll end up in the Atlantic and doom the US East coast and Caribbean.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30494924</id>
	<title>Nonsense.</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1261140120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even a relatively small astroid hitting anywhere would be a major disaster for all people on Earth. This idea of choosing where to hit is just a distraction. If it hits it is a problem. The only solution is no hit. That actually isn't that hard if you're going to the trouble of doing anything at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even a relatively small astroid hitting anywhere would be a major disaster for all people on Earth .
This idea of choosing where to hit is just a distraction .
If it hits it is a problem .
The only solution is no hit .
That actually is n't that hard if you 're going to the trouble of doing anything at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even a relatively small astroid hitting anywhere would be a major disaster for all people on Earth.
This idea of choosing where to hit is just a distraction.
If it hits it is a problem.
The only solution is no hit.
That actually isn't that hard if you're going to the trouble of doing anything at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493420</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1261131840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next <em>100 years, and after that</em>, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.</p></div><p>I might be going completely off-topic here (burn, karma, burn...), but think about what saibot is saying.</p><p>When, in the history of mankind, would anyone say that in 100 years we will have completely different ways of handling asteroids?  When would it ever be believed?  When would it ever be true?</p><p>That statement is a testament to the fact that science and technology are progressing faster than ever.  Let us hope we can put the knowledge and capability we will gain to some good uses.</p><p>(You may go about your business.  Move along.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years , and after that , we 'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I might be going completely off-topic here ( burn , karma , burn... ) , but think about what saibot is saying.When , in the history of mankind , would anyone say that in 100 years we will have completely different ways of handling asteroids ?
When would it ever be believed ?
When would it ever be true ? That statement is a testament to the fact that science and technology are progressing faster than ever .
Let us hope we can put the knowledge and capability we will gain to some good uses .
( You may go about your business .
Move along .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I might be going completely off-topic here (burn, karma, burn...), but think about what saibot is saying.When, in the history of mankind, would anyone say that in 100 years we will have completely different ways of handling asteroids?
When would it ever be believed?
When would it ever be true?That statement is a testament to the fact that science and technology are progressing faster than ever.
Let us hope we can put the knowledge and capability we will gain to some good uses.
(You may go about your business.
Move along.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485258</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261137480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>America! It's new, and contains nothing of use. Wipe it out. Then we'll send all the religious nuts from Europe (again) to populate it (again).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>America !
It 's new , and contains nothing of use .
Wipe it out .
Then we 'll send all the religious nuts from Europe ( again ) to populate it ( again ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>America!
It's new, and contains nothing of use.
Wipe it out.
Then we'll send all the religious nuts from Europe (again) to populate it (again).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610</id>
	<title>Who gets to decide where it's targeted?</title>
	<author>theIsovist</author>
	<datestamp>1261129140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It'll be an international, outerspace game of hot potato.  I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US, we'll find a way to knock it off course.  Then, say if it's headed towards Russia, I'm sure they'll try to pass it along to.  Eventually, it'll be targeted towards an area that is either uninhabited, or too poor to play the game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll be an international , outerspace game of hot potato .
I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US , we 'll find a way to knock it off course .
Then , say if it 's headed towards Russia , I 'm sure they 'll try to pass it along to .
Eventually , it 'll be targeted towards an area that is either uninhabited , or too poor to play the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll be an international, outerspace game of hot potato.
I can guarantee you that if that asteroid is headed towards the US, we'll find a way to knock it off course.
Then, say if it's headed towards Russia, I'm sure they'll try to pass it along to.
Eventually, it'll be targeted towards an area that is either uninhabited, or too poor to play the game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490264</id>
	<title>Re:Asteroid != Climate Change</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1261163220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's also less of a reason to deny it.  Solving climate change involves significant lifestyle changes (at least in the short term) and a lot of investment by society.  This is really why its so controversial.  People want to keep driving their SUVs without feeling guilty, and switching all our power plants off of coal is a massive prospect.  Solving an asteroid impact is a one-time cost of a few hundred million for a small one, or a few billion for a large one, and then people can go on about their lives as normal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's also less of a reason to deny it .
Solving climate change involves significant lifestyle changes ( at least in the short term ) and a lot of investment by society .
This is really why its so controversial .
People want to keep driving their SUVs without feeling guilty , and switching all our power plants off of coal is a massive prospect .
Solving an asteroid impact is a one-time cost of a few hundred million for a small one , or a few billion for a large one , and then people can go on about their lives as normal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's also less of a reason to deny it.
Solving climate change involves significant lifestyle changes (at least in the short term) and a lot of investment by society.
This is really why its so controversial.
People want to keep driving their SUVs without feeling guilty, and switching all our power plants off of coal is a massive prospect.
Solving an asteroid impact is a one-time cost of a few hundred million for a small one, or a few billion for a large one, and then people can go on about their lives as normal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496680</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261160100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is this Antartica place you speak of? Does it have any resemblance to Antarctica, the huge continent of ice at the bottom of the world?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is this Antartica place you speak of ?
Does it have any resemblance to Antarctica , the huge continent of ice at the bottom of the world ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is this Antartica place you speak of?
Does it have any resemblance to Antarctica, the huge continent of ice at the bottom of the world?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485562</id>
	<title>at the axes of evil!</title>
	<author>ByTor-2112</author>
	<datestamp>1261141860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cartesian coordinates (0,0) on the axes of evil of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cartesian coordinates ( 0,0 ) on the axes of evil of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cartesian coordinates (0,0) on the axes of evil of course.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486636</id>
	<title>Re:Religious Armaggedon</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1261148940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't that part of the plot of <i>The Hammer of God</i>? That humanity was able to build a ship and weapons sufficient to destroy/deflect a world killing asteroid, but a lone religious nut sabotaged the mission and imperiled the world?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't that part of the plot of The Hammer of God ?
That humanity was able to build a ship and weapons sufficient to destroy/deflect a world killing asteroid , but a lone religious nut sabotaged the mission and imperiled the world ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't that part of the plot of The Hammer of God?
That humanity was able to build a ship and weapons sufficient to destroy/deflect a world killing asteroid, but a lone religious nut sabotaged the mission and imperiled the world?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487450</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>AGMW</author>
	<datestamp>1261152960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth, but isn't the idea to reduce civilian casualties?</p></div><p>
Actually, that whole "<i>reduce civilian casualties</i>" malarky would likely be the main problem. The damn politicians would likely be counting up civilians (and in the case of an asteroid strike <b>everyone</b> is a civilian!) rather than working out the most suitable place to do the least damage to the planet! That <i>most suitable place</i> may well be uninhabited - but Antarctica is most certainly isn't (sea level changes).
</p><p>
Even assuming we'd be able to chose a landing target, an empty place that throws large amounts of debris into the atmosphere could end up being worse than landing it somewhere more populated, but with a more suitable geology! In cases like these you have to stop thinking about individuals and think of the health of the planet as a single organism - and let me tell you, that isn't going to happen any time soon!
</p><p>
That's why the Climate Conference is getting nowhere! If the Scientists <i>know</i> the planet is warming then the <i>Scientists</i> should tell the Politicians what the solution is, and the Politicians should tell the World! - it's like going to a Doctor who says you've got cancer, then asking your accountant for the best treatment and he suggests (as all accountants always do!) that cutting all the pencils in half ought to do it!<br>
The Doctor says you've got cancer you ask the Doctor what treatment. You ask <i>another</i> Doctor too<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... hell, you ask <b>ALL</b> the Doctors!<br>
The trouble we've got with the AGW problem is the Scientists say there's a problem, but the people are asking the damn homoeopaths and crystal therapists for a solution, and a dilute one at that!
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth , but is n't the idea to reduce civilian casualties ?
Actually , that whole " reduce civilian casualties " malarky would likely be the main problem .
The damn politicians would likely be counting up civilians ( and in the case of an asteroid strike everyone is a civilian !
) rather than working out the most suitable place to do the least damage to the planet !
That most suitable place may well be uninhabited - but Antarctica is most certainly is n't ( sea level changes ) .
Even assuming we 'd be able to chose a landing target , an empty place that throws large amounts of debris into the atmosphere could end up being worse than landing it somewhere more populated , but with a more suitable geology !
In cases like these you have to stop thinking about individuals and think of the health of the planet as a single organism - and let me tell you , that is n't going to happen any time soon !
That 's why the Climate Conference is getting nowhere !
If the Scientists know the planet is warming then the Scientists should tell the Politicians what the solution is , and the Politicians should tell the World !
- it 's like going to a Doctor who says you 've got cancer , then asking your accountant for the best treatment and he suggests ( as all accountants always do !
) that cutting all the pencils in half ought to do it !
The Doctor says you 've got cancer you ask the Doctor what treatment .
You ask another Doctor too ... hell , you ask ALL the Doctors !
The trouble we 've got with the AGW problem is the Scientists say there 's a problem , but the people are asking the damn homoeopaths and crystal therapists for a solution , and a dilute one at that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth, but isn't the idea to reduce civilian casualties?
Actually, that whole "reduce civilian casualties" malarky would likely be the main problem.
The damn politicians would likely be counting up civilians (and in the case of an asteroid strike everyone is a civilian!
) rather than working out the most suitable place to do the least damage to the planet!
That most suitable place may well be uninhabited - but Antarctica is most certainly isn't (sea level changes).
Even assuming we'd be able to chose a landing target, an empty place that throws large amounts of debris into the atmosphere could end up being worse than landing it somewhere more populated, but with a more suitable geology!
In cases like these you have to stop thinking about individuals and think of the health of the planet as a single organism - and let me tell you, that isn't going to happen any time soon!
That's why the Climate Conference is getting nowhere!
If the Scientists know the planet is warming then the Scientists should tell the Politicians what the solution is, and the Politicians should tell the World!
- it's like going to a Doctor who says you've got cancer, then asking your accountant for the best treatment and he suggests (as all accountants always do!
) that cutting all the pencils in half ought to do it!
The Doctor says you've got cancer you ask the Doctor what treatment.
You ask another Doctor too ... hell, you ask ALL the Doctors!
The trouble we've got with the AGW problem is the Scientists say there's a problem, but the people are asking the damn homoeopaths and crystal therapists for a solution, and a dilute one at that!

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490032</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1261162560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its a big deal because we're just now reaching the point where we know how to avert a potential impact.  Since its a relatively cheap thing to do (~$300M for an Apophis-sized asteroid) it would be irresponsible not to consider the possibilities and have plans in place to handle the event.  It's not a choice of one or the other.</p><p>There are a *LOT* of people in this world, all doing a lot of things.  Having people work on finding solutions to a potential asteroid impact doesn't take effort away from solving global climate change.  I work with NEA's, and while I'm not a climate change denier, if I weren't doing this I wouldn't be working on green technology instead.  My skills are in spacecraft mission design, so if I weren't working on asteroids I'd be working on other missions instead -- and with unemployment at 10\% we're not in a labor shortage right now either (believe me, this is hitting just graduated engineers as much as anyone else). The miniscule amount of money involved in NEA research would do nothing as far as climate change goes -- climate change is a political problem (requiring potential lifestyle changes to fix) rather than a monetary one anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its a big deal because we 're just now reaching the point where we know how to avert a potential impact .
Since its a relatively cheap thing to do ( ~ $ 300M for an Apophis-sized asteroid ) it would be irresponsible not to consider the possibilities and have plans in place to handle the event .
It 's not a choice of one or the other.There are a * LOT * of people in this world , all doing a lot of things .
Having people work on finding solutions to a potential asteroid impact does n't take effort away from solving global climate change .
I work with NEA 's , and while I 'm not a climate change denier , if I were n't doing this I would n't be working on green technology instead .
My skills are in spacecraft mission design , so if I were n't working on asteroids I 'd be working on other missions instead -- and with unemployment at 10 \ % we 're not in a labor shortage right now either ( believe me , this is hitting just graduated engineers as much as anyone else ) .
The miniscule amount of money involved in NEA research would do nothing as far as climate change goes -- climate change is a political problem ( requiring potential lifestyle changes to fix ) rather than a monetary one anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its a big deal because we're just now reaching the point where we know how to avert a potential impact.
Since its a relatively cheap thing to do (~$300M for an Apophis-sized asteroid) it would be irresponsible not to consider the possibilities and have plans in place to handle the event.
It's not a choice of one or the other.There are a *LOT* of people in this world, all doing a lot of things.
Having people work on finding solutions to a potential asteroid impact doesn't take effort away from solving global climate change.
I work with NEA's, and while I'm not a climate change denier, if I weren't doing this I wouldn't be working on green technology instead.
My skills are in spacecraft mission design, so if I weren't working on asteroids I'd be working on other missions instead -- and with unemployment at 10\% we're not in a labor shortage right now either (believe me, this is hitting just graduated engineers as much as anyone else).
The miniscule amount of money involved in NEA research would do nothing as far as climate change goes -- climate change is a political problem (requiring potential lifestyle changes to fix) rather than a monetary one anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485338</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>hotdiggity</author>
	<datestamp>1261138920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica, where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse, causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities. <p>

If you could aim it towards eastern Antarctica, that might be ok - but I'd rather you didn't, as I'm currently living there!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica , where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse , causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities .
If you could aim it towards eastern Antarctica , that might be ok - but I 'd rather you did n't , as I 'm currently living there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica, where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse, causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities.
If you could aim it towards eastern Antarctica, that might be ok - but I'd rather you didn't, as I'm currently living there!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</id>
	<title>Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261128300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's your least favorite country: Italy or France?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's your least favorite country : Italy or France ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's your least favorite country: Italy or France?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489218</id>
	<title>Re:Nuclear?</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1261159860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your lack of confidence in the nuclear option is... misguided.</p><p><a href="http://www.aere.iastate.edu/no\_cache/events-seminars/article/article/2806/2506.html" title="iastate.edu">http://www.aere.iastate.edu/no\_cache/events-seminars/article/article/2806/2506.html</a> [iastate.edu]</p><p>When scientists talk about using nukes to move asteroids, they are usually talking about using the enormous heat and other radiation from the blast to ablate one side of the asteroid; this will cause the asteroid to move in the opposite direction (per newton's third law).</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your lack of confidence in the nuclear option is... misguided.http : //www.aere.iastate.edu/no \ _cache/events-seminars/article/article/2806/2506.html [ iastate.edu ] When scientists talk about using nukes to move asteroids , they are usually talking about using the enormous heat and other radiation from the blast to ablate one side of the asteroid ; this will cause the asteroid to move in the opposite direction ( per newton 's third law ) .-b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your lack of confidence in the nuclear option is... misguided.http://www.aere.iastate.edu/no\_cache/events-seminars/article/article/2806/2506.html [iastate.edu]When scientists talk about using nukes to move asteroids, they are usually talking about using the enormous heat and other radiation from the blast to ablate one side of the asteroid; this will cause the asteroid to move in the opposite direction (per newton's third law).-b</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487214</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261132440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous wines</p> </div><p>Well there's Wolf Blass and Jacob's Creek for starters.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , unlike Italy and France , they do n't have famous wines Well there 's Wolf Blass and Jacob 's Creek for starters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, unlike Italy and France, they don't have famous wines Well there's Wolf Blass and Jacob's Creek for starters.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622</id>
	<title>An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261129380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth, but isn't the idea to reduce civilian casualties?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth , but is n't the idea to reduce civilian casualties ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a scientist and I realize that wherever it hits could cause a chain of reactions that affect the entire earth, but isn't the idea to reduce civilian casualties?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485014</id>
	<title>The Allies would just do it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If an asteroid were about to hit the earth, the USA would probably, in consultation with its NATO allies, and Russia, launch everything it had it.  Anything else would really be just a matter of luck.  The third world might get pissed off at not being included, but really, for something like this, the technological nations would just have to take a best shot at it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If an asteroid were about to hit the earth , the USA would probably , in consultation with its NATO allies , and Russia , launch everything it had it .
Anything else would really be just a matter of luck .
The third world might get pissed off at not being included , but really , for something like this , the technological nations would just have to take a best shot at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If an asteroid were about to hit the earth, the USA would probably, in consultation with its NATO allies, and Russia, launch everything it had it.
Anything else would really be just a matter of luck.
The third world might get pissed off at not being included, but really, for something like this, the technological nations would just have to take a best shot at it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492140</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>Roger W Moore</author>
	<datestamp>1261126920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who is focussing on nuclear weapons. My point was simply that it is unrealistic to assume that governments will sit about wringing their hands in the face of imminent danger. They may over react or react stupidly but react they will regardless of what international law or diplomacy may suggest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who is focussing on nuclear weapons .
My point was simply that it is unrealistic to assume that governments will sit about wringing their hands in the face of imminent danger .
They may over react or react stupidly but react they will regardless of what international law or diplomacy may suggest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who is focussing on nuclear weapons.
My point was simply that it is unrealistic to assume that governments will sit about wringing their hands in the face of imminent danger.
They may over react or react stupidly but react they will regardless of what international law or diplomacy may suggest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485724</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261143480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have famous wines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have famous wines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have famous wines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486372</id>
	<title>Pah, aim it at the US</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1261147740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our politics have been almost uniquely stupid recently. We've been meddling with other nations for a very long time, half our population is willfully ignorant to the point of rejecting evolution, we somehow think improving our healthcare system is immoral, one of our political parties is enthusiastically pro-torture, anti-science, and anti-reality while the other is hardly cohesive enough to be called a party, we think we're the best in the world while we do our very best to undermine the basics of civilization in the name of lassiez-faire. Just aim it for the middle of the bible belt in the US. The craziest of our crazies will even applaud it, because they're looking forward to punishment coming to the "sinful" nation.</p><p>At least it would be entertaining watching some yahoos talk about how it's immoral to use state power to deflect it, because... OH! Once there's a need, there's a market, and the market creates the invisible hand! And the invisible hand will swat that asteroid out of the sky. Yeah, it's the new religion, and watching them watch it smoosh them would at least give us a laugh while the impact slowly smothers the rest of us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our politics have been almost uniquely stupid recently .
We 've been meddling with other nations for a very long time , half our population is willfully ignorant to the point of rejecting evolution , we somehow think improving our healthcare system is immoral , one of our political parties is enthusiastically pro-torture , anti-science , and anti-reality while the other is hardly cohesive enough to be called a party , we think we 're the best in the world while we do our very best to undermine the basics of civilization in the name of lassiez-faire .
Just aim it for the middle of the bible belt in the US .
The craziest of our crazies will even applaud it , because they 're looking forward to punishment coming to the " sinful " nation.At least it would be entertaining watching some yahoos talk about how it 's immoral to use state power to deflect it , because... OH ! Once there 's a need , there 's a market , and the market creates the invisible hand !
And the invisible hand will swat that asteroid out of the sky .
Yeah , it 's the new religion , and watching them watch it smoosh them would at least give us a laugh while the impact slowly smothers the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our politics have been almost uniquely stupid recently.
We've been meddling with other nations for a very long time, half our population is willfully ignorant to the point of rejecting evolution, we somehow think improving our healthcare system is immoral, one of our political parties is enthusiastically pro-torture, anti-science, and anti-reality while the other is hardly cohesive enough to be called a party, we think we're the best in the world while we do our very best to undermine the basics of civilization in the name of lassiez-faire.
Just aim it for the middle of the bible belt in the US.
The craziest of our crazies will even applaud it, because they're looking forward to punishment coming to the "sinful" nation.At least it would be entertaining watching some yahoos talk about how it's immoral to use state power to deflect it, because... OH! Once there's a need, there's a market, and the market creates the invisible hand!
And the invisible hand will swat that asteroid out of the sky.
Yeah, it's the new religion, and watching them watch it smoosh them would at least give us a laugh while the impact slowly smothers the rest of us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487126</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Rocketship Underpant</author>
	<datestamp>1261151460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Quebec has (along with Russia) the world's best hockey players and the winningest team in all of sports history.</p><p>2. Juste Pour Rire, North America's number-one comedy club, is in Montreal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Quebec has ( along with Russia ) the world 's best hockey players and the winningest team in all of sports history.2 .
Juste Pour Rire , North America 's number-one comedy club , is in Montreal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Quebec has (along with Russia) the world's best hockey players and the winningest team in all of sports history.2.
Juste Pour Rire, North America's number-one comedy club, is in Montreal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485872</id>
	<title>A not inhabited place is the obvious choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261144920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Select a place not inhabited by humans. Ohio, perhaps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Select a place not inhabited by humans .
Ohio , perhaps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Select a place not inhabited by humans.
Ohio, perhaps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489584</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1261161180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The odds of a massive asteroid strike in any given human lifetime are miniscule.</p><p>The odds of a massive asteroid strike in the lifetime of the human species are close to 1.</p><p>If you let the first fact discourage you from preparing for the second fact, you are dooming humanity to extinction. Long odds come in eventually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The odds of a massive asteroid strike in any given human lifetime are miniscule.The odds of a massive asteroid strike in the lifetime of the human species are close to 1.If you let the first fact discourage you from preparing for the second fact , you are dooming humanity to extinction .
Long odds come in eventually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The odds of a massive asteroid strike in any given human lifetime are miniscule.The odds of a massive asteroid strike in the lifetime of the human species are close to 1.If you let the first fact discourage you from preparing for the second fact, you are dooming humanity to extinction.
Long odds come in eventually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484776</id>
	<title>Where have the dupes gone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261130700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just realized I haven't seen a dupe on slashdot for months. Am I just not paying attention?

-1, Offtopic</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just realized I have n't seen a dupe on slashdot for months .
Am I just not paying attention ?
-1 , Offtopic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just realized I haven't seen a dupe on slashdot for months.
Am I just not paying attention?
-1, Offtopic</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485304</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261138140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts, with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever. Especially if the impact site seems to target their "enemies", though probably also when it targets them..."punishment from allowing the world to fall"/etc.</p><p>Quite a bit of unrest generally, on top of what's already there. Escalation of conflicts. All while trying to launch something very sophisticated, quite delicate operation...</p></div><p>If there was sufficient certainty of the impact and of the resultant impact damage then I would expect that people "working against the efforts" would be dealt with quite harshly.  Harshness of the "dealing with" would ramp up exponentially with the severity of the treat.</p><p>If the incoming asteroid was a definite planet killer if not stopped and individuals or groups attempted to interfere with efforts to stop it I expect they'd simply be liquidated en masse.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts , with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever .
Especially if the impact site seems to target their " enemies " , though probably also when it targets them... " punishment from allowing the world to fall " /etc.Quite a bit of unrest generally , on top of what 's already there .
Escalation of conflicts .
All while trying to launch something very sophisticated , quite delicate operation...If there was sufficient certainty of the impact and of the resultant impact damage then I would expect that people " working against the efforts " would be dealt with quite harshly .
Harshness of the " dealing with " would ramp up exponentially with the severity of the treat.If the incoming asteroid was a definite planet killer if not stopped and individuals or groups attempted to interfere with efforts to stop it I expect they 'd simply be liquidated en masse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And there will another complicating factor - expect quite a bit of people actually working against the efforts, with their expectation of incoming Rupture/Ragnarok/punishment from gods/whatever.
Especially if the impact site seems to target their "enemies", though probably also when it targets them..."punishment from allowing the world to fall"/etc.Quite a bit of unrest generally, on top of what's already there.
Escalation of conflicts.
All while trying to launch something very sophisticated, quite delicate operation...If there was sufficient certainty of the impact and of the resultant impact damage then I would expect that people "working against the efforts" would be dealt with quite harshly.
Harshness of the "dealing with" would ramp up exponentially with the severity of the treat.If the incoming asteroid was a definite planet killer if not stopped and individuals or groups attempted to interfere with efforts to stop it I expect they'd simply be liquidated en masse.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484912</id>
	<title>Aim it for my back yard, please.</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1261132320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I want the mineral rights.  Please do kindly tell me when it's due to impact, though, so I can be sure to be on vacation at the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I want the mineral rights .
Please do kindly tell me when it 's due to impact , though , so I can be sure to be on vacation at the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want the mineral rights.
Please do kindly tell me when it's due to impact, though, so I can be sure to be on vacation at the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484898</id>
	<title>Re:Asteroid != Climate Change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261132200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think it is harder to deny a giant rock is going to hit the Earth.</p><p>Basically replace "climate change" with "Giant Rock" and everything that has happened would happen. Objections to the science, objections to the money to be spent, objections to the disruptions to everyday life.</p><p>From "I don't trust them sciencey folks!" to "They're going to spend my tax dollars on what?!" and everything in between.</p><p>Also, a bunch of assholes somewhere would find a way to get rich off it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think it is harder to deny a giant rock is going to hit the Earth.Basically replace " climate change " with " Giant Rock " and everything that has happened would happen .
Objections to the science , objections to the money to be spent , objections to the disruptions to everyday life.From " I do n't trust them sciencey folks !
" to " They 're going to spend my tax dollars on what ? !
" and everything in between.Also , a bunch of assholes somewhere would find a way to get rich off it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think it is harder to deny a giant rock is going to hit the Earth.Basically replace "climate change" with "Giant Rock" and everything that has happened would happen.
Objections to the science, objections to the money to be spent, objections to the disruptions to everyday life.From "I don't trust them sciencey folks!
" to "They're going to spend my tax dollars on what?!
" and everything in between.Also, a bunch of assholes somewhere would find a way to get rich off it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</id>
	<title>I don't understand this</title>
	<author>saibot834</author>
	<datestamp>1261132200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is there such a focus on asteroids? Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation? (yes, "Armageddon", I'm looking at you).<br>Asteroids are not rare, Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are. It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.<br>I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.<br>We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming. Unlike asteroids, it wont happen by chance, it is happening and will continue to happen, even if we cease to pollute right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming). This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is there such a focus on asteroids ?
Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation ?
( yes , " Armageddon " , I 'm looking at you ) .Asteroids are not rare , Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are .
It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years , and after that , we 'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I 'm not saying that research in this area is wrong , but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human ( and animal ) existence on earth , it 's called global warming .
Unlike asteroids , it wont happen by chance , it is happening and will continue to happen , even if we cease to pollute right now ( which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming ) .
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is there such a focus on asteroids?
Do the USA need to justify their nuclear arsenal in the current post-cold-war situation?
(yes, "Armageddon", I'm looking at you).Asteroids are not rare, Asteroids capable of destroying humanity are.
It is very unlikely that one will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert incoming asteroids.I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called global warming.
Unlike asteroids, it wont happen by chance, it is happening and will continue to happen, even if we cease to pollute right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to minimize effects by global warming).
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than Asteroids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500522</id>
	<title>Re:Dose of Reality</title>
	<author>mog007</author>
	<datestamp>1261216980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bin Laden had absolutely no interest in the rights infringed upon it by the US federal government, nor did he really concern himself with trying to get our military overextended.  He wants the United States to stop throwing money and guns at Israel.  That's all he wants.  Canada hasn't been hit by Bin Laden.  Why not?  Because they don't send money to Israel.  Not to mention that the US military was more than capable of being in Afghanistan without being considered "overextended".  Bin Laden wasn't relying on a US invasion of Afghanistan followed by an occupation of Iraq when he concocted his plan for September 11.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bin Laden had absolutely no interest in the rights infringed upon it by the US federal government , nor did he really concern himself with trying to get our military overextended .
He wants the United States to stop throwing money and guns at Israel .
That 's all he wants .
Canada has n't been hit by Bin Laden .
Why not ?
Because they do n't send money to Israel .
Not to mention that the US military was more than capable of being in Afghanistan without being considered " overextended " .
Bin Laden was n't relying on a US invasion of Afghanistan followed by an occupation of Iraq when he concocted his plan for September 11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bin Laden had absolutely no interest in the rights infringed upon it by the US federal government, nor did he really concern himself with trying to get our military overextended.
He wants the United States to stop throwing money and guns at Israel.
That's all he wants.
Canada hasn't been hit by Bin Laden.
Why not?
Because they don't send money to Israel.
Not to mention that the US military was more than capable of being in Afghanistan without being considered "overextended".
Bin Laden wasn't relying on a US invasion of Afghanistan followed by an occupation of Iraq when he concocted his plan for September 11.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485416</id>
	<title>Australia is the only choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261140240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rationally speaking, Australia has the least population to land mass, with the largest room for error of any other nation. It has to go (of course, it won't matter, an impact that big would throw us into oblivion anyway).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rationally speaking , Australia has the least population to land mass , with the largest room for error of any other nation .
It has to go ( of course , it wo n't matter , an impact that big would throw us into oblivion anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rationally speaking, Australia has the least population to land mass, with the largest room for error of any other nation.
It has to go (of course, it won't matter, an impact that big would throw us into oblivion anyway).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30495534</id>
	<title>just aim it at Africa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261145940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>simple: just aim it at Africa. Solve poverty and overpopulation with one shot. Besides, given what Africa produces the economic impact to the world would be negligible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>simple : just aim it at Africa .
Solve poverty and overpopulation with one shot .
Besides , given what Africa produces the economic impact to the world would be negligible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>simple: just aim it at Africa.
Solve poverty and overpopulation with one shot.
Besides, given what Africa produces the economic impact to the world would be negligible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500172</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>GravityStar</author>
	<datestamp>1261255500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ICBM address: 51.04 N, 4.92 E. Bring it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ICBM address : 51.04 N , 4.92 E. Bring it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ICBM address: 51.04 N, 4.92 E. Bring it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488302</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261156260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I mean, what do they have? Good baseball? Nope. Good football team? Nope. Good comedy? Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy?</p></div></blockquote><p>
And after the dust settles, yet another of the world's largest nickel/iron mines.
</p><p>
We're looking at this the wrong way; if it's not an extinction-level event, it's going to be Australia's outback, northern Canada, the American West, and Russian Siberia <em>clamoring</em> to have the thing land on their turf.
</p><p>
(In a supreme stroke of irony, Dubai decided to get itself some natural resources, singlehandedly built a big-ass rocketship, and an even bigger-ass dome over itself, and landed the thing in the middle of the Arabian desert, obliterating the rest of the Middle East and thereby ensuring perpetual world peace.  Also, the oil that didn't get incinerated now bubbles straight up from between cracks in the solid nickel/iron ground again, so there's no longer any need for drilling<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , what do they have ?
Good baseball ?
Nope. Good football team ?
Nope. Good comedy ?
Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy ?
And after the dust settles , yet another of the world 's largest nickel/iron mines .
We 're looking at this the wrong way ; if it 's not an extinction-level event , it 's going to be Australia 's outback , northern Canada , the American West , and Russian Siberia clamoring to have the thing land on their turf .
( In a supreme stroke of irony , Dubai decided to get itself some natural resources , singlehandedly built a big-ass rocketship , and an even bigger-ass dome over itself , and landed the thing in the middle of the Arabian desert , obliterating the rest of the Middle East and thereby ensuring perpetual world peace .
Also , the oil that did n't get incinerated now bubbles straight up from between cracks in the solid nickel/iron ground again , so there 's no longer any need for drilling : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, what do they have?
Good baseball?
Nope. Good football team?
Nope. Good comedy?
Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy?
And after the dust settles, yet another of the world's largest nickel/iron mines.
We're looking at this the wrong way; if it's not an extinction-level event, it's going to be Australia's outback, northern Canada, the American West, and Russian Siberia clamoring to have the thing land on their turf.
(In a supreme stroke of irony, Dubai decided to get itself some natural resources, singlehandedly built a big-ass rocketship, and an even bigger-ass dome over itself, and landed the thing in the middle of the Arabian desert, obliterating the rest of the Middle East and thereby ensuring perpetual world peace.
Also, the oil that didn't get incinerated now bubbles straight up from between cracks in the solid nickel/iron ground again, so there's no longer any need for drilling :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486100</id>
	<title>too many lies</title>
	<author>Savior\_on\_a\_Stick</author>
	<datestamp>1261146420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was a kid, we were told smoking marijuana would cause birth defects.</p><p>When we realized how badly our parents lied to us, we spent the next couple of decades assuming everything they said was a lie.</p><p>Environmentalists are in the same boat now.</p><p>Environmentalism cleaned up my air and water, then went on to spin so many lies that an awful lot of people are mistrustful of them - and rightly so.</p><p>The tech is simply not there to support movement from theorizing about anti asteroid systems to developing them.</p><p>The risk analysis of such endeavors is a massive fail.</p><p>It's insane to propose multiple systems with little chance of effectiveness, but which are so expensive that engaging in them would throw us back to the Dark Ages in terms of quality of life.</p><p>There is no hard decision here.</p><p>It's an easy one, and we've already decided "No - not at this time - check back with us in a century or so."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was a kid , we were told smoking marijuana would cause birth defects.When we realized how badly our parents lied to us , we spent the next couple of decades assuming everything they said was a lie.Environmentalists are in the same boat now.Environmentalism cleaned up my air and water , then went on to spin so many lies that an awful lot of people are mistrustful of them - and rightly so.The tech is simply not there to support movement from theorizing about anti asteroid systems to developing them.The risk analysis of such endeavors is a massive fail.It 's insane to propose multiple systems with little chance of effectiveness , but which are so expensive that engaging in them would throw us back to the Dark Ages in terms of quality of life.There is no hard decision here.It 's an easy one , and we 've already decided " No - not at this time - check back with us in a century or so .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was a kid, we were told smoking marijuana would cause birth defects.When we realized how badly our parents lied to us, we spent the next couple of decades assuming everything they said was a lie.Environmentalists are in the same boat now.Environmentalism cleaned up my air and water, then went on to spin so many lies that an awful lot of people are mistrustful of them - and rightly so.The tech is simply not there to support movement from theorizing about anti asteroid systems to developing them.The risk analysis of such endeavors is a massive fail.It's insane to propose multiple systems with little chance of effectiveness, but which are so expensive that engaging in them would throw us back to the Dark Ages in terms of quality of life.There is no hard decision here.It's an easy one, and we've already decided "No - not at this time - check back with us in a century or so.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497736</id>
	<title>Re:Help me out here...</title>
	<author>RockDoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1261225440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>1) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact. You wouldn't know for sure that it would impact yet. Much less would you know where the impact would occur.</p></div> </blockquote><p>to know that there is going to be an impact, you need to have the asteroid and the Earth within (to a first approximation, for the description not for the calculation) 6360km of each other AT THE SAME TIME.<br>The Earth's orbital velocity is around 100000km/hour ; to get Earth and asteroid in the same place at the same time, you need to have your asteroid crossing the Earth's orbit within a window about 7 minutes in duration. During 7 minutes, the Earth's equator travels around 100km.<br>If we know (or have high confidence) that there's going to be an impact, then we know to a quite close location where it's going to hit. Remembering that we're not really concerned about small impacts, but ones with a nation or continent obliterating potential, then we can assure destruction of "Ground Zero".<br>(The back-of the envelope calculations are assuming that the asteroid comes in perpendicular to the Earth's orbit; a grazing or low-angle impact is considered more likely, I think.</p><blockquote><div><p>2) If the asteroid's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth, then there's a 70\% chance (roughly) that it will hit water.</p></div></blockquote><p>If it's going to hit, we'll know Ground Zero to within a few hundred kilometers, as discussed above. But the level of damage that a "civilisation threat" would do makes the water-vs-land impact question pretty trivial. A water impact may well be worse than a land impact.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact .
You would n't know for sure that it would impact yet .
Much less would you know where the impact would occur .
to know that there is going to be an impact , you need to have the asteroid and the Earth within ( to a first approximation , for the description not for the calculation ) 6360km of each other AT THE SAME TIME.The Earth 's orbital velocity is around 100000km/hour ; to get Earth and asteroid in the same place at the same time , you need to have your asteroid crossing the Earth 's orbit within a window about 7 minutes in duration .
During 7 minutes , the Earth 's equator travels around 100km.If we know ( or have high confidence ) that there 's going to be an impact , then we know to a quite close location where it 's going to hit .
Remembering that we 're not really concerned about small impacts , but ones with a nation or continent obliterating potential , then we can assure destruction of " Ground Zero " .
( The back-of the envelope calculations are assuming that the asteroid comes in perpendicular to the Earth 's orbit ; a grazing or low-angle impact is considered more likely , I think.2 ) If the asteroid 's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth , then there 's a 70 \ % chance ( roughly ) that it will hit water.If it 's going to hit , we 'll know Ground Zero to within a few hundred kilometers , as discussed above .
But the level of damage that a " civilisation threat " would do makes the water-vs-land impact question pretty trivial .
A water impact may well be worse than a land impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) TFA mentions that you would start this mission decades before a possible impact.
You wouldn't know for sure that it would impact yet.
Much less would you know where the impact would occur.
to know that there is going to be an impact, you need to have the asteroid and the Earth within (to a first approximation, for the description not for the calculation) 6360km of each other AT THE SAME TIME.The Earth's orbital velocity is around 100000km/hour ; to get Earth and asteroid in the same place at the same time, you need to have your asteroid crossing the Earth's orbit within a window about 7 minutes in duration.
During 7 minutes, the Earth's equator travels around 100km.If we know (or have high confidence) that there's going to be an impact, then we know to a quite close location where it's going to hit.
Remembering that we're not really concerned about small impacts, but ones with a nation or continent obliterating potential, then we can assure destruction of "Ground Zero".
(The back-of the envelope calculations are assuming that the asteroid comes in perpendicular to the Earth's orbit; a grazing or low-angle impact is considered more likely, I think.2) If the asteroid's initial trajectory is going to hit the Earth, then there's a 70\% chance (roughly) that it will hit water.If it's going to hit, we'll know Ground Zero to within a few hundred kilometers, as discussed above.
But the level of damage that a "civilisation threat" would do makes the water-vs-land impact question pretty trivial.
A water impact may well be worse than a land impact.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488100</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492072</id>
	<title>Re:Dose of Reality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261169880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just tell the USA that the asteroid is a pedophile or someone playing violent video gamers, and rest assured they will get rid of the problem in a matter of days.</p><p>Also tell them it's illegally downloading music, and you can knock that down to a few hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just tell the USA that the asteroid is a pedophile or someone playing violent video gamers , and rest assured they will get rid of the problem in a matter of days.Also tell them it 's illegally downloading music , and you can knock that down to a few hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just tell the USA that the asteroid is a pedophile or someone playing violent video gamers, and rest assured they will get rid of the problem in a matter of days.Also tell them it's illegally downloading music, and you can knock that down to a few hours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496340</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>randyleepublic</author>
	<datestamp>1261154700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please do not call CO2 "pollution".  It is the veritable staff of life.  Remember?  Carbon based life forms?  No CO2, no food.  More CO2, more food.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please do not call CO2 " pollution " .
It is the veritable staff of life .
Remember ? Carbon based life forms ?
No CO2 , no food .
More CO2 , more food .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please do not call CO2 "pollution".
It is the veritable staff of life.
Remember?  Carbon based life forms?
No CO2, no food.
More CO2, more food.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485230</id>
	<title>yes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261136880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, step one:

Kill all the politicians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , step one : Kill all the politicians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, step one:

Kill all the politicians.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484936</id>
	<title>Just put grafiti on it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261132560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.unisci.com/stories/20022/0408022.htm" title="unisci.com" rel="nofollow">cover it in goatse and the problem is solved</a> [unisci.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cover it in goatse and the problem is solved [ unisci.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cover it in goatse and the problem is solved [unisci.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485916</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>R2.0</author>
	<datestamp>1261145280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Why is there such a focus on AGW? Do the environmentalists need to justify their existence in the current post-no-nukes world? (yes, "Inconvenient Truth", I'm looking at you).<br>Climate change is not rare, climate change capable of destroying humanity is. It is very unlikely that the consequences will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert climate change.</p><p>I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.<br>We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called asteroids. Unlike AGW, it's happened before, and will happen again, even if we triple NASA's budget right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to maximize our ability to affect asteroid impacts). This is a much more serious threat to our existence than AGW."</p></div></blockquote><p>I'd say FTFY, but I didn't - BOTH are ridiculous statements.  It's not an either/or choice, you know.  And the problem with BOTH is international cooperation and human nature, not technology.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Why is there such a focus on AGW ?
Do the environmentalists need to justify their existence in the current post-no-nukes world ?
( yes , " Inconvenient Truth " , I 'm looking at you ) .Climate change is not rare , climate change capable of destroying humanity is .
It is very unlikely that the consequences will hit us in next 100 years , and after that , we 'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert climate change.I 'm not saying that research in this area is wrong , but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human ( and animal ) existence on earth , it 's called asteroids .
Unlike AGW , it 's happened before , and will happen again , even if we triple NASA 's budget right now ( which we nevertheless should strive after to maximize our ability to affect asteroid impacts ) .
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than AGW .
" I 'd say FTFY , but I did n't - BOTH are ridiculous statements .
It 's not an either/or choice , you know .
And the problem with BOTH is international cooperation and human nature , not technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Why is there such a focus on AGW?
Do the environmentalists need to justify their existence in the current post-no-nukes world?
(yes, "Inconvenient Truth", I'm looking at you).Climate change is not rare, climate change capable of destroying humanity is.
It is very unlikely that the consequences will hit us in next 100 years, and after that, we'll probably have completely different means available for trying to avert climate change.I'm not saying that research in this area is wrong, but it should be low priority and the risks must not be overestimated.We already have something threatening human (and animal) existence on earth, it's called asteroids.
Unlike AGW, it's happened before, and will happen again, even if we triple NASA's budget right now (which we nevertheless should strive after to maximize our ability to affect asteroid impacts).
This is a much more serious threat to our existence than AGW.
"I'd say FTFY, but I didn't - BOTH are ridiculous statements.
It's not an either/or choice, you know.
And the problem with BOTH is international cooperation and human nature, not technology.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491782</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261168860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually global warming is nothing compared to an impact.  Actually global warming is something that is blown way out of proportion and is still a theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually global warming is nothing compared to an impact .
Actually global warming is something that is blown way out of proportion and is still a theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually global warming is nothing compared to an impact.
Actually global warming is something that is blown way out of proportion and is still a theory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486098</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261146420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maple syrup - I heard they've got nice Maple syrup in Quebec.<br>Personally speaking, I find that Quebec has some of the sexiest women with brains that I've ever met, but I'm posting in Slashdot, so obviously my opinion's not worth a grain of salt. As for the asteroid, somewhere in the deep ocean so that by the time the waves hit the shore, we've got plenty of time to either a) move out of the way, or b) go catch some awesome surf. May as well make the most of a once-in-a-lifetime event.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maple syrup - I heard they 've got nice Maple syrup in Quebec.Personally speaking , I find that Quebec has some of the sexiest women with brains that I 've ever met , but I 'm posting in Slashdot , so obviously my opinion 's not worth a grain of salt .
As for the asteroid , somewhere in the deep ocean so that by the time the waves hit the shore , we 've got plenty of time to either a ) move out of the way , or b ) go catch some awesome surf .
May as well make the most of a once-in-a-lifetime event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maple syrup - I heard they've got nice Maple syrup in Quebec.Personally speaking, I find that Quebec has some of the sexiest women with brains that I've ever met, but I'm posting in Slashdot, so obviously my opinion's not worth a grain of salt.
As for the asteroid, somewhere in the deep ocean so that by the time the waves hit the shore, we've got plenty of time to either a) move out of the way, or b) go catch some awesome surf.
May as well make the most of a once-in-a-lifetime event.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484926</id>
	<title>Don't make waves, please?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1261132440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you have your way, I'm finally gonna have to learn how to surf, dammit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have your way , I 'm finally gon na have to learn how to surf , dammit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have your way, I'm finally gonna have to learn how to surf, dammit!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485312</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>MountainMan101</author>
	<datestamp>1261138380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Makes me think "What's the most famous w(h)ine from Australia"...</p><p>"It's too f**king hot mate".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes me think " What 's the most famous w ( h ) ine from Australia " ... " It 's too f * * king hot mate " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes me think "What's the most famous w(h)ine from Australia"..."It's too f**king hot mate".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30520064</id>
	<title>What's going on in Tunguska these days?</title>
	<author>Shang Chi</author>
	<datestamp>1261413120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we have the ability to choose an impact site, why not Tunguska again?  Seems like the world did fine after the last time something hit there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we have the ability to choose an impact site , why not Tunguska again ?
Seems like the world did fine after the last time something hit there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we have the ability to choose an impact site, why not Tunguska again?
Seems like the world did fine after the last time something hit there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760</id>
	<title>Religious Armaggedon</title>
	<author>feedayeen</author>
	<datestamp>1261130580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat. As recent history has demonstrated, people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat .
As recent history has demonstrated , people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god 's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those who interpret this as an act of god will be the biggest threat.
As recent history has demonstrated, people are willing to kill themselves and civilians in hope that their god's will be done and it may be impossible to insure that sabotage has not occurred in the construction of the super weapon that will be necessary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486678</id>
	<title>Re:Dose of Reality</title>
	<author>chrysrobyn</author>
	<datestamp>1261149180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law, lawyers or anyone else may say. Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks.</p></div></blockquote><p>I hope you're not an American, because if you are, you've demonstrated the most dangerous misperceptions I've ever seen.  Normally, I'm a big fan of telling people to get out and get their beliefs heard by voting, but stay home.  Seriously.</p><p>1) OBL's 2 goals was to a) Get the US to overextend itself by fighting at least one battle on the other side of the world and deplete its riches (at the time, widely thought to be way too ambitious, but I think we know how things are going in this department) and b) Deprive the US of our freedoms (I hope you flew once before 9/11 and once after to see how this worked).  Maybe you've read Slashdot or any other non-Fox news source for a few other examples.</p><p>2) Invading Afghanistan had at least a little international support, and from more than just the UK.  Invading Iraq, on the other hand, did do quite a bit of international law violating, or just skirting around it.  France understood the threat Iraq posed to the international community, far better than anyone gave them credit for.  The UN is there to prevent nations from infringing on each other's sovereignty and doing something colossally stupid out of a knee jerk reaction (and hopefully not relevant here, preventing World War 3).</p><p>3) Let's make a list of people's opinions who were changed by bullets, and another list of people's opinions who were changed by money.  Let's start with World War II, take a walk down history lane through Korea and we can stop today's exercise with Vietnam.  Bullets don't make friends.  The only time the US made any friends was in the reconstruction period afterward.  If you asked me, and those who did laughed at me, Afghanistan needed hundreds of millions of dollars a year to give them a useful manufacturing industry and a good educational background -- a fraction of what we're spending today.  Going over there and shooting at people who don't like us, interestingly enough, makes more people not like us.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law , lawyers or anyone else may say .
Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks.I hope you 're not an American , because if you are , you 've demonstrated the most dangerous misperceptions I 've ever seen .
Normally , I 'm a big fan of telling people to get out and get their beliefs heard by voting , but stay home .
Seriously.1 ) OBL 's 2 goals was to a ) Get the US to overextend itself by fighting at least one battle on the other side of the world and deplete its riches ( at the time , widely thought to be way too ambitious , but I think we know how things are going in this department ) and b ) Deprive the US of our freedoms ( I hope you flew once before 9/11 and once after to see how this worked ) .
Maybe you 've read Slashdot or any other non-Fox news source for a few other examples.2 ) Invading Afghanistan had at least a little international support , and from more than just the UK .
Invading Iraq , on the other hand , did do quite a bit of international law violating , or just skirting around it .
France understood the threat Iraq posed to the international community , far better than anyone gave them credit for .
The UN is there to prevent nations from infringing on each other 's sovereignty and doing something colossally stupid out of a knee jerk reaction ( and hopefully not relevant here , preventing World War 3 ) .3 ) Let 's make a list of people 's opinions who were changed by bullets , and another list of people 's opinions who were changed by money .
Let 's start with World War II , take a walk down history lane through Korea and we can stop today 's exercise with Vietnam .
Bullets do n't make friends .
The only time the US made any friends was in the reconstruction period afterward .
If you asked me , and those who did laughed at me , Afghanistan needed hundreds of millions of dollars a year to give them a useful manufacturing industry and a good educational background -- a fraction of what we 're spending today .
Going over there and shooting at people who do n't like us , interestingly enough , makes more people not like us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law, lawyers or anyone else may say.
Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks.I hope you're not an American, because if you are, you've demonstrated the most dangerous misperceptions I've ever seen.
Normally, I'm a big fan of telling people to get out and get their beliefs heard by voting, but stay home.
Seriously.1) OBL's 2 goals was to a) Get the US to overextend itself by fighting at least one battle on the other side of the world and deplete its riches (at the time, widely thought to be way too ambitious, but I think we know how things are going in this department) and b) Deprive the US of our freedoms (I hope you flew once before 9/11 and once after to see how this worked).
Maybe you've read Slashdot or any other non-Fox news source for a few other examples.2) Invading Afghanistan had at least a little international support, and from more than just the UK.
Invading Iraq, on the other hand, did do quite a bit of international law violating, or just skirting around it.
France understood the threat Iraq posed to the international community, far better than anyone gave them credit for.
The UN is there to prevent nations from infringing on each other's sovereignty and doing something colossally stupid out of a knee jerk reaction (and hopefully not relevant here, preventing World War 3).3) Let's make a list of people's opinions who were changed by bullets, and another list of people's opinions who were changed by money.
Let's start with World War II, take a walk down history lane through Korea and we can stop today's exercise with Vietnam.
Bullets don't make friends.
The only time the US made any friends was in the reconstruction period afterward.
If you asked me, and those who did laughed at me, Afghanistan needed hundreds of millions of dollars a year to give them a useful manufacturing industry and a good educational background -- a fraction of what we're spending today.
Going over there and shooting at people who don't like us, interestingly enough, makes more people not like us.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490604</id>
	<title>use its own rotational kinetic energy!</title>
	<author>jrvz</author>
	<datestamp>1261164360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we do discover an asteroid coming our way, I think we need a
better method of dealing with it than a nuclear explosion, which
would just break it up and make some collision more
likely (i.e. like a shotgun instead of a rifle).  I propose to
use a space elevator instead.  I assume the asteriod will be
rotating, so I suggest we use that rotational kinetic energy for
propulsion: <p>(1) Rendezvous with the asteroid.  Time is important,
so this will probably require a nuclear rocket.  </p><p>(2) Construct a
really strong anchor point, probably using a net around the
entire asteriod.  </p><p>(3) Construct a space elevator connected to the
anchor.  The asteriod will have much weaker gravity and much
higher rotational velocity than the earth, so an elevator there
wouldn't have to be nearly as long or strong as here. The motion
of the asteriod may not be simple (precession in addition to
rotation), which means the elevator will pivot about the anchor
point.  </p><p>(4) Use the elevator to launch payloads (bags of rubble).  This doesn't require any net energy: a payload beyond the stationary
orbit radius will pull outward, and can be used to lift the next
payload.
Each launch gives the asteroid a nudge (by conservation of
momentum).  You can't choose the direction of the nudges
arbitrarily - assuming simple rotation, they have to be in the
plane of rotation.  Approximately twice a year, payloads can be
launched toward earth.  That would be a good time to send
construction workers back home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we do discover an asteroid coming our way , I think we need a better method of dealing with it than a nuclear explosion , which would just break it up and make some collision more likely ( i.e .
like a shotgun instead of a rifle ) .
I propose to use a space elevator instead .
I assume the asteriod will be rotating , so I suggest we use that rotational kinetic energy for propulsion : ( 1 ) Rendezvous with the asteroid .
Time is important , so this will probably require a nuclear rocket .
( 2 ) Construct a really strong anchor point , probably using a net around the entire asteriod .
( 3 ) Construct a space elevator connected to the anchor .
The asteriod will have much weaker gravity and much higher rotational velocity than the earth , so an elevator there would n't have to be nearly as long or strong as here .
The motion of the asteriod may not be simple ( precession in addition to rotation ) , which means the elevator will pivot about the anchor point .
( 4 ) Use the elevator to launch payloads ( bags of rubble ) .
This does n't require any net energy : a payload beyond the stationary orbit radius will pull outward , and can be used to lift the next payload .
Each launch gives the asteroid a nudge ( by conservation of momentum ) .
You ca n't choose the direction of the nudges arbitrarily - assuming simple rotation , they have to be in the plane of rotation .
Approximately twice a year , payloads can be launched toward earth .
That would be a good time to send construction workers back home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we do discover an asteroid coming our way, I think we need a
better method of dealing with it than a nuclear explosion, which
would just break it up and make some collision more
likely (i.e.
like a shotgun instead of a rifle).
I propose to
use a space elevator instead.
I assume the asteriod will be
rotating, so I suggest we use that rotational kinetic energy for
propulsion: (1) Rendezvous with the asteroid.
Time is important,
so this will probably require a nuclear rocket.
(2) Construct a
really strong anchor point, probably using a net around the
entire asteriod.
(3) Construct a space elevator connected to the
anchor.
The asteriod will have much weaker gravity and much
higher rotational velocity than the earth, so an elevator there
wouldn't have to be nearly as long or strong as here.
The motion
of the asteriod may not be simple (precession in addition to
rotation), which means the elevator will pivot about the anchor
point.
(4) Use the elevator to launch payloads (bags of rubble).
This doesn't require any net energy: a payload beyond the stationary
orbit radius will pull outward, and can be used to lift the next
payload.
Each launch gives the asteroid a nudge (by conservation of
momentum).
You can't choose the direction of the nudges
arbitrarily - assuming simple rotation, they have to be in the
plane of rotation.
Approximately twice a year, payloads can be
launched toward earth.
That would be a good time to send
construction workers back home.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487096</id>
	<title>Re:An ocean? Antartica?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261151460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica, where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse, causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities.</p></div><p>Doesn't sound very serious to me since the alternative is a few countries getting wiped out. Moving live people a few meters uphill is a lot easier than bringing a few tens of millions to billions of people back from the dead.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica , where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse , causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities.Does n't sound very serious to me since the alternative is a few countries getting wiped out .
Moving live people a few meters uphill is a lot easier than bringing a few tens of millions to billions of people back from the dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Antarctica would be a pretty dangerous place to put it - particularly west Antarctica, where the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is very unstable and could collapse, causing the ocean to rise 4-20 m and flood all the coastal cities.Doesn't sound very serious to me since the alternative is a few countries getting wiped out.
Moving live people a few meters uphill is a lot easier than bringing a few tens of millions to billions of people back from the dead.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30495688</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Chris Gunn</author>
	<datestamp>1261147320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>no famous wines!?

Penfolds Grange Shiraz is very famous, and is.. one of the most expensive new wines you can buy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>no famous wines ! ?
Penfolds Grange Shiraz is very famous , and is.. one of the most expensive new wines you can buy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no famous wines!?
Penfolds Grange Shiraz is very famous, and is.. one of the most expensive new wines you can buy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488548</id>
	<title>obvious</title>
	<author>thelonious</author>
	<datestamp>1261157220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Park it in the grand canyon, soon to be the grander canyon, charge admission, profit</htmltext>
<tokenext>Park it in the grand canyon , soon to be the grander canyon , charge admission , profit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Park it in the grand canyon, soon to be the grander canyon, charge admission, profit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484928</id>
	<title>Who gets to decide?</title>
	<author>thomst</author>
	<datestamp>1261132500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do.</p><p>Next question?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do.Next question ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do.Next question?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485054</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261134420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What? The <b>pacific</b> is not big enough?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
The pacific is not big enough ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
The pacific is not big enough?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608</id>
	<title>Dose of Reality</title>
	<author>Roger W Moore</author>
	<datestamp>1261129140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes I'm sure if an asteroid threatens the world leaders will all sit down with their lawyers and fiddle while the Earth burns. What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law, lawyers or anyone else may say. Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks. The trick is to ensure that you have a leader who can listen to scientific advice and make the right decision based on that and not on what will win them the next election. However, since if they get it wrong there probably won't be another election, they should at least be well motivated!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes I 'm sure if an asteroid threatens the world leaders will all sit down with their lawyers and fiddle while the Earth burns .
What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law , lawyers or anyone else may say .
Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks .
The trick is to ensure that you have a leader who can listen to scientific advice and make the right decision based on that and not on what will win them the next election .
However , since if they get it wrong there probably wo n't be another election , they should at least be well motivated !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes I'm sure if an asteroid threatens the world leaders will all sit down with their lawyers and fiddle while the Earth burns.
What this author forgets is that if your survival is on the line people will generally do what they think needs to be done regardless of what the law, lawyers or anyone else may say.
Just look at the US after the 11/9 attacks.
The trick is to ensure that you have a leader who can listen to scientific advice and make the right decision based on that and not on what will win them the next election.
However, since if they get it wrong there probably won't be another election, they should at least be well motivated!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488392</id>
	<title>Target Practice</title>
	<author>Ukab the Great</author>
	<datestamp>1261156620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or we could practice on non-earth-threatening asteroids to hone our skills for this sort of thing when it really does become a crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or we could practice on non-earth-threatening asteroids to hone our skills for this sort of thing when it really does become a crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or we could practice on non-earth-threatening asteroids to hone our skills for this sort of thing when it really does become a crisis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488682</id>
	<title>Aim the Asteroid at Self-Righteous Island</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261157820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok here&rsquo;s my plan:<br> <br>
We tell people of similar caliber (Bill O'reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Karl Rove, etc) that after a life dedicated to &ldquo;promoting the greater good&rdquo;, they are to be rewarded with a free gift of land on one of the uncharted islands in the south pacific. <br> <br>
We even go a step further and build houses and infrastructure for them to convince them it is a legit offer.  Once they have settled in, we aim the asteroid at the island.<br> <br>
Two problems solved with one stone (no pun intended)!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok here    s my plan : We tell people of similar caliber ( Bill O'reilly , Rush Limbaugh , Ann Coulter , Glenn Beck , Karl Rove , etc ) that after a life dedicated to    promoting the greater good    , they are to be rewarded with a free gift of land on one of the uncharted islands in the south pacific .
We even go a step further and build houses and infrastructure for them to convince them it is a legit offer .
Once they have settled in , we aim the asteroid at the island .
Two problems solved with one stone ( no pun intended ) !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok here’s my plan: 
We tell people of similar caliber (Bill O'reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Karl Rove, etc) that after a life dedicated to “promoting the greater good”, they are to be rewarded with a free gift of land on one of the uncharted islands in the south pacific.
We even go a step further and build houses and infrastructure for them to convince them it is a legit offer.
Once they have settled in, we aim the asteroid at the island.
Two problems solved with one stone (no pun intended)!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485006</id>
	<title>the answer is obvious</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261133760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somalia. Their "head of state" doesn't even control its capital and no one recognizes the sovereignty of Somaliland; so guess what country doesn't get a say when the others vote to obliterate it via asteroid? Somalia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somalia .
Their " head of state " does n't even control its capital and no one recognizes the sovereignty of Somaliland ; so guess what country does n't get a say when the others vote to obliterate it via asteroid ?
Somalia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somalia.
Their "head of state" doesn't even control its capital and no one recognizes the sovereignty of Somaliland; so guess what country doesn't get a say when the others vote to obliterate it via asteroid?
Somalia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485708</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1261143360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>WTF? We have some of the best wine growing areas on the planet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF ?
We have some of the best wine growing areas on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF?
We have some of the best wine growing areas on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488372</id>
	<title>Just call in Bruce Willis!</title>
	<author>L3370</author>
	<datestamp>1261156560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ask Bruce Willis. He knows nukes in space will do nothing unless you bury it WITHIN the asteroid!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask Bruce Willis .
He knows nukes in space will do nothing unless you bury it WITHIN the asteroid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask Bruce Willis.
He knows nukes in space will do nothing unless you bury it WITHIN the asteroid!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487506</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand this</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1261153140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So you're saying we should let the asteroid hit, hoping that it will kick up enough debris into the atmosphere to cool the earth? I think if you want to prioritize, however, the risk of warming the globe a few degrees is far less threatening to human existence than an asteroid impact. Is an asteroid teleportation device or a global air-conditioning system more likely in 100 years? In the end I think we'll have neither, but we'll at least be warm as we watch the show in the sky.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying we should let the asteroid hit , hoping that it will kick up enough debris into the atmosphere to cool the earth ?
I think if you want to prioritize , however , the risk of warming the globe a few degrees is far less threatening to human existence than an asteroid impact .
Is an asteroid teleportation device or a global air-conditioning system more likely in 100 years ?
In the end I think we 'll have neither , but we 'll at least be warm as we watch the show in the sky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying we should let the asteroid hit, hoping that it will kick up enough debris into the atmosphere to cool the earth?
I think if you want to prioritize, however, the risk of warming the globe a few degrees is far less threatening to human existence than an asteroid impact.
Is an asteroid teleportation device or a global air-conditioning system more likely in 100 years?
In the end I think we'll have neither, but we'll at least be warm as we watch the show in the sky.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</id>
	<title>And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261130400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-Can't be USA -- I'm writing this from there.<br>-Can't be Antartica -- We all love them Penguins<br>-Can't be the Artic -- Ditto for the polar bears<br>-Can't be France -- too obvious<br>-Can't be the Middle East -- Our oil comes from there.<br>-Can't be China -- We'd all die from the toxic dust cloud stirred up from the impact.</p><p>So, that pretty much leaves:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Quebec</p><p>I mean, sure, we all love Canada.  Great comedy, good place for NFL up-and-coming players to practice (CFL for those who don't get it), and also home to many polar bears (See Antartic above).</p><p>But face it: even CANADA doesn't like Quebec!</p><p>I mean, what do they have?  Good baseball?  Nope.  Good football team?  Nope. Good comedy?  Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy?</p><p>And best of all:<br>Quebec doesn't have UN veto power.</p><p>Problem solved!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-Ca n't be USA -- I 'm writing this from there.-Ca n't be Antartica -- We all love them Penguins-Ca n't be the Artic -- Ditto for the polar bears-Ca n't be France -- too obvious-Ca n't be the Middle East -- Our oil comes from there.-Ca n't be China -- We 'd all die from the toxic dust cloud stirred up from the impact.So , that pretty much leaves :                             QuebecI mean , sure , we all love Canada .
Great comedy , good place for NFL up-and-coming players to practice ( CFL for those who do n't get it ) , and also home to many polar bears ( See Antartic above ) .But face it : even CANADA does n't like Quebec ! I mean , what do they have ?
Good baseball ?
Nope. Good football team ?
Nope. Good comedy ?
Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy ? And best of all : Quebec does n't have UN veto power.Problem solved !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-Can't be USA -- I'm writing this from there.-Can't be Antartica -- We all love them Penguins-Can't be the Artic -- Ditto for the polar bears-Can't be France -- too obvious-Can't be the Middle East -- Our oil comes from there.-Can't be China -- We'd all die from the toxic dust cloud stirred up from the impact.So, that pretty much leaves:
                            QuebecI mean, sure, we all love Canada.
Great comedy, good place for NFL up-and-coming players to practice (CFL for those who don't get it), and also home to many polar bears (See Antartic above).But face it: even CANADA doesn't like Quebec!I mean, what do they have?
Good baseball?
Nope.  Good football team?
Nope. Good comedy?
Do Quebecois even HAVE comedy?And best of all:Quebec doesn't have UN veto power.Problem solved!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491040</id>
	<title>Re:A few years notice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261165920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC the orbit of Mercury was not worked out completely satisfactorily until general relativity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC the orbit of Mercury was not worked out completely satisfactorily until general relativity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC the orbit of Mercury was not worked out completely satisfactorily until general relativity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486564</id>
	<title>Re:And the target is....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261148580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except you've just cut off a sizable fraction of electrical power being delivered to the U.S. from Canada.</p><p>Besides, Canada wouldn't be Canada without Quebec, and much of TROC (the rest of Canada) does like Quebec.  I do, anyway.</p><p>On the other hand, Quebec does have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manicouagan\_Reservoir" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">quite</a> [wikipedia.org] a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearwater\_Lakes" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">collection</a> [wikipedia.org] of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pingualuit\_crater" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">impact</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlevoix\_crater" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">craters</a> [wikipedia.org] there <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La\_Moinerie\_crater" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">already</a> [wikipedia.org].  Maybe they can take it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except you 've just cut off a sizable fraction of electrical power being delivered to the U.S. from Canada.Besides , Canada would n't be Canada without Quebec , and much of TROC ( the rest of Canada ) does like Quebec .
I do , anyway.On the other hand , Quebec does have quite [ wikipedia.org ] a collection [ wikipedia.org ] of impact [ wikipedia.org ] craters [ wikipedia.org ] there already [ wikipedia.org ] .
Maybe they can take it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except you've just cut off a sizable fraction of electrical power being delivered to the U.S. from Canada.Besides, Canada wouldn't be Canada without Quebec, and much of TROC (the rest of Canada) does like Quebec.
I do, anyway.On the other hand, Quebec does have quite [wikipedia.org] a collection [wikipedia.org] of impact [wikipedia.org] craters [wikipedia.org] there already [wikipedia.org].
Maybe they can take it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485132</id>
	<title>Re:Simpsons did it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261135560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a Frenchman, I protest! I'll never let that happen to my... ok I give up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Frenchman , I protest !
I 'll never let that happen to my... ok I give up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Frenchman, I protest!
I'll never let that happen to my... ok I give up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489052</id>
	<title>Unnecessary worries.</title>
	<author>Wardish</author>
	<datestamp>1261159260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cease your concerns.</p><p>After all we all have leaders that are the people best qualified to make hard decisions based on all the rational evidence that is available.</p><p>It's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to raise money from various people wanting special access.</p><p>And our wonderful legislatures, composed of the best minds available, who would immediately understand the "gravity" of the situation and pass the necessary laws to enable the populace to line up behind emergency programs while maintaining a functioning society.</p><p>It's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to direct federal money to their districts.</p><p>In closing I would just like to say that our best and brightest would lead us through.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cease your concerns.After all we all have leaders that are the people best qualified to make hard decisions based on all the rational evidence that is available.It 's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to raise money from various people wanting special access.And our wonderful legislatures , composed of the best minds available , who would immediately understand the " gravity " of the situation and pass the necessary laws to enable the populace to line up behind emergency programs while maintaining a functioning society.It 's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to direct federal money to their districts.In closing I would just like to say that our best and brightest would lead us through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cease your concerns.After all we all have leaders that are the people best qualified to make hard decisions based on all the rational evidence that is available.It's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to raise money from various people wanting special access.And our wonderful legislatures, composed of the best minds available, who would immediately understand the "gravity" of the situation and pass the necessary laws to enable the populace to line up behind emergency programs while maintaining a functioning society.It's not like they were picked for their charisma and ability to direct federal money to their districts.In closing I would just like to say that our best and brightest would lead us through.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488100
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30495688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_18_0516246_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484938
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484924
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485458
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486388
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30495688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485656
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486372
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485338
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485014
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486100
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30497736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30484902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30493776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30488460
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487506
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30496340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489584
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30491782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30485916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30490032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30492072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30486678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30500522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_18_0516246.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30487214
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_18_0516246.30489218
</commentlist>
</conversation>
