More from NASA on the Not-so-much End of the World

January 27, 2012

There is no “Planet X” hurtling toward us from space. Nothing particularly on tap astronomically for December 2012. Likewise no pole shift, no need to lay in supplies, so says the manager of Nasa’s Near-Earth Object Office.

I know this isn’t a big issue among my readers, but keep this handy for responding to panicky emails from Aunt Teabag and Uncle Dittohead.

The “Planet X” hypotheses, – fun fact here – was put forward by, among others, Richard Muller, of BEST temperature project fame. So add yet one more check to his oddball resume – you can view more below.

12 Responses to “More from NASA on the Not-so-much End of the World”

  1. Jean Mcmahon Says:

    I just heard of Guy Mcpherson,and I believe I agree w his thinking..a talk of his was posted somewhere..He says only a worldwide financial collapse soon can save the living planet…Before that I saw the movie Melencholia..I keep thinking about the ending when the planets collide and it is kind of,sort of what I think we are doing to the planet…except the non living part thatGeorge Carlin tells us can take care of her self..Have you heard of Guy Mcphearson?? If there is financial collapse,I am really going to get that garden going…need the garden and 500 gallon water tank anyhow..

  2. prokaryotes Says:

    And the Mayans know it all along 🙂

    THis is so stupid, earth crust displacement…. buahaha. However i love Roland Emmerich movies!

  3. prokaryotes Says:

    Neil deGrasse Tyson – World End In 2012?

  4. Martin Lack Says:

    I’ve seen just about all those apocalyptic programmes on the National Geographic or Discovery Channel, including the one you have extracted a piece of here I think, where scientists systematically pull to pieces all the 2012 doomsday stuff.

    However, I hope that the huge world-wide audiences that have viewed these programmes are intelligent enough to spot the difference between all of them and Doomsday 2210?, which is a very sobering warning of what will happen over the next 200 years if we do not stop burning fossil fuels.

    The world is not going to end in 2012 but, for many of its inhabitants, it will be Game Over within the next 200 years. Therefore, this is one case where we desperately need to avoid “throwing the baby out with the bath water”!

  5. Planet Nibiru isn’t going to deliver a mass extinction event on Earth in 2012! What a relief. We can continue to work on completing the project without a cosmic competitor.

    • Martin Lack Says:

      Good point. We humans are nothing if not independent. We can do anything. Causing mass extinction of most life on Earth? Hell, we can almost do that in our sleep… Come to think of it, that is exactly what many are doing: Sleepwalking into a global catastrophe. Unfortunately, despite the growing numbers of people screaming in alarm, the background noise-cancelling technology of sceptics’ headphones is getting so good, it seems they still can’t hear us.

      Maybe it will be different if nature rips their blindfolds off (although I think it has already started)? Unfortunately, here too, the “frog in the saucepan” analogy applies once more: The frog is boiled alive because the rate of change of water temperature is never great enough for it to realise its life is threatened… Sorry folks; I think we’re screwed.

      • There’s a diminishing chance that we’re not already hopelessly screwed – until enough people who think that we “might have a problem” reach the same conclusion. Every year, the cost of improving our odds grows exponentially.

        • Martin Lack Says:

          Thanks Charles. I realise that we must not give up. I was allowing my desperation over still being unemployed to spill over into the environmental arena.

          Nevertheless, with the exception of a sudden (return to?) accelerating change (as per Hansen et al 2012), I see little prospect of the received insanity that “we will burn all the Earth’s fossil fuels before fully embracing alternatives” being rejected.

          Our greatest hope may be in the sky-rocketing cost of insurance of all kinds, which may yet prove that Stern was right and Nordhaus was wrong.

      • Alteredstory Says:

        The problem is that we humans AREN’T independent.

        We delude ourselves into thinking we are, and then we screw ourselves by acting like all the resources we use just appear by magic (literally, according to some people).

        • Martin Lack Says:

          Another good point. I should have said “independent-minded” because as you say – and as Edward O Wilson and many others have said – we are not independent of nature. On the contrary we are wholly dependent upon it and yet – in large part – continue to act as if we don’t need it at all.

  6. Jean Mcmahon, the presentation to which you refer by Guy McPherson is posted here. There is much more commentary at Nature Bats Last and a few more videos at this YouTube channel.

  7. owlbrudder Says:

    The world is not going to end in 2012? What a relief! This tin-foil hat was starting to get itchy – I think I’ll take it off.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: