Will sophisticated militarized factions of advanced nations utilize asteroids to potentially terrorize other countries and or the citizens of earth in an (evil) God-like manner?
In recent weeks we have been inundated with asteroid, meteor and fireball reports worldwide.
A recent Friday meteor scare caught the attention of many people over the eastern United States. Mike Wall reports on NASA saying, “When you have something like this occur at 8 o’clock at night over one of the most populated regions of the United States, it’s going to get people’s attention,” according to Bill Cooke, head of the Meteoroid Environment Office at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., told reporters on Saturday.
In fact there were even reports and video that backed the theory that a spaced based weapon was utilized to split apart the meteor that struck Russia causing an enormous amount of property damage and over 1200 human injuries.
So why did a Russian politician named, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, claim the day of the Russian meteor strike that the American’s were testing a space weapon? Although we might not know the source of Zhirinovsky’s information, video evidence shows that something interacted with the asteroid in question that was already moving at 33,000 mph as it burned in toward earth. Whatever that something was, was moving considerably faster than that.
Was this an actual space based weapons test in action or a threat?
Do space based weapons even exist? The answer is yes.
There are several known space based weapons platforms in existence such as “Rods From God” and others. However, the one that split the asteroid might be utilizing a new ion technology according to sources.
Wikipedia explains the reality of such space based weapon platform concepts (the public version listed as an “idea”);
Project Thor is an idea for a weapons system that launches kinetic projectiles from Earth orbit to damage targets on the ground. Jerry Pournelle originated the concept while working in operations research at Boeing in the 1950s before becoming a science-fiction writer.
The most described system is “an orbiting tungsten telephone pole with small fins and a computer in the back for guidance”. The weapon can be down-scaled, an orbiting “crowbar” rather than a pole. The system described in the 2003 United States Air Force (USAF) report was that of 20-foot-long (6.1 m), 1-foot-diameter (0.30 m) tungsten rods, that are satellite controlled, and have global strike capability, with impact speeds of Mach 10.
The time between deorbiting and impact would only be a few minutes, and depending on the orbits and positions in the orbits, the system would have a world-wide range. There is no requirement to deploy missiles, aircraft or other vehicles. Although the SALT II (1979) prohibited the deployment of orbital weapons of mass destruction, it did not prohibit the deployment of conventional weapons. The system is prohibited by neither the Outer Space Treaty nor the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
The idea is that the weapon would inflict damage because it moves at orbital velocities, at least 9 kilometers per second. Smaller weapons can deliver measured amounts of energy as small as a 225 kg conventional bomb. Some systems are quoted as having the yield of a small tactical nuclear bomb. These designs are envisioned as a bunker buster.
In the case of the system mentioned in the 2003 USAF report above, a 6.1m x 0.3m tungsten cylinder impacting at Mach 10 has a kinetic energy equivalent to approximately 11.5 tons of TNT (or 7.2 tons of dynamite). The mass of such a cylinder is itself over 8 tons, so it is clear that the practical applications of such a system are limited to those situations where its other characteristics provide a decisive advantage – a conventional bomb/warhead of similar weight to the tungsten rod, delivered by conventional means, provides similar destructive capability and is a far more practical method.
The highly elongated shape and high density are to enhance sectional density and therefore minimize kinetic energy loss due to air friction and maximize penetration of hard or buried targets. The larger device is expected to be quite good at penetrating deeply buried bunkers and other command and control targets. The smaller “crowbar” size might be employed for anti-armor, anti-aircraft, anti-satellite and possibly anti-personnel use.
The weapon would be very hard to defend against. It has a very high closing velocity and a small radar cross-section. Launch is difficult to detect. Any infra-red launch signature occurs in orbit, at no fixed position. The infra-red launch signature also has a small magnitude compared to a ballistic missile launch. One drawback of the system is that the weapon’s sensors would almost certainly be blind during atmospheric reentry due to the plasma sheath that would develop ahead of it, so a mobile target could be difficult to hit if it performed any unexpected maneuvering. The system would also have to cope with atmospheric heating from re-entry, which could melt the weapon.
While the larger version might be individually launched, the smaller versions would be launched from “pods” or “carriers” that contained several missiles.
So now we have to ask ourselves, how deep does all of this go?
A February 24th report details;
At a meeting devoted to Defender of the Fatherland Day yesterday, Rogozin said, “This can provoke an undesirable effect. Under cover of fighting asteroid impacts, certain states will be used as a pretext for exploiting space for military purposes.”
” The existing technology and the warning system, the anti-missile and air defense systems are useless, if we talk about anti-asteroid security of the Earth”, Rogozin said. “It is necessary to create an absolutely new system in order to monitor the space system.The key task is that it is necessary to understand how we can fight this phenomenon. This is beyond high-tech capacity,” he said.
He stressed that information on the asteroid danger could not help mankind. “If you know you’ll be killed tomorrow, this put you out of humour,” the vice-prime minister pointed out.
While certain nations claim to seek asteroid defense technologies, others might possess asteroid offensive technologies, the kind that leave no fingerprints and can be blamed on God. So is the cat out of the bag between governments that the US possesses such a devise and if so, will the devise be used to torment countries, or will the devise be used to torment citizens of the earth in the ultimate false flag style manner? A manner in which only an act of God could be to blame.