Space mining startup set for launch in US

[kentauros]

150. I can't help but call it fear when you pose all these fear-based suppositions.

So, state what you mean in the beginning, and people won't make assumptions you don't like!

1, And you're making a big assumption here that people don't know math! Or planetary geology. Or even just plain old geology for that matter. Before any object gets moved, they'll drill it to discover whether it's what they want, what it's make-up consists of, and in turn, if it's stable for a move. That's pretty easy to determine. And, if for some reason, they fuck that up monstrously, then its instability will show itself early on. You do understand that any move like this will take years and years, right? That's plenty of time to "fix" things, such as purposely breaking it up further into manageable pieces. Or worse, losing it, so to speak, and putting it on a trajectory that sends it into Sol, or into another orbit around Sol. Humans never could have gone to the Moon (and back) without trajectory math. And I don't even understand such complex mathematics. However, I do trust that people know what they're doing. If they didn't, satellites wouldn't remain in any kind of orbit, including geostationary.

2. Sea above.

3. Perhaps, again, you need to be specific in your statements. I had nothing to go on, so I also assumed you meant the initial fuels, or the later proposed ideas for moving these objects. Now, I'm also going to assume that you've read the whole thread (or why did pick my post to needle?) and that once on any asteroid, one of the most efficient means of moving it is a mass-driver. Fuel can certainly be made from any water found, but once a propulsion system is in place, they won't be changing it out for the fuel based one, if they aren't using it. Better to spend the years while it's being moved to process that fuel. And any cataclysmic accident as you assume might happen would be minimized by one very important fact: they are in a vacuum. Gases dissipate fast. And if you use the Apollo 13 accident as an example, you're again assuming quite a lot.

You are also assuming that no one else has assumed the worst outcomes, because you are coming across loud and clear as what you say you do not want to be perceived as. Try a different tactic next time and people won't see you as ill-informed.