https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/ Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:59:32 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531174 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:59:32 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531174 sorry guys it was me…. i pissed off the bug planet again

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531173 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:19:50 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531173 Ha, revenge at last for Skylab!

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531172 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:15:55 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531172 NASA insists it’s not satellite debris, but then, how can we trust the same people who faked the moon landings? Seriously, larger debris chunks would likely continue to follow the satellites’ orbital paths, more or less, for a while, so I’m wondering why those paths haven’t been mentioned in the speculation. Do they go near Austin? Does the direction of travel of the meteor match the direction the satellite debris would be going?

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531171 Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:16:57 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/02/16/no-it-is-not-satellite-junk-fa/#comment-531171 Ready to cue the Devo reference in 3…2…

]]>