Thread by @dburbach

I'm with Bill Nye and @GarretsonPeter in wanting more attention to impact threats... but there is zero reason to move it to Space Force vs the current NASA lead (per the 2016 national strategy)

nasa.gov/sites/default/…

https://twitter.com/GarretsonPeter/status/1359997319429644298

What we need now is research: more searches and more effective search methods for objects, and research into the asteroid characteristics (including response to deflection attempts). 2/

Those missions dovetail perfectly with what the astronomy and planetary science mission community do, and which NASA already conducts and supports. Internationally, too, it's universally a subject where civilian science agencies are in the lead, not militaries 3/

There just no case for handing asteroids to Space Force, there's no expertise or capability there that wouldn't be a *downgrade* from where things sit today. If there's an argument, I'd love to see it. 4/

An argument beyond "Space Force should do everything", of course. 5/5

addendum that if we detect a threatening object, possibly a military role comes in. Even then if we wanted to put a small ion-thruster pusher on a small asteroid, there's probably on net more expertise at NASA than USSF, but both deal with the same contractors anyway 6/

if it were concluded that a nuclear detonation would be the best strategy -- it might not be!!! -- then there's a stronger case for military involvement in the design and operation of an intercept mission. 7/

In all likelihood we'd have years of warning to figure out the best response. If the object isn't discovered until it's right about to hit us, then it's either too small to worry about or too late for any organization to do anything anyway 8/8