In a news flash, scientists get burned

Three researchers and their obscure theory on how to save the Earth from a hotter sun - a billion years from now - get a little too close to the media.

By TOM ZUCCO

© St. Petersburg Times,
published June 25, 2001

You probably missed the story. The one last week about the scientists who propose using an asteroid to slingshot the Earth farther from the sun as it gets bigger and brighter.

There are two distinct conclusions you can draw from this.

First, we're all gonna burn to a crisp. Well, not us. It'll happen to the schmos unlucky enough to be living on Earth about a billion years from now. And you're thinking, "A billion years from now! I'm worried about being here next year. Even Strom Thurmond won't be around in a billion years. Probably."

The other thought is this: How can I get a job as a scientist? It's obvious that all these people do every day is drop acid, log on to the Internet and make up bizarre statements and theories. And they get all sorts of grant money to do it. It's like being paid to be Timothy Leary.

Here, essentially, is what the story said:

Don Korycansky, a planetary scientist at the University of California at Santa Cruz; Greg Laughlin, a scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center; and Fred Adams, a University of Michigan physicist, came up with a proposal more than a year ago that could address the problem of the sun becomming too hot.

Remember, that'll happen over hundreds of millions of years, as the sun gradually grows stronger. It's like living in the same neighborhood with Jennifer Lopez.

The scientists suggest finding an asteroid about 60 miles long and somehow getting someone there to attach a rocket to it. (Do you know how hard it is to get a plumber to come over, let alone a rocket guy?) Then the asteroid would be sent into an orbit whose gravitational pull would very slowly start to move the Earth away from the sun. It would also move Jupiter closer to the sun. Like we care about Jupiter.

Important safety tip: The asteroid would have to pass within 10,000 miles of Earth, which is actually cutting things pretty close. If the person who attaches the rocket to the asteroid aims it even a little bit the wrong way, we're all crispy critters a lot sooner than we thought.

But it was just a theory. Something to think about.

There was no mention of global warming.

And then the media got ahold of it.

Somehow, when this theory was published several months ago, a newspaper in England announced that this was the "cure" for global warming. Forget carbon dioxide emissions and holes in the ozone layer ... just move the pot away from the stove.

Wrong.

Fred Adams, one of the scientists, explained during a recent phone interview how a simple theory in an obscure journal (Astrophysics and Space Science) was bent and tweaked into a story that made international headlines.

Question: What's up, Doc?

Answer: "This whole thing has gotten a bit out of hand. All we did was find an orbit."

Q. Come on. No need to be modest.

A. "Well, okay. The research is interesting for a couple of reasons. It tells you one can actually move planets around. That's important, because over a billion years, the sun will get brighter and life on Earth won't last. Whoever is living at that time might have something they can do about it, and some people right now might find that comforting."

Q. So how did this turn into a "cure" for global warming?

A. "Some British newspaper started it."

Q. Figures. You know they run pictures of naked women in their papers?

A. "What happened was we used a phrase that they picked up on. We said you might want to move the Earth because when the sun heats up, we'll be faced with catastrophic global warming.

"They probably did a word search, and since we used it, they found the research paper. If they read the abstract carefully, they'd know it had nothing to do with global warming.

"And it wouldn't work because the time element is completely wrong. We're talking hundreds of years with global warming, and hundreds of millions with the intensity of the sun.

"All we've done is found an orbit. It's nothing profound, and it's in no way a solution to global warming."

Q. Anybody else buy into the story?

A. "Rush Limbaugh did a radio program about it, and I'm still getting nasty e-mail from people who think we're trying to move the Earth to cure global warming. Limbaugh's people didn't call or contact us."

Q. If you strapped rockets onto Rush Limbaugh and launched him into space, would he have enough mass and density to pull the Earth away from the sun?

A. "I think he's a little too light. But that's an interesting theory."

Q. Will this story hurt your credibility? Will people think you guys are ... well, a little weird?

A. "Well, it's a little bit maddening because I worked very hard to become a serious scientist. Now I'm kind of put in the role of a crank. Only a crank would try to put a rocket on an asteroid and ... it sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it?"

Q. Not at all. Then again, I'm one of those people who just likes to say the word "asteroid." So what can I do, in the name of science, to help?

A. "I'm interested in sort of putting water on the fire here."

Q. Water on the fire? Very good!

A. "Really. All we did was find an orbit. It has nothing to do with global warming. We just saw this problem and then this amusing spin got put on it."

Q. Amusing spin. And people think scientists aren't funny.

A. "Huh? Oh, sorry about that."

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.