In article <4658ce99$0$27161$742ec2ed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Don Bruder <dakidd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Drop 'em on land and things are likely gonna get *REAL* ugly in a big
>hurry, for a long time, and over a wide area due to the dust/debris
>clouds. A "Nuclear Winter" scenario, without the "Nuclear", I'd expect.
Yep....
>Drop 'em in the oceans, and coastal lowlands get washed away by massive
>tsunamis, but inland/higher elevation areas areas see little (if
>anything) more than a short-term increase in precipitation.
Nope. Dropping them in the oceans is worse, climate-wise, than dropping
them on land. A lot worse. See, for instance, the article "Giant
Meteor Impact" in the March 1966 issue of _Analog_.
(You get water va**** instead of dust, yes...but you get *a lot more*
water va**** than you would dust.)
--
David Goldfarb | "Justice or immortality. An intriguing
choice."
goldfarb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
goldfarb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| -- Babylon 5, "Deathwalker"
|
