A new eruption from Krakatoa could have disastrous effects on the entire world's climate, causing huge quantities of sulphur to fly into the atmosphere, reflecting sunlight and causing global temperatures to drop. (Which could actually come in handy about now.)

Dr.Marco Fulle, an Italian astronomer and volcano expert who runs Stromboli online, took these photos, showing the full extent of the reawakened volcano's destructive potential. One especially striking image (the one with the clouds and stars) shows the volcano against a backdrop of turning constellations, including the Plough and the Big Dipper.

Images by Dr. Marco Fulle/Bancroft Media. More photos are at the link. [Daily Telegraph]

Not that all that equipment you're seeing in the top photo is for communication with the outside world, of course. The shelter in Ligatne, Latvia, has separate rooms for the KGB, and they include direct phone lines to Moscow but also rows and rows of gray electronic devices that allow you to listen in on conversations taking place anywhere in the shelter. So even once you were entombed in the ground, hiding from an uninhabitable world, you still would have been under the thumb of the surveillance state at all times.

Somehow that single vase with its drooping flowers is the saddest thing of all.

My favorite part: the huge, monstrous facility only had enough food and supplies to last three months, meaning after months of claustrophobic repression, you still would have had to venture out into an atomic wasteland. Images by AP.

LiveScience writer Michael Schirber doesn't think so. He writes:

One way to see this is to compare the energy of a nuclear blast to that of the rotational motion of the Earth. The largest nuclear bombs have an explosive energy of several tens of megatons, or about 10^17 Joules, whereas the Earth's rotational energy is around 10^29 Joules.

Yeah, that's a pretty big difference. Spirber notes that the energy of the largest nuclear blast is less than that released by the 2004 earthquake that caused the tsunami.

The amount of fault-moving ("Earth-slimming") energy in this magnitude 9.3 earthquake was estimated at more than 10&^22 Joules, or roughly 100,000 times that of the biggest nuclear bombs. So any effect of a nuclear blast on Earth's rotation would be far below what is measureable.

So, it seems unlikely that one nuke — or several — of today's technology could do harm to the planet (though the environmental effects are quite a different story).

The tsunami did, however, alter the Earth's rotation.

Scientists calculated that the colossal tsunami-causing 2004 Sumatra earthquake caused a slimming of the Earth that shortened the day by a few millionths of a second and shifted the North Pole by an inch.

Do we have enough nukes to achieve a similar effect?

The researchers at the Arms Control Foundation suggest it's possible. According to their calculations, between Russia and the United States, we have about 26,000 warheads — there are only about a thousand between the rest of the countries that officially, unofficially and probably have nukes. If one assumes — a big assumption, but let's go for the doomsday scenario — that each nuclear weapon stockpiled the world's nuclear leaders has an energy of 10^17 Joules, then between Russia and the United States, we have the potential capacity to release 2.6^22 Joules — or approximate 25% of the energy of the 2004 tsunami-causing earthquake.

So by concentrating the capacity of the world's nuclear arsenal in one place, we might be able to shift the North Pole by one-quarter of an inch. Doesn't exactly seem worth it. But it's for science!

Can a Nuclear Blast Alter Earth's Rotation? [Live Science]
Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance [Arms Control Association]

As you scan through the data (Hole G, section 8 is where the action is, really), you can almost imagine running your fingers along the fault. The images are side-by-side photos, taken from opposite sides of the drill cores. Admittedly, they're not as sexy as a lot of the eye candy we usually link to. But they're beautiful in the same way images of the comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 slamming into Jupiter in 1994 were beautiful. Looking at them, it's hard to ignore that little voice inside saying "wow, that could happen to us."

Source: Earthscope.org via Discovery News

If a comet or asteroid doesn't slam into the planet between now and then, ending civilization, it will greatly improve our chances of killing ourselves off, instead of being snuffed out by some cosmic accident. Thank you, Canucks.

As this New Scientist article says, astronomers on the ground have been looking for potentially threatening asteroids for decades, but even a small space telescope like NEOSSat will really help us out:

Scientists are using ground-based telescopes to track down more of the near-Earth objects (NEOs) to determine if any could potentially hit the planet in the foreseeable future. But some of these objects are difficult to see from the ground.

t will rely on a telescope with a 15-centimetre mirror, smaller than many backyard telescopes used by amateur astronomers. Chief scientists for the mission are Alan Hildebrand of the University of Calgary and Brad Wallace of Defence Research and Development Canada.

Despite its modest dimensions, the spacecraft's unique vantage point in space may allow it to spot objects that are difficult to see from the ground.

Most of the NEOs found so far have elongated orbits that extend far away from the Sun. But some never venture much beyond Earth's orbit.

These stay close to the Sun in the sky, meaning they must be observed when the Sun is not far below the horizon - before sunrise and after sunset. At those times, the glow of the sky can make the objects hard to see.

Operating above the atmosphere, NEOSSat will have a clearer view of such objects. It is expected to catalogue at least 50% of the ones that span more than 1 kilometre.

These close-in objects are more dangerous than their more far-flung siblings because they spend more time in the vicinity of Earth, where there is the potential for a collision, says Timothy Spahr. An astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Spahr co-authored a 2007 NASA report to the US Congress on the risk to Earth from NEOs.

NEOSSat only weighs about 60kg and cost $10 million to build...about what it costs for a candy bar in the Pentagon cafeteria. And for that pittance all we get is an unprecedented level of interplanetary defense. We owe you one, Canada.

Source: New Scientist (image: TreeHugger)

Artist Mark Goerner paints concept art for film and illustration projects, and in his spare time he likes to paint desolate images like the one above. In fact, this is the first part in a series of paintings that follow the aftermath of the moon crashing to the Earth through Spring, Summer, and Autumn.

The scenario starts with the effect of a meteorite's collision with one of the planet's moons as the catalyst for a series of events that would get the process of organic reanimation started. Imagine the fragments of a moon falling out of orbit, dashing across the planet's surface, and burrowing into the tectonic plates causing massive volcanoes and the release of giant gas clouds and dust.

• Alien: Blowing up the Nostromo in order to kill one single Alien was one of the biggest (and best) sacrifices in movie history, and the resulting explosion as Ripley flees in the shuttle still stands alone as a perfect example of why you don't need 40 billion rendered polygons showing you just how the ship would look as it broke up into its component atoms. (You can see video of it above.) Plus, you have the audible countdown over the ship's PA system literally beating a ticking clock against Sigourney's ass every step of the way. It worked so good that they decided to repeat it in Aliens.
• Battlestar Galactica — "Exodus Part 2": Lee Adama's emotional outbursts might not win him another command anytime soon, because when he took over as the helmer of the Pegasus he got complacent and fat. However, he redeemed himself by sacrificing his superior ship (with its fighter-building ability) in order to save the Galactica, his pop, and everyone on the planet below. This still stands as one of the most powerful moments in the show. Just when you think everything is hopeless, the camera pulls extremely far back, and... boom. Pegasus to the short-lived rescue.

  
  

• Star Trek III: The Search for Spock: Captains of the Enterprise sure have been careless with their ships. What are they on, Enterprise-Q by now? However, the first time the Enterprise was sacrificed was probably the best. Faced with insurmountable odds, Kirk proves he's best at surviving by activating the ship's self-destruct sequence and letting it take out some nosy Klingons. As he watched it burn to cinders from the planet below, he asks Bones "My god, what have I done." Nothing that Starfleet will court martial him for, apparently.

  

• The Fifth Element: Even cruise ships aren't safe in this film, especially when carrying blue-skinned singing divas with stones buried in their stomachs. The poor luxury spaceliner Fhloston Paradise survives an attempt by Zorg to blow it to smithereens, only to find itself blown up moments later by someone with the sense to use a very short timer and not a wonky thing that you deactivate with a hotel cardkey. Cool escape pods, though.

• Tron: While fleeing Sark and his troops, Tron and his girlriend Yori narrowly escape on a Syd Mead designed Solar Sailer, which rides beams of light around Tronworld. Sark's massive carrier eventually catches up with it and opens up a ship-chomping hole, reducing it to pieces. The best comparison would be if a modern-day aircraft carrier chewed up a catamaran. Sark and the others leave the ship, and he orders it to be derezzed, which is what is really cool about Tron. If you need something, the system can rez it up, and when you're done, you just recycle it.

  

• Lost in Space: Bonehead Joey, er... Major West uses remote control to ignite the engines on the superior Proteus, full of futuretech and possibly life-saving equipment in order to get hull-burning space spiders off the Jupiter 2. However, not content to just let them burn up in the engine's wake, he also makes the ship self-destruct. Even though his ship has had its systems majorly trashed by the malfunctioning Robot, he still blows up the first sweet ride they find. Oh, and it manages to make their own ship crash. Genius.

• The Last Starfighter: When video game expert turned space pilot Alex keys the "Death Blossom" onboard his Gunstar, it turns into a hypersonic laser death machine. However, once it's in the post-orgasmic glow it's rendered dead and useless. They can't even steer out of the way of Xur's approaching ship, which shipicides itself into a moon. However, that bastard Xur got away, never to be caught since the movie didn't get a sequel.

  

• Independence Day: This is more of a shipicide from within, but when Jeff Goldblum and Will Smith fly up to the alien mothership and plant the virus, they're basically giving the thing a huge case of indigestion, which it doesn't quite recover from. Sadly (or maybe gladly) I couldn't get a clip from this since three of the Blockbuster stores I visited in Los Angeles don't carry ID4. Lame. But as a bonus, enjoy this clip mashing up Star Wars with Independence Day. Randy Quaid uses the Force.

  

• Return of the Jedi: While this one wasn't done on purpose, it's sort of a hilarious "Oops" moment as a rebel A-Wing pilot banzais into the bridge of the Imperial Flagship Super Star Destroyer Executor. This causes the ship to veer out of control and crash right into the the new and improved Death Star. Either that was one extremely lucky hit on the bridge, or whoever built the windshield of that thing needs to be fired. It can withstand the rigors of laser fire and hyperspeed, but can't take the impact of a measly A-Wing? I wonder if that have a transportation safety board that investigates these things.

  

• Vanilla Sky: Cameron Diaz gets an honorable mention in this film for tanking her "ship" (okay, a Buick Skylark) off a bridge in an effort to die in a warped suicide love pact with Tom Cruise. Let this be a note to you love 'em and leave 'em types out there: if you scorn someone, they may seek revenge, fuck up your face, and force you to go into a bizarre cryogenic freeze / lucid dreaming / virtual reality state of existence. Just so you know.

  

• 
  

While we love Robert Carlyle, especially in Trainspotting and 28 Weeks Later, this movie unfortunately looks like an artifact from the days of Volcano, Twister, and Earthquake. Carlyle plays an engineer who worked on the Thames Barrier, which can't withstand the double whammy of high tide and a series of perfect storms that brew up enough water to bury Big Ben underwater.

Of course, Carlyle fights back against the water with some hokey science and cheesy melodrama, and the movie gets mired in relationshippy chatter as people prepare for the end, instead of buying a boat and getting the hell out of dodge. Still, we in the States are hankering to see it. Flood washed into the UK several months ago, but hasn't made it to our shores yet — except, apparently, on the "family friendly" ION network where it aired in December, got its advert ripped to YouTube, then ripped to our own Flash player. Still, you can really catch the fear on Carlyle's face through the pixelation, can't you?

Flood [Channel 4]

Sanders, author of Celluloid Skyline, says "everybody" thought there would be no more images of New York's destruction after Sept. 11. But the New York skyline makes too tempting a target for film-makers. NYC provides a "yardstick" for the scale of destruction, and is meaningful to overseas audiences in a way that Chicago or St. Louis just aren't.

Then we get to the crack-smoking portion of Sanders' quotes in the Times article:

In contrast to I Am Legend — which like The Omega Man (1971) is based on a Richard Matheson novel — the Cloverfield images verge on being tasteless, Mr. Sanders said. "They are playing on feelings not just about New York as civic symbol but on the shock of Sept. 11," he said. "To some degree, that's not fair ball."

I'm not sure which part of his statement is weirder. The idea that there's a "tasteful" way to show millions of people dying, or the idea that audiences can't tell the difference between real destruction and movie spectacle. Actually, I know: it's the notion that I Am Legend wasn't pure 9/11 porn, which it was. (How many times does Will Smith use the phrase "Ground Zero" in that movie again?)

Still, I'm beginning to understand why director Francis Lawrence decided to make I Am Legend look less post-apocalyptic and more nature-park. If you actually cut loose in your fantasy movie and show real destruction and havoc, then people will accuse you of being an impolite bounder, not fit for good society.

Luckily, the problem will solve itself. America won't be the world's main superpower much longer, and NYC won't be the world's leading city. Soon, people will be much more interested in seeing Shanghai or Seoul destroyed than NYC anyway.

[New York Times]

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

iphone image by idiotboy Crystal meth bong image by kissthis.

The other one, of course, is Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The only lame part of the Odyssey 5 pilot is the kindly old man from outer space who rescues the last few humans, on the space shuttle. He sends their memories back in time, so their five-years-ago selves remember the destruction of Earth. It's a bit cheesy, but could be the set-up for a cool show. Too bad it only lasted one season.