http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Kiev Fri, 24 May 2013 05:33:18 -0400 Liveleak http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/u/u/ll2/logo.gif http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Kiev Thu, 23 May 2013 03:36:52 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=114_1369294253 gubastek Car crash aftermath with vehicle extrication of two victims - filmed in Kiev , Ukraine. The guy that was in the back seat was able to get out of the car, and called the emergency services. A female was freed from the front seat and taken to the hospital before the film crew arrived. Two people remained in the vehicle: the driver in a semi-conscious state, who was wedged against the pole, and in the back seat - the girl who was trapped by the drivers seat. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=114_1369294253 gubastek BMW Wrapped Around A Pole Kiev, Ukraine, vehicle crash, car crash, crash aftermath, bmw, bmw crash, crash victims, vehicle extrication, Sat, 18 May 2013 23:27:34 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=afa_1368933941 volker_muller55 Scuffles have broken out in Ukraine as opposition parties and government supporters held separate rallies in Kiev.A group of people hurled stones and plastic bottles at oppposition supporters before being pushed away by police in riot gear. Opponents of President Viktor Yanukovych have been rallying against what they call an increasingly authoritarian state. They are also demanding the release of former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko. Al Jazeera's Peter Sharp reports. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=afa_1368933941 volker_muller55 Clashes as thousands rally in Ukraine Ukraine, demonstration, violence Thu, 09 May 2013 13:25:07 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb2_1368119983 omniradar The Severity of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster: Comparing Chernobyl and Fukushima By Prof. Matthew Penney and Prof. Mark Selden Global Research, March 11, 2013 Asia Pacific Journal and Global Research 24 May 2011 Region: Asia Theme: Environment Originally published on May 24, 2011 On April 12, 2011 the Japanese government officially announced that the severity of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster had reached level 7, the highest on the International Nuclear Event Scale. Before Fukushima, the only level 7 case was the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, whose 25th anniversary was marked on April 26. Two and a half months after the 3.11 catastrophe, the first to affect multiple reactors, TEPCO and the Japanese government continue to struggle to bring the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi under control. TEPCO estimates that the problems could be solved in six to nine months now appearing extraordinarily optimistic and plans have been announced to close nuclear power plants deemed of particularly high risk such as the Hamaoka facility. Fukushima explosion Following the upgrade to level 7, Japan's Prime Minister's Office released a statement comparing Fukushima and Chernobyl. ( Source ) The Japanese government argues that apart from children who contracted thyroid cancer from drinking contaminated milk, there have been no health effects among ordinary citizens as a result of Chernobyl radiation. Is this really the case? Given the Japanese government's precautions against thyroid cancer in children, is there reason to believe that the Fukushima accident will take no lives except those exposed to the highest dangers in the plant clean-up? ( Source ) On April 15, Kyodo, Japan's major news service, ran an English language piece by Russian scientist Alexey V. Yablokov ( source ). Yablokov's stern warnings about the threat of even low levels of radiation had been ignored by the major media but was reported in Japanese in the Nishi Nippon Shimbun . ( Source ) The English only Kyodo piece, however, ties Yablokov's extensive Chernobyl research with the unfolding Fukushima crisis. Under the headline "How to minimize consequences of the Fukushima catastrophe," Yablokov observed that The analysis of the health impact of radioactive land contamination by the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, made by Professor Chris Busby (the European Committee of Radiation Risk) based on official Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology data, has shown that over the next 50 years it would be possible to have around 400,000 additional cancer patients within a 200-kilometer radius of the plant. This number can be lower and can be even higher, depending on strategies to minimize the consequences. Underestimation is more dangerous for the people and for the country than overestimation. Based on the Chernobyl experience, he made the following recommendations: 1. Enlarge the exclusion zone to at least about a 50-km radius of the plant; 2. Distribute detailed instructions on effective ways to protect the health of individuals while avoiding the additional contamination of food. Organize regular measurements of all people by individual dose counters (for overall radionuclides) at least once a week. Distribute radioprotectors and decontaminants (substances which provide the body protection against harmful effects of radiation) of radionuclides. . . 3. Develop recommendations for safe agriculture on the contaminated territories: reprocessing of milk, decontamination of meat, turning agriculture into production of technical cultures (e.g. biofuels etc.). Such "radionuclide-resistant" agriculture will be costly (it may be up to 30-40 percent compared with conventional agriculture) and needs to be subsidized; 4. It is necessary to urgently improve existing medical centers - and possibly create new ones - to deal with the immediate and long-term consequences of the irradiated peoples (including medical-genetic consultations on the basis of chromosome analysis etc.); 5. The most effective way to help organize post-Fukushima life in the contaminated territories (from Chernobyl lessons) is to create a special powerful interagency state body (ministry or committee) to handle the problems of contaminated territories during the first most complicated years. Yablokov is one of the primary architects of the 2006 Greenpeace report "The Chernobyl Catastrophe: Consequences on Human Health" and an extensive 2010 follow-up study Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment published by the New York Academy of Sciences, which makes the startling claim that 985,000 deaths can be attributed to the 1986 disaster. This claim is startling because it differs so dramatically from a 600 page 2005 study by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the WHO, and the UN Development Programme, which claimed that fewer than 50 deaths can be attributed directly to Chernobyl and fewer than 4000 likely from Chernobyl-related cancers in the future. Indeed, the two works continue to frame much of the public controversy, with little progress toward resolution. Attempts to assess the consequences of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster remain the subject of fierce debate over widely different estimates in both the scientific and policy communities. In the months since the Fukushima disaster, scores of reports have uncritically passed on the results of the IAEA/WHO or the Yablokov study published by the New York Academy of Sciences without seriously engaging the conflicting conclusions or moving the debate forward. Here we present the major findings of major studies across the divide that may help to clarify the likely outcomes of the Fukushima disaster. ( 1 , 2 ) Yablokov and colleagues assessed thousands of studies of the localities and people affected by the Chernobyl disaster in Russian and other Eastern European languages. They argue that these studies have been ignored by the Anglophone scientific community. Critics, such as the British science journalist George Monbiot, have criticized Yablokov and his colleagues for attributing any increase in cancer occurrence in regions affected by Chernobyl to the radiation released in the disaster. Emphasizing the multiplicity of factors that may affect cancer rates, Monbiot states, for example, that none of the hardest hit areas subjected to Chernobyl radiation,show as dramatic a cancer increase in the 1986-2000 period as does Japan. The impact of Chernobyl radiation in Japan was negligible, yet the cancer rate there has nearly doubled since the disaster. In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, at a time when many have moved to reject the nuclear power option, Monbiot announced that he had abandoned his former criticism to embrace nuclear power as a responsible component of a green energy policy. Japanese government statistics in fact show large increases in screening rates for cancer during this period and this is one possible explanation for the increase in the number of cases reported. ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ) Monty Charles of the School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, reviewed Yablokov's work in the journal Radiation Protection Dosimetry (Volume 141, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 101-104) and found the statistical conclusions far from clear and even contradictory: Numerous facts and figures are given with a range of references but with little explanation and little critical evaluation. Apparently related tables, figures and statements, which refer to particular publications often disagree with one another. The section on oncological diseases (cancer) was of most interest to me. A section abstract indicated that on the basis of doses from 131I and137Cs; a comparison of cancer mortality in the heavily and less contaminated territories; and pre- and post-Chernobyl cancer levels, the predicted radiation-related cancer deaths in Europe would be 212 000-245 000 and 19 000 in the remainder of the world. I could not however find any specific discussion within the section to support these numbers. The section ends with an endorsement of the work of Malko who has estimated 10 000-40 000 additional deaths from thyroid cancer, 40 000-120 000 deaths from the other malignant tumours and 5000-14 000 deaths from leukaemia-a total of 55 000-174 000 deaths from 1986 to 2056 in the whole of Europe, including Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. These numbers confusingly, do not agree with a table (6.21) from the same author. The final section on overall mortality contains a table (7.11), which includes an estimate of 212 000 additional deaths in highly contaminated regions of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. This figure is for the period of 1990-2004, and is based on an assumption that 3.8-4.0% of all deaths in the contaminated territories being due to the Chernobyl accident. One is left unsure about the meaning of many of these numbers and which is preferred. If his work has been subject to trenchant critiques, Yablokov has offered a few of his own concerning the WHO/IAEA study discussed above. Yablokov's work forms a major part of a document, "Health Effects of Chernobyl: 25 Years after the Reactor Catastrophe", released by the German Affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War on the occasion of an international conference on Chernobyl held in Berlin between April 8 - 10, 2011. ( Source ) The report contains a devastating critique of the low WHO and IAEA Chernobyl death toll estimates: Note on the unreliability of official data published by WHO and IAEA At the "Chernobyl Forum of the United Nations" organised in September 2005 by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organisation, the presentation of the results of work on the effects of Chernobyl showed serious inconsistencies. For example: the press release of the WHO and IAEA stated that in the future, at most, 4000 surplus fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia amongst the most severely affected groups of people might be expected. In the WHO report on which this was based however, the actual number of deaths is given as 8,930. These deaths were not mentioned in any newspaper articles. When one examines the source quoted in the WHO report, one arrives at a number betwen 10,000 and 25,000 additional fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia. Given this it can be rationally concluded that the official statements of the IAEA and the WHO have manipulated their own data. Their representation of the effects of Chernobyl has little to do with reality. The report continues: S. Pflugbeil pointed out already in 2005 that there were discrepancies between press releases, the WHO report and the source quoted in it (Cardis et al.). Up until now neither the Chernobyl Forum, IAEA nor the WHO have deemed it necessary to let the public know that, on the basis of their own analysis, a two to five-fold higher number of deaths due to cancer and leukaemia are to be expected as the figures they have published. Even in 2011 - some 5 years on - no official UN organisation has as yet corrected these figures. The latest UNSCEAR publication on the health effects of Chernobyl does not take into account any of the numerous results of research into the effects of Chernobyl from the three countries affected. Only one figure - that of 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer among children and juveniles, and leukaemia and cataracts in liquidators - was included in their recent information to the media. Thus, in 2011 the UNSCEAR committee declared: On the basis of studies carried out during the last 20 years, as well as of previous UNSCEAR reports, UNSCEAR has come to the conclusion that the large majority of the population has no reason to fear that serious health risks will arise from the Chernobyl accident. The only exception applies to those exposed to radioiodine during childhood or youth and to liquidators who were exposed to a high dose of radiation and therefore had to reckon with a higher radiation induced risk. Even if Yablokov's estimates for Chernobyl deaths are high, the WHO and IAEA numbers are almost certainly too low. One area of continuing debate is the fate of the "liquidators" at Chernobyl. A major difference between Fukushima and Chernobyl is government handling of the aftermath. While the Japanese government can be criticized for the speed of evacuation and the limited evacuation radius, the seriousness of the issues was immediately recognized and efforts made to send people away from the stricken plant. In the case of Chernobyl, even as the state suppressed information about the catastrophe, between 600,000 and 1,000,000 people termed "liquidators" were sent to the most heavily irradiated zone to work to contain the effects of the meltdown, many with limited protection and unaware of the risks. Some research, such as the article "Thyroid Cancer among 'Liquidators' of the Chernobyl Accident" published in the British Journal of Radiology (70, 1997, pp. 937-941), suggests relatively limited health effects (fewer than 50 cases of thyroid cancer in a group of over 150,000 liquidators followed in the study). ( Source ) The article "Chernobyl Liquidators - The People and the Doses", published by the International Radiation Protection Association, likewise concludes that across the majority of the liquidator group, "The health consequences from these radiation doses are too small to be identifiable in any epidemiological study, which does not target specific sub-groups with potentially higher exposure." ( Source ) Support groups for liquidators, however, claim that 25,000 have died and over 70,000 are disabled. ( Source ) The issue cannot be limited to fatalities. The German Affiliate of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War "Health Effects of Chernobyl" report presents extensive evidence of widespread crippling disability among liquidators. As in the case of the Chernobyl death toll, the plight of liquidators is a hotly contested topic with radically different figures emerging from different quarters. Some commentators have presented data that suggests a way out of the deadlock over the health and death consequences of Chernobyl. Peter Karamoskos , a Nuclear Radiologist and public representative on the Radiation Health Committee of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency argues in "Do we know the Chernobyl death toll?" that despite uncertainties about the numbers, "The weight of scientific opinion holds that there is no threshold below which ionising radiation poses no risk and that the risk is proportional to the dose: the "linear no-threshold" (LNT) model." Drawing on the 2006 report of the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (BEIR) of the US National Academy of Sciences. Karamoskos points out: "The ... view that low-level radiation is harmless, is restricted to a small number of scientists whose voice is greatly amplified by the nuclear industry (in much the same way as corporate greenhouse polluters amplify the voices of climate science sceptics)." He continues: There is general agreement that about 50 people died in the immediate aftermath of the Chernobyl accident. Beyond that, studies generally don't indicate a significant increase in cancer incidence in populations exposed to Chernobyl fallout. Nor would anyone expect them to because of the data gaps and methodological problems mentioned above, and because the main part of the problem concerns the exposure of millions of people to very low doses of radiation from Chernobyl fallout. For a few marginal scientists and nuclear industry spruikers, that's the end of the matter - the statistical evidence is lacking and thus the death toll from Chernobyl was just 50. Full stop. But for those of us who prefer mainstream science, we can still arrive at a scientifically defensible estimate of the Chernobyl death toll by using estimates of the total radiation exposure, and multiplying by a standard risk estimate. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates a total collective dose of 600,000 Sieverts over 50 years from Chernobyl fallout. A standard risk estimate from the International Commission on Radiological Protection is 0.05 fatal cancers per Sievert. Multiply those figures and we get an estimated 30,000 fatal cancers. A number of studies apply that basic method - based on collective radiation doses and risk estimates - and come up with estimates of the death toll varying from 9000 (in the most contaminated parts of the former Soviet Union) to 93,000 deaths (across Europe). Those are the credible estimates of the likely eventual death toll from Chernobyl. Claims that the death toll was just 50 should be rejected as dishonest spin from the nuclear industry and some of its most strident and scientifically-illiterate supporters. Karamaskos then turns to Fukushima, observing that Nuclear industry spruikers will insist that no-one is at risk from low-level radiation exposure from Fukushima. The rest of us will need to wait some months or years before we have a plausible estimate of total human radiation exposure upon which to base an estimate of the death toll. To date, radiation releases from Fukushima are estimated by the Japanese government to be 10 per cent of the total Chernobyl release. Needless to say, the view that low-level radiation is harmless is completely at odds with the current situation in Japan - the 20 km evacuation zone around the Fukushima nuclear plant, restrictions on food and water consumption in Japan and restrictions on the importation of food from Japan. ( Source ) A joint survey conducted by the Japanese and U.S. governments has produced a detailed map of ground surface radioactive contamination within an 80-kilometer radius of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Yablokov's Chernobyl research and the dire prediction of as many as 400,000 radiation-related cancers in the Fukushima region if wider evacuation is not considered, deserves consideration, scrutiny, and debate as the Japanese government deals with radiation releases from Fukushima Daiichi. The same is true of alternative methodologies, particularly as the "linear no-threshold model" described by Peter Karamoskos . Despite recent efforts to evacuate people from high radiation areas outside of the 20 km evacuation zone, however, Japanese newspapers reported on April 20 that at the same time, the Japanese government had increased the permissible hourly radiation dose at schools in Fukushima Prefecture to 3.8 microsieverts. The Mainichi describes this as "a level that would see students absorb the internationally recognized maximum of 20 millisieverts per year." See "Save the Children: Radiation Exposure of Fukushima Students," link . What are the risks of such doses? Thomas L. Slovis of the Society for Pediatric Radiology writes in Pediatr Radiol (2002:32:225-227) ... the risk of cancer from radiation is 5% per sievert... That's an average number; but an average is almost meaningless. If you are a mature, late middle-aged individual, it is maybe 1% per sievert. But if you are a child, it is maybe 15% per sievert, with a clear gender difference too at these early ages. So children are very, very sensitive compared to adults." For an adult the acceptable risk for any activity for emergency workers is 50 mSv. For a child the equivalent risk is (50 mSv /250 mSv)*66 mSv=13 mSv. The standard suggested by Japan for children is twice this value. The change in standard to 20 mSv corresponds to a change to 0.3% risk in cancer later on in life. Uncertainty about the long-term health effects of even low levels of radiation was further highlighted by David J. Brenner in the April 5 issue of Nature. ( Source ) In recent weeks, the issue of radiation and the 300,000 children of Fukushima has moved to the center of debate in assessing Japanese government handling of the Fukushima meltdown, even as the seriousness of radiation issues has grown with the belated disclosure by TEPCO of the multiple disasters experienced at the outset, and still far from under control, in Fukushima Daiichi. On April 28, Kosako Toshiso, a radiation specialist at Tokyo University, resigned his position as Special Advisor to the Cabinet. Kosako had earlier gained notoriety for his role in helping to deny the extension of benefits to some radiation victims of the atomic bombs in a 2003 court case. After Fukushima, however, Kosako made an impassioned and courageous stand against what he saw as a government taking the potential health effects of long-term radiation exposure too lightly. In a press conference, Kosako castigated the Kan cabinet for its decision to increase permissible radiation exposure for Fukushima children: At times of emergency, we cannot do without exceptions to standard rules and we are indeed capable of setting them up, but in any case, international common sense ought to be respected. It is wrong to forcibly push through conclusions that happen to be convenient only for the administrative authorities but which are utterly unacceptable by international standards. Such conclusions are bound to draw criticism from the international community. This time, upon discussing the acceptable level of radiation exposure for playgrounds in primary schools in Fukushima, they have calculated, guided and determined a level of "3.8 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cb2_1368119983 omniradar Fukushima Disaster Severity Being Underplayed By Mainstream Media !! Possible ELE ! Tue, 26 Mar 2013 08:58:55 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9b0_1364302645 jamesclarke1974 26 March 2013 A makeshift ski slope has appeared in Ukraine's capital after record snowfall. Skiiers and snowboarders flocked to the historic Andriyivskyy Descent in Kiev after officials declared Monday a day off. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9b0_1364302645 jamesclarke1974 <span class="highlight">Kiev</span> street turned into ski slope after record snowfall Skiing, Kiev, Snow Sun, 24 Mar 2013 05:47:49 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b8_1364118414 jamesclarke1974 24 March 2013 Snow blankets the Ukrainian capital, slowing traffic, and stranding drivers as army vehicles called to haul out snow-trapped trucks. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b8_1364118414 jamesclarke1974 Heavy snow blankets <span class="highlight">Kiev</span> Heavy, Snow, Kiev, Ukraine Sun, 17 Mar 2013 14:46:38 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a58_1363545732 VideosDTP Scary truck crash in Kiev, Ukraine http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a58_1363545732 VideosDTP Scary truck crash in <span class="highlight">Kiev</span>, Ukraine truck crash Sun, 21 Apr 2013 18:55:04 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ca_1366584171 v_lecavalier Enjoy a wonderful tilt shift short film depicting a day in the life of my city. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ca_1366584171 v_lecavalier A miniature day in life of Kyiv Kyiv, Kiev, tilt shift, miniature, Ukraine Sat, 20 Apr 2013 12:08:53 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=676_1366473453 Vegas Street Prophet Unidentified Object on NASA Stereo Ahead HI2! (HUGE) SunsFlare News http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDvp74ylTzw Published on Apr 20, 2013 There is something that is massive visible now on Stereo Ahead HI2. There is a possibility that it is 67P/Churyumov--Gerasimenko The Rosetta spacecraft will rendezvous with its primary target, comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, set for 2014. Image link that seems to match target from stereo ahead's point of view. http://i36.tinypic.com/2s6as91.jpg jpl applet orbital diagram -- http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?ID=c... Info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/67P/Chur... Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko JPL Small-Body Database Browser 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Classification: Jupiter-family Comet SPK-ID: 1000012 Ephemeris Orbit Diagram Orbital Elements Physical Parameters Discovery Circumstances Close-Approach Data ] http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/orbits/images/test242.gif Additional Notes: the orbits shown in the applet are color coded. The planets are white lines, and the asteroid/comet is a blue line. The bright white line indicates the portion of the orbit that is above the ecliptic plane, and the darker portion is below the ecliptic plane. Likewise for the asteroid/comet orbit, the light blue indicates the portion above the ecliptic plane, and the dark blue the portion below the ecliptic plane. Orbit Viewer applet originally written and kindly provided by Osamu Ajiki (AstroArts), and further modified by Ron Baalke (JPL). Top of Form alternate orbits: K084/14 (default) SAO/2002 SAO/1996 SAO/1989 SAO/1982 SAO/1976 SAO/1969 Bottom of Form Orbital Elements at Epoch 2456364.5 (2013-Mar-13.0) TDB Reference: JPL K084/14 (heliocentric ecliptic J2000) Element Value Uncertainty (1-sigma) Units e .6411889611380622 3.2757e-08 a 3.463889153077574 1.5827e-07 AU q 1.242881665518362 1.4587e-07 AU i 7.044033863175343 8.9794e-06 deg node 50.1720552341185 8.3079e-05 deg peri 12.73650673253869 8.4362e-05 deg M 225.0378349463 1.5494e-05 deg t p 2457247.282959700190 (2015-Aug-12.78295970) 0.0001605 JED period 2354.747831480167 6.45 0.00016139 4.419e-07 d yr n .1528826123915392 1.0478e-08 deg/d Q 5.684896640636786 2.5975e-07 AU Additional Model Parameters Parameter Value Uncertainty (1-sigma) A1 9.297767227922673E-10 3.13E-11 A2 1.031296480630282E-10 8.082E-13 A3 1.577975795036645E-10 3.904E-11 Orbit Determination Parameters # obs. used (total) 2629 data-arc span 8727 days (23.89 yr) first obs. used 1988-07-06 last obs. used 2012-05-28 planetary ephem. DE405 SB-pert. ephem. SB405-CPV-2 condition code 0 fit RMS .79178 data source ORB producer Ryan S. Park solution date 2013-Mar-03 19:24:56 Additional Information Earth MOID = .255674 AU T_jup = 2.745 Ephemeris Orbit Diagram Orbital Elements Physical Parameters Discovery Circumstances Close-Approach Data ] Physical Parameter Table Parameter Symbol Value Units Sigma Reference Notes comet total magnitude M1 11.4 mag 1. K084/14 2 parameter fit from 496 observations, autocmod 2.5b comet total magnitude slope K1 11. n/a K084/14 autocmod 2.5b diameter diameter 4.0 km n/a Lamy,P.L.;Toth,I.;Fernandez,Y.R.;Weaver,H.A. (2004) Comets II, pp. 223-264 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Discovered 1969-Oct-22 by Churyumov, Klim Ivanovic at Alma-Ata Observatory, Russia discovered on plate/photo taken on 9/11 Reference: comet.dis Last Updated: 2003-08-29 Alternate Designations Perihelion Year (est.) New-Style Desig Roman Numeral Year/ Letter 1989.8 1989 VI 1988i 1983.4 1982 VIII 1982f 1976.9 67P/1975 P1 1976 VII 1975i 1970.5 67P/1969 R1 1969 IV 1969h Ephemeris Orbit Diagram Orbital Elements Physical Parameters Discovery Circumstances Close-Approach Data ] 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation , search 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Discovery Discovered by Klim Ivanovich Churyumov and Svetlana Ivanovna Gerasimenko Designations Alternative names 1982 VIII; 1982f; 1989 VI; 1988i; 1969 R1; 1969 IV; 1969h; 1975 P1; 1976 VII; 1975i Orbital characteristics Epoch 2010-Jun-13 (JD 2455360.5) Aphelion 5.6839 AU Perihelion 1.2458 AU Semi-major axis 3.4648 AU Eccentricity 0.64043 Orbital period 6.45 yr Inclination 7.0424^0 Physical characteristics Dimensions 4 km in diameter Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko , officially designated 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko , is a comet with a current orbital period of 6.45 years. It will next come to perihelion on 13 August 2015. It is the destination of the European Space Agency's Rosetta spacecraft mission, launched on March 2, 2004. Contents hide ] 1 Discovery 2 Observations 3 Orbital history 4 References 5 External links edit ] Discovery The comet was discovered by Klim Ivanovich Churyumov, who examined a photograph that had been exposed for periodic comet 32P/Comas Sol'a by Svetlana Gerasimenko on September 11, 1969 at the Alma-Ata Astrophysical Institute. Churyumov found a cometary object near the edge of the plate, but assumed that this was Comas Sol'a. After returning to his home institute in Kiev , Churyumov examined all the photographic plates more closely. About a month after the photograph was taken (October 22), he discovered that the object could not be Comas Sol'a, because it was about 1.8 degrees off the expected position. Further scrutiny produced a faint image of Comas Sol'a at its expected position on the plate, thus proving that the other object was a newly discovered comet. edit ] Observations 3-D illustration of the nucleus of Churyumov-Gerasimenko from Hubble telescope observations. As preparation for the Rosetta mission, Hubble Space Telescope pictures taken on March 12, 2003, were closely analyzed. An overall 3-D model was constructed and computer generated images created. edit ] Orbital history Comets are regularly nudged from one orbit to another when they encounter Jupiter or Saturn in close proximity. Before 1959 Churyumov-Gerasimenko had perihelion distance of about 2.7 AU. In February 1959 a close encounter with Jupiter moved the comet's perihelion inward to about 1.3 AU, where it remains today. edit ] References 1. ^ a b "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko" . Jet Propulsion Laboratory. 2010-06-29 last observation. Retrieved 2012-02-09. 2. ^ Seiichi Yoshida (December 30, 2010). "67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko" . aerith.net. Retrieved 2012-02-09. 3. ^ Krolikowska, Malgorzata (2003). "67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko - potential target for the Rosetta mission". Acta Astronomica 53 : 195-209. arXiv : astro-ph/0309130 . Bibcode : 2003AcA....53..195K . 4. ^ "JPL Close-Approach Data: 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko" . 2010-06-29 last obs. Retrieved 2012-02-09. 5. ^ Kazuo Kinoshita (2009-05-07). "67P past, present and future orbital elements" . Comet Orbit. Retrieved 2009-04-25. edit ] External links 67P on Kronk's Cometography 67P/Churymuov-Gerasimenko at ESA/Hubble Color image of 67P/Churymuov-Gerasimenko Detailed description of 67P with light curves and pictures The Dust Trail of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko between 2004 and 2006 67P at ESA website Mission to Land on a Comet Periodic comets ( by number ) Previous 66P/du Toit 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko Next 68P/Klemola Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko&amp;oldid=550505960 " Categories : Comets Rosetta mission Astronomical objects discovered in 1969 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/67P/Churyumov%E2%80%93Gerasimenko Unidentified Object on NASA Stereo Ahead HI2! (HUGE) - SunsFlare News.pdf https://anonfiles.com/file/a93073ebe78ff954331b9d345cc5b02d http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=676_1366473453 Vegas Street Prophet Unidentified Object on NASA Stereo Ahead HI2! (HUGE) | SunsFlare News Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, NASA, Unidentified Object Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:32:40 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a2d_1366035672 gubastek Politician and businessman Vadim Chiorniy has announced a reward for injuring or killing the man who attacked him in Odessa on April 4. According to the businessman, his proposal is "perfectly aligned in accordance with the law" and he is not afraid of prosecution for a public "order" of his offenders. Assassination attempt took place on April 4 in the center of Odessa. As a result of the incident the victim was hospitalized with a closed head injury and five fractures. Vadim Chiorniy saw the face of the assailant, who used an iron pipe wrapped in newspaper. In addition, the incident was recorded by a surveillance camera. In the past, the businessmen has survived two murder attempts, when few years ago two of his cars were exploded by criminals. Vadim Chiorniy heads the Union of Anarchists of Ukraine since 2002. He twice ran for a post of Odessa mayor (1998 and 2010). Today, he is the owner of Odessa hotels "Zirka" and "Tokyo-star" and of the building, where restaurant "Kiev" was located in the past.Prior to this offer, Chiorniy addressed the killer, promising to leave him alive in exchange for the information about his "customer". Here is the public letter, which he broadcasted through a local media: "I address the person who attacked me on Thursday. Thanks to my coach I was able to move away and stay alive. Now let's talk about you. You probably were offered three hundred dollars to hit me with a pipe. That's the usual price. As you were explained - it was an easy job, since I always walk without bodyguards. There is one thing, however, which they didn't tell you: I am from the 90's, and though I have somewhat polished my habits, they essentially remained the same. I haven't learned to forgive . Today I am the only person who needs you alive. Because I need the information about your customer or intermediary. Your client knows that very soon you will hand him over. Quarter of million , which I offered for your capture, is enough of the price to make people hunting you. Dozens of police officers, who formally are not related to the investigation, are currently looking for you. Bandits are searching you as well.You might be even not from Odessa, but then you are definitely caught by a high-resolution camera near the train station. Or some other cameras. Your pictures are all over the Internet, they are broadcasted on the central TV channels. Someone will recognize you. Surveillance cameras show that you were talking on the phone. To trace this call is a matter of days. Neither you nor your intermediary can hide for a long time - you don't have enough money or strong spirit for that. One week later or two years later - it does not matter when - but one day you will get drunk and tell everything to your drinking buddies. Or boast about it during sex (I saw your face - you are not the person who knows to be silent). And then someone will come after you. Your big problem is that your customer understands it as well. And his only choice is to kill you now. Perhaps, he will offer you to hide for a while - in this way it will be even easier to eliminate you - then you will hide your body yourself. How difficult is for the customer to get rid of you? It's quite simple. He found you, and in the same way he will find someone else to break your head with an iron pipe. Surrender to the police? Nice attempt, you can try that. But your problem is in the new rules: your testimony against the customer has value only when you give it to the court. Knowing your customer, are you sure that you will survive till the court? I am not interested in you. You interest me not more than a pipe which was in your hands. Therefore, I propose you a deal. This is the best deal in your life, because it gives you a chance to stay alive. Albeit a small one, but still a chance. The deal is as follows: you call the number 066-1948147 and very clearly and in details tell me about the customer. I need all the details: when did you communicate, which telephone did you call, how did you get the money. Your task is to convince me that you are telling the truth. After that you can run. I will not be looking for you. Look around and think about it: how many of people you know will sell you for a quarter of million." http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a2d_1366035672 gubastek Ukrainian Businessman Places Bounty On His Attackers Head Ukraine, Odessa, businessman, businessman seeks revenge, vadim chiorniy, revenge for hire, contract killing, assassination, assassination attempt, murder for hire, contract murder, Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:49:24 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a3d_1365198232 Pakistani A group of Muslim women has launched an online campaign in response to demonstrations by bare-breasted activists staged in front of mosques and Tunisian embassies across Europe. The "Muslimah Pride Day" was organised in response to the Ukrainian women's rights group Femen's self-declared "Topless Jihad Day", a day of topless protests around the world to support Tunisian activist Amina Tyler . Organiser Sofia Ahmed, writing on Facebook , said: "Muslimah pride is about connecting with your Muslim identity and reclaiming our collective voice. Let's show the world that we oppose Femen and their use of Muslim women to reinforce Western imperialism." Using social media sites, some Muslim women have posted photographs of themselves holding placards with messages to Femen such as "Nudity does not liberate me - and I do not need saving" and "Femen can't tell me what I can and can't wear". The Femen rallies on Thursday targetted the case of Tyler, who sparked a scandal last month when she posted pictures of herself online with the words "My body belongs to me" emblazoned across her bare chest. Supporters fear she could face criminal prosecution. "Topless Jihad Day" was celebrated in capitals such as Berlin, Kiev and Paris. "We're free. We're naked. It's our right. It's our body. It's our rules and nobody can use religion, some other holy things, to abuse women, to oppress them," Femen member Alexandra Shevchenko said at a small demonstration in front of a Berlin mosque amid near-freezing temperatures. Police in Kiev detained two young activists with "Free Amina" on their exposed chests immediately after their arrival in front of the city's only mosque. Around two dozen topless feminists in Paris whose bodies were tagged with "No Islamists" and "No Sharia" tried to approach the Tunisian embassy but were deterred by police as they emerged from the subway, according to a photographer with the AFP news agency. In Brussels, a small group of women stripped to the waist gathered in front of the Grand Mosque shouting "Free Amina", while three protested briefly outside the Tunisian consulate in Milan. http://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/muslim-women-decry-topless-gender-protests-122405808.htm Below is a picture of Pakistani model 'Ayyan Ali'. l http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a3d_1365198232 Pakistani Muslim women response to topless 'Jihad' day Muslim women response to topless 'Jihad' day Thu, 28 Mar 2013 14:10:09 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=273_1364494110 jamesclarke1974 28 March 2013 IF you suffer from vertigo you might want to look away now. One Ukrainian former legal advisor took these terrifying pics as he climbed over buildings and dangles from towers in Kiev and Moscow. Using no form of safety equipment, the 26-year-old who calls himself "Mustang Wanted" risks his life by taking his hobby to the extreme. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=273_1364494110 jamesclarke1974 Terrifying pics of real-life Spiderman Spiderman, Climbing, Vertigo Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:37:24 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b4_1364165579 PullaMacOut KIEV, UKRAINE --- Anastasia Sokolova is simply incredible. Her pole-dancing routine met the approval of not only the judges... but teenage boys &amp;amp; grandmothers alike. The fun starts at 2:40 . Enjoy! http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b4_1364165579 PullaMacOut Ukraine's Got Talent 5 - Anastasia Sokolova 16.03.13 Anastasia, limber, hooker, sexy, PVC