Asteroid YR4's Collision Risk with Earth Increases
NASA updates impact probability for 2032
Space agencies are keeping a close eye on something that could change life as we know it. A newly discovered asteroid, 2024 YR4, has scientists crunching numbers and reviewing impact scenarios more seriously than ever. Initially thought to have a slim chance of colliding with Earth, recent calculations have doubled its likelihood of impact. What once seemed improbable is now a real possibility, and the world is paying attention.
This asteroid, detected by the ATLAS observatory in Chile on December 27, 2024, is estimated to be around the size of a football field. At first, the probability of impact stood at roughly 1.2 percent. However, with new data, that number has climbed to 3.1 percent, meaning a 1 in 32 chance that it could collide with Earth on December 22, 2032. While those odds still lean toward a miss, any increase in probability raises concerns, particularly when dealing with an object of this scale.
If 2024 YR4 were to strike, the consequences would be catastrophic. The energy released from the collision would be equivalent to approximately 7.7 megatons of TNT. To put that in perspective, it would be about 500 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Such an impact could flatten an entire city, cause massive wildfires, or, if it hits an ocean, trigger devastating tsunamis. The projected impact zones cover a vast stretch, including the eastern Pacific Ocean, northern South America, the Atlantic Ocean, Africa, the Arabian Sea, and South Asia.
Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has been vocal about the need for increased planetary defense efforts. He emphasizes that cutting funding for asteroid detection and mitigation programs is reckless. The ability to track, predict, and potentially deflect space threats is critical, and he warns that neglecting these efforts could leave Earth vulnerable to an avoidable disaster.
International efforts to study and monitor 2024 YR4 are in full swing. NASA, the European Space Agency, and other space organizations are working together to refine calculations and assess the asteroid’s behavior. The James Webb Space Telescope is set to observe it in March and May of 2025, gathering critical data on its composition, trajectory, and possible methods of deflection. These observations will determine whether the asteroid’s course could be altered or if more drastic measures need to be considered.
China has also stepped into the discussion, announcing the formation of a dedicated planetary defense team. This move signals that governments worldwide are acknowledging the potential risk and taking steps toward a collective response. The range of proposed defense methods includes kinetic impactors, which involve sending a spacecraft to collide with the asteroid to nudge it off its path. Other ideas, such as nuclear interventions, remain on the table as a last resort.
Despite the alarming increase in impact probability, experts remain cautiously optimistic. Historically, as more data becomes available, estimates of asteroid threats often shift in a more favorable direction. Continued tracking and updated calculations may ultimately reduce the level of concern. However, this situation highlights a harsh reality—Earth is not immune to space threats, and preparation is non-negotiable.
The key takeaway from all of this is the necessity of global cooperation and commitment to planetary defense. The technology exists to monitor asteroids, but without proper funding and international collaboration, our ability to respond effectively is limited. Scientists, engineers, and policymakers must work together to ensure that strategies are in place should a worst-case scenario become reality.
As 2024 YR4’s trajectory continues to be studied, staying informed is more important than ever. This asteroid may not pose an immediate, definite danger, but it serves as a reminder that Earth’s place in the cosmos is far from secure. Space agencies will continue tracking it, and the world will be watching closely. The question now isn’t just whether it will hit but whether we are truly prepared if it does.
________________
😱 The craziest deals are live. You won’t believe what’s on sale! 👉 See for yourself
About the Creator
Ojo
🔍 I explore anything that matters—because the best discoveries don’t fit into a box...
DoJ Attorneys Resign Over Decision Not to Investigate Agent in Minneapolis ICE Shooting
A Justice Department Decision Sparks Fallout Several US Department of Justice (DoJ) attorneys have resigned following an internal decision not to pursue a criminal investigation into a federal immigration agent involved in a shooting in Minneapolis, according to multiple officials familiar with the matter. The resignations have intensified scrutiny of the DoJ’s handling of the case and fueled public debate over law enforcement accountability, particularly when federal agents are involved. The shooting, which occurred during an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation in Minneapolis, has already drawn local outrage and national attention. The decision not to open a formal investigation has now added a new layer of controversy—this time from within the Justice Department itself. What Is Known About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting Details surrounding the incident remain limited, as authorities have not released a full public account. What has been confirmed is that an ICE agent discharged a firearm during an operation, resulting in a civilian being shot. The condition of the victim has not been fully detailed in official statements, though local officials confirmed the individual survived. Local law enforcement initially responded to the scene, but jurisdictional authority shifted quickly due to the involvement of a federal agent. Under standard procedure, incidents involving federal officers are typically reviewed by the DoJ to determine whether a civil rights or criminal investigation is warranted. It was this review—and its outcome—that ultimately triggered internal dissent. Why DoJ Attorneys Walked Away According to sources familiar with the resignations, multiple attorneys—some with experience in civil rights and public integrity cases—objected strongly to the decision not to open a formal investigation. They argued that the shooting met the threshold for independent review, regardless of whether charges were ultimately brought. One former official described the decision as “a dangerous precedent,” warning that declining to investigate could erode public trust. Others reportedly felt that political considerations, rather than legal standards, influenced the outcome. While the DoJ has not publicly confirmed the number of resignations, officials acknowledged that departures occurred and said they were handled in accordance with internal procedures. The Justice Department’s Position In a brief statement, the Department of Justice said it had conducted an initial assessment of the incident and concluded that there was insufficient basis to proceed with a criminal investigation at this time. Officials emphasized that such decisions are made after reviewing available evidence, including use-of-force policies and witness statements. The department rejected claims that the decision was politically motivated, insisting that prosecutors follow established legal thresholds rather than public pressure. However, the DoJ declined to provide further details, citing the sensitive nature of law enforcement operations and personnel matters. Minneapolis Officials and Community Reaction In Minneapolis, the reaction has been swift and critical. City leaders and community advocates have called for greater transparency, arguing that federal agents operating within city limits should be subject to the same level of scrutiny as local police. “This isn’t about politics—it’s about accountability,” said a local civil rights advocate. “When someone is shot, there must be an independent investigation, regardless of the badge involved.” Protests and community meetings have followed, with residents demanding the release of body camera footage, operational details, and a clearer explanation for the DoJ’s decision. ICE Operations Under Renewed Scrutiny The shooting and subsequent fallout have reignited broader concerns about ICE enforcement tactics. Critics argue that immigration operations often take place with limited oversight, creating conditions where accountability gaps can emerge. Advocacy groups note that ICE agents are armed and authorized to use force, yet incidents involving shootings are relatively rare—and therefore require especially careful review when they occur. Supporters of ICE counter that agents operate in dangerous environments and must make split-second decisions, warning against rushing to judgment without full facts. Political Pressure and the Rule of Law The resignations have also raised questions about political pressure within federal law enforcement agencies. While no direct evidence has been made public, former prosecutors say internal disagreement of this magnitude is unusual and concerning. “When career attorneys resign over a single decision, it signals a serious breakdown of trust,” said a former federal prosecutor. “That doesn’t happen lightly.” Lawmakers from both parties have begun asking questions, with some calling for congressional oversight hearings into the incident and the DoJ’s decision-making process. Legal Standards vs Public Expectations At the heart of the controversy is a long-standing tension in US justice: the gap between legal thresholds for prosecution and public expectations of accountability. Opening an investigation does not imply guilt, but declining to investigate can be perceived as preemptively closing the door on transparency. Civil rights experts argue that even if prosecutors believe charges are unlikely, a formal investigation can still serve an important public interest. “The process matters as much as the outcome,” said one legal scholar. “Especially when federal authority is involved.” What Happens Next While the DoJ has indicated it will not revisit its decision at this time, pressure is mounting. Civil lawsuits, independent reviews, or congressional inquiries could still follow. Meanwhile, the resignations themselves may become part of a broader reckoning inside the Justice Department, as leaders assess how internal dissent is handled—and how public confidence can be restored. For the attorneys who resigned, the decision appears to have been a matter of principle. For the public, the unanswered questions surrounding the Minneapolis shooting remain unresolved. Conclusion: A Case That Won’t Fade Quietly The resignations of DoJ attorneys over the decision not to investigate an ICE agent involved in a Minneapolis shooting have turned a single law enforcement incident into a national flashpoint. Beyond the specifics of the case, the episode raises fundamental questions about accountability, transparency, and the independence of the justice system. Whether through further investigation, legal action, or political oversight, the issue is unlikely to disappear—and the consequences may shape how similar cases are handled in the future.
By Aarif Lashariabout 5 hours ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.