original passage: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay admitted that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was unrealistic. Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is only in diameter, while the comet in the movie is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."
original sentence: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay admitted that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was unrealistic.
sentence2: Again, assuming that Bay's understanding of technical feasibility was accurate, does the passage make it sound like the biggest technical hurdle for NASA to deal with a potential planet-killing asteroid would be dealing with the immense size of an asteroid rather than accurately tracking and reaching it in time?
sentence1: In an interview with "Entertainment Weekly", Bay proclaimed that the film's central premise "that NASA could actually do something in a situation like this" was far from unrealistic, even at the time . Additionally, the largest known Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) is (53319) 1999 JM8, which is much smaller in diameter, and thus more manageable, while the comet in the movie is described as being "the size of Texas". Near the end of the credits, there is a disclaimer stating, "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's cooperation and assistance does not reflect an endorsement of the contents of the film or the treatment of the characters depicted therein."