Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/SPACEDIG/V15_3/V15NO316.TXT

Internet Message Format | 1993-07-13 | 30KB

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 05:00:01
From: Space Digest maintainer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Space Digest V15 #316
To: Space Digest Readers
Precedence: bulk


Space Digest                Thu, 15 Oct 92       Volume 15 : Issue 316

Today's Topics:
                     Amber (Was: Re: Population)
                       another sad anniversary
                        Climate Data Shutdown?
                      Clinton and Space Funding
                            Cosmic strings
                   Diesen sphere or Strungen Sphere
                      HRMS/SETI Answers (2 msgs)
                          Landsat pictures?
                 Mariner Mark II vs smaller missions
           Math progs with arbitrary precicion, for UNIX...
                            overpopulation
                PLANETLIKE OBJECT SPOTTED BEYOND PLUTO
         Seeking Correlation of Solar Activity to S/C Events
                        South africa tests sat
                   Space and Presidential Politics
Too thin for light pressure? (was Re: Diesen sphere or Strungen Sphere) (2 msgs)
             Toutatis impact in 2000 AD? (was Re: Help !)
                Two-Line Orbital Element Sets, Part 2
                 UFO EVIDENCE VS. Carl Sagan (2 msgs)

    Welcome to the Space Digest!!  Please send your messages to
    "[e-mail]", and (un)subscription requests of the form
    "Subscribe Space <your name>" to one of these addresses: listserv@uga
    (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle
    (THENET), or [e-mail] (Internet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 11:35:46 GMT
From: Ron Baalke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Amber (Was: Re: Population)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.geo.geology

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Roberts) writes...
>-From: [e-mail] (Doug Mohney)
>-I suppose we should next try to restore the dinosaurs to the prominance they
>-had a couple million years ago?
>
>That's a *little* beyond our current capability. I believe the current
>(and recent) record for DNA extraction is ~25 million years, for a termite
>trapped in amber. Reconstructing the entire genetic code from DNA fragments
>and using that code to produce a living organism are additional challenges.
>
>I'd like to see the restoration of the wooly mammoth. With frozen tissue
>available, there's a pretty good chance that they could be cloned.

The basic premise of the book "Jurassic Park" is that dinosaurs were brought
out of extinction by extracting their DNA from mosquitos preserved in amber
which had the dinosaur's blood still in them.  Real interesting book, and I
believe it is being made into a movie.

The termite that the DNA was extracted from was Dominican amber, which is
dated to be in the Oligocene period.  So, this makes the insect to be
25 to 36 million years old.  If they can extract DNA from Dominican amber,
they'll be able to extract it from even older amber.

There are other critters that have been trapped in amber besides insects
that potentially can have their DNA extracted.  For example, I have a
piece of Dominican amber with a lizard tail in it, and an African amber
(20 million years old) with about 15 strands of hair of an unidentified
mammal.  Complete frogs have also been found in amber.

While I would very much like to keep this discussion going, I don't think it is
appropriate for sci.space, and I have temporarily cross posted this
article to sci.geo.geology.
     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | [e-mail]
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Quiet people aren't the
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | only ones who don't say
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | much.

------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 02:19:15 GMT
From: Scott Fisher <[e-mail]>
Subject: another sad anniversary
Newsgroups: sci.space

[e-mail] (Ron Baalke) writes:

>May 15, 1993 may mark another sad anniversary.  That's when Magellan is
>scheduled to be turned off.  It will be the first time that NASA has turned
>off a functioning spacecraft.  NASA has recently communicated to JPL that
>this will still happen.  The reason is similiar, to save money.

How do you save money by turning off a spacecraft or an instrument on the moon,
is someone charging for the bandwith they take up in the electromagnetic
spectrum? :-)  I can understand that there may nolonger be funding to
operate the craft/instruments but who cares if it is sending back a stream
of data that nobody is listening to?  Why not get some amatures/groups
around the world to take on the projects?

Regards Scott.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Scott Fisher [[e-mail]]  PH: Aus [61] Perth (09) Local (380 3272).
                                                             _--_|\       N
Department of Psychology                                    /      \    W + E
University of Western Australia.                 Perth -->  *_.--._/      S
Nedlands, 6009.  PERTH, W.A.                                      v

Joy is a Jaguar XJ-6 with a flat battery, a blown oil seal and an unsympathetic wife, 9km outside of a small remote town, 3:15am on a cold wet winters morning.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 13 Oct 92 19:15 PDT
From: Energy and Climate Information Exch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Climate Data Shutdown?
Newsgroups: sci.space

For those of you who do not follow issues regarding global climate
change there has been a major uproar on net lists devoted to
these topics due to reports that NASA plans to shut down some or
all orbiting instrument platforms which gather climate data.

I am writing an article on this issue for publication and would
appreciate pointers to any official or unoffical sources of
information on the exact nature of the proposed shutdown and,
more importantly, what it would mean for climate scientists.

* -------------------------------------------------------------
* Dan Yurman              |  Internet:  [e-mail]
* Climate Digest Editor   |    Bitnet:  ecixdy%igc.org@stanford
* Econet Energy & Climate |  MCI Mail:  364-1277
* Information Exchange    |       Map:  43N28 112W02 -7 GMT
* -------------------------------------------------------------
* Pony Express  >>>  PO Box 1569, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83403 USA


------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 03:30:31 GMT
From: Jeff Privette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton and Space Funding
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

|> vacuum. The Democrat Congress dominates where, when, and how much is
|> spent on various programs. They have a 50 year track record of ignoring
|> Presidential budgets and doing as they please.

Then vote out your Congress members.  Don't use your fear of Congress
to justify keeping fresh ideas and leadership out of the White House.
Bush is perpetuating this "fear" vote and you seem to have bitten.  (check
your history by the way.  In many of the last 12 years Congress has spent
*less* than the President proposed in his budget.)

  A Democrat in the White
|> House has a slightly better chance of getting some of his programs
|> enacted, but only at the cost of rubber stamping a lot of other programs
|> demanded by Congress.

Only slightly better than Bush's chance?  You are deceiving yourself (or
listening to campaign pitches too much).  Even Reagan was more successful
with Congress, but that is because he *worked* with Congress to pass his
agenda.  Most conservative writers that I've read readily admit disappointment
in Bush's neglect of pressuring/working/leading/bargaining with Congress
to pursue his agenda.  No wonder Congress views Bush as weak and goes on
as it wishes.  As the leading moderate voice in the Democratic Party for the
last 10 years, Clinton can expect more success I believe at leading
Congress and even enjoy some support from moderate conservatives.  Wouldn't
that be a nice change: seeing the cogs of government begin turning again (you
will pay their salaries whether this happens or not...).  In the last 4
years, we have only seen the Federal government get mired down and basically
not work for anybody, anywhere  (except, arguably, for the richest 1%).
That is the biggest tragedy of all.

|> Many of the leading economists say that the US would already be well
|> into recovery if it weren't for the massive tax hike that Congress
|> wrangled out of Bush.

Yea, right.  ...and an across the board 1% tax reduction will also
solve our problems.  The problems facing the US are much more complex
than that, and such gimmicks -- used by both candidates -- will do nothing.
What we need are fresh, comprehensive plans to deal with such things
as welfare reform, health care, etc.  Clinton has an established record
of experimenting with new approaches to such problems.  Not all have worked;
many have.  While trying these pilot programs in Arkansas, he has balanced
the budget 12 straight years.  Change can happen in a fiscally responsible
manner, but you have to be willing to trust that change can happen for
the good and not vote on fear.  If you simply lack any such trust, then
you should move.

How much bigger will
|> the deficit be in four years?

You seem to forget it was Reagan who tripled the national debt, not Carter
or even Bush.  In this decade of fiscal concern -- heightened by the S&L
debacle and the House Bank scandel that spurred a postwar record of incumbant
primary losses -- Clinton can kiss '96 goodbye and the Democrats can kiss the
next 20 years goodbye if he presides over foolish spending.  But this is a
party working to redefine itself from the Kennedy style of liberalism and
certainly it is led by a more moderate voice (witness, for instance, Clinton's
lukewarm reception of the labor union endorsement or his support of capital
punishment or his desire for welfare reform).  Your arguments against
Kennedy, Johnson and Carter are understandable yet show your ignorance of
Clinton's idealogy and record.

International affairs is the major province
|> of the President, and there Bush's record is much better.

Sure it is.  And Carter had much more international experience
than Reagan did in '80.  But that did not preclude Reagan from international
leadership.

 Do you
|> believe Clinton can do better than an experienced leader like Bush
|> with his military and spook experience?

I'm not sure what you mean by "spook experience."  If you are referring to
Clinton's opposition to the Vietnam War, I must say I think the bigger
coward was Quayle who *supported* the War but wouldn't subject himself to it.
As unethical at it may seem, history shows the US government subjectively preferred sending high school dropouts and minorities to the war before
Rhodes Scholars.  That is simply the bare truth of the matter.  As for
future leadership, every President surrounds himself with knowledgeable
professionals (incl. the Joint Chiefs of Staff) to help insure military
decisions are well thought out.  Obviously, armed service experience does not
ensure intelligent leadership, and certainly the lack of service does not
preclude it.  Did Margaret Thatcher serve in the Royal Armed Forces?
Was she an international leader?  Obviously.  Your argument here is weak.

For fun, you should read the current issue of Newsweek where Schwartzkopf (sp?).
Basically says that the Persian Gulf war would have been easier if Bush
had just handed over the task to the professional servicemen (and
women) and then stayed out of it.  Perhaps a little knowledge is the more
dangerous thing! :)

-Jeff

------------------------------

Date: 14 Oct 92 14:52:20 GMT
From: Richard Ottolini <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cosmic strings
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Justin Smith) writes:
>
>Are any cosmic strings known (or believed) to exist?

NOW I know where those little strings come from in my dryer after washing
clothes.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 15:20:17 GMT
From: Greg Hennessy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Diesen sphere or Strungen Sphere
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Henry
Spencer) writes:
#You're not going to get
#any useful amount of gravity out of any practical thickness.

You're not going to get *ANY* gravity out of it, NO MATTER how thick
you make it. The gravitational force on the inside of a sphere is
zero. Gauss's law as applied to gravity.


--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      [e-mail]
 UUCP:        ...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w

------------------------------

Date: 12 Oct 92 16:41:15 GMT
From: David Harwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: HRMS/SETI Answers
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Edward T. Olsen) writes:
[...]
>
><Is HRMS capable of detecting signals of power equivalent to terrestial
><broadcasts (different frequencies) at distances of say 50 light years or so?
>
>YES or NO, depending upon which mode of NASA HRMS you are considering,
>and more importantly, what terrestrial signals you choose to include
>in your list of broadcast signals.
>
>Neither component is capable of detecting the leakage of our
>commercial broadcasts at interstellar distances. However, there have
>been highly beamed, strong signals emitted from the Earth which both
>components are capable of detecting. The strongest signal emitted from
>the Earth is the Arecibo planetary radar, EIRP = 10**13 W. The strongest
>commercial broadcasts eminate from UHF television stations, and have
>EIRP = 10**6 W to 10**7 W. The sky survey could detect Arecibo at
>approximately 50 ly, and the targeted search could do so at
>approximately 1000 ly.
>
>The strong military radars which have been used over the last decades
>to detect possible bomber attacks and ICBM attacks are another source
>of signals which HRMS could detect from nearby stars. Woody Sullivan
>published an interesting article some time back in Science which
>discussed this (Science, 199, pp377-388, 27 Jan 1978). Tarter and
>Billingham also gave a paper at the 40th congress if the International
>Astronautical Federation in 1989, whose publication reference escapes
>me at this moment. These radars have EIRP levels of approximately
>10**11 W. There is a torus around the north pole which has been
>illuminated thusly for a few decades. Any advanced civilization within
>20 ly within that torus would have been able to determine not only
>that our solar system is inhabited by intelligences using the
>electromagnetic spectrum, but would also have been able to determine
>the parameters of our planetary orbit and rotation, our sun's mass
>and infer the temperature of the earth.
>
\\\\\\\\\\\

Thanks for your reply. I hope NASA will keep the international
community of scientists and engineers, many of whom read Usenet,
informed of technical developments and findings. For example, as
a specialist in computer pattern recognition (image analysis) I'd
be interested to hear about algorithms which discriminate signals.

Considering your examples, as well probable compression and EC encoding
of communications (images, linguistic data), is HRMS restricted to
detecting deep-space ranging signals, or perhaps synchronization signals?

[I suppose that inhabited planets would track all natural and artificial
objects of their solar systems, for which they might employ advanced
deep-space radar. For example, we will want to avoid being hit by large
meteors or asteriods here or elsewhere.]

D.H.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:14:18 GMT
From: Ian Taylor <[e-mail]>
Subject: HRMS/SETI Answers
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Edward T. Olsen) writes:
>
>Neither component is capable of detecting the leakage of our
>commercial broadcasts at interstellar distances. However, there have
>been highly beamed, strong signals emitted from the Earth which both
>components are capable of detecting. The strongest signal emitted from
>the Earth is the Arecibo planetary radar, EIRP = 10**13 W. The strongest
>commercial broadcasts eminate from UHF television stations, and have
>EIRP = 10**6 W to 10**7 W. The sky survey could detect Arecibo at
>approximately 50 ly, and the targeted search could do so at
>approximately 1000 ly.
>
Why can't HRMS detect a current earth-like technology leakage at interstellar
distances? Isn't this the most likely case?

So is HRMS designed only to detect narrow beams directed our way?

+-- I -------- fax [phone] --------------------- voice [phone] --+
| T a y l o r  Alcatel-ELIN Research, 1-7 Ruthnergasse, Vienna A-1210 Austria  |
+-- n ---- [e-mail] --- PSI%023226191002::SE_TAYLOR --- 20731::ian -----+

                               TBD

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:02:04 -0500
From: Keith Stein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Landsat pictures?
Newsgroups: sci.space

John I work at NASA Headquarters and just the other day was talking with
a guy that knows all about getting thoses LANDSAT pictures. If you leave
me your address I can send you some information, or you can call me at
NASA [phone], hope this helps.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 01:21:35 GMT
From: Frank Crary <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mariner Mark II vs smaller missions
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>To be fair it should be noted that the failure of Galileo's antenna only
>jeopardizes part of the mission (the imaging which requires high bandwidth).

There are quite a few people here at CU Boulder involved in non-imaging
science on Galileo who would disagree. If NASA gave up on imaging
entirely, the rest of the mission could get by without problems. However,
they are going to record and slowly broadcast back as many images as
possible. This will have a substantial impact on non-imaging science.

(I'm saying this based on my interpertation of what others have said:
I haven't heard any official or public complaints about the lower
data rates available for non-imaging science, nor any suggestions
that NASA should dump imaging. Those are my own conclusions...)

>Also, if you didn't need a big antenna and a powerful battery on each
>sattelite for communications (because of the relay sattelite), you
>could conceiably make a sattelite much smallar and cheaper than the ones
>they are planning on flying by Pluto.

The Pluto mission isn't going to use a big antenna or a powerful transmitter:
They are planning on recording the flyby and playing the data back
slowly over a low-gain minimum-mass/power antenna.

                                                  Frank Crary
                                                  CU Boulder

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 09:28:55 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Phil G. Fraering)
Subject: Math progs with arbitrary precicion, for UNIX...

In article <seal.719016011@leonardo>
[e-mail] (David Seal) writes:

>  other mac programs or ways of computing pi?

>It's no wonder Mathematica is rapidly emerging as the standard, at
>least in academia. Not only was I able to redo all the math I had in
>all of high school, college, and grad school in an afternoon (my
>favorite command is still InverseLaplaceTransform[expr, s, t]), but
>it's also frighteningly easy to use. Pricey, but well worth it, and no,
>Steven Wolfram didn't pay me to write this. (Perhaps he should...)

I'm not saying it's as good as Mathematica, but a somewhat good
PD prog for unix is calc.el, which runs under emacs. There are also
several other "real" lisp math packages out there...

>E-mail me if you're interested in 10,000 or more places,
>[e-mail]

You mean you're not going to gratuitously post them?

--
Phil Fraering [e-mail] where the x is a number from 1-5.
Phone: [phone] SnailMail: 2408 Blue Haven Dr., New Iberia, La. 70560
---------------------
Disclaimer: Some reasonably forseeable events may exceed this
message's capability to protect from severe injury, death, widespread
disaster, astronomically significant volumes of space approaching a
state of markedly increaced entropy, or taxes.

------------------------------

Date: 14 Oct 92 14:15:54 GMT
From: Joe Wang <[e-mail]>
Subject: overpopulation
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>However, population density is not the source of Turkish poverty. The
>perfect counterexamples being Singapore and Hong Kong.

Population density is not a source of poverty, but high population
growth is a factor in poverty.  If you have a place with 3%/year
population growth then you need 3%/year economic growth to keep things
the way they are.  The big problem is that without economic growth,
people just keep have the same number of kids and this leads to a
nasty cycle in which you have more and more people at the same
standard of living.

In Turkey's case, maladministration and ethnic tensions are a bigger
problem than population growth.

------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 02:40:38 GMT
From: Dave Tholen <[e-mail]>
Subject: PLANETLIKE OBJECT SPOTTED BEYOND PLUTO
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> From "New Scientist", 26 September 1992:
> ICY OBJECT FOUND ORBITING BEYOND PLUTO
>   A long search for objects on the outer fringes of the Solar System
> has finally yielded results. American astronomers have found an object
> about 200 kilometres across beyond the most distant part of Pluto's
> orbit.

The most distant part of Pluto's orbit is about 49 AU.  1992 QB1's orbit
is currently computed to be about 41 AU in radius, with the eccentricity
indeterminate at this time.  I saw it last night, and it was about 1.2 arcsec
northwest of the ephemeris.  Not too bad.

------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 06:31:52 GMT
From: frisbee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seeking Correlation of Solar Activity to S/C Events
Newsgroups: sci.space

To Whom it May Concern,

    I am trying to correlate certain effects observed on an
active spacecraft with possible solar proton emissons. The events
occured at UTC 1992/274-02:54:31 and UTC 1992/275-03:33:22. Was there
a high degree of solar activity at these times?

        [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:07:19 -0500
From: Keith Stein <[e-mail]>
Subject: South africa tests sat
Newsgroups: sci.space

I read a article in the Washington Post a few months back about South
Africa starting up there own space program. I wrote to CSIR in South
Africa but they didnt release anything but information about their AMSAT
satellite project. In the Post article they said their getting this
missile technology from Isarel. They hope to start launching their own
geostationary satellites in late 94-95 I think it said. Interesting
stuff, everyone is getting into space now!

------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 03:48:43 GMT
From: Jay Denebeim <[e-mail]>
Subject: Space and Presidential Politics
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

> I also think Dan Goldin is possibly NASA's last hope. It would be the
> act of a low grade moron with the mental cabilities of an amoeba to
> replace him.

Oh no, isn't it Quayle who's the administration's pro-space person?
Does this mean Goldin is out?

> Which is why my (absentee) vote is for Marrou/Lord.
They'll get my vote too.

--

 |_o_o|\\
 |. o.| || The           Jay Denebeim
 | .  | ||  Software
 | o  | ||   Distillery
 |    |//        Address: UUCP:     duke!wolves!deepthot!jay
 ======                   Internet: [e-mail]
         If the above bounces try: uunet.uu.net!oichq!deepthot!jay
                 BBS:(919)-460-7430      VOICE:(919)-460-6934

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 10:52:30 GMT
From: Paul Dietz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Too thin for light pressure? (was Re: Diesen sphere or Strungen Sphere)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

> I doubt whether 3 microns is enough to be reasonably opaque, let alone
> a nearly perfect reflector (which you want when building a solar
> sail.)  I don't have a handbook handy, but I think you need dozens of
> microns of aluminum to make a good reflector.

I believe the skin depth of aluminum at optical wavelengths is in
the tens of nanometers.  You can reduce the mass still further by
drilling holes << 1 wavelength in diameter.

    Paul F. Dietz
    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:16:14 GMT
From: Nick Haines <[e-mail]>
Subject: Too thin for light pressure? (was Re: Diesen sphere or Strungen Sphere)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey) writes:

   I doubt whether 3 microns is enough to be reasonably opaque, let alone
   a nearly perfect reflector (which you want when building a solar
   sail.)

What's the solar wind pressure at 1AU? Are those protons slow enough
to be stopped by 3 microns of rock?

Nick

------------------------------

Date: 1 Oct 92 02:36:04 GMT
From: Dave Tholen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Toutatis impact in 2000 AD? (was Re: Help !)
Newsgroups: sci.space

Bill Higgins writes:

> I am sure that by the time the Decmber 1992 encounter has happened,
> the uncertainties in Totatis's future position will shrink
> considerably.  Then we will know whether we should start panicking or
> forget about the whole thing.

Why wait?  We already know it isn't going to hit in 2000.  We do know it
will pass 0.011 AU in 2004.

------------------------------

Date: 14 Oct 92 14:42:28 GMT
From: Mike McCants <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two-Line Orbital Element Sets, Part 2
Newsgroups: sci.space

In article [e-mail] writes:
>Sorry, but we are in mid of october and the last state of EUVE is
>for august 19th.

Here are the latest elements:
EUVE
1 21987U 92 31  A 92285.81753728  .00005089  00000-0  25123-3 0   785
2 21987  28.4334 202.2838 0010989 126.5670 233.5936 15.15501367 19142

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:18:00 GMT
From: Rich Krum <[e-mail]>
Subject: UFO EVIDENCE VS. Carl Sagan
Newsgroups: sci.space

Another Quote from Heinlein:

The difference between Scinece and the fuzzy subjects is
that science requires reasoning while those other subjects
merely require scholarship.
--R.A.H.

Opinion:  McElwaine is, in fact, a scholar.

See above definition.  It's always fun to see
what turns up in this world labeled as "Science".

Talk about an "intellectual sandbox" -- someone
may be a few grains short of a full load--Hmmm?

"I have abandoned my search for reality and am
now looking for a good fantasy" -- bumper sticker

--rich

---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My opinions are my own, and my employer (Boeing Computer Support Services)
 denies any responsibility for me, all opinions in general, and anything
 I may say, do, or be otherwise associated with outside of work for them.
 -- Use at your own risk, your mileage may vary, no news is good news."

 E-MAIL REPLY TO:  [e-mail]     PLEASE KEEP IT "G" RATED
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 14 Oct 92 15:08:32 GMT
From: Patrick Chester <[e-mail]>
Subject: UFO EVIDENCE VS. Carl Sagan
Newsgroups: sci.space

You ever get the feeling that this is another joke on the scale of that idiot
who did the "F*CK You All" posts a few weeks ago? I've emailed this guy to see
if he was joking and he ASSURED me that it was NOT a joke. He even was "KIND"
enough to GIVE me a COPY of ANOTHER IMPORTANT ARTICLE(tm):). Still, that could
be part of the joke. I hope it all turns out to be a joke we can laugh at
because it is scary that someone w/McElwaine's education can seriously promote
such idiocy. Still, it's fun to flame his posts anyway. Damn the bandwidth!
Plasmas... ON! :)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Chester            |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
[e-mail] |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Politically Incorrect      |"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us
Future Lunar Colonist      |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 316
------------------------------