Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/pc/text/spacedig/v09_3/v9_326.txt

Internet Message Format | 1991-07-08 | 16KB

Return-path: <[e-mail]>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 7997;andrew.cmu.edu;Ted Anderson
Received: from holmes.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for +dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/[e-mail] (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/Mailbox/gYAnDMy00UkZ4=wE54>;
          Fri, 31 Mar 89 03:16:25 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <wYAnDEy00UkZA=[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 89 03:16:16 -0500 (EST)
Subject: SPACE Digest V9 #326

SPACE Digest                                      Volume 9 : Issue 326

Today's Topics:
         Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?
         Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?
         Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?
     Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications?
              Re: volatiles on the Moon
           NSS Board of Governers Statement
              NSS Space Policy Platform
            Fletcher's replacement
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 29 Mar 89 13:30:56 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Matthew T. DeLuca)
Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (MacLeod) writes:
>
>On Tuesday March 14, 1989 at 6:42 am the following message was received by a
>UFO investigator in Baltimore through WA3NAN (Goddard) amateur radio
>transission from the orbiter Discovery.  "Houston, this is Discovery.  We
>still have the alien space craft, uhh, under observance."  The transmission
>was picked up on a Radio Shack scanner tuned to 147.45 mhz.
>
This is patently ridiculous, thinking that this is actually an alien spacecraft
sighting.  Most likely, this was either a bit of humor, or the 'alien'
spacecraft is 'alien' only in the sense that it was not made in the US (most
likely Soviet).  First of all, if there really was an alien craft, and the crew
wanted to say something to Houston about it and wanted to keep it secret, they
would *not* broadcast over an open, unencrypted channel that every Tom, Dick,
and Harry with a $99.95 scanner could pick up.  More likely, if an alien ship
did appear near the shuttle, the crew would turn around and head for home, under
orders from the ground, since they're not equipped for alien contact.  Finally,
any *real* aliens would make contact with government officials, and we can
assume that this didn't happen, since at last check, Bush was at some elementary
school, talking about U.S. drug policy.

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

Date: 29 Mar 89 19:53:46 GMT
From: sun.soe.clarkson.edu![e-mail]  (Russ Nelson)
Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes:

   This is patently ridiculous, thinking that this is actually an
   alien spacecraft sighting.  Most likely, this was either a bit of
   humor, or the 'alien' spacecraft is 'alien' only in the sense that
   it was not made in the US (most likely Soviet).
That's a guess that is totally unsubstantiated by the [skimpy] facts.

   First of all, if there really was an alien craft, and the crew
   wanted to say something to Houston about it and wanted to keep it
   secret, they would *not* broadcast over an open, unencrypted
   channel that every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a $99.95 scanner could
   pick up.
Accidents *do* happen.

   More likely, if an alien ship did appear near the shuttle, the crew
   would turn around and head for home, under orders from the ground,
   since they're not equipped for alien contact.  Finally, any *real*
   aliens would make contact with government officials, and we can
   assume that this didn't happen, since at last check, Bush was at
   some elementary school, talking about U.S. drug policy.
More guesses.  How do you know that?  I counter your skepticism with my
skepticism.

I think that a piece of hard evidence could be found if several people
can be found who heard the report of the "fire" and the "alien craft"
transmissions, AND they are missing from official NASA recordings.
If that's the case, then it lends substance to Stanford T. Friedman's
accusations of a government coverup.
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu])
If you can, help others.  If you can't,       |        Leftoid and proud of it
at least don't hurt others--the Dalai Lama    |

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

Date: 29 Mar 89 23:38:48 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Matthew T. DeLuca)
Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter?

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Russ Nelson) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes:
>
>    This is patently ridiculous, thinking that this is actually an
>    alien spacecraft sighting.  Most likely, this was either a bit of
>    humor, or the 'alien' spacecraft is 'alien' only in the sense that
>    it was not made in the US (most likely Soviet).
>
> How do you know that?  I counter your skepticism with my
> skepticism.
>
> I think that a piece of hard evidence could be found if several people
> can be found who heard the report of the "fire" and the "alien craft"
> transmissions, AND they are missing from official NASA recordings.
> If that's the case, then it lends substance to Stanford T. Friedman's
> accusations of a government coverup.
> --

I will admit, the evidence for my conclusion is as skimpy as the
evidence for the UFO theory, but let's be realistic.  Astronauts have
been seeing 'UFO's' since the dawn of the space age, and the vast
majority, if not all, have been sightings of expended booster segments,
ejected garbage, and frozen urine.  Each time, the UFO crowd came
running, and each time there was a very reasonable explanation for the
phenomenon.  Each time, the UFO crowd then claimed that there was a
massive coverup.  Well, it's been a quarter of a century now since these
sightings from sapce have started, and I find it difficult to believe
that an event of such magnitude as contact with alien life or alien
technology could be kept secret.  When alien life *does* contact us (and
I am of the opinion that we are not alone in the universe, although I am
not on the edge of my seat, waiting for them to come along), it will hit
us like a ton of bricks.  Two tons of bricks.

A very possible explanation of this occurrence comes to mind: since the
frequency of the alleged transmission is in the middle of the commercial
radio band, it is possible that someone with a radio set to that
frequency broadcast the two items to see what happened, knowing that
someone might be listening.  A pretty good joke, if you ask me.

Matthew DeLuca                      :
Georgia Institute of Technology     : Remember, wherever you go, there you are.
ARPA: [e-mail]        :

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

Date: 29 Mar 89 05:55:15 GMT
From: nunki.usc.edu![e-mail]  (Abhay Sawant)
Subject: Re: Room Temperature fusion - possible indications?

>>Unless I have slipped a decimal point. It is under 1.6*10^9 miles round

AAAARGH!!!!!   Why so many people here using fps?  I thought higher
education in the US used SI only.

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

Date: 29 Mar 89 05:16:51 GMT
From: amdahl!drivax![e-mail]  (David Ambrose)
Subject: Re: volatiles on the Moon

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes:
>Wouldn't the light being reflected from the moon show spectrum signatures from
>the various elements located in the moon, or at least the surface?  This could
>tell us for sure.
>
    Only if the spectrograph were looking at the right place at the
right time.  There have been ongoing programs to try and record gaseous
outbursts from the lunar surface.  There are only a few isolated areas
which are suspected of this type of activity.  The crater Aristotle is
the only one that comes to mind.

    The outgassings as observed,  result in cloudiness above the
lunar surface.  these can be seen in modest instruments.  The
Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers is coordinating the
program.


--
Rational Thinking's goal is to separate one's reaction from reality.
David L. Ambrose, --  Digital Research, Inc          ...!amdahl!drivax!dambrose
SPECIFIC DENIAL: Don't blame DRI.  They wouldn't approve of this anyway. r}ix
NO CARRIER

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

Date: 28 Mar 89 19:29:00 GMT
From: arisia!cdp![e-mail]
Subject: NSS Board of Governers Statement


THE NATIONAL SPACE SOCIETY BOARD OF GOVERNOR'S STATEMENT*


               AN AGENDA FOR ADVENTURE


    The National Space Society believes...

* That Humankind is entering a new era of dramatic exploration
and discovery.  Indeed, humanity's very future will depend
on human exploration of our solar system, the birthplace of our
species.  As adventurers, we can now prepare a roadmap, first into
the inner solar system, and then outward, eventually, to the
stars...

* That for humankind to realize our future in space, we must begin
by initiating a decade of doing.  We have studied where we can go
in space--we should embark now, on the grand adventure that
awaits...

* That this adventure should not solely be a governmental activity,
but should solicit the best minds of private enterprise...

* That current efforts are inadequate to achieve the goals of an
exciting future.  That to accelerate the process, we must educate
the public and build a level of public consciousness and a
continuity of support for space exploration...

* That to build a critical mass for an aggressive era of space
exploration and development, the National Space Society needs to
build a strong membership, representative of all sectors of our
public...

* That this will require full use of educational networking, and
creative use of mass media...

In summary:  after over three decades of space exploration we stand
ready to put in place an agenda for adventure--befitting
humankind's thirst for exploration, discovery and expansion--beyond
the shores of earth to the new lands and resources of our future.











* Drafted and approved at the Board meeting held January 13-15,
1989 in Scottsdale, AZ.

** An Official NSS Information Release **        Jordan Katz

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

Date: 28 Mar 89 19:27:00 GMT
From: arisia!cdp![e-mail]
Subject: NSS Space Policy Platform


THE 1989 SPACE POLICY PLATFORM OF THE NATIONAL SPACE SOCIETY

    The National Space Society (NSS) endorses the vision of the
National Commission on Space as the proper focus for the American
space program. We believe the technologies and industries created
on the space frontier in the next few decades will drive the
world's leading economies in the next century.
    Our role is to educate the public on the benefits of space
development and work with allied organizations to create the
cultural and political context for an open frontier in space.
    We believe the United States must be a leader on that
frontier, or it will cease to be the great hope for human liberty
and freedom.

What Steps Need to be Taken?

Take the Lead in Space Transportation
     1. Establish a national policy goal of radically lowering the
cost of manned and unmanned access to space.  New initiatives
should be encouraged from the civil, military, industrial, and
scientific space communities.
     2. Provide assured access to space with a robust mixed fleet,
including the Shuttle, and new heavy lift launch vehicles.  Ensure
a robust industrial infrastructure to support the fleet.
     3. Promote the international competitiveness of the U.S.
commercial launch vehicle industry.
     4. Pursue the development of advanced air-breathing launch
vehicles with the National Aerospace Plane Program.  At the same
time, continue evolutionay improvements of the Shuttle to enhance
its effectiveness.
     5. Initiate development efforts to improve the capabiity and
efficiency of in-space transportation systems for manned and
unmanned missions beyond Earth orbit.

Learn How to Work in Space
     1. Build the Space Station Freedom to create the enabling
technologies and knowledge for people to live and work in space.
     2. Develop capabilities for the routine performance of space
construction, servicing, and in-space repair tasks.  Initiatives
are needed in human extravehicular activities (EVA), teleoperation,
and robotic spacecraft.
     3. Establish a permanent manned return to the Moon by the
early 21st Century as a Space Station mission requirement.
Evolutionary growth of the Station complex should support the
creation of multiple facilities in low Earth orbit.

Open the Frontier
     l. Establish scientific and resource extraction facilities on
the Moon.  Mission requirements should emphasize the greatest
possible degree of self-sufficiency.
     2. Promote renewed study of solar power satellites to provide
energy to space facilities and potentially to the Earth.
Construction and operation of such satellites should emphasize
economic benefits and environmental acceptability.
     3. Explore the Solar System using manned and unmanned
expeditions.  Priority missions should be those with clear
scientific and potential economic value.
     4. Pursue a long-term goal of extending human life beyond
Earth's atmosphere, leading ultimately to the establishment of
space settlements throughout the Solar System.

Reform the Governmental Environment for Space Policy
     1. Increase the efficiency of the interagency process and
provide timely resolutions to space policy questions.  The national
security, civil government, and commercial sectors of space
activity are recognized as having distinct functions that promote
U.S. interests.
     2. Oppose the so-called Moon Treaty, and open discussions with
signatories to the l967 Outer Space Treaty and the l972 Liability
Convention on measures to speed the commercial development of space
for all parties.
     3. Establish a national policy goal of sustained industrial
expansion into space, assisted but not controlled by government
agencies.

Revitalize the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
     1. Provide the resources and management focus for NASA to
perform leading edge research and development in space. Areas for
special attention include propulsion, life sciences, automation,
robotics and artificial intelligence technologies, space power
systems, microgravity research, and the processing of non-
terrestrial materials.
     2. Provide limited exemptions from Federal civil service
regulations to enable NASA centers to attract the vital talent it
needs for its leadership and oversight roles.
     3. Increase NASA's budget commensurate with its mission.  A
minimum of $14 billion is required for fiscal year l990.









[This was provided by Jordan Katz: National Computer Networking Coordinator;
of The National Space Society.

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

Date:    Wed, 29 Mar 89 08:33:47 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Fletcher's replacement
X-St-Vmsmail-To: UTADNX::UTSPAN::JPLLSI::"[e-mail]"

I saw a rumor in the New York Times science section a few weeks ago and I'm
surprised to see it hasn't shown up on the net yet.  Anyway, they ran a short
article about Fletcher's resignation and added at the bottom that "White
House sources" (founts of all knowledge that they are) have said that Bush's
choice for a replacement is Frank Borman, former astronaut and former head
of Eastern Airlines.  (We've been joking that this means he's going from
managing the shuttle to managing the Shuttle.)  Supposedly the announcement
will be made as soon as the FBI check is finished.

Any comments?  (Personally, I would like to see Pete Conrad as head of NASA...)


Marc Hairston--Center for Space Sciences--University of Texas at Dallas
SPAN address  UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTD750::HAIRSTON

"I'm a solipsist, but of course that's just one man's opinion."
(stolen from Raymond Smullyan's book "5000 BC and Other Philosophical
Fantasies")

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

End of SPACE Digest V9 #326
*******************