Return-path: 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/space.dl@andrew.cmu.edu (->+dist+/afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr1/ota/space/space.dl) (->ota+space.digests) ID ; Fri, 31 Mar 89 03:16:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Reply-To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU From: space-request+@Andrew.CMU.EDU To: space+@Andrew.CMU.EDU 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: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu (Matthew T. DeLuca) Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter? In article <4440@drivax.UUCP> macleod@drivax.UUCP (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!nelson@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Russ Nelson) Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter? In article <7751@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (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: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu (Matthew T. DeLuca) Subject: Re: Discovery - UFO Close Encounter? In article , nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes: > In article <7751@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (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: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu : ------------------------------ Date: 29 Mar 89 05:55:15 GMT From: nunki.usc.edu!sawant@oberon.usc.edu (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!dambrose@apple.com (David Ambrose) Subject: Re: volatiles on the Moon In article <1208@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM> johnson@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (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!jordankatz@lll-winken.llnl.gov 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!jordankatz@lll-winken.llnl.gov 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: hairston%utdssa%utadnx%utspan.span@vlsi.jpl.nasa.gov Subject: Fletcher's replacement X-St-Vmsmail-To: UTADNX::UTSPAN::JPLLSI::"space@angband.s1.gov" 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 *******************