Date: Sat, 29 May 93 05:00:00 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V16 #646 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 29 May 93 Volume 16 : Issue 646 Today's Topics: About Grissoms Mercury Capsule. Comet Shoemaker-Levy, Possible Collision With Jupiter in 1994 (2 msgs) Failed mail (msg.aa14213) How would we get back to the moon, if we had to? lunar stability Mining on the Moon? Moon Base (2 msgs) New DC-X GIF Sour grapes (was Re: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan?) Space Calendar - 05/28/93 Space Station Freedom Paper Sim #3 Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF - Truth or Fiction? Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan? (2 msgs) Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 28 May 93 20:37:05 GMT From: Pat Subject: About Grissoms Mercury Capsule. Newsgroups: sci.space Is it possible to recover his capsule now with modern sallvage techniques or would it probably be buried in muck beyond recovery? It'd sure make an interesting artifact for a maritime museum. ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 19:52:57 GMT From: Thomas Clarke Subject: Comet Shoemaker-Levy, Possible Collision With Jupiter in 1994 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro When in 1994 will the comet collide with Jupiter. I have to arrange my vacation schedule! I guess its too early to tell if it will be visible from North America. This event would definitely be worth an observing trip to another continent. I'd guess it's a once in a millenium event!! -- Thomas Clarke Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL 12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826 (407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 13:21:24 From: Steinn Sigurdsson Subject: Comet Shoemaker-Levy, Possible Collision With Jupiter in 1994 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro Latest IAUC says that, based on the current orbital solution, the entire train may collide with Jupiter. The trail has the best chance of missing, which is interesting as it will then be flung into (a family of) heliocentric short period orbits - possibly Earth crossers! Yeomans at JPL quotes 0.64 prob of collision given current orb params. So, where in the sky will Jupiter be July next year? If it hits, observations should probably be done by high resolutions ground based scopes (maybe CFHT and Keck if in position) and fast CCD imagers and spectrometers, Jupiter is order arcminute across on average (assuming I did me 'rithmetic rite), so large fields of view help. Wonder which hemisphere will be lucky, still, with Hawaii and the Canaries the globe is pretty well covered... * Steinn Sigurdsson Lick Observatory * * steinly@lick.ucsc.edu "standard disclaimer" * * The laws of gravity are very,very strict * * And you're just bending them for your own benefit - B.B. 1988* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 93 12:25:13 EDT From: "VACATION.VENARI.CS Mail System" (MMDF) Subject: Failed mail (msg.aa14213) Your message could not be delivered to 'space-usenet@isu.isunet.edu (host: isu.isunet.edu) (queue: smtp)' for the following reason: ' :include:/users/digests/space/.usenet... Cannot open /users/digests/space/.usenet: File table overflow' Your message follows: Received: by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU id aa14213; 27 May 93 6:04:05 EDT Received: from CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU by VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU id aa14200; 27 May 93 6:03:03 EDT To: bb-sci-space@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Xref: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu sci.space:63425 Newsgroups: sci.space Path: crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!uunet!pipex!uknet!brunel!ccusbdm From: Brian D Milner Subject: New Hubble Pics: Location ??? Message-ID: Organization: Brunel University, West London, UK Date: Thu, 27 May 1993 09:08:06 GMT Lines: 15 Sender: news@CRABAPPLE.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU Source-Info: Sender is really isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU I'm looking for new NASA images from the HST which would have been posted in the last three days. They are of a galaxy, an NGC object 7572 I think. Can anyone point to an anon FTP location for these? I tried ames.arc.nasa.gov but I couldn't find them just browsing around in the directories. +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Brian Milner, The Computer Centre, Brunel University , West London, UK | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |brian.milner@brunel.ac.uk | Notice on Giraffe pen at Chester Zoo: | | "Sponsored by TallTrees Crane Hire " | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1993 19:40:47 GMT From: "Blake P. Wood" Subject: How would we get back to the moon, if we had to? Newsgroups: sci.space A year or so ago, there was a long discussion in this newsgroup about how we would get back to the moon, if it was necessary to do so. The most of the discussion centered around whether we would try to resurrect the couple Saturn V's laying around in museums, and reconstruct the Apollo program, or whether we would simply start from scratch. The consensus seemed to be that we would go the latter route, because the technology has changed so much in the past 20-25 years. I'm working on a think-piece concerning the future of the nuclear weapons complex, and this strikes me as a useful analogy. Any debate about nuclear weapons should be directed to another newsgroup (although if anyone has feelings about the validity of this analogy, I'd be happy to hear them via email: bpw@ctxsys.lanl.gov), but I need some info about the state of the technology used to build the Apollo program. In particular: 1) For what subsystems has the technology changed the most? (I'm guessing it's the computers/electronics) 2) What was the state of the computer technology in the Apollo program (ie. was it even as sophisticated as, say, an 8008?) 3) Are there any techologies used in the Apollo program which are now long out of use, or simply not available? 4) What do you think about the question posed above, if there was a compelling reason to get back to the moon FAST? Would (could?) we simply resurrect equipment from museums? Would we use the major pieces, updating the electronics, etc. as necessary? Or would it be fastest to simply start all over? Blake P. Wood Group P-1, MS-E526, Los Alamos Nat'l Lab, Los Alamos NM 87545 ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 18:49:15 GMT From: "Bruce d. Scott" Subject: lunar stability Newsgroups: sci.space In article , henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: |> If you can arrange a lunar collision, you can arrange an Earth gravity |> assist. Two or three of those ought to suffice to put the thing into |> trajectory for Venus... and if there's a more useless object in the |> whole solar system than Venus, I don't know what it is. A perfect place |> to dump the trash. But you don't want a useless object. Those earth-crossers have what the moon lacks: volatiles. Unless _all_ of them would be lost by a collision, it would be nice to create a few resource sites on the Moon. -- Gruss, Dr Bruce Scott The deadliest bullshit is Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik odorless and transparent bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de -- W Gibson ------------------------------ Date: 29 May 93 09:44:00 +1200 From: brs@waikato.ac.nz Subject: Mining on the Moon? Newsgroups: sci.space Has anyone read Heinlen's "The moon is a harse Mistress" in which an inertial catapult is used to sling large loads of ore surrounded by a metal jacket with braking thrusters to Earth. Is this a practical option - can it be done and if so would it be to expensive? I don't know what the extent of mineral resources on the moon are or wether they are worth mining but if the transportation was cheap enough ie. just put it on this catapult with a metal jacket around it and some thrusters and you can deliver it anywhere on Earth, then it might the practical. Can anyone help me - is this practical, can this system be set up? - what are the type and extent of the mineral resources on the moon? - has this idea been explored seriously before? Baz Earth Science Dept University of Waikato New Zealand ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 93 19:43:23 GMT From: William Mills Subject: Moon Base Newsgroups: sci.space >Closed cycle environments can be tested on Earth or in LEO much more >easily than on Luna. Luna isn't a realistic simulation of either deep >space or Mars environments, so testing on the Moon is no more relevant >than testing in the Mojave or LEO. Unless we have real reasons for going >to Luna, testing doesn't cut it as a reason to spend the money. Any closed cycle environment is going to rely on biology. We really know nothing about how Earth life will react to Mars gravity. LEO can only give you zero-g, unless you put up a big centrifuge. (The Space Station, at least before the current redesign, included a small centrifuge, which could handle some biology testing, but not a whole biological closed system.) The Moon at least gives you low gravity: if Earth life can do well in long term lunar gravity, it's a good bet it can handle Mars gravity. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 93 20:03:04 GMT From: William Mills Subject: Moon Base Newsgroups: sci.space > investment. It's akin to attempting to plant a colony in a malarial swamp > when there is nice fertile high ground just over the next rise. The first Remember Jamestown: a colony in a malarial swamp near fertile high ground. It survived for about 90 years because it was on the water, and had easier transportation back to England. A Moon Base would have a similar advantage over Mars or asteroids. ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 18:52:19 GMT From: "Bruce d. Scott" Subject: New DC-X GIF Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May27.073215.24661@hparc0.aus.hp.com>, robink@hparc0.aus.hp.com (Robin Kenny) writes: |> Some of the *.gif files can't be displayed. All were ftp'd in binary mode |> and some are OK (a very classy looking craft!) Have all gif's been checked |> for format? With xv on a Sun Sparc I have seen all the DC-X gifs. (Many thanks to whoever sets them up!!) -- Gruss, Dr Bruce Scott The deadliest bullshit is Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik odorless and transparent bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de -- W Gibson ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1993 12:27 PDT From: "Horowitz, Irwin Kenneth" Subject: Sour grapes (was Re: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan?) Newsgroups: sci.space In article <1993May28.112132.231@corning.com>, cecce_aj@corning.com writes... > My personal politics: Sagan has raised some good questions. > Somebody needs to do this. Enquiring minds do want to know. > I love the idea of humans in space, but exactly what is the > cost of us being there? Would it be better to wait until we > have exhausted the benefits of automated probes? This comes > from a personal bias I guess. I have finally come to the > realization that I will never make it into space. So if I > can't go, why should anyone else? ;-) > Sour grapes? Is this truly a legitimate reason to be opposed to human space flight? If so, I daresay there are a number of things I would oppose just b/c I an unable to participate in them directly...but I'm not that self- obsessed :-). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Irwin Horowitz | Astronomy Department |"Whoever heard of a female astronomer?" California Institute of Technology |--Charlene Sinclair, "Dinosaurs" irwin@iago.caltech.edu | ih@deimos.caltech.edu | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 21:53:53 GMT From: Ron Baalke Subject: Space Calendar - 05/28/93 Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary,sci.space.shuttle The Space Calendar is updated monthly and the latest copy is available at ames.arc.nasa.gov in the /pub/SPACE/FAQ. Please send any updates or corrections to Ron Baalke (baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov). Note that launch dates are subject to change. The following people made contributions to this month's calendar: o Jeff Hagan - COMET launch is now in August 1993. o Doug Ramsay - UHF-2 launch is now July 22, 1993. o Frank Knight - APEX launch is now September 14, 1993. Also, Seastar and SeaWIFS are the same mission, SeaWIFS is one of the instruments on Seastar. o Greg Bollendonk - STS-51 launch date is now July 15, 1993. o Dennis Newkirk - Various Soyuz/Progress launch dates and landings. ========================= SPACE CALENDAR May 28, 1993 ========================= * indicates change from last month's calendar May 1993 May ?? - Radcal Scout Launch June 1993 Jun ?? - Temisat Meteor 2 Launch Jun ?? - NOAA-I Atlas Launch Jun ?? - First Test Flight of the Delta Clipper (DC-X), Unmanned * Jun ?? - Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) Launch (India) * Jun 02 - Galaxy 4 Ariane Launch Jun 04 - Lunar Eclipse, Visible from North America Jun 14 - Sakigake, 2nd Earth Flyby (Japan) * Jun 14 - STS-57, Endeavour, European Retrievable Carrier (EURECA-1R) Jun 22 - 15th Anniversary of Charon Discovery (Pluto's Moon) by Christy * Jun 24 - GPS Launch July 1993 Jul 01 - Soyuz TM-17 Launch (Soviet) * Jul 09 - Hispasat 1B & Insat 2B Ariane Launch * Jul 15 - STS-51, Discovery, Advanced Communications Technology Satellite Jul 20-21 - Iapetus/Saturn Eclipse * Jul 21 - Soyuz TM-16 Landing (Soviet) * Jul 22 - UHF-2 Atlas Launch * Jul 27 - Progress M-19 Launch (Soviet) Jul 28 - S. Delta Aquarid Meteor Shower (Maximum: 19:00 UT, Solar Longitude 125.8 degrees) Jul 29 - NASA's 35th Birthday August 1993 Aug ?? - ETS-VI (Engineering Test Satellite) H2 Launch (Japan) Aug ?? - GEOS-J Launch Aug ?? - Landsat 6 Launch Aug ?? - ORBCOM FDM Pegasus Launch * Aug ?? - Commercial Experiment Transporter (COMET) Conestoga Launch Aug 08 - 15th Anniversary, Pioneer Venus 2 Launch (Atmospheric Probes) Aug 09 - Mars Observer, 4th Trajectory Correction Maneuver (TCM-4) Aug 12 - N. Delta Aquarids Meteor Shower (Maximum: 07:00 UT, Solar Longitude 139.7 degrees) Aug 12 - Perseid Meteor Shower (Maximum: 15:00 UT, Solar Longitude 140.1 degrees) * Aug 13 - Galileo, Trajectory Correction Maneuver #20 (TCM-20) Aug 24 - Mars Observer, Mars Orbit Insertion (MOI) Aug 25 - STS-58, Columbia, Spacelab Life Sciences (SLS-2) * Aug 26 - Galileo, Trajectory Correction Maneuver #21 (TCM-21) Aug 28 - Galileo, Asteroid Ida Flyby (9:52 AM PDT) September 1993 Sep ?? - SPOT-3 Ariane Launch Sep ?? - Tubsat Launch * Sep ?? - MSTI-II Scout Launch * Sep 02 - GPS Launch * Sep 14 - Advanced Photovoltaic Electronics Experiment (APEX) Pegasus Launch * Sep 26 - Galileo, End of Ida Data Playback, Part 1 October 1993 Oct ?? - Intelsat 7 F1 Ariane Launch Oct ?? - SLV-1 Pegasus Launch Oct ?? - Telstar 4 Atlas Launch * Oct 01 - Seastar Pegasus Launch * Oct 05 - Galileo, Trajectory Correction Maneuver #22 (TCM-22) * Oct 12 - Soyuz TM-20 Launch (Soviet) Oct 22 - Orionid Meteor Shower (Maximum: 00:00 UT, Solar Longitude 208.7 degrees) * Oct 28 - GPS Launch November 1993 Nov ?? - Solidaridad/MOP-3 Ariane Launch * Nov ?? - Soyuz TM-17 Landing (Soviet) Nov 03 - 20th Anniversary, Mariner 10 Launch (Mercury & Venus Flyby Mission) Nov 03 - S. Taurid Meteor Shower Nov 04 - Galileo Exits Asteroid Belt Nov 06 - Mercury Transits Across the Sun, Visible from Asia, Australia, and the South Pacific Nov 08 - Mars Observer, Mapping Orbit Established Nov 10 - STS-60, Discovery, SPACEHAB-2 Nov 13 - Partial Solar Eclipse, Visible from Southern Hemisphere Nov 15 - Wilhelm Herschel's 255th Birthday Nov 17 - Leonids Meteor Shower (Maximum: 13:00 UT, Solar Longitude 235.3 degrees) Nov 22 - Mars Observer, Mapping Begins Nov 28-29 - Total Lunar Eclipse, Visible from North America & South America December 1993 Dec ?? - GOES-I Atlas Launch Dec ?? - NATO 4B Delta Launch Dec ?? - TOMS Pegasus Launch Dec ?? - DirectTv 1 & Thiacom 1 Ariane Launch Dec ?? - ISTP Wind Delta-2 Launch Dec ?? - STEP-2 Pegasus Launch Dec ?? - Soyuz TM-18 Launch (Soviet) Dec 02 - STS-61, Endeavour, Hubble Space Telescope Repair Dec 04 - SPEKTR-R Launch (Soviet) Dec 05 - 20th Anniversary, Pioneer 10 Jupiter Flyby Dec 08 - Mars Observer, Mars Equinox Dec 14 - Geminids Meteor Shower (Maximum: 00:00 UT, Solar Longitude 262.1 degrees) Dec 20 - Mars Observer, Solar Conjunction Begins Dec 23 - Ursids Meteor Shower (Maximum: 01:00 UT, Solar Longitude 271.3 degrees) January 1994 Jan 03 - Mars Observer, End of Solar Conjunction Jan 24 - DSPSE (Clementine) Titan IIG Launch (Lunar Orbiter, Asteroid Flyby Mission) February 1994 Feb ?? - SFU Launch Feb ?? - GMS-5 Launch Feb 05 - 20th Anniversary, Mariner 10 Venus Flyby Feb 08 - STS-62, Columbia, U.S. Microgravity Payload (USMP-2) Feb 15 - Galileo's 430th Birthday * Feb 15 - Galileo, Trajectory Correction Maneuver #22A (TCM-22A) Feb 21 - DSPSE (Clementine), Lunar Orbit Insertion Feb 25 - 25th Anniversary, Mariner 6 Launch (Mars Flyby Mission) March 1994 Mar ?? - TC-2C Launch * Mar 02 - GPS Launch Mar 05 - 15th Anniversary, Voyager 1 Jupiter flyby * Mar 08 - Galileo, Ida Data Playback, Part 2 (3 months) Mar 14 - Albert Einstein's 115th Birthday Mar 27 - 25th Anniversary, Mariner 7 Launch (Mars Flyby Mission) Mar 29 - 20th Anniversary, Mariner 10, 1st Mercury Flyby Mar 31 - Galaxy 1R Delta 2 Launch * Mar 31 - STS-59, Endeavour, SRL-1 April 1994 Apr ?? - Equator S Scout Launch * Apr ?? - GOES-Next Launch Apr 04 - Mars Observer, Perihelion May 1994 * May ?? - ISTP Polar Delta-2 Launch * May ?? - Soyuz TM-19 Launch (Soviet) * May ?? - Helios 1 Launch * May ?? - ISO Launch * May 04 - 5th Anniversary, Magellan Launch (Venus Orbiter) * May 04 - Mars Observer, Mars Southern Summer * May 05 - STS-63, Discovery, SPACEHAB-3 * May 10 - Annular Eclipse, Visible from Mexico & USA * May 25 - Lunar Eclipse * May 29 - Ulysses, Begin of 1st Solar Passage ___ _____ ___ /_ /| /____/ \ /_ /| Ron Baalke | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov | | | | __ \ /| | | | Jet Propulsion Lab | ___| | | | |__) |/ | | |__ M/S 525-3684 Telos | Never laugh at anyone's /___| | | | ___/ | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | dreams. |_____|/ |_|/ |_____|/ | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 May 1993 21:50:27 GMT From: kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov Subject: Space Station Freedom Paper Sim #3 Newsgroups: sci.space Boy, that was fun! Yesterday, we held Paper Simulation #3 for the Space Station flight controllers. This was a stand-alone sim. To gel my thoughts on the sim, and to let you folks out on Usenet know what's going on in Space Station Mission Ops, I'll post a summary to the 'Net. Since you folks can't be expected to have all of the training of flight controllers, I'll try to explain the arcane terms and concepts involved. Flight controllers are the folks here in Houston who help the astronauts keep track of their systems, plan their procedures, and send commands up to their spacecraft. A "Paper Sim" is a sim in which we don't use the computers in the Consolidated Control Center (CCC) (we actually used the Shuttle Mission Control Center [MCC], Flight Control Room number two [FCR-2]). A "stand-alone sim" is a sim in which the role of the astronauts is played by training personnel, not actual astronauts. This is the antonym of an "integrated sim," in which the crew is in the spacecraft simulator. The purpose of this sim was to help flight controllers become familiar with the handover of duties and information from one shift of the flight control team (FCT) to the next. This was the first SSFP sim which had such a handover. The Mission Operations Space Station Training folks set up the sim scenario as follows: the Space Shuttle Orbiter was docked with the Space Station Freedom (as defined by the current baseline, not any of the redesign options NASA is examining). This was Mission Build flight 6 (MB-6), Flight Day 4 (FD4). The Training folks gave us pieces of paper containing the Initial Conditions (IC's) describing differences between the planned situation at MB-6, FD4 and the sim scenario. In the IC's, (1) the crew complained that the air temperature in the node and the lab were too high, and (2) there was a leak in the Thermal Control System (TCS) radiator number 1. The TCS radiators are considered an Orbit Replacable Units (ORU's), which means that they can be changed out and/or repaired on orbit. The TCS radiators reject waste heat from SSF systems. IC #3 told us that we had already activated audio and video communication with the SSF. IC #4 was that there was some crew exercise (treadmill or stationary bicycle or something -- I'm not sure which) scheduled for FD4. IC #5 was that the Total Hydrocarbon Analyzer (THA), which is a redundant part of the Air Revitalization (AR) subsystem of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS), was not operational, not recoverable, and would be swapped out on MB-7. Other IC's: the Space Radiation Analysis Group had forecasted heavy solar activity for the next 12 hours, so we were no-go for extra-vehicular activity (EVA or space walks). The leak in TCS radiator 1 was only about .6 pounds of Ammonia (.6 pounds per what? I dunno), which the Thermal folks (console position THOR in the CCC) determined was not really critical. THOR eventually isolated the leak to the A side of radiator 1, which allowed the B side to circulate ammonia normally (but that leaves radiator one in a "one-failure-away-from-death" situation). But the leak made it really necessary to deploy radiator 2. At GMT 14:10:00, the FCT commanded radiator deploy. The crew confirmed that they could see the radiator moving, and the FCT could see telemetry which reported that the motors were going. Suddenly, when radiator 2 was 75% deployed, it stopped. The ODIN flight controller (Onboard Data, Interface and Networks) determined that their telemetry object list (TOL) indicated no problem with the built-in test (BIT). By 14:53:00, the FCT had determined that the problem was in a remote power controller (RPC). The PHALCON flight controller started the procedure to trouble shoot the RPC. The result was negative; we had a failed RPC. That radiator wasn't gonna deploy. Meanwhile, Propulsion Module 1 had a failed Multiplexer/Demultiplexer (MDM). The SEECO (Station Enviromental, Electrical and Communications Officer) flight controller reported that a delta-pressure gauge in the node 2 hatch was going bad. The OSO (Operations Support Officer) flight controller reported that there would be a problem in the present configuration if we had to have the Shuttle un-dock, go home, then come back; the re-docking forces would cause the radiators to collide. However, the only way to fully deploy the radiator at this point was an EVA, which was contra-indicated because of the solar radiation hazard. Basically, we were stuck. Just before the end of the day-long sim, the Training folks sent us a note telling us that the solar radiation warning was rescinded, and we were go for EVA. Much more happened, but I'm out of time. Have a good weekend. -- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/DE44, Mission Operations, Space Station Systems kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (713) 483-4368 "I use not only all the brains I have, but all I can borrow." -- Woodrow Wilson ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 18:43:22 GMT From: "Bruce d. Scott" Subject: Tom Wolfe's THE RIGHT STUFF - Truth or Fiction? Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle,rec.arts.books In article , wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) writes: |> [...] If memory serves rightly, he flew a Mercury for 6 orbits. Who? Grissom's flight, like Shepherd's (sp), was sub-orbital. Glenn, with 3 orbits, was the first US astronaut to orbit in Feb 1962. -- Gruss, Dr Bruce Scott The deadliest bullshit is Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik odorless and transparent bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de -- W Gibson ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 14:45:30 EDT From: "John F. Woods" Subject: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan? Newsgroups: sci.space cecce_aj@corning.com writes: >In article <1993May26.190345.27184@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes: >> My feelings *exactly*. Given his record of late, I'm left feeling >> that Dr Sagan left his scientific integrity somewhere in the swirl of >> publicity quite a few years ago. He lets his political agenda drive >> the analysis of data and the conclusions he claims to 'prove' with it; >> an odious habit in a scientist, to say the least. >His politics are definately a driving factor in his work. But is that so >bad? Someplace you have to balance science, politics, morality, reality, >etc... It is bad when his politics tells him to discard science and tell lies in the guise of science. In the nuclear winter flap, his cohorts used the flexibility of the modelling approach to tune the parameters for the worst possible result; this, then, was used to trumpet the fact that nuclear war is bad (OK, folks, hands up -- how many in the audience here were saying to themselves, "Gee, I thought nuclear war was a splendid idea until TAPPS proved their nuclear winter idea!"). More careful work, using model parameters based on reality rather than results, indicated a much less severe outcome (the "nuclear autumn" result). Now, of course, anything Sagan says about much of anything can be cheaply rebutted with the suggestion that he's probably jiggered his data to bolster a bogus claim: big help, Carl. The problem is not "balancing science, politics, morality, reality, etc..." It is having one's politics or morality convince one to claim that one's statements are scientific or represent reality when, in fact, neither is the case. ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 93 20:31:05 GMT From: Pat Subject: Why is everyone picking on Carl Sagan? Newsgroups: sci.space If we are going to bust on Sagan, we should get together and lynch Teller. He's a much worse offender. ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 16 : Issue 646 ------------------------------