A debate on the use of nukes in space and on earth

Note:

On the 18th of August, the nuclear space probe Cassini completed its so called "flyby"-maneuver successfully. Thus the immediate threat stemming from Cassini has ended, yet while others may claim so this doesn't prove at all nukes in space are safe. They aren't, as numerous accidents involving space based nuclear payloads have shown. Shooting up space capsules loaded with uranium, plutonium or other highly dangerous nuclear substances and flinging them around the planets of this solar system should be banned altogether - now. On September 23, 1999, NASA admitted they had lost their "Mars Climate Orbiter", a space probe which was intended to work as a weather satellite over Mars. They misfired its engines, and 125 million dollars were gone. Misfiring Cassini's engines as close to Earth as they brought it on August 18, 1999 would have had direr consequences. This webpage, part of my small collection of texts referring to Cassini and nukes in space in general, may have lost its immediate concern yet shall remain online for the sake of documentation.

The following is a compilation of three pieces of e-mail, which make up my correspondence with Louis Friedman, head of the Planetary Society, an organization of supposedly 100.000 concerned with space travel and space exploration. Mr. Friedman advocates the use of plutonium and other radioactive materials in space, and was challenged on this by Russell D. Hoffman, programmer, editor and environmental activist, who runs the largest anti Cassini website I know of. The original argument between Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Friedman broke out around the statement of Mr. Hoffman, that NASA hasn't proved their experiments in the past didn't kill already millions of people, which Mr. Friedman found intolerable. When following the argument it occurred to me, that it could shed a bright light on the use of nukes in space and on earth in general, so I engaged Mr. Friedman in the following debate.

I publish this correspondence with the stated permission of all authors involved.

Further information on Cassini, nukes in space and related topics is to be found here.

MY INITIAL E-MAIL TO LOUIS FRIEDMAN

***START***

Dear Mr. Friedman!

My name is Marcus Hammerschmitt, I'm a German writer. I have been following your debate with Russell D. Hoffman of Animated Software on the topic of Cassini's intended flight and its implications. Reading the last synopsis of Mr. Hoffman on said debate brought some questions to my mind.

But first of all, some clarifications on my position in all of this.

I don't like Cassini, because I don't like nukes. Space exploration is a thrill to me, nukes aren't. I think their use in space is dangerous, irresponsible and unnecessary, even more so than on earth.

Russell D. Hoffman doesn't pay me, I'm no relative of his, I don't work for his commercial outfit, I don't promote the products thereof. I don't even know him personally, because we've only met on the internet. In fact I think we disagree on numerous occasions, but we almost perfectly agree on Cassini.

Now here are my questions. You are invited to comment and point out any factual errors they may contain.

1) Do you know of any effort to collect the SNAP-27 put on the Moon November 19, 1969? Has it come back yet to where it came from, earth in this case? Do you know of any scheme to collect what radioactice material the "Mars Pathfinder" will leave on Mars, after it's done? Exploration of Saturn and Titan is highlighted by NASA public relations experts as a means of looking for the origins of life on earth or actual traces of contemporary life existing there. I don't believe there is "life" on any other planet than ours in this solar system, but just for the fun of it: what would you think of relatives annonuncing there arrival for a visit by a poisoned letter which kills you while opening it? NASA has made Moon and Mars a nuclear dumpsite, in the case of Mars without a human being having set foot on it. Do you really think this is reasonable? Even NASA officials would dump a gallon of engine oil only with utmost reluctance in a well at Yellowstone national park, but they bravely go on endangering not only our own planet as a whole, but other planets too. We haven't even been on Mars yet, but our pollution's already there, in its worst variety. Out of sight, out of mind?

2) I have been told that unmeasured quantities of information gathered by the Apollo programme are inaccessible to us now, because computer tapes which were in heavy use at the time are unreadable to modern machines, due to the rapid change of computer technology. Doesn't that mean that the billions spent on Apollo and the like were partly spent in vain? Yes, this is none of my business, because it's the american taxpayer's. The NASA risking my and my family's health and life with plutonium for the reward of unreadable computer tapes is my business, isn't it? I was quite content, if NASA officials and scientists strictly risked their own lives for the rings of Saturn and the atmosphere of Titan, but I don't like them risking mine. Fair enough?

3) May I point out to you, that R.D. Hoffman didn't claim NASA experiments actually killed millions, but that there's no proof they didn't, which is quite a different thing. If you want to market a novel food, an appliance, a car, or anything else, you will be required to prove that it isn't harmful to people using it. In case it is, you will be held liable. The American tobacco industry offers right now to pay more than 600 billion dollars acknowledging the damage it's products have caused with smokers. Fair enough? I don't know. But I swear I don't own an ounce of plutonium, let alone 72,3 pounds. NASA wants to use this stuff. They are doing it. They should prove beyond any reasonable doubt that this intended use isn't able to harm anybody. Are they doing so? On the contrary. Numbers of deaths due to a worst case scenario with Cassini vary from 120 to 3500 in their own papers. I don't know if millions have died from what NASA did in the past. Personally I doubt this. But I know one thing for certain: the largest imaginable pile of data on the rings of Saturn or the atmosphere of Titan isn't worth 120 human lives. To my conviction not a single one. What do you think?

4) Do you know what Alan Kohn, a 30-year veteran of NASA says about Cassini? I'm attaching the text, in case you don't. Is this guy just wetting his pants, is he senile or is he lying?

Best regards,

M. Hammerschmitt

http://www.geocities.com/athens/1224

***STOP***

TEXT OF THE ATTACHMENT MENTIONED AT
THE END OF MY INITIAL E-MAIL

***START***

Introductory Note:

The following speech was delivered at a rally against Cassini, held June 14 by the FCPJ (Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice). Author is Alan Kohn, a 30 year employee of NASA. He retired in 1994.

"I haven't given a public speech for a long time. In the favorite biblical phrase of the late President Johnson, `Come, let us reason together.'

I have great respect for Joel Reynolds, the safety director at KSC [Kennedy Space Center]. He is a real gentleman; he was a pleasure to work with. And I want to tell you that the pressure does not come from the Kennedy Space Center. They're obeying orders from higher up. This is not a little story, this is a national or even an international story. The pressure comes from NASA headquarters. The orders come down-- and when the orders come down, if you work for a bureaucracy, particularly a government bureaucracy, you do what you're told, you say what you're told to say, and you even think despite your intelligence the way you're taught to think. I've never understood the voluntarily surrendering of intelligence and I certainly can't put up with surrendering the moral requirements of justice and protection for each other.

Specifically, I was the emergency preparedness operations officer--in NASA-ese I was called the EPO--on the Galileo and Ulysses missions...

I was also a member of the Radiological Emergency Force Group and the RTG Contingency Working Group. My responsibilities were as already defined: I was responsible for the safety of the government employees on both sides of the river: CCAFS [Cape Canaveral Air Force Station] right over here and KSC right over there.

Let me tell you, they didn't even let me do that job. I was told that the job was cosmetic, that nothing was going to happen and I should just sit and counsel everyone in the radiation control center and do nothing, and in case of disaster, the unlikely event of disaster would take place, I could take all protective measures real time. The only protective measure I could have taken at that time, of course, would have been to wet my pants. And my own immediate management told me: lay off, keep a low profile, don't let the public know, above all don't let the protest groups know that there is any danger at all.

I disobeyed orders. I provided that all the buildings should be turned into fall-out shelters, that air conditioning be shut off, that buildings be sealed, the doors be sealed, that people who were going to work outside would be put in bunny suits and given gas masks with HEPA filters. I provided washdowns. I told them no visitors.

They brought visitors out anyway. And by the way, in the mission control center when I said no visitors, I got an ovation from the people....The people applauded me because they agreed with me. They didn't agree with me publicly but the applause was enough to show me that on the government side of those fences, there are a lot of people who agree with you, but out of misguided loyalty they don't have the freedom-- they think they don't have the freedom-- to speak out.

I disagree. The first loyalty is to the public. The first loyalty is to the taxpayer. The first loyalty is to each other, to our own families. These are your friends and neighbors here. They feel the same way you do but they're not going to say so....We were told by NASA that the odds against the Cassini blowing up and releasing radiation is 1,500 to one. Those are pretty poor odds. You bet the lottery and the odds against you there one in 14 million--1,500 to one are unacceptable odds. You can't in good conscience do a thing like that.

I call for the people who live in this community to protect themselves, their families and their children, to protect their neighbors. And I call on the people on the other side of the fence, the government side of the fence, who have families and friends and neighbors in the area also: don't let this launch go forward with 72-plus pounds of plutonium. That is not really a sane alternative. I expect people to speak out regardless of what the cost is.

If you're going to keep quiet about an issue like this, then your jobs aren't worth a bucket of warm spit. If you're going to give up your soul and your conscience just to keep your jobs, the jobs aren't worth it.

Now I'm going to tell you: they think their hands are tied, their hands are not tied. They have a freedom to speak out, too. I had resistance from many in management when I converted the buildings to fall-out shelters and when I did all the other work I did to protect the government workers. But I had a lot of support also. The support unfortunately was quiet. I got away with doing the job I did against opposition and then I got rewarded with all kinds of awards and thank yous after I had done the job. That didn't take away the fact that we were willing to risk the public doing these launches. How would we had protected the public? We had representatives from, I forget whether it was fourteen to seventeen government agencies including FEMA and Brevard Emergency Management associations, and what they were going to do was they were going to go out there and they were going to monitor the fall-out as the plutonium fell on your heads, you here in Brevard County.

And what could they have done to stop that plutonium from falling on your heads if it was a real-time emergency? Exactly nothing. They couldn't have erected an umbrella like I see out here over all of Titusville, for example. And I saw the footprints of potential fall-outs which depended on wind, speed and direction and height at which the explosion took place. They call the RTG's indestructible; they're indestructible just like the Titanic was unsinkable. And they are committing the lie, the sin of omission, in not telling you the whole truth. There should be public hearings. I don't see the Congress holding public hearings. I don't see NASA holding public hearings. I don't see anyone addressing the issues. They figure if they keep it quiet, if they just pacify everyone, they can get away with everything they want to do. And they have gotten away with everything they wanted to do up until now. It is time to put a stop to their freedom to threaten the lives of the people here on the Earth and particularly the people here in the vicinity of the space centers. I don't know know they can do this. I don't know what in a democracy they think gives them the right to do a thing like this. They have no such right. There is no right in the government. This is not a combat situation. You are not soldiers. You cannot be put at risk because someone makes a decision that nothing is going to happen. As I said, they themselves say the odds are 1,500 to one, wherever they got those numbers from I don't believe any numbers they give me because they're all speculations. I have been in weapons systems analysis groups. I've done figures, too. The figures are always phony, they're just pulled out of a series of formulas which are nothing but presumptions. The Titan IV has blown up before. If it blows up this time and it releases plutonium it will be too late to do anything about it whatsoever.

I call on my former co-workers to speak up. I call on the people who know the truth to speak up. If it means your jobs, so what? Who cares about a job? Health and the lives of the public are more important than any job on this Earth including the presidency of the United States. The job of the government is to protect the people, not to put the people at risk. I expect better from my co-workers and former employers. I expect honesty, I expect complete hearings, I expect testimony, and after that I expect them to cancel this launch until they can do it safely."

Alan Kohn

***STOP***

MR. FRIEDMAN´S REPLY (HIS OWN COMMENTS ARE CAPITALIZED BY HIMSELF)

***START***

At 04:42 PM 7/28/97 +0200, Marcus Hammerschmitt wrote:

>Dear Mr. Friedman!

>My name is Marcus Hammerschmitt, I'm a German writer. I
>have been following your debate with Russell D. Hoffman
>of Animated Software on the topic of Cassini's intended
>flight and its implications. Reading the last synopsis
>of Mr. Hoffman on said debate brought some questions to
>my mind.

>But first of all, some clarifications on my position in
>all of this.

>I don't like Cassini, because I don't like nukes. Space
>exploration is a thrill to me, nukes aren't. I think their
>use in space is dangerous, irresponsible and unnecessary,
>even more so than on earth.

>Russell D. Hoffman doesn't pay me, I'm no relative of his,
>I don't work for his commercial outfit, I don't promote
>the products thereof. I don't even know him personally,
>because we've only met on the internet. In fact I think we
>disagree on numerous occasions, but we almost perfectly agree
>on Cassini.

>Now here are my questions. You are invited to comment and point
>out any factual errors they may contain.

>1) Do you know of any effort to collect the SNAP-27 put on the
>Moon November 19, 1969? Has it come back yet to where it came
>from, earth in this case? Do you know of any scheme to collect what
>radioactice material the "Mars Pathfinder" will leave on Mars,
>after it's done?

NO -- IT WOULD BE EXTRAORDINARILY EXPENSIVE AND WASTEFUL.

>Exploration of Saturn and Titan is highlighted
>by NASA public relations experts as a means of looking for the
>origins of life on earth or actual traces of contemporary life
>existing there. I don't believe there is "life" on any other planet
>than ours in this solar system, but just for the fun of it: what
>would you think of relatives annonuncing there arrival for a visit
>by a poisoned letter which kills you while opening it?

PROBABLY NO LIFE THERE -- BUT VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT ORGANIC CHEMISTRY AND THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF LIFE. TITAN HAS AN ORGANIC-RICH ATMOSTPHERE, WHOSE INVESTIGATION WILL BE VALUABLE IN THIS REGARD.

>NASA has madE Moon and Mars a nuclear dumpsite, in the case of
>Mars without a human being having set foot on it. Do you really think
>this is reasonable?

12 MEN HAVE STEPPED FOOT ON THE MOON. I DO NOT THINK THE TRIVIAL AMOUNT OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL ON THE MOON AND MARS WILL INTEFERE WITH HUMAN EXPLORATION AT ALL. IN FACT IT WILL HELP IT -- WITHOUT NUCLEAR POWER THERE IS NO REASONABLE WAY TO GET ENOUGH POWER FOR A MOON OR MARS BASE. (NOT VERY DIFFERENT FROM EARTH, WHERE MUCH OF THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD RELIES ON SUCH POWER).

>Even NASA officials would dump a gallon of
>engine oil only with utmost reluctance in a well at Yellowstone
>national park, but they bravely go on endangering not only our
>own planet as a whole, but other planets too. We haven't even been
>on Mars yet, but our pollution's already there, in its worst variety.
>Out of sight, out of mind?

>2) I have been told that unmeasured quantities of information gathered
>by the Apollo programme are inaccessible to us now, because
>computer tapes which were in heavy use at the time are unreadable to
>modern machines, due to the rapid change of computer technology.
>Doesn't that mean that the billions spent on Apollo and the like were
>partly spent in vain?

NO -- THIS IS NOT TRUE. WAY OVEREXAGGERATED. APOLLO DATA IS WELL ARCHIVED AND USED.

>Yes, this is none of my business, because it's the american taxpayer's.
>The NASA risking my and my family's health and life with plutonium for
>the reward of unreadable computer tapes is my business, isn't it? I was
>quite content, if NASA officials and scientists strictly risked their own
>lives for the rings of Saturn and the atmosphere of Titan, but I don't like
>them risking mine. Fair enough?

>3) May I point out to you, that R.D. Hoffman didn't claim
>NASA experiments actually killed millions, but that there's no
>proof they didn't, which is quite a different thing. If
>you want to market a novel food, an appliance, a car, or anything
>else, you will be required to prove that it isn't harmful to
>people using it. In case it is, you will be held liable. The American
>tobacco industry offers right now to pay more than 600 billion dollars
>acknowledging the damage it's products have caused with smokers.
>Fair enough? I don't know. But I swear I don't own an ounce of
>plutonium, let alone 72,3 pounds. NASA wants to use this stuff. They
>are doing it. They should prove beyond any reasonable doubt that this
>intended use isn't able to harm anybody. Are they doing so? On the
>contrary. Numbers of deaths due to a worst case scenario with Cassini
>vary from 120 to 3500 in their own papers. I don't know if millions
>have died from what NASA did in the past. Personally
>I doubt this. But I know one thing for certain: the
>largest imaginable pile of data on the rings of Saturn or the
>atmosphere of Titan isn't worth 120 human lives. To my conviction
>not a single one. What do you think?

NO THIS IS NOT FAIR. YOU CANNOT MAKE A RIDICULOUS ASSERTION AND THEN SAY THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT ISN'T TRUE. HIS SAYING "MILLIONS MAY HAVE DIED..." IS IRRESPONSIBLE, AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS WITH HIM.

IN SCIENCE YOU CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE. I CAN SAY TO YOU I AM AN ALIEN FROM PLUTO, AND THERE IS NO WAY FOR YOU TO "PROVE" ME WRONG. BUT THE BURDEN OF PROOF RELIES ON THE ASSERTER.

>4) Do you know what Alan Kohn, a 30-year veteran of NASA says
>about Cassini? I'm attaching the text, in case you don't. Is
>this guy just wetting his pants, is he senile or is he lying?

NEVER HEARD OF HIM, I WILL LOOK AT IT.

>Best regards,

>M. Hammerschmitt

>http://www.geocities.com/athens/1224

>Attachment Converted: C:\WINDOWS\A-TO-DO\KOHN.TXT

--------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Friedman TPS.LDF@MARS.PLANETARY.ORG
The Planetary Society FAX: 626-793-5528 http://planetary.org
(NOTE: Our area code in Pasadena has changed -- it is now 626)
------------------------------------------------------------------

***STOP***

MY ANSWER TO MR. FRIEDMAN´S REPLY

***START***

Dear Mr. Friedman!

Thank you for your comments. I blame their shallowness partly on the assumption that you must be a very busy man. The other part is to be blamed on the lack of substance pro nuke arguments inevitably carry when confronted with deeper concerns about the moral, political, economical and ecological status of using nuclear power. I didn't expect otherwise.

>>1) Do you know of any effort to collect the SNAP-27 put on the
>>Moon November 19, 1969? Has it come back yet to where it came from,
>>earth in this case? Do you know of any scheme to collect what
>>radioactice material the "Mars Pathfinder" will leave on Mars,
>>after it's done?
>NO -- IT WOULD BE EXTRAORDINARILY EXPENSIVE AND WASTEFUL.

Hardly more expensive and wasteful than to put it there in the first place. We know now that NASA specialists can make up funny names for rocks. That's about it. You know and I know that Mars won't be visited by man for the next decade at least. And still you maintain putting nuclear mines up there will help colonize Mars. If that was your concept of terraforming Mars, you had at least humour on your side (if not reason): because it would indeed mean modeling Mars in the image of contemporary earth .

> Exploration of Saturn and Titan is highlighted
>>by NASA public relations experts as a means of looking for the
>>origins of life on earth or actual traces of contemporary life
>>existing there. I don't believe there is "life" on any other planet
>>than ours in this solar system, but just for the fun of it: what
>>would you think of relatives annonuncing there arrival for a visit
>>by a poisoned letter which kills you while opening it?
>PROBABLY NO LIFE THERE -- BUT VERY IMPORTANT
>INFORMATION ABOUT ORGANIC CHEMISTRY AND
>THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF LIFE. TITAN HAS AN ORGANIC-RICH
>ATMOSTPHERE, WHOSE INVESTIGATION WILL BE VALUABLE
>IN THIS REGARD.

So what? Threatening life on earth for the gain of knowing its origins? Please! If you absolutely have to know what titanic life is like, use solar to get there. If you dig up something relevant, I will use it in my next novel.

>>NASA has madE Moon and Mars a nuclear dumpsite, in the case of Mars
>>without a human being having set foot on it. Do you really think
>>this is reasonable?
>12 MEN HAVE STEPPED FOOT ON THE MOON.

Did I deny that? Can you see the dust on their helmets? Heroes of a day, fools for a lifetime.

>I DO NOT THINK THE TRIVIAL AMOUNT OF NUCLEAR
>MATERIAL ON THE MOON AND MARS WILL INTEFERE
>WITH HUMAN EXPLORATION AT ALL. IN FACT IT WILL HELP IT --
>WITHOUT NUCLEAR POWER THERE IS NO REASONABLE
>WAY TO GET ENOUGH POWER FOR A MOON OR MARS BASE.
>(NOT VERY DIFFERENT FROM EARTH, WHERE MUCH OF THE
>INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD RELIES ON SUCH POWER).

Yeah indeed. Very much like a beached whale "relies" on the sand. Not too many years from now "nuclear physicist" will be an insult. With the death toll rising, safe storage still unfound, the piles of plutonium in stock rising, Chernobyl still glowing, the nuclear reminders of NASA failures still in every continent´s soil (and in the Tonga trench), the reactors of nuclear submarines still fraying in the oceans we are in for radiating times. But not radiating with joy. Ask the people in Kiew, Harrisburg, Stade (town in Germany where leukemia with children is unusually high exactly since the local NPP's running). Ask them, and you get about all the answers you need. Ask the people who will take the heat, if NASA's toy comes down.

Pro nukers have no answers. Their only answer is power. And that's what tey're really about.

A Moon base? A Mars base? Ha ha. In 1957 Wernher von Braun forecast a 50 men Moon base for 1971. Thirty years later you have nothing on the Moon but debris. You don't even have a permanent space station in orbit. Delusions of grandiosity, I would call that.

>>2) I have been told that unmeasured quantities of information gathered
>>by the Apollo programme are inaccessible to us now, because computer
>>tapes which were in heavy use at the time are unreadable to modern machines,
>>due to the rapid change of computer technology. Doesn't that mean that
>>the billions spent on Apollo and the like were partly spent in vain?
>NO -- THIS IS NOT TRUE. WAY OVEREXAGGERATED.
>APOLLO DATA IS WELL ARCHIVED AND USED.

Why then does the "Scientific American" say otherwise? (No, I don't have the issue right at hand, and yes, it could be a different source). Why then does "Chip" (German computer publication / June `97) put the number of defunct tape reels at 1.2 million (...)?

>>Yes, this is none of my business, because it's the american taxpayer's.
>>The NASA risking my and my family's health and life with plutonium for the
>>reward of unreadable computer tapes is my business, isn't it? I was quite
>>content, if NASA officials and scientists strictly risked their own lives
>>for the rings of Saturn and the atmosphere of Titan, but I don't like them
>>risking mine. Fair enough?

I find the lack of any comment to this quite telling.

>NO THIS IS NOT FAIR. YOU CANNOT MAKE A RIDICULOUS
>ASSERTION AND THEN SAY THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT
>ISN'T TRUE. HIS SAYING "MILLIONS MAY HAVE DIED..." IS
>IRRESPONSIBLE, AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS WITH HIM.

What might be fair then? Saying that SNAP incident in 1964 killed tens of thousands until now? Hundreds of thousands? Not a single one?

>IN SCIENCE YOU CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE. I CAN SAY
>TO YOU I AM AN ALIEN FROM PLUTO, AND THERE IS NO WAY
>FOR YOU TO "PROVE" ME WRONG. BUT THE BURDEN OF
>PROOF RELIES ON THE ASSERTER.

This is quite ridiculous, isn't it? When Lavoisier proved that there isn't such thing as "phlogiston" he did so by proving that burning stuff makes the products of the process heavier because oxygen comes into play. The latter excludes the former. Dialectics as simple as you can get them.

You are evading the subject. This debate isn't on numbers. If it was, NASA were knocked out in minutes, because they are making up numbers regularly. This debate is on responsibility. The "asserter" at the start of the chain is NASA. The burden of proof lies with them. They want to sling plutonium into space. They have gone wrong earlier, with dire consequences, and they should prove that they won't go wrong again.

If I say NASA can be wrong, I don't have to prove it. Because they have been wrong on more occasions than I can mention within the cache limits of my mail program. One peculiar feature of plutonium is that you mustn't do wrong handling it, or people will die. Failure margins with plutonium are narrower than we can meet. The best you can do about plutonium isn't good enough. That's why NASA shouldn't use it.

>>4) Do you know what Alan Kohn, a 30-year veteran of NASA says
>>about Cassini? I'm attaching the text, in case you don't. Is
>>this guy just wetting his pants, is he senile or is he lying?
>NEVER HEARD OF HIM, I WILL LOOK AT IT.

Thank you.

Thank you for this conversation.

M. Hammerschmitt

***STOP***

Links on Cassini and related topics,
both English and German speaking

Die Stop-Cassini-Homepage von R.D. Hoffman.
The Stop Cassini homepage of R.D. Hoffman.

Die Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice (FCPJ) wollte den Start von
Cassini durch zivilen Ungehorsam verhindern.
The Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice (FCPJ) wanted to prevent the
Cassini mission by civil disobedience.

Das Global Response Network findet Cassini auch nicht lustig.
The Global Response Network doesn't like Cassini either.

Was ein ehemaliger Angestellter der NASA von Cassini hält (in englisch).
What a former employee of NASA thinks about Cassini (English speaking).

The English speaking part of my website.

Kontakt zu Russell D. Hoffman.
Talk to Russell D. Hoffman.

Kontakt zu mir.
Talk to me.

Und schließlich: Er kann sich nicht mehr wehren.
Last and least: he can't speak up anymore.

[Cassini] [Texte] [English] [Home]

wörter

(kein inhaltlicher Bestandteil des Texts)

NASA Rakete Start Cassini Explosion Treibstoff Plutonium Katastrophe Protest Umwelt Verseuchung Radioaktivität Nuklide DNS Genetik Atmosphäre Saturn Weltraum Weltraumforschung Reaktor RTG Nuklearbatterie Umlaufbahn Trajektorie Risiko Strahlen Strahlung Strahlenschäden Tschernobyl Harrisburg Raumsonde Sonde Mission Wahnsinn

bullshit catastrophe disaster cassini missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit catastrophe disaster cassini missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit catastrophe disaster cassinicatastrophe disaster cassini missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit catastrophe disaster cassini missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit catastrophe disaster cassini missile saturn launch NASA space exploration president plutonium radiation bullshit