|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
from www.fas.org
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT The National Aeronautics and Space Administration earlier this year attempted to block public access to a comprehensive report on planetary defense against asteroids, but the document found its way into the public domain anyway. NASA undertook the study in response to a 2005 Congressional mandate "to provide an analysis of alternatives to detect, track, catalogue, and characterize" potentially hazardous near- Earth objects (NEOs) and to submit "an analysis of possible alternatives that NASA could employ to divert an object on a likely collision course with Earth." An abbreviated version (28 pages) of the resulting report, which generally recommended against initiation of a new planetary defense program, was provided to Congress and the public in March 2007. http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/171331main_N...rt_march07.pdf Strangely, however, NASA sought to prevent public disclosure of the full 272-page report that provided the underlying analysis for NASA's conclusions. To prevent uncontrolled dissemination, NASA did not distribute a soft copy version of the report. And altogether, no more than around 100 copies of the hard copy document were published. Public requests for the document were denied, though it is unclassified. "The document you requested was distributed in hard copy as a 'thank you' to [NASA working group] team members and is not an official, distributable NASA publication," Marcus Shaw, a contractor at the NASA Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, told Secrecy News. "Copies beyond those for the study team are not available. An electronic copy will not be distributed or posted by NASA," he wrote in a March 13 email from NASA headquarters. In fact, however, the report is clearly marked as a NASA product and is presumptively subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. A legal challenge proved unnecessary, however, as the report soon leaked out through unauthorized channels. It was obtained by the private B612 Foundation, an organization that advocates a more pro-active planetary defense program. ("Our goal is to significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid in a controlled manner by 2015.") The full document (in a large 23 MB PDF file) was posted this month, along with the organization's technical critique of NASA's analysis, he http://www.b612foundation.org/press/press.html B612 is the asteroid home of Saint-Exupery's Little Prince. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
On 16 May, 13:45, Mike wrote:
fromwww.fas.org NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT The National Aeronautics and Space Administration earlier this year attempted to block public access to a comprehensive report on planetary defense against asteroids, but the document found its way into the public domain anyway. Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. There is justification for secrecy ONLY where a potential enemy might use the information. Does the NASA bureaucracy believe that there is intelligence in asteroids? Do Little Green Men steer them? Bully for a free press and investigative journalism. I feel that the normal way for Science to advance is by peer group review. Who knows, someone outside NASA might have a brilliant idea. Something someone had not thought about. - Ian Parker |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
Possible idea - I don't know if you would call it "brilliant" is
lasers. If you can measure speed to mm/sec and positions to a meter, you might be able to predict Earth collisions early and get away with an impulse of no more than a few mm/sec. Discuss this, I may be wrong - at least think. In an environment of secrecy you cannot think. Lasers by the way would be mounted on the assets described in the report viz - large telescopes Earth or Space based. - Ian Parker |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
On 16 May 2007 10:43:17 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian Parker
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: On 16 May, 13:45, Mike wrote: fromwww.fas.org NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT The National Aeronautics and Space Administration earlier this year attempted to block public access to a comprehensive report on planetary defense against asteroids, but the document found its way into the public domain anyway. Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. We see you slunk away and hoped we'd forget, but we're still waiting to see scans of Leahy and Daschle's death certificates, Ian. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
On 16 May, 20:06, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On 16 May 2007 10:43:17 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: On 16 May, 13:45, Mike wrote: fromwww.fas.org NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT The National Aeronautics and Space Administration earlier this year attempted to block public access to a comprehensive report on planetary defense against asteroids, but the document found its way into the public domain anyway. Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. We see you slunk away and hoped we'd forget, but we're still waiting to see scans of Leahy and Daschle's death certificates, Ian. Right here are the references. I have to make a confession here. As you can probably judge I gave the account on recollections. The reports in fact say that they contracted Anthrax but recovered. http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/cbw/anthrax.pdf This reference is rather glutinous. It consists of an almost diary account about what happened. Its main shortcoming is that it does not cover the most recent events. Original investigations, which I recollected said that the Anthrax had come from a US military program. The latest reports say that the Anthrax was pure but did not have any penetration aids, such as silica, in it. BTW there is a biological weapons program. Also looking through you can see that the investigation was carried out in a very amateurish way. The report towards the end mentions tensions between the FBI, CIA and the military. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092401014.html This makes it clear that no additives (silica) were present. Why this was thought to be the Dr. Hatfill BTW is taking legal action against the authorities. I am anti bureaucratic, I am not anti American. American, unlike Zimbabwean or Turkish, justice is capable of putting things right and challenging bureaucratic power. America as you rightly say has achieved great things in the PRIVATE field. American universities are acknowledged to be the best in the world, the Internet was created in America. Basically liberal capitalism is the best system. In the PUBLIC sphere America seems to be peopled by a load of liars and incompetents. Why? Is it that Americans want a commercial, or possibly academic career and that government/military is very much a second choice? American academics get quite a good basic salary as well as opportunities for commercial augmentation. Is it that large organizations (like NASA) simply have a momentum of their own. As I said one would think that LGM were directing asteroids. http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/ This is a more or less encyclopaedic compendium with loads and loads of other references. It seems to believe. 1) That Al Qaeda had nothing to do with it. 2) That it was brewed up in a commercial or academic lab in the New Jersey area. If this was right someone must know who did it. People in a modern lab simply don't work unsupervised on their own to that extent. It could have been a foreign power like the Russians. Why they should want to I really don't know. What gives rise to suspicion is fundamentally the amateur nature of the investigation. The main point is the reduction of existential risk for everyone. I think Stephen Hawking has done us all a great disservice by wittering on about a Martian colony - complete pipedream until we have quantum leaps in technology. Most we could ever do without some soft of VN capability would be to provide some sort of habitat on Mars which would eventually wear out and fail completely to be self sustaining. It would be an expensive and pointless exercise. Reduce the existential risks for everyone. I should have done the research I have now done before posting. I will admit that. I just felt hot under the collar. On warp drive. Have I read too much science fiction? http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/re...warp/warp.html http://www.americanantigravity.com/c...r-Experiments/ There are documents. A REAL warp drive as I have said would be extremely dangerous. Some of the antigravity experiments are subject to an alternative explanation, such as the air pressure in the middle of a vortex being reduced. We say that the Wright brothers flew, they threw down a mass of air at 9.81M m/sec every second. Why do we insist that VTOL by means of rotating air is antigravity. It isn't! It is 9.81M m/sec, same as the Wrights, same as any common or garden airplane or helicopter. We come to another point - deliberate disinformation. Won't propel you into space - might be useful though on blended wing aircraft. Either people are bare faced liars or they are taking grave risks. Of course a virtual helicopter is, in fact, only dangerous to its crew. Why do people claim anything else? - Ian Parker |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
BTW - I don't like the expression "skunk away". In fact I have been on
holiday in the South of France. In the Hotel the price of the Internet was 6€ for half an hour. No way José! BTW - In Spain the keyboard is an international one. In France it is odd and if you type at any speed you find the French very difficult. There was a memorial to the 2million Armenians masacred by the Turks. My remarks on American and Turkish justice stems from the fact that Turkey jails anyone who contradicts their version of history. - Ian Parker |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
Ian Parker wrote:
:On 16 May, 20:06, (Rand Simberg) wrote: : On 16 May 2007 10:43:17 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian Parker : made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a : way as to indicate that: : : On 16 May, 13:45, Mike wrote: : fromwww.fas.org : : NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT : The National Aeronautics and Space Administration earlier this year : attempted to block public access to a comprehensive report on : planetary : defense against asteroids, but the document found its way into the : public domain anyway. : : Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a : giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. : : We see you slunk away and hoped we'd forget, but we're still waiting : to see scans of Leahy and Daschle's death certificates, Ian. : :Right here are the references. I have to make a confession here. As :you can probably judge I gave the account on recollections. The :reports in fact say that they contracted Anthrax but recovered. : Still wrong. Neither Leahy nor Daschle even came in contact with anthrax. : :http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/cbw/anthrax.pdf :This reference is rather glutinous. It consists of an almost diary :account about what happened. : Perhaps you should try actually reading it? It contradicts both your original claim and your current one. : :Its main shortcoming is that it does not :cover the most recent events. Original investigations, which I :recollected said that the Anthrax had come from a US military program. : Not in the way that you mean it. Not even original reports said that. : :The latest reports say that the Anthrax was pure but did not have any enetration aids, such as silica, in it. : False as a general statement. Some of it was and some of it was not. : :BTW there is a biological weapons program. : False in the way that you mean it. : :Also looking through you can see that the :investigation was carried out in a very amateurish way. : In what way? : :The report :towards the end mentions tensions between the FBI, CIA and the :military. : For some definition of 'tensions'. : :http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092401014.html :This makes it clear that no additives (silica) were present. Why this :was thought to be the : ??? : : [Loon spew elided] : : :http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/ :This is a more or less encyclopaedic compendium with loads and loads f other references. It seems to believe. :1) That Al Qaeda had nothing to do with it. :2) That it was brewed up in a commercial or academic lab in the New :Jersey area. : Note that this is one guy who has no special knowledge about anthrax, the investigation, or anything else germane. : :If this was right someone must know who did it. People in a modern lab :simply don't work unsupervised on their own to that extent. It could :have been a foreign power like the Russians. Why they should want to I :really don't know. : :What gives rise to suspicion is fundamentally the amateur nature of :the investigation. : You mean the one you elect to cite. : : : [Remaining loon spew elided] : Keep working, Ian. Perhaps some day you'll get SOMETHING about this episode right... -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
Ian Parker wrote: Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. It's the Bush administration; everything should be classified whenever possible. These are the guys who ordered Fat Man and Little Boy to be taken off display at the National Atomic Museum, because what our enemies could learn about nuclear bomb construction by studying them...and getting their hands on a B-29, for that matter. :-) Pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
On Thu, 17 May 2007 21:21:03 -0500, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Ian Parker wrote: Why the secrecy? This only serves to confirm my view that NASA is a giant bureaucracy where people are intent on saving their arses. It's the Bush administration Yes, of course. What isn't the fault of "the Bush administration" (to use the polite phrase) to the Bush deranged? Nothing bad ever happened under any previous adminstration, of course. NASA in particular never had a rent-seeking bureaucracy under any other adminstration... Do you have any sense at all of how much of a loon you are? Or at least how much of one you come across on Usenet? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
NASA TRIES, FAILS TO WITHHOLD PLANETARY DEFENSE REPORT
On Thu, 17 May 2007 21:21:03 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: It's the Bush administration; Stock answer to every problem, it seems. It will be funny in 2009 when Bush is gone and the Dems are totally in control. Suddenly, there will be rational explanations for all these problems... These are the guys who ordered Fat Man and Little Boy to be taken off display at the National Atomic Museum, So Hiroshima and Nagasaki never really happened, I take it? :-) Brian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA JPL Conspiracy to Withhold Mars Spirit Results | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Astronomy Misc | 1 | January 25th 05 12:19 AM |
NASA JPL Conspiracy to Withhold Mars Spirit Results | Thomas Lee Elifritz | Policy | 1 | January 25th 05 12:19 AM |
Whats needed for planetary defense? | bob haller | History | 2 | June 4th 04 04:57 PM |