MARS SPECIAL INTEREST MISSIONS: NASA NOW WORKS FOR HALLIBURTON

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 05:13:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

You are so full of it.
Everything you say is anti-Bush...

How can you say that? Bush is fulfilling an agenda that is preordained,
preplanned -- and in him doing that, well, it is very satisfying.

Besides, Bush likes the controversy. He thrives on it.

"*" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:44:20 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

Nice attempt at redirect... but it isn't my problem because I don't mind.
YOU are the one complaining.

Complaining about what? I like George Bush, he's killing everything on
the
planet.


"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:27:34 GMT, "Clif Davis"
wrote:

And your point is what? You still haven't said anything about how you
would
fix the problem.

There is no fix.

Your singlemindlessness shows so much lack of thought. I really wish
you
could try harder. But I know that is asking to much.

Your problem is not my problem. Fix it yourself.

"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:12:37 GMT, "Clif Davis"
wrote:

hey nosespam.... and tell us how you would fix the problem. Who
would
do
the
work NASA does? Come one here, be a positive influence for a
change.

I'm only responding to promote the header.

You do know that Carlyle has controlling interest in Lockheed and
Lockheed
is NASA and the NSA and Echelon. Bush Sr. has a lock on the world
right
now.

And it was Bush Sr. who wanted to be world dictator too, and he's
suceeded.



"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 03:22:35 GMT, "Clif Davis"

wrote:

Reposting the same stuff from no-name slobs, one doesn't make it
true
or,
two, doesn't make it a bad thing.

I wish the sissies at NASA would WAKE UP and smell the coffee!
NASA
scientists are being manipulated by special interest agendas
because
Bush
Sr's Carlyle now has controlling intrest in interest! (and
Echelon)

NASA is in complete conflict of interest with the United States
Government.



"*" wrote in message
.. .
http://www.petroleumnews.com/pnarch/010228-49.html

NASA Ames Center looks at problem of drilling on Mars


Kristen Nelson

PNA Editor-in-Chief


If there is life on Mars, it would probably be microorganisms
in
water
deep
below the surface of the planet. Dr. Geoffrey Briggs,
director,
Center
for
Mars Exploration at the NASA Ames Center, told "Meet Alaska"
that
NASA
is
looking at ways to drill on Mars to look for water - and the
life
it
might
contain.

Briggs said NASA has been working with Halliburton, Shell,
Baker-Hughes
and
the Los Alamos National Laboratory to identify drilling
technologies
that
might work on Mars.

The first goal, he said, would be "to drill a hole down into
the
permafrost,
maybe 100 meters as a trial of the technology; ultimately we
want
to
go
to
several kilometers."

The earliest drilling opportunity would be 2007, and one of
the
problems
will be power. A very power-efficient system might cut out
cores
a
meter
at
a time, Briggs said, perhaps grinding away at material needed
to
get
the
core at a rate of one core a day for hundreds of days.

Deeper drilling, into the multi-kilometer range, might occur
as
part
of
a
2014 Mars mission which would put astronauts on the planet to
assist.

Los Alamos developed a melting tool intended for use in
high-technical
geothermal drilling, he said, and that's one of the things
NASA
is
looking
at. The melting tool would also "tend to sterilize the hole on
the
way
down"
which would help with the problem of contamination issues.

Halliburton and Baker-Hughes are working on some very advanced
systems,
Briggs said, some so advanced they aren't willing to talk much
about
them.
He said the NASA Ames Center relies on working with people in
the
industry
who "really understand the problems and make us face up to the
realities .

"We do appreciate," he said, "that this is a non-trivial
activity."

And as a side note: There's be no reason to expect oil on
Mars
if
NASA
didn't have prior undisclosed knowledge that Mars once had
abundant
planet
and animal life.

NASA is lying to the public big time.

And of course you have access to that agenda.... but have no desire to
publish where you found the information other than your own brain.
"*" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 05:13:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

You are so full of it.
Everything you say is anti-Bush...

How can you say that? Bush is fulfilling an agenda that is preordained,
preplanned -- and in him doing that, well, it is very satisfying.

Besides, Bush likes the controversy. He thrives on it.

"*" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:44:20 GMT, "Clif Davis"
wrote:

Nice attempt at redirect... but it isn't my problem because I don't
mind.
YOU are the one complaining.

Complaining about what? I like George Bush, he's killing everything on
the
planet.


"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:27:34 GMT, "Clif Davis"
wrote:

And your point is what? You still haven't said anything about how
you
would
fix the problem.

There is no fix.

Your singlemindlessness shows so much lack of thought. I really
wish
you
could try harder. But I know that is asking to much.

Your problem is not my problem. Fix it yourself.

"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 04:12:37 GMT, "Clif Davis"

wrote:

hey nosespam.... and tell us how you would fix the problem. Who
would
do
the
work NASA does? Come one here, be a positive influence for a
change.

I'm only responding to promote the header.

You do know that Carlyle has controlling interest in Lockheed and
Lockheed
is NASA and the NSA and Echelon. Bush Sr. has a lock on the
world
right
now.

And it was Bush Sr. who wanted to be world dictator too, and he's
suceeded.



"*" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 03:22:35 GMT, "Clif Davis"

wrote:

Reposting the same stuff from no-name slobs, one doesn't make
it
true
or,
two, doesn't make it a bad thing.

I wish the sissies at NASA would WAKE UP and smell the coffee!
NASA
scientists are being manipulated by special interest agendas
because
Bush
Sr's Carlyle now has controlling intrest in interest! (and
Echelon)

NASA is in complete conflict of interest with the United
States
Government.



"*" wrote in message
.. .
http://www.petroleumnews.com/pnarch/010228-49.html

NASA Ames Center looks at problem of drilling on Mars


Kristen Nelson

PNA Editor-in-Chief


If there is life on Mars, it would probably be
microorganisms
in
water
deep
below the surface of the planet. Dr. Geoffrey Briggs,
director,
Center
for
Mars Exploration at the NASA Ames Center, told "Meet
Alaska"
that
NASA
is
looking at ways to drill on Mars to look for water - and
the
life
it
might
contain.

Briggs said NASA has been working with Halliburton, Shell,
Baker-Hughes
and
the Los Alamos National Laboratory to identify drilling
technologies
that
might work on Mars.

The first goal, he said, would be "to drill a hole down
into
the
permafrost,
maybe 100 meters as a trial of the technology; ultimately
we
want
to
go
to
several kilometers."

The earliest drilling opportunity would be 2007, and one of
the
problems
will be power. A very power-efficient system might cut out
cores
a
meter
at
a time, Briggs said, perhaps grinding away at material
needed
to
get
the
core at a rate of one core a day for hundreds of days.

Deeper drilling, into the multi-kilometer range, might
occur
as
part
of
a
2014 Mars mission which would put astronauts on the planet
to
assist.

Los Alamos developed a melting tool intended for use in
high-technical
geothermal drilling, he said, and that's one of the things
NASA
is
looking
at. The melting tool would also "tend to sterilize the hole
on
the
way
down"
which would help with the problem of contamination issues.

Halliburton and Baker-Hughes are working on some very
advanced
systems,
Briggs said, some so advanced they aren't willing to talk
much
about
them.
He said the NASA Ames Center relies on working with people
in
the
industry
who "really understand the problems and make us face up to
the
realities .

"We do appreciate," he said, "that this is a non-trivial
activity."

And as a side note: There's be no reason to expect oil on
Mars
if
NASA
didn't have prior undisclosed knowledge that Mars once had
abundant
planet
and animal life.

NASA is lying to the public big time.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 06:06:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

And of course you have access to that agenda.... but have no desire to
publish where you found the information other than your own brain.

It's all public knowledge.

As usual, the easy way out. You make specific charges with no proof. Offer
no solution and give weak non answers to questions about your statements.
Typical for someone who is afraid to tell the world who you are.
Coward.
"*" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 06:06:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

And of course you have access to that agenda.... but have no desire to
publish where you found the information other than your own brain.

It's all public knowledge.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 14:40:04 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

As usual, the easy way out. You make specific charges with no proof. Offer
no solution and give weak non answers to questions about your statements.
Typical for someone who is afraid to tell the world who you are.
Coward.

Don't be so hard on yourself, it's difficult enough to pay your bills
without having to tell the world you're a Lockheed fascist.

How wrong you are. Do I like for corps. to be profitable? You bet. Can they
be wrong? Yes. Enron is an example. Crime should be punished. All of it. All
I am asking you for is to back up your allegations. Which you won't do.

But I know you won't do that, just like you don't have the courage to tell
the world who you are.
"*" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 14:40:04 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

As usual, the easy way out. You make specific charges with no proof.
Offer
no solution and give weak non answers to questions about your statements.
Typical for someone who is afraid to tell the world who you are.
Coward.

Don't be so hard on yourself, it's difficult enough to pay your bills
without having to tell the world you're a Lockheed fascist.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:14:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

How wrong you are. Do I like for corps. to be profitable? You bet. Can they
be wrong? Yes. Enron is an example. Crime should be punished. All of it. All
I am asking you for is to back up your allegations. Which you won't do.

But I know you won't do that, just like you don't have the courage to tell
the world who you are.

Everyone knows Bush is a crook.

More inane dribble from a coward who doesn't know how to post proof.
It is easy to say someone is a crook. But what evidence will you use to
prove it.
It is easy to come from a hidden position, nospam, with no courage to let
the world know who makes the accusations, to accuse the President of a
crime, but it takes courage to stand up and be counted.

Oh, are you still abusing your mother? Everyone knows you do.

"*" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:14:00 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

How wrong you are. Do I like for corps. to be profitable? You bet. Can
they
be wrong? Yes. Enron is an example. Crime should be punished. All of it.
All
I am asking you for is to back up your allegations. Which you won't do.

But I know you won't do that, just like you don't have the courage to
tell
the world who you are.

Everyone knows Bush is a crook.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:33:09 GMT, "Clif Davis" wrote:

More inane dribble from a coward who doesn't know how to post proof.
It is easy to say someone is a crook. But what evidence will you use to
prove it.
It is easy to come from a hidden position, nospam, with no courage to let
the world know who makes the accusations, to accuse the President of a
crime, but it takes courage to stand up and be counted.

Oh, are you still abusing your mother? Everyone knows you do.

Everyone in the world knows Bush is a crook.

Even Bush supporters know Bush is a crook.

Most people will do anything for money.

Clif Davis wrote:

hey nosespam.... and tell us how you would fix the problem. Who would do the
work NASA does?

It's not so much a matter of letting someone else do what NASA does.
It's a matter of ending corruption and conflict of interest. Not just
wrt NASA.

Which of course is hardly NASA's scientists call to make, since the
decisions at NASA are made by its managers - the same ones who decided
to launch anyway in spite of concerns about the o-rings, and the same
ones who decided not to look into the concerns about the foam.

db