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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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?

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