Some Factual Errors about the Space Program by Darin_Selby@hotmail.com
As 'remarkable' as landing on Mars was, it still does not take away from the fact of the HUGE amount of rocket pollution left behind as it went into space, and the risk of 10 lbs. of plutonium 238 disbursement in a launch accident.
I see this landing on Mars as no triumph, but more like a casino roulette game that just so happen to be won...
So now, what will be the outcome? More of the same, with more rocket launches and funding for more nuclear-powered spacecraft. As long as humanity supports this kind of activity, a devistating radioactive fallout accident waiting to happen is no longer 'if', it is 'when'.
As amazing as this technology seems to be, it still is only an intellectual type of insanity to pursue such a course to begin with! This is because NASA's track record shows clearly that it has its own military agenda, which does not include taking care of the environment, that we all rely upon. "Arming the Heavens" is a prophetic message about the 'Hidden Military Agenda of Space', (1945-1955), and these words are just as true today, if not more so.
So I maintain my position that going to Mars to laser-beam some rocks, and continually mis-inform people about the possiblity of life being there, so as to sell the mission, is an extremely unconscious and self-serving act.
These continuing streams of misinformation come from an organization that has gotten to be the military empire that it is at the expense of the environment! NASA's environmental pollution history, as well as other countrie that have followed suit, shows a complete disregard for preserving and caring for the fragile balance of life on THIS planet first.
Take the military out of the space program, and it would look a lot different!
Maybe then we are shown how to traverse out into the spendors of the Universe, into deep space with water. Yes, that is the one thing which must be transported with, in the form of liquid hydrogen, and liquid oxygen.
We learn in all of our daily activities to care for the Mother, then we of Earth will think twice before we launch these incredibly pollutive machines, so much farther out spewing its toxic stream, piercing through LAYERS of our atmospheric envelope to accomplish their militaristic ends.
Just imagine what $2.5 billion (which is 2,500 MILLION dollars) would do to start cleaning up the environment!
What would you do if given one million dollars to make the world a better place to live in?
Now, multiply that by 2,500 people, who could be given one million dollars each to feed and clothe the hungry, house the homeless, clean up the pollution, and work toward restoring the Earth to its former beauty.
Imagine $2.5 billion put towards cleaning up the environmental disaster at Cape Canaveral from the illustrious 'Space Shuttle' program!
While we're at it, let's include some funding to clean up the PERCHLORATE disaster from rocket fuel testing, that poisoned over 300 wells in CA.
And now NASA is once again rolling the dice.
Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is author of "The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program's Nuclear Threat To Our Planet." writings back up what I've just posted. This rocketry space program stuff has MESMERIZED most people into believing that it is humanity's DESTINY to go into outer space.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
We can learn how to exercise our ability to DISCERN whether an endeavor is a good one or not.
As the 'patternman' JESUS once said, "You cannot get good fruit from a poison tree", and also that "You shall know them by their fruits". 'Peacetime rocketry'? Not possible, for it was born out of a warmongering era, and STILL wages war on the environment every single time there is a launch into space. To me, that is a BIG red flag that continually gets brushed aside, as humanity falls under the SPELL that NASA is casting forth.
Here is Prof. Karl Grossman's article on this eye-opening background information:
Here are some other pertinent articles to consider. I base all of my gathered material upon facts and science.
The dangers of a plutonium 238 disbursement rocket launch accident:
-also this article: http://www.nationofchange.org/nuclear-power-space-pushed-1343834133 which says:
"Dr. Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear physicist and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, explains that Plutonium-238 is about 270 times more radioactive than Plutonium-239 per unit of weight. Thus in radioactivity, the 10.6 pounds of Plutonium-238 being used on Curiosity is the equivalent of 2,862 pounds of Plutonium-239. The atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki used 15 pounds of Plutonium-239. "
-which then links to an ENTIRE website dedicated to this crucial information: http://www.space4peace.org/
Here is the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD http://www.c-spanvideo.org/appearance/596823795 of launching Cassini Space Probe, carrying 72 POUNDS of Plutonium 238 to the outer planets, with a dangerous 'gravity slingshot' orbit around Earth happening as well.
As far as what comes out the 'tail pipe' of a solid rocket fueled spacecraft, have you heard of a scientist named Helen Caldicott? Here's what she has to say about it: http://ringnebula.com/project-censored/1976-1992/1990/1990-story4.htm
I've read in chat room forums, etc. that people think it is mostly steam as the main rocket exhaust ingredient. Unfortunately, as with the environmentally disastrous Space Shuttle, the liquid H2 and liquid O2 were ONLY on the Shuttle itself, not in the solid rocket boosters that lifted it to orbit.
Why is that? There is much more 'BANG for the buck' using solid rocket fuel.
Take a moment to imagine a full beverage can being the solid rocket-fueled spacecraft. Then the PULL-TAB would represent the Space Shuttle payload.
Then there is Rockedyne's PERCHLORATE issue, from rocket fuel testing, that poisoned California's groundwater,
and http://www.freedrinkingwater.com/water-pollution-perchlorate.htm which shut down 300+ wells in CA, and CONTINUES to poison the launch area of Cape Canaveral with every launch. http://www.organicconsumers.org/perchlorate.htm
And another eye-opening article: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-07-31-nasa-environmental-cleanup_n.htm
One more informational tidbit about Rocketdyne irresponsible practice. Did you know that they built the 10.5 lb. plutonium 238 nuclear reactor for the Curiosity Rover? http://www.enviroreporter.com/?s=rocketdyne&x=0&y=0
The fact of the matter is, that if WE THE PEOPLE decided once and for all, not to pursue this folly of BLASTING OFF from the Earth, then the reason to keep having all of this continuing pollution occur, and all of the HUMAN SUFFERING that it causes, also goes away!
For, an unlovely state will die for want of attention. And, these states might best be rubbed out by imagining "'beauty for ashes and joy for mourning. It's done by daily practicing the art of "Loving your neighbor as you would want to be loved".
Then the rest is pretty much commentary for a full and happy life.
Through the continuing MISINFORMATION of the media, the majority of us Baby Boomers have been brainwashed to believe that,
and launch the Mars Rover!" all go together hand-in-hand.
In the process, the planet is being trashed by more and more launches, as the industry WORLDWIDE increases, to launch even privatized space vehicles,
based upon the tried and tested technology of the environmentally-disastrous Space Shuttle era. At this point, I question the need to go into outer space at all, to accomplish the very thing that we're collectively seeking to do in the first place.
This veil of hypocrisy of the space program being for the 'betterment of all Mankind' must be lifted, to reveal what is REALLY going on with the trashing of the environment at large.
First Factual Error
was in the disregard for all of life and the environment, by launching 10 POUNDS OF PLUTONIUM
and risking an accident in the process.
So not only did NASA risk life and limb with launching 10 lbs. of Plutonium, what came out of the TAIL PIPE of the ATLAS ROCKET BOOSTER that lifted this spacecraft into
The space program has proved itself in many ways, but exploring pristine space has a large environmental cost here on Earth. NASA estimates that complete cleanup of the remnants of space shots going all the way back to the Apollo Program will take decades and the cost will run close to one Billion dollars.
Learn more about the Mars rocket launch environmental disaster here:
What have we really benefitted by all of the trips already taken to the Red Planet? How does doing this help us in our daily lives?
After all the environmental damage to our atmospheric envelope from the solid rocket fuel pollution, http://www.organicconsumers.org/perchlorate.htm, and the risk of 10 lbs. of Plutonium dispersement from an accident, http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/30/nukes-on-mars/, now the 'Curiosity' rover has now landed.
The Tao Te Ching explains it this way,
"Plan difficult tasks through the simplest tasks
Achieve large tasks through the smallest tasks
The difficult tasks of the world must be handled through the simple tasks
The large tasks of the world must be handled through the small tasks"
In other words, that which has become simple has matured.
Though, as simple-minded as the ex-prez appears to be, there's a huge complexity in having to remember all the details about how the past supposedly happened. There can be no inner peace while one is operating under the guise of 'might makes right'.
This is the same tactic used by NASA to justify launching their nuclear-powered, solid-fuel rockets.. Backed by the U.S. government and its military, to disregard any environmental issues, and to basically do whatever they damn-well please.
Another Factual Error
is that people are continuously fed, through the media, the B.S. that we need to go into outer space, or to Mars, or back to the moon.
This propaganda was all started in the U.S.
captured Nazi rocket scientist, and alleged war criminal, Wernher Von Braun,
Through Disney media movies,they BRAINWASHED a good majority of the Baby Boomer generation into this totally INSANE way to treat the environment, & frivolously waste BILLIONS of dollars on unnecessary outer-space satellite projects.
And one thing about every single satellite in orbit is that they ALL must
eturn in a decaying orbit, to burn up in the atmosphere, releasing TONS of TOXIC & RADIOACTIVE CHEMICALS in re-entry into our fragile atmospheric envelope.Instead of billions of dollars wasted on gathering some MOON and MARS ROCKS, couldn't it be better
channeled by using this voluminous scientific knowledge of technology information overload that has already been acquired...
on the betterment of Mankind here on Earth? Learn more about this here:
One more Factual Error is the misinformationthat we need satellites at 250 - 350 miles altitude, as well as at a 22,500 miles geosynchronous orbit. MILITARY advantages are the main reason.
Because, almost EVERYTHING that we're doing with orbital space satellites can be done with Stratospheric Airships, and at a mere 25 miles altitude!
As far as orbital satellites go, this ridiculous and environmentally unsound BLASTING OFF from the earth is no longer necessary. For we can now FLOAT to the edge of space instead, and accomplish just about everything that we were doing at 10 times the altitude. Learn more about this here:
Just imagine, one day the WORLD may get so fed up with all of this rocketry pollution, that this could actually become true...