"David Patrick" <david.patrickNO+SPAM@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:9sdbnvsbuqm1c9drmmdka8d9m1o5h7f9re@4ax.com...

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:49:21 GMT, Sir Arthur C. B. E. Wholeflaffers
A.S.A. <nospam@newsranger.com> wrote:

In article <bl38t6$451$1@pencil.math.missouri.edu>, Lars Bomm says...

Launched in 1989, Project Galileo crashed the most
radioactive isotope of plutonium into Jupiter's
atmosphere last Sunday. Lt-Gen. Abrahamson, head
of SDI Org., at Albuquerque 1988 symposium:
"Failure to develop nuclear power in space could
cripple efforts to deploy anti-missile sensors
& weapons in orbit." "It is reasonable to believe
that the real reason NASA launches plutonium into
space on these so-called 'civilian' missions is
as a COVER for their military launches of plutonium.
Without the civilian infrastructure for using
plutonium in space, military launches would require
a whole lot of additional infrastructure, money,
security, & LIES." -R. Hoffman, computer programmer,
9-20-03.
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/kg8801tn.htm
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/thewrong.htm

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/cass/2003/good_riddance_galileo.ht

m

The European Space Agency uses solar power instead
of plutonium on these probes, such as their Rosetta.

ESA has not launched a probe to Jupiter. Has this person compared the
power usage of Galileo and Rosetta? I doubt it. He seems to be making
the assumption that both draw roughly equivalent levels of power.

In reality, Rosetta will not be going out as far as Jupiter when its
mission begins, and most of it's main mission will happen as the comet
flies in system and around the sun. It is a smaller probe and it needs
less power. Also lets not forget that Rosetta was scheduled to launch
in 2003. Galileo was orignally planned to launch in 1986. Is it not
slightly possible that Rosetta is a lot more advanced than Galileo
because it was built nearly two decades later?

I don't see that the US military would need civilian launches of
relatively small amounts of Plutonium to hide what would have to be
significantly larger launches of their own.

So, Flaffer, you reposted this claim so do you believe the military is
hiding nuclear weapons in space?


David Patrick

Come on David, give the poor old kook a break. Somebody somewhere had to
incorporate the end of the Galileo mission into some dumb-ass conspiracy
theory, so naturally Art had to repost it here. It's what he does, and it's
his only reason for living. Deny him this one small pleasure and his life
would be over. He'd end his days as a sad, lonely husk of a man, bereft of
human contact, with only his fading fantasies of alien invasion to sustain
him. He'd probably be put away in a mental institution, where his mutterings
about underground alien bases and rounding up debunkers, and his claims
about being a UFO researcher would be drowned out by the equally pitiful
ramblings of the other inmates. I expect he'd end up having his brain fried
with drugs and ECT, just like Jack Nicholson in 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's
Nest', and surely none of us want to see that happen...do we...? Hmmm.

--
Cliff Smith

"And we'll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere.
And to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together,
guys."