This sort of posting shouldn't happen.  Whether we agree or disagree with
Mr. Krell's opinions on this matter, he shouldn't promote his unrelated
interests on Bee-L, no matter what they are nor how important he
considers them.
 
It's no different from advertising.
 
On Tue, 9 Sep 1997 22:26:00 +0002 "Krell, Rainer (REUS)"
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
>Dear concerned all,
>
>The following is for your information and if you consider it
>worthwhile it
>is also for your participation, further distribution or at least your
>own
>awareness.   Whether all the details are correct I cannot guarantee,
>but the
>fact alone of sending another spacecraft with a large load of
>Plutonium into
>space is enough reason for concern - not out of anti-technology
>sentiment
>(as is often argued by the pro-nuclear proliferation side), but out of
>simple safety concerns, particularly when there are other (just as
>high-tech) solutions available.
>
>Regards
>
>Rainer Krell
> ----------
>
>The mission is called Cassini and intends to explore the rings around
>Saturn
>a.o..
>
>In Italian, a casino is a whore house and "fare casini" means making a
>big
>mess.  Accidental?
>
>The speed of the space craft at its most critical point (leaving earth
>or
>reentering and burning up in its atmosphere) near earth is supposed to
>be
>711.666 Miles per minute.  If you believe in numerical symbology this
>means
>"playing dice (gambling - casino) with the devil".  Accidental?
>
>Accidental, accident or not, puns aside.
>
>No big deal if this would be just an ordinary space mission; but the
>payload
>is a Saturn explorer with 72 lbs of plutonium on board.  The published
>risk
>analysis seems highly understated if considering case histories and
>keeps
>changing; and the worst case scenario is that enough Plutonium is
>distributed in the earth atmosphere to cause lung cancer in every
>human
>being; no speculation on what it might do to the rest of nature.
>
>The deal can supposedly be avoided by a few  years' delay for
>redesigning
>the spacecraft with solar panels.  No risk versus high risk?
>
>Are we that much in a rush or willing to gamble with a saved billion
>against
>trillions of dollars of damages to risk global health (i.e. possibly
>more
>Plutonium released than during all nuclear testing combined) for just
>a
>little bit more of scientific knowledge?  OR?
>
>For more information read the attachment >Cassini.doc< or check
>http://www.lovearth.org/
>
>What can we do?  For suggestions see the attachment >todonext.doc<
>
>"We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is
>to
>survive."    Albert Einstein
>
>Your help and awareness will make a difference
>
>Rainer
>