Re: DID YOU BUY IT ??

On Feb 16, 12:43*pm, "greysky" <grey...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "TomThumb" <tsor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d6dbcf8e-3a1d-449c-8743-e44b6279d33a@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > NASA wants to shoot down a satellite. *It's is loaded with hazardous
> > unspent fuel. *Fuel that is used to guide the satellite.
>
> > Anybody notice the contradiction here?
>
> > Sixty million dollars says you don't !
>
greysky wrote:
> The truth of the situation is that the satellite has been infected with an
> alien organism which, if it makes it to the earth's surface, will turn all
> of us into brain eating zombies. But the government will never tell you the
> truth because of the panic and mayhem it will cause. But, now you kow...

oldcoot wrote:
Depends on your priorities.. whether you wish to disperse the stuff
harmlessly in space, or risk having a tank of the stuff survive
reentry.

TomThumb responds: Since rocket scientists have yet to figure it out,
I'm going to cross post this puzzle to a support group. Let's see if
they can help.

On Feb 16, 3:54*pm, TomThumb <tsor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TomThumb responds: *Since rocket scientists have yet to figure it out,
> I'm going to cross post this puzzle to a support group. *Let's see if
> they can help.- Hide quoted text -

I hadn't heard that they were going to "shoot it down". Just how is
NASA going to "shoot down" a spy satellite? And what gives them the
right?

>I hadn't heard that they were going to "shoot it down". Just how is
>NASA going to "shoot down" a spy satellite? And what gives them the
>right?

I suspect the military is itching to try out one of their anti-ICBM toys.

An ICBM re-entry would be similar to a falling satellite.

They may also have weapons intended to destroy satellites up in
geosynchronous orbit.

Again, it is a perfect opportunity to test things without launching a
target.

15 or 20 years ago the BBC did a documentary claiming that the US was
developing a program for using a high powered laser to destroy satellites or
missiles. The documentary said the program had a name like "Sipapu." It
was supposed to be an Indian word, as in Native American.

"Quiet Neighbor" <private@spamless.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:nwRtj.3517$Ru4.1381@newssvr19.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
>>I hadn't heard that they were going to "shoot it down". Just how is
>>NASA going to "shoot down" a spy satellite? And what gives them the
>>right?
>
> I suspect the military is itching to try out one of their anti-ICBM toys.
>
> An ICBM re-entry would be similar to a falling satellite.
>
> They may also have weapons intended to destroy satellites up in
> geosynchronous orbit.
>
> Again, it is a perfect opportunity to test things without launching a
> target.
>
> 15 or 20 years ago the BBC did a documentary claiming that the US was
> developing a program for using a high powered laser to destroy satellites
> or missiles. The documentary said the program had a name like "Sipapu."
> It was supposed to be an Indian word, as in Native American.
>

Yes the Sipapu hole. I thnik it´s hopi and is to be believed by the hopi
that it is a spiritual hole in the earth where the souls travel to and from
after death and before reborn again.

On Feb 17, 12:41*am, "Quiet Neighbor" <priv...@spamless.net> wrote:
> >I hadn't heard that they were going to "shoot it down". Just how is
> >NASA going to "shoot down" a spy satellite? And what gives them the
> >right?
>
> I suspect the military is itching to try out one of their anti-ICBM toys.
>
> An ICBM re-entry would be similar to a falling satellite.
>
> They may also have weapons intended to destroy satellites up in
> geosynchronous orbit.
>
> Again, it is a perfect opportunity to test things without launching a
> target.
>
> 15 or 20 years ago the BBC did a documentary claiming that the US was
> developing a program for using a high powered laser to destroy satellites or
> missiles. *The documentary said the program had a name like "Sipapu." *It
> was supposed to be an Indian word, as in Native American.


I thought the Reagan administration called it "star wars". Claimed it
was one reason for the downfall of the USSR. Apparently, it was just
another bluff.

On Feb 17, 12:41*am, "Quiet Neighbor" <priv...@spamless.net> wrote:
> >I hadn't heard that they were going to "shoot it down". Just how is
> >NASA going to "shoot down" a spy satellite? And what gives them the
> >right?
>
> I suspect the military is itching to try out one of their anti-ICBM toys.
>
> An ICBM re-entry would be similar to a falling satellite.
>
> They may also have weapons intended to destroy satellites up in
> geosynchronous orbit.
>

Looks like a good test of the Sea-Based X-Band Radar to me also and an
insurance of destruction of anything on the satellite they fear may
survive the earth entry besides the fuel!:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/

excerpt:

n a matter of weeks, three Navy warships -- the USS Lake Erie, USS
Decatur and USS Russell -- were outfitted with modified Aegis anti-
missile systems, the ships' crews were trained for an unprecedented
mission, and three SM-3 missiles were pulled off an assembly line and
given a new guidance system.

Giant golf ball deployed. CNN says that "a floating X-band radar has
to be modified to track the satellite's trajectory." That would be
the massive -- and massively controversial -- Sea-Based X-Band Radar.
The $815 million, 28-story, orb-like contraption has the ability, in
theory, to tell which way a baseball is spinning -- from 3,000 miles
away. But it's also proven to susceptible to the elements and high
seas. The thing has been in and out of the repair shop for years.
Big bucks. "The attempt by the U.S. Navy to use an anti-missile
missile to shoot down a potentially hazardous satellite will cost
between $40 million and $60 million, Pentagon officials told CNN.
"The
missile alone costs almost $10 million."

Your chances of being hit by the falling satellite: one in a
trillion. "Compared with, for example, a one in 1.4 million chance
of
being hit by lightning in the United States," the Discovery Channel
notes. ...