Postponing The Launch Of Cassini
For The Safety Of A Solar Fuel Cell Redesign
End The Militarization And Nuclearization Of Space


March 20, 1999                                                   T+ 520 Days

Dear Citizens of Earth

At 4:43 AM EDT, on Wednesday, October 15, 1997, from launch complex # 40 at The Cape Canaveral Air Station, in Florida, a spacecraft called Cassini is scheduled to liftoff. On board Cassini will be 72.3 pounds of the deadliest substance known, Plutonium (Pu). This is by far the most Pu ever attempted to be launched in a space mission. Inhaling less then 27 millionths of a gram of Pu will give you lung cancer and also causes long term genetic damage. (The Pu's %'s and 1/2 life's are Pu 238 @ 70.8% 1/2 life 87.74 years, Pu 239 @ 12.86% 1/2 life 24,110 years, Pu 240 @ 1.79% 1/2 life 6537 years, Pu 241 @ .17% 1/2 life 14.4 years, Pu 242 @ .11% 1/2 life 376,000 years, Pu 236 @ .000001%, Oxygen @ 11.85% Antinides and Impurities @ 2.41% and of course the Missing @ .00999%.)


Cassini is to use the 72.3 lbs. of Pu not as a fuel to propel it, but to power (by the heat given off during radioactive decay) 3 Lockheed-Martin (LM) built, radioisotope thermal generators (RTG's) that will create the modest 745 watts of electricity, to run all of the onboard instruments and experiments. A small part (.77 lb.) of the Pu will also be used in 130 Radioisotope Heater Units (RHU's). The RHU's provide heat for controlling the thermal environment of the spacecraft and several of its instruments. This modest generation of 745 watts of electricity, can now be done in deep space conditions, by using a combination of advanced photovoltaics (solar power) and long lived fuel cells. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been using both solar and fuel cell technologies since the days of the Gemini missions back in the mid 1960's. NASA, however has denied that the Cassini mission can use the solar fuel cell process, stating that Saturn's solar insolation is only about 1% (it's 1.087%) compared to the Earth's. Well thanks to the European Space Agency (ESA) announcing back on 4/29/94, "a technology milestone, the development of new, low-intensity, low-temperature (LILT) solar cells that are capable of 25% efficiency, the highest efficiency ever reached, and could be used in deep space missions. If given the contract to do the work, within 5 years ESA could have solar cells ready to power a space mission to Saturn," said Dr. Carla Signorini, a ESA physicist in Noorwijk, Holland.


Some background info to show where NASA is coming from: For the 1989 Galileo mission to Jupiter, a NASA witness swore in court that it could only be completed by getting its electricity from the 49.25 lbs. of Pu in its RTG's. Yet, two weeks after the launch, in response to a Freedom Of Information Act requested by Professor Karl Grossman of the State University of N.Y. at Old Westbury and the narrator of the award winning film Nukes In Space (Call 800 ECO TV46 and buy this video - then get your local cable access channel to show it - and/or show it to a group of friends - do this right now) (A request that was filed two years earlier with NASA and the Department of Energy (DoE) ) The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) acknowledged that solar energy could substitute for nuclear power. "Based on the current study, it appears that the Galileo Jupiter orbiting mission could be performed with a concentrated photovoltaic solar array power source without changing the mission sequence or impacting science objectives" so stated one of the reports. A year later when the Ulysses mission was launched, NASA actually admitted in its pre-launch Final Impact Statement "that solar could substitute for nuclear power but would require a redesign." When are we going to find out from NASA that the Cassini mission could have had a solar fuel cell redesign, just before the launch, or just after?

A JPL study showed it would take 5,380 sq. ft. of solar power, or 2, 30' x 105' solar arrays (but that = 6,300 sq. ft. ?) (it should be 2, 30' x 90' = 5,400 sq. ft.) to produce the 745 watts of electricity in deep space. This, they said would make Cassini too massive for launching. (But not with a booster rocket with a little more thrust) I have cautiously calculated the solar #'s out myself, and found it's more like 3,900 sq. ft. or 2, 30' x 65' solar arrays to produce the 745 watts. ESA has evaluated (strong armed) this JPL study and concluded that "our LILT solar cells aren't a viable power source alternative for the presently defined Cassini mission of NASA." The key words here are, "Presently Defined", NASA and the ESA are playing Orwellian word games, knowing all to well that the Cassini mission can be redesigned to use solar fuel cells, but that's not what is "Presently Defined" by NASA. Cutting edge technology in clean renewable solar hydrogen fuel cell energy is what is needed to be funded, not nuclear. If funded, Cassini could be redesigned to use solar fuel cell technology and launched within 3 years. Fund Clean Renewable Energies.

NASA, JPL, the DoE's national nuclear laboratories, and the corporations that have been involved in the producing of nuclear hardware for the space missions insist on sticking with nuclear on Cassini. NASA has been in bed with the DoE and its laboratories, the Department of Defense (DoD), the National Security Agency (NSA), The Pentagon, and all the military industrial complex corporations from the start. Then, near the end of the Apollo days, NASA sold their souls to the military for new contracts. Just take a look at the Space Shuttle missions, many of them are top secret military missions.


Cassini is a 3.4 billion dollar, 11 year, unmanned mission to explore Saturn and one of its satellites, Titan. Cassini plans call for an arrival at Saturn on July 1, 2004. The Cassini mission consists of delivering a probe (called Huygens, provided by ESA) to Titan. It is then expected to make at least 30 loose elliptical orbits of the planet, each optimized for a different set of detailed observations of the planet and its rings and satellites. The principal objectives are to: 1) determine the three-dimensional structure and dynamical behavior of the rings; 2) determine the composition of the satellite surfaces and the geological history of each object; 3) determine the nature and origin of the dark material on Iapetus' leading hemisphere; 4) measure the three-dimensional structure and dynamical behavior of the magnetosphere; 5) study the dynamical behavior of Saturn's atmosphere at cloud level; 6) study the time variability of Titan's clouds and hazes; and, 7) characterize Titan's surface on a regional scale.


Cassini's launch vehicle (booster rocket), the Titan 4 B (SRMU)/Centaur, built by LM, does not have the thrust to propel it at 10 Kilometers Per Second (KPS), which is the speed that is needed to send it directly out to Saturn. So in order to achieve the 10 KPS to reach Saturn, which is on average 794 million miles from Earth, Cassini will be utilizing 4 gravity assist swingby maneuvers. This GAS maneuver is accomplished by flying very close to a large mass such as a planet and using that planets gravitational field to transfer some of its energy to the spacecraft, which then enables the spacecraft to increase its velocity tremendously.

So, after a hopefully successful launch, Cassini will first head to Venus. The first 2 swingbys will be around Venus, with the first occurring on 4/21/98. Then there is a huge swing taking it all the way out between the Earth and Mars, where a maneuver on 12/2/98 will then turn it back to Venus. On 6/20/99 the 2nd Venus swingby will occur. Cassini then slingshots back out toward Saturn. The 3rd swingby will be of the Earth on 8/16/99, at an altitude of only 310 miles (as of 4/11/97 the new altitude is now 496.8 miles, this is a little safer - is NASA beginning to listen? - it leaves 35.56 seconds which is 15.75 seconds more then 310 mile high trajectory window before entering our atmosphere), and traveling at 42,699.96 MPH. This leaves as little as 19.81 seconds for a trajectory window before a fiery inadvertent reentry into our atmosphere. The 4th swingby will be of Jupiter on December 30, 2000.


Dr. Michio Kaku, Professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York and the author of the wonderful books Beyond Einstein and Hyperspace notes "The American people don't realize that on the very next mission after the 1/28/86 Challenger accident, the Ulysses spacecraft, was supposed to be sent into outer space with 25 lbs. of Plutonium. Now imagine that very same Challenger carrying the Ulysses spacecraft exploding on our television screens." Every living creature that was to be unluckily downwind breathing in the lethal Pu fallout would now be developing cancer. Booster rockets fail. Before the Challenger accident, NASA's #'s on a Space Shuttle's booster rockets' failure rate was 1 in 100,000. After the accident, the failure rate was revised to 1 in 76 (1.316%).

As for Cassini, NASA's #'s for the Titan 4 B (SRMU)/Centaur booster rocket that is to be used to lift Cassini to reach escape velocity: It has been used only once so far, on 2/23/97 a successful launch was completed. Its predecessor the Titan 4/Centaur had been used 19 times. On 8/2/93, at Vandenberg A.F.B. in California, a 1.1 billion dollar, secret NSA mission with 3 spy satellites, blew up during its liftoff. This equals a 1 in 20 failure rate, a 5% chance for a possible Cassini disaster, just on the liftoff. Incidentally, each of the Titan's earlier models, the Titan, Titan 2, Titan 3 - C,D,E, and Titan 34 D, have all had analogous failure rates. Chemical booster rockets by nature are all quite volatile. In April of 1986 at the Vandenberg A.F.B a launch blew up using a Titan 34 D, destroying the launch pad completely. Just this year, on January 17th, a Delta rocket blew up 13 seconds into its liftoff at Cape Canaveral. spewing its highly noxious chemical fuel South along the coast for up to 73 miles. These people where told to stay indoors with the windows closed. 


If the Cassini mission fails during its liftoff and releases its Pu, the potential clean up costs associated with land contamination run upwards of 1 million dollars per acre. The 6 county region surrounding the Cape Canaveral Air station consists of Volusia, Seminole, Lake, Orange, Osceola and Brevard Countries. This region contains 4.1 million acres, if this region were contaminated it would cost upwards of 4.1 trillion dollars to try to "decontaminate". NASA would have to relocate the 2.3 million affected people permanently, as well as ban all future agricultural land uses. This region could be rendered useless for about 12,000 generations, or 240,000 years because of the Pu 239's long 1/2 life of 24,110 years. Cassini is carring 9.3 pounds of Pu 239.

Dr. Horst Poehler, a scientist, who for over two decades worked with NASA contractors told me "at the very least NASA should move the Cassini launch to a remote location such as the Russian site at Kazakhstan or perhaps the ESA site at The Guiana Space Center at Kourou. There are over 2 million people within the 6 counties surrounding the Cape Canaveral launch site and the prevailing winds there in October blow right back over all of these people. NASA is immoral, they are mad scientists willing to poison the people of Florida on the launch and the whole world during the Earth flyby."


Will NASA wait till the wind blows out toward the Atlantic Ocean, away from land and the 2.3 million people in the 6 county region surrounding the Cape before trying to launch Cassini? The Cassini mission has a 41 day launch window from October 6th through November 15th, with each day the launch window being 2 hours and 20 minutes. NASA says the earliest time for a launching would be the best for mission sequences, but only 19% of the time, or 8 days, the wind blows away from land (NW, WNW, W, WSW, SW). Out of these 8 days, approximately half, or 4 days, which is less then 10% of the time, the winds will be blowing with the best direction and speed in case of a failure during liftoff with the Pu possibly being released.

If Cassini does liftoff, will NASA wait for this best 8 to 10% of the time, with the winds blowing away from all these humans, before trying to launch? The answer to that lies in the recent history of NASA nuclear missions and the wind direction and speed at liftoff. For the Galileo mission with 49.25 pounds of Pu on board, the winds were from the South at 8 knots. This would have blown a possible Pu release right up the coast to Daytona Beach and the Jacksonville area. For the Ulysses mission with 25 pounds of Pu on board, the winds were from the East at 14 knots. This is about as bad as it gets, a release would go right back over everyone on land. If there were a high enough release, maybe even Mickey Mouse himself would be reached 50 miles due West in Orlando. Will NASA wait for the best wind direction and speed for the liftoff of the Cassini mission? No they won't... This is utter arrogance...


Last November 16, the Russian Mars 96 spaceprobe with .44 lb. of Pu 238 malfunctioned, sending it crashing back to Earth. According to the U.S. Space Command: "The area where any debris surviving the heat of reentry would have fallen was a 200 mile long portion of the Pacific Ocean, Chile and Bolivia." This is not an isolated incident. Six of the 39 (15.38%) space missions with nuclear material on board that the former Soviet Union has launched, have failed. Including the 1/24/78 Cosmos 954 carrying 68 lbs. Uranium 235 (U 235) which burned apart as it fell back to Earth. It scattered 25% of its radiation over a 124,000 square kilometer area of northwestern Canada, and the remaining 75% of the lethal radiation vaporized in our atmosphere.

NASA concedes, 3 of the 24 (12.5%) U.S. missions involving spacecraft with nuclear material have met with accidents, including the TRANSIT 5BN-3. It fell back to Earth on 4/21/64, disintegrating as it came down. Its RTG with 2.1 lbs. of Pu vaporized and dispersed worldwide. Dr. John Gofman, professor emeritus of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley, an M.D. and Ph.D. and a co-discoverer of isotopes of Plutonium and Uranium as a member of the Manhattan Project, has long attributed the increased rate of lung cancer to the TRANSIT 5BN-3 accident. So between the 2 countries folly with nuclear space missions, it's 9 accidents in 63 tries, 1 in 7, a 14.286% failure rate.


Now back to Cassini's 310 mile high, 42,699.96 MPH, Earth flyby with as little as 19.81 seconds for a trajectory window (as of 4/11/97 it is a 496.8 mile high and 35.56 seconds). Dr. Michio Kaku explains the catastrophic consequences of such a flyby accident: "If there is a small misfire of Cassini's rocket system, it will mean that Cassini will penetrate into the Earth's atmosphere. This thing coming into the Earth's atmosphere, will vaporize, releasing the payload and then particles of plutonium dioxide will begin to rain down on populated areas, if that is where the system is going to be hitting. Pulverized plutonium dust will rain down on people's hair, people's clothing, get into people's bodies. And because it is not water soluble, there is a very good chance that it could be inhaled and stay in the body causing cancer over a number of decades."

Dr. Arjun Makhijani a nuclear engineer from The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research has stated to me "the total radiation fallout from all the open air nuclear explosions from July 16,1945 till the present is 440,000 curies. Now, if Cassini had an inadvertent reentry with the 3 RTG's and the 130 RHU's vaporized in our atmosphere, approximately 406,000 curies of radiation would be released." There have been more then 900 open air nuclear explosions, a single accident of Cassini could possibly emit more radiation then all of these 900 put together. The International Committee on Radiological Protection has set the maximum permissible level of Pu in the human body at .00000004 curies. Cassini is carring 406,000 curies. This is not good.

NASA's Final Environmental Impact Statement On Cassini States:

"In an inadvertent reentry during the gravity assist flyby of Earth on 8/16/99, with the 72.3 lbs. of Pu vaporized throughout our atmosphere, approximately 5 billion of the 7 to 8 billion humans on Earth could receive 99% or more of the radiation exposure." (On 8/16/99, there will be 6.07 billion humans inhabiting the Earth, not the 7 to 8 billion that NASA states) By the way, the Cassini spacecraft has no heat shield for protection against a possible inadvertent reentry into our atmosphere.

Dr. Ernest Sternglass, professor emeritus of radiological physics at the University of Pittsburgh, has warned that if Cassini disintegrated it would present a great danger and "that the death toll from the plutonium exposure of a Cassini inadvertent reentry may be as high as 30 to 40 million people." The International Committee on Radiological Protection states "that inhalation of 1/10,000 of a gram of Pu causes lung cancer." There are 453.59 grams to a lb. so, 10,000 x 453.59 = 4,535,900 x 72.3 lbs. = 327,945,570 people. Dr. Arjun Mahhijani says inhalation of less then 27 millionths of a gram of Plutonium, (this = 1,215,443,333 people) will give you lung cancer and also causes long term genetic damage. Dr. Helen Caldicott, founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, writes in her book Nuclear Madness: "Plutonium is so toxic that less than one-millionth of a gram, an invisible particle, is a carcinogenic dose. One pound, if uniformly distributed, could hypothetically induce lung cancer in every person on Earth." So, an inadvertent reentry of Cassini would cause lung cancer in up to 30 to 40 million people, up to 328 million people, or up to 1,215,433,333 people, or hypothetically everyone on Earth. This potential down side does seems quite the price to pay to explore Saturn...


NASA states the 72.3 lbs. of Pu in the 3 RTG's and 130 RHU's is in a heat resistant, ceramic form, which "reduces its chance of vaporizing" in fire or inadvertent reentry. In each of the 3 RTG's the Pu is also divided among 18 small independent units, each with its own .022" thin iridium heat shield and a graphite carbon impact shell. The Iridium casing and graphite carbon blocks that protect the Pu, only "reduces its chance of vaporizing" in a fire or in the extreme temperatures of the 3000 plus degrees Fahrenheit conditions during an inadvertent reentry. General Electric, the original manufacture of the RTG's, Stated in its Final Safety Analysis Report On The RTG's For The Galileo Mission: We have conducted tests which "resulted in the complete destruction of the RTG's." NASA has chosen to ignore these results in their safety evaluation, stating "they could not be replicated under real conditions." It makes one wonder, why does NASA bother with final safety analysis reports, only to ignore them?


NASA's original estimate for a release of Pu on the Cassini mission were 1 in 1500, then they were lowered to 1 in 900. The statistical odds for a Titan 4 B (SRMU)/Centaur rocket failure on the Cassini liftoff is 1 in 20. NASA's estimates are that about 1 in 25 (probably another overly optimistic NASA #) liftoff failures will result in a breaching of the RTG's releasing the lethal Pu. By NASA's own #'s this = a 1 in 500 gamble that Pu will be a released, just on liftoff. Let me repeat this, using NASA's own #'s there is a 1 in 500 gamble for Pu to be released, causing a disaster, just on the liftoff. (Hot off the presses... NASA's new lowered odds, as of 4/11/97, for a Pu release on the Cassini mission are now 1 in 345, just 1 horrendous catastrophe in 345) So, NASA's first odds were 1 in 1500, then 1 in 900, then 1 in 500 and now it is 1 in 345. What do you think they will be tomorrow?

I happen to personally think it is more like 1 in 158 gamble for a Pu release on the Cassini mission. The first 11 minutes and 29 seconds (from liftoff at T- 0 till Cassini leaves the orbit of the Earth at T+ 689 seconds) is the most likely for a failure. I believe the most dangerous time being from T+ 206 seconds till T+ 689. At T+ 206 Cassini will already be at an altitude of 68.56 miles, if somethings happens from here on up till T+ 689, Cassini will inadverently reenter our atmosphere and release some, most or all its 72.3 lbs. of Pu. Best case scenario: Everything works, no Pu release. Worst case scenario: From tens of thousands to tens of millions of premature deaths over just the next 50 years. And of course all the long term genetic damage to ourselves and all the others in the web of life that makes Earth.

As for NASA's #'s for an inadvertent reentry during the 8/16/99 GAS of Earth, it = 7.6 in 10,000,000 or 1 in 1,315,789.4. Remember that the odds before the Challenger's accident were 1 in 100,000, then after the Challenger's accident, they were 1 in 76. If the same proportional ratio is used 100,000/76 = 1315.7894 for a more realistic inadvertent reentry #, 1,315,789.4/1315.7894, it = exactly a 1 in 1000 gamble. (this same exact "scientific" NASA # is quite an unbelievable coincidence? a smoking gun) This is pure absolute insanity, for no reason, none at all. Unless You Like, Gambling With The Devil...


The late Nobel prize winning physicist Dr. Richard P. Feynman, a member of the Presidential Commission that investigated the Challenger disaster, criticized NASA sharply in his 13 page report, "Personal Observations on the Reliability of the Shuttle." In the June 11, 1986 edition of the New York Times, Dr. Feynman said that NASA managers "exaggerated the reliability of the Shuttle to the point of fantasy." He offered a detailed picture of NASA officials who "fooled themselves" into believing that the Shuttle was safe and that the probability of catastrophe was low.

He was particularly critical of the space agency's method of calculating probabilities of catastrophes. Commenting on NASA's official testimony that the probability of catastrophic failure of a solid-fueled booster rocket was 1 in 100,000. He said, "I saw considerable flaws in their logic. I found that they were making up numbers not based on experience. NASA's engineering judgment was not the judgment of its engineers." He said the most competent engineers in and out of NASA estimated the probability of catastrophe as 1 in a 100. The fact that the Shuttle flew many times without failure was accepted as an argument that it would fly safely again. "Because of this reasoning," he said, "obvious weaknesses were accepted again and again."


The Cassini mission, if it wins its gamble (in late April, a Freedom of Information Act reply disclosed the United States now has a dozen more nuclear missions scheduled over the next 12 years), will help to develop support for the nuclear militarization of space. The U.S. Space Command is already preparing itself for a future of U.S. military control of space, which would depend upon the ability to use nuclear reactors in space as a power source for hypervelocity guns, particle beams and laser weapons on battle platforms. As Lt. General James Abrahamson, former head of the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization stated, "Failure to develop nuclear power in space could cripple efforts to deploy anti-missile sensors and weapons in orbit." This prospect of nuclear powered weapons stations in space is anathema to those who wish to preserve human life and create a peaceful society. Outer space, the military's new ultimate high ground...

"Nuclear energy in outer space" says Dr. Kaku, "is the linchpin of the U.S. space program and the key to the militarization of space. We have nuclear weapons on the land. We have nuclear weapons in the ocean. We have nuclear weapons in the air." And now, Dr. Kaku warns: "What we are headed for is a nuclear propelled rocket with nuclear propelled lasers in outer space. And ultimately what they would like to do is have nuclear powered battle stations in outer space. That's what all this is leading up to." Dr. Kaku says "it is up to environmentalists, activists and concerned citizens, to stop this now before it reaches the point of the militarization of outer space. We have to stop these Cassini's, send a signal to NASA, and a signal to the United States Pentagon that we're not going to tolerate the nuclearization of outer space, and it stops now."

Bruce Gagnon Co-Coordinator of The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space and State Coordinator of the Florida Coalition for Peace and Justice declares: "Our concern is that the U.S. military and major weapons corporations view space as a new market, ultimately to profit from. They are using taxpayers dollars to put a new round of the arms race in space. At the same time the nuclear power industry views space as its new market, a place where they can put plutonium and other radioactive sources, whether it's military missions or civilian inter-planetary missions... What is needed now is for the American public to speak out to this sheer and utter madness."


In 1991 NASA, DoD, DoE and The Pentagon, signed the "Space Nuclear Power Agreement" restricting death or damage benefits from an accident caused by a U.S. space nuclear device to the limits of the Price-Anderson Act. That law, passed in 1957, supposedly on a temporary basis, now caps U.S. payouts at 7.3 billion and assigned a mere 100 million for all damage to other countries and their people. This is called covering your financial ass, they know it's only a matter of time before the gamble again fails on a nuclear space mission.


At the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the number of documented incidents of radioactive contamination across the laboratory rose 22% according to a July 12, 1996 study obtained by The New Mexican in Santa Fe. The report also said the number of reports of contamination's at the laboratory's Plutonium facility jumped by 75% between 1993 and 1995, from 139 to 244. Lab officials say the increase has one primary cause: the Cassini project.


I've been telling myself that the Cassini mission was gambling with the devil starting on 4/7/97. Serendipitously, on 4/11/97, while on the Internet I noticed a discrepancy on the exact Earth flyby speed among 2 JPL documents. Fun Facts says 19.1 Kilometers Per Second (KPS) or 45,040 MPH. Amazing Facts says 19.1 KPS or 42,725 MPH. (This MPH speed error is only one of many errors I have found among NASA and JPL documents) Both used 19.1 KPS so I used that # to figure it out for myself. 19.1 KPS x .621 (Kilometer to Mile Ratio) = 11.8611 Miles Per Second x 60 seconds = And this is Cassini's exact Earth flyby speed, and you are not going to believe this, it is 711.666 Miles Per Minute. x 60 minutes = 42,699.96 MPH. 711 = gambling/craps, 666 = the devil, 711.666, I couldn't believe it... Gambling With The Devil... If there was ever an ominous sign for the Cassini Mission Vs. Earth, this 711.666 Earth flyby speed must be it, Feeling Lucky?


So why the hell are we playing nuclear roulette, and gambling with the devil with 72.3 pounds of Plutonium, when there is no reason to? And why the hell does the entire press have a total blackout on this utmost issue of importance to all of humanity? Could it be the US's propaganda machine makes that of Germany under Joseph Goebbels in 1937 look like a bunch of girl scouts? Wake up American people, start to care, we can stop this...

This letter was written to make you aware of the probability of this horrendous nightmare and its impact on all life on Earth. This letter was written because there are detailed plans to stop the launch, by creating an awareness throughout our country. This letter was written for your help is now needed. Only by working together we will postpone the launch of Cassini for the inherent safety of a solar fuel cell redesign.   LOVEARTH   

         "When the aimless blade of science slashed the pearly gates"

-from Thrasher by Neil Young        

Tinkering With Divine Creation

Playing with deadly radiation

Like a bunch of babbling babies

Tinkering with divine creation

Never caring about all the maybes

Trying to genetically engineer life

While your own species goes extinct

Lying to hide all inequitable strife

When to Earth you are forever linked


892    ME  

November 11, 1996


5683 Midnight Pass Road  Suite 106
Siesta Key FL 34242

84-10  53rd Avenue
Elmhurst NY 11373

Phone Toll Free: 1 877 LOVEARTH  = 1 877 568.3278
Or Outside The United States: 1 941 349.9426

Fax Toll Free: 1 877 WEB OF LIFE   = 1 877 932.6354
Or Outside The United States: 1 941 349.0295



Mark Elsis



Visit the Cassini Flyby page