Originally published by Russell D. Hoffman
STOP CASSINI Newsletter #125, May 12th, 1999
THE ANIMATED SOFTWARE COMPANY
P.O. Box 1936
Carlsbad CA 92018-1936
(800) 551-2726
(760) 720-7261
Fax: (760) 720-7394
Web site: http://www.animatedsoftware.com
Dr. Helen Caldicott was invited by employees at NASA's Ames Research Center,
Moffett Field, CA to speak on Earth Day, April 22, 1999. The speech began
with Dr. Caldicott's more general discussion of the relevant issues --
environmental, political, and personal, and then she began to talk directly
about Cassini. Dr. Caldicott has checked the following transcript and
gave permission for it to be published in the STOP CASSINI Newsletter.
Dr. Helen Caldicott, Earth Day, 1999 (Space Exploration/Cassini portion)
I suppose I should talk a little bit about -- I want to mention Y2K in a
minute, and the nuclear area but I also need to talk about NASA I'm afraid,
because -- you know, I know you explore space and that's good and Carl
Sagan was a very close friend of mine and I've always been fascinated by the
planets myself, but I do object to 72.3 pounds of plutonium 238 being
launched over our heads on the Titan IV and the Delta -- was it a Delta?
Two damned dangerous rockets -- and one of them had an accident just after
they launched Cassini -- I object to that.
And you know, you can do all the calculations, which are all based on
probabilities and statistics -- but you don't really know! It's like in
medicine -- we can, you know, you can come in with leukemia and I can say,
"Well, you've got Hairy Cell Leukemia, which is pretty malignant, um -- your
prognosis might be six months. But I might be wrong, you could die in a
month. I don't know. I'm not God. And all estimates are based on
probabilities -- as we know as scientists -- and we don't really know what's
going to happen. And when it comes back and it swings by we still don't
know what's going to happen ... if any of the vectors are off by a fraction
of a degree we could have an "Apollo 13". Will it burn up? I don't know.
You probably don't either. You can estimate, but you don't know how much
plutonium could be released.
Well, it's not a lot of plutonium when you think about -- Philip Morrison
told me, who was in the Manhattan project, they released about four tons of
plutonium to the atmosphere during weapons testing days, and it's still
falling out, no it's not so much, although 238 is about 80 times more toxic
than 239 because it's got a much shorter half life and it's VERY
carcinogenic. But every male in the northern hemisphere has a small amount
of plutonium in his gonads and his testicles from fallout days. The
incidents of testicular cancer is rising -- for sure.
And what that means to future generations when the sperm are irradiated by
alpha particles -- we don't really know, but it might be like the drosophila
fruit fly. That is not medically indicated. And I come back again to
biology. Alpha particles are HIGHLY mutagenic. Plutonium -- YOU KNOW --
described by Nobel Laureate Dr. Glenn Seaborg who developed it -- as the
most toxic substance known. And 238, more than 239.
WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT.
And I don't care how much you have to explore space! Because know what?
We're killing the Earth right now. We're killing it. And I know it's fun
to explore space, and science is terribly interesting. But you know we MAY
on be the only planet in the universe with life. Well, we found another
solar system maybe it's not -- we don't know. But RIGHT NOW, we have
something that's INORDINATELY PRECIOUS. Which we're destroying. And
shouldn't we be spending the money -- and I'm just being philosophical now,
I'm not really challenging you -- but shouldn't we be spending the money
fixing the problems here before we do that? And shouldn't we be DAMNED
CAREFUL that we're not going to damage the Creation, and the genes of future
generations of plants and animals, by doing these experiments?
Then, I'm worried about NASA and its relationship with the Air Force. I'm
worried about that, because NASA is mapping the planets for rare minerals
now and I know that. And the asteroids, and the moon, and they want to put
nuclear reactors up there to maybe mine these rare minerals and bring them
back, and who will pay for it? The taxpayers. Who gets the profit?
Probably the corporations. And because it takes a lot of money to put
nuclear reactors up there, now the Air Force says that America has to
DOMINATE SPACE.
Oh?
Is it five percent of the Earth's population, the American population? We
don't like that! And now they're talking about Star Wars, which Clinton has
started to fund, which will probably violate the ABM treaty which will make
the Russians really cross! You don't want to make the Russians cross
because all their bombs are targeted on you! And we may have orbiting
hydrogen bombs in space. You know -- that's Edward Teller's dream, the
father of the hydrogen bomb. But that's going ahead and being funded now.
Great for Universities to do research in it. Probably great for NASA or the
Air Force or whatever. But the Air Force -- So the Air Force wants to take
its nuclear war into space, not on Earth. Maybe they can do both! That
would be exciting.
This is similar to the law of the sea. Elliot Richardson took years and
years to negotiate the law of the sea so everyone has access to minerals on
the floor of the sea and then America said "No, we want to dominate the sea"
and they didn't sign it.
That's arrogance beyond belief! And we don't want to be looking up at OUR
STARS and the Southern Cross star maybe and say "Oh, there's an orbiting
hydrogen bomb up there!" I mean, I'm being semi-facetious, but you know
what I'm talking about. So the juxtaposition and the correlation of NASA
with the Air Force is "not on!" I wouldn't trust the Air Force as far as I
could kick 'em! NASA has some good motives. Exploration. But not putting
nuclear reactors up there to mine the minerals on other planets or the moon
or asteroids -- I mean, I think that's a very big philosophical question
that the WHOLE EARTH -- all the people of the planet need to be engaged in,
not a few people making decisions for all of us. So that's how I feel about
that, and I don't want you to launch more exploration things with more
plutonium, and I don't know how many more you're going to do in the next ten
years but I hear its about ten, I might be off by you know, one or two, and
I hear you're going to tone down your plutonium, not have so much, how much
you gonna have? It's NOT ON!
People don't like it! IT'S OUR EARTH TOO!
And however much you want to explore, it's OUR earth too and we have to have
a say -- PARTICULARLY the physicians because WE care for the people with
cancer. And it's not a pretty sight to see someone die of Cancer.
END OF TRANSCRIPTED PORTION
Dr. Caldicott concluded with a more general (and VITAL) discussion of
Y2K/nuclear issues. More information about those issues is available at her
web site: http://www.noradiation.org