Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU!crb7q From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Ion Engines Summary: pervasive anti-nuclear mindset Message-ID: <1991Apr4.192805.29705@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Date: 4 Apr 91 19:28:05 GMT References: <1991Mar22.043009.5544@zoo <1991Mar25.184907.16454@zoo.toronto.edu> <16851@chopin.udel.edu> Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU Organization: University of Virginia Lines: 32 In article <16851@chopin.udel.edu> garrett@chopin.udel.edu (Joel Garrett) writes: >the whole point behind SDI was to keep us from getting irradiated in a >nuclear attack (maybe less radiated is a more realistic objective, but that's >another story...) If we have launchers that are going to spread radiation on >launch of equipment to stop a nuclear attack, then is this an improvement? The whole point of SDI is to protect against the explosion of ballistic missile warheads. The fact that radioactive materials are used to create the explosion is nearly a moot point. Many more people would die as the result of blast effects (and heat, fires ...) than would die of radiation sickness. Spreading radioactive substances an incredibly inefficient way of killing people. In any case, the spread of radioactive substances must be weighed against the amount of radioactivity generated. Face it, you spread radioactive substances with each bowel movement. We do not suggest shooting you because of this foul crime because we retain a sense of proportion. It would be nice if every time someone heard 'nuclear' or 'radioactivity', they would try to retain this same sense of proportion. Not holding my breath. dale bass -- C. R. Bass crb7q@virginia.edu Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering University of Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia (804) 924-7926