Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 1, 2004 - Art Bell

02:50:57

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Robert Zimmerman - Space Exploration

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music From the high desert of the great American Southwest, I bid
	you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be in the Earth's prolific time zones.
	This show covers all of them.
	It is Coast to Coast AM, this being the weekend version.
	And this is going to be a fun hour.
	It's going to be an open line hour.
	We're going to follow that up next hour with Robert Zimmerman.
	We'll talk about space and where we're going or not going.
	of the U.S.
	Space Program, but right now, let's begin with the news of the day, and it's a very, it's a difficult chore to know where to begin.
	Am I going to begin with what we're really going to talk about, Janet Jackson?
	Or, the more serious news?
	I think I'm going to take a stab at the quorum and try this.
	President Bush, under mounting political pressure, We'll sign an executive order to establish a full-blown investigation of U.S.
	intelligence failures in Iraq, according to a senior White House official.
	That's a big deal.
	The investigation will look at what the United States believed it knew before the war against Saddam Hussein's regime, and what has been determined since the invasion.
	Former Chief Weapons Inspector David Kaye has concluded that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction.
	A chief rationale for the U.S.-led war.
	That leads the news.
	As well as does the second story of Iraq 2.
	Two suicide bombers have killed at least 56.
	So it goes on.
	Daily.
	Killed at least 56.
	Wounded more than 235.
	And the deadliest assault in Iraq in six months.
	The attack struck in the Kurdish heartland, took a heavy toll among senior leaders at Iraq's most pro-American ethnic group.
	Now, like most red-blooded Americans, Mona and I watched the Super Bowl followed by the beginning of the All-Star Survivor thing.
	Well, the Super Bowl.
	First of all, it was a very good game.
	It didn't start out that well.
	Defensive, typical of a lot of Super Bowls.
	You know, boring, kind of, for a lot of people.
	But then it took off.
	Did not meet Mr. Morton's expectations at all.
	32-29 New England, as you now know.
	But what everybody's talking about is what's on drudge right now, and I will Escort you through Matt Drudge's headline.
	Outrage at CBS after Janet bares breast during dinner hour.
	Super Bowl show pushes limits.
	That's the, and then of course there's the photograph of that magic moment.
	Well now, okay so, halftime comes and the dance ends and Who is he?
	This gentleman, this singer, Timberlake, reaches over and appears to rip from the body of Janet Jackson the very portion of her dress that covers one mammary gland.
	Now, they did this just like that.
	You know, you could hear the gasps in the back.
	And you could only imagine that the CBS execs, you know, the execs of the old, probably in their seventies, right?
	By now, I don't really know that to be true, but I just kind of imagine them sitting there watching the Super Bowl.
	We, the proud carriers of the Super Bowl.
	And then that instant when it was ripped off, they probably went, So CBS was not really happy at all.
	Also the NFL chimed in and the NFL was, I don't know, I guess shocked?
	Doubtful they'll use the same routine for the next Super Bowl they said during the show.
	And then the Drudge story tonight.
	This is the capper.
	The male involved here, Mr. Timberlake, is now quoted down the Drudge page as saying, quote, I'm sorry that anyone was offended by the wardrobe malfunction during the halftime performance of the Super Bowl.
	End quote.
	The wardrobe malfunction?
	Now, the photograph is on the Drudge site, and I'm sure everybody's racing to it right now.
	Remind you that this would perhaps not be appropriate for children.
	Doesn't bother me.
	It is... It is, well...
	It's a memory gland with a metal starfish, I would think it is, missing the center portion of the fish.
	And that's all there is on this memory gland.
	And now, it may have been a just, you know, it just may be that piece just fell right off and just collapsed in his hand.
	But, you know, it just...
	While I do believe in coincidences, this one, I don't know.
	I guess you will have to decide.
	Do you see this as a serious, very serious wardrobe malfunction?
	Or do you see this in some other way?
	So, you know, the ocean currents are headed west.
	Europe will freeze, but we will talk about this.
	Because this is America!
	Oh boy.
	So anyway, it was a good Super Bowl.
	That's what everybody is going to talk about.
	I absolutely guarantee it.
	Being 58 years old, I've seen a few, and I'm not shocked, nor outraged, nor even particularly surprised, honestly.
	I guess I can imagine the CBS guys.
	So it'll be interesting to see how everybody handles this.
	You know what?
	uh... let's take a break and all of your how else would the super bowl and uh...
	Vinatieri kicking a field goal in the last four seconds or something.
	Right?
	And that's the way it ends.
	Vietnamese officials on, oh wait a minute, uh, CBS, uh, here's something from CBS.
	CBS apologized on Sunday for an unexpectedly R-rated end to its Super Bowl halftime show when singer Justin Timberlake tore off part of Janet Jackson's top, exposing her breast.
	Well, that would seem to be in conflict with the wardrobe malfunction statement.
	Oh.
	Uh oh.
	We have a difference here.
	By the way, in the program following the Super Bowl, Richard Hatch also had a wardrobe malfunction.
	Anyway, let's try and gather it together here.
	Vietnamese officials on Monday said tests had confirmed that an 18-year-old boy did, in fact, die of the bird flu.
	Becoming now the country's ninth victim to die from the disease, now raging through the region.
	The teenager from the ethnic minority group in the Central Highlands died early Monday, said Tran Tin Hien, who would happen to be Deputy Director of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Ho Chi Minh City, where the boy was admitted January 29.
	That's an important story for all of you to keep Following very closely, this is a species jump thing, and it's not good.
	There is this incredible girl who has been brought to Britain.
	I guess you've probably heard about her.
	Maybe, maybe not.
	Claims, in fact, demonstrates amazing powers.
	Absolutely amazing powers.
	Russian Natashka Dominga.
	17 years of age, stunned doctors in her home country with her ability to see medical conditions inside of people.
	It's a real story.
	We flew her 1,500 miles to London to demonstrate her extraordinary powers to a Sun reporter, that'd be Brian Warden, who suffered multiple injuries when she was knocked down by a car in October last year.
	So in other words, This incredible talent she claims to have began after the car accident.
	She is still recovering from the hit and run and uses crutches or a wheelchair to get around.
	Before she arrived, one reporter removed a leg brace and hid all clues to her injuries.
	Then the petite blonde teenager, who looks years younger than her age, began an examination.
	She just stood up, let her eyes scan over the fully clothed body and made her diagnosis and she's able to do this again and again and again and tell what's wrong with people.
	So she's being investigated right now.
	I wonder how, don't you, how many humans, you know, through some Either inherent natural born ability or one that is acquired in some accident that changes the chemistry in the brain can do things that might amaze us all.
	Anyway, I said open line, so let's deliver.
	A wild card line, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Hello, my name is Randall.
	Hello.
	You were talking about the article that was on the UK story.
	Global warming will plunge the UK into ice age within a decade.
	Yes.
	Now, Whitley Strever was talking about doing some helpful tips and one of them was to minimize the greenhouse gases, wasn't that correct?
	Yes.
	Well, wait, there's a caveat.
	If you recall, he said that there was a plan for planting trees.
	Uh-huh.
	But the discovery was, and the truth was, that they emitted more carbon dioxide than they absorb.
	And so, ultimately, that plan was thought to be not viable.
	Well, it seems that the greenhouse gas is the major contributor to what's being emitted from vehicles, diesels, and cars.
	So, if that's the case, you had a guest speaker on the 9th Yeah, that was with George.
	September 2003 Gary Pratt. It would be interesting to get him on because he had some new technology covering that
	That you had and he was only on for an hour on that day, and I think it would be great
	What would you want to do briefly? What did his technology do that was not an interview that I did yeah
	That was with George. I'm right. What did the technology do the technology was basically based off of Nikolai Tesla and
	basically short Same theory of vibration and frequency like the fluorescent
	light bulb, but he did it in a three-dimensional Hologram tip that you put on
	For example, he was talking about this chip that you put on to the vehicle or onto the fuel tank that modified the molecules of the fuel to burn cleaner and get more fuel mileage.
	In fact, the website is on your webpage on the lower left at the bottom, which is a A green tab, which rotates with miles per tank, and he has his... Some kind of ad up there?
	Yeah, he's got a hot button up there on the lower left of your website.
	Alright, well I'm sure he appreciates that plug.
	That's interesting.
	However, I guess I would put this in the same box with, you know, machines that get more output than input, machines that eternally move, Whatever the claim is, I'm always ready to listen to stuff like that, but I have yet to see anything delivered.
	And I'm always available, by the way, for a convincing demonstration that will allow inspection of what's actually supposedly being done.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Art?
	Yes.
	How you doing?
	I'm doing.
	Well, I've got a cute little story about my cat.
	Your cat?
	She's four years old.
	And she rescues animals, dogs and cats, and brings them home.
	Really?
	Yes, so far we've... I found a home for two little dogs and now I've got another cat sleeping on our back porch.
	I mean, does she just like them wandering in with a dog trailing behind?
	No, no, no.
	With eyes of expectation?
	I mean, how does your cat do this?
	We live out in the country and a lot of people dump animals And one night about midnight, she wanted to go out a little bit.
	So I let her out, and I don't let her out real late because we have coyotes around our house.
	Yes.
	And so I stood and watched, and here she came up the driveway with this little shaggy white dog.
	Mostly she did.
	That's what I was asking.
	And it was so funny.
	She came and sat on the porch with him and just looked at me like, well, aren't you going to do something?
	Those would be, okay, there you go.
	Those are the eyes of expectation.
	A cat that saves other animals and brings them home to this lady.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hey Art.
	Hi.
	After listening to your show last night, I was floored when I got up and tuned into the Weather Channel and I saw a new promo for their feature called Storm Stories.
	Storm Stories on the Weather Channel is one of the better programs on TV.
	I watch the Weather Channel all the time, and I've never seen the way they're promoting it now.
	I believe I heard the words, are we headed for global catastrophe caused by catastrophic weather changes.
	Well, doesn't it make sense to you that storm stories on the Weather Channel would latch onto this like a... Sure, but I mean, you know, so suddenly.
	That's what's weird about it.
	Yeah, well that's what's weird about the coming global change.
	I got a premonition, you know.
	Suddenly.
	1996.
	We're headed for a big change.
	We're definitely headed for a big change.
	I agree with that.
	What astounds me is that something of this world-changing magnitude is sort of, I don't know, not mentioned.
	Barely mentioned!
	It's a gigantic story.
	Modern America, right?
	First time caller line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi Art.
	Hi.
	This is Zach in California.
	Hey Zach.
	How are you doing tonight?
	Fine, what's up?
	Well, I'm calling for my friend Natasha in Austin, Texas.
	Oh?
	She had a question she'd like to ask you.
	Yes?
	Do you think that in You know, I wouldn't make a prediction.
	I guess all I could say is I hope so.
	I would like that question answered in my lifetime.
	I would love that.
	Let me think about that. Do I believe that?
	You know, I Wouldn't make a prediction. I guess all I could say is I
	hope so I would like that question answered In my lifetime, I would love that. Would wouldn't you? Oh,
	yeah. I I think it's really building the undercurrent and you know, the media the television the
	It's really in our collective unconscious now, I think.
	That's true.
	So I don't know anything else to say.
	I'm sorry.
	That's it.
	I can't give you a prediction.
	I'm not a prophet.
	Would I like it?
	I would love it.
	I really would love it if we could contact, uh, even if we could just contact another civilization.
	Forget the, uh, the spaceship's, uh, landing for a moment and aliens here, whether that is or is not.
	Uh, simply contact, uh, with another civilization would be really cool to know about while I'm still on this Earth.
	How do you feel about that?
	Even if it was light years away, Jodie Foster-Light, uh, received, you know, The radio telescopes suddenly begin getting a signal from somewhere out there.
	Wildcard line, you're on the air, hi.
	On the air now?
	Yes, on the air now.
	Turn your radio off first.
	Okay, fire away.
	I was just wondering, you keep, lately you've been mentioning about the pictures from Mars.
	Yes.
	And you're not very impressed with what we've been seeing.
	No, I'm trying to be honest.
	What I see so far are rocks.
	I was just wondering, what did you expect to see?
	I mean, because... Well, I guess I expected to see some rocks, mostly, and I'm not disappointed.
	Oh, I... They're nice rocks.
	There are even cliffs and, you know, areas that show possible weather wear and all the rest of that, and that means water, so I'm not disappointed in the rocks.
	And what's your opinion on the soil up there?
	Doesn't it look like kind of clay or mud to you?
	Really weird.
	It's totally weird.
	Could water be that close to the surface with that kind of texture?
	I don't know.
	You would think so with that texture.
	The whole thing is fascinating, sir.
	Very much so.
	But they're rocks.
	They're rocks, yes.
	Thank you very much and take care.
	I just don't see anything else yet.
	Attributed generally to my only two-dimensional vision.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi, Art.
	Yes.
	Hi, are we on the air?
	Yes, when I say I take on-screen callers, baby, you're on the air.
	That's how it works.
	That's right.
	Yes, so I was just calling, first of all, to mention a little bit about, let's see, it was Sean David Morton you had on the first hour last night, right?
	No, it was Whitley Streber.
	Sean was on for the balance of the show in the second hour.
	Anyway, I recall him saying that he predicted that the Panthers would win the Super Bowl by three points.
	20-17.
	20-17.
	He almost got the point spread right, but unfortunately it was a reverse outcome.
	Yeah.
	And, um, so I'm, uh, I'm not certain what I think of, uh, his predictive abilities.
	All right, having said that, hold on a moment, all right?
	Yeah.
	We're going to take a break, and then we'll be right back.
	It's the bottom of the hour.
	We must do these things.
	They absolutely insist on them.
	From the high desert in the middle of the night, doing what we're supposed to be doing.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	Oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh You don't have to go
	Oh oh oh oh oh oh oh You don't have to go
	Oh oh oh oh oh oh oh You don't have to go
	I, I, I, I, I, I I still, I cry
	I, I, I, I, I I'll listen to you
	You get a shiver in the dark It's raining in the park, meantime
	Cause I love the way that you stop and you hold everything.
	A band is blowing Dixie, double fall time You feel alright, when you hear the music play Well now you're stepping aside, but you don't see too many faces Coming in out of the rain, they hear the jazz go down Hey everybody, it's halftime of the first hour.
	No, no, we won't do that.
	the and what is that time of the first hour
	no we won't do that here are the numbers
	To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east to the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	line is area code 775-727-1222. To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll-free
	at 800-825-5033. From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country Sprint Access
	number, pressing Option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast, and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	Well, I could read stories like, oh, here, this one's interesting.
	U.S.
	eyes space as possible battleground.
	That's right.
	In other words, we're getting ready to...
	Fight battles in space.
	You might want to read about that.
	It came from Yahoo News.
	But of course, there is Janet.
	Okay, where were we?
	I believe this caller was just suggesting that Sean had flubbed the Super Bowl, or even though it was close, he flubbed the score.
	And so, you have no faith in what he says.
	Is that about it?
	Well, I guess somebody could have lost a fair bundle if they'd gone with his prediction.
	Well, they certainly could have.
	Yes, but the only time I recall hearing an advance prediction of his was just before Bush invaded Iraq, and he was saying that he thought that when that happened that the North Koreans would I do something like come across the DMZ.
	Was that Sean or was that someone else?
	It could have been Ed Dames.
	It could have been Ed Dames, although I think perhaps Sean had something similar to say.
	So how much did you bet on the game?
	Oh, I didn't bet anything.
	You didn't bet anything?
	No, no.
	Actually, I'm not even a football fan, so I watched bits and pieces of it because there wasn't much else on.
	And I missed the unveiling of Janet's breasts.
	You missed that altogether?
	I think I was on the phone.
	I really need an opinion.
	And that's not going to be you, I guess.
	No, I guess not.
	Well, to me, that wouldn't be upsetting.
	Although I can think of other breasts that I might like to see other than Janet's.
	but anyway that's fine i also wanted to uh...
	uh... something about what you and what they were talking about last night
	and you are you are absolutely right there has been like zero coverage i'm
	calling from toronto by the way and we have a a guy appear who doesn't use that he's uh... like a one of
	the the original founders of greenpeace
	yes uh... it is bob hunter and he doesn't have three minutes a bit on the
	morning news where he kind of like uh...
	highlights of some of the very stories that are in the daily newspapers
	You have like three or four major daily newspapers in Toronto.
	And he hasn't mentioned anything about this, which means that there's been absolutely no coverage in any of the papers.
	Well, I mean, there was Fortune, of course, and The Independent in London.
	But yeah, God, this is incredible.
	I'm trying to keep a good humor about it all.
	It'll probably dawn on Maybe a lot on people, I don't know.
	Yeah, when, you know, when there's like, you know, glaciers coming down the Thames River or something, maybe then they might snap out of it and realize, hey, we got a problem here.
	You know, it's going to be interesting to watch, sir.
	All right, thank you.
	Okay, bye.
	Right, take care.
	Yeah, the whole thing is, I'm trying, it's protective in a way.
	Otherwise, I would get angry at the lack of coverage, but I mean, a story this big by People like Woods Hole, you know, with so much authority and science behind them, to be ignored is just, that's just absolutely, totally amazing to me.
	West of the Rock, do the wild thing at 775-727-1295.
	No, hold on, we gotta start fresher, buddy.
	We're not allowed to give last names on the air, so let's just take your first name only as Tony, right?
	Right, my name's Tony.
	I'm listening, KFI.
	Right.
	We still have you on, thank God.
	Anyway, you were earlier talking about, there was a gentleman on talking about ways to clean the air.
	Is that not right?
	No, that is correct, yes.
	And I wrote you a couple of times about a technology I found out about that was invented by a former physics professor in Pasadena in the 1970s.
	It's called energy towers.
	And basically what it is, is it's a large air scrubber.
	And it has some pretty big dimensions to be efficient, so it has to be pretty tall, you know, 3,000 feet tall.
	Well, we could make gigantic air scrubbers.
	That could be done.
	I'm not sure you could do it on a scale that would make any difference, but I'd be interested in hearing about it.
	Yeah, I really hope you get Dr. Mel Pruitt on.
	He's a former Livermore He's got 19 new current patents on fabric-skinned energy towers, and really what it does is it creates a downdraft that cleans the air.
	It also creates a wind at the bottom, so you ring the bottom of this tower with wind turbines that run all the time.
	That's really fascinating, and I'll tell you what, our government and our Highest officials are eventually going to have to turn to people like that and ideas like that.
	They're going to be forced to.
	If you simply read the right stories, like the ones that I've been presenting you with, that tell you what's coming, then you realize that efforts of that magnitude are going to have to be looked at along with a lot of other things.
	When people wake up and realize what's going on.
	First time caller line, you are on the air.
	Hello.
	Hi there.
	Hi.
	This is Beth from Venice, California, 640 KFI.
	KFI, yes.
	We have a big problem here.
	Well, I know all about it, of course, as you well know.
	I've made my statement about it.
	Well, if I'd like to go forward, and I may, with your kind permission.
	Sure, that's with you and your audience.
	Yes.
	FYI, KFI 640 Los Angeles has in fact moved Mr. Norrie Slott, the gracious, gentle, and most significantly informative from 10 to 1.
	From 10 p.m.
	to, of all things, 1 a.m.
	where seemingly most of our heads Well, we're on the pillow, you know, and when we have to hit the desk at 7, 8, or 9, well, golly gee, we're deprived.
	We're deprived.
	And I mean that in the most serious fashion.
	Well, and they made the most serious mistake, as I said.
	Well, okay, so here we go.
	I understand that I've reviewed my sources, and I'm duly pissed.
	Thank you.
	Here's what I am imploring all of your listeners, and when I say that, I mean all of those.
	All of those.
	You're imploring what?
	Just listen up, please.
	I'm listening.
	For all of those who care about us in Los Angeles, regardless of region, those of you who have friends or family in Los Angeles, we need your support, too.
	And, for permission, Art, I would like to provide, in fact, in this case, an address as per instruction.
	KFI is not receiving phone calls or emails regarding this matter.
	Well, they are, because I've seen the responses.
	So, yes.
	Oh, okay.
	So, if I may, go for it.
	No, but you may not give out an address on there.
	No, I can't let you do that because without having arranged it first and I do open lines and so I can't arrange that kind of thing.
	We can't check it out and it could be something other than even though I'm sure you would never give us something that would lead people in the wrong way.
	No way.
	I know you wouldn't because your heart is no doubt good.
	Yeah.
	And your mission a great one.
	But I can't let you do it.
	but I will make some comments for you.
	It was a terrible programming error.
	Once again, look, Coast was number one in every single demographic.
	That means every age group listening.
	It was number one, number one, number one right across the board,
	and I have nothing against John Ziegler, who is now in that time slot.
	I'm sure he's a great guy, but he's doing what, well, what's on the radio all day long everywhere else.
	and...
	And it's just more of the same.
	And by 10 o'clock at night, people don't want that.
	People would like a little, something a little different.
	Which is the reason that this program has done as well as it has done.
	It is the material that we deal with.
	It's unlike anything else you can hear about on any other radio program, anywhere, anytime.
	And it's done in a very different way, and that's why it's number one, and a lot of people are really upset.
	Thousands, I've had thousands of emails.
	John says he hasn't had one.
	Now that's a perhaps a bit disingenuous, since I have copies of many that have been, you know, sent to him, so that's certainly not true.
	And, you know, in the end, not to worry, because The people will tell the story.
	In the end, what happens when the audience measurement is done will tell the story better than any other thing that could be done.
	In fact, I offered to engage the program director of KFI in a bit of a wager, one of her paychecks against one of mine.
	Regarding the results of the next measurement that I just spoke about, and she declined to participate in that.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello, Art.
	Yes, hi.
	Yes, I'm Adam Cullen from River Falls, Wisconsin.
	Welcome.
	I have some questions regarding your ice age.
	My ice age?
	I'm not your ice age.
	This would be our ice age.
	Our ice age, you're right.
	Well, first off, I remember hearing a blip about this, maybe five years ago, about possibly, in the near future, an ice age.
	And I was in a geology class at the time, and I'd asked a professor about this, and he told me that there was no way possible that an ice age could come on this quick.
	But, that was him.
	Now I'm listening to your stuff.
	Okay, well now see, there is this thing about woolly mammoths.
	Now, wooly mammoths are big, hairy beasts, you know?
	Really, I mean, just beyond anything that even would play in the NFL.
	They're big beasts.
	And they were found frozen in place with little green things, buttercups, in their frozen, stiff mouths.
	You see, now, that meant that these monsters were in an instant frozen, and remained frozen, I might add.
	For thousands and thousands of years.
	That would appear to be irrefutable proof that the climate can change that way.
	Right.
	Just ask the mammoth.
	Right.
	Um, I also have one more question.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Alright.
	This, along with all this climate changes and stuff.
	Yes.
	And the freezing and all that.
	Yes.
	I was just wondering if in any way possible this could be connected with Planet X.
	Well, that wouldn't be my first leap of conclusion.
	Planet X, which, of course, has not yet arrived.
	You continually, if you watch your email, will see sightings of it claimed at various observatories at certain times, sometimes in Australia, but no Planet X yet.
	So I wouldn't jump to that as my first conclusion.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello?
	Yes, hello.
	Yes, sir.
	This is Jack from Dallas.
	Yes, hi, Jack.
	How you doing?
	Fine.
	I listen to you whenever I get a chance.
	I finally got retired, so I can keep it on now.
	My grandfather was in the Navy and the Pentagon for quite some time.
	Yes, sir.
	And when he died, he gave me a briefcase.
	Oh.
	And I opened it up, and the thing was full of papers.
	What kind of papers?
	It took me three days to read them.
	Yes.
	It's all stuff the government's never told us.
	About?
	Well, you're talking about the Ice Age, about outer space and all that, and aliens.
	And it's all about that?
	Yeah.
	And what have you done with this valuable briefcase full of stuff?
	Well, a friend of mine's a major in the Navy.
	Yes.
	He says, man, you better keep your mouth shut.
	And so?
	Here you are on a national talk radio program.
	I know that, but I didn't tell you the right state either.
	Oh, I see.
	You lied about the state you're in.
	Yes.
	I didn't think you sounded like a proper Texan to me.
	I'm from West Virginia.
	I've been through there, but I wouldn't live there.
	So what are you going to do with this little jewel of a briefcase of documents?
	Are you going to whisk them off to me?
	Well, I was talking to this colonel the other day.
	I don't think that was a yes.
	Yes it was.
	And what did the colonel say?
	He said, we've asked the same question.
	What are you going to do with him?
	Right.
	An obvious question.
	And I asked him, what do you think I'll do with him?
	He said, I'll put him out to the public.
	I said, man, that'll shoot me.
	And he said, well, there's a possibility.
	I said, I ain't dying for that to be a yes.
	I see.
	So, rather than die, you're going to sit on your briefcase.
	All right, well, if you change your mind, call or email me.
	In the meantime, I guess you're sitting on it, buddy.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hey, Art Bell?
	Hey, yes.
	One of my favorite people in the whole wide world.
	Thank you.
	I am kind of hyperventilating.
	I get to talk to you.
	So I have, why don't you pick your story.
	Let's see.
	Aliens in the Crop Circle, a cat that was a soul, or energy, people power.
	You mean I get to choose those topics?
	Yeah.
	Let's pick the cat.
	What about the cat?
	Okay, my sister was four years older than I and she went off to college four hours away from where I lived.
	Yes.
	She brought home this cat when she was five years old.
	Yes.
	It was 14 when she was in college or whatever.
	Anyway, the cat was named Caesar.
	It looks just like your cat.
	Excuse me.
	And anyway, Caesar, he kind of came home with his old job pulled out and he was in such a bad shape that my dad went out and popped him one.
	That's how you did it in the old days.
	Popped him one.
	Never mind.
	Anyway, we put him out of his misery.
	Anyway, poor Caesar, you know.
	And my sister called up the next morning and said, Mom, I dreamed Caesar died last night.
	Yes.
	Right.
	And that was the night that he came home and he, you know.
	But my sister was away at college, you know.
	That was the very night that Caesar got popped?
	Yep.
	That's a heartwarming story.
	Thank you for that.
	The night Caesar got popped.
	First time caller on the air, hello.
	Hello.
	Hi.
	Speak up good and loud, because you're not too easy to hear.
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	First, I wanted to know if you've ever seen the movie Phantasms?
	Yes, I have.
	I was unable to stick with the entire thing.
	It got a little... Corny?
	Well, yeah.
	Yeah, corny comes to mind.
	But you know, the first deaths were really cool.
	Yes.
	But after that, I don't know.
	It's, with everybody, it's, everyone on these shows is... Like when the thing, was it where, like the thing hit his head and then bored its way in?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that was really cool.
	But then, I don't know, you can only take so much of the head boring.
	Oh, so you didn't get to watch the end of the movie?
	No, I don't believe I did stick with it.
	Oh, that's a shame.
	The reason I say, or mention, I just thought again for the, I thought when it first came out and just... How many times have you seen it, sir?
	Twice.
	Yeah, once back in 1980 or so and then tonight.
	Watching that more than twice could be hazardous to your health.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	Your mental health.
	Could be.
	The thing is, is if what people are saying on this show and predicting with the aliens and whatnot, that's based on a true story.
	Oh, what is?
	That movie Phantasm.
	Oh, come on.
	If you were to watch the end of the movie, it will all fit into place.
	I could tell you, but it would be kind of...
	Well, you should never tell the end of movies. I have a rule against that, too.
	But if you really mean it, then somehow I will force myself to return and get a copy of Phantasm and skip out to the
	end.
	Absolutely, yeah. Just stay the last half an hour.
	So I can see whether all the apparent mindless brain boring...
	Oh, there's no more... There's one person that dies after that, I believe.
	Maybe two.
	After that part, it's all about the story and basically it tells them why and how and what.
	It's like a trick ending.
	Alright, I'll try and return to it and see if there is redeeming value at the very end.
	Yes, that did get me, the little machine that hit the guy's head and then bored its way in.
	Awful.
	Absolutely awful.
	We're going to take a break here, and when we get back we're going to talk about the U.S.
	space program and where we're going or perhaps not going with it.
	Music playing.
	And all your sorrows...
	Ain't got no trouble in my life No foolish dream to make me cry
	I'm never frightened or worried I know I always get by
	I heat up, heat up, cool down When something gets in my way I go round it Don't let life
	get me down, gonna take it the way that I found it I got music in me, I got music in me, I got music in me
	They say that life is a circle, a man in the way that I found it
	But I'm moving a straight line, keeping my feet firmly on the ground
	When you talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 7.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access Number, pressing Option 5, and dialing toll-free, 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast, and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM, with Art Bell.
	The very same.
	Good morning, everybody.
	How you doing?
	Robert Zimmerman coming up.
	America's Space Program.
	Robert Zimmerman has been a producer and a screenwriter of feature films, documentaries, industrials, and commercials, taught at New York University, the New School for Social Research, and the Stevens Institute of Technology.
	He is an award-winning author, writing articles and books on issues of science, history, technology, In the year 2000, he was co-winner of the David N. Schramm Award given by the High Energy Astrophysics Division of the American Astronomical Society for Science Journalism.
	Mr. Zimmerman received his Bachelor of Arts degree cum laude from Brooklyn College.
	He received a Master's degree from New York University in 1995, majoring in History and film, and he's got a lot to say about the U.S.
	a space program coming up.
	Robert Zimmerman in a moment, and I guarantee you that by the end of the night tonight, you're going to be going, Oh my God, I didn't know that happened during that mission.
	Robert Zimmerman is going to talk to us about About U.S.
	space flight, past, present, future, and I guarantee you he has got some information on some of what occurred in space that's going to just blow you away.
	Robert, welcome to the program.
	Oh, I'm so glad to be here.
	Glad to have you.
	You come to us from What, New England or New York?
	Well, everyone who listens to me and knows anything about accents says, oh, he must be from Brooklyn.
	That's where I lived most of my life, but the last five or six years I've lived in Maryland, near the D.C.
	area.
	Oh, you're in Maryland?
	Yeah, I'm in Maryland.
	I do recall that best from the show prior, that there were about, I don't know, four or five times when I went, what?
	We did what?
	Anyway, we are here and talking, of course, on the first anniversary of the Columbia accident.
	And so that, I guess, is a good place to begin all of this.
	How much of an impact has that accident had with regard to what they're still doing?
	In other words, we're not yet flying again, which means they're still, what, dissecting, thinking, figuring out how not to have it happen again, what?
	Well, you know, NASA had scheduled the next flight, return to flight, to be September of this year.
	Yes.
	And just this week they pushed it back to October of this year.
	And there's real questions right now whether they can actually fix the technical problems that were identified as the cause of the Columbia accident.
	In this case, the foam breaking off the Okay, what are we up against?
	I mean, that is what happened, right?
	I think everybody's pretty clear on that it was the foam and all the rest of it.
	Well, there are two components trying to fix it.
	One is trying to figure out some way to reduce the foam from breaking off, and from what I can gather, they pretty much don't think they can do that.
	It's almost impossible.
	Really?
	Yeah, they're going to reduce the problem, but I don't think they'll be able to eliminate it, and they recognize that.
	What they're trying to do now is approach the technical solution from several routes.
	One is, can they do repairs in orbit?
	And they're looking at a variety of different technical engineering designs for allowing an astronaut to do a spacewalk with equipment to either put a plug in a small hole or to maybe put an inflatable patch that would go inside and inflate.
	Or even put an overlay, and they would actually use the kind of ablative material that was used in the Apollo program, which burns off, takes the heat away as it burns away.
	But what that does is, of course, it protects the spacecraft.
	They're still struggling with that.
	They haven't really solved it completely.
	They really haven't problems.
	Robert, I have a question for you.
	Was there anybody that knew how much trouble Columbia was in before it began to re-enter?
	There were engineers at NASA who were very worried about the problem.
	How much have they learned?
	They had seen similar issues earlier and they were concerned.
	They had been raising this issue several times.
	This is a repeat of what happened with Challenger.
	What is it now?
	That was 1986.
	That's 18 years ago, I believe.
	This is really a repeat of the same story.
	You had managers who Douglas Goldstein, financial planner & investment advisor, interviewed Jones on Arutz Sheva Radio.
	engineers and so a Person moves up the line of command even if they started
	out as an engineer They're now in the management position and management
	concerns become the primary Driving force of whatever is accomplished. So if an
	engineer says look we think there's an engineering problem the management concerns take
	The force if they had full knowledge of what was going to happen. Well, I wouldn't say full knowledge. I didn't
	I didn't say that.
	No, no, no, listen.
	I said if.
	If.
	Even if they had full knowledge of the damage that had occurred to Columbia, could they have done anything about it?
	Oh, I'll tell you that.
	This, no.
	No.
	And the orbit that Columbia was in, and that's one of the other things they're addressing with the shuttle ProGrid to try to avoid this accident from occurring again, It is very unlikely.
	It's almost impossible they could have done anything about it.
	Had they known, it was almost impossible.
	Which is one of the reasons I think they took a nonchalant attitude towards it.
	They didn't, at that time, have any real solution to this.
	So, what's the point of pursuing it very aggressively?
	If that happened, we can't solve anything.
	Had there been communication between the spacecraft and ground about this potential problem?
	Yes, there was some conversation But it was downplayed, it was low-keyed.
	They basically told the crew, we noticed there was an impact from some foam,
	we're checking into it, but we don't think it's a concern.
	We've asked our engineers, we don't think it's a concern.
	That's what they basically told the crew.
	And they left it at that.
	And they didn't really pursue it very aggressively.
	There were engineers trying to get the management people to pursue it,
	but they couldn't get those management people to do it because they had other things on their mind.
	There was nothing in space that could have been utilized to try and get a picture of the shuttle.
	Not really.
	There could have been some satellite photos from military security stuff, both on the ground and in space.
	It might have told them something, but then it might not have.
	They might have been able to get an answer.
	You know, I forget what day of the mission, but early in the mission they saw the radar now shows that something moved away from the shuttle.
	I don't want to say broke off because we don't really know, but something moved away from the shuttle, an object.
	And had they been worried about this, yes, they might have been able to take close-up pictures and may have been able to identify that.
	But you've got to understand that the nature of the Columbia mission itself was a science mission.
	It didn't have any capability for spacewalks.
	It wasn't really the suits or the equipment on board.
	Or the training to have done a spacewalk.
	And then on top of that, they didn't have any kind of repair material on board to make any kind of repairs.
	So it really was a doomed mission while it was in orbit.
	There's no doubt about that.
	But they didn't know it.
	No, they did not.
	They didn't really know it.
	There were worries by engineers.
	There were concerns that some engineers had in NASA.
	And they were trying to follow up those concerns because they were concerned.
	Those concerns weren't followed up, so no one knew.
	So when the shuttle starts to come back into orbit, and they start to get the sensor readings that are indicating there is an anomaly, the people in Mission Control at the time really were not aware of the concerns the engineers had, and they just were responding to the data they were getting, and then suddenly the shuttles are gone.
	You can't hear it anymore.
	They're cut off, and we all see the contrails breaking up, As the thing falls apart.
	How are we doing in the casualty and risk versus benefit category with our manned space program?
	Well, this is one of my pet peeves because as tragic as the Columbia accident was, I think we're doing spectacular for rocket science and exploration.
	We launched a little over a hundred shuttle missions And in that time, we lost essentially 2% of those missions.
	And you could say we've lost 40% of our fleet.
	We built five shuttles and we've lost two.
	That's one way to look at it.
	But in actual launches, we've launched over 100 and lost about 2%.
	And I mentioned this on my last appearance, but I'll say it again.
	When the Clipper ship existed as the epitome of the sailing ship, 5,000 years of technology, on an average, they lost 5% of their best ships Every year and that was the best technology. The shuttle is
	a prototype first prototype reusable ship It's the first spaceship that's ever been built. That's
	even partly reusable and for that reason It's an extremely experimental and it's been incredibly
	successful in that in that respect I was once asked at a lecture
	Isn't the International Space Station an accident waiting to happen?
	Is it? My response to that was yes. It is. So is the shuttle, so is the Soyuz, so was Mir, so was the Apollo
	Based on what?
	This is dangerous stuff.
	It's exploration.
	That's the bottom line.
	The astronauts know this.
	They accept the risk.
	They know what they're doing.
	But the way you said that, you made me think there was something extraordinarily Obviously fatal about the space station.
	You're just saying they're all at risk.
	Of course they are.
	That's right.
	I'm not saying... Yes, I'm trying to include everything.
	They're all risky endeavors, and the astronauts know this.
	They take that risk on because they recognize that the benefits far exceed the risks, and they're willing to sacrifice their lives for the benefits for themselves, for the nation, for the human race.
	All right, you know, right away, a lot of the audience, I can hear them.
	They're throwing up their hands and they're saying, What benefits, dammit?
	What benefits?
	That's what you hear.
	So, um, fulfill it.
	What benefits, Robert?
	Well, I'll tell ya.
	The standard answer is, oh, we get all these technological spinoffs, and that's true.
	But I don't make that argument as a first argument.
	I say, if you dream small dreams, you're a small person.
	You'll become that.
	You won't really grow.
	If you dream big dreams, you become greater than you are.
	That's my That's my mantra.
	You have to think big, dream big, and you do great things if you do that.
	Or you get great failure, but at least you went out and did.
	That's right.
	You try.
	You have to try to do the best you can.
	Otherwise, what are you?
	And on top of that, it's fun.
	It's exciting.
	So in other words, your first argument is a human spirit argument, right?
	Absolutely.
	And it's very non-trivial as far as I'm concerned.
	I think that for a long time we've needed goal and reason and the space program gives that to us unlike a lot of other things.
	So yeah, that's high on my list too.
	I agree.
	You know, I'll give you another example.
	The Soviet Union ended up to be basically a disaster in the end and it fell.
	It fell apart.
	But the one industry that came out of the Soviet Union that is respected worldwide And is the one great achievement that the Soviet Union brought to the world?
	They make big rockets.
	Oh, they make big rockets.
	And they make them well.
	They have taken the commercial market away from Boeing and Lockheed.
	They've won that market because they make good, but it happened because in that respect, they dreamt big and they went for the glory.
	They went for the golden ring and they got it.
	And I don't see any reason why, when we did the same thing with Apollo, and you know, A lot of people complaining.
	They say, well, we love Apollo!
	That was the People's Gold Ring.
	You know, the Communist Gold Ring.
	And, of course, that's the one thing they did.
	And it's still there, sort of the remnants of it.
	But, you know, they're not even keeping their missiles up to snuff.
	You know, their ICBMs and all the rest of it, they're in hard times over there.
	Well, actually, you know, I spent For writing my most recent book, Leaving Earth, I spent a month in Moscow interviewing a lot of people, and talking to a lot of engineers, a lot of cosmonauts, a lot of scientists involved with the program, both in the Soviet days and today.
	And actually, it's not hard times.
	That's a boomtown right now.
	Things are really straightening out.
	It's taking them time, but they are really getting their act together.
	Ultimately, they'll be fine.
	Well, I think they're actually doing very well right now.
	Yes, but if you actually look at the amount of money for their gross national product that they devote to the maintenance of the ICBMs that, by the way, are pretty much aimed this way, you'll find it's appallingly short.
	And the condition of these rockets and ICBMs is appallingly old.
	Part of the reason for that is that they've refocused their energies.
	Oh yes, indeed.
	They're not looking anymore at world domination.
	They just simply want to make their own garden grow properly.
	And so they're focusing their energies on trying to make a living.
	Yes.
	And being productive and creative in their own way, freely.
	Yes.
	Using capitalism.
	They will ultimately succeed.
	They'll do it.
	They're doing it right now.
	I really believe that.
	Yeah.
	And I think their space program proves it because they're really trying to make a profit and they're succeeding.
	They're making a profit.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	There's no question of that.
	I mean, for one thing, just the tourist industry that they have tried to establish in space, that they have actually made 40 plus million dollars on, they have a whole range of customers in training right now to go up to the International Space Station.
	But I don't know how you balance this, Robert, because an awful lot of money was spent by the USSR on defense.
	I mean, enormous amounts of money.
	Some, by percentage, so much more than we do, you know, against GMP.
	You mean then?
	Yes, absolutely.
	And it went bankrupt, that's the part that went bad.
	I'm focusing on what the space program, on what did work, and I think it's because they went for the, in this respect, their space program, their specific trying to explore the universe, to bring their dream, their nation, their culture into space, and make it dominant in space.
	Was a great thing.
	And that was them trying to do the best they could be.
	And in that respect, they succeeded.
	Chinese are going for it, too.
	Say again?
	Chinese are going for it, too.
	Japan, just in the last two days, have announced they're reconsidering putting their own manned program together.
	India has signed an agreement with China, and they're planning to try to put a manned program in as well.
	Oh, yes.
	So, I mean, the world is going to do this.
	It's a question of whether the United States wants to be part of it or not.
	And I think that it would be a very bad mistake if we chose not to be part of it.
	The question really is now, how do we become a part of it?
	What's the best way to do that?
	And that's really the bottom line.
	I've been on several radio shows recently and the hosts have been telling me that their calls have shifted.
	They were expecting opposition.
	The same kind of question you raised, what do we get out of it?
	And they said that wasn't the kind of calls they were getting.
	Instead they were getting a lot of arguments about how to do it.
	Disagreeing with my ideas, which is okay, but a lot of argument about how should we do this because it seems we have no choice, we have to do it because everyone else is.
	I don't think you'd get a lot of argument about wanting America to continue in space, not from this audience.
	You might get a few who would decry the expenditure when we see what's going on on land around the world going on.
	But that's probably about as bad as it would get.
	This audience would tend to be pretty pro-let's rock and roll up there.
	Yeah, you know, it's an interesting thing from my perspective because I've been on shows where the audience is very clearly hostile, what you'd think would be hostile to space.
	And that's one of the things I've noticed is that they're not arguing hostile to space as much anymore, they're just arguing about how to do it.
	And even with your audience, I think that We have to really think about this because, and we can now talk about George Bush's proposals about how to do it, and what's good or bad about that.
	Well, let's start with how seriously do you take what the President said?
	Actually, it's not a question of how seriously I take it, it's a question of how realistic I think his proposal is.
	Translate it to that if you want to.
	I break it down into several different parts.
	His proposal, I think, is just like we said at the beginning.
	It's the right idea.
	You've got to have the courage, the brave, to do these great things.
	At least he's dreaming the right things.
	Let's go and do it.
	And that's the courageous part of his plan.
	The smartness of his plan, it's very smart in a lot of ways.
	He's decided to finally get the American Manned Program focused on what it should be.
	It's not doing science research in the International Space Station.
	It's not being a commercial hauling service for satellites.
	It's exploration.
	If you're going to put people in space, it's to explore the solar system.
	And he's focusing on that now.
	So, for example, and this is really one of my themes in Leaving Earth, he's going to use the International Space Station the way it should be used.
	Anytime you put human beings on a vessel in orbit around the Earth, at this stage of our technological development in space, You're really learning how to build interplanetary spaceships.
	So those space stations, I think that name is a misnomer.
	They are prototyped interplanetary spaceships.
	And he wants to use the International Space Station for that kind of research and focus all the work on it in that, and that's very smart.
	All right.
	Hold it right there, Robert.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	My guest is Robert Zimmerman, and we're here talking about the U.S.
	space program and space in general, and he's really got some stories.
	stay right there I'm not a fan of the way you talk
	I'm not a fan of the way you talk I'm not a fan of the way you talk
	I'm not a fan of the way you talk with Art Bell. Call the wildcard line at area codes
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	line is area code 775-727-1222. To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll-free
	at 800-825-5033. From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country Sprint Access
	number, pressing Option 5, and toll-free 800-893-0903. From coast to coast and worldwide
	on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	You know, all things considered, the trouble the one rover did have, we're having a whole lot of success right now,
	apparently, with the rovers on Mars. They're, I think, down both now and gathering information, photographs.
	We're going to find out about what are on Mars.
	It's pretty big in the space program, and that's what Robert Zimmerman is here talking about.
	So we'll ask him about the rovers in a moment.
	All right, Robert, we've got them on the ground.
	They're doing, it would seem, incredibly well.
	The Mars rovers, what do you think so far?
	Oh, it's quite exhilarating.
	I was just, in fact, during the break looking at pictures again.
	Both landers landed in places that no landing has ever gone before on any other planet.
	Right.
	I mean, the first one, Spirit, when those pictures first came out, it's completely different than any of the other landers on Mars because It was like a sandy beach with little cobblestones, and the cobblestones looked like the kind you'd see in a stream.
	They got kind of smoothed out, which is very interesting because water, wind, it's interesting.
	And they were scattered.
	There weren't a lot of rocks.
	They didn't have that jagged, crumbly look that rocks have.
	They looked solid.
	And then, opportunity, it lands dead center inside a crater.
	You couldn't have done better.
	And the crater is interesting.
	Not only do you get a first bedrock, you know, You get the layers.
	You get the layers, cross-cutting layers, into weaving the joints, which implies much activity.
	But then you've got, it's very dark, which means it has what they call, it's a hematite, which is a mineral which is produced in one of two different ways, generally, geologically.
	One either through water processes or through lava flow.
	And they don't know exactly what it is yet, but they're hoping it's from water, and that would tell them some information about the water history of Mars.
	Odds are pretty good for water, aren't they?
	Oh, there's no question.
	If you were making a bet, you'd win, because there's water on Mars.
	There's no question of that.
	I mean, there's lots of water in the poles.
	It's frozen.
	There's other areas of the planet where it's frozen.
	The spectroscopic work that's been done by both Mars Odyssey and Mars Global Surveyor have both indicated that there are areas where there is frozen water underground, pretty likely, which means you're going to get You could get underground ice caves.
	You could get water flows in the caves.
	The temperature is very cold, but nonetheless you can get these kind of things.
	Right.
	So the water is there.
	The water tends to sublimate directly into a gas, so you don't get flowing water on the surface as far as we can tell anywhere on the surface, but there is evidence that flowing waters existed recently within geological time and possibly recently within human history.
	Recently, like with the next like decades, it might have been.
	We don't have that fact, but it's possible.
	You could be right with very rapid changes.
	Why?
	You just never know.
	Yes, exactly.
	I mean, if something happens fast, it happens.
	You could take a picture of it a week after it happens.
	You might not be able to tell it happened only a week ago.
	And there is evidence of what looks like water flows that could have happened 100,000 years ago and might have happened only a week ago.
	It's hard to tell at this point.
	You've been a pretty good student of the photograph so far.
	You know, I check every day.
	Every day, okay.
	Have you seen anything yet that would suggest to you anything un-rock-like?
	You mean artificial?
	Yeah.
	Unfortunately, no.
	And I say unfortunately, I'm speaking for every scientist at JPL, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and every scientist at NASA who's involved in the project, and every scientist who dreams of winning a Nobel Prize.
	Because if they saw any artificial evidence at all, they would, if you thought they jumped up and down in joy when the thing landed, they would hit the ceiling in joy.
	I have to agree with that.
	I think they would too.
	Do you know how much money that would bring to them, too?
	I mean, the enthusiasm.
	If we saw artificial evidence, artificial structures there, if they could get a picture of that, my God, they'd be so happy.
	It'd be on words.
	And I would be, too.
	We all would.
	But unfortunately, no, they're not seeing anything like that.
	We're seeing geological formations.
	They're interesting.
	And there's some mysteries going on that are not explainable by Earth geology.
	But nothing yet to suggest ever intelligent life, machines, tools, pottery.
	Sadly, I mean, I talked to Mike Mallon, who basically owns the company that runs the camera on Global Surveyor that's been orbiting Mars now for almost 60 years, taking pictures, and he told me, you know, when they took the close-up of the face, He really wished he'd seen a structure there, but it wasn't.
	It was a mesa, and it was a very strange mesa.
	It definitely was geologically totally inexplicable by Earth's processes, though some form of wind and erosion was going on, but it was not like what you see on Earth.
	But he was really actually disappointed.
	He said, I wish it had been artificial.
	It wasn't.
	So no, unfortunately, no, I haven't seen anything, and neither have they, and they wish they could.
	Strange stuff though.
	Hold on, we're going to come away from here.
	Do you believe we'll come away with absolute evidence that there was recent above ground water on Mars?
	That's speculation.
	I don't know.
	I can't really predict that.
	They're going to, I think, find evidence that there was.
	They're hopeful they'll find evidence of water.
	Everything they've looked at seems to indicate, and they've landed in places where they think heavy flows of water did occur, based upon the orbital photos.
	Okay, are there any tests coming up that will be a watershed moment in the cause of finding that out?
	Yes, I mean, as the rovers take samples, and when they say taking samples, they're basically just scraping the rock, Okay, let's say, just for argument's sake, that there's water on Mars.
	Okay.
	Okay, what does that mean for what we might do?
	pin down whether the hematite minerals there are caused by lava flows or by water.
	And that will be significant.
	Okay, let's say, just for argument's sake, that there's water on Mars.
	Okay.
	Okay, what does that mean for what we might do?
	Well, it's the same thing that applies to the Moon.
	The possibility that there's water on the Moon applies the same as Mars.
	It gives us, as colonists, the resources we need to live there.
	It's like finding, being able to plant plants when you come to the New World.
	Water gives you oxygen, it gives you hydrogen, which gives you energy, and it also gives you water to drink.
	Is there anything you've seen in the photographs from Mars yet that would Make you want to move there?
	Yes.
	I gotta tell you, looking at the... Why?
	It depends on what one likes about... I love the outdoors.
	I do cave exploration, I don't know if you're aware.
	And I love out hiking and stuff like that.
	And the Southwest in the United States is one of the more beautiful places.
	Grand Canyon.
	Well, I've seen some pictures from Global Surveyor of some of the canyons on Mars.
	That are probably some of the most spectacular places in the solar system to hike.
	And I would love to go there.
	I mean, obviously it's going to take a great deal of technology to make it livable.
	It does look like a hiker's paradise, I'll give you that.
	Oh, without question.
	And it's a very hostile, it's a hostile environment right now.
	Less hostile in many ways than the moon, but nonetheless extremely hostile.
	You're talking about temperatures that are very rarely above like minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit.
	So it's very cold and you have very little atmosphere.
	There's almost no, there's no water in the atmosphere compared to the earth.
	You know, it's very dry desert like environment.
	But still, I mean, yes, there are places.
	Wouldn't some of that take the edge off your hiking?
	Technology is, you know, we're a tool-bearing species.
	You come up with a solution, and you solve it, and then, whoa, go do it.
	Yes.
	I mean, I've done cave exploration.
	You actually would, just for the sake of asking you this, you would do what you would have to do to move to Mars.
	I mean, given the opportunity.
	You're going to go to Mars, and you're going to live in the following circumstances, and there it is.
	It's pretty spartan, but you can do it.
	But you can't come back.
	For the chance to go where no one has ever gone before, I think many Americans would take that choice.
	You really think so?
	Oh, without question.
	You know, you ask that question of audiences, and routinely a large percentage of the audience, if not everyone, raises their hand and says, yeah, I'd go.
	People are willing to do this.
	I don't know about that.
	Obviously, when we're going, finally, we're going to have the knowledge on how to do it, and that's getting back to Bush's proposal, how to learn how to do that.
	Once we go, we'll have the skills to make it possible to do it with some reasonable comfort and practicality.
	Maybe some of my audience will comment on whether they would actually move to Mars.
	I'd love to hear those answers.
	It was in the Hubble Space Telescope.
	Did it take the last of the good pictures that you could get out there?
	I mean, now we're going to abandon the Hubble, right?
	And did we get all the shots we wanted?
	You know, this is one of those great fallacies.
	I've been upset about Hubble getting abandoned now for about seven years, because the scientific community, I think they're kind of hypocritical right now, the scientific community made a decision in 1996 that after The 2004 repair mission, which was the one that got cancelled, they were going to abandon Hubble.
	They were going to just basically let it die.
	No more maintenance.
	They made that decision themselves.
	My question was, have we taken enough pictures?
	It wasn't that significant a difference to Hubble's fate.
	It's going to now be in orbit until it fails.
	Well, alright, my initial question remains.
	Have we taken all the good pictures there are to take?
	No.
	No, of course not.
	Hubble's still operating, and it'll still continue to operate until something goes badly wrong, and they will try to keep it alive as long as they can.
	It'll probably get, at minimum, I mean, I'm being, you know, something can go wrong tomorrow, but if things continue to operate as they have been, it'll probably get anywhere from three to five more years of operation.
	It may be, you know, if things go bad, it could fail in two weeks, but they're hoping for three to five more years.
	And they'll keep reusing it every minute because the thing is an incredible facility.
	I would prefer we kept fixing it.
	But one of the consequences of the Columbia accident and the Columbia investigation is
	that they do, and this is one of the other solutions they've come up with to try
	to make the shuttle so safe nothing can ever go wrong, unrealistically I think,
	is that no mission should go into an orbit that is an orbit you cannot dock
	with the International Space Station.
	You have to be able to dock with the International Space Station if you're going to go into orbit.
	So you have a place to stay in case something goes wrong.
	Well, Hubble's not in that kind of orbit.
	So you can't go to Hubble without breaking one of the criteria of the Columbia investigation to make the shuttle safer.
	I've got you.
	And therefore, Hubble will eventually be allowed to die.
	Yes, that's right.
	Now, there's talk at NASA, I spoke to some people at Goddard, and there is talk in the NASA circles about making a robot mission to get up there and maybe boost its orbit and keep it around for a while, and then have a controlled re-entry when the time came, finally.
	But, you know, I think that's really a pie in the sky for a lot of reasons.
	One of which, it requires a robot docking, and there's only one nation in the world that's ever successfully done that, and that's Russia, and we haven't.
	We've always done it manned, controlled docking.
	So, us suddenly coming up with a robot that can do a man docking, an unmanned docking like this, I think is just being unrealistic.
	Alright.
	And I don't think it'll happen.
	Right.
	You have written of the Apollo 8 mission.
	Yes, my first book was called Genesis, the story of Apollo 8.
	Can you give us a highlighted capsule version of Apollo 8?
	I wrote that book because I felt that that mission, which had become forgotten in between decades with the landing, I thought that mission was actually the most important Apollo mission.
	And if you talk to a lot of astronauts, they say the same thing.
	They think that's the most important mission, both historically, culturally, and in terms of winning the space race.
	Why?
	It was the mission that actually did win the race to the moon, because the Soviets were trying to get to the moon up until that mission, and as soon as that mission happened, they canceled all plans.
	So we won the race with that mission.
	It happened at the end of 1968, which in many ways was one of the more significant historical years in the United States for the last half of the 20th century.
	That was the year Martin Luther King's death, Kennedy's death, riots, you had the Democratic Convention.
	It was a very significant year.
	The whole world changed in that year.
	Yes, absolutely.
	The end of that year was the Apollo 8 mission, which was the first time human beings actually went somewhere in a spacecraft.
	They were going to another world, and they did it Christmas week.
	They got into lunar orbit on Christmas Eve, and from lunar orbit, they read from the Bible on Christmas Eve to the world.
	And why they did that, I thought was really, I want to find out why they did that.
	And it was, I think, a very old-fashioned American attempt to express their goodwill to everyone else and why they chose what they chose to read.
	And then the images that they took of the moon was that dark, stark, almost skull-like landscape.
	Yes.
	shook up the world and the United States especially in terms of exploration
	because it made us kind of like almost afraid of exploration again because it
	didn't look like a very inviting place
	and I think that shook us up. It also made us, they took the first
	Earthrise picture, the first time human beings saw the Earth rise above the horizon of another world and it's
	ironic that it didn't really, to them, their eyes, it didn't rise above
	the horizon It actually came out from right to left because they were orbiting a planet world.
	They weren't on the surface of the planet.
	Robert, wouldn't you think that of the first men who would go and leave Earth, actually and go to the moon, that there would be some moments of intense reflection and going right down to your very roots and thinking about All the cosmic questions we don't consider much of the time.
	I mean, it would force you into that kind of thing, wouldn't it?
	Well, you know, it's interesting if you consider the reactions of the three men that went on Apollo 8.
	The captain, the commander, Frank Borman, he was just an action-oriented type of guy.
	To him, his response to that mission wasn't spiritual.
	It was mostly his family.
	He realized the risks involved were too much.
	It was causing too much turmoil with his wife.
	And he felt his family was more important, and that's why he retired after that mission.
	And Jim Lovell, I asked him, and you know, Jim Lovell is famous for Apollo 13.
	He was the commander of that mission.
	Yes.
	And what we don't realize is that he was also on Apollo 8.
	Had the same thing happened on Apollo 8 that happened to him on Apollo 13, he would have been dead in 60 minutes.
	It was a much more risky mission, Apollo 8.
	They actually thought they had about a 50% chance of failure.
	It didn't have the lunar module, so if something had gone wrong as they left Were they told a 50% chance of success?
	That's right.
	That shocked me, too.
	Everyone at NASA believed it was about a 50-50 chance of success.
	They went anyway.
	Their wives told them they had to go.
	They all asked their wives, and they said, yeah, you've got to do this.
	This is for the nation, for the world.
	Now, in retrospect, we now know the odds were probably better, because Apollo Systems is a really good system.
	But nonetheless, it was very risky.
	Jim Lovell told me To him, God is spiritual stuff.
	But to him, it doesn't matter if you go to the moon or go to Earth.
	He's everywhere and it's going to be the same.
	He really didn't change spiritually.
	He just felt, you know, I wanted to go to space.
	I always wanted to be a spaceman, explore.
	Did you find that to be generally true also of the others?
	Well, you know, that was Borman.
	This is Lovell.
	The third guy, Bill Anders, he did change.
	He was a very devout Catholic before he went on his mission.
	He told me about one moment in particular on the mission in which he had given the ground
	mission control a whole bunch of tapes, audio tapes, music to play for the astronauts in
	the capsule so they pipe up music for these guys.
	Some of it was Herb Albert and Tijuana Brass, but he also gave a whole bunch of Christmas
	carols to play as well because he was a Catholic and it was Christmas week and all three guys
	would like to hear that.
	makes them feel good, makes them feel like they're at home.
	At one point, it was playing a Christmas carol like a Hallelujah chorus and the spacecraft
	was turning the spacecraft, changing its orientation.
	In the process of doing that, the communication signal got weakened and it sounded like you
	take a record and slow it down.
	Anders told me he didn't realize at first what was happening.
	It was like the world was ending.
	and he came back from that mission saying he doesn't, not that he isn't religious anymore,
	but he doesn't believe in any particular religion.
	Religion is how, human beings are like ants on a log.
	How can any particular religion know what the right way to practice right and wrong
	is?
	And he was very changed by that mission.
	His wife told me, I'd never seen a person change so much, in terms of his philosophy
	of life.
	And he's still a decent guy.
	He's, you know, he's...
	No, that's incredible.
	Very different.
	Hold it right there.
	I want to do more on this when we get back.
	Sort of the stories behind the stories about what actually happened to the astronauts as a result of their experience.
	I don't know.
	Think about it yourself.
	You see the Earth shrinking behind you until finally it's eclipsed by the Moon, which you're in orbit around.
	That would be a moment.
	that really would be a moment.
	And I've got such a long way to go. So I'm looking forward to making some money.
	making some money.
	So I'm looking forward to making some money. So I'm looking forward to making some money. So I'm looking forward to
	So I'm looking forward to making some money.
	And we still have time.
	time but still goodbye.
	Every time I think about it, I wanna cry.
	With bombs in the air, the little kids keep coming.
	No way to breathe, easy, no time to be alone Well, I tell myself that I'm a-doin' alright
	There's nothin' left to do at night If I breathe the only way
	To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 825-5033.
	Call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access number, pressing
	Option 5, and dialing toll-free, 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast, and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM, with
	Art Bell.
	You know, maybe man is not meant to be in space at all.
	suggest that, not meant to be in space at all.
	It's a hostile accident waiting to happen.
	and that we've done with actually does seem like that's exactly what it is
	by the way were uh... robert uh... ron from vancouver canada sends me on the
	computer i get these messages Moved to Mars?
	Can't ever come back?
	Do I get 14 virgins?
	No, Ron, you don't.
	Now, just thought I'd toss that in.
	We were actually in the middle of a pretty serious discussion about change in astronauts, and it leads me to ask you about why so many astronauts have, after their experience, had such stress manifesting itself in various ways beyond the norm one would think.
	Well, it depends.
	I mean, for the Apollo astronauts, per se, they actually didn't have a great deal of
	stress.
	I think it's been exaggerated.
	I mean, you had situations where some of them, such as Bill Anders, went through some life
	change.
	Edgar Mitchell was another one that went through life change.
	Oh, he sure did.
	Yes.
	But more than not, they didn't.
	These are really down-to-earth.
	They're jet pilots in the Apollo program.
	They're straightforward guys.
	Others had marital difficulties.
	I mean, it did manifest in a number of ways.
	You know, it's interesting.
	I'm not sure the marital difficulty is actually a reflection of the space program as much as it was a change in our culture.
	Because the Apollo 8 mission, that's an interesting one in this respect, too.
	It's the only Apollo crew which all three men are still married to the same wives, all of whom were high school sweethearts.
	That's an unusual thing.
	All the program, all the astronauts had that problem, but I think that's more a reflection
	of our society than anything else.
	I'm not sure it was the space problem.
	What is interesting, and I learned this in my third book, Leaving Earth, in discussing
	long missions in space, is the challenge of trying to survive in a spaceship for a very
	long time in orbit, especially if the spaceship is small and doesn't have a lot of adequate
	It's not easy.
	Well, you heard me in the beginning.
	We're not meant to go to space.
	Well, I don't agree there.
	Once again, I think we are a tool-making animal.
	We figure out how to solve the problem and then solve it.
	And in truth, the Russian program over many years Has figured out, has solved most of these problems.
	Some of those problems, by the way, were solved by us in our first space station, Skylab, and then we kind of forgot the solution.
	By the way, have the Russians shared all of the really important biological information, physiological readings and information from their very long missions with us?
	Is that totally shared now?
	The data is mostly shared, yes.
	You pretty much can find out what they learned.
	All you've got to do is ask them, and a lot of it's been published.
	What they don't share completely, and I don't blame them in this respect, is they won't share with us completely the solutions.
	For example, I spent three days interviewing Valery Polyakov.
	He has the present-day record for the longest space flight.
	He was 14 and a half months in space.
	He's also a doctor, and he focused his whole life on space medicine.
	He wanted to prove that it would be possible to go spend like 10 months in weightlessness and then immediately be able to work when you got to Mars.
	You know, you can't just simply be helped around when you get to Mars like they do when
	they come back from long missions in orbit.
	You've got to be able to get there and start taking samples and walk around.
	He wanted to prove you could do that.
	I spoke to him for three days and he told me pretty much everything, all the results,
	how much bone he lost, bone density he lost, and I could go into that,
	and how he solved his medical problems.
	But he told me very bluntly, we have figured out that exercise will reduce the bone loss
	problem, exercise can reduce the bone loss problem.
	He is a licensed financial professional both in the U.S.
	and Israel.
	Securities offered through Portfolio Resources Group, Inc., Member FINRA, SIPC, MSRB, NFA, SIFMA.
	Accounts carried by National Financial Services LLC.
	Member NYSENDT, a Fidelity Investments company.
	And I think that was just fine. I have no problem with that.
	And he wasn't saying, I'm not going to keep it a secret, he's saying, you know, where's the moolah?
	And I think that's a very fair, that's a very capitalist approach and I think it's perfectly reasonable.
	But they're very willing to tell you what the results were.
	There's no question that.
	In fact, they want you to know because they want to show how their research has produced results and can teach us things.
	So then we've only become partners until it gets to the dollar?
	Oh, without question.
	We want them to be communists and give us everything for free because we're all in this cooperative I certainly recall when somebody bid to get on, and the Russians sold a seat at the International Space Station, the United States got all out of joint.
	NASA got out of joint.
	and we'll give us the bucks and we'll provide you the stuff, we'll sell our services.
	And I think actually they're right.
	Well, I certainly recall when somebody bid to get on and the Russians sold a seat on the,
	at the International Space Station, the United States got all out of joint, NASA got out of joint,
	everybody got out of joint.
	I think, I think it was appalling actually.
	Here was Dennis Tito, a free American.
	He's earned his money legally.
	He has the cash.
	He wants to go into space.
	He has the cash.
	He's willing to buy a ticket.
	He's in physical shape.
	He can do it.
	The Russians have the capability and the training.
	They've been putting up foreign astronauts in their space stations now for more than 30 years.
	They know how to do it, and they're willing to sell them the ticket.
	I think that's a perfectly free enterprise, liberty-oriented approach to things.
	And who's the ones who object?
	We do.
	And that Americans are even asking the question, is space tourism, should it be allowed?
	I mean, are we free?
	Freedom says, it's not my place to tell him what's allowed.
	If he wants to do it, he should do it.
	I've been trying to figure out where our objection was, and I still haven't.
	you know i think this is strange uh... transition between united states and
	russia like with his ships back in the night and they become often we become
	them it's very sad i'm ashamed of my country's about will we have a lot more
	i've been trying to figure out where are objection was and i still haven't
	i really haven't uh... what what inner part of america objected to that was
	I'll tell you, Art, it's very strange, but Americans today seem to want everything to be command from above.
	I was on a radio show the other day and I get one call that says, no, no, the government should run our space program.
	No one else can do it.
	And another call that says, no, no, the government shouldn't do it.
	We should have a corporate board dictate terms.
	And my answer was no.
	Well, the citizens should do it, and no one should tell them how to do it.
	But people seem to want it to be centralized from the top.
	It's very strange.
	I find it very baffling.
	We're supposed to be freedom-oriented, and citizens choose.
	Instead, we want a centralized bureaucracy.
	It's really strange.
	Of all the people you know, and I know a few myself, Robert, who are planning private Enterprise missions into space, and I mean completely private sector here.
	We're talking hotels and things across that line.
	So if they didn't want to see Tito up there bounding around, how are they going to feel about a five-star hotel?
	I think right now that's where we started to talk about Bush's proposal, and I think that's the one area of his proposal that is the biggest failure of the proposal.
	He basically didn't, you know, the problem, Columbia accident and the Columbia Investigation Board's results clearly showed that the American space program needed to be shaken up, clean house.
	Rethink how we do things.
	Not so much to come up with a new project, but to rethink how we do things.
	And that's what Bush failed to do.
	He basically went with the status quo.
	He asked NASA what should be done.
	NASA told him what they would like to do and he decided to say,
	okay, we'll have NASA do it and he's not going to give NASA very much money to do it
	and being a government agency, they're going to need five times as much money
	as any private company would.
	And so unfortunately, it's one of the weaknesses of that proposal.
	We need to shake up how we do our space program.
	And when you talk about the private enterprise, I'll use the ex-private.
	Robert, isn't the funding for this way down the line, isn't it one of those things where you get to announce the beginning of it, sort of put a token little amount toward it, but the real bill is going to be paid by another president.
	Which means it won't get paid.
	Isn't that right?
	Look, I'll use the International Space Station as an example.
	Reagan proposed that around 84, I think it was.
	I always confuse it, 84 or 86.
	It was 84.
	But they did the same thing.
	It was a very small budget to begin with.
	So they basically spent the next 10 years doing blueprints.
	He wanted it built by 1990.
	When 1990 rolled around, they were going to build it for $8 billion.
	They had spent almost $4 billion and only drawn blueprints.
	Because they stretched the money out, and they hadn't built anything.
	The only reason that the space station ever got launched at all was because Clinton forced it through as a foreign policy initiative.
	And that's the only reason it got built.
	He wanted that foreign policy project with the Russians.
	He wasn't interested in space exploration.
	He wanted a foreign policy project.
	How much does the President's announcement change the mission of the space station?
	Well, it changes it drastically.
	It finally gives it its proper focus.
	I mean, I mentioned Polyakov, 14 and a half months in space.
	What the Russians learned over time, and what we started to learn with Skylab, but then dropped the ball, is that If you're going to travel long distances in space, you have to deal with the problems that weightlessness causes on the human body.
	In addition, you have to learn the engineering involved for building the spaceship that will get you there.
	That just doesn't mean making the air system recyclable or the water recyclable, both of which, by the way, the Russians have succeeded in doing, but you also have to learn how to make the spaceship repairable by the crew.
	And that the Russians also learned on Mir.
	They figured out how to do that.
	We also learned, we're learning how to do that on Skylab.
	And the trouble with the International Space Station up to now is we haven't taken that point of view.
	And so the engineering of the International Space Station doesn't allow repair very easily by the crew.
	In fact, it's dependent on the ground.
	What part of the President's articulated mission happens at the Space Station?
	What part does it play?
	He wants to start focusing on medical research, which I think is a smart move.
	The engineering aspect of building spaceships to go to Mars, unfortunately the International
	Space Station can't really do that because it's been designed already and built.
	So it's going to be what it is.
	Unfortunately, the American half of that station is not built with that engineering project
	in mind.
	So it doesn't have closed systems of air and water.
	It doesn't really provide facilities for a crew to live on a station for a long time
	very well.
	The Russian half, though, does those things, because it's basically... The Russian half is essentially their Mir 2, what they were going to build after Mir, and they're basically putting that up now, and they're making it a closed system, and they're actually making it independent.
	They could separate it for their half.
	Their half would function.
	Now, that's something I didn't know.
	I really didn't know that.
	I have no idea.
	It's like there was a line drawn down the middle of the station, their half and our half.
	That's really the way it is?
	Yes.
	You're kidding.
	Absolutely true.
	The two systems are very closely integrated, so they work together, so that both mission controls in both Moscow and the United States, Houston, can operate.
	But no question, the two systems are independent.
	You can separate the two systems.
	And our system is not self-sufficient, so it depends on the Russian half.
	So you're saying in a mission-critical situation, the Russians could pull the big lever and separate the whole damn thing?
	Not at this moment in time, but eventually, yes.
	When they get the whole thing, their whole half finished, yes.
	Our system can never be separated from theirs.
	Wait a minute, they're building in what that will facilitate a separation of the station?
	Well, you see, once again, It's based upon what they learned with Mir.
	Their part of the station has a closed water system.
	They take the urine from the crew.
	They separate out the... How could that be efficient for them, for each side to have its own environmental support system?
	Why is that?
	There's political reasons why they might do that.
	There's political reasons why they might not.
	In terms of, if there was competition between the two nations, then you might actually get more results.
	When we try to cooperate, we tend to not do anything.
	That's still separate issues, but for them, they're very smart.
	They want to have the ability and the flexibility if we fall down on the job, which is maybe
	so, they can pull out and still have their station.
	They are thinking about building that station so that it is independent as possible from
	Earth because it's designed with the idea of learning how to build those interplanetary
	spaceships down the road.
	That's their thinking.
	So they have closed water, closed oxygen, in other words, the oxygen produced from the
	urine so that they can actually provide the air for three guys forever.
	The water comes from the atmosphere.
	They pull it out of the atmosphere and they purify it and you drink it.
	You don't need any other water brought up.
	Which are the two main ingredients.
	They're doing plant experiments on the station where they're actually growing plants to eat.
	Now that's on their half of the station.
	In fact, NASA forbids American astronauts from eating any of those plants.
	Why?
	Because if they screw up, they're died.
	What?
	Oh, I can tell you, it's a really incredible story.
	Fresh plants?
	What?
	Fresh plants?
	Yes, yes, yes.
	It's a salad bowl.
	Gail Bingham out of Utah State University is one of the major space agricultural researchers in the world, and he's been trying for many years to do this kind of research with NASA, but the bureaucracy is too difficult.
	Bob, what the hell are they worried about?
	What the hell are they worried about?
	That something will mutate in the tomatoes?
	No, no, no.
	A lot of it is just power.
	You want to have the experiment controlled by NASA, and in this case it's not.
	It's a Russian experiment.
	The deal is that the Russian cosmonauts, on their personal time, not their work time, tend the garden, and they get to eat half the plants.
	The other half gets sent back for the scientists to study.
	It's a greenhouse that's built by Americans, but it's not on the American half of the station.
	It's a deal with the Russian half, because the Russians say, you know, let's make it happen.
	It's incredible.
	Bingham told me that if you wanted to do this to NASA, it might take him 10 years to get
	one experiment approved with bureaucracy.
	With the Russians, he's already done almost a half a dozen experiments, and they've been
	eating these plants in orbit.
	In the Russian half, they eat the...
	I have videotaped.
	It's very funny.
	You taste it kind of bland when you're in space because of the weightlessness.
	So fresh fruit and fresh vegetables are really...
	Instead of squeezing that tube full of whatever it is, roast beef in a tube, right?
	Is that what we're still eating?
	And while the Russians are having fresh vegetables?
	the most wonderful thing I've ever seen. Instead of squeezing that tube full of whatever it is, roast beef in a
	tube, right?
	Yeah, and baked bag pie, that's right.
	Is that what we're still eating?
	Well, they use fresh vegetables. They use fresh dried stuff.
	And it's not bad.
	But the point is, what the space agriculture stuff is trying to do is if you can grow your plants in space,
	not only are you growing your food, which means you have a resupplyable stock.
	Seems logical.
	But on top of that, it's producing oxygen!
	Which means you have less of a need to... your system is more closed.
	Well, on what official basis are our astronauts not allowed to eat their tomatoes?
	part of it was not to make a difficult whatever but but the the the comes down to one thing in its power national
	to control the experiment you are doing it you better not touch it
	secondly they have this vision they don't they want to have that nasa astronauts have very clear idea of what they beat
	so they don't have to the medical experiments when they do their medical
	research they know exactly what they beat and they keep track of what they
	beat so that they won't be any confusion about what they've been you never know
	what a russian lady which is a silly it's absolutely silly and i know for a
	fact i know that the astronauts don't say this publicly and of
	course they will always deny it
	but you don't think the russians are kind don't let them have some of those
	leaves and salad why not good relations I'm out.
	I don't know what to say.
	I had no idea this was going on up there, and God knows what it could lead to.
	I mean, eventually some grumpy astronaut or cosmonaut drawing a chalk line right down the middle, forbidding the other side to step across.
	Well, actually, what's more likely to happen is that the astronauts themselves on both sides will team up and tell the people on Earth to go away, because the biggest Cultural divide actually isn't between the Russians and the Americans.
	The biggest cultural divide is between the people in space and the people on the ground.
	Because it's very hard to understand the alien environment of weightlessness.
	Do they learn to hate their masters?
	It depends on who the masters are.
	The Russians, because of their long-term program of many missions, they've learned you've got to let the astronauts in space dictate how to do things.
	You let them run the show.
	We don't know that.
	Mission control in Russia, mission control in Houston, do they learn to hate these people?
	Is there a tension between them?
	No, no, no.
	What ends up happening is that American mission control tends to try to tell the astronauts in space How to do everything, when to do it, the schedule every
	minute of their time.
	They keep trying to do that.
	And the astronauts up there want to tell them, no, go away, I'll decide when to do things.
	The Russians have learned this.
	You let the guys in space figure out when to do things at their own pace.
	And Americans have learned it at Skylab.
	This is the same lesson that was learned at Skylab.
	We forgot it.
	We're trying to relearn it again.
	And the Russians have been training us again that you leave the guys in space alone.
	Look, and it's not a matter of facts!
	We've got a break here, we've got a break here.
	Hold on a moment.
	Sheesh!
	But it's absolutely fascinating, isn't it?
	Did you have any idea that this was going on on board the space station?
	I certainly didn't.
	As a matter of fact, it's a first.
	Yeah, it sounds like more than just a friendly rivalry.
	Comradeship perhaps lacking a little bit.
	As they circle from the high desert in the middle of the night.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Good morning.
	Don't leave me this way.
	I can't survive.
	I can't save a life without your love Oh baby, don't leave me this way
	You throw your life by the wind You throw your time in a spin
	I'm...
	I gave you love I thought that we Had made it to the top I gave you all I had to give Why did it have to stop?
	You've blown it all sky high By telling me a lie Without a reason why You've blown it all sky high To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell, from east to the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	line is area code 775-727-1222. To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll-free
	at 800-825-5033. From west of the Rockies, call Art at 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country Sprint Access
	number, pressing Option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903. From coast to coast and
	worldwide on the Internet, call Art Bell. This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell. While
	you're considering your new possible future home on Mars or in space, maybe in orbit or
	something in a five-star hotel or whatever your plans might be, I want to remind you that you
	can always call Art Bell. You I notice that Robert, what he's sent me, has promised to include hair-raising, but little-known events that have occurred in space over the last 40 years.
	So, no doubt his reciting some of those will help you make your decision.
	Stay right there.
	Rest assured that at the top of the hour I shall deliver Mr.
	Zimmerman into the loving Well, you know, most of those little-known events generally occurred on the Soviet-slash-Russian space stations.
	calls but uh... i do want to get into some of the hair raising but little
	known events that have occurred over the last forty years in space will help
	people decide where they're going to live well you know most of those little known events generally
	occurred on the soviet slash russian
	the space station they did some incredible things and uh...
	including construction in space and we don't know much about it
	uh... having one of the best stories to my mind is uh...
	three weeks before the fall of the soviet union on mir they had a project to build
	a forty five for all garter on the air
	That's about four and a half stories tall.
	A girder.
	And they were going to assemble it in ore, but they were using actually a strange alloy, which when you heat it, it remembers its original shape.
	So they were like sleeves that they made a little bit larger.
	They originally made them a small size and then they expanded them and then in space you would heat them and they would squeeze together to act as a joint.
	Wow.
	It's very interesting.
	It's a heat memory.
	It was an alloy that remembered a previous shape and they would actually use it.
	They'd use electricity to heat it and it would get back to its original shape.
	What were they doing?
	What?
	What were they doing?
	They were building a girder that was 45 feet high and the purpose of the girder This tower, essentially, was to put an engine at the top of it so it would be more efficient to rotate Mir.
	Because if you have an engine at the outer axis, away from the axis, you use less fuel to get the thing to rotate.
	Indeed, yes.
	Alright, so they wanted to add this engine, this thruster at the very top of this tower, but they also wanted to test construction technologies in space, because if you're going to have a spaceship traveling to other worlds, you've got to be able to do construction.
	And they wanted to see if this alloy was going to work in orbit as well.
	Douglas Goldstein, financial planner & investment advisor, interviewed Jones on Arutz Sheva Radio.
	One of them gets a great idea. He says, I'm a construction worker. I'm building a girder in space.
	So I'm going to be like every construction worker.
	He goes out and he buys himself a hammer and sickle flag.
	And he's going to put it at the top of this girder when they finish building it.
	They had about, it took them about four spacewalks.
	They built section by section.
	On the outside of the station in spacesuits, they would assemble them.
	They had actually a work table they set up outside the station.
	And they would assemble the pieces and then they hinged it upward.
	So it was vertical, 45 feet.
	And then he decided, look, I've got to get the flag up to the top, and we also test the rigidity of this girder.
	So he climbs up to the top.
	Now you have to understand that the Russian space suit at that time only gives you about seven hours per space walk.
	Right.
	You run out of air.
	Right.
	And so he's climbing.
	They've been already out about four hours, five hours.
	He climbs up to the top, and he puts the flag there, the hammer and sickle.
	And then at that point, the thermal system in his space suit fails.
	Oh.
	Which means that it fogs up.
	He can't see anything.
	Here he is, four and a half stories up in the air on top of this girder on a space station that's 250 miles in the air, and he's quite a distance away from the airlock.
	He's got to come down the girder, then cross two modules to get up to where the airlock is.
	Right.
	And plus, he had a video camera, and the wires got tangled up.
	So his partner climbs up to help, and meanwhile, the astronaut, his name was Artie Bartzky, he rubs his chin at the base of his That's incredible.
	He can get like if he tilts his head down, he can kind of like get a little aerial, his
	chin clears the window, he can see a little bit.
	And it takes him about two hours to get him back inside and close the hatch, which is
	just in time, just about right there.
	What I found most ironic about the story is this hammer and sickle.
	Three weeks later is the fall of the Soviet Union, that was the last hammer and sickle
	to fly anywhere.
	It stood up there for another year before they finally got to the United States.
	That's incredible.
	Where did you get this story?
	Oh, I got this story from the horse's mouth.
	I interviewed both astronauts.
	Artiboski and Sergei Krikalev.
	Krikalev was the last Soviet citizen on that same mission.
	He was the guy that got stuck up there when the Soviet Union fell for an extra six months.
	And I interviewed him for like three days.
	He's very fluent in English because he was the first Russian to fly on a shuttle.
	How much was there that you asked him about in that interview that he couldn't or wouldn't talk about?
	Nothing.
	Nothing at all?
	Nothing.
	Any question I asked him, they were talking.
	He talked to me for hours.
	We spent about three days together.
	In fact, I can't... I'll tell you what I did find.
	You've got to understand the way the Russian society is.
	They're still somewhat closed, but not anywhere like they used to be.
	They really want people to hear this story.
	And some of them, like any normal human being, some of them are a little more suspicious than others.
	Some of them are more old school.
	But they also want to tell their story.
	There's also an awful lot of death involved in the Russian space program that the world doesn't know about.
	Oh, actually, no, that's not true.
	Oh?
	No, that's not true.
	There's not much secretiveness there.
	For example, there was never a cosmonaut that was dead in orbit that no one knows about.
	That's not true.
	That's an old rumor I get asked.
	I'll cut the air question off right off the bat.
	They never lost anyone in orbit that we don't know about.
	At the times that it occurred, we didn't always know about it right away at all, from the Russians.
	In terms of every loss of human life in space, we knew when it happened, because we had to know, because the guys up in space, they announce it, and then their first loss, Karmarv, on Soyuz 1, he dies on the parachute landing.
	And the second crew on Salyut 1, all three men were up for 28 days, It was an incredibly successful mission, and on the return, the atmosphere in their capsule escapes, and they suffocate.
	So, everyone knew they were up in space.
	There's no secret there.
	What they did keep secret is the failures in test programs, to a certain extent.
	The stuff that doesn't get publicized.
	Yes.
	But this is not... That's actually what I was referring to.
	Some of the very... I just want to make it clear, it wasn't stuff that happened in space.
	It was stuff that happened, let's say, either test programs on the ground, it might be fires, it might be They didnít keep it as secret as we think.
	I mean, they had like a guard who died in a plane accident.
	That was pretty much revealed almost immediately.
	Itís interesting if you go back and look at old Soviet press releases, itís really
	interesting.
	They really donít lie about anything.
	What they do is they avoid topics.
	Or later on, theyíll explain the problem after theyíve fixed it.
	Nowadays, itís different.
	They really will tell you almost anything you want to know.
	They really will.
	It was really interesting.
	What you do have in situations is the military cosmonauts, their program is the cosmonauts
	are split into two groups, the military half and the civilian half, and every mission has
	They always have two crew members, there's always a military guy, and there's always a civilian guy.
	I was able to talk to almost every civilian guy who I wanted to talk to.
	You're talking about the Russians.
	What about the Americans?
	What do you know has happened on our missions that we're not fully aware of?
	Is there much, or did we know at all?
	Well, you know, there's some things that happened that in later years we got a little bit more detail out of, but it's mostly because it wasn't reported in great.
	For example, on Skylab, A lot of people will know about this, about how Pete Conrad and Joe Kerwin and Paul White had to repair that station when it was first launched.
	There was damage to a heat, they lost a heat shield and one of their solar panels was lost and another one got tangled up in straps and so they had to do a repair mission to get the one solar panel that was still there untangled and opened.
	What a lot of people don't know is they were not in contact with the ground when they were doing the final Release of that solar panel.
	They had to use rope to pull it, to pull it free as it would come out.
	It would unhinge itself.
	And what people don't know is when they finally got it to release, there was a lot of tension on the line.
	As soon as it released, that tension went away and both men went flying out into space and had to pull themselves back on 45 foot long tethers.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	I had not heard of that.
	And you know, they're not in touch with the ground when this happens.
	They pull themselves back and they, you know, He did it, it was great, and when they got back on the
	ground, they said, ìWe see, we got power, you fixed it.î He said, ìYeah, yeah, it was
	pretty straightforward.î And later on, in later years, they did tell in debriefings what
	happened, but that didnít get any press.
	I only found out about that later.
	Those kind of things, details, thereís not a lot.
	When our astronauts were on Mir, however, there was a lot of secretness in the American
	NASA that didnít want toÖ there was spin, they didnít want to tell the truth.
	So, for example, when Jerry Lininger was on Mir, and there was a fire, it was very difficult
	for him to get anyone on the ground to take the problem seriously.
	He did not get them to listen.
	How terrified were some of the American astronauts after spending time on Mir?
	No, they weren't terrified at all.
	I mean, all of them tell me Mir was a really good vessel, actually.
	It had technical problems at the time we were there because it was There were sections of it that were old that needed overhaul.
	But there were stories about that, though.
	Yes, and in the process of our occupancy, with the money we gave them, they were able to actually refurbish the station.
	And by the time the Americans left Mir, the station was actually in better shape than it had been when we arrived.
	It had new power systems, new solar panels.
	It was really in really good shape.
	That one module that had been hit by the Progress freighter was still out of commission, but
	they were getting power from three of its four solar panels and they were working.
	Mir actually functioned reasonably well by the time we left, and most of the astronauts
	that went to Mir, they were not terrified by the situation on Mir.
	There were problems there.
	But there was one or two that came back expressing some trepidation.
	I clearly remember that.
	Jerry Leninger in particular was very unhappy with what went on at Mir, but mostly because
	of the difficulty he had to get NASA to take the situation on Mir seriously.
	That was getting, once again, that communication problem between the ground and the men and
	women up in space.
	He could not get them to listen to him.
	In fact, when he was on Mir before Michael Foale, before the collision, and this was
	Douglas Goldstein, financial planner & investment advisor, interviewed Leningrader on Arutz Sheva Radio.
	Douglas Goldstein, financial planner & investment advisor, interviewed Leningrader on Arutz Sheva Radio.
	NASA takes the word of the Russians, who at that time was not communicating very well at the very beginning of this program, and they wouldn't tell us what was going on, and they swept it under the rug.
	And Leninger's trying to tell them what happened, and they won't listen to him.
	And so the end result of that is when they decided to do a second test docking three months later, when Michael Foale was there, it failed again, but this time it turned into a collision.
	And that was partly because Leninger could not get the ground to understand that the Russians With using some poor judgment in some of the things they were doing, and he wanted them to be aware of it.
	Oh, that would be politically difficult.
	Poor judgment is very politically difficult.
	In this particular case, too, Art, because remember, that mission was a foreign policy initiative by Clinton, and to say bad things about our partner in that foreign policy initiative was politically incorrect, and the Clinton administration did not want to hear any of that.
	So they were willing to look away from any possible dangers.
	And that's a similar problem that's happened with Columbia and Challenger.
	Management concerns overrided the engineering concerns.
	And when you're in space and you're trying to learn how to build ships in space, engineering has got to be the boss.
	And that's a problem.
	And it's a problem our space program has right now.
	We were talking at the beginning of the program about the reasons to go.
	And for the pragmatists out there, Robert, I really think you ought to take a moment and nevertheless outline the real hardline money benefits we can realize by going to space, or potentially realize.
	Any American investor worth his salt would want to know the possible upside of a venture.
	Well, I can give you one in particular that is directly beneficial to people on Earth.
	that a long-term space flight connects with and that's bone loss.
	When you're in space, if you don't exercise in space, you're going to lose anywhere from a half to 3% of your bone
	density in the weight-bearing bones per month.
	Very similar to osteoporosis, which I have myself personally. It's a problem.
	A lot of people have on Earth. You lose bone density.
	Weightlessness causes that to happen.
	The research to try to reduce that bone loss is crucial to be able to go to Mars,
	but the result of learning how to prevent the bone loss is going to be directly applicable to curing osteoporosis.
	Do you know if the Russians completely conquered the problem?
	No.
	What they have found, and I mentioned this with Polyakov, what they have found, and this is an interesting, once again, cultural difference between the United States and Russia.
	The Russians have flown the missions.
	They've flown, they've had four people who've been in space more than a year.
	including polyacloth, and they've done innumerable missions longer than six months,
	and we've now done a few since we've had the ISS.
	And what they have learned is that if you do certain exercises and a certain regimen of diet,
	but mostly exercise, and that includes anywhere from 90 minutes to two hours of exercise per day,
	and it's got to be specific kinds of exercises, you can reduce the bone loss pretty routinely to about a
	half a percent a month, which in space is tolerable for getting to and from Mars
	without question.
	Maybe Mars, but not much beyond.
	No, not much beyond, but then you get to Mars, you know, you do it step-by-step then, maybe.
	But then maybe, you know, and they're still looking at other solutions.
	Now, it's interesting to me, talking to American doctors and American scientists and astronauts, they don't want to listen to the Russian results.
	They say, oh no, the exercise doesn't help.
	But they haven't done the work!
	And I don't understand how they can just dismiss it.
	The Russians seem to be pretty confident about this.
	However, if we're going to go to Mars to really understand the problem, you're going to have to go 18 months, maybe, or even 24 in orbit to see the consequences of that and how you can reduce the bone loss even more.
	Once again, that's directly applicable to osteoporosis on Earth.
	Once again, the medical results from every long-space mission, especially our Skylab missions, was immeasurable.
	In terms of medical research.
	How would you be, from a continuing medical point of view, Robert, if you were living on Mars?
	In the same field?
	In terms of bone loss, that's not a problem.
	As soon as you put some gravity there, the problem goes away.
	Okay, so if you were living on Mars, this wouldn't be an issue?
	The bone loss itself is no longer an issue.
	There are issues, of course.
	See, that's the interesting thing about Bush's proposal, because he's talking about setting up moon bases, and he's talking about using the space station to learn about long-term weightlessness.
	And you see, there's two components.
	If you're going to go to Mars and set up bases on Mars, you have to learn two things.
	You have to learn how to travel to Mars, that's one problem, and you have to learn how to live on Mars, that's another problem.
	And to learn how to live on Mars is what you do on the moon.
	And some of the problems that will exist on a low-gravity environment We don't quite know yet.
	In fact, we don't know because we haven't done it.
	One of the issues it's going to be, it's going to mostly, I think, have to do with engineering to build the residence, the facility that you live in, to make it, once again, a closed environment that's habitable and reasonably pleasant to live in.
	And that's, once again, an engineering question that has to be learned over time.
	And I think that's where the moon comes in because it's close, you can do the research without having to go nine months One way, just to get there.
	Is there something so valuable on the moon or Mars, potentially, to make all this profitable?
	Don't know.
	You know, it's the same question that you could have asked Columbus.
	It's an old cliché, but it's really true.
	There was no way of knowing where the profit was going to be.
	I'll use Betty at the British Settles.
	When they first came to Virginia, they thought they were going to find gold everywhere.
	Of course, gold was not where the profit was.
	In fact, the first Six or seven years of the Virginia colony, they lost a fortune and they lost a lot of lives.
	Almost two-thirds of the colonists died.
	Until they discovered, and this is a discovery that happened after they got there, they discovered tobacco.
	And then they started to make a real profit from Virginia.
	Later on in the North American, the English colonies, the New England colonies, they didn't come with the same goals, but by then they had learned how to colonize a new world, so they could actually just create Self-sufficient colonies for people to live in.
	They came to practice religion.
	Tobacco, however, will not serve even rare Martian tobacco.
	No, that's true.
	The point I was trying to get at is that they didn't know about tobacco when they came, and we don't know what Mars will get us there.
	One of the things I think the space is going to bring us is minerals.
	I mean, for example, not so much Mars, but the asteroids.
	You get an iron, a stony iron asteroid, You can pull out pure iron in quantities more than has been mined in the history of the human race very quickly.
	So there's actual real minerals to be mined that could be very useful for both industries on Earth and on space.
	On top of that, there's always the energy question.
	Space has gobs of free energy coming from the Sun.
	And that can be... That's a technological problem that has to be solved.
	It's not a difficult problem to solve, how to turn that energy and get it down to Earth.
	Collect that energy and then perhaps microwave it to Earth or something along those lines.
	This is not a difficult problem, but it does require the engineering up in space to figure out how to do it.
	And that, once again, is learning how to be in space.
	And then there's the scientific benefits, which is learning about the universe.
	And it's learning about the Earth.
	You learn how Mars became the way it is.
	You learn how Venus became the way it is.
	Venus is a hellhole.
	You know, it's sulfuric clouds, it's 900 degrees Fahrenheit on the surface, it's 900 pounds per square inch atmosphere, it's really a horrible place to even dream of going to, but yet the planet is about almost exactly the same size as Earth.
	All right, Robert, hold it right there.
	When we come back, I want to turn you over to the audience.
	Sure!
	They're going to have lots of questions about all of this, I'm sure.
	I can answer them all.
	I know you can.
	All right, stay right there.
	Robert Zimmerman is my guest.
	And, uh, he's up for you now.
	So when these phone numbers come winging your way here in a few moments, listen very carefully.
	We're about to go to the phones.
	I'm not sure if that's a good idea.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	Your line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from east of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach Art by calling your in-country Sprint Access number, pressing
	option 5, and dialing toll free, 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast, and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM, with Art Bell.
	Well, we've obviously got a very strong advocate for the U.S.
	space program on our hands here, Robert Zimmerman.
	So it might be sort of interesting, I thought, to ask him about the growing army of people out there.
	Some of them citing all kinds of technical things and photographs and all the rest of it as evidence that we never went to the moon.
	I wonder what Robert would say to that group.
	There is an entire army of people out there, Robert, who, well, they'll cite technical details and photographs and do
	all kinds of things and tell you and convince you we have never, we never went to the moon.
	It never happened. It's Hollywood. It's baloney. It just never happened.
	What do you say to those folks?
	I think it's despicable.
	I think it's no different than the Holocaust revisionists who say Hitler didn't kill 11 million people, mostly Jews.
	There are astronauts who died.
	I've spoken to people, their relatives, to make it possible for us to go to the moon.
	It's a horror to my mind.
	It's almost like Americans can't deal with reality anymore.
	What it comes down to is this.
	Our generation, the post Apollo generation, has really not accomplished that much in the United States when it comes to space exploration or exploration.
	We haven't done great things.
	I'm very disappointed.
	Hold on, Robert.
	Because we haven't accomplished great things, we're willing to denigrate the achievements of others to make it seem less of an achievement.
	Robert, take a deep breath.
	With me for a second, and explain to me what you think is the psychology behind these people that's pushing them in this direction.
	What's driving them?
	Well, I think it's what I was just saying.
	I mean, our generation has not accomplished very much, and a lot of this is almost like, well, we can't do it, so maybe no one else ever did, and let's make believe that didn't happen.
	It really is absurd when you think about it because millions of people went to Florida
	over and over again to watch the Saturn V launch.
	Where did it go?
	I mean, it's absurd to just send it up into orbit and not go anywhere.
	Okay, so then you're trying to tell me then that the reason you think people are doing this is because they think they can't do it and we can't do it now and therefore it never could have been done?
	That's right.
	That's pretty wild.
	It's a lot of this psychobabble.
	I hate to over-psychoanalyze people, but I just think, but yeah, that's, to my mind, that's part of it, but I just think it's really tragic and it's also tragic for another reason, which is, and if this gets back to the kind of exploration that's going on on Mars, there's a lot of focus on What I consider to be fringe fantasy stuff, when the actual research going on itself is fascinating, the real stuff is amazing.
	And the same thing applies to man exploration.
	You know, the space station exploration research that's been done has involved some daring do and some really courageous acts by a lot of men and women.
	And instead of focusing on that, we're trying to make believe that past achievements haven't occurred.
	And I think that's a shame.
	There's really great stuff going on, and there's people willing to do even greater stuff.
	And rather than give them the wherewithal to get it done, we're kind of like trying to make believe we didn't do anything in the past that can't be done in the future.
	And that's really tragic.
	That's a pretty weird psychology.
	It is a very weird psychology.
	I don't understand it.
	I mean, I don't understand it.
	I mean, it doesn't take much research to find out very clearly that we went to the moon.
	You don't have to do much to really the evidence.
	It's just absurd to try to make believe it was a Hollywood set.
	It's just not possible.
	The people who believe that are every bit as passionate as are you.
	Oh, well, that's fine.
	You know, all I'm saying is that I know people who have relatives died to make it possible to go to the moon.
	I'm sure we want to try to denigrate the honor of their memory.
	And I'm sorry, I will say that bluntly again and again and again.
	I have no problem with that, and I appreciate your response.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hey, it's Mark and Jack from the home of Super Bowl 39.
	Oh, hey there.
	Hey, Mark.
	Our first one to say, you're one of the least pretentious fellows on radio, and I highly respect you.
	Thank you.
	I hope you never retire.
	Thank you.
	For your guest, well, I think it was novel for GW to encourage this Mars proposal at such a time as this.
	But in the interim, what would it take for a Mars probe to collect a sample and return to Earth with it?
	It's a good question.
	Actually, the unmanned program that NASA's got going right now is actually a very, very well coordinated, smartly designed program.
	They kind of like, it took them a few mistakes and a few failed missions to finally get the thing organized.
	Their inevitable goal is to bring a sample back.
	What they're doing is, every two years, the orbital arrangements of Mars and Earth make it convenient to send probes there, and that's why they all come in bunches.
	So what they're doing is, they send orbital missions, and they did that two years ago, and that takes photos, and that takes spectroscopy, and it finds out where they should send the rovers.
	And then two years pass, and now they're sending the rovers, and what the rovers do is they land where they think the good stuff is, and do the research, to try to prove that what they're seeing in the orbital
	photos is what they think it is.
	How do you think they could mechanically get a sample back here?
	How could that be achieved?
	Well, part of the problem there is you have to work out...
	The key is getting it off the planet.
	So what you're going to have to do is figure out, you have to create a little lunar limb that has an engine that can fire and go up.
	It's not quite so little.
	That's not such a difficult thing to do.
	But it's not as little as the one for Mars, because there's very little gravity on Mars, or on the Moon rather, but more on Mars.
	More on Mars, but it's still significantly less than Earth.
	It's a third of Earth, plus it's got an atmosphere which can be maybe used.
	Well, you basically have to put an engine there.
	It has to be able to launch.
	So what you do is you create a robot arm that reaches down, grabs some samples, drops them into a hopper, closes itself up, and takes off again.
	Well, yes.
	I'm making it sound really simple.
	You are.
	I'm not an engineer.
	But this is not technical.
	You know, the Russians, the Soviets did this on the moon.
	They were able to send a robot to the moon, get a sample, and bring it back to Earth.
	Again, though, not the same degree of difficulty as Mars.
	No, absolutely not.
	But nonetheless, they were able to do it.
	I don't see that as a significant engineering challenge.
	It's just a question of sitting down and doing it.
	What our space program, our unmanned program is doing, though, is it's not going to do that mission until it has a much clearer idea of where to land and what to look for.
	And that's why they've set this program up.
	And they're not planning any sample return mission until after 2011 in the program as they've got it now.
	There's going to be another set of orbital missions in two years.
	Followed by a much more sophisticated set of rovers two years after that.
	And then at that point, they might start considering where they're going to send their sample mission.
	And it's definitely in the plans.
	It's just they haven't settled on where and how it's going to be designed yet.
	All right.
	Excellent.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	This is Jeff calling from Los Angeles.
	Hello, Jeff.
	Hi, Robert.
	I, too, am a big advocate of the space station program and the space shuttle program.
	And my question to you this evening, you talked a little bit about it.
	What are the, what are your top, maybe top three or top five products or processes you see coming out of the ISS?
	Here's a couple that I like.
	Protein crystal growth, they're much larger and much higher yield in space, much purer.
	Zeolite crystals can be much larger and much more purely grown in space.
	Glass fibers are clearer with less defects and easier to produce in space, including Z-blend fibers.
	And antibiotics.
	There's a tenfold increase in the yield in some antibiotics grown in space.
	So I was wondering what... All of that is remarkable.
	Does it turn into enough dollars to justify what we put into it?
	Well, you know, I actually am not a big fan of the science research going on on ISS.
	I mean, I am and I'm not.
	I'm very conflicted.
	I think the science research is valuable.
	It's worthwhile.
	But I think we're missing the main point of the station.
	And this would be kind of like, we go to the moon, but we make believe the Apollo capsule is really just a science laboratory.
	We're going to go proteins on it.
	What is it we're missing?
	We're not interested in really landing.
	What is it we're missing?
	We're missing, as I mentioned before, this is, we're not at a stage where we're ready to do that kind of factory work in orbit.
	We're not really there.
	We need to build and design our engineering so that people can live in space for long periods of time successfully.
	And that engineering is not there yet.
	We have to focus on building those vessels in orbit that people can live on for a long period of time and solve all the problems involved with that before we can even start thinking about the science research.
	That doesn't mean the science research cannot be going on at the same time.
	but it shouldn't be the end and focus of the program, and that's where the ISS has been
	screwed up.
	It shouldn't be the focus of the program.
	Like I say, it would be like they did grow protein crystals, by the way, on one of the
	Apollo missions to the moon, but it would be like making that the main reason you create
	the Apollo capsule.
	Of course, that's foolish, and it's the same thing with ISS.
	So all the things you're mentioning are good, and they all should happen, but they shouldn't
	be the priority.
	And in fact, because they aren't the priority, a lot of that research is now going to be put aside for a while, because we need to first find out how to make it possible for people to live in space long enough to get to and from Mars.
	Shouldn't the Russians have accumulated most of that needed information?
	Some, yes, but once again, Polyakov's mission was only 14 and a half months.
	If you're going to go to Mars, a realistic mission is probably a minimum of 18 months,
	more likely 24.
	Of that time, most of it is going to be in weightlessness.
	The question that Polyakov didn't answer, because when he got back after 14 and a month,
	he was able to stand immediately, but he could not walk without help for at least an hour.
	Now that's better than most people, but is it good enough on Mars?
	For an hour.
	And then, what about a follow-up to that, Robert?
	How did he do in the next days and weeks and months?
	He recovered remarkably well.
	Within an hour, he was walking on his own.
	And he did better than almost anyone has ever done after a long mission like that.
	And actually, the other three guys that have been up more than a year that the Russians have sent all managed to be walking within an hour.
	But that first few minutes, they needed help.
	Well, okay.
	When you get to Mars, there's not going to be anyone there to help you.
	Yeah, but that's still not a lot.
	I mean, did the follow-up show any other serious consequences?
	No, definitely not.
	In fact, your heart and blood systems, which do get redistributed in space, your blood doesn't pool to the legs.
	You feel like you have a head cold all the time, because it's like you're hanging upside down in a chin-up bar in space, because the blood rushes to the head.
	And that's all the time.
	But it redistributes itself.
	It takes a few days.
	Your muscles come back.
	The balance takes a little longer to come back completely, but not horribly.
	It takes, you know, pretty much within a day or so, everyone is pretty much more or less normal.
	They can work.
	They can manage.
	Especially if they've done the exercises appropriately.
	That's what the Russians have learned.
	Well, we're down line.
	What happens at 18?
	Yeah, we're down line.
	We're down line here far enough so that if there had been secondary consequences, we would have seen them and haven't.
	Is that correct?
	No, it's unknown.
	Once again, 18 months is not the same as 14 months, and we don't know.
	I think that it's absolutely absurd to think, you know, when we went to the moon, we made sure we did a two-week mission before we sent anyone to the moon, because we knew the missions were going to be at least 10 days.
	I think it would be foolish to send a crew to Mars without having done a 24-month mission in Earth orbit, and find out, well, do the exercises work over that length of time?
	What about bone loss?
	Does it get really, really bad?
	I mean, these are questions that happen, and it would be very nice to combine that mission with landing on the moon.
	So you have an interim gravity for a few days.
	How do you respond after nine months in weightlessness, and then you land on the moon?
	That would be a really perfect experiment to learn what would happen when you get to Mars, because it's very comparable.
	All right.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hello.
	Hello, this is David calling from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
	Hi, David.
	Thank you, and Robert for a very informative show tonight.
	A couple questions for you, Robert.
	First one, has any experiments or anything been, or hypothesis been formed on asteroids out between Mars and Jupiter as to its origin?
	I'm sorry, the volume was low, so I didn't quite get the question.
	Okay, he's talking about asteroids between the Earth and Mars, is that correct?
	Yes.
	And he's speculating that a planet once may have exploded, the Van Flanderen theory, that a planet once exploded there.
	Is that correct, Collar?
	Between Mars and Jupiter.
	Is that correct, Collar?
	The asteroid belt, Mars and Jupiter.
	Is that what you're talking about, Collar?
	Yes, that's correct.
	No, actually not.
	What the scientists think happened in that case is that the gravity of Jupiter prevented any planet from ever coalescing.
	What's to the Rockies?
	In other words, before any planet could come together, the strong gravity of Jupiter would
	kind of break it apart.
	So all you get is the remnants of a planet.
	And there's not that much there, because over the eons, Jupiter's gravity has more or less
	swept it out.
	So what's left is not very much, actually.
	It wouldn't make much of a planet.
	And it wasn't that it exploded, it just never was able to form.
	Gotcha.
	All right.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hi, this is Brandon from Seattle.
	I'd like to thank you guys for this great show you've been putting on.
	It is hot stuff, really.
	Welcome.
	Yeah, I'd like to ask him a few questions about some of the interviews he's given to some of the astronauts.
	Have they ever talked about extraterrestrials or anything of that sort?
	It's a fair question.
	I know that certainly things were seen, Robert, in space.
	And there were reports of, oh, I don't know, two or three different Pretty wild incidents, angels, and some wild stories.
	What about it?
	The astronauts I've spoken to don't talk about it.
	They have not seen anything.
	I've talked to a lot of guys and gals, and they don't really report anything spectacular like that.
	What they do say is, you know, you do see that the things you see in space are space things, which have to do, like, The Aurora Borealis, you've seen it from above, so you fly
	through it on the shuttle, so it looks different and it looks spectacular.
	The fuel that spills out of the craft or even ice, it becomes sparkly stars all around your
	ship.
	It's really spectacular.
	But I haven't come across any astronaut at this point that's spoken to me about seeing
	angels or extraterrestrials.
	I'm sorry to say that.
	Once again, if that could be found and seen, it would actually be to everyone in the space program's benefit, because it would get us going.
	Well, I'm not sure.
	I don't know about angels.
	Well, angels, yeah, that's a little bit more difficult.
	Yeah, that might be a little over the top.
	But on the other hand, so would little creatures of any other description be very over the top?
	If a rover took a picture of a creature walking across the face of Mars, no matter what it looked like, and that picture was there, they would be quite excited, and they would be putting it on front pages.
	I heard you say that with great enthusiasm earlier in the show.
	Are you sure such a picture would, without interruption, consideration, and phone calls being made, get to the American public?
	I don't know about that.
	I have no doubt.
	Once again, I speak to the guys who handle the cameras, and they want this.
	If they saw that... Sure, I know that.
	And the fact is, the policy that NASA does have with this kind of stuff is that the raw images get released immediately, and there are too many people involved.
	For any picture to be kept secret.
	The policy is the raw image, and you can go to the web and see the raw images from both Spirit and Opportunity, and there's hundreds of them.
	You certainly can, but there is a period of time, I believe, when they go buy mail-in before they get distributed on the web.
	Well, in this case, not mail-in, because he's global surveillance.
	Or somebody like mail-in, it doesn't matter.
	The point I'm getting at, though, is I'm sorry, if that happened, He would have a press release out the next minute.
	The only reason it was delayed was so he could write the press release.
	He would not want to hide it.
	It just doesn't pay for him.
	And this is once again getting back to government and bureaucracy.
	This brings money into the bank.
	Alright, so you're saying then that NASA's official policy on this is if they ran into an alien, by God, we'd know about it right away.
	Oh yeah.
	No question about it.
	They could not keep that secret.
	Not a chance.
	Not a chance in a million years.
	I'm sorry.
	I don't believe... That's conspiratorial stuff that I think is silly.
	There's just no way to keep it secret because people talk.
	And too many people... Americans just assume they have the right to speak.
	And too many of those scientists are going to be talking very quickly.
	It just can't be kept secret.
	There's too many press guys who are going to be wanting to know, including me, and who talk to them.
	It just can't.
	There's no way.
	I'm sorry.
	I mean, I know a lot of your listeners aren't going to agree with me and they're going to say, ah, nah, he's part of the conspiracy, but I'm sorry.
	I just... I wouldn't accuse you of that.
	However... You've noticed I'm not shy about telling what I think.
	No, you're not.
	You're not.
	No, and that's fine.
	Listen, hold it right there.
	We've got a break.
	This is an awful lot of fun.
	We've got lots of people who want to talk to Robert Zimmerman, so...
	Just hang in there and you'll get your chance.
	From the high desert, I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Subscribe to the After Dark Newsletter and reserve your free CD of Art Bell and the late father Malachi Martin.
	888-727-5505 888-727-5505
	888-727-5505 I'll find a place in his life.
	I've been drifting on a sea of heartbreak, trying to get myself ashore for so long.
	He's got a man.
	I've been drifting on a sea of heartbreak.
	Trying to get myself ashore for so long.
	For so long.
	Listening to the strangest stories, wondering where it all went wrong for so long.
	For so long.
	But hold on, hold on, hold on to what you got.
	So hold on, hold on, hold on to what you got.
	Do Sunk with Art Bell. Call the wildcard line at area code 7.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	The first time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
	To talk with Art Bell from East of the Rockies, call toll free at 800-825-5033.
	From west of the Rockies, call ART at 800-618-8255.
	International callers may reach ART Bell by calling your in-country Sprint Access Number,
	pressing Option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903.
	From coast to coast, and worldwide on the Internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with ART
	Bell.
	A very strong advocate for the space program.
	That's what we have with Robert Zimmerman, as Yodel would say.
	Anyway, he's an awful lot of fun.
	He's got a lot of stories to tell and things to say that you may never have heard before.
	If you have a question for him, we're deep into the phones.
	Be right with you.
	You know, one has to imagine.
	Bye.
	The really good show would be to get Robert Zimmerman together with one of those advocates for we never went to the moon.
	Here's a couple of computer messages.
	Real quickly, Cory from Minnesota says, this guy's full of himself and NASA.
	Ask him how the moon missions ever got through the Van Allen radiation belt.
	That's one of them.
	You know where that comes from.
	Or Jeff in Sarnie, Ontario, I take offense to your guest comparing the belief of an Apollo moon hoax the belief that the holocaust never happened I hate
	the idea of a moon hoax but some of the evidence of it cannot be easily explained away in my
	opinion Robert
	well I mean the first point I had to be detailed very frustrating because the Van Ellendale
	they know the radiation levels there When they went through the Van Allen belts on Apollo 8, they were checking them very carefully with about a half a dozen unmanned space probes in solar orbit as well as Earth orbit.
	So how much radiation?
	How much was there?
	And it was not dangerous.
	It's a higher level, they know what the rabs are, but it wasn't unreasonable.
	And it was definitely survivable.
	It's just not a non-issue.
	It's a non-starter, it's not an issue.
	It wouldn't be something you could pass through frequently.
	There is an issue you have to deal with, but it's not... In fact, truth of the matter is, a long-term mission to Mars, you have to deal with making sure you have certain shielding.
	And actually, that problem was solved by the Russians as well, because if you... You're going to have batteries to store your power from the solar panels, and you're going to have water tanks to store your water that you're recycling.
	And those two units Would you have to launch a mission to Mars during a solar minimum?
	What he would do is he would sleep in the module where most of the batteries in the
	water tanks were.
	And he had, he got no, what happens to all astronauts, they get what they call cosmic
	ray flashes in their eyes.
	Your eyes open or close, it doesn't matter.
	A cosmic ray comes through and it causes a flash in your eye because those get to you
	in space.
	Well, he didn't get that when he was sleeping there because he's protected.
	Would you have to launch a mission to Mars during a solar minimum?
	Could you not risk launching near a solar maximum?
	Well, this is getting back to one of the things we need to find out.
	The solar maximum has risks involved.
	Once again, this is an engineering question.
	Can you put the safety shielding in a ship practically?
	Can you put that much shielding?
	And since you need to bring batteries and water tanks up to the station anyway, I'm not sure it would be quite that bad.
	they likely protect you from most of that stuff, but I'm not the engineer.
	There is certain very careful calculations that have to be done to make sure of that.
	There are indeed certain dangers.
	I mean, if there was a super flare directed right at them, there are those who suggest you couldn't live through that.
	I'm not sure it would be quite that bad.
	I don't know the exact numbers, so I'm not gonna say that's wrong, but I just don't know.
	I would say, though, that based on what I do know about solar flares, the shielding for that
	is far from difficult.
	It's just a simple... Okie dokie.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hi.
	Hi, this is Tim from Cool Lake, Alberta, Canada.
	Okay, you're going to have to yell at us a little, Tim.
	You're not too loud.
	Okay, I've got a question for Robert.
	Yes.
	And it's to do with the rovers that are sitting on Mars right now?
	Yes, sir.
	I'm a proponent of these unmanned missions, I think, like going back to the moon, where you guys have already been, or going to Mars would be just a colossal, huge investment of money.
	It'd be like building a Saturn V all over again.
	I don't think you'd be able to afford it.
	But why did they... I'd like to go actually to Europa and go salmon fishing through that ice, but speaking of ice, the Mars, why didn't they land the rovers closer to the North Pole, where the ice is, And they could actually take a look, because the ice, as you know, maybe that was the last ice where the water flowed, whatever then happened to create it, and the water flowed to the North Pole.
	Let me answer the last one first.
	They did try to, you know, the previous lander that failed, that disappeared, was supposed to land at the edge of the polar ice cap, for that exact reason.
	And why they didn't go back there is because I think they decided To study some of the geology in the middle regions of the planet where there is evidence that water once flowed and get a better idea of the geology at that point.
	The poles are more risky because the geology there is more unstable.
	It changes all the time and it's very likely the reason polar lander was lost is because it landed in rough terrain and was not able to unfold and make contact with us.
	And so I think they made a A cost-benefit decision to try to be a little safer, but go places that could answer major geological questions.
	And later rovers will have much greater range, and so you maybe put them down, once again, maybe put them down much closer to the pole, but not at the pole, and actually travel to the pole.
	Now in terms of manned versus unmanned, I think this is always a strawman debate.
	You need unmanned missions to do the scouting that's necessary.
	They're cheaper, they're simpler, they can get you the basic knowledge you need for when
	you want to go with men.
	We did this with Apollo, we had landers, we had orbiters to figure out where we wanted
	to land and to find out what the surface was like.
	It is a mistake to think you can ever, for the same amount of money, for less money,
	learn as much with unmanned probes.
	It actually costs a lot more and takes a lot longer to try to equal what humans can do
	at the same time.
	Robert, let me ask you a science fiction-y kind of question.
	Okay.
	But it's not really so outrageous.
	I mean, Mars is, oh, I guess by comparison to other planets, almost hospitable.
	Yes.
	So, almost is the key word here.
	Now, that's a little facetious, but I guess I want to ask you if you think someday it will be possible to terraform a planet.
	Start a planet on some kind of course that will eventuate in an atmosphere or some other goal you might have for that planet, or is that too godlike for you?
	No, I actually think that, you know, of course.
	I mean, what's the old saying when a scientist says it's impossible, wait for it to happen?
	No, I think this is going to be down the road.
	It's going to happen.
	But I think it's a mistake for us to focus on that right now, because we really don't even know what it's like to live on a low-gravity planet at all.
	We don't have the energy engineering at the moment.
	And I think the people who will solve that problem, because they'll have a need to solve it, will be the people living on Mars.
	And they will solve it, because it is definitely doable.
	You've got the ingredients on Mars for making the atmosphere you need.
	And it's just a matter of figuring out how to do that, but you've got to live there to figure that out, and we're not at that stage yet.
	Oh, by the way, your caller mentioned Europa, and I would love to get to Europa.
	Europa could be, actually, of all the globes in the solar system, planets and moons, Europa actually has maybe the best chance of actually having life.
	Because it not only has a lot of water, we think it might have liquid water on the inside, And you combine liquid water with energy, and you very conceivably could have life in that internal ocean.
	This is a great mystery.
	I mean, Europa has lots of lines, fissures all across its surface, where the ice crust is cracked from orbital mechanics.
	But in those ridges, they see red material coming out, and they don't know what that red material is.
	And I'm not going to speculate what it is, But it sure is interesting to think what it might be.
	We don't know what comes in from that ocean underneath.
	We don't even know exactly how much of an ocean there is, but it's likely to be there because tidal forces from Jupiter are probably going to keep the water liquid.
	Well, if it's volcanic.
	Water as volcano.
	Well, if it's volcanic.
	Then there could be life down there somewhere, because we've got it.
	Way down at the bottom of our oceans, all around these weird volcanic vents, there is life.
	That's right.
	I'm trying to figure where you'd fit in as a crew member on a Mars mission.
	I'd be the poet.
	You're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Hi.
	Good evening.
	Good morning.
	How are you doing?
	Good morning.
	Yes.
	Mr. Zimmerman, how are you doing?
	I'm doing great.
	First of all, I want to preach to you.
	I want to tell you, I really love your show.
	First time I've talked to you, sir.
	Please keep it up.
	Thank you.
	Don't ever stop.
	Mrs. Emmerman, real quick, have you ever heard or do you know of NASA ever trying, since we have so many problems with nuclear waste, trying to put something on the moon or just sending it out into space?
	Is there problems with that?
	I mean, would that ever be a problem?
	Has it ever come up with NASA to take the nuclear waste out of our planet, either take it to the moon or just send it way out?
	Why would they ever think of that or have they ever thought of that?
	Just let me make sure I understand the question.
	You're asking, could we use space as a dumping ground for the nuclear waste on Earth?
	Yeah, that's right.
	As it stands, the dumping ground is going to be miles from me, Yucca Mountain.
	I can understand the concern.
	This is getting back to the third aspect of space exploration.
	I mentioned you've got to learn how to get to another planet, and then you've got to learn how to live on the planet.
	Well, the third aspect of that is how to get off the Earth.
	And that's the biggest problem of all, because cheap access to space is still a problem.
	And the reason you don't use space as a method of dumping out nuclear waste is we don't have a really good, reliable, and cheap way to haul it up out of orbit.
	And the reliability is very important, because if you're taking nuclear waste up on a ship and you have an explosion, you've now caused a much bigger problem.
	This is not an unreasonable, down-the-road, possible idea.
	But, once again, Americans love to really think far into the future, and I kind of like to think really near future.
	When we get to about 50 cents a pound, maybe.
	Yes, we've got to bring it down to about 50 cents a pound.
	I think that's about right.
	I would love it.
	That would be great.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Robert Zimmerman.
	Yeah, how are you doing, Robert?
	Fine.
	Howdy.
	This is Paul from Yakima, Washington, KIT.
	I've got a question concerning gravitational wave detection, and are you familiar with the Lisa Project?
	I'm sorry, it's very faint.
	It's hard to hear you.
	The what?
	The Lisa Project?
	Yes, the Lisa Project.
	Do you know anything about the Lisa Project?
	The name actually rings a bell, but you're going to have to remind me.
	I know the name, but I can't remember what it is.
	It's a laser and a zero-meter space antenna to detect gravitational waves.
	Oh, okay, yes, yes.
	LIGO and Lisa, yes.
	Yes, I have a theory concerning the space junk, the 8,000 plus objects that are zinging around our orbit in space.
	Alright, real quick.
	Okay, whether the data that we've accumulated tracking those items may be used to detect gravitational waves.
	Do you think that's possible?
	That sounds like actually not a bad idea, because they do track the space junk in orbit very precisely, within inches.
	They really need to know every item that's there, and they do have a very precise sense, and so that actually might not be a bad idea.
	I leave the math to the scientists.
	I just translate their work so that we can understand it.
	I'm not sure about the math of that.
	How big a problem is space junk now, both to our satellites, Satellite constellations we have up there, and boy, we've got a lot of them right now, and to a manned space station, and how much of a danger in general is all that junk?
	It's an issue.
	It's an issue that has to be dealt with.
	How much of one?
	It depends on who you talk to.
	My impression of the situation is it just needs awareness at this point more than anything else, and it also depends on where in orbit you are.
	I mean, if you're in geosynchronous orbit, it's not so much junk that's going to hit you, it's just that there's just so many slots up there for geosynchronous satellites, so there's kind of a fight to get who's going to get what slot.
	In terms of lower Earth orbit, it's mixed, because once again, you've got a range of different orbits.
	The problem, I don't think, at this stage of the game is serious, but it definitely bears watching, because you do get objects flying about that have to be tracked.
	Don't we get more of them every time we launch?
	To a certain extent, but you've got to understand that there's a cycling going on.
	You're also losing more all the time, because the orbits decay.
	I mean, you've got to understand, at low Earth orbit, about 200 miles, where the space station hangs, there is an atmosphere, and that atmosphere does slow the objects down, and they do decay.
	They come out of the orbit.
	So, it's a process.
	You get some new ones, but you get... And actually, because of the issue, they're trying very hard not to add more junk.
	So, because of that, I think, if anything, the problem might actually be coming less.
	But, you know, it's something you have to be aware of, because, you know, we used to just nonchalantly throw gloves away and stuff like that, and that's not really a good idea, and they know that now.
	Because if a glove hit you hard enough, it would put a hole, probably.
	Right, but you also have to recognize this, that, for example, if, at the International Space Station, a guy loses, actually this is a good case, there was, in Mir, they were doing, they had a crane that they would move manually to move equipment, and men from one point to the other on the surface of the
	thing and it had little handles to do it. One of those handles at one point floated away.
	Really? Yes, and they actually had to postpone a repair mission because they had to send up another handle.
	Now that handle floated away, right?
	So you think, oh, it's dangerous.
	But in a sense, it isn't, because it's flying at approximately the same relative speed as Mir.
	So even if it laps Mir in orbit, it's going to be coming back at a relatively slow speed.
	If you saw it, you could just reach out and grab it again.
	That would be true for that spacecraft.
	But for another spacecraft, it could be a very, very different story.
	That's actually right.
	But you have to be able to balance it.
	This is an issue that needs to be watched.
	I'm not trying to downplay it.
	It's not as if you stand out there and you're going to be splattered like rain hitting you.
	I don't think the problem is that serious, but it's something that has to be taken seriously, and it's only in the recent years that they have finally done it.
	I'll talk to you about something that has to be taken seriously.
	The program is ending.
	So, you've got a couple of books, and you've been a real trooper.
	Plug the hell out of your books.
	I mean, have at it.
	You've got several, right?
	Well, I mean, the most recent one, Leaving Earth, it's basically a history of space exploration since Apollo, and therefore it's about 80% Russian.
	And what it does is, I'm telling the history of space exploration in the context of why it was going on with the politicians on the ground.
	And so you see a cultural change in the United States and Russia At the same time, you're learning how and what needs to be
	done to build interplanetary spaceships.
	I cover that history in great detail and some of the stories I told come right out of that
	book.
	My first book was Genesis.
	I told you some of that about Apollo 8 mission.
	an encyclopedia which is basically a chronological encyclopedia of every single mission that
	went into space, not just simply science or man but also the military, the communication
	satellites, and what was learned or accomplished.
	So for example, you can find out when the GPS system was first installed in orbit.
	You find out, you know, the first military surveillance photos that were taken.
	I have a question for you.
	Is the space race, Robert, back on?
	Yes.
	Yeah, because we've got the Chinese out there and the Russians doing lots of work and everybody jumping in.
	So, in a way, the space race is reborn?
	It's reborn, but the question is whether we are in it.
	Douglas Goldstein, financial planner & investment advisor, interviewed Bush on Arutz Sheva Radio.
	and I haven't got a chance to talk about this, but I don't think Bush's plan is going to succeed tragically enough.
	I think its failure at this point is going to finally wake us up that we have to do things in a different way.
	And that's...
	Meaning what? Including commercial interests?
	Well, I've said this, I'll say it very fast, I know we're out of time.
	If you took the $12 billion he wants to offer to the space program, which is too insufficient for NASA to build it,
	and you fired everyone at NASA, all those great engineers, and they are great engineers,
	fired them, but to keep the $12 billion and you offer it as a prize to the first private company
	that can build a vessel that can take crews back and forth to the International Space Station,
	that's cheap access to orbit.
	You have a dozen companies formed by those same NASA unemployed engineers who have the reputation and can raise capital.
	They build it.
	And we have a dozen companies building it very fast.
	Well, there are some aerospace efforts underway privately in the U.S.
	You know about them?
	Oh yeah, there's the X-Prize.
	That's my inspiration for this idea.
	The X-Prize is doing the same kind of thing, but it's a low orbit, it's a suborbital, 100 kilometers, bring people up to 100 kilometers, bring them back, and then repeat the thing with the same vessel three weeks later.
	If you do that, you win, I think it's eight million dollars, and it's privately raised.
	And Burt Rutan's company, the first guy to fly a plane around the world non-stop, he's very close to winning that prize.
	He's done drop tests with crews on it, piloted.
	He's very close to winning and my idea is that the government could, we need unfortunately
	some government subsidy to get this business started, but the government should get out
	of it as quick as possible.
	So if we just reserve $12 billion to award the company that can succeed at doing it,
	then the government's out of the business because at that point you have competition,
	you'd have many private companies with vessels selling tourism to the foreign market.
	All right, buddy, you've made your point.
	Well, we gotta go.
	Oh.
	It's been a pleasure.
	Thank you.
	Thank you all.
	And good night.
	Robert Zimmerman.
	And you might want to check out his book, Leaving Earth, Space Stations, Rival Superpowers, and the Quest for Interplanetary Travel.
	That's a weekend, folks.
	So fast.
	From the high desert, it has been an honor.
	Good night.
	Midnight in the desert Shooting stars across the sky This magical journey Will take us on a ride

▲