Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 21, 2005 - Art Bell

02:27:15

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Sir Charles Shults III - Space Technology and Mars

Participants

Main voices

52:03

sir charles shults-iii

01:03:20

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In the meantime, I'm taking a lot of time off and, you know, doing things that people who get time off do.
		At least I will be shortly, as soon as the summer heat leaves the desert.
		Now, I've got a pretty cool announcement coming up for you about a kind of a secret website that I'm going to introduce you to.
		So I want you to get a pencil and a paper.
		Get ready to write it down.
		In the meantime, tonight's webcam photograph, I should let you know that both of the new bells, Tower Bell, our little bird, and Dusty Bell, are both doing swimmingly.
		Now, Tower is a little bird that fell out of my, you know, a bird made a cage.
		A couple of birds made a, not a cage, but a nest up in my tower at about 80 feet.
		And this little run of a bird fell down and was in shock and would have died.
		So we rescued it and got a cage.
		And now the bird is growing up in a house with four cats, one of which is brand new, Dusty.
		Now, Dusty, you see that photograph, that glad box there?
		We have spent, I don't know how much on cat toys, but that happens to be Dusty's, by far, Dusty's favorite toy.
		Dusty is about to grow out of it.
		And you can see that picture taken, I think, day before yesterday.
		You can see Dusty has grown to the point where she can barely fit in, but she still wiggles into that box, and it's her favorite toy, and it cost what?
		Just about nothing.
		Absolutely nothing.
		All right, here comes my announcement.
		Now, as many of you know, because I have talked about it over the years, I'm an amateur ham radio operator, and I thought as a way to get people interested in amateur radio, something we very much need to do these days, we would introduce you to how it sounds.
		So what I did was I took a transceiver and put it at K-N-Y-E, and then I put an antenna about 100 feet up on the tower, and then I took the output of that transceiver and I streamed it on the web so that you can actually listen to the frequency that I operate on during the week.
		You know, frequently late at night.
		I'm never going to change.
		I'm a night owl.
		So anyway, I found this wonderful guy named Bob who runs a site called Smeter.net.
		Now that is www.the letter S and then meter, M-E-T-E-R dot net.
		www.smeter.net.
		And Bob takes the output of my stream and then streams it out to the rest of the world.
		Now there are about 100 current slots available, or slightly more, and people can actually listen to the frequency that I operate on with a whole group, a whole spectrum of people from there's very interesting people on there, ranging from people who are physicists and ham radio operators as well, to teachers, to school bus drivers, to, you name it.
		I mean, there's just, you know, a whole spectrum.
		And then there's some bad guys, too.
		And so it's a wild, woolly, anything goes kind of frequency, kind of like this one, the one you're listening to right now.
		Anyway, I thought I would open it up and give everybody an idea of what Ham Radio sounded like.
		Now, Bob runs this wonderful site that streams not just my receiver located here in Perup, Nevada, but several others as well.
		And it allows you to sort of listen into the world of shortwave.
		And we think in that way, you may sort of build an interest and then eventually want to be on there yourself.
		So once again, it is www.s, the letter S, and then meter, M-E-T-E-R dot net, www.smeter.net.
		And I'll mention that again as the show continues.
		But most nights, most days, matter of fact, actually what we do is we record the period between 8 o'clock at night and 4 o'clock in the morning Pacific time.
		Then we play it back twice, covering the 24 hours of the day.
		And that can be heard on what's called the Perump receiver.
		That one I built down at the radio station, K-N-Y-E-F-M, our alma mater, wonderful little radio station here in Perump, Nevada, on 95.1, plug, plug, plug.
		So by all means, you know, pick a time.
		And if it's full, just wait.
		You'll be able to get in later.
		There's only about 100 people going to be able to get in there at any given time.
		And I know they're going to get rushed.
		Very quickly, oh, I do have another surprise coming up.
		In fact, let me read this to you, and we'll cover the news.
		JC, how many of you know of the fellow named JC?
		I think this is real because I got an email from somebody calling themselves Edna Pringle.
		And I don't know who Edna is.
		Edna is, it may be JC's biblical partner, I don't know.
		But I've had these before, and it reads real.
		It says, JC demands his time.
		It's been almost 10 years.
		That's Y-E-E-R-S, since you let him talk to the audience.
		How dareth you?
		JC will grant you get that.
		JC will grant you one hour to discuss his views on the new revelation, the spelling here, the war on media porn, glonal G-L-O-N-A-L, glonal warming and hell heating up.
		Hell and how people will be eaten by the devil.
		I wonder if he means eaten or beaten.
unidentified		Eaten by the devil over, ABD over.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The Canadian Declaration of War on American Values, degenerate authors, the truth about George Norrie, evil cats, and the Antichrist will be named.
		Do you have the guts, Bell?
		See, then there's one more here.
		Mr. Bell, we have sent you the phone number.
		This is a clamp safe house, whatever in the hell that is.
		JC will be down from his mountain compound to take the call.
		Do not harass this number.
		Do not give it, G.I.B., give it out to telemarketers.
		Or even worse, George Norrie or Mike Siegel.
		J-C want full honors as guest.
		You will play our national anthem.
		And darn it, stand up.
		Be warned.
		Jay-Z says that he's tried to be kind, tried to be nice all these years, softly tried to, oh, please, softly tried to ply you away from sin and destroying America.
		Well, Bell, no more Mr. Nice Guy.
		Jay-Z knows Jay-Z knows we're going to do this the hard way.
		So be ready for spiritual combat.
		The gloves come off.
		When, Belle, when?
		So, uh.
		Unless I lost the number, the paper with the number on it.
		I got it.
		I'll try that here in a minute.
		In the news, Sunnis warn against constitutional draft.
		Baghdad, Iraq, a day before the deadline for the new constitution.
		Sunni Arabs appealed Sunday to the U.S. and UN to prevent Shiites and Kurds from pushing through a draft parliament without their consent.
		Warning that if they do, it's only going to worsen the crisis in Iraq.
		Leaders of the Sunni, Arab, Shiite, and Kurdish factions planned final talks on Monday, according to the officials of all three of those groups.
		Said, one, I'm not optimistic at all.
		So we'll see what happens there.
		Senator, actually, this is pretty interesting.
		A Republican senator that I very, very, very much, I'd frankly have loved to have seen him become president, McCain, is warning that Iraq is starting to look an awful lot like Vietnam.
		And I guess we were all wondering when somebody of substance would stand up and say that.
		Also, he said that, well, actually, the senator took a trip up to Alaska and came back with the impression that it's melting.
		And he says, anyone doubting the effects of human activity on global climate change ought to talk to the people of Alaska and the Yukon, said McCain yesterday.
		Fresh from a trip to Barrow, America's northernmost city, the Arizona senator said, anecdotes from Alaskans and residents of the Yukon Territory confirm scientific evidence of global warming.
		We are convinced, this is a quote, that the overwhelming scientific evidence indicates that climate change is taking place and human activities play a very large role.
		End quote.
		That is Senator McCain.
		In a moment, if this is real, if Edna Pringle's communique to me is real, JC is just around the corner.
		The End It probably has been 10 years since I granted JC the honor of, I don't know, spending an hour or so with the audience.
		So it appears to be real.
		Guess who, JC?
unidentified		It is I, J.C. Webster III, and you did not introduce me correctly, Mr. Bale.
unidentified		As usual, you are disrespecting me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There was nothing to do with it.
unidentified		Insultation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Insultation, there's nothing in this communique about the way you should be introduced.
unidentified		I should be introduced as the bringer of the new revelation, God's ten-star general in the war against media pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, let's find out exactly what this new revelation is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What do you mean?
unidentified		God is angry.
		That is the new revelation.
		He has begun to me to bring forth in the fight against media pornography because, you see, what has happened to our country, God built this nation as his house, and his house has been overrun with media pornographers.
		Degenerates, when our founding fathers fled those crazies in Europe because they wanted to get away from their decadent evil ways, they came here and God built a place in the wilderness for them.
		And his house has been overrun.
		And God, he tried to send his son.
		He tried to give us an easy way out.
		Jay-Z.
		He tried to help us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Jay-Z, obviously, you and Edna have a computer, or you could not have sent me this demand, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You have a computer.
unidentified		We have access.
unidentified		And that's another thing I want to talk about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, before you get off on that, look, Jay-Z, if you have a computer, that means that you get all kinds of email with porn in it.
unidentified		Yes, yes.
unidentified		And that's what I want to talk about, is your filthy listeners have been sending so much filthy pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My listeners have.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I recall that we published on the website several years ago a couple of email communiques from Edna Pringle.
unidentified		I've had the guts to put the new commandments on your website.
unidentified		Yes, and we are still getting pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is Edna Pringle your biblical mate?
unidentified		No, she is not my mate.
unidentified		How dare you?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you didn't explain then.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In what relationship to you is Edna Pringle?
unidentified		A servant, a woman in her place who knows where her place is, and that is at the feet of the man who is bringing down the new revelation.
unidentified		She is at the feet of the general for God's pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is Edna listening to all of this right now?
unidentified		No, I am angry at Edna.
		For?
		Because I'm not going to get into the details, but she seems to think that she wants to go off and find another man, and she has been questioning me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What in heaven's name could have brought her to a decision like that?
unidentified		I know exactly who is doing it, and it's the devil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's the devil.
unidentified		about the pornography and i don't want people standing for our theater anymore because you're corrupting her so we have a new if it is And we have a new email, and it's boilingpitsofsewage at yahoo.com.
unidentified		So you send your filth to the boiling pitsofsewage at yahoo.com, and I will send the new commandment to you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Boiling pits of sewage.
unidentified		Boiling pits of sewage.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		At yahoo.com.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that a real address are you putting us on?
unidentified		I am not a liar.
unidentified		Don't you call me a liar.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, I asked if you were putting us on.
		You call me a liar.
		Well, I'm sorry you take it that way.
		Boiling pits of sewage.
unidentified		Boiling pits of sewage.
		Because that is where all the media pornographers are going to go.
		They're going to be tossed into the boiling pits of sewage.
		And they're going to have a body of excretement.
		And they'll be covered in red-hot excretement for all eternity.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Look, glonal warming, G-L-O-N-A-L warming.
unidentified		Glonal warming.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Global warming.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, Edna wrote this.
unidentified		That's right, because I do not encourage my followers or anybody into book learning.
unidentified		Book learning is evil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Perhaps you wrote this.
unidentified		I, I tell her what to write.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it has the sound of JC to it.
unidentified		See, listen, I will not touch a computer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let me hear you spell global warming.
unidentified		I am not going to do what you tell me to do.
		This is not a spelling bee, Mr. Bell.
		This is spiritual combat.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Global warming is a very important topic to me, so let's hear it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What exactly...
unidentified		And this is what's happening, Mr. Bell, is the dirtier the souls are getting, the more corrupted they're getting, the more they're being pornographized by the media pornographers, they burn hotter.
		They burn hotter in hell.
		You see, a good person who does one bad thing and goes to hell doesn't burn as hot as a degenerate that has been degeneratized by the media pornographers.
		Their souls are burning hotter and hotter in hell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've got it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Degenerate souls burning hotter, causing global warming.
unidentified		That's global warming.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, then spell it right.
unidentified		Let's book burning.
unidentified		More book burning.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would you burn books?
unidentified		I burn.
		I burn.
		We just had a book burning.
		We just had to burn the newest Harry Potter book because it's attacking and killing Christians.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You burned a Harry Potter book?
unidentified		I didn't just burn them, Mr. Bell.
		I took holy sticks of dynamite and blew them up.
		And it's a compound.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that means you had to buy them first, didn't you?
unidentified		Mr. Bell, we confiscate them.
unidentified		And it's better that we buy them so that we keep them out of the hands of children who are going to be turned to the devil by Harry Potter.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you believe then that the particularly evil souls are burning at an ever hotter rate, causing some of the heat to irradiate around the world into the atmosphere, and that's why it's getting warmer.
unidentified		Heat, the throbbing heat of hell is radiating out, and people can feel it.
		And that's why volcanoes are going off.
		And that's why the hot spots you're talking about are going off.
		And tsunamis and earthquakes and plagues and floods and fires.
		It's because those evil, corrupted souls that the devil wants so badly, it's of the filthier the sinner, the hotter the burn.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why, JC, do you think that I am personally involved with the devil?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've always wondered if you're not.
unidentified		Mr. Bill, you are simply the most dangerous man in America.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And in what way?
unidentified		You have created an intellectual terror of BIMA with your radio program.
		I want you to take a listen to me.
		Do you know of a man named Stuart McBurney?
		No.
		Does that name ring a bell to you?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It does not.
unidentified		Of course it wouldn't, because he was the voice of American Americanism.
		For years he held the line against the Soviet Union.
		He was the greatest, the greatest radio man ever.
		And you are on sacred ground, which is talk radio.
		This is the realm of the conservatives.
		We have been using talk radio to take back America from the hippie-degenerate no-goods that have corrupted and degenerated our society over time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Then you actually consider yourself to be a right-wing talk show host.
unidentified		I should have my own show, and I will have my own show.
unidentified		And that is in the works, Mr. Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I can well imagine it might be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you really think you could keep up this phony baloney act for that long?
unidentified		Excuse me?
		You dare accuse me.
		You are the one with baloney, Mr. Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you really think you could keep up this act like that?
unidentified		This is not an act, Mr. Bell.
unidentified		This is the anointing brought forth onto me from God.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You really feel all of this comes to you directly from God and not the devil?
unidentified		There you go, revealing your true self.
		I am not being influenced by the devil, Mr. Bale.
		You are the one.
		You are the one creating the intellectual tower of Babel.
		Your voice, Jay-Z, has a certain tone to it that we all wonder about.
		I want everyone out there in the audience right now to listen to this.
		This is the true voice of the man that you have been listening to for these years.
		He is the one trying to drag your soul down to Satan so that you will be thrown into the boiling pits of sewage, skinned alive, dipped in salt, and eaten and devoured over and over again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Dipped in salt?
unidentified		Dipped in salt, Mr. Bruce.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What does salt have to do with it?
unidentified		Because it burns.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, I see.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's after you get scratches in the pit of sewage.
unidentified		After the devil sticks you with his pitchfork over and over and over again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And, well, you say here people are going to be eaten by...
unidentified		Over both?
		Both.
		The devil is going to eat your body up, and he's going to take it and eat it up, and then you're going to be excreted out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Give me that sound again, please.
		What sound?
		That eating sound.
unidentified		No, I don't have to do what you say.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Come on.
unidentified		Mr. Bell, you're trying to get me off my message.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's not hard, JC.
unidentified		And my message, I am trying to save America from the utter destruction of the satanic Soviet Union.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore, buddy.
unidentified		Yes, it does.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, it doesn't.
unidentified		It's a lie that you and your friends in the media love to perpetrate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The Soviet Union crumbled, JC.
		You know that.
		I know you know it.
unidentified		That's a lie, Mr. Bell.
		It is a deception from the devil.
		The devil's deception.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Everything bad is from the devil, isn't it, JC?
unidentified		Everything is from the devil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know what?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I think I think you're consumed by the devil.
unidentified		I am not consumed by the devil, and I am insultated that you would even insinuate such things.
unidentified		You disrespect me continually.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, a lot of people are curious, JC.
		What part of the country are you from?
		Where do you originate from?
unidentified		I am not going to disclose my secret location.
unidentified		Just so God will reveal to those who are faithful to come calling to our new ground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		well, how can all these people come if they don't know where you are?
unidentified		God's going to tell them.
		He's going to speak to the hearts of the faithful.
		we are going to be relocating anyway to a new compound in idaho Cute little furry cats.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're beautiful.
unidentified		Cats are demonic creatures, Mr. Bill.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Say what?
unidentified		They are lycanthropes, demons in disguise.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They are not.
unidentified		Yes, they are.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They are the sweetest little furballs you will ever want to meet.
unidentified		They're evil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you think cats are evil, JC, then let me tell you, brother, you're evil.
unidentified		Cats are evil because they steal souls and they are the familiars of Satanists.
		Now, let me tell you, you never, you're still disrespecting me.
		You're not allowing me to make my points about media pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, one of your points was evil cats.
unidentified		Cat, yes.
		Devil cats.
		Demons.
		They hide themselves in the appearance of what they look there.
		They try to look like these innocent, furry little things, but they're really demons.
		And they really are.
		They're evil.
		You look at their eyes and they look at you and they just want to devour you and they want to steal your soul.
		I've got one cat right now on my compound that I've been chasing for the better part of a year.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know what?
		I think you're overly sensitive on this whole pornography issue.
		Now, maybe it would be true, JC, that you, in your idle time, look at what?
		I bet.
unidentified		In my idle time, I review all manner of pornography.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I knew it.
unidentified		You are trying to insinuate that I would enjoy media pornography.
		If I have to review a Larry Flynn magazine, I do not enjoy it one bit.
		I have to know the enemy.
		And I'm going to tell you, there's more to media pornography than dirty pictures of naked people.
		I'm going to make a point here right now because you need to hear this.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And every moment that you see it wounds your soul, JC, right?
unidentified		It can't harm me because I'm praying against it.
		God has charged me with this work.
		God has charged and gave me the energy, the power.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it's like you're praying against it, but you're looking at it going, oh yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right?
unidentified		Yeah.
		Your program, the volatility of the ideas in your program makes me sick to insinuate that I would sit there and enjoy it makes me sick.
		Draws millions of men out of church, and that's football.
		And I'm going to tell you exactly how evil is.
		What is wrong with football?
		Football is a homosexual ritual.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, for God.
unidentified		Let me tell you why.
		Because anytime you've got a man who's putting his hands on the backside of another man like that, and what that is, is a simulation of the homosexual consummation.
		And the ball, the football represents the birth.
		It's the mockery of birth.
		It represents the homosexual self, which is then given to the quarterback, who is usually the best-looking one on the team.
		And then he takes that.
		He takes that homosexual self, and he looks out among the field of other men who will receive and take his homosexuality, and he sends it to him.
		And with the intention of taking it into sacred ground, the sacred space of America and the family and values.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, America has taken a more tolerant attitude toward homosexuality, certainly in the last few decades.
unidentified		Alternately, queer guys trying to turn straight guys queer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you don't join in on that, I take it.
unidentified		I hate homosexuals.
unidentified		Isn't that clear?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, yeah, that's clear.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		First time caller line, you're on the air with JC.
unidentified		Hello, is this me?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, only you know that for sure, but it really sounds like you, yes.
unidentified		Good deal.
unidentified		I appreciate my call.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, where are you?
unidentified		This is Adam from Decatur, Illinois.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And why in God's name are you calling JC?
unidentified		Well, I wanted to tell him I really appreciate him coming on the air, and I enjoy a good laugh every once in a while, and I was wanting to ask him.
		A good laugh?
		What are you?
		Are you laughing at the new revelation, you echo God?
		Listen to me, you degenerate.
		You have to be able to do that.
		I was laughing at the whole thing, and I wanted to know if you came on the air for an interview or a comedy.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, has it occurred to you, JC, that some people just think this is funny?
		They think you're a total put-on.
		Maybe you are.
unidentified		No.
		No, because they don't want to believe in the truth and the light and the love of the Lord.
		I'm bringing love.
		I'm bringing salvation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Then why do you scream?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Then why scream?
unidentified		Why scream?
		Because you have to scream in order to get people to listen.
		Sometimes you've got to break a few eggs to make an omelet.
		And that's another thing I want to talk about is the food porn.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Food porn.
unidentified		Yes, I've touched on that before.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Food porn?
unidentified		Yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What's food porn?
unidentified		Food porn.
		The cooking shows where they make food look so delicious and make you want to eat.
		But also a sin, Mr. Bill.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Isn't there some basics?
unidentified		Isn't it the same thing?
		People need to eat, but they don't need to be fat, so.
		And listen.
		Am I still on the air?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, you're on the air.
unidentified		How did you get him off the air so I can eat it?
unidentified		I'm going to get you off the air, and I appreciate it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Have a good morning, caller.
unidentified		Thank you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Make a point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Any point.
unidentified		This is where the satanic Soviet empire has this elaborate plan, and what they are trying to do is pornography and indulgence.
		It's more than just dirty, naked pictures of people doing dirty, naked things.
		It is.
		It is also food.
		Because listen, people, like they say, I was born gay.
		That's what they say.
		I'm gay.
		I'm born gay.
		And that's the way I am, so I have to be that way.
		You don't believe that?
		No, I don't.
		I'll tell you, the only person that was Warren Gawain...
		Absolutely not in favor of gay marriage.
		That is why Canada has declared war on the United States with the recently they are allowing gays to get married in Canada.
		And that's the subversive, that's the evil subversiveness of the Canadian, which is because they can look like you and me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And that constitutes war?
unidentified		A declaration of war on America and America's family values because they know that the majority of Americans do not support gay marriage.
		They do not support homosexuality.
		They don't want them in their communities.
		They don't want them in their churches.
		They don't want them in their schools.
		They don't want them in the nation.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wild card line.
unidentified		God doesn't want them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wild card line.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're on there with JC.
unidentified		Hey, JC.
		Oh, I'm sorry.
		Hey, this is Tim from L.A. Yes.
		Address me as JC Webster, the third God's General.
		Okay.
		Hey, JC, I know you're for book burning, but does this include like burning the Bible?
		Because you spell you can't spell global warming.
		Why would I burn the Bible?
		You look like you're not doing a very good job.
		You're an idiot.
		Shut up.
		Oh, you shut up, you idiot.
		Just shut your mouth.
		Saying I would burn the Bible.
		I know where you are.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You're right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He couldn't spell global warming.
unidentified		Less book burning.
		More book burning.
		I burned books, Byla.
		I know where Clive Baker and Stephen King.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, JC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know where JC's what?
unidentified		I know where his count is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		His what?
unidentified		Come on, buddy.
unidentified		Come on down to the compound.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You can follow him.
unidentified		Let me wait for you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Go on down and see JC.
unidentified		Come on down.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You see how JC would like, how people would like to meet you, JC?
unidentified		Come on down.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They want to be in your presence.
unidentified		You come on down to the compound.
unidentified		If God reveals a location to you, you bring it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, okay.
		Used to the Rockies.
		You're on the air with JC.
unidentified		Yeah, that would be me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's you.
unidentified		Okay.
unidentified		I hope this is a joke because I'll tell you, if this guy's on the level, he's scary, okay?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
unidentified		See, he only scare more people than Ed James.
		And instead of burning them, you have you.
		Hold on, Jay C. JC, let this letter speak.
		The guy is just outrageously nuts.
		And in a world where we have all kinds of stuff that are going wrong, all that energy being stupid, come on.
		Don't you call me stupid, woman.
		I'll tell you what stupid is you.
		Hey, making sure you're trying to have the right thing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now let JC.
unidentified		Hold it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let JC respond.
unidentified		Okay.
		No, hussy.
		No, don't call names.
		So, JC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You call them as you seize them.
		Well, is that it?
		Is that as good as it going to get?
		I know you have certain feelings about where women ought to be.
		Okay.
unidentified		Let her speak.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, go right ahead, young lady.
unidentified		You need to get back in your time machine.
		Go back to the dark ages where you belong, sir.
		No, we need to bring America back to you.
		We need to bring America back.
		You know what?
		Unfortunately, there are some people out here that are going to take you seriously.
		We need to bring America back good because we're back.
		America was stolen from the Indians to begin with, sir.
		Who are slaughtering hosts there?
		Steal this country.
		Okay.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, let him respond.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		America was originally stolen from the Indians, is what she said.
unidentified		Well, that's a bold-faced lie because it was stolen from God by the devil's people.
		The red man.
		Who's red?
		The devil.
		I've had enough.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, all right.
		Thank you very much.
		Have a good morning.
unidentified		Goodbye.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, your turn with JC.
unidentified		JC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		JC.
unidentified		Yes, I'm here.
		Yes, Art.
		This is Jason Colin from Canada.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Jason.
unidentified		I would really like to know what JC's problem is with Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, he's had a problem with me for years.
unidentified		He's the devil's mouthpiece.
		I don't think so.
		He is the devil's mouthpiece.
		I've said it for decades.
		JC, I think you need to get your head checked out.
		Mr. Art Bell is a very wonderful man.
		I love cats.
		Yeah, I bet you do.
		Pardon me?
		I bet you do.
		I do.
		They're wonderful, wonderful creatures.
		You degenerate Canadian?
		I don't like degenerate Canadians.
		Anyway, I just wanted to call in and say that JC there, you know, God doesn't come to those who are uninvited.
		If you seek him, he will come to you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You hear that, JC?
unidentified		I don't need a degenerate, filthy, European, decadent Canadian to tell me how God seeks people out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, you're not going anywhere further with that caller.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much.
unidentified		I want people to agree with me.
		Why, Jay-Z, would you call me the devil's mouthpiece?
		You are the devil's mouthpiece.
		Don't tell him.
		No.
		Listen to him.
		He's revealing his true voice.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You've heard this sound many times, haven't you?
unidentified		You better listen good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You've heard this sound before, Jay-Z.
unidentified		I haven't heard.
		No, when you're in my bushes, that's why you're picking more time off is so you can build more Sundays out in the bushes.
		I don't have time to spend every other Sunday chasing you around.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		International Line, you're on the air with JC.
unidentified		Good evening, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good evening.
unidentified		Long time listener, and boy, I hate to admit it, but even with JC here, I'm glad I called.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Glad to have you.
unidentified		Okay, JC, I got a question for you here.
		You ready?
		I was born ready.
		Okay.
		So you think cats are demonic?
		I know they're demonic.
		Don't tell me.
		And I respect your judgment.
		And I'd like to know, I've got a little poodle, an apricot poodle.
		And I've seen her doing things that are a little off-tilter.
		And I'm wondering if you know about poodles.
		Let me ask you about your poodle because you sound a little funny.
		Are you going to marry your poodle since homosexuals can marry each other?
		Would you be interested in marrying your poodle?
		Because you sound like that kind of guy.
		A degenerate.
		A degenerate?
		I know.
		I want to know.
		Poodles demonic.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, he just simply wants to know if poodles are demonic like cats, Jay-Z.
unidentified		Poodles?
		Yes, they are because they're French.
		Okay.
		Thanks, Jay-Z.
		You have a good night.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Take it.
unidentified		Another thing, Mr. Bell, about Norrie.
unidentified		You haven't let me breach the topic of Nori.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You were going to say something about the money.
unidentified		I was going to give you the truth.
unidentified		I told you just a couple years ago how he was seeing money from you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How he was?
unidentified		He stole money from you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		George Norrie, did you?
unidentified		He stole money, $20 from your wallet.
		You wondered what happened to it.
		I revealed it.
		God revelation to me.
		And I'll tell you what.
		You don't tell him about George Norrie's criminal past in the underworld.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, that's pretty good because George Nori's never been anywhere near my wallet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He's never actually been anywhere.
unidentified		Haloney, Bill.
unidentified		I know you're all at the compound.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All at the compound together?
unidentified		Yeah, don't cry.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You really do have a twisted little mind, you know, and I think it comes from looking at too much of that which you decry.
unidentified		I will not even let you insultate me that way.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Insultate me.
		Insultate me.
		Where do you get these words?
		You wrote this, not Edna.
		East of the Rockies, you're on there with JC.
unidentified		Good evening, gentlemen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good evening.
unidentified		JC, you're doing God's own work.
unidentified		She has got demonic laughter.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, and that laughter is not laughing with you, JC.
unidentified		Shawn, demon.
unidentified		She's going to rebuke you, demon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		She's demonstrating at you.
unidentified		It's the laughter of Satan.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There's a big difference.
unidentified		Well, you know what?
		You know what I'm doing?
		You're showing the God of you.
		People like you.
		I'm waiting for you to know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did you hear that?
		See, you didn't even hear that, JC.
		Quit talking and listen every now and then.
		She said it's not the devil that's a problem or God.
		It's you, JC.
unidentified		You are such a pure sinner.
		Grow up.
		You know what?
		Grow up.
		Get back in your kitchen and get off the phone.
		Get off my back, little man.
		Little man, who are you calling a little man?
		You.
		You're lucky I'm even aware that you don't know me.
		Hello, JC.
		You're honored.
		I know.
		It's an honor for you.
		Hello.
		You know what?
		Do you believe in Jesus?
		That is the stupidest question I have ever, ever heard.
		Of course I believe in Jesus.
		Well, why are you...
		See?
		Well, that was Jesus.
		That's the new revelation, and I'm doing work because you call the Jesus.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hold on, caller.
		He makes a good point.
		Jesus would be gentle and soft-speaking.
unidentified		Not when he comes back.
		Not when he comes back.
		He's riding with the point of the sword of Jesus for the justice of Jesus.
		You know what?
		I think that, you know, in the Revelation, it talks about that in the last day there'll be doctrines of devils, and you're one of them.
		And you know what?
		You're so full of crap, and you should not be yelling at me.
		You have a foul mouth.
		Oh, you know what?
		Foul mouth.
		We bitten mongrels to tell me that.
		How dare you?
		How dare you?
		When you go to hell, Satan's going to pull you with his pitchfork over and over and over and over and over again with his hammer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You really think he'll treat people that way?
unidentified		Satan?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, this eating of them and then beating of them and eating of them.
unidentified		That's just the beginning of hell, Mr. Bell.
unidentified		He's going to poke them with his pitchfork over and over again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Doesn't it bother you, JC, that I bring on the average person here, and you're getting the same thing again and again?
		Well, okay, let's open the I Agree with JC line at 775-727-1-222.
		Now, I bet it doesn't even ring.
unidentified		I bet it rings off the hook, Mr. Bell.
unidentified		You may even have 1,000 listeners.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		First time caller line, you're on with JC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hello.
unidentified		Hi, this is Nate from Massachusetts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Nate.
unidentified		Hi, I was wondering, I had a question for JC.
		I know he's a 10-star general.
		Well, correct.
		That's correct.
		And what does it take to join the army?
		Was my question.
		To join God's army, it takes committing your will.
		You're J.C.'s army.
		Lord.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		JC's army.
unidentified		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Here's somebody asking about joining with you.
unidentified		Joining with me?
		Well, open your heart and pray to God.
		And if you're worthy, if you're sincere, God will reveal it to you on how to become a part of God's army.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There you have it, Colin.
unidentified		Fight against the media pornographers and the satanic Soviet Union, which still exists.
		Don't let them tell you otherwise.
		Who's the Antichrist?
		I have not come to the point where I'm going to reveal that yet because I have not been allowed to make my point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, you've made your point repeatedly about internet porn and boiling pits of sewage and all the rest of the usual stuff you say.
unidentified		Now, listen, Mr. Bell, I have not been allowed to make my point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Make your damn point.
unidentified		My point is that we need to save this nation from degenerates.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You like the people that have been calling you?
unidentified		Your listeners.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My listeners.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So they're all degenerates.
unidentified		They're all degenerates.
		Every single one of them.
		Dopers.
		And I was very proud of Mr. Punnett last night telling the alcoholics not to call your show anymore because most of your listeners are drunkards.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Did he really say that?
unidentified		Yes, he did, and I'm proud of him.
unidentified		He might have hope yet, but you're brainwashing him.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, it sounds like you might be under the influence of something yourself, JC.
unidentified		You dare accuse me of being under substances.
unidentified		I don't have to take this kind of abuse.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that was JC hanging up.
		What a coward.
		What a total coward.
		That's all I can say.
		Well, there was JC.
		Actually, you know what?
		That's no way for him to end a conversation and to end his hour.
		I've got his number.
		let's call him back.
		let's see.
unidentified		Mm-hmm.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I think this is right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, this is right.
unidentified		There we go.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Can't hang up on me like that.
		Oh, see, now he left it off the hook.
		All right.
		Well, there you have it.
		That's as much as he was willing to take.
		And who among you, listening out there right now, cannot imagine that JC was indeed under the influence of something or another?
		He sounded rather hyper to me.
		How about you?
		He's always sounded hyper to me.
		And I think that probably he had at least, I don't know, 10 cups of coffee, wouldn't you say?
		Something like that?
		Who worked at Martin Marietta, Aerospace Division, for about 10 years on weapons systems and computer-based automated test equipment?
		He wrote, get this, he wrote the nuclear EMP test software for the Pershing II missile system, worked on the Patriot, the Copperhead Tank Killer, and advanced attack helicopter systems.
		Charles has performed research under grant on nuclear fusion, was knighted, and received a long-term grant for his present research in robotics and artificial intelligence.
		He has written many technical publications and magazine articles on space, astronomy, the atmosphere, and space resource development.
		In addition, Charles has also appeared on several television and radio programs over the years.
		He's a very, very bright guy, and he's made some discoveries about Mars.
		In a moment, Sir Charles.
unidentified		Sir Charles.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sir Charles, welcome back to the program.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, thank you.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		A pleasure and a privilege as usual, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, great to have you back on.
		You're an intelligent guy.
		And before we dive into the material on Mars, I want to ask a couple of questions about fields you've worked in.
		America's starving for energy.
		The pump prices are now, you know, like the top news story everywhere.
		It's a big deal.
		You worked on nuclear fusion.
		Nuclear fusion is one possible answer to some of our problems.
		So how far have we come with nuclear fusion, and is it, in fact, a possible answer to our looming crisis?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It is a possible answer, and there are a number of ways it's going right now.
		The research in high-temperature fusion, which is almost always done with magnetic fields to hold the plasma in place, has made some advances.
		Russia appears to be pursuing something called helium-3 fusion, which has the advantage of being very clean.
		It doesn't emit a lot of neutron radiation as opposed to typical hydrogen fusion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are they able to contain it?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, from what I understand, they're making some advances, but I think that's not quite as important as what it implies.
		You see, the biggest supply of helium-3 is on the moon.
		That would mean that they would have to go to the moon to get their fuel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Does anybody have any idea why there is so much helium-3 on the moon as opposed to Earth?
		I mean, supposedly, the moon was once part of Earth, many people contend.
		So why would it have a large amount of helium-3?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's because cosmic radiation and particles from the sun and other stars land on the lunar surface and stick to the rocks and soil there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So its origin is not with the moon, but what the moon has collected.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
unidentified		Huh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, learn something every day.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why is helium-3 that much better?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Because when you fuse hydrogen, whatever form of hydrogen you have, typically there's a lot of energy, but also neutron radiation released.
		Helium-3 fuses cleanly.
		It doesn't give off a great deal of neutron radiation.
		In fact, it's referred to as aneutronic because it has such a low radiation level.
		So it wouldn't make the reactor containment vessels become radioactive over time as typical hydrogen fusion vessels would.
		So it has a number of advantages.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do we have deposits of helium-3 on Earth, or are they just very rare or what?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's extremely rare on Earth because our only source of helium on Earth tends to be from gas mines.
		We get it from underground.
		And so that helium has to be sorted out by its isotopes.
		Certain helium has more or less neutrons on average.
		And the helium that we normally deal with has an atomic mass of 4.
		It has two neutrons and two protons in it.
		So helium-3 is a little odd because it's missing a neutron.
		And we have to literally sort out the individual atoms of helium-3 from the bulk of helium-4 that we collect from mines underground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I remember a lot of stories indicating that fusion had only been achieved for a very tiny instant.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that still the case?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Actually, you know, the instance in which they have the fusion occurring are still pretty brief, but what they're doing to overcome that is they're going to be firing it very rapidly.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So you will have it being done repetitively, and overall you'll get a large amount of energy on average.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, one big problem, of course, with nuclear reactors now is that it ends up with the kind of stuff that's about to be stored in my backyard.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		Yes, that would be a problem.
		If you're using reactors that are fueled with deuterium or tritium or normal hydrogen, then that would be a problem.
		Over time, the reactor vessels do become radioactive and they would have to be decommissioned and stored as waste.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you actually had, I guess, money, a grant given to you to work on nuclear fusion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		At the point that you finished your work, what had you concluded about its viability?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		We discovered that there was a definite effect and that fusion did appear to be occurring in the cells.
		We were getting a lot more energy out than we were putting in.
		However, that has now changed gears.
		And, you know, we talked momentarily about sonoluminescence, where they use ultrasound to create fusion through cavitation.
		That was studied, but it didn't really seem to go very far.
		Recently, a new advance in cold fusion is they're using something called a crystal, a thermoelectric crystal, and it creates extremely intense voltage fields that can confine the protons and make them fuse.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So that looks like it's going to be a very viable method of doing it.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And so far, the signature that they were looking for, the production of neutron radiation, is present, which proves the process is working.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, Sir Charles, we're approaching, I think, an absolute economic meltdown or some sort of crisis as a result of energy.
		I mean, everybody can see it around them now.
		It's no longer any sort of secret.
		So something like this or something else is going to have to come along to save our butts.
		I mean, it really is, or we're just in big trouble.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, yes.
		You know, it's interesting because one of the things we've often discussed is orbital solar power.
		And it turns out that Mitsubishi Corporation is promoting a scheme to place a microwave satellite in orbit, powered by sunlight, to beam the microwaves down into city areas and to use the beam to power cell phones and laptops and PDAs.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
		Oh, really?
		What an intriguing idea.
		So, in other words, the energy could be spread out on Earth instead of tightly beamed to power devices, handheld devices, that sort of thing?
		That's right.
		What about the environmental impact of doing such a thing?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, of course, they've looked at the same problems that we've investigated, such as how it will interact with the atmosphere and other things on the ground.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And they've concluded that they can easily get it to pass through the atmosphere and Have almost no effect on the environment, and that only a tuned receiver will pick up any significant amount of the power.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And effects on the biological organisms walking around us?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, the energy levels are so minute, it appears it's not going to have any effect.
		And, you know, that brings up another point.
		I remember that just after the last show I did, you had a call from the author of Sunstroke, David Kagan.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and he said that he was elated that somebody was actually pursuing the idea.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely correct.
		Yes, David Kagan.
		He's kind of a friend of mine, and he wrote Sunstroke.
		And you know the premise of that book, right?
		That a satellite is put up to beam down energy, and that, of course, obviously, science fiction, something goes wrong.
		The satellite begins to wander in orbit and turn people into French fries as it goes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		Well, what I wanted to point out, and I think he wasn't truly aware of the amount of energy involved, if you have a piece of, let's say, a steak in the microwave or a piece of meat in the microwave, it would be barbaric to do a steak, but let's say some piece of meat.
		You generally get an energy level of about five watts per square centimeter cooking the meat.
		There is a thin piece of perforated metal stuck in the glass window of your microwave.
		And that little piece of perforated metal blocks the signal, and you don't get cooked.
		It takes very little to block that signal.
		Of course, you always see the signs that say, you know, users of pacemakers, stay away from the microwave.
		But personally, I've never seen anybody have any difficulty.
		I've never certainly seen anybody drop dead from having a pacemaker around the microwave.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I stand in front of it all the time waiting for my coffee.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, there you go.
		And so that bit of metal is enough to shield you from any effects.
		And that's a very energetic beam.
		By comparison, sunlight would be about 96 milliwatts, or thousandths of a watt, per square centimeter.
		Far less dense, about 50 times less dense than what you're getting from microwaving a piece of meat in the microwave oven.
		And the microwave power beam from the power satellites would be about 23 milliwatts, one-fourth of that level.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So they're seriously considering launching such a satellite.
		That would mean, folks, that your cell phones, your PDAs, and other small devices would be powered from space.
		In other words, no more batteries, no more batteries going dead on you in the middle of a phone call, that kind of thing, because you have no battery.
unidentified		That's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's exactly right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's incredible.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's just the tip of the iceberg, you know?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, yes.
		And of course, the next question is about a Kagan kind of scenario.
		Is it reasonable, is it economically feasible to put a spacecraft in orbit, collect sunlight, and then microwave it back to Earth?
		The safety part of it will put off for a moment.
		Is it technically and economically feasible?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
		Yes, it is.
		In fact, you know, I had talked to you about Gene Myers and his efforts to put a system up for his launch system and how we were cooperating about orbital power stations.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And he was speaking in terms of $10 billion for the project over seven years, but that includes the development of the entire launch system.
		If you were simply putting up a demonstrator power satellite, you could probably do it for as low as $3 billion if you weren't using reusable hardware.
		So we're talking about something that's actually quite doable.
		When you consider what it costs to build power plants or gasoline cracking plants to produce fuel, then you're not far off.
		In fact, I live in Orlando and Universal is down here, the theme park, and they spent over $3 billion on their expansion just a few years ago.
		That's a theme park.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So if you're looking at $3 billion and you look at a theme park or an orbital power system, you know, the choice is clear if you're trying to make money on energy where you're going to be able to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, give me a few figures.
		I would be very interested to know, for example, how much power an orbital station could collect, and then I'd be also very interested in how much it could actually deliver.
		In other words, the efficiency of the transfer.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		If you had a station, and typically they quote one the size of Manhattan Island, it would collect roughly enough to be equivalent to about 120 large power plants.
		And by the time you converted it to electrical power and beamed it to the ground in the full of microwaves, you could collect between 30 and 60 billion watts, depending on your efficiency.
		So you could replace between 30 and 60 power plants at the bottom line.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My God.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you think this could be done for how much money?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I believe the first setup could be done in orbit and flying for roughly $3 billion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		$3 billion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That would be a demonstrator craft.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
		But understand that once it's up there, it provides the economic impetus to complete the system, to build more of them.
		And once you've got money coming in, people are going to sign on.
		Anybody who sees an opportunity like this will invest in it.
		Oh, I think it's a good idea.
		And we could replace 85% of our fuel consumption if we went to orbital solar power.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do we have collectors that are efficient enough now and would withstand the environment of space for a long period of time?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it depends on the design.
		There are two competing designs right now.
		Solar cells, or photovoltaics that convert sunlight directly into electricity, actually are a little delicate and a little expensive to make, and they have a limited lifespan.
		They have about a 20% conversion efficiency.
		So in my mind, solar cells really wouldn't be your best bet.
		If you went to a mechanical system where you actually had steam boilers, collected the sunlight with reflectors and lenses, really, and made steam in space in boilers.
		And run it through a turbine.
		That's correct.
		And you can get about 89% conversion efficiency there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So wait a minute.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're saying the turbine would be in space?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's a lot of weight, buddy.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, no.
		There are a number of compact turbines in development right now, and you'd be amazed at some of the efficiencies you can get out of them.
		And they can be made out of very lightweight materials.
		But not only that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Not only that, your generators can use some of the new generations of supermagnets, which are extremely lightweight, and get very good efficiencies out of them.
		So a lot of your mass of copper and iron can be removed by using very intense magnetic fields generated by the new rare earth magnets.
		And if you wanted to, you could even go to superconductors, Which could outperform them even further.
		So, when you come down to it, I did a mass calculation, and typically, for the mass of material that you'd have to orbit for solar cells, you could get about four times the power for the equivalent mass in generators and turbines.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now, you mentioned superconductivity.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That would perhaps seem practical in the temperatures in space.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and that's an absolutely perfect point.
		You don't have to cool superconductors once they're down to their operating temperatures if you keep them in the shade.
		It would take little or no refrigeration for the superconductors to run, as long as you didn't hit them with direct sunlight and warm them up.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so that would mean some sort of shield, even there, I guess, huh?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
		Well, basically what you would do is you'd put like the same sort of cryogenic insulation you use on Earth.
		You'd have a silver reflector on the front that was opaque to their sunlight, and you'd have a reflector on the back that would keep any Earth shine from hitting the thing as well.
		And once the things had been chilled down, by letting them be exposed to blackness of space, which is basically about three degrees Kelvin, extremely cold, then they would reach their operating point and remain there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Boy, that's fascinating.
		And where do you think such a beam would come back to Earth?
		If you were in charge of such a project and you had to designate a place where you'd bring it back, now, remember, you've got to keep it fairly near an entrance point for the grid, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's true.
		You know, I would actually recommend that it be done in some of the outlying areas around cities where people place things such as landfills.
		Think about your landfill having the receiving antenna spread out for square miles around, and nobody wants to live near the landfill anyway.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		What an ideal environment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I suppose.
		And other possibilities would be wouldn't it turn the landfill into JC's steaming pit of sewage?
		Heating it up or something?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's a funny thought, but actually it wouldn't.
		Remember, the receiving antenna for this thing would operate in the same way that the shield in the door of your microwave oven does.
		The signal can't get through it.
		It's absorbed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it would not affect.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It wouldn't affect the ground or anything under it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're really sure of that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that is the big worry, of course.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's true.
		See, you've got two things working on your side.
		The power density is only a quarter of sunlight.
		And remember, for the microwave oven, you've got about 5 watts per square centimeter.
		For this beam, you've got about 0.023 per square centimeter.
		And that same sort of metal shield in the door of your microwave blocks out that 5 watt per square centimeter density.
		And it's perfectly effective.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How big a field of antennas, I'm sorry to be jumping ahead like this, but how big a field of antennas to receive the energy?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Typically about a square mile at maximum.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's not so bad.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's really not so bad.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And keep in mind that you can have numerous receivers fed from the same power station because you can send multiple beams all over the place.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This would all be doable in what span of time, Sir Charles?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Seven years or less.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		As soon as you get somebody to support you economically in a project like this, you're off and running.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If it is, as you say, economically and technically feasible, the obvious question is, then why isn't somebody doing it now?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, we talked about the fact that launch costs are very expensive.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		the myers group is working on cutting that way down and he has been working very closely with a number of investors groups from insurance companies and states as well By the way, Bob has put a picture of me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You notice I've chosen to put my furry little friends up on my web slot, but Bob at smeter.net has put a picture of me up there, front page, taken yesterday.
		So another reason to go to www.smeter.net.
		S-M-E-T-E-R.net.
		And a picture of me taken yesterday by Ramona.
		So now, once again, here is Sir Charles.
		And again, I don't mean to co-opt this interview into energy, but I'm telling you, my friends and I on Short Wave, and people everywhere are talking about the price of gasoline.
		It's leading a lot of the news stories.
		The barrel of oil keeps going up every day.
		It's getting a little frightening.
		And you're saying that economically, technically, this idea of putting a power collector in space is viable.
		Now, we all know the launch costs are high.
		And I want to ask you about something that when I, well, when I heard about it, I laughed, and a lot of people did, this space elevator thing.
		The idea of creating an elevator into space, into a geosynchronous point which is, what, 22,300 miles up?
		It seems laughable, but I guess it's not.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, the materials are now being made and experimented with that will make it all possible.
		Basically, it's a new type of carbon called nanofibers or nanotubes.
		And this material is so strong that a length of it that was not tapered, just like a standard rope, a length of it 3,400 kilometers long could support its own weight.
		To give you a comparison, if you had a sisal fiber rope, which is standard rope, it could support a length of itself about 6 kilometers long.
		And polyethylene rope, the plastic, could support about 18 kilometers of itself.
		This stuff can support 3,400 kilometers.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My God.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's stronger than diamond.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Stronger than diamonds?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Fibers?
		Yes, the fibers have been successfully manufactured, and it looks like they have a process for making them in bulk.
		And that would be fantastic.
		And this means that we can build a cable strong enough to support its own weight all the way from orbital space down to the ground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, this sounds like Jack and the Beanstalk.
		How would you begin building this monstrosity?
		Would you start from the ground Going up?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Actually, you'd start from orbit because you'd put a factory or a manufacturing facility and an assembly plant up in orbit, and then you would start building the cable and extending it toward the ground.
		And if you just manufactured four or five kilometers a day, well, in no time at all, the thing would be scraping on the ground.
		And then you'd anchor it down, and you'd send up your first cable car.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It seems what would hold it just the string.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Just yeah, what would hold it up?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay, actually, it's much simpler than people might imagine.
		It's actually in orbit.
		So the hub of this whole assembly is in orbit, just as any satellite would be.
		And if we place it in orbit above the equator at the geostationary point, and that is, as you said, 22,300 miles up, then it would not move with relation to the ground.
		And so as you start extending the cable, one length of cable would go downward toward the Earth, another length would go outward, holding a counterweight.
		So between the two, the tensions would remain equal, and it would not move.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, a counterweight in space.
		But in space, things don't have weight as we understand it.
		So you're just talking mass?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct, just the mass.
		And as the system is designed now, they might not even need that because there will be enough mass in the taper of the cable.
		You see, the cable, if it were uniform in strength and uniform in size, would reach a point where you couldn't have any more length or it would snap.
		So in order to fix that, at the top, you make it broader so that it has the ability to support more of itself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So one day, we would just look up and we'd see this little dark strand of something headed toward Earth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I suppose we wouldn't because it would have to be at the equator, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you'd be able to see it from a long way off.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I bet you would.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		But you probably would see it as being a light color unless something was changed in the technology.
		They plan on coating it with a thin layer of metal so that oxygen erosion will not eat the cable.
		talking about the ability to lift twenty times at a time and atmospheric troubles like hurricanes and things like that would with it Well, consider that this cable, like a guitar string, would have a resonant frequency, but its resonant frequency would be about 7.2 hours.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry, say it again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		7.2 what?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Hours.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hours?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, if you plucked it like a string, the vibrations would take over seven hours to work it back and forth once.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, I see.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wow.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Because of its resonant frequency, we shouldn't have any problem with hurricanes or storms.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They would just whiz by it, and it simply wouldn't be affected.
		That's correct.
		Can you give me an idea of how actually, for example, by the time it got to Earth, how big would this cable, as you call it, be?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It would be about a meter wide and flat.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Flat like a sheet of paper.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that way you can grab it with a pair of rollers and run up and down it, and you have a lot more surface tension or surface area to contact it, so you can't slip.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's incredible.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you'd be able to virtually ride this thing right up out of the Earth's atmosphere slowly with no friction, not having to achieve...
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I see where you're going with that.
		Actually, if you're not orbiting the Earth in a rocket, if you were to stand stationary over the Earth, you'd find that you'd still fall toward the ground, but the force of gravity gets weaker as you leave the surface.
		So as you go up the cable, you don't have to worry about orbital motion because you're suspended on a solid object.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've got that, but something still has to power this thing, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		No, that's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You'd beam power up to it either through microwaves or laser beams.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And I wonder what kind of journey we're talking about here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you were to get into an elevator attached to this thing at the bottom and start up, how long would it take you to get there?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you went to the geostationary point where the main station would be, it would take about eight hours.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Eight hours?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Quite a while.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's no more unreal than an airline flight, you know?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, unreal in a lot of ways.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So if something like that existed, I suppose then that the solar station you talk about and Resupply and all the rest of it working on it would all be a piece of cake.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's right, because once you had the first skyhook or space elevator in place, you'd use it as the facility to build two or three more.
		And then you'd have some that ride up with cargo and some that come down with cargo, and you'd have a continuous flow of passengers and hardware.
		And this would cut your launch costs from, let's see, the recent estimate was $20,000 per kilogram down to eventually about $10 per kilogram.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is all of this, is this idea, for example, reasonable?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are they actually approaching the viability of these materials in that kind of mass?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it looks like they are.
		They have discovered a manner of getting the nanofibers to assemble themselves.
		And it turns out as simple as dragging a post-it note over the material as it was grown on a substrate, and the fibers self-assemble.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wow.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		But the other thing is, and this is a technological spin-off, the first batch of the material they produced appears to be transparent.
		And it looks like they may be able to turn it into a new type of display.
		There are talks about the same material being used to make flat televisions or displays that can be rolled up or folded.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
		Yes.
		So we've really come a very long way in a very short time.
		I had no idea some of this could actually be just about viable.
		All right.
		I thank you for all of that.
		I mean, these are questions I really wanted answered.
		Mars.
		Now, I know for some reason, with your background, you suddenly took a gigantic interest in Mars.
		Why?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's just been such an interesting place, and there were so many things I learned as a kid about the solar system that just kept me wanting to learn.
		And in technology, particularly in aerospace and in science, the more things you learn, the more tools you have in your arsenal to solve problems with.
		And it just sort of naturally was an outgrowth for me.
		Being in aerospace, everything you learn about space in general tends to have a relationship to what you're doing.
		So Mars has always been a fascinating place to me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Skipping to the chase, you know, you have looked at Mars really hard.
		What would be the headline that you would write about what you found on Mars?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That Mars is a fossil planet, and life was common throughout both Mars and Earth at the same times.
		Not only that, but not only that, we now know where the water is.
		And that's the big thing right now.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why is there water at all on Mars?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Because all the planets in our solar system were formed out of the same material and at the same time, and their chemistries were similar.
		And the gases known as ammonia and methane, and of course water vapor, were trapped inside the molten material that the planets were made of.
		So water is in the mix underground.
		It's the product of ammonia and methane being broken down in molten rock.
		It gets cooked into water and petroleum, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen.
		So our oceans, our petroleum, and our atmospheres all come from that same source.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are we to imagine that at one time on Mars there were oceans, much as there are here on Earth now?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Indeed.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It looks as if the whole planet were covered by water at some point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The whole planet.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It must have undergone ice ages as well as our world.
		And so at this point, the areas that the two rovers are looking at presently, Gusev Crater and Meridiani Planum, were both estimated to be at least a meter deep in water.
		They're about the same elevation.
		And Mars doesn't have its continents moving around.
		There's no tectonic activity.
		So we know the altitudes of those areas must have remained constant for many millions of years, possibly billions.
		So the sedimentary rocks, and they have admitted there are sedimentary rocks, were formed by water.
		So minerals were being eroded in the weather and deposited in this water.
		And now as you look at those areas, you see all of these huge polygons and all these spherules.
		The water was lost because of its weaker gravity and thin atmosphere, but there's still water underground.
		And there's still water underground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But wait a minute.
		If there was at once water on Mars, then something must have changed.
		You said it's gravity.
		It's atmosphere.
		At one time, they were sufficient to hold the water.
		So what happened?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, we both started out, Earth, Mars, and in fact Venus as well, started out with very thick atmospheres.
		Venus still has a great deal of it.
		Earth had an atmosphere about 250 times as dense as the atmosphere we have today.
		And its gravity wasn't sufficient to hold it, and it bled off, fortunately, over the many billions of years.
		Mars started with roughly the same amount of atmosphere, by all accounts that we can tell from the chemistry and the materials it was from.
		But because its atmosphere was held by its gravity much less strongly, it was lost to space.
		And when the atmosphere goes, the water starts to go.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it slowly leaked out.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It all leaked away because Mars only has about one-third of the gravity, 38% of the gravity the Earth has.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		By the way, skipping backward for one second, I've received, I don't know, a lot of emails from people.
		And first, they've seemed laughable, Sir Charles, but they said, you know, every time we launch a spacecraft, we lose something.
		I mean, it's like, you know, bursting through a balloon or something temporarily, and we lose a little of our own atmosphere or lose something or another.
		I get these emails.
		There is some truth to that, isn't there?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's a little bit of material loss, but it is absolutely minuscule.
		There's material falling to Earth just as well.
		But our atmosphere is being replenished, and this is a very interesting thing that you brought this up, and this is very interesting for people to know.
		Volcanoes replenish our atmosphere and our water.
		Did you know that the material that comes out of volcanoes is average about 70% water?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I didn't know that.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, in fact, some volcanoes have as much as 97% water coming out of its exhaust.
		Homotombo has 97.1% as measured in 1994.
		Kilauea and Hawaii puts out about 37.1% water in its eruptions.
		This is why lava often explodes.
		It's loaded with water, and this water is flashed to steam when the pressure is released from the lava, and it explodes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And there's no volcanoes on Mars, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, there are some volcanoes.
		They're very large volcanoes.
		In fact, the largest volcano known in the solar system, Olympus Mons, is on Mars.
		Unfortunately, it appears that there's very little or no volcanic activity on Mars at this time because the planet lost a lot of its heat.
		The Earth has a very large core, and a lot of material in it stays hot because of radioactive meltdown.
		Mars' core is smaller and therefore has less of this material in it to keep it hot, and it's apparently just about worn out, worn out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So is it fair to say Mars is a dead planet?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Not entirely.
		You see, recently they discovered what appears to be a frozen sea on the equator of Mars, big glaciers of ice.
		And they say that it was formed roughly 5 million years ago in what appears to have been a volcanic episode.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why should we be interested in Mars, Sir Charles?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That is an excellent question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it is a very good answer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Let me tell you a story about an ice cap.
		For 40 years, this northern ice cap has been melting.
		It's melting away, and there's no question about it.
		Over 10,000 measurements have been made with CCD instruments like cameras.
		But this ice cap is not melting because of SUVs or exhausts or oil companies or industry.
		And the reason they know that is because it is Mars' north polar cap that is melting.
		So somehow, both Earth and Mars appear to be undergoing a phase of global warming simultaneously.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's very interesting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I did see a story on global warming on Mars, and apparently it's moving at a faster rate than it is here on Earth.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that indicates that it has to have a common source, most likely, and that would be the sun.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That would indeed be the sun.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And the report was made by the Astronomical League at the Alcon Expo 2005.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		They had a conference in Kansas City just last Week.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Maybe you'd like to come.
		I mean, clearly, I've felt for some time that our climate is in the midst of a very quick change by our standards.
		I mean, human beings, I think, are not supposed to see changes in the climate.
		They occur over millions of years, and yet a lot of people are beginning to notice a real change in climate.
		Do you believe there's justification in that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, yes.
		You know, we haven't kept good records over the last 2,000 or 4,000 years.
		So it would be difficult for us to say with great precision just how much change there was.
		But think about the case of Greenland.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or Alaska.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, yes, Greenland wasn't named Greenland just because somebody was thinking wishfully.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It was actually green just 1,000 years ago.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Senator McCain just came back, I guess, from Alaska, and he virtually said the place is melting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And those Alaskans I've talked to verify that the tundra is turning to mush.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And it doesn't surprise me.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Parts of the state looks like very much that these sorts of changes might be natural, and there's very little that we can do about it directly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You believe that.
		Okay, our North Pole, our South Pole, when you see 10-year photographs of them, it's frightening.
		The North Pole is, you know, perhaps two-thirds or less what it was 10 years ago or 40 years ago.
		I don't know.
		It's fast.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's true.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		We don't have anything to compare it to typically, but yes, it appears to be happening in just a matter of decades.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Our navy.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And it may be, you know, it may be in part what we're doing, but it appears that there's also a link to Mars itself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A link to Mars.
		And that link is what?
		The sun?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		The sun itself.
		Yes, it drives all of our weather.
		In fact, it drives the weather throughout our solar system.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Then, like gas prices, do you think it's just going to keep getting hotter and hotter and hotter?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, no, I don't.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And I think that what's going to happen is it's going to have to bottom out at some point and then reverse.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The gas or the sun?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The gas or the sun or both?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, the sun, typically.
		Gas, we're going to have to do something about.
		We have to take some action on that.
unidentified		We have to take some action on that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Once again, Sir Charles Schultz III with a small prediction, Sir Charles.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly.
		You know, I've been looking at the situation with petroleum and China and India, this whole energy picture.
		And it turns out that China and India between them have invested, or promised to invest over the next 30 years, a total of $150 billion in the development of new petroleum resources.
		And that's from drilling into the ground, processing, pumping, running to the sea, and shipping it home.
		Now, half of the world's oil supply resides in Alberta, Canada, of all places, and it's in the form, unfortunately, of tar sands.
		That's 1.3 trillion barrels there.
		So it's been uneconomical up to now to do anything with it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it now?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, now it is economical.
		And here's my prediction.
		I'm going to predict that China will attempt to buy into the Alberta tar sands.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, really?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you're saying now, at the price for a barrel of oil, it's now economical to convert this into petroleum?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It certainly is.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So that's a small prediction, but I think it's going to have a big impact.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I knew as the price went up, all of a sudden, all sorts of things that were not particularly interesting, you know, a dollar or two ago for gas now are.
		And will continue to be as it goes up.
		I don't know where the breakpoint is, but one of these wonderful things has got to come along before the American economy just, you know, grinds to a halt.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think a lot of people don't realize that the price of gasoline or the price of oil affects everything in the economy because you have to pay for shipping to get things places, and that takes diesel fuel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You know, energy to manufacture things.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So the price to extract this and then turn it into something usable is now suddenly worth doing.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's in reach now.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It's in reach.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And it will happen.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You think the Canadians will go along with this?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's going to depend on where they feel morally they should accept the money from.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If they just want the money, then a business deal is a business deal.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I've heard rumors, Sir Charles, that the environment in China right now, maybe you can confirm this, is much like it was during the 70s oil shortage in the U.S. And that was a pretty severe climate.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it that bad in China now?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		From what I understand, yes, it is.
		And there are desperate needs of sources of energy because they are a huge economic growth point at this time in history.
		They're at their biggest burst of growth they've ever had.
		And also, look at this from another standpoint.
		It looks like the Chinese are going to have somebody on the moon in just a very few years.
		Perhaps this is the sort of thing we need to get our government to get moving on space travel.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why do you think the Chinese want back or want to get to the moon?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think they understand the value of space in terms of energy and resources.
		And I believe I'm not mistaken.
		They're going to want to develop it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Helium-3?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Or why else go to the moon?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Possibly helium-3, but think about all the minerals that nobody claims.
		They're right on the surface for anyone who wishes to mine them.
		But it also could be a national prestige issue as well.
		If you develop the technology to get a spaceship to the moon with people in it safely and return them to Earth, you also have developed a lot of other technologies that other countries will not sell you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I guess it is not proven to the American people nor the lawmakers that allocate the money for this sort of thing because we don't seem inclined to go back to the moon, do we?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		At this point, there's only been talk about it.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I haven't seen any really commitment to it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, exactly.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		We seem to do a lot of planning and generate tons of paper, but get very little done sometimes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Uh-huh.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, if there was really a good reason other than to beat the other guy to get to the moon, it seems to me we'd be going.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, and you know, it all is going to depend on if we start building power stations, the moon would be the best place for the materials, because it would be things we wouldn't have to launch from Earth.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's economically feasible right now to make most of the power station in the form of mirrors and generators and heat exchangers from lunar materials, then to ship it up from the planet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's talk about NASA a little bit, shall we?
		I'd be quite interested, I think, in your perspective now on NASA.
		I know that you began as something of an innocent with NASA, certainly with some of the discoveries that you've made on Mars.
		And I'm sure that you've had some discussions and interaction with NASA.
		And I wonder how you feel about NASA now as an agency.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You know, that's a prickly question.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes, I ask those.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's fine.
		You know, that's what I'm here for.
		And, you know, when I look at it, I realize that most of the people who work with NASA are just like anybody else.
		They're just in there doing their job to the best of their abilities.
		But clearly, whoever's in charge of the flow of information really doesn't want to share.
		They tend to be very tight-lipped about things, and it's things that you don't imagine would have any direct influence.
		I don't understand why anybody would be unhappy about revealing the fact that there are fossils on Mars.
		And I know you've seen them, and many other people have seen them, and I talked to people in NASA, in the Jet Propulsion Lab, quite often, and every one of them has given me at least some confirmation that my findings are correct.
		And some have said, yes, what you found is exactly right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, incidentally, I think that we have some examples of some of your recent finds on the website, don't we?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
		And in fact, if you have a look at it, there's a little sea biscuit.
		It's similar to a sand dollar, but thicker.
		And it has a perfect little starfish pattern on the top of it.
		And that was found by Opportunity on Salt 507.
		And you know, you came to mind when I spotted that one.
		And so I've named it because, as you know, if you discover a new species or organism, the discoverer has the right of naming it.
		And so I'm naming it Aria fabrica campana.
		And the reason for that is fabrica campana is as close as I can get in Latin to Art Bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So there's an organism being named after you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		An organism.
		I'm honored.
		Is that me in the middle of that rock up there?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's got that little starfish pattern.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I knew that you would recognize it right away, but I thought that that'd be something interesting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A little stick me.
		Okay.
		Well, all right.
		So you have concluded basically that there was, or is, but was, at least was, life on Mars.
		That's correct.
		And in discussing this with NASA, you feel something of a reluctance to publicly jump on board that ship.
		Is that correct?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's correct.
		Not one placed official that could make any official statements for NASA has come forward and said, yes, there were fossils on Mars or there was life on Mars.
		So, you know, at this point, we have just an overwhelming amount of data, and it doesn't take a great deal of searching to find things like that organism I just mentioned that's got a five-pointed star on it.
		And as anyone who knows anything about minerals or crystals or erosion and biology would tell you, a five-pointed star that is regular like that doesn't form in nature unless it's formed by biological means.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And why do you think NASA doesn't want this endorsed?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I'm not certain if it really would be in keeping with what they want to do.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Some people have expressed to me that if it was discovered that there was life on Mars, that they would lose funding for the presently planned exploratory mission.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Because then people would say, well, you know, you've answered that question.
		There's no reason to spend a half a billion on this satellite that you're going to send there because we know the answer now.
		But I don't really see it that way.
		You know, economics and politics make very strange decisions about what we should and shouldn't do.
		And I think this is right there.
		And the other one is the religious standpoint.
		Many people who are strongly religious have a problem with accepting life anywhere other than on Earth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Bingo.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now I think you've hit it.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that may very well be the case.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you think NASA, in deference to the world's religions, might not be wanting to confirm that there is life somewhere other than Earth, period.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that may very well be the case, yes.
		And to me, that's the only thing that I can think of that even comes near a rational explanation.
		I was asked if I was interested in attending a conference in October by the Logos Institute.
		And at that conference, it was going to be in Bellingham, Washington, they were going to discuss different viewpoints about life in the universe and the religious take on it in particular.
		And so I was asked if I was interested in participating, and I said, yes, I'd love to, you know.
		And the fellow that I spoke with has actually been a guest on your show before, Dr. Michael Heiser.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And so, you know, I accepted immediately.
		And then later, I found out just a couple of days back that the organizer, Rob Haskell, had not put me on the roster.
		He dropped me from the lineup.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, that's unusual because I would think that I would be uniquely suited to speak about life on Mars.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		One would certainly think so, yes.
		I mean, you've produced actual solid evidence that there certainly was life on Mars.
		I certainly see it that way.
		Now, there are others with other theories.
		Richard C. Hoagland is one of them.
		And he thinks that there is some great darker matter to all of this, that NASA is well aware of not only life on Mars, but the fact that at one time there was intelligent life on Mars.
		Have you locked out that one?
		Or do you wonder about it?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I don't believe that Intelligence arose on Mars.
		And this is a point that I try to make very clear.
		The life that existed on Mars seemed to be pretty primitive sea life, nothing truly advanced.
		If there was ever intelligent life on Mars, it would have had to have come from some other world, not from Mars itself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that, of course, is also possible.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's true.
		That's a very good possibility.
		Now that we know there's life on Mars as well as on the Earth, or was at least, we're certain of that, it would tell you that there should be life throughout our universe, and there could be billions of worlds with life.
		And, you know, intelligence is another question.
		We don't know how common intelligence is.
		We've only got the examples of humanity on Earth and some other near-misses in the terms of other animals such as chimpanzees and dolphins.
		But intelligence on other planets is another question entirely.
		We don't see any signs of that yet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we don't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I mean, we've got SETI, and some of the SETI officials will frankly tell you if in another, you know, at least 50 years, and I think it could be sooner than that, they don't find something, then, you know, there's a legitimate question there about whether there is something.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, that's another interesting point, too.
		Notice that as we have moved from analog to digital technology, what we transmit by radio has changed very dramatically.
		In many cases, if you pick up a radio signal and it could be voice or data or anything, you can't decode it without a certain specific key or a frame.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right, yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Now, it has been suggested that up to one quarter of the radio noise we receive from the sky could in fact be mixed digital signals from all over.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And we, without the key, would be unable to decode it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And we just don't have the key yet.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So we could be bathed in alien signals and not be aware of it because we don't have the key to decode it or the framing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is that a current pursuit of SETI?
		I mean, that's such a fascinating concept that it really is all around us, and we simply have not provided the encryption key yet to unlock it.
		That's such a fascinating idea.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, it isn't a key.
		I mean, I'm sorry, it isn't a pursuit of SETI because they concentrate on a specific set of frequencies very near the water hole.
		Yes.
		Yes.
		And so we don't broadcast on that frequency or that set of frequencies.
		And to assume that other intelligences would, I mean, why do we make that assumption?
		They would be broadcasting all over the band just as we do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Spread spectrum.
		That's right.
		And spread spectrum, folks, means that a frequency is hopping around at what would seem like a random rate, making it totally impossible to track the signal and therefore extract any intelligence from it.
		And Sir Charles is talking about the fact that actually the signals could be, and it could be, all around us right now, and we simply don't have the key.
		Wouldn't that be a reasonable pursuit for some of the computers at SETI?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it could.
		And Fourier analysis, which is a special type of mathematical analysis dealing with frequencies and time and energy, might be able to tell us whether or not this is the case, but understand that they're only looking at a very narrow band of frequencies and not at these other signals.
		But we've got a disadvantage as well.
		Our environment around us is very, very noisy.
		So it would be next to impossible to sort out what was being generated by our machinery and technology versus what was actually coming from space.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it would be nice to know somebody who's going to go to work on that because it sounds so logical.
		I'm going to have to give that one some serious thought.
		Have you been contacted at all, Sir Charles, by anybody within the government?
		Forget NASA for a moment, but any other area of the government?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's good you ask that.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I have not been directly connected, but my website, as you know, most websites do record the types of visitors and how often.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And I get some regular visitors that would probably astound people to know about.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Any given day, I get somewhere between 5 and 40% of government and military hits on my site.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No kidding.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Between 5 and 40%.
		Some of the regulars, and I wasn't going to name names, but I think I'm going to do that now.
		Some of the regulars who visit my site are Lockheed Martin Corporation, Boeing, Lear, Virgin, NASA, JPL, Orbital Sciences, Rocketdyne, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, for instance.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My goodness.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I get regular hits from the Department of Defense, and not just in this country, from Canada, the Department of National Defense, D ⁇ D, and the Australian Department of Defense, the Department of Defense Information Systems Center, the National Security Agency, Foreign Technologies Division, Army, Air Force, Navy, Defense Mapping Agencies, Naval Warfare Centers, Army Special Ops Commands.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's almost the whole group.
		I mean, you could go on and on, but that's all government.
		My gosh.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, that's just the tip of the iceberg.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And why do you think they're there, Sir Charles?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, I can see what pages they're looking at, and that's interesting, because they're downloading, in particular, the organisms.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		They're making copies of the organisms.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're making copies.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		The Centers for Disease Control, the MyoClinic, Johns Hopkins, and the National Institute of Health each spent roughly a week on my page looking at every single organism that I had posted on my site.
		But now there's an interesting byproduct of this.
		We had some hits from Berkeley, after which Dr. Seth Szostak, the chief administrator of SETI, published an article warning of the dangers of a Mars sample return.
		The Mars sample return mission has been pushed back to 2011.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The obvious point being that organisms might still be there, and do we really wish to bring them back to planet Earth?
		And then there's also an interesting reverse of that, Sir Charles.
		I've heard that a number of the probes, the early probes, that we sent to Mars, we didn't spend a great deal of contamination time, decontamination time on them.
		And in fact, we might have contaminated Mars.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's a very good possibility.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It could have happened.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How true is that that the early spacecraft weren't all that spiffy in terms of having been boiled and whatever?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, whenever you try to sterilize an organism, you Also, subject the hardware to the same sort of conditions that can destroy electronics and sensors.
		And so they have to be very careful about how they go about the sterilization business.
		Early spacecraft typically weren't sterilized very well, and it wasn't just a budgetary matter, but it was also a rather Earth-centric belief that there really wasn't life anywhere and there was no risk.
		So we've got a lot of dirty hardware floating around out there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And presumably then, organisms generated by technicians' hands and all the rest of it could now be racing around Mars.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's a good possibility.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If any of them find themselves at home in briny, wet soil, they would love it there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So if we bring back a sample from Mars, unless that gets scrubbed as perhaps a bad idea, we might find ourselves.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's possible, but there would be an easy way to know if that were true.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How so?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Our genetic code is probably very different from a Martian genetic code or an alien genetic code.
		And so if we spot something that has a known sequence of genes, then we're going to know it was an earthly organism.
		It's like a fingerprint.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I see.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would Mars support the spread of an organism that came from Earth?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it could.
		It really depends on the type of organism.
		They've discovered a number of soil bacteria that could probably thrive, and we know that there are many bacteria called extreme halophiles.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm so curious, Sir Charles, what do you think all these agencies really want?
		I mean, they're working, these agencies have the same NASA photographs available to them.
		Presumably, they know all this stuff already.
		Why?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I think that it's in the presentation of the data.
		The fact is, a lot of the stuff is very difficult for people to spot without looking through masses of data.
		And on my site, well, we spent a great deal of time finding the most obvious fossils and presenting them and the information about them in a very concise manner.
		And you can find everything right there.
		If you go to the NASA site, all of the information is there, but you can't find it.
		Think about an encyclopedia and the index required for it.
		It's the same way.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Of course, there's probably no way for you to know the level of the people that are coming in.
		But, of course, we have a lot of government workers, and a lot of them do work for different agencies.
		You don't have any way of knowing how high up the food chain it's been going, do you?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		No, I don't.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		But we had a number of interesting hits just a couple of days ago from the Justice Department, and they were looking at over the State Department as well.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and you know, it's interesting because the State Department has been looking at whether technology transfer would be involved in, let's say, the orbital power concepts.
		And different parts of the government are probably looking at some of this information and some of the other things that I'm doing.
		And it's all public knowledge.
		And I don't know exactly what they're putting together, but obviously everything they need, they can find right there.
		I mean, the fossils are there.
		The information on what I'm working on is there.
		And I hope they find everything they want.
		And I hope even more clearly that I'm telling them, call me.
		I'll tell you anything you want to know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		A little chuckle in your voice.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, and the water issue.
		I didn't want to sidestep that.
		I wanted to tell you just how important that is.
		You know, we've been told for years that Mars is dry.
		And on the links that I gave you for the site, there is a picture of a crater that they found on Mars, and it's about 70 degrees north latitude near the North Pole.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And it has apparently two cubic miles of water ice inside it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's a lot.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's just in one crater.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's enough to give every man, woman, and child on Earth over 300 gallons of water.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And now, obviously, water is important for fuel.
		Water is important for sustenance.
		If we were to send people to Mars, the water would sustain them, correct?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The water could then separate to hydrogen and make fuel.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And oxygen to breathe.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And oxygen to breathe, yes.
		And all of that could be done now.
		I mean, of course, we're not going to Mars.
		We're barely going back to the moon.
		I'm not so sure about that.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's true, but I think what is most important is what it implies.
		You see, if there's water present in those quantities now, then obviously there should still be something alive.
		The planet was never dry.
		But the interesting thing is, there appears to be some form of precipitation now, and that's backed up by pictures of the rovers' tracks.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Precipitation?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So, yes, and it may be spray from a geyser, and it may be actual fog of water droplets.
		The rovers leave tracks, and we're told that the erosion on Mars is very slow.
		I think it was Dr. Stephen Squires, the principal investigator for the Mir project, who said, we found some craters four to six inches in diameter, and they could be up to 100 million years old.
		Well, these little potholes are on the sides of sand dunes, and when you consider there are dust storms and sandstorms and dust devils, it doesn't seem even possibly or remotely possible that a pothole four inches across could last 100 million years.
		But now we know that it's impossible.
		When the rover opportunity was stuck in that dune for a while, it left its tracks behind it, and then they backed out over the tracks later.
		They turned the cameras and the microscopic imager on those tracks.
		Now, instead of being clean and sharp and pristine as they were, they were eroded, and they were eroded into the pattern identical to that that raindrops make in sand.
		And this happened over the space of one to two weeks.
		But more important, if you've ever seen rocks on a sandpile, when the rain falls, the rocks are left on pillars of sand.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		They stand upright.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I have the microscopic image that shows the spherules standing on the sand in the track that was absolutely flat and ridged by the rover's wheels.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you trying to suggest it rains on Mars?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I don't know if it was rain, but I do know that there are active geysers.
		It may well have been spray from a geyser.
		But whatever it is, there's water precipitating on the surface on a basis of a week or less.
		And that's proven by the age of the tracks, which is known.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Why should we be interested in Mars again?
		What possible reason could we have for going to Mars, expensive as it would be?
		What would we gain?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, for one thing, there is a great deal of material available on Mars in the forms of metals and chemicals and minerals that we cannot easily get to in those quantities on the Earth.
		So industrial development and living space would be very easy to manufacture on Mars using the available materials.
		Another is it provides a whole biological laboratory for us to study the development of life.
		And this is a very important question.
		Where do we come from?
		Who are we?
		Where are we going?
		What is life in the universe like?
		And how common is it?
		And we could discover a lot of that just from looking at Mars.
		And, of course, the climate issue, as we discussed earlier, the global warming points.
		So there are many things we can learn from Mars.
		And anytime you have a place where people can go, if it's possible for them to live there, they'll make a frontier of it and they'll move there.
		This is to be expected.
		People will be going.
		And there's some support from the government, actually, in a small form.
		In a recent discussion between Mike Griffin, the new chief administrator of NASA, and Gene Myers, they spoke for a couple of hours on the phone.
		One of the things that Mike Griffin told him was that they really supported shuttle-derived launch vehicles.
		But he also admitted that he and the president were very keen on turning over the development of low-Earth orbit space to industry and commerce.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So apparently some wheels are getting moving, and they see that because private individuals and small companies can indeed afford to make workable spacecraft, that maybe it's time to begin turning these things over to the small guy.
		Now, there's one thing that will help us greatly in space development.
		Presently, anything that's launched has to have the approval of the government.
		If you live in this country, the government has to approve whatever you launch.
		And that's because the government takes responsibility for anything you launch, if it were to hit somebody's city or home or something.
		But what about airliners?
		We don't do that for airplanes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If we did, it would be impossible to have air travel.
		Clearly, if you want to have space become a commercial and a viable commercial venture, you have to turn the responsibility for launched vehicles over to the individuals or companies doing the launching.
		Once you do that, the floodgates will open.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If an airliner crashes on some friendly country's buildings and kills a bunch of people, you're saying our government takes responsibility for that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		No, actually, they do not.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Private companies do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Private companies.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		The difference is, if you had a rocket and the same thing happened, our government would hold itself responsible.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		This is, well, I don't know why they do it, but it gives them a measure of control.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Unless they actually approve it, you can't launch it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		In what way is it different than an airliner?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's my point exactly.
		It isn't different.
		It's only perceived to be different.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		For what purpose?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, not being privy to what they're thinking.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there has to be a reason they don't want private individuals launching without their permission.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, one thing to think about is this.
		If you have the energy necessary to create a sizable spacecraft, all you have to do is aim it at the ground and it becomes a weapon.
		And so there's a bit of a paranoia attached to that sort of thinking.
		The same thing is true for an airliner, as we all know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Sir Charles, it's not just the Myers Group.
		There are others.
		I'm aware personally, Sir Charles, of some projects underway right now to make cheap launch vehicles, not just the Myers Group, although they're certainly at top of the heap.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly Elon Musk for one.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and others.
		I just won't name them, but they exist, and they're pretty well underway.
		Do you see these private ventures succeeding and soon, one of them?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Actually, I do, because it's just as inevitable as development in any field.
		Just as computers became extremely cheap and commonplace, you're going to see the barnstorming era of spaceflight begin.
		And we're going to see space transport on a scale we can't even imagine right now.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Barnstorming.
		Unlike that.
		That's correct.
		And you really think it'll get to the point where there'll just be all kinds of launches by all kinds of groups?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, of that much, you know, you can be certain, because if it's possible to make it fly and make a dollar at it, somebody's going to do it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you don't believe the government will put the clamps on this for some as yet unconfirmed reason?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you think about it, other countries are now going to be stepping to the fore in space travel.
		And they're not going to be doing it just for demonstration.
		They're after resources, money, and electrical power.
		And energy is the big thing right now.
		If, let's say, China were to, or India were to put up a power satellite, how quickly do you think it would polarize us to get something done?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Very quickly.
		Yes.
		In that arena, very quickly.
		You know, I don't know if the Chinese go back to the moon, whether that will cause us to sort of enter another race or not.
		I have my doubts.
		Even if they were to go to Mars, but if they were to do as you just suggested, oh, yes, I think we'd be embarrassed kind of the way when the Russians put up the first Sputnik and it beeped its way around The world.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, indeed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So, are they working on it, Sir Charles?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't know if they're directly working on orbital power in China, but they do know the concept exists.
		It has been touted as a solution instead of using hydrocarbon fuels and coal.
		I know that Condoleezza Rice and her secretary have been to China, India, and Japan and other nations in an effort to try and sell them on other technologies besides the petroleum industry or the coal industry.
		And so far, there have been no takers.
		And, you know, you've heard the huge amount of money that China and India are going to be investing in petroleum.
		You know, $150 billion is a lot of money.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It is indeed.
		One other area, we're going to go to the phone lines here in the last hour, but I want to ask you about, you and I have talked before about artificial intelligence and about robots and about robots even going to war, for example, in Iraq.
		Oh, yes.
		Where are we with all of that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, as you'll know, when we spoke last, this was in January, we talked about the fact that we're sending some robotic fighters to Iraq.
		And I mentioned...
		unmanned autonomous vehicles, particularly aircraft.
		The cover story of the July popular science was exactly that.
		I know of at least six unmanned autonomous vehicles that are under development or actual testing that will be used very shortly in warfare.
		For instance, they have one called the DP-5X, and it's an 11-foot-long helicopter, and it is unmanned, and it has about a five-and-a-half-hour endurance in flight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It sits in the back of a Home V. And it carries weapons?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's mostly sensors and recon hardware right now, and it can also be used as a communications relay, like a satellite.
		You hover it over a point, and you use it to relay your communications around.
		I don't see why it couldn't carry weapons.
		They have another one called Long Gun.
		It's about a 12-foot-long craft, and it's an automated missile.
		This one you'll like.
		It has about 30 hours of flight time.
		You send it out after targets, and it locates the targets using infrared and other parts of the spectrum, and it decides on whether it's a target it should hit.
		If it finds a target, it will hit it automatically.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're saying it makes these decisions on targeting on its own.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		But here's the interesting part.
		If it doesn't find a target, it can be ordered to return to base.
		It can be refueled and flown again.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My goodness.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And that's just two of a number.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		One of them is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are we using these now?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Some small of the vehicles, some of the smaller models are in test right now as to whether they're in the field or not.
		I know that there are some autonomous vehicles in the field, but I don't know how effective they are at this point.
		But they even have one in development that will fit in a backpack, and it's like a hover platform so that the soldiers can carry it out, throw the thing out in the field, and take off with a video camera or whatever.
		Fits in their backpack.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are we headed toward a world where machines will do our warfare?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		We certainly are, yes.
		We're to the point now where we've got hardware and development that could very easily, if not automatically perform warfare functions.
		We could simply operate a lot of it by remote control.
		So yes, we are headed for automated warfare.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, there are...
		And I don't think I have any compunction about that.
		I mean, war is hell, and war is bad, and war is killing, and if you don't have to have your own people die while at the task, I can't find fault with it.
		Can you?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I'd have to agree with you.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If it means that we can save at least some lives and it gives us an edge in combat, then I'd have to agree with it, yes.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you understand the ethical objections some have?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, I do.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Some people feel that somehow it's worse being killed by a robot than a bomb.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, or that it's some sort of cowardly warfare.
		I don't know.
		I don't know.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		You know, I don't know if you have an objection to fighting and you're forced to fight, and you do it because you must.
		Are you a coward if you try not to fight?
		If you try to cover yourself or defend yourself in a better manner?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We've come a long way from the days where the British stood in very nice, neat lines and marched toward the enemy.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And they learned a lesson there, very valuable.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They did indeed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So anyway, the world of robotics is beginning to come true, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		In fact, it is, and we're going to see more and more of it around us every day.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Battlefield is the first.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you imagine that right now, Sir Charles, we have orbiting weapons?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		We've touched on this subject before.
		I can see a few systems that could be considered weapon.
		I cannot specifically say if we do have weapons in orbit.
		I know of some systems that could easily be considered weapons.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let's try another approach.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that any country in the world has orbiting weapons?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, I suspect that some do.
		And we have to face the inevitability of warfare in space.
		If we start space travel and we start using weapons in space because of something, it doesn't matter what it is, we run some serious risks.
		And we know there's going to be fighting.
		It always happens.
		Wherever there's human beings, you will have warfare.
		But if we use those weapons in space, we run into some real problems.
		For instance, debris.
		On the ground, when you explode a bomb or hit a target, the debris ends up on the ground or in the atmosphere.
		If you do that in space, the debris ends up in orbit.
		And the problem is you can contaminate a pristine environment.
		So a spacecraft or a satellite being hit by some of this debris can be destroyed.
		A paint flake moving at orbital velocities can carry the energy of a hand grenade.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So by exploding something or destroying something, we could be creating projectiles that would destroy our own spacecraft.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Do you remember the super gun that Saddam Hussein was working on years ago?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I certainly do.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, one of the projections they made was that if he shot out of the gun a small rocket motor, it could carry a small payload into orbit.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And if he were to put a sack of BBs in that payload and fire it in the opposite direction that satellites orbit, let's say the geosynchronous orbit, that sack of BBs could spread out and destroy many of the satellites in that orbit and make it uninhabitable for satellites for thousands of years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That was a serious concern.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So Despite some very dire predictions that were made, thank God the space shuttle returned to Earth safely recently, as you all recall.
		However, there was, while they were up there, much consternation about this damage or that damage, and frankly, it seemed like they spent the better part of the mission worrying, justifiably so, I guess, about the damage that might or might not have been done to the spacecraft on launch and the safety of a return.
		They really did spend a hell of a lot of time on that.
		And I wanted you to comment, Sir Charles.
		The space shuttle seems like it's nearing the end of its life.
		It really does, one way or the other, grounded yet again, I guess, and, you know, old.
		We don't see a replacement for it in the wind.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, it should be retired.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's a 30-year-old system.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		But fine.
		But what about its replacement?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, as you know, the Space Island Group has a design for a vehicle that would replace the shuttle easily, and most of the components will be directly from the shuttle manufacturing facilities with minor modifications.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry to interrupt.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You're suggesting it's not going to be the government that provides the replacement or NASA.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, if we're lucky, it will be an outside group and not the government, because typically when you get a situation where you have private industry in competition, they'll make it a lot cheaper.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I mean, imagine if your family car was made by the government instead of Ford Motor Company or Chevy or whoever.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is there time, Sir Charles?
		I mean, we've got the International Space Station under construction.
		We can't afford to just, you know, hand the shuttle a golden parachute and say goodbye.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, there is time because many systems have already been designed, and even NASA on their own website has a number of vehicles that are derivatives of the shuttle.
		And their new administrator, you know, Mike Griffin states he is strongly in support of shuttle-derived vehicles.
		And the reason for that is those components are knowns.
		They're manufactured now.
		There are lines that can be turned on in an instant to start manufacturing them.
		And they've been tested, so we know that they're reliable.
		But we need to change the heat shielding, the foam on the tanks.
		A couple of issues can be resolved that will end any debate about the safety of the system.
		And if you're sending things up that never come back to Earth, you don't need to worry about the heat shielding on it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you not a fan of man in space?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you more a fan of machine in space?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, no.
		I strongly support a manned space effort.
		But the thing about it is, when you send something as large as a shuttle up, you should be committed to keeping something that big in orbit.
		The expenditure of getting that much hardware up there is the largest cost of the mission.
		If you need to bring things back, it should be human beings in a return capsule or glider and the results of their experiments.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If you had an opportunity other than for the thrill of it, would you feel safe flying in a shuttle?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Five years ago, I would have said, where's my toothbrush?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Today, I don't think I would do it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it is time, then, in your opinion, to retire the shuttle, even if it means a delay in the space station?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I don't think we're going to see a completion of the space station.
		And at this point, looking at the results of the research done in the station, I really don't see that we're getting our money's worth out of it.
		There are a lot of experiments you can't do on the space station.
		In fact, there are many experiments that cannot be done on a manned station at all, because human beings and the machines to keep them alive produce a lot of vibrations, and it's a dirty environment.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I want to take some calls, and they certainly are here.
		First time caller line, you're on the air with Sir Charles Schultz.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi.
		This is Sharon in L.A. Hello, Sharon.
		Hi.
		Earlier, you stated that it was a fallacy that microwave ovens can bring about negative biological effects.
		And I have seen many studies, for example, showing that microwaves that happen to be leaking at eye level cause eye damage.
		And they had quite a lot of opportunity to study this in people who worked in fast food places, and they could see where they were standing.
		And you also stated that the microwave technology that would be beaming down the equivalent of a quarter of what's produced in a microwave oven, excuse me, would not produce any negative biological effects.
		And I would be interested in what references there are to support that statement.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Actually, what I stated was that I'd never seen anybody with a pacemaker die in exposure to a microwave oven.
		It's true that a leaky oven can have negative biological effects.
		We know that.
		It can harm you.
		But the figure you quoted, one quarter the density of what's in a microwave oven, actually is incorrect.
		What I quoted was one quarter the density of sunlight.
		And the microwave oven energy is about 50 times more intense.
		So what we would be dealing with in the power beam would be one two hundredth, or just half a percent of the power density of a microwave oven, not one fourth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So her concerns about the effects of microwave on biology?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, there are effects.
		If you have, I mean, obviously you can cook with microwaves, but once again, it's a matter of power density.
		And if your microwave is leaking, there are some obvious signs.
		If you feel a slight warmth with your hand around the door, man, right away you get yourself a sensor.
		They're real cheap at many electronic stores.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Your bad, you're cooking.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That heat is cooking you.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		And we certainly would not want to beam that sort of power down to Earth, where the density would be great enough to be damaging.
		That's the whole point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do we, sir, Charles, really know enough about the long-term effects of low dosages of microwave?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, the studies that have shown that microwaves in very low doses over a long period of time don't seem to have any effects don't seem to be getting as much airtime as the ones that claim gloom and doom.
		I mean, that's the same situation with people saying, oh, I live near a power wire.
		I'm worried about my animals, you know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		All right.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning, Art, and good morning, Sir Charles.
		Well, Art, first a pleasure.
		Thank you very much for taking my call.
		You're very welcome.
		And I'm very fascinated by the space-based microwave because I'm kind of mindful of the pharmaceutical companies who want to hear about that, in that well people don't need drugs, so there's no impetus for them to proceed.
		And I'm wondering what kind of an impedance you're finding from industries such as oil as far as developing not only just this, but wind and solar and those kinds of things.
		And one other thing, Art, if you wouldn't mind repeating the website for the short wave, I would certainly appreciate that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, happy to do it.
		And remember, folks, there may or may not be something there when you go up.
		I mean, you're listening to short wave.
		It's not a commercial broadcast.
		It's simply short wave.
		But it's www.smeter.net.
		That's S, letter S, M-E-T-E-R.net.
		And you'll sort of have a little window into shortwave, the good, the bad, the ugly, all of it.
		So, Sir Charles, the impedance.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we don't seem to be having any impediments because right now everybody is feeling the cost of generating power.
		And people, you know, man on the street, he's going to be very concerned.
		And already people are very concerned about the cost of petroleum because of what it's doing at the gas pump, for instance.
		And what is it going to do to our power bills when the winter comes and we have to start heating?
		I don't see, and I certainly haven't seen, any problems with power companies.
		Big oil, as you know, depends on the ability to produce petroleum.
		When the costs get this high, it costs more than a barrel to produce four barrels of oil, then they realize they're not going to make as much profit because at some point people are just going to stop paying for it.
		They're going to choke on it.
		So it is in everybody's best interest, including oil companies, to begin to diversify.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The profits the oil companies are making right now are rather large, I've heard.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		At what point do you think the American people will begin to, I don't know, get activist in some manner about the price of energy?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, a lot of people are using public transportation because they just can't afford anything else.
		But public transportation itself can be problematic.
		It would be better if we had more and better quality public transportation, and probably less people would drive their vehicles around.
		That would be a big dent in the cost of gasoline right there.
		The less you buy, the less demand there is, the lower the price becomes.
		Typically.
		Not always, but typically.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Would you like to make an educated guess as to the sort of the cracking point economically for us if it keeps going up?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you predict it will, or do you believe it?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I think it's going to continue to go up.
		And I'll tell you why.
		We haven't built another gasoline cracking plant since I believe around 1970 or 75.
		And, you know, that seems rather foolish.
		We need gasoline.
		Because of that, we don't have any assurances there will be a larger supply of gasoline, even if there's more oil available.
		If you can't make the gasoline, then it doesn't do you any good.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm just a show host, so I don't get it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But if there's all this demand for gasoline, then why not more cracking stations?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I wish I knew.
unidentified		I wish I knew.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Could it be the oil companies know something we don't ever wonder about?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It's always possible.
		It's always possible.
		People always bring the specter of peak oil to mind whenever that question is asked.
		That's right.
		And perhaps they feel that they're not going to be able to make any more money because there won't be enough oil to support their needs.
		But that's not necessarily true.
		As I pointed out, half the oil reserves are right up in Alberta right now in the form of tar sands.
		And they're going to start processing it because it's now cheap enough to do.
		It's economically viable.
		But I think that people are really going to crack when it starts hitting $4 to $5 a gallon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
		Yes.
		And I think the whole economy will crack sometime between 4 and 5 itself.
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Hi.
unidentified		Hello, Art.
		Good morning to you and also your guest, Sir Charles.
		Earlier in the evening, you were discussing the microwave transmitting solar collector satellite.
		If I wasn't mistaken, Sir Charles had mentioned the energy that would be transmitted was 23 milliwatts.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct per square centimeter.
unidentified		Okay.
		I thought maybe it's just coincidental, but 23 milliwatts is also the optimum operating current for the nation's telecommunications network, the landline network.
		Were you aware of that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		No, that's an interesting coincidence.
unidentified		Yeah, also we find that at that particular current, it's quite good for recharging a lot of common rechargeable type batteries and whatnot.
		Would that be what would go on with this system?
		It would actually recharge like gel packs and stuff like that on Earth?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's a possibility.
		All you'd need to do is put some small sort of an antenna that would act like a rectifying antenna or receiver.
		Exactly, and it could be used to charge batteries.
		Yes, that can be done.
		But the largest push is to actually get that electrical power into the grid baseline electrical.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sir Jarles, out of curiosity, though it seemed like an interesting scheme you talked about to supply, I don't know, you know, cell phones and small devices.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wouldn't it be equally possible and a big problem that this power would be pirated?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, yes, it would.
		But I don't think they're really so much worried about that.
		It's possible to use a signal that has a specific frequency that's tuned to a specific filter that would be a little difficult for somebody to duplicate, and that could reduce some of the piracy.
		But yes, somebody's going to figure out how to crack it, and somebody's going to be using it.
unidentified		Hopefully, it'll be cheap enough nobody cares.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's a good point.
		Welcome to the Rockies.
		You're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		Well, I have a question about microwaves also.
		Well, given the fact that there is a supposedly non-lethal weapon, which we are constantly testing, God knows why, using electromagnetic pulse radiation, I would like to ask both of you whether you know for sure whether or not this is being used on any satellite.
		I know it's been referred to, but in sort of a vague way when I've heard about it.
		And I'm going to reveal my ignorance in how satellites work by asking whether satellites would always be sort of tuned or set and backed up or working in tandem so that if the people who are testing this out on the populace or using it to control the populace or whatever they're doing are shooting down a beam of this,
		can they have a constant beam or would it be that it would come around at certain times in a predictable pattern?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I see.
		Well, actually, that sort of power would spread out on a small antenna.
		You need a large antenna, such as you would have on a power satellite, to make a beam that's going to be dense enough and stay together well enough to reach the ground in one piece.
		If you've shown it out of a satellite with a small antenna, the same thing is going to happen that happens with a flashlight.
		It'll spread out so much that by the time it reaches the ground, it'll barely be detectable except as a little radio wave signal.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		The commercial satellites that are up there now for television and such have what are called spot beams.
		And they really are rather narrow beams that serve a broadcast to a very specific area, for example, southeast Alaska or something about that size.
		Is that what you imagine they would do with power?
		Would they have power spot beams?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, they would, and they put them in parallel.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If you imagine that you have one flashlight and you shine it at a distant wall, it spreads out into a very large spot, no matter how you try to focus it, because of the nature of the light waves themselves.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		And microwaves are the same way.
		They spread out, just like light does.
		However, even though you can't focus a single one down to a spot, if you had many of them working in concert shining on the same area, then the average power level would go up to a significant level.
		So in this case, your beam doesn't seem to spread out.
		It is spreading out, but they're overlapped so that they reinforce each other.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What specific effect would this energy have as it traversed the various layers of our atmosphere?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Actually, we can pick frequencies that pass through the air with almost no effect.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		A very, very tiny amount of heating would occur, on the order of about a hundredth of a degree centigrade.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wow.
		So you're saying harmless.
		In other words, we do have some rather sensitive areas, right, of atmosphere that we're concerned about.
		The ozone layer, for example.
		In other words, as it came through these, it would have no measurable effect on them.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's correct.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, now it's interesting because somebody has even suggested that by using tuned microwaves or laser beams, we could use them to break down compounds that affect the ozone before they get to that layer.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No kidding.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		So there actually could be some benefits to the proper frequencies and energy levels being shown through certain layers of the atmosphere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So if we wanted to affect the atmosphere with a satellite, we could conceivably do that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, certainly we could.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, that's a horse of a different color, isn't it?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's true.
		If you really wanted to change heating effects, yes, you could do it.
		You'd pick a frequency that the atmosphere would absorb, and then you could cause local heating.
		And the interesting thing about that sort of plan is a lot of it would be absorbed by the atmosphere and not reach the ground.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But it would affect the atmosphere.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		But it would affect the atmosphere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Conceivably what?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Changing climates?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It could change the climate, yes.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		You could select areas and shoot them with specific frequencies and energies of microwave beams, and you could affect the climate in areas.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank God, our government would never consider such a thing, right?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, of course, they would never consider such a thing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know, we laugh, but there are projects underway, ionospheric heaters, you know, that sort of thing, that I'm sure you're well aware of.
		Are they bedabbling, Sir Charles, in areas they ought not?
		That's a pretty straight-on question.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's an interesting question, too.
		Whether they ought not, man, that assumes a lot.
		You want to try things if you can do so without harming things, to find out how everything works.
		I mean, we basically study things by picking them apart and poking them and seeing what's inside.
		When we do experiments on the atmosphere, you do have to be careful.
		It's just like the first atomic bomb.
		They didn't know if it was going to ignite the atmosphere, you know, and they did it anyway, and it didn't.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sir Charles Schultz III is my guest, and it certainly has been a fascinating conversation, one that will resume in a moment.
		This show this morning really does have an extremely optimistic side to it.
		And I'm glad to be able to present that because, frankly, what's going on with oil right now in the world is scaring the hell out of me.
		And I know a lot of you out there as well.
		I mean, most people, you know, can clearly see where it's headed economically with what's going on in the world.
		And I mean, China's demand and all the rest of it.
		So we're either going to find more energy someplace in a place perhaps like this, or we're in big trouble.
		Sir Charles, welcome back.
		Thank you.
		Do you have something, you know, I know you've got a website, so please promote that.
		And anything else you have, please promote away.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Well, first off, the book is nearly finished.
		I now need to locate a publisher, and I'm working on that right away.
		Second, I wanted to give some thanks to Andy Doan, my new webmaster, who redesigned my site, and I know everybody who sees it appreciates it.
		XenotechResearch.com.
		X-E-N-O-T-E-C-H dot com.
		I'm sorry.
		X-E-N-O-T-E-R-C-H-C.
		R-E-S-E-A-R-C-H.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Could have made it easier, you know.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I could have.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So that's xenotechresearch.com.
unidentified		Okay, and we have a link.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We have a link, by the way, folks.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, very good.
		And I needed to correct one thing.
		I said eight hours for the space elevator to reach the midpoint, the orbital point, geostationary.
unidentified		It would be eight days.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry about that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Eight days?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Yes, eight days.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, it only moves 190 kilometers per hour.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That would require a little provisioning on the way, a couple of Hershey bars or something.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		It'd be like a cruise.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, back to the phone.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Sir Charles Schultz III.
unidentified		Oh, thank you very much.
unidentified		Art Gary in Santa Maria, KSMA 1240.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hey, Gary.
unidentified		Perfect person to ask this question.
		20-second setup, maybe 25 at the most.
		Bin Laden just got religious Approval from the clerics to set off a nuclear device.
		People wonder why it hasn't happened yet.
		He's a very religious man in that religion, and he wanted approval for the American Hiroshima.
		Paul Williams says that there's already 20 nuclear weapons planted here.
		Whether or not you believe they're here with a border absolutely wide open and with the recent attacks that they've just discovered in London, 40 million radical Muslims in the world ready to do a kamikaze.
		That's why we had such a hard time in World War II when a man is willing to give up his own life to kill you.
		It's very, very hard to stop.
		And our border is wide open.
		Why, under God's green earth, is this president committing this country to an American Hiroshima, whether it be nuclear, biological, or chemical, the red carpet is rolled out, and he keeps saying, well, we're taking the war to them.
		How under God's green earth do you run strictly an offense with no defense and the red carpet rolled out to come say, come take out America?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's a heck of a question, and I can tell you this.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If I were a politician and I could answer that question, I wouldn't be a scientist.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I would say don't be so concerned about his permission to do this as any story that would indicate that he actually has come into possession of a nuclear weapon.
		Then I would be very concerned because there's always going to be somebody willing to extinguish their own life for the cause and set it off.
		No question about that.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Creation is much easier than destruction.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Sir John.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There may be one question you could attempt to answer for me.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If there were nuclear weapons in place in the U.S., as some suggest, or there would be one en route to us, do we have sufficient detection equipment in place to know about that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		There is pretty good detection equipment, and you know that most of it ended up in strategic places where they expect things to come through.
		Nuclear weapons do have specific signatures, lots of neutrons, for instance.
		And neutron detectors aren't really plentiful right now, but there is a big push to make many more of them.
		As for the detectors being in place, I would say at this point they probably have a lot more than I'm aware of, and they probably wouldn't say anything about it.
		Sometimes the stealth that you use in detecting these things is your strongest ally.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		International line, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Hi.
		When I push the button.
		Hi there.
		You're on the air now.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I hear you.
unidentified		Hello, gentlemen.
		I have two questions.
		One is in reference to the nanotubes technology.
		And I'm calling from Honalay in the Pacific.
		My name is Robin.
		And we have all the fiber optics.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know where she went.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are you still there?
unidentified		Hello?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, hi.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, the nanotube question.
unidentified		Yes.
		In reference to the nanotubes and the fiber optics, what is the difference between the two as far as the two technologies are concerned?
		And also, who is manufacturing the nano fibers and where are they doing it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Both good questions.
		The difference between nanotube technology and fiber optics.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Fiber optics is basically a fiber made of either glass or plastics or other clear materials, and it has two different types of material, an interior material and a cladding material.
		And each one has a different rate of allowing light to pass through it.
		The index of refraction is different.
		So what happens in fiber optics is the light is actually confined to a pathway inside the fiber so that it emerges pretty much as it was when it entered the fiber.
		The nanotubes are entirely different materials.
		They're made of carbon atoms, and the carbon atoms are put together in a sort of a spiral that forms a tiny tube about one billionth of a meter across, one nanometer in size.
		But they can be very long, just as a hair is tiny in size, but very long.
		The nanofibers aren't actually related to fiber optics at all.
		They're intended to be a very high strength, high tensile strength material and could end up replacing a lot of things in, let's say, bulletproof vests as well as making space elevators.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And her follow-up question was, Sir Charles, who is currently doing this manufacturing?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I think there's a company called Microsystems and Applied Sciences also that is working on the nanotubes right now.
		I know that Applied Sciences is.
		And there are a number of small companies that are working on it that we don't really hear a lot because they're under the wire.
		But I think Applied Sciences is one of the largest manufacturers at this point.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		I've heard some pretty exciting stuff about paint you can put on your house for getting energy and that sort of thing.
		You heard about that?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes.
		Because of the fact that these nanofibers act almost as antennas do for light waves, you know, antennas for radio waves can pick up the energy.
		These fibers can be tuned to light waves, and they could convert it theoretically into electrical current.
		So nanofiber coatings, paints, could become the next solar cell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, good enough.
		Wildcard line, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Hi.
unidentified		Hi, Arthur.
		Hi, Sir Charles.
		I was curious about the so-called phenomenon of the Cambrian explosion, how all the modern phyla of animals seem to appear all at once without gradually evolving from a common ancestor.
		And I'm wondering if this Cambrian explosion might have occurred more slowly on Mars.
		And then as the Martian climate became periodically a desert and then wet again and the deserts got longer and longer in duration and time, the cysts got better at handling harsh conditions and then survived an asteroid splash and they got planted here on Earth.
		And that's why there's a Cambrian explosion here because the common ancestors occurred on Mars.
		And If that's true, then maybe we could still find cysts that could hatch into trilobites on Mars or places where they're still existing in little puddles, and we could get to see living trilobites.
		I'm wondering what you have to say about this.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, understand that when the Cambrian explosion occurred, and this is a period early in Earth's history, about 500 million years ago, when all of a sudden life became very complex.
		There were huge changes in our atmosphere, lots of free oxygen, and small organisms showed up that began becoming all different sorts of life forms.
		Now, most of these don't show up in the fossil record because they are such delicate and small objects.
		However, enough has shown up to show us that suddenly there was a huge amount of diversity in life on Earth.
		Similar processes appear to have occurred on Mars, and whether they occurred more quickly or more slowly is hard to say.
		But the thought of an asteroid impact carrying all these organisms from one planet to the other has some problems.
		Some bacteria could probably make it very easily, but larger organisms are much more fragile than bacteria, and they stand a far worse chance of surviving such a transfer.
		So if organisms were carried from one planet to the other by asteroid or meteor impacts, it probably would be nothing much larger than spores or bacteria.
		There might be a relationship.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why should we be any more concerned about NASA returning a sample from Mars than we are about a Mars rock re-entering our atmosphere, or no, I'm sorry, entering our atmosphere and then coming down and cracking open on the ground and spreading something?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Well, actually, that's an easy one to answer.
		When a Mars rock is removed from the planet, it's typically blasted off the planet by an impact, such as an asteroid or a meteor.
		When this happens, the rock is subjected to a great deal of stress and heat.
		It has to rip through the atmosphere very rapidly in order to escape from the planet.
		And it may be incandescent when that happens.
		When it travels through space, it typically takes many millions to tens of millions of years to reach the Earth.
		And organisms don't tend to survive for tens of millions of years.
		As it is right now, it takes special conditions such as being frozen or stuck in a salt crystal for an organism to last from thousands to millions of years.
		So by the time it reaches the Earth, now it's gone through our atmosphere as well.
		And it's been pretty thoroughly sterilized and quarantined.
		So we don't really have many things to worry about for Martian.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You would certainly be uniquely qualified to answer this, Sir Charles.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		If a Martian sample came back after all you've seen and demonstrated on your website about Mars and we had a Martian sample sitting in front of us, would you be in the same room when they opened it?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I certainly would not.
		I am extremely concerned about the possibility of organisms still extant or still living on the Martian surface because it is proven to be wet.
		And in fact, you can see proof that it's wet and it's been right under their noses all along.
		When you look at Meridiani, the surface of the plain is covered with trillions of identical little fossil spherules and rocks as well.
		So the question is, why are all the rocks and spherules on the surface?
		Any farmer knows the answer.
		If you plow a field and you remove the rocks preparatory to planting and there's a freeze, the next day you come out and there's rocks in the field again.
		And this happens because of a process called frost heave.
		When there's moisture in the soil and it freezes, ice pillars form and thrust all the rocks to the surface.
		Now, if this is true, we should see evidence of that on Mars.
		And we do.
		Where the heat shield crashed, the soil underneath it that it dug the trench in shows no rocks or spherules underneath it.
		So if all the spherules and rocks are on the surface, some process put them there, and it is my theory that frost heaved did it, and it's another confirmation that there's moisture in the soil.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So if you were on a board making a decision about bringing a sample back from Mars, you would urge caution or you would want the project scrapped altogether or what?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		I wouldn't let it come any closer than the moon.
		I would not want it on the Earth.
		I certainly wouldn't want it in an orbital station because orbital stations can re-enter and not everything burns up.
		If we had it on the moon, then I wouldn't feel so bad about it.
		If it was quarantined there in the proper biological facilities, that would be fine.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Art.
unidentified		How are you doing today?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Just great.
unidentified		I'm calling from the oil sands capital of the world, up here in Fort McMurray, Alberta.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		And just to let you know that, Sir Charles, China has already bought into the oil sands up here now.
		They bought into one of the future mines north of the existing mines.
		So they're already investing their money.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Were you aware of that, Sir Charles?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		No, I wasn't.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		That's interesting.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Your prediction already is apparently coming true.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They're sinking money in.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		They're going to get out more.
unidentified		Last month.
		And that's about the only thing they can buy into because there's so many companies buying up around the world here that they just can't get their foot in the door anywhere else.
		So just letting you know, Sir Charles, they're already up here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, we appreciate the information.
		That's amazing.
		So it's already occurring.
		West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Edna, if you're still listening, JC's a madman.
unidentified		Make a line for it while you can.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Thank you.
		Yes, we're well aware of that.
		First time call our line, you're on the air with Sir Charles.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello.
		I'd like to start this brief conversation here by saying everyone across the planet has heard the common saying of think globally, act locally.
		Well, I just wanted to say that I believe it's time.
		I also have a question, but I believe it's time for us to start saying think universally, act globally.
		And it's time for us to step up.
		And one thing that has been the common thread in all the things that Sir Charles talks about is the centralization of everything that has to do with energy.
		So we're not able to provide for ourselves.
		And my question for you, Sir Charles, is I believe decentralization would help people to be able to contribute and act globally or locally Or, however, you want to say it.
		But a question is: there's devices, I'd just like to hear your comment and tell me that this is not possible.
		If you take a regenerative solid oxide fuel cell that's taken hydrogen in and is also regenerating some of that hydrogen back out as fuel and then is outputting its heat, which is significant,
		to a Stirling engine device, which is a heat engine, which is capable of working on a free piston type system and turning the heat into energy, taking the energy from the solid oxide fuel cell, as well as taking the hydrogen that comes back out from the regenerative fuel cell.
		Is it not possible that we have the technology right now, right here on Earth, to deploy to people, just to make it commercially viable and available through just common plastics?
		And I also like to say that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's a lot to comment on, so hold right there, please.
		In other words, does this kind of system exist now?
		Could it be deployed?
		Could it be done?
		Are we just ignoring it?
		Are the oil companies burying it?
		What's the deal?
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		Okay, any system that consumes fuel has a loss.
		And if it's generating fuel, when it's consuming fuel, there's going to be a loss on the way.
		So it's going to make less than you want.
		It's kind of like putting a windmill on the hood of your car and hoping it'll charge the battery up without using the energy from your fuel.
		You're getting that same energy out of the fuel back into the system less efficiently than you would with a regular generator.
		So a system that made its own fuel that way is going to lose.
		It's a losing proposition because it's a perpetual motion machine.
		And thermodynamics just doesn't permit that to happen.
		On the other hand, he had a good point.
		We need to start acting individually as well so that we have a global effect.
		I did a calculation that showed that over 12.6 trillion watts of sunlight heating occurs on just the rooftops of our homes in this country.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's amazing.
sir charles shults-iii ▲ ● ▼		If we were simply to make the roofs reflective or silver, we'd eliminate an immense load on our air conditioning.
		And if we actually use it to generate power, you could have your air conditioning essentially for free.
		Depends on how much it costs to set up, however.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the kind of world that you describe cannot be far off, or put another way, had better not be very far off, looking at current conditions.
		Sir Charles, it has been a pleasure having you here tonight.
		Our time has evaporated.
		Well, much like the weather on Mars.
		Okay, my friend.

▲