STOP CASSINI Newsletter #138 -- June 17th, 1999

Copyright (c) 1999

STOP CASSINI Newsletters Index


To: Subscribers, Press, Government Officials

Subject: Bud Aaron arrogantly tries to pull rank: STOP CASSINI #138

Date: June 17th, 1999

Time Frame: There are 7 days left to demand that NASA smash Cassini into Venus, the best thing we can do with it.

Today's Subjects:


(1) Russian space experts turn out to be human -- rdh suspects American ones are too:


----- INCOMING HOT NEWS ITEM FROM JAMES OBERG (VIA LARRY KLAES) -----

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:40:41 -0400
To: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
From: Larry Klaes
Subject: ABC News tonight on ISS Commanding Flub

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:39:04 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: fpspace@SOLAR.RTD.UTK.EDU
Originator: fpspace@solar.cini.utk.edu
Sender: fpspace@SOLAR.RTD.UTK.EDU
From: JamesOberg@aol.com
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: ABC News tonight on ISS Commanding Flub
X-Comment: Friends and Partners in Space

ABC Evening News on the US tonight [June 17th, 1999] will have a feature with Ned Potter, about an incident over the weekend when the ISS was supposed to perform a collision avoidance burn (its first), but Russian flight controllers flubbed the commanding and the station went into a free drift slow tumble instead (the debris, a Russian rocket stage, missed anyway). NASA officials are very reluctant to talk about this control foul-up, but were forced to by ABC and its ace space consultant, yours truly.

----- END OF INCOMING HOT NEWS FROM JAMES OBERG (VIA LARRY KLAES) -----


(2) BUD AARON, OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA: ARROGANT, CLOSED-MINDED


To follow along in this sequence of emails, we have separated each email with a title line with dashes (-----) on each side of it. Some commentary is included between some of the emails; that commentary is marked with the word COMMENTARY preceding it. Within some of the emails, prior emails are quoted. Those are marked with a greater-than sign in the first column (>).

----- FIRST INCOMING EMAIL FROM BUD AARON -----

At 01:08 PM 6/12/99 -0700, Bud Aaron wrote:

From: "Bud Aaron"
To:
Subject: Your tabloid piece
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 13:08:50 -0700

You really should research what you write. The problem is many will read your trash and accept it as fact and that's really a sad commentary on our society.

Bud
(Bud Aaron)
http://www.checkmaster.com 760-757-6635

----- END OF BUD AARON'S FIRST LETTER -----

----- MY RESPONSE -----

I notice you made no SPECIFIC complaint.

I did research what I write. Did you?

----- END OF MY RESPONSE -----

COMMENTARY: I failed to notice the PDF file he had sent, which I have posted here:

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/procassi/budaaron.pdf

----- FROM BUD AARON (#2) -----

At 10:51 AM 6/14/99 -0700, Bud Aaron wrote:

From: "Bud Aaron"
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
Subject: RE: Your tabloid piece
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 10:51:22 -0700

I notice you made no SPECIFIC complaint.
My specific complaints were in the PDF attachment.

I did research what I write. Did you?
Somehow direct personal experience in weapons effects testing seems relevant to me.

Bud
(Bud Aaron) http://www.checkmaster.com 760-757-6635

----- END OF BUD AARON'S SECOND EMAIL -----

COMMENTARY: Still, I didn't notice the PDF, so my second response was as brief as his:

----- MY RESPONSE -----

That's still not a very direct response.

----- END OF MY SECOND RESPONSE -----

COMMENTARY: Then I woke up enough to realize he HAD actually included a "detailed" response, so I wrote this:

----- MY THIRD RESPONSE TO BUD AARON -----

Oops, sorry -- yes it is a VERY specific response and I'll read the attachment and respond, as well as post your response at my web site.

I've just gotten back from a few days away (25th High School reunion) and I guess I'm not reading my email carefully enough.

Take care, and THANKS for responding (whatever I think of it, I do appreciate the effort).

Sincerely,
Russell Hoffman

----- END OF MY THIRD RESPONSE -----

COMMENTARY: But upon reading his "detailed" response, I found that it contained NO INFORMATION AT ALL! So I wrote him the following critique of his own critique of my essay:

----- MY FOURTH RESPONSE TO BUD AARON -----

Okay,

Now having read your very few comments (I was hoping for more detailed information, with references, etc.) I'm afraid I was closer to right the first time -- that there is little of substance in your response.

Here are some direct responses:

1) You wrote: "Gamma radiation from the blast will not kill..." See paragraph 11.86 of THE EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS (U.S. gov't report AFP-136-1-3): "The RBE [Relative Biological Effectiveness] for gamma rays is approximately unity, by definition, although it varies somewhat with the energy of the radiation... For beta particles, the RBE is also close to unity; this means that for a given amount of energy absorbed in living tissue, beta particles produce the same extent of injury within the body as do X-rays or gamma rays." I agree many -- if not most -- will die from starvation, disease and "other" causes -- noting that the breakdown of the immunity system caused by the radiation will let diseases take hold that would otherwise have been harmless.

2) Your "total damage" area of 3 miles in diameter is for HOW BIG A BLAST? Certainly not a 1 megatonner, the main focus of the essay. What's "total damage" mean anyway, and who cares?

3) Firestorms are the result of lots of fires started all at once, with no fast way to put them out. Firestorms don't even need a nuclear weapon to get them started.

4) You refer to one of my paragraphs as "Mostly over exaggerated hype" but that is hardly a specific comment (and it's wrong, besides).

5) If a 20 megaton weapon were dropped on San Diego sure, Carlsbad, 30+ miles away would probably NOT be blasted into oblivion (nor O'side), as I stated. 30 miles is 2,800+ square miles. I said the firestorm from a 20 megaton weapon could cover nearly 2500 miles. So we aren't actually in disagreement, are we?

6) My name's Russell, not Robert, and it is YOU who wish to spread falsehoods about the effects of nuclear weapons. I wonder why? Because you LIKE them! You built them (or had some sort of "direct personal experience", whatever that means)! Do you hope to be able to justify to your God some day, or to St. Peter or whomever finally questions your judgement, why you did it, with such weak answers as these? Are these the best answers you can come up with -- to simply deny the truth of the effects? I think you should prepare better answers; you may some day need them.

I'm sorry to have misled you, but there is little of substance in your letter and nothing worth publishing that I can see. To turn your phrases back on you, it is truly too bad that "folks like yourself" (whoever that might be) can safely write trash like what you have responded with, with little fear that the majority of the population will research the matter and find that I am indeed, substantially more correct than your version of the same things.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman

---- END OF MY FOURTH RESPONSE -----

COMMENTARY: I read his PDF file some more, and added the following in a followup email to Mr. Aaron (it includes a relevant clip from newsletter #127 which was included in the email to Mr. Aaron):

----- SECOND RESPONSE TO BUD AARON'S PDF DOCUMENT -----

Here's a little more, based on your first page:

1) "Burns" don't create the printed patterns of people's cloths on their skin, as happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

2) Sure the EMP would be extremely short lived. You haven't noticed all the computer-controlled devices that protect us and aid in living everywhere, have you? They would be destroyed, but no one in the 40's, 50's or even early 60's would have known that.

3) How can you possibly say no one EVER died as a result of exposure to the gamma pulse of a nuclear weapon? I suggest you visit some of the DOWNWINDER's web sites for statistical references. I will say this: No one EVER has been proven to have died from a gamma pulse, chest x-ray, or plutonium inhalation. You're right as far as that goes. Such ghastly experiments cannot be done and the only proofs are statistical in nature.

4) Alpha particles cannot penetrate more than a few layers of skin, but the emitting material can be inhaled or ingested. Beta particles can penetrate just a little further. But to say they can only cause "minor damage" once ingested or inhaled is ludicrous. As Dr. Karl Z. Morgan [recently deceased -- see Newsletter #135 -- rdh], the "father of health physics" stated to me, the internal dose to the cells around an ingested or inhaled particle can be 10s of thousands of rem. One particle can cause one cancer or leukemia or birth defect.

5) What becomes "sedimentary" does NOT "no longer pose a real health risk"! That's absurd -- it IGNORES the uptake through the food chain as well as the re-suspension of particles.

6) The "point source" of the EMP -- a point has no dimensions at all. The source is much bigger than that. 40 feet? 100 feet? 10 feet? 1 foot? I don't know when exactly the EMP is emitted from the blast, but "point source" is a fallacy. and those square laws are certainly in effect, but that doesn't mean that a nuclear blast high in the atmosphere above the United States would not have an effect much as I have described, destroying all the delicate electronic equipment for thousands of miles around.

7) You say "none of those troops have ever suffered ill effects". What have you got for proof? The double-books on radiation exposures kept by the military? The failure to follow those soldiers properly through their life-cycles?

8) YOU "seriously doubt that a nuclear war will ever happen". That's nice, but what's your point?

Lastly, I seriously doubt that you are free to talk about the things you know, due to various things you've signed and sworn to. I am a free United States Citizen and do not have those constraints. But I feel I am obligated to tell the truth as I know it and have researched it, and I do so in the hope that it will help people to understand the seriousness of the consequences of our current policies.

Thank you for your letters and sorry I didn't wait to read EVERYTHING you had written before responding. As I said I'm rather backed up with things, having just returned from a few days out of town, and I should have taken it a little slower. Of the 8 service people you referred to, how many are still living? Would you consider 8 people to be capable of producing a statistically significant test sample? Of the 10s of thousands of nuclear test subjects, how many are still living? How many have died of EXACTLY what? YOU DON'T KNOW, and the Government has very carefully NOT studied it, and the reason is because the truth would hurt. I suggest you read up on Dr. John Gofman (he isolated the first working quantities of plutonium, for the Manhattan project). Much of his material is available at www.noradiation.org. Also, below is a letter he recently wrote, and his credentials.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman


Dr. John W. Gofman on recent scientific proof of radiation dangers:


Dr. Gofman is a nuclear physicist and health physicist, Professor Emeritus of Medical Physics at the University of California at Berkeley. Dr. Gofman is a co-discoverer of Uranium 232, Pa 232, U 233, and Pa 233, and of slow and fast neutron fissionability of U 233, co-inventor of the uranyl acetate and columbium oxide processes for plutonium separation. He was also the first to isolate plutonium in working quantities (for the Manhattan Project during WWII). Dr. Gofman has taught and/or done research in radiochemistry, macromolecules, lipoproteins, coronary heart disease, arteriosclerosis, trace element determination and x-ray spectroscopy, and was the first Director of Biomedical Research at the Lawrence Livermore Radiation Laboratory (1963), where he conducted extensive studies on cancer, chromosomes, radiation and human health.

----- LETTER FROM DR. JOHN W. GOFMAN -----

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94720

May 11, 1999
LETTER OF CONCERN.

To Whom It May Concern:

During 1942, I led the "Plutonium Group" at the University of California, Berkeley, which managed to isolate the first milligram of plutonium from irradiated uranium. (Plutonium-239 had previously been discovered by Glenn Seaborg and Edwin McMillan.) During subsequent decades, I have studied the biological effects of ionizing radiation --- including the alpha particles emitted by the decay of plutonium.

By any reasonable standard of biomedical proof, there is no safe dose, which means that just one decaying radioactive atom can produce permanent mutation in a cell's genetic molecules. My own work showed this in 1990 for xrays, gamma rays, and beta particles (Gofman 1990: "Radiation-Induced Cancer from Low-Dose Exposure". For alpha particles, the logic of no safe dose was confirmed experimentally in 1997 by Tom K. Hei and co-workers at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) Vol. 94, pp. 3765-3770, April 1997, "Mutagenic Effects of a Single and an Exact Number of Alpha Particles in Mammalian Cells").

It follows from such evidence that citizens worldwide have a strong biological basis for opposing activities which produce an appreciable risk of exposing humans and others to plutonium and other radioactive pollution at any level. The fact that humans cannot escape exposure to ionizing radiation from various natural sources --- which may well account for a large share of humanity's inherited afflictions --- is no reason to let human activities INCREASE exposure to ionizing radiation. The fact that ionizing radiation is a mutagen was first demonstrated in 1927 by Herman Joseph Muller, and subsequent evidence has shown it to be a mutagen of unique potency. Mutation is the basis not only for inherited afflictions, but also for cancer.

Very truly yours,

(signed)
John W. Gofman, M. D., Ph D
Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology

----- END OF LETTER -----

----- END OF SECOND RESPONSE TO BUD AARON'S PDF DOCUMENT -----

COMMENTARY: Of course at this point, things changed because we are getting into REAL facts. Or at least we would have, if Mr. Arrogant had wanted to actually debate the facts instead of just the fiction. But no. Once we got down to brass tacks, he had no choice but to start ranting:

----- BUD AARON'S THIRD RESPONSE TO ME -----

At 02:01 PM 6/14/99 -0700, Bud Aaron wrote:

From: "Bud Aaron" To: "Russell D. Hoffman" Subject: RE: More... Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 14:01:18 -0700

One thing is painfully obvious... this is a significant waste of your time and mine. I honestly don't believe I could present anything to you that you would not find fault with.

Therefore I will apply one of my maxims... Never try to teach a pig to sing... it's a waste of time and only irritates the pig.

And you are welcome to apply that maxim to me.

Best of luck to you

Bud
(Bud Aaron)
http://www.checkmaster.com 760-757-6635

----- END OF BUD AARON'S THIRD EMAIL TO ME -----

COMMENTARY: If you have not already done so, now is probably a good time to actually read his PDF file. Here is the URL:

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/procassi/budaaron.pdf

If you read Mr. Arrogant's intro to his "response" to my essay about the effects of nuclear weapons, you will see that his lofty attitude about his "relevant experience" is a facade -- he merely set up strain gauges and the like to test the pressures that were achieved! There is no indication that he studied the health effects of low-level radiation. He is apparently unaware (despite my having sent him the reference!) of the findings of Dr. John W. Gofman (who isolated the first working quantities of plutonium for the Manhattan Project, from which came the atomic bombs which Bud Aaron studied).

----- MY FIFTH RESPONSE TO BUD AARON -----

From: Russell D. Hoffman [mailto:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 3:47 PM
To: Bud Aaron
Cc: Eric Grebs
Subject: RE: More...

So you set up the instrumentation to study overpressures from nuclear blasts. This makes you some sort of expert in the dangers of low level radiation? I cited respected and qualified sources for my information. You have not done the same, and your experience is not relevant, unless I had said something about what the exact effects of a 5 psi overpressure versus a 5.5 psi overpressure would be, and you wanted to correct that.

If this is a significant waste of your time, it is probably because you know you will lose any logical debate going in the direction this one has been leading.

I will of course print all this as I see fit in my newsletter. Hopefully www.checkmaster.com will get some business out of it. I'm sure anyone who can set up the instrumentation to study nuclear blast overpressures is capable of writing a check-balancing program, however, that doesn't make you an expert in radiation dangers.

I'm "cc'ing" a friend of mine, who like you is also a U. S. Navy Electronics Technician veteran, since you have taken to insulting me directly without even trying to stick to the facts. I just wanted him to see why I sometimes get upset with people trying to "pull rank" on me as you did when you started out, stating, "Somehow direct personal experience in weapons effects testing seems relevant to me", then in the end it turns out your "experience" is no more relevant to the issues at hand than his is (and far more dated), and yet you're calling me a pig (ever so slightly indirectly).

I am deeply, deeply offended, as an American citizen. As an honest citizen trying to tell the world the truth about radiation dangers, and my statements are based on careful research -- years of it.

You don't have time for me?

Speaking of pigs, that's hogwash. You're just losing the argument, and trying to end it by insulting me is the only way you can think of to keep some of your false pride and dignity, which in fact, you gave up when you claimed to have "relevant" experience, if not sooner when you accused me of writing "trash".

If you owe anyone due diligence, as you say you do for your readers, then you owe it to me now. Clearly, what you REALLY don't have time for, is you don't have time to learn how deeply you've been lied to and how much you're just a part of a big lie. But it's not that hard to discover, if you try. You just don't want to try; you find insulting me far easier.

At the rate you're going, no, you couldn't present anything I wouldn't find fault with. A leaky boat eventually sinks, and your story is full of holes.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman

----- END OF MY RESPONSE -----

----- BUD AARON'S FOURTH EMAIL TO ME -----

At 03:51 PM 6/14/99 -0700, Bud Aaron wrote:

From: "Bud Aaron"
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
Subject: RE: More...
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 15:51:36 -0700

If you assumed that I was calling you a pig I apologize.

I will of course print all this as I see fit in my newsletter.
You really should read up on copyright law. You DO NOT - I repeat - DO NOT have my permission to publish my writing!

Now please stay out of my mailbox.

Bud
(Bud Aaron)
http://www.checkmaster.com 760-757-6635

----- END OF BUD ARROGANT'S FOURTH EMAIL -----

COMMENTARY: Of course, it always happens that when the going gets tough, the unprepared want out. Notice how he had NO OBJECTIONS to my printing his pablum in the early stages, when he thought he was winning. But now as we wait, and wait for him to back up his accusations with his own references and facts, instead he threatens me about my right to publish this material at all! It is inconceivable to me that I am not allowed to publish whatever I feel I must to respond to his charges. If he wishes he hadn't said it and wants to retract something, let him. But he said it, and I'm publishing it in order to defend my honor.

In order to be fair to him, I have deleted NOTHING (except the "ugly" headers which are appended to a message in transit on the Internet).

----- MY FIRST RESPONSE TO BUD AARON'S FOURTH EMAIL -----

You should check copyright laws yourself, Bud.

----- END OF MY FIRST RESPONSE -----

----- MY SECOND RESPONSE TO BUD AARON'S FOURTH EMAIL -----

From: Russell D. Hoffman [mailto:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 6:46 PM
To: Bud Aaron
Cc: Eric Grebs
Subject: RE: More...

You called me a liar and many other vile things. Such statements MUST be answered in public.

You will find that I am perfectly within my rights to make a fool, and an example, out of you, and to answer your statements impinging on my integrity in any way I see fit, as long as I don't misrepresent anything, which I have no need or intention of doing. Indeed, even if I had specifically told you I would NOT publish stuff, it would not matter, because standing above such a promise would be my higher right to defend my honor against your vicious and unwarranted attacks. Furthermore you have not promised not to publish it yourself, which would be ABSOLUTELY VITAL if there is any chance for me not to do so. You must have written your emails to me for a reason -- was it just to waste my time? You've done that admirably.

You stepped up to the plate, you hit me with your best shot (a totally unfair one at that). If you're going down in flames now, utterly defeated as a citizen, as a writer, and as a compassionate human being, it's not my fault. It was YOUR choice to try to besmirch my name. It's my right to try to undo that. You could have carried on a decent conversation, and stuck to facts and facts alone, but you chose not to, which I don't blame you for, because the facts are not on your side. And you could have researched the issues (my answers) better before responding again and again with your attacks. But instead you just insulted me further -- I guess you thought I would crawl under a rock, afraid of you. I'm not afraid of you, Bud Aaron. I have no reason to be. I believe I have truth, justice, honor, the American Way, and if there is one, God, all on my side. That should be enough help to defeat you and to respond to your unkind and unfair barbs.

It's funny how you backed off completely as soon as I said I would publish the stuff -- what's the matter -- are you afraid of the heat? The public scrutiny? If you're so right, why worry? Won't you stand up for what you believe in? Well, I've been wrong in public before, and believe me -- it isn't any fun. But you put yourself there, NOT me. How do you think you made me feel today, getting YOUR emails? Being called "ludicrous", being told I write "trash", "over exaggerated hype", and so on? Do you think after writing such stuff, that you now deserve kindness from me? If so, do tell me how that could be possible! Your inhumanity towards me is symptomatic of a national shame, a crime against the citizens of this country and of the world, and I have no intention of putting up with it. That's my vow -- to you, to my dead older brother (complications from leukemia, which is usually caused by MAN MADE POLLUTANTS such as plutonium) and to everyone's relatives who are now dead from your radioactive poisons, and to those who will die today and tomorrow and tomorrow from the insidious pace at which your radioactive pollution creeps.

It is not impossible to cajole me into publishing your trash anonymously, or at least with just your name with no email address or affiliation, but so far your wretched correspondence has given me no reason not to. You have not retracted anything important, you have not said you will NEVER, EVER publish ANY of it ANYWHERE so help you God, and you have steadfastly accused me of the worst crime a citizen can commit -- that of trying to mislead the people.

Sincerely,

Russell Hoffman

----- END OF MY PENULTIMATE EMAIL TO BUD AARON -----

----- BUD AARON'S FIFTH AND FINAL (SO FAR?) EMAIL TO ME -----

At 07:11 PM 6/14/99 -0700, Bud Aaron wrote:

From: "Bud Aaron"
To: "Russell D. Hoffman"
Subject: RE: More...
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 19:11:28 -0700

Mr. Russell D. Hoffman

Publishing my private email to you in whole or in part will be considered a violation of my intellectual property rights. Check with your attorney. I DO own a copyright in anything I write including my personal email to you or anyone. And, once again, you DO NOT have my permission to use my material even in quoted form with credit.

Further, I have asked you quite nicely to stay out of my email. To make my position quite clear - I will consider ANY FURTHER EMAIL from you to me to be criminal stalking and harassment and I WILL turn it over to the appropriate authorities. And you may want to check that with your attorney as well.

Bud
(Bud Aaron)
http://www.checkmaster.com 760-757-6635

----- END OF BUD ARROGANT'S FINAL (?) EMAIL TO ME -----

COMMENTARY: Intellectual property? Hah! Calling me a liar does not constitute "intellectual property"!

----- MY FINAL RESPONSE TO MR. ARROGANT -----

I will publish it all in a future newsletter and post it online for everyone to enjoy. This indeed will be the last email you'll receive from me, unless I get anything more from you (which may of course, also be published, at my discretion). You'll do whatever you think is best, no doubt. But has there been any "criminal stalking/harassment" for answering your absurd charges? No. You sent me 4 emails before trying to threaten my right to defend myself, six altogether, 5 today [Correction: actually, it was 5 altogether -- rdh]. And you accused me of the most vile things, which I have not done. And you haven't said YOU won't publish it nor have you taken anything substantial back. In short, you are just way, way off base and I cannot worry about whatever you and your attorney are going to decide to do.

You can't call me a liar, and then try to silence me by saying I'm harassing/stalking you, simply for taking one or two (or three, or even a dozen) letters to properly answer such a vicious and unwarranted charge. Nor for wanting to do so in full view of the public. Your right to privacy on this issue is nil.

There has been no harassment, no threats to your person, NOTHING but the promise to defend myself -- in public -- against your absurd and unfair statements against my honor. That constitutes nothing the least bit criminal. You can check with anyone you want, of course, but I'm confident you will find that that's the way it is. I am a free citizen of the United States who has been accused of the most vile things imaginable, and I choose to defend myself against those charges in public, and that is what I shall do.

Sincerely,

Russell D. Hoffman

----- END OF MY FINAL (SO FAR?) RESPONSE TO MR. ARROGANT -----

COMMENTARY: But that turned out not to be the end of it. It turns out that Mr. Arrogant has also responded in the NORTH COUNTY TIMES, to a letter which I wrote which was published on June 12th, 1999 regarding "bringing back Dr. Irving Bengelsdorf (which I was recommending, despite my objections to some of his columns). In Bud Aaron's response he accuses me of doing all this merely to sell shareware software! (Actually, only some of my software is shareware; the flagship products are not.) It is truly amazing how many things Mr. Arrogant has accused me of. And NOT ONCE has he provided any facts or references to support HIS positions!

----- LETTER ABOUT ME BY BUD AARON, OCEANSIDE, CA (Published in the North County Times, California, June 17th, 1999) -----

FALSE INFO SPREAD FOR MANY REASONS

Russell Hoffman, (Letters, June 12) said, "May I suggest that you ask Dr. Bengelsdorf to comment on its technical accuracy?" Mr. Hoffman was referring to an essay on his Web site that delineates his view of the danger of nuclear weapons. Now, I'm not Dr. Bengelsdorf, but I do have considerably more expertise than Mr. Hoffman.

I was from 1950 part of a weapons effects test team working from Sandia National Laboratories and the Naval Ordnance Laboratory. During that time I witnessed and was directly involved in the testing of more than 12 weapons. So I believe I can safely say that Mr. Hoffman's essay is tabloid journalism at its worst with virtually no basis in fact.

Worse, I suspect Mr. Hoffman's agenda might be visitors to his Web site to sell his shareware software offerings. Disseminating false and misleading information is bad enough. Using it to exploit his e-commerce offerings is even worse. Any visitor to his Web site should insist that Mr. Hoffman provide some authoritative references.

BUD AARON
Oceanside

----- END OF LETTER ABOUT ME BY BUD AARON -----

COMMENTARY:

Here is the URL of the article on the effects of nuclear weapons: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/tenw/nuke_war.htm

Here is the URL of the original letter about Dr. Bengelsdorf: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/nltrs/nltr0081.htm

Here is the text of the June 12th, 1999 letter which Mr. Aaron responded to:

----- FROM NORTH COUNTY TIMES, PAGE A-15, JUNE 12TH, 1999 -----

BENGELSDORF SHOULD RETURN

A few months ago I wrote you what I believe was a scathing indictment of one of Irving Bengelsdorf's columns regarding the problem of space debris. I hoped that he would: A) adjust his thinking accordingly after considering the facts presented, and B) respond in a column with a more realistic attitude.

Instead, not all that long thereafter, Bengelsdorf disappeared from your pages and has not returned. This is not what I was looking for and I hope you will return him. Please let him know that I, too, am saddened to see him go.

Also, I fully support the removal of any tax on newspapers, and fully support your right to hawk papers on city streets in Carlsbad. I also think you should drop the price so more people can read your paper.

Lastly, here is the URL of an article I wrote about the effects of nuclear weapons. Right now we are on a precipice where nuclear war is being thought about more than any time in the past 10 years. Here's the URL of the essay: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/tenw/nuke_war.htm. May I suggest that you ask Dr. Bengelsdorf to comment on its technical accuracy?

Russell D. Hoffman
Carlsbad

----- END OF LETTER IN NORTH COUNTY TIMES -----

----- FOLLOWUP LETTER SENT TO THE NORTH COUNTY TIMES JUNE 17th, 1999 -----

To: Editor, North County Times
From: Russell D. Hoffman, Carlsbad, CA (760) 720-7261
Subject: A response to Bud Aaron's letter about me in your paper today

June 17th, 1999

To The Editor:

I would like to respond to Bud Aaron's absurd and unwarranted charges against me which were published in your paper today (June 17th, 1999).

First of all, he claims to have been on the "weapons effects test team working from Sandia National Laboratories and the Naval Ordnance Laboratory".

While that is presumably true, a more complete review of his credentials, as presented in his own letter to me in which he attempted to "critique" the article he refers to, shows that his job was simply "to instrument pressure, strain, acceleration and displacement on structures involved in nuclear explosions" during the late 1940's and 1950's. That has no more to do with the far more recently acknowledged dangers of low-level nuclear fallout than having built a good oven would make you a good cook!

Furthermore it has even less to do with the dangers of the Electro-Magnetic Pulse, which is a relatively new threat. EMPs existed for all nuclear blasts but we have become far more vulnerable to it because of the recent proliferation of computers throughout society, including as imbedded controllers at nuclear power facilities and nearly everywhere else.

My own credentials? None, personally, nor did I claim to have any. But I DO claim to know how to do good research! And I DO claim to have been in DIRECT CONTACT with many people who have many strong credentials! That is hardly "tabloid journalism" as Mr. Aaron refers to it. It is exactly the sort of thing readers of the North County Times should expect. (I doubt your reporters are personally experts on all the subjects they write about.)

I have interviewed Dr. John W. Gofman (his credentials are shown below), Dr. Ernest Sternglass, Dr. Michio Kaku, Dr. Horst Poehler, Dr. Jay Gould and two years ago, Dr. Karl Z. Morgan, who passed away this very week, at age 91. These are of course only a few of the sources I have used in order to try to understand these very complicated and important issues so that I could write about them. I have researched the nuclear demon for at least 20 years.

Dr. Helen Caldicott and I have corresponded occasionally, and I have read all sorts of books, including numerous government reports and of course, the well-referenced texts of learned scholars such as those mentioned above and many others, as well as the works of numerous activists. (And yes, I know which is which.)

The scientific debate about the dangers of fallout were long ago won by the side which determined that open-air weapons testing was killing American civilians and military personnel by the millions. Mr. Aaron's views are as outdated as his "relevant experience".

At my web site are hundreds of references to specific items which support my statements against nuclear power and nuclear weapons, as well as links to good sources of further information on both sides of the debate, such as the NRC, as well as activist's web sites. I am not afraid that I have erred significantly in the things I have stated.

If Mr. Aaron can actually point to a factual error and reference his correction properly, then I would GLADLY make a retraction. Good God -- of course I *WISH* I was wrong! But he has done nothing of the sort. Mr. Aaron sent me a series of emails after my letter was first published in your paper, in which he claimed to be presenting factual arguments against my document, but in fact, he did not cite ONE reference and did not correct ONE fact!

To declare me to be wrong is one thing; to prove it, another.

Lastly, I would like to mention that although my web site is a mixture of software for sale and personal commentaries, it is all the work of ONE person. I think there is nothing wrong with a company having a social conscience, and my one-person company does. If he thinks sales increase by including such commentary, I only can say that I wish he was right. However, I would like to add that the United States military has purchased my educational software (and the Navy even recently asked for permission to use the graphics from my ALL ABOUT PUMPS program in their own training material -- for FREE (permission was, of course, granted). Numerous nuclear power plants use it, and thousands of schools, universities, technical/vocational training companies, and on and on and on. It's good software, but this letter is hardly intended to gain more sales. I hope, however, it wakes people up to the dangers we are facing from nuclear weapons.

Sincerely,

Russell D. Hoffman
Carlsbad CA

URL of article about the effects of nuclear weapons, which Mr. Aaron tried to criticize: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/tenw/nuke_war.htm

URL of Bud Aaron's commentary about my article: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/procassi/budaaron.pdf

URL of my newsletter #138 which includes ALL correspondence between Mr. Aaron and myself (will be posted by late tonight): http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/nltrs/nltr0138.htm

Attachment: Statement by Dr. John W. Gofman, + is credentials [the attachment was the same as the one shown above]

----- END OF FOLLOWUP LETTER SENT TO THE NORTH COUNTY TIMES -----


What you can do today to stop the Cassini flyby of Earth:


To stop NASA's dangerous upcoming August 17th (note new date!), 1999 flyby of Earth by NASA's Cassini spacecraft, with its deadly cargo of 72.3 pounds of plutonium 238 dioxide, arrogantly launched in 1997 amidst strong protests, please start by contacting NASA/JPL immediately and tell them you oppose Cassini:

Cassini Public Information
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena CA 91109
(818) 354-5011 or
(818) 354-6478

NASA states that they do not have the resources anymore to answer most emails they receive. Liars! They have $13 billion dollars to play with. They can answer the public's questions!

Here's NASA's "comments" email address:
comments@www.hq.nasa.gov

Daniel Goldin is the head of NASA. Here's his email address:
daniel.goldin@hq.nasa.gov or
dgoldin@mail.hq.nasa.gov

Here's the NASA URL to find additional addresses to submit written questions to:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/facts/HTML/FS-002-HQ.html

YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT NASA IS DOING TO YOUR HEALTH.

Be sure to "cc" the president and VP and your senators and congresspeople, too.

president@whitehouse.gov
vice.president@whitehouse.gov

Always include your full name and postal address in all correspondence to any Government official of any country.

After you have acquainted yourself with what NASA is doing, please:

READ OUR RESOLUTION AGAINST CASSINI!
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/petition/reso1999.htm

SIGN OUR PETITION!
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/petition/cass1999.htm

CANCEL CASSINI by JUNE 24th, 1999!


Subscription information


Thanks for reading! Welcome new subscribers!

Home page of our STOP CASSINI movement:
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/cassini/cassini.htm (Accept no immitations!)

This newsletter is free and is not distributed for profit.
To subscribe, simply email the editor at
rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com and state:
SUBSCRIBE STOP CASSINI NEWSLETTER
Please include a personal message of any
length and subject matter. Thank you!


To unsubscribe email me and say
UNSUBSCRIBE STOP CASSINI NEWSLETTER

Published by Russell D. Hoffman electronically.
Written in U.S.A.
Please distribute these newsletters EVERYWHERE!
WHAT YOU DO NEXT MATTERS MOST OF ALL!
*** CANCEL CASSINI BY JUNE 24TH, 1999! ***


Next issue (#139)
Previous issue (#137)

CASSINI TABLE OF CONTENTS

CANCEL CASSINI


This article has been presented on the World Wide Web by:

The Animated Software Company

http://www.animatedsoftware.com
Mail to: rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
First placed online June 17th, 1999.
Last modified June 25th, 1999.
Webwiz: Russell D. Hoffman
Copyright (c) Russell D. Hoffman