Re: [meteorite-list] Apparent Meteorite Lands In Elma High

[Rob Wesel]

Evaporation possibly, but only if exposed during atmospheric re-entry. An intact fuel vessel landing intact but then compromised by impact is a whole different story. There is a large argument over the safety of plutonium powered satelllites for just that reason. And there are known levels of airborn plutonium produced by both fuel and weapon mishaps. I am not necessarily subscibing to the complete text here but, http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1999/365/365p20.htm . -- Rob Wesel ------------------ We are the music makers...and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971     ----- Original Message ----- From: MARK BOSTICK To: Tom aka James Knudson ; Marcia Swanson ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Meteorite List Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:50 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Apparent Meteorite Lands In Elma High   Tom wrote:   Hello Marcie, you asked; Do they rapidly cool after initial impact ? Also, why, in the case of the "Columbia" retrieval, were people warned not to touch fragments, as they were hazardous? I think the reason was two fold, the one they gave, Hazardous fuel from the tanks could of contaminated the pieces. Two, They wanted to scare the people in an effort to keep them from taking pieces home! About the fall, the witness's claim to see have seen the     Hello Tom, Marcie, and List,   I think I would be more to believe the second reason.  Although one could understand why NASA would make such a statement, its hard for me to imagine that most of the fumes would not evaporate during its decent.   Mark Bostick