PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet DIGEST, 17 February 1999
------------------------------
(1) WHAT LIST MEMBERS THINK ABOUT THE CCNet
Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>
(2) DYNAMICAL EVOLUTION OF ASTEROID 1036 GANYMED
Paolo Farinella <paolof@keplero.dm.unipi.it>
(3) OCEANIC IMPACTS - MECHANISMS & ENVIRONMENTAL
PERTURBATIONS
Ron Baalke <BAALKE@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
(4) NRC REPORT DETAILS
Heidi B. Hammel <hbh@alum.mit.edu>
(5) BARENTS SEA IMPACT CRATER
Michael Paine <mpaine@tpgi.com.au>
===================
(1) WHAT LIST MEMBERS THINK ABOUT THE CCNet
From Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac..uk>
Of the 243 subscribers who returned completed questionnaires,
some
150 list members have provided personal comments regarding the
CCNet
and their views about this network. I was very pleased to learn
that
the vast majority of those who commented were generally happy
with the
CCNet format, regardless of a number of suggestions for
improvement
(some of which will be implemented soon, I promise). I have
attached
some of my favorite quotes below. List members who wish to read
all
of the individual comments submitted will find them posted on the
Internet where Bob Kobres has kindly linked them to the CCNet
website at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/ccwlmt99.html
------------------------------------------------
WHAT LIST MEMBERS THINK ABOUT THE CCNet:
This is a very thoughtful, community-building service. Everybody
whose work involves NEOs should be a subscriber. (Erik Asphaug,
USA)
Good clean fun! (Sir Arthur C Clarke, Sri Lanka)
It's great! Right on! (Tom Gehrels, USA)
I like the network being a little bit wild. If it were too
organized
and edited, it would loose its charm. (Birger Schmitz, Sweden)
It's one of the best services I know on the Internet, and I wish
other
fields of science would have news & discussion fora of
similar quality!
(Daniel Fischer, Germany)
A very informative list, and it is fascinating to see what issues
get
researchers in the field really worked up. (Sue Bowler, UK)
Keep it coming. There is a lot out there we don't know about.
NEOs
are a classic example of history repeating itself. Unless we
learn
all we can about them, we are going to be very surprised by the
next
one that drops in and society will be totally unprepared for the
consequences. (Ted Bryant, Australia)
Thank you Benny, for doing this. Many of the topics treated are
not
my personal preference, but that's OK. I wish that you had been
more
effective in striving toward scientific understanding on some
recent
controversial topics. (Clark Chapman, USA)
The discussions between the learned and generally civilised
contributors help remind me of some of the reasons I enjoy space
science and the community ("Go Paolo! Go Andrea!") as
well as providing
a real scientific resource. Like a round table discussion but
with
coffee breaks whenever we want and a library on hand for those
all-important facts. (Ian Giblin, USA)
The professionalism of the editorial process and final packaging
is
what makes CCnet one of the best space lists on the Net today,
and
should be used by other list publishers as a blueprint for how to
do
it right (Simon Mansfield, Australia)
I find the CCNet to be invaluable, both as a source of news and
information and as a stage for debate and discussion regarding
controversial issues (Ilan Manulis, Israel)
You're doing a great job, have successfully eliminated the most
egregious ad hominem remarks and have been extraordinarily
patient in
ensuring that all reasonable sides of an issue are covered.
(Brian Marsden, USA)
I like the insight behind the 'news' as in the recent Pluto
debate
comments. So I think the 'letters to the editor' are particularly
interesting (Margaret Penston, UK)
This forum is, well, "somewhat unique." It's great that
scientists
feel OK about getting on each other's case as much as they do.
This
is a necessary outlet in our field. I have never seen it to harm,
only to help. The controversy over XF11, for example, has only
clarified things, not clouded them. A great chapter in CCNet!
(Joe Montani, USA)
THE MODERATOR APPARENTLY LIKES TO MAGNIFY AND STIMULATE
CONTROVERY,
ESPECIALLY BY PROMOTING MINORITY (EVEN FRINGE) VIEWS. WHILE THIS
MAY
MAKE THE MATERIAL MORE INTERESTING TO AN OUTSIDER, IT DEGRADES
ITS
USEFULNESS TO SCIENCE AND IS DISTASTEFUL TO MANY SCIENTISTS.
CCNET IS
TO SCIENCE AS A TABLOID IS TO REAL NEWS. IT IS AN ECLECTIC
MIXTURE OF
SCIENCE AND PSEUDOSCINECE, OF NEWS AND VIEWS, OF RESPONSIBLE
INFORMATION / REFERENCE MATERIAL WITH POORLY-INFORMED
SPECULATION.
CAVEAT EMPTOR. (David Morrison, USA)
This network is an outstanding and unusual resource for all
aspects
of the space science, providing a forum for a diversity of views
seldom seen elsewhere (Lewis Pinault, USA)
Where else can one find interesting commentary and exchange of
views
by Chandra Wickramasinghe, Sir Arthur C. Clarke, David Levy,
Brian
Marsden, and others? Only on CCNet did I see Marsden's account of
the
XF11 affair. (Bill Dillon, USA)
I like the media press releases and 'chit chat'. I think most
scientists tend to get immersed in their own research world
without
considering the public perception of their results (Sara Russell,
UK)
A good service, but avoid the chit-chat (Bradley E. Schaefer,
USA)
It gives me the opportunity to be informed about the latest
developments and publications in the field (Viktor A. Shor,
Russia)
I find the network never less than thought provoking and at times
it
can kick start thinking along fresh lines (Richard Taylor, UK)
The CCNet seems to be very useful for us, partly from a
scientific
point of view (abstracts of new papers, scientific debate, news
from
observing programmes and so on), on the other hand CCNet brings
us
interesting and important information about the attitude of mass
media and the public towards hazards due to asteroids and comets
and
towards a support of NEO research in other countries. (Jana
TICHA,
Milos TICHY, Zdenek MORAVEC, Klet Observatory, Czech Republic)
This network is very important because it lets you read some new
information and keeps you informed easly every day about results
of
research in the world. (Hamid Touma, Morocco)
I thoroughly enjoy it. (Roy Tucker, USA)
It gives me essential information that I cannot get here
otherwise in
a small town in the Ural region with the virtual absence of
scientific
journals and with very limited access to the Internet.
(Simonenko A Vadim, Russia)
A MARVELLOUS RESOURCE. (Gerrit Verschuur, Memphis)
I find the net fascinating and I love it. I cannot speak too
highly of
your work on it. (Jasper V. Wall, UK)
This is an excellent service to scientists, and I think
foreshadows
the way science communication would go in the future.
(Chandra Wickramasinghe, UK)
FIVE STARS!! IT'S THRILLING TO LEARN ABOUT THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS
IN
CRATERING AND CATASTROPHISM. I VALUE THIS A LOT. IT IS ALSO VERY
WELCOME TO GET UP-TO-THE-MINUTE INFORMES OF PUBLIC MEDIA
RELEASES.
I'M NEVER CAUGHT OFF-GUARD. (Jeff Wynn, USA)
You can find more at
http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/ccc/ccwlmt99.html
===============
(2) DYNAMICAL EVOLUTION OF ASTEROID 1036 GANYMED
From Paolo Farinella <paolof@keplero.dm.unipi.it>
Dear friends and colleagues,
you can find on my website the preprint (ps file) of a paper
submitted
to A&A by P. Michel, R. Gonczi, Ch. Froeschle' and myself on
the
dynamical evolution of 1036 Ganymed, the largest NEA. It is also
available by anonymous ftp at tycho.dm.unipi.it (cd
/pub/paolof/). Let
me know if for any reason you wish to receive a hardcopy.
Best regards,
Paolo Farinella
http://tycho.dm.unipi.it/~paolof/
==========================
(3) OCEANIC IMPACTS - MECHANISMS & ENVIRONMENTAL
PERTURBATIONS
From Ron Baalke <BAALKE@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
Oceanic Impacts - Mechanisms And Environmental Pertubations
2nd Workshop of the ESF-IMPACT Scientific Programme
April 15-17, 1999
Alfred Wegener Institute For Polar and Marine Research,
Bremerhaven, Germany
More info: http://psri.open.ac.uk/esf/
=====================
(4) NRC REPORT DETAILS
From Heidi B. Hammel <hbh@alum.mit.edu>
Ed Grondine says: "I wish I could give a fuller citation for
the NRC
report [regarding planetary protection], but this is the only
copy of
it that I have ever seen."
The report is "Evaluating the Biological Potential in
Samples Returned
from Planetary Satellites and Small Solar System Bodies:
Framework for
Decision Making" by the NRC Space Studies Board Task Group
on Sample
Return from Small Solar System Bodies. The report is available on
the
web (http://www.nas.edu/ssb/sssbmenu.htm).
==================
(5) BARENTS SEA IMPACT CRATER
From Michael Paine <mpaine@tpgi.com.au>
Dear Benny,
A Norwegian website with information about the Barents Sea crater
is at
http://www.oslo.sintef.no/gemini/1999-01/15.html.
The structure was
created about 150 million years ago by an object about 2km in
diameter.
The Gemini science magazine associated with that report is quite
interesting but does not appear to have other NEO articles.
Regards
Michael Paine
----------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
----------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To subscribe, please
contact the moderator Benny J Peiser at <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational use only. The attached information may not be copied
or
reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the
copyright holders. The electronic archive of the CCNet can be
found
at http://abob.libs.uga..edu/bobk/cccmenu.html