Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [coldwarcomms] Doomsday Bunkers Make a Comeback

Expand Messages
  • Mike Cowen
    Sam, I m not interested in getting into a pissing match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive. Suddenly you re jumping into a topic you ve
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Sam, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing
      match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive.

      Suddenly you're jumping into a topic you've
      previously avoided, and you ask 'Who cares if
      it's been discussed before?', well, probably each
      of us who have already tried to add knowledge and
      value to this thread would be on that list. It's
      a shame you weren't interested in this thread the
      first two passes of sharing new info. Maybe you
      could have contributed something new, useful and
      interesting to the topic besides a bad attitude? That would be refreshing.

      Why do we keep discussing AT&T? Maybe it's
      because the scope of influence of AT&T was so
      vast we're still discovering new things, new uses
      for old things, new inventions based on their
      legacy, or discovering recently declassified
      things certain listmembers -couldn't- discuss
      previously. I have no doubt there are many more
      things we've yet to discover, and we'll continue to discuss them here.

      You want to discuss other things? Sounds good to
      me! Acknowledging it's your suggestion, why
      don't you lead off? There are 1237 other members
      awaiting your contribution. You have the floor...

      Mike


      At 10:23 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
      >
      >
      >Or you could just skip things you're not interested in. It's a new
      >piece of information that aired *today*. Who cares if it's been
      >discussed before?
      >
      >Actually, tell you what, we talk about AT&T all the time. I think
      >that topic has pretty much been discussed about as far as we can.
      >Let's move on to other topics please?
      >
      >Sheesh.
      >
      >sam
      >
      >On 7/2/10, Mike Cowen
      ><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
      > > The best we can tell it is Baker. Nobody here has knocked on the door
      > > yet...
      > >
      > > We've gone through several rounds of discussion
      > > on this EXACT topic this year, and every few
      > > weeks (or so) someone in this group rediscovers
      > > this story for the first time. There were
      > > numerous messages covering it well April 17-24,
      > > and May 17-18. Check the archives for "Vivos:
      > > buy your own bunker!" (marketing BS), and
      > > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
      > > (technical & coords). HINT: There's a link at
      > > the bottom of this message called "Visit Your Group". Start there.
      > >
      > > The last time I posted THIS type of "old news"
      > > message (on this topic) was "way back" on June 16. Yep, just 2 weeks ago!
      > >
      > > I know many of us are getting long in the tooth,
      > > but one can get a lot more from the wealth of
      > > knowledge in this group by doing more than just skimming subject lines...
      > >
      > > Mike
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > At 08:32 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>On 7/2/10 8:34 PM, Sam Etler wrote:
      > >>
      > >> > I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be of
      > >> > some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing a
      > >> > number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want a
      > >> > place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.
      > >>
      > >>Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker...
      > >>
      > >
      > > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
      > > and selfless acts of beauty.
      > > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >

      ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
      and selfless acts of beauty.
      mcowen@... -Anonymous



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mike Cowen
      Sorry, I can t recall the details off the top of my head. We covered this pretty extensively last year for the 40th anniversary of the Moon landing. I m
      Message 2 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Sorry, I can't recall the details off the top of
        my head. We covered this pretty extensively last
        year for the 40th anniversary of the Moon
        landing. I'm surprised I don't remember, it was
        of personal interest at the time... If nobody
        else has this handy, I'll dig through my archives and see if I can find it.

        I know there has been recent work on Goldstone's
        "big dish" to replace the 50-year-old gimbal
        bearings. I don't know if that project has been completed.

        Mike


        At 09:44 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >What fed it? It had to have good-sized pipes to GSFC and MSFC....
        >
        >

        ---------------------------------------------------------------
        Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
        and selfless acts of beauty.
        mcowen@... -Anonymous



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Jim
        ... I wouldn t necessarily assume that just because it was a big dish and cost a lot of money. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_S-Band The telemetry
        Message 3 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > What fed it? It had to have good-sized pipes to GSFC and MSFC....
          >

          I wouldn't necessarily assume that just because it was a big dish and cost a lot of money.

          From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_S-Band

          The telemetry could be at one of two rates, 1.6 kilobits/sec (low rate, 1/640 of the subcarrier frequency) and 51.2 kilobits/sec (high rate, 1/20 of the subcarrier frequency).

          But, at that time, 56kb was a high-speed data channel.

          I used to work around a VSAT data hub. Big impressive, expensive dish. Everyone thought it put out a lot of power, but it only radiated 60 watts - 1/10 of what a good microwave does. The 'special' part of it was the precise aiming - not the power.
        • Sam Etler
          Well my lame attempt at sarcasm about AT&T clearly failed. Next time I ll use the appropriate tags. You assume I wasn t interested in the previous
          Message 4 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Well my lame attempt at sarcasm about AT&T clearly failed. Next time
            I'll use the appropriate <sarcasm> tags.

            You assume I wasn't "interested" in the previous discussions because I
            refrained from adding to the noise level by not saying anything. I
            "avoided" the previous discussion because I had nothing to contribute.
            I did find it interesting however. And had the California Report not
            dragged their feet in producing that radio spot perhaps I would have
            been able to post it in the previous discussions.

            I'm actually genuinely curious here. Yes, the topic has been
            discussed. Is the topic closed? What was so wrong about posting a
            link to something related to it that was released yesterday?

            sam

            On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen <mcowen@...> wrote:
            > Sam, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing
            > match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive.
            >
            > Suddenly you're jumping into a topic you've
            > previously avoided, and you ask 'Who cares if
            > it's been discussed before?', well, probably each
            > of us who have already tried to add knowledge and
            > value to this thread would be on that list. It's
            > a shame you weren't interested in this thread the
            > first two passes of sharing new info. Maybe you
            > could have contributed something new, useful and
            > interesting to the topic besides a bad attitude? That would be refreshing.
            >
            > Why do we keep discussing AT&T? Maybe it's
            > because the scope of influence of AT&T was so
            > vast we're still discovering new things, new uses
            > for old things, new inventions based on their
            > legacy, or discovering recently declassified
            > things certain listmembers -couldn't- discuss
            > previously. I have no doubt there are many more
            > things we've yet to discover, and we'll continue to discuss them here.
            >
            > You want to discuss other things? Sounds good to
            > me! Acknowledging it's your suggestion, why
            > don't you lead off? There are 1237 other members
            > awaiting your contribution. You have the floor...
            >
            > Mike
            >
            >
            > At 10:23 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
            >>
            >>
            >>Or you could just skip things you're not interested in. It's a new
            >>piece of information that aired *today*. Who cares if it's been
            >>discussed before?
            >>
            >>Actually, tell you what, we talk about AT&T all the time. I think
            >>that topic has pretty much been discussed about as far as we can.
            >>Let's move on to other topics please?
            >>
            >>Sheesh.
            >>
            >>sam
            >>
            >>On 7/2/10, Mike Cowen
            >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
            >> > The best we can tell it is Baker. Nobody here has knocked on the door
            >> > yet...
            >> >
            >> > We've gone through several rounds of discussion
            >> > on this EXACT topic this year, and every few
            >> > weeks (or so) someone in this group rediscovers
            >> > this story for the first time. There were
            >> > numerous messages covering it well April 17-24,
            >> > and May 17-18. Check the archives for "Vivos:
            >> > buy your own bunker!" (marketing BS), and
            >> > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
            >> > (technical & coords). HINT: There's a link at
            >> > the bottom of this message called "Visit Your Group". Start there.
            >> >
            >> > The last time I posted THIS type of "old news"
            >> > message (on this topic) was "way back" on June 16. Yep, just 2 weeks
            >> > ago!
            >> >
            >> > I know many of us are getting long in the tooth,
            >> > but one can get a lot more from the wealth of
            >> > knowledge in this group by doing more than just skimming subject
            >> > lines...
            >> >
            >> > Mike
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> > At 08:32 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
            >> >>
            >> >>
            >> >>On 7/2/10 8:34 PM, Sam Etler wrote:
            >> >>
            >> >> > I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be of
            >> >> > some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing a
            >> >> > number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want a
            >> >> > place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.
            >> >>
            >> >>Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker...
            >> >>
            >> >
            >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
            >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
            >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
            >> > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> > ------------------------------------
            >> >
            >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >>
            >
            > ---------------------------------------------------------------
            > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
            > and selfless acts of beauty.
            > mcowen@... -Anonymous
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Mike Cowen
            Sam, I apologize if I misinterpreted your comments. The topic is still open, and any NEW info is welcome. Most of us are wondering if the guy (Robert Vicino)
            Message 5 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Sam, I apologize if I misinterpreted your
              comments. The topic is still open, and any NEW
              info is welcome. Most of us are wondering if the
              guy (Robert Vicino) will get enough takers to
              actually begin operation before that Mayan clock needs winding. :-)

              Yes, I concluded you hadn't followed the previous
              discussions based on your use of the English
              language. You only mentioned "California Report"
              *today* (though I don't know what it is), and
              there was NO link in your original post. The way
              it was phrased came across much more like "I just
              heard about this bunker thing for the first
              time. Does anybody know anything about it?" vs.
              something like "Now they're promoting that
              doomsday bunker on the radio. I'm in the
              (location) vicinity, and heard this (local /
              network) (news item / commercial). They were
              promoting the (same / different [list]) features
              compared to their previous methods we've
              discussed". The second version implies a prior
              knowledge and interest of the subject while
              clearly adding something new to the
              discussion. Your original post added the words
              "radio" and "today", and little else. You asked
              "Do we know the site?". Yes, and had you
              followed the May discussions under the thread
              "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
              you'd already know we thoroughly hashed out all
              the possibilities and eliminated all but Baker,
              especially with William Miller (thanks!) locating
              the tax records of the site. Here is a link to
              Baker with the crosshairs on the entry portal:
              http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=35.134715&lon=-116.214252&z=17.3&r=0&src=msl

              You've posted some great stuff in the past, but
              yesterday's post really missed the target. I'm
              not asking for a literary work of art, but
              perhaps you could add details like the broadcast
              area, the station involved, if it was an ad or a
              news item, any other new info they might have
              included, or even a link. Knowing where and how
              they are promoting this scheme IS adding value to
              the discussion. The previous thread started with
              a local news item in the L.A. Times. I'm in the
              Phoenix area, and while this is supposedly within
              their market area (based on published info), I
              haven't heard any word of it around
              here. Please, DO tell us something new about
              this topic. I'd even be up for info on any other
              similar projects (I know of two, but no details).

              Mike



              At 11:22 AM 7/3/2010, you wrote:
              >
              >
              >Well my lame attempt at sarcasm about AT&T clearly failed. Next time
              >I'll use the appropriate <sarcasm> tags.
              >
              >You assume I wasn't "interested" in the previous discussions because I
              >refrained from adding to the noise level by not saying anything. I
              >"avoided" the previous discussion because I had nothing to contribute.
              >I did find it interesting however. And had the California Report not
              >dragged their feet in producing that radio spot perhaps I would have
              >been able to post it in the previous discussions.
              >
              >I'm actually genuinely curious here. Yes, the topic has been
              >discussed. Is the topic closed? What was so wrong about posting a
              >link to something related to it that was released yesterday?
              >
              >sam
              >
              >On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen
              ><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
              > > Sam, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing
              > > match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive.
              > >
              > > Suddenly you're jumping into a topic you've
              > > previously avoided, and you ask 'Who cares if
              > > it's been discussed before?', well, probably each
              > > of us who have already tried to add knowledge and
              > > value to this thread would be on that list. It's
              > > a shame you weren't interested in this thread the
              > > first two passes of sharing new info. Maybe you
              > > could have contributed something new, useful and
              > > interesting to the topic besides a bad attitude? That would be refreshing.
              > >
              > > Why do we keep discussing AT&T? Maybe it's
              > > because the scope of influence of AT&T was so
              > > vast we're still discovering new things, new uses
              > > for old things, new inventions based on their
              > > legacy, or discovering recently declassified
              > > things certain listmembers -couldn't- discuss
              > > previously. I have no doubt there are many more
              > > things we've yet to discover, and we'll continue to discuss them here.
              > >
              > > You want to discuss other things? Sounds good to
              > > me! Acknowledging it's your suggestion, why
              > > don't you lead off? There are 1237 other members
              > > awaiting your contribution. You have the floor...
              > >
              > > Mike
              > >
              > >
              > > At 10:23 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
              > >>
              > >>
              > >>Or you could just skip things you're not interested in. It's a new
              > >>piece of information that aired *today*. Who cares if it's been
              > >>discussed before?
              > >>
              > >>Actually, tell you what, we talk about AT&T all the time. I think
              > >>that topic has pretty much been discussed about as far as we can.
              > >>Let's move on to other topics please?
              > >>
              > >>Sheesh.
              > >>
              > >>sam
              > >>
              > >>On 7/2/10, Mike Cowen
              > >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
              > >> > The best we can tell it is Baker. Nobody here has knocked on the door
              > >> > yet...
              > >> >
              > >> > We've gone through several rounds of discussion
              > >> > on this EXACT topic this year, and every few
              > >> > weeks (or so) someone in this group rediscovers
              > >> > this story for the first time. There were
              > >> > numerous messages covering it well April 17-24,
              > >> > and May 17-18. Check the archives for "Vivos:
              > >> > buy your own bunker!" (marketing BS), and
              > >> > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
              > >> > (technical & coords). HINT: There's a link at
              > >> > the bottom of this message called "Visit Your Group". Start there.
              > >> >
              > >> > The last time I posted THIS type of "old news"
              > >> > message (on this topic) was "way back" on June 16. Yep, just 2 weeks
              > >> > ago!
              > >> >
              > >> > I know many of us are getting long in the tooth,
              > >> > but one can get a lot more from the wealth of
              > >> > knowledge in this group by doing more than just skimming subject
              > >> > lines...
              > >> >
              > >> > Mike
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> > At 08:32 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
              > >> >>
              > >> >>
              > >> >>On 7/2/10 8:34 PM, Sam Etler wrote:
              > >> >>
              > >> >> > I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be of
              > >> >> > some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing a
              > >> >> > number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want a
              > >> >> > place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.
              > >> >>
              > >> >>Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker...
              > >> >>
              > >> >
              > >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
              > >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
              > >> > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> > ------------------------------------
              > >> >
              > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >> >
              > >>
              > >
              > > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
              > > and selfless acts of beauty.
              > > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > ------------------------------------
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >

              ---------------------------------------------------------------
              Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
              and selfless acts of beauty.
              mcowen@... -Anonymous



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Sam Etler
              Point taken about the way I worded the e-mail. I pulled the old California trick of assuming a familiarity that of course no one outside of California would
              Message 6 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Point taken about the way I worded the e-mail. I pulled the old
                California trick of assuming a familiarity that of course no one
                outside of California would have. The California Report is a radio
                program that airs on NPR affiliate KQED-FM in the San Francisco Bay
                Area (and other stations I assume).

                I would however like to point out that while perhaps the wording of my
                original post wasn't a dissertation I did in fact include a link to
                the report in question at the end of the original e-mail. I'm sorry
                you missed that. I also never asked if anyone knew the site. I only
                summarized what was in the report itself and went on my way.

                sam

                On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen <mcowen@...> wrote:
                > Sam, I apologize if I misinterpreted your
                > comments. The topic is still open, and any NEW
                > info is welcome. Most of us are wondering if the
                > guy (Robert Vicino) will get enough takers to
                > actually begin operation before that Mayan clock needs winding. :-)
                >
                > Yes, I concluded you hadn't followed the previous
                > discussions based on your use of the English
                > language. You only mentioned "California Report"
                > *today* (though I don't know what it is), and
                > there was NO link in your original post. The way
                > it was phrased came across much more like "I just
                > heard about this bunker thing for the first
                > time. Does anybody know anything about it?" vs.
                > something like "Now they're promoting that
                > doomsday bunker on the radio. I'm in the
                > (location) vicinity, and heard this (local /
                > network) (news item / commercial). They were
                > promoting the (same / different [list]) features
                > compared to their previous methods we've
                > discussed". The second version implies a prior
                > knowledge and interest of the subject while
                > clearly adding something new to the
                > discussion. Your original post added the words
                > "radio" and "today", and little else. You asked
                > "Do we know the site?". Yes, and had you
                > followed the May discussions under the thread
                > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
                > you'd already know we thoroughly hashed out all
                > the possibilities and eliminated all but Baker,
                > especially with William Miller (thanks!) locating
                > the tax records of the site. Here is a link to
                > Baker with the crosshairs on the entry portal:
                > http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=35.134715&lon=-116.214252&z=17.3&r=0&src=msl
                >
                > You've posted some great stuff in the past, but
                > yesterday's post really missed the target. I'm
                > not asking for a literary work of art, but
                > perhaps you could add details like the broadcast
                > area, the station involved, if it was an ad or a
                > news item, any other new info they might have
                > included, or even a link. Knowing where and how
                > they are promoting this scheme IS adding value to
                > the discussion. The previous thread started with
                > a local news item in the L.A. Times. I'm in the
                > Phoenix area, and while this is supposedly within
                > their market area (based on published info), I
                > haven't heard any word of it around
                > here. Please, DO tell us something new about
                > this topic. I'd even be up for info on any other
                > similar projects (I know of two, but no details).
                >
                > Mike
                >
                >
                >
                > At 11:22 AM 7/3/2010, you wrote:
                >>
                >>
                >>Well my lame attempt at sarcasm about AT&T clearly failed. Next time
                >>I'll use the appropriate <sarcasm> tags.
                >>
                >>You assume I wasn't "interested" in the previous discussions because I
                >>refrained from adding to the noise level by not saying anything. I
                >>"avoided" the previous discussion because I had nothing to contribute.
                >>I did find it interesting however. And had the California Report not
                >>dragged their feet in producing that radio spot perhaps I would have
                >>been able to post it in the previous discussions.
                >>
                >>I'm actually genuinely curious here. Yes, the topic has been
                >>discussed. Is the topic closed? What was so wrong about posting a
                >>link to something related to it that was released yesterday?
                >>
                >>sam
                >>
                >>On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen
                >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
                >> > Sam, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing
                >> > match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive.
                >> >
                >> > Suddenly you're jumping into a topic you've
                >> > previously avoided, and you ask 'Who cares if
                >> > it's been discussed before?', well, probably each
                >> > of us who have already tried to add knowledge and
                >> > value to this thread would be on that list. It's
                >> > a shame you weren't interested in this thread the
                >> > first two passes of sharing new info. Maybe you
                >> > could have contributed something new, useful and
                >> > interesting to the topic besides a bad attitude? That would be
                >> > refreshing.
                >> >
                >> > Why do we keep discussing AT&T? Maybe it's
                >> > because the scope of influence of AT&T was so
                >> > vast we're still discovering new things, new uses
                >> > for old things, new inventions based on their
                >> > legacy, or discovering recently declassified
                >> > things certain listmembers -couldn't- discuss
                >> > previously. I have no doubt there are many more
                >> > things we've yet to discover, and we'll continue to discuss them here.
                >> >
                >> > You want to discuss other things? Sounds good to
                >> > me! Acknowledging it's your suggestion, why
                >> > don't you lead off? There are 1237 other members
                >> > awaiting your contribution. You have the floor...
                >> >
                >> > Mike
                >> >
                >> >
                >> > At 10:23 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
                >> >>
                >> >>
                >> >>Or you could just skip things you're not interested in. It's a new
                >> >>piece of information that aired *today*. Who cares if it's been
                >> >>discussed before?
                >> >>
                >> >>Actually, tell you what, we talk about AT&T all the time. I think
                >> >>that topic has pretty much been discussed about as far as we can.
                >> >>Let's move on to other topics please?
                >> >>
                >> >>Sheesh.
                >> >>
                >> >>sam
                >> >>
                >> >>On 7/2/10, Mike Cowen
                >> >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
                >> >> > The best we can tell it is Baker. Nobody here has knocked on the door
                >> >> > yet...
                >> >> >
                >> >> > We've gone through several rounds of discussion
                >> >> > on this EXACT topic this year, and every few
                >> >> > weeks (or so) someone in this group rediscovers
                >> >> > this story for the first time. There were
                >> >> > numerous messages covering it well April 17-24,
                >> >> > and May 17-18. Check the archives for "Vivos:
                >> >> > buy your own bunker!" (marketing BS), and
                >> >> > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
                >> >> > (technical & coords). HINT: There's a link at
                >> >> > the bottom of this message called "Visit Your Group". Start there.
                >> >> >
                >> >> > The last time I posted THIS type of "old news"
                >> >> > message (on this topic) was "way back" on June 16. Yep, just 2 weeks
                >> >> > ago!
                >> >> >
                >> >> > I know many of us are getting long in the tooth,
                >> >> > but one can get a lot more from the wealth of
                >> >> > knowledge in this group by doing more than just skimming subject
                >> >> > lines...
                >> >> >
                >> >> > Mike
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> > At 08:32 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
                >> >> >>
                >> >> >>
                >> >> >>On 7/2/10 8:34 PM, Sam Etler wrote:
                >> >> >>
                >> >> >> > I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be
                >> >> >> > of
                >> >> >> > some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing
                >> >> >> > a
                >> >> >> > number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want
                >> >> >> > a
                >> >> >> > place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.
                >> >> >>
                >> >> >>Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker...
                >> >> >>
                >> >> >
                >> >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
                >> >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                >> >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
                >> >> > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> > ------------------------------------
                >> >> >
                >> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >> >
                >> >>
                >> >
                >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
                >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
                >> > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
                >> >
                >> >
                >> >
                >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >> >
                >> >
                >> >
                >> > ------------------------------------
                >> >
                >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >> >
                >> >
                >> >
                >> >
                >>
                >
                > ---------------------------------------------------------------
                > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                > and selfless acts of beauty.
                > mcowen@... -Anonymous
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Mike Cowen
                It looks like Yahoo set us up. This is all I got at the time I replied: ====== I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be of some
                Message 7 of 15 , Jul 3, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  It looks like Yahoo set us up. This is all I got at the time I replied:

                  ======
                  "I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be of
                  some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing a
                  number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want a
                  place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.

                  Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker..."
                  =====

                  Earlier today, your original post with the link
                  arrived with the earlier timestamp. Had I seen
                  that message in the proper sequence, I certainly
                  would have worded things differently.

                  Mike


                  At 03:43 PM 7/3/2010, you wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >Point taken about the way I worded the e-mail. I pulled the old
                  >California trick of assuming a familiarity that of course no one
                  >outside of California would have. The California Report is a radio
                  >program that airs on NPR affiliate KQED-FM in the San Francisco Bay
                  >Area (and other stations I assume).
                  >
                  >I would however like to point out that while perhaps the wording of my
                  >original post wasn't a dissertation I did in fact include a link to
                  >the report in question at the end of the original e-mail. I'm sorry
                  >you missed that. I also never asked if anyone knew the site. I only
                  >summarized what was in the report itself and went on my way.
                  >
                  >sam
                  >
                  >On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen
                  ><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
                  > > Sam, I apologize if I misinterpreted your
                  > > comments. The topic is still open, and any NEW
                  > > info is welcome. Most of us are wondering if the
                  > > guy (Robert Vicino) will get enough takers to
                  > > actually begin operation before that Mayan clock needs winding. :-)
                  > >
                  > > Yes, I concluded you hadn't followed the previous
                  > > discussions based on your use of the English
                  > > language. You only mentioned "California Report"
                  > > *today* (though I don't know what it is), and
                  > > there was NO link in your original post. The way
                  > > it was phrased came across much more like "I just
                  > > heard about this bunker thing for the first
                  > > time. Does anybody know anything about it?" vs.
                  > > something like "Now they're promoting that
                  > > doomsday bunker on the radio. I'm in the
                  > > (location) vicinity, and heard this (local /
                  > > network) (news item / commercial). They were
                  > > promoting the (same / different [list]) features
                  > > compared to their previous methods we've
                  > > discussed". The second version implies a prior
                  > > knowledge and interest of the subject while
                  > > clearly adding something new to the
                  > > discussion. Your original post added the words
                  > > "radio" and "today", and little else. You asked
                  > > "Do we know the site?". Yes, and had you
                  > > followed the May discussions under the thread
                  > > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
                  > > you'd already know we thoroughly hashed out all
                  > > the possibilities and eliminated all but Baker,
                  > > especially with William Miller (thanks!) locating
                  > > the tax records of the site. Here is a link to
                  > > Baker with the crosshairs on the entry portal:
                  > >
                  > <http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=35.134715&lon=-116.214252&z=17.3&r=0&src=msl>http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=35.134715&lon=-116.214252&z=17.3&r=0&src=msl
                  > >
                  > > You've posted some great stuff in the past, but
                  > > yesterday's post really missed the target. I'm
                  > > not asking for a literary work of art, but
                  > > perhaps you could add details like the broadcast
                  > > area, the station involved, if it was an ad or a
                  > > news item, any other new info they might have
                  > > included, or even a link. Knowing where and how
                  > > they are promoting this scheme IS adding value to
                  > > the discussion. The previous thread started with
                  > > a local news item in the L.A. Times. I'm in the
                  > > Phoenix area, and while this is supposedly within
                  > > their market area (based on published info), I
                  > > haven't heard any word of it around
                  > > here. Please, DO tell us something new about
                  > > this topic. I'd even be up for info on any other
                  > > similar projects (I know of two, but no details).
                  > >
                  > > Mike
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > At 11:22 AM 7/3/2010, you wrote:
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >>Well my lame attempt at sarcasm about AT&T clearly failed. Next time
                  > >>I'll use the appropriate <sarcasm> tags.
                  > >>
                  > >>You assume I wasn't "interested" in the previous discussions because I
                  > >>refrained from adding to the noise level by not saying anything. I
                  > >>"avoided" the previous discussion because I had nothing to contribute.
                  > >>I did find it interesting however. And had the California Report not
                  > >>dragged their feet in producing that radio spot perhaps I would have
                  > >>been able to post it in the previous discussions.
                  > >>
                  > >>I'm actually genuinely curious here. Yes, the topic has been
                  > >>discussed. Is the topic closed? What was so wrong about posting a
                  > >>link to something related to it that was released yesterday?
                  > >>
                  > >>sam
                  > >>
                  > >>On 7/3/10, Mike Cowen
                  > >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com><mailto:m
                  > cowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
                  > >> > Sam, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing
                  > >> > match with you. At the same time, your arrogance is offensive.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Suddenly you're jumping into a topic you've
                  > >> > previously avoided, and you ask 'Who cares if
                  > >> > it's been discussed before?', well, probably each
                  > >> > of us who have already tried to add knowledge and
                  > >> > value to this thread would be on that list. It's
                  > >> > a shame you weren't interested in this thread the
                  > >> > first two passes of sharing new info. Maybe you
                  > >> > could have contributed something new, useful and
                  > >> > interesting to the topic besides a bad attitude? That would be
                  > >> > refreshing.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Why do we keep discussing AT&T? Maybe it's
                  > >> > because the scope of influence of AT&T was so
                  > >> > vast we're still discovering new things, new uses
                  > >> > for old things, new inventions based on their
                  > >> > legacy, or discovering recently declassified
                  > >> > things certain listmembers -couldn't- discuss
                  > >> > previously. I have no doubt there are many more
                  > >> > things we've yet to discover, and we'll continue to discuss them here.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > You want to discuss other things? Sounds good to
                  > >> > me! Acknowledging it's your suggestion, why
                  > >> > don't you lead off? There are 1237 other members
                  > >> > awaiting your contribution. You have the floor...
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Mike
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> > At 10:23 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>Or you could just skip things you're not interested in. It's a new
                  > >> >>piece of information that aired *today*. Who cares if it's been
                  > >> >>discussed before?
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>Actually, tell you what, we talk about AT&T all the time. I think
                  > >> >>that topic has pretty much been discussed about as far as we can.
                  > >> >>Let's move on to other topics please?
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>Sheesh.
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>sam
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >>On 7/2/10, Mike Cowen
                  > >> >><<mailto:mcowen%40bolderconcepts.com>mcowen@...> wrote:
                  > >> >> > The best we can tell it is Baker. Nobody here has knocked on the door
                  > >> >> > yet...
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > We've gone through several rounds of discussion
                  > >> >> > on this EXACT topic this year, and every few
                  > >> >> > weeks (or so) someone in this group rediscovers
                  > >> >> > this story for the first time. There were
                  > >> >> > numerous messages covering it well April 17-24,
                  > >> >> > and May 17-18. Check the archives for "Vivos:
                  > >> >> > buy your own bunker!" (marketing BS), and
                  > >> >> > "Barstow AT&T Bunker resurfaces in the news"
                  > >> >> > (technical & coords). HINT: There's a link at
                  > >> >> > the bottom of this message called "Visit Your Group". Start there.
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > The last time I posted THIS type of "old news"
                  > >> >> > message (on this topic) was "way back" on June 16. Yep, just 2 weeks
                  > >> >> > ago!
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > I know many of us are getting long in the tooth,
                  > >> >> > but one can get a lot more from the wealth of
                  > >> >> > knowledge in this group by doing more than just skimming subject
                  > >> >> > lines...
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > Mike
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > At 08:32 PM 7/2/2010, you wrote:
                  > >> >> >>
                  > >> >> >>
                  > >> >> >>On 7/2/10 8:34 PM, Sam Etler wrote:
                  > >> >> >>
                  > >> >> >> > I heard this on the radio coming home today. Thought it might be
                  > >> >> >> > of
                  > >> >> >> > some interest in this group. In short, there's a guy refurbishing
                  > >> >> >> > a
                  > >> >> >> > number of old AT&T bunkers to sell space inside to people who want
                  > >> >> >> > a
                  > >> >> >> > place to live out doomsday if it ever comes.
                  > >> >> >>
                  > >> >> >>Do we know the site? It said it was in/near Baker...
                  > >> >> >>
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
                  > >> >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                  > >> >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
                  > >> >> > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > ------------------------------------
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >> >
                  > >> >>
                  > >> >
                  > >> > ----------------------------------------------------------
                  > >> > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                  > >> > and selfless acts of beauty.
                  > >> >
                  > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com><mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@...
                  > -Anonymous
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> > ------------------------------------
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >>
                  > >
                  > > ----------------------------------------------------------
                  > > Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                  > > and selfless acts of beauty.
                  > > <mailto:mcowen%40mindspring.com>mcowen@... -Anonymous
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ------------------------------------
                  > >
                  > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >

                  ---------------------------------------------------------------
                  Mike Cowen Practice random acts of kindness
                  and selfless acts of beauty.
                  mcowen@... -Anonymous



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • David
                  ... I looked and while we ve discussed Garden City-GSFC-Suitland; I didn t see such discussion on Goldstone. I assume NASA insisted on redundant routes. ...
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jul 7, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 7/3/10 9:53 AM, Jim wrote:

                    >> What fed it? It had to have good-sized pipes to GSFC and MSFC....

                    I looked and while we've discussed Garden City-GSFC-Suitland; I didn't see
                    such discussion on Goldstone. I assume NASA insisted on redundant routes.

                    > The telemetry could be at one of two rates, 1.6 kilobits/sec (low rate,
                    > 1/640 of the subcarrier frequency) and 51.2 kilobits/sec (high rate,
                    > 1/20 of the subcarrier frequency).
                    >
                    > But, at that time, 56kb was a high-speed data channel.

                    Indeed. Ma spend big $$$$ on their Data Under Voice sometime after that,
                    and it delivered a phenomenal coast-to-coast DS-1 channel, yes, a full
                    1.544 MB/s.

                    As I recall, contemporaneously, the original IMP's [predecessors to the
                    backbone routers...] were fed at 50 kb/s, and had an inverse mux & ?8?
                    circuits with modems.

                    > I used to work around a VSAT data hub. Big impressive, expensive dish.
                    > Everyone thought it put out a lot of power, but it only radiated 60
                    > watts - 1/10 of what a good microwave does. The 'special' part of it was
                    > the precise aiming - not the power.

                    What was the power density at the focus.... THAT's what counts. Just like
                    our favorite horns....
                  • OZOB99
                    ... Here s a couple of pages with some answers: http://tmo.jpl.nasa.gov/progress_report2/II/IIX.PDF
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jul 7, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, David <wb8foz@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > On 7/3/10 9:53 AM, Jim wrote:
                      >
                      > >> What fed it? It had to have good-sized pipes to GSFC and MSFC....
                      >
                      > I looked and while we've discussed Garden City-GSFC-Suitland; I didn't see
                      > such discussion on Goldstone. I assume NASA insisted on redundant routes.
                      >
                      > > The telemetry could be at one of two rates, 1.6 kilobits/sec (low rate,
                      > > 1/640 of the subcarrier frequency) and 51.2 kilobits/sec (high rate,
                      > > 1/20 of the subcarrier frequency).
                      > >
                      > > But, at that time, 56kb was a high-speed data channel.
                      >
                      > Indeed. Ma spend big $$$$ on their Data Under Voice sometime after that,
                      > and it delivered a phenomenal coast-to-coast DS-1 channel, yes, a full
                      > 1.544 MB/s.
                      >
                      > As I recall, contemporaneously, the original IMP's [predecessors to the
                      > backbone routers...] were fed at 50 kb/s, and had an inverse mux & ?8?
                      > circuits with modems.


                      Here's a couple of pages with some answers:

                      http://tmo.jpl.nasa.gov/progress_report2/II/IIX.PDF

                      http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/38871/1/03-0834.pdf
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.