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

Re: And speaking of Goldstone

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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.