HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johannes.beekhuizen@contrast.wlink.nl (Johannes Beekhuizen)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Distance of horizon
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:41:42

Hello steve,

On Wednesday November 18 1992, steve hix wrote to All:

 sh> Anyone have handy a function for figuring the distance of the
 sh> horizon from a viewer based on the viewer's height from the
 sh> surface?

I make it:
        horizon = SQRT ( 2 * eyelevel * earthradius + eyelevel * eyelevel )
all in the same units, of course.
The earth radius is about 6378160 meters.

 sh> This has to do with amusing my kids a bit during our next
 sh> science discussion.  Dad's got to stay ahead *some* way... :}

Sigh...


Regards,

       Johannes (friends call me Hans).

Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
From: gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: Gravity waves (Was: Galilean Electrodynamics)
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:33:02 GMT

Well, at least I know that Beckmann still reads and posts to the net. 


beckmann@spot.Colorado.EDU  writes:
#     More generally, an experiment can only refute a theory, it cannot prove
#it since there might be alternative interpretations, as in the example
#above.

I don't recall anyone saying otherwise in this thread. 

#I am open to criticism. I do get a wave equation for gravity, but it differs
#from Einstein's, and my weak disbelief is centered mainly on the Einstein
#type of gravity waves.

I for one would be very interested in seeing these equations. I
personally find the interesting thing to be not where your theory
gives the same answers as GR, but where it gives different answers,
such that the two theories could be tested. A prediction of what your
theory would give in the situation of two closely orbiting newtron
stars, such as PSR 1913+16 is beleived to be, would be most
interesting to compare with the GR prediction.

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
From: fxt@helios.ucsc.edu (oxide owner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: supernova
Date: 20 Nov 92 10:20:46 GMT
Organization: UCO/Lick Observatory
NNTP-Posting-Host: helios.ucsc.edu


> From: palmer@cco.caltech.edu (David M. Palmer)
> The supernova went off Feb 23 1987, (by the time of the neutrino burst),

lovely hubris. 1987a exploded some 170,000 years ago.

fxt
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: gawne@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Star buying
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: sci,na
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 02:22:15 GMT

In article <schnitzi.721922589@eola.cs.ucf.edu>, 
schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:

> Okay, I'll probably get flamed for this, but here
> goes.  Has anyone heard about a place you can send
> away for an official looking "certificate of owner-
> ship" for a particular star in the sky?  I am
> embarassed to ask this question in a scientific
> forum such as this, but this would be the perfect
> gag present for someone I know.  I fully realize
> that one cannot "own" a star like this, but if anyone
> could mail me the address, I would greatly appreciate
> it.

There was something called the "International Star Registry" doing this
a few years ago.  They even advertised their service at the Oklahoma City
Kirkpatrick science center's planetarium!  

-Bill Gawne,  Space Telescope Science Institute
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: john@mercury.cs.uregina.ca (John Rosloot)
Subject: out of touch
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:46:30 GMT
Organization: University of Regina, SK, Canada

     I have been out of touch with the net for a couple of months and was
curious as to whether there were any further developments regarding:

(A) a planet-like object, designated 1992 QB-1, possibly travelling
    in an orbit ranging from 37 AU to 59 AU (though initial orbital
    calculations were uncertain)

(B) an unusual crystalline growth discovered on NASA's recovered LDEF unit

John Rosloot
University of Regina
john@cs.uregina.ca
Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 20 November
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 21 Nov 92 09:24:05 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 325, 11/20/92
10.7 FLUX=158.8  90-AVG=125        SSN=146      BKI=1101 1101  BAI=002
BGND-XRAY=B6.8     FLU1=3.1E+05  FLU10=1.0E+04  PKI=1101 1112  PAI=004
  BOU-DEV=006,005,004,008,006,006,004,008   DEV-AVG=005 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C5.6   @ 0035UT    XRAY-MIN= B5.4   @ 2236UT   XRAY-AVG= C1.2
NEUTN-MAX= +003%  @ 2315UT   NEUTN-MIN= +000%  @ 2350UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.8%
  PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 2325UT     PCA-MIN= -0.8DB @ 1555UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55421NT @ 1401UT   BOUTF-MIN=55394NT @ 1933UT  BOUTF-AVG=55413NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+103NT@ 2202UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+007NT@ 2335UT  G7-AVG=+083,+030,+010
GOES6-MAX=P:+121NT@ 2205UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-014NT@ 0326UT  G6-AVG=+100,-008,+031
 FLUXFCST=STD:165,165,165;SESC:165,165,165 BAI/PAI-FCST=005,010,020/010,015,025
    KFCST=0104 4100 0005 5000  27DAY-AP=002,005   27DAY-KP=1000 1111 2010 2121
 WARNINGS=*SWF;*PROTON
   ALERTS=
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: price@nosc.mil (James N. Price)
Subject: Re: comet observations (aka I seen it!  I seen it!)
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:15:35 GMT

OK, I've lost the bubble on where Comet S/T is right now.  Please
give some approx. coordinates, both actual and relative to
constellations, and an indication of how much longer it will be
visible, along with magnitude estimates if possible.

Thanks--Jim
milnet: price@nosc.mil
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Gravitational lenses
Keywords: Gravity, lense, Einstein, cross
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:26:30 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

millnerrl@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (CALLABLE_TPU) writes:

> 	Hello.  I can't recall off hand where I saw it, but I saw a picture of
> an odd stellar object called I believe "The Einstein Cross" that was explaine
> as four images of a star that were really the same one bent around the star i
> front of it.  I apologise for not being able to recall the source of the
> refrence and if someone could tell me where to find data, I would be most
> appreciative.

I've never heard of the Einstein Cross, but I _do_ know of the Einstein 
Ring.  This is an image of a distance quasar with two ejected jets.  
Because of a massive cluster of galaxies in the foreground, the image is 
deformed:  one of the jets is not visible (directly behind the cluster 
of galaxies, I believe), and the other is deformed into a ring.  The 
image of the center of the quasar is duplicated on both sides of the 
Ring.

It's interesting to point out that they're now attempting to use 
gravitational lenses to determine the Hubble constant.  The idea is that, 
particularly with a doubled image, they look for a flicker in the 
intensity of one image, and then wait to see when the other image 
flickers.  Then they check the times to see how far away that quasar must 
be.  Since they know the redshift, they have a measure of the Hubble 
constant.

----------
Erik Max Francis   Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.  Coming soon:  UNIVERSE _ | _
USmail:  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1 San Jose CA 95117  ICBM:  37 20 N  121 53 W _>|<_
UUCP:  ..!apple!uuwest!max   Usenet:  max@west.darkside.com   464E4F5244   |
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford)
Subject: Re: Distance of horizon
Organization: U. of Washington
	<ETHANB.92Nov19004023@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu>
	<1992Nov19.181159.25667@sfu.ca>
	<ETHANB.92Nov19122624@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:48:58 GMT

In article <ETHANB.92Nov19122624@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu> ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford) writes:
>     d \approx sqrt(2Rh) ( 1 - 5/12 h/R + 43/80 (h/R)^2)

Though I'm sure you all noticed my error right away, let me say that
that formula should read:
      d \approx sqrt(2Rh) ( 1 - 5/12 h/R + 43/160 (h/R)^2)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: I seen it!  I seen it!
From: thacker@RHEA.ARC.AB.CA
Date: 16 Nov 92 14:49:42 MDT
Reply-To: thacker@RHEA.ARC.AB.CA
Organization: Alberta Research Council

Last night was the first clear night in 3 weeks and my first chance
to see how Swift Tuttle has brightened since I saw it Oct. 22 as a
very faint blur in my 6" scope at low magnification (19 to 60X),
from light polluted suburbia.
     Last night, 5 km past the last houses at the edge of Edmonton
(pop. ~800,000), in 10 X 50 binocs the comet looked similar in
size and appearance to M13, but the comet appeared one magnitude
brighter.  I could see no evidence of the tail that several people
have mentioned.  At this site I needed averted vision to see all 
the stars of the Little Dipper, and the Milky Way was obvious but 
not bright.  I could not see the comet with my naked eye.
     I drove a further 15 km from the city and stopped on another
gravel road, where the Little Dipper stars could all be seen 
directly.  I managed to see the comet with my naked eye, but ever
so faintly.  (It took about 15 minutes of observing for me to 
be completely convinced that it was the comet and not one of the 
surrounding stars I was getting brief glimpses of).  Still no 
tail visible in binoculars from this site.
     Back in suburbia I got out both my binoculars and telescope.
Suprisingly, the binocular view from suburbia was about as good as
from my dark site.  The comet was no doubt more washed out, but so
were all the surrounding stars so the contrast seemed about the 
same.  Had there been a tail I'm sure the dark site would have
been much superior.  It's a bit harder finding the comet from 
suburbia because the framework of stars is *greatly* reduced.
The telescope showed that the comet has a fairly strong central
condensation, whereas in binoculars the whole coma appeared 
equal brightness.
     Gee..... it doesn't LOOK dangerous......
From: collins@emperor.gatech.edu (Tom Collins)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Distance of horizon
Date: 19 Nov 92 14:46:11 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Nov19.021430.13833@sfu.ca> palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer) writes:
>In article <lglhj3INNb0c@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM
>(steve hix) writes:
>>Anyone have handy a function for figuring the distance of the
>>horizon from a viewer based on the viewer's height from the
>>surface?
>                            -1
>Try d = R arccos ( 1 + h/R )
>
>    d = horizon distance
>    h = height above MSL (assuming horizon is at sea level)
>    R = radius of Earth


Don't think so.  Look at the figure below and see if the answer isn't 
pretty simple.  (Assuming of course, a smooth earth that is round, rather
than pear-shaped).  Don't peek at the answer :-).

   __________________________________
   \               d         _   -  |
     \ h              _  -          |
       \           -                |  (lines of tangency are always 
         \     -                    |   perpendicular to radius)
           \/                       |
             \                      |
               \                    | R
                 \                  |
                   \                |
                     \              |
                     R \            |
                         \          |
                           \        |
                             \      |
                               \    |
                                 \  |
                                   \  Center of earth 

 Answer below:















       2    2        2
since R  + d  = (R+h)         (Pythagorean theorem)

                2    2
d = sqrt(  (R+h)  - R  )

This says that the horizon for a six-foot tall person is about
3 miles away.
-- 
Tom Collins                               tom.collins@ee.gatech.edu
Georgia Institute of Technology           (404) 894-2509
400 Tenth St. NW, CRB 384
Atlanta, GA  30332-0540 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: otto@vaxb.acs.unt.edu (M. Otto, "Virtual Prisoner of the VAX")
Subject: Re: NEWS: Galileo Cleared of Heresy Charges by Vatican
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 01:47:14 GMT

If anyone has the complete text of the UPI article, please post it, or send it
to me via email.

AdTHANKSvance.
--
         __ ____ __      otto@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
 /|/|   / / / / / /  A virtual prisoner of the VAX     // I'm sorry; my karma
/   |. /_/ / / /_/  at The University of North Texas \X/  ran over your dogma
                             Denton, USA
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: andromed@cs.dal.ca (Mike Boschat)
Subject: Last Posting and a question
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 12:08:40 GMT


 Hello fellow Observers;

  Since I will be in the hospital tommorow for an operation and will be
out for 3 weeks ( I hope !! ) I wanted to get this question answered, 
hopefully before tommorow since I will not be here to see any posts.
 Did any observer see any Leonid meteors last week and if so any increase in 
their hourly rates ?
 Thanks in advance...
						Clear skies

						Mike Boschat

                                          andromed@sleet.atm.dal.ca
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                   |  "Our problems are man-made,          |
|        JOHN F. KENNEDY            | therefore they can be solved by man " |
|                                   |                                       |
|   ASTRONOMICAL  OBSERVATORY       |                 J.F.K.                |
|                                   |                                       |
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: d.bublitz@abbs.hanse.de (Dieter Bublitz)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: New People
Reply-To: d.bublitz@abbs.hanse.de
Date: 19 Nov 92 22:32:00 MET
Distribution: sci
Organization: ABBS AstroMail, D-W 2121 Dahlenburg / Germany
X-Version: ZerUU V6.45c

From : d.bublitz@abbs.hanse.de (Dieter Bublitz)
Subject : New People
Message-ID : 1992Nov18.034556.29@abbs.hanse.de
Organization: just me


In article <1992Nov18.034556.29948@news.cs.indiana.edu> vivek gupta
<vigupta@tope.cs.indiana.edu> wrote:

 > I dunno, that they'd appreciate getting loads and loads of
 > requests for this, so if anyone can suggest a way to distribute
 > it over the net? I have my set, and i could type it out (not 
 > right now, but over winter break?) and it could be either
 > added to the faq or maybe a ftp'able copy somewhere?

 > Suggestions are welcome.

 > Vivek Gupta
 > vigupta@indiana.edu

Save bandwidth, please 

--
Dieter Bublitz, Keltenstrasse 13 , W-8072 Manching, Germany
Tel: [+49] 8459 7754        e-mail: d.bublitz@abbs.hanse.de




!! MsgBase 1.6h

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABBS AstroMail, the first and most popular German astronomical bulletin board
------------------------- for amateur astronomers ----------------------------
    + 49 5851 7896 / V.21, V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP5
    ------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: dadams@cray.com (David Adams)
Subject: Re: Lunar astronaut covers earth with thum
Reply-To: dadams@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 17 Nov 92 12:22:36 CST

In article 15162@mav.com, kevin@mav.com (Kevin Bagley) writes:

|I'm always impressed with the illusion of the moon appearing larger
|near the horizon.  Yes, it's only an illusion.  Anyone want to
|explain the illusion?
|

Let's see if I can get it right.  When the moon appears near the horizon
it's light must traverse a greater amount of earths atmosphere.  The
light rays are bent more and thus the atmosphere actually acts like
a magnifying lense when the moon (or sun) is in this position.  (Did
I get it right?)


--David C. Adams  Statistician  Cray Research Inc.  dadams@cray.com
___________________________________________________________________
       Old Sourdoughs never die.  They just ferment away.
From: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Kepler's Mom Not Burned...
Date: 17 Nov 1992 11:59 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <bruce.721941117@spssig>, bruce@spss.com (Bruce Stephenson) writes...
>ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings) writes:
> 
>> [Kepler's] beliefs on astrology, numerology, and the music of the
>>spheres were enough to get him burned at the stake by today's
>>scientific community standards, but then again, he had this
>>really SLICK IDEA ABOUT ORBITS!         8-)
> 
>Actually, Kepler had no beliefs I can think of to which the word
>"numerology" might apply. His beliefs on astrology were pretty

There is always Keplers "Fourth Law," the one we don't talk about much
today.  If I remember correctly, he claimed that the semimajor axes of the
planetary orbits were in the ratios of the radii of all the inscribed regular 
polyhedra.  This is not exactly numerology, but it's close enough to
be considered pretty silly by modern standards.

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"It is not a simple life to be a single cell,
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		 although I have no right to say so, having
				 been a single cell so long ago myself that I 
				 have no memory at all of that stage of my 
				 life." - Lewis Thomas
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space
From: K3032E0@ALIJKU11.BITNET
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Questions About Nickel-Iron Meteorites
Date: 17 Nov 92 11:58:56 GMT
Organization: Johannes Kepler University Linz - Computing Center

Try this book:
Mc.Sween: "Meteorites and their parent bodies".
It describes the formation of the Widmanstaetten-pattern, and lots of other
interesting facts about meteorites.

Or try this:
When you see a shooting star next time, wish you would know all about the
Widmanstaetten-pattern. Maybe it *REALLY* works...?|?
So...
     ...keep looking up|
             Herbert

By the way: The Newmann are very different from the Widmanstaetten-pattern.
The Newmann-lines are shock-lamelles, caused by an impact on their parent body.
Although they are easily visible on etched hexaedrite-surfaces, some coarse
octahedrites show these lines, too.
From: mikec@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Micheal Cranford)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Galilean Electrodynamics?
Keywords: creationism, magnetic field, pseudo-science
Date: 19 Nov 92 22:05:46 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

-------------------------

Mark Schlegel asks :

 * The past few months in Sky and Telescope magazine I have been seeing this
 * ad for a bimonthly publication called "Galilean Electrodynamics" written
 * by a group of professors. What is the story on this group?  The editorial
 * board is made of up of scientists and engineers (five are listed in the ad)
 * Edit. Board:       
 *       Thomas Barnes, U of Texas, Prof. Emeritus
 *       Howard Hayden, Univ. of Connecticut, Prof. of Physics
 *       P. Parshin, Academy of Civil Aviation, St. Peterburg, Russia
 *       Cynthia Whitney, Tufts Univ.
 * Editor:
 *       Petr Beckmann, Prof. Emeritus of Electrical Eng., Univ. of Colorado/
 *                                                               Boulder
 *
 * Does anyone know about whether the papers published by this group have any
 * validity in the general physics world?  They seem to believe there are 
 * obvious contradictions between general rel. and observation.


  Thomas Barnes is a young earth creationist.  He claims to have proved that
evolution could not have happened because the earth is only about 6000 years
old.  He has created (pun intended) a "model" of the earth's magnetic field
that exhibits an exponential decay (ignoring overwhelming evidence to the
contrary).  Based on this "model" he extrapolates back 6000 years BP to get
an "impossibly high" value for the earth's magnetic field and (illogically)
concludes that the earth must have been "created" then.  Outside of several
credulous creationist followers, Barnes has ZERO credibility (at least in
earth history and the earth's magnetic field).



  UUCP:  uunet!tektronix!sail!mikec  or                  M.Cranford
         uunet!tektronix!sail.labs.tek.com!mikec         Principal Troll
  ARPA:  mikec%sail.LABS.TEK.COM@RELAY.CS.NET            Resident Skeptic
  CSNet: mikec@sail.LABS.TEK.COM                         TekLabs, Tektronix
From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Distance of horizon
Date: 21 Nov 92 01:10:38 GMT
Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.

In article <1992Nov20.131437.8385@cs.com| jack@cs.com (Jack Hudler) writes:
|In article <75439@hydra.gatech.EDU> collins@emperor.gatech.edu (Tom Collins) writes:
|>In article <1992Nov19.021430.13833@sfu.ca> palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer) writes:
|>>In article <lglhj3INNb0c@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM
|>>(steve hix) writes:
|>>>Anyone have handy a function for figuring the distance of the
|>>>horizon from a viewer based on the viewer's height from the
|>>>surface?
|>>                            -1
|>>Try d = R arccos ( 1 + h/R )
|>>
|>>    d = horizon distance
|>>    h = height above MSL (assuming horizon is at sea level)
|>>    R = radius of Earth
|>
|>       2    2        2
|>since R  + d  = (R+h)         (Pythagorean theorem)
|>
|>                2    2
|>d = sqrt(  (R+h)  - R  )
|>
|>This says that the horizon for a six-foot tall person is about
|>3 miles away.
|
|But these equations would give the 'mean' horizion, shouldn't you include
|refraction to give the 'apparent' horizion?

You're not going to get much refraction in 3 miles of air.

-- 
Bruce Watson (wats@scicom)  Tumbra, Zorkovick; Sparkula zoom krackadomando.  
....alien language from an SF short story on a 78-RPM record I had as a kid.
Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 22 November
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:48:01 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 327, 11/22/92
10.7 FLUX=166    90-AVG=127        SSN=107      BKI=0123 3333  BAI=010
BGND-XRAY=B8.6     FLU1=1.7E+05  FLU10=1.1E+04  PKI=1124 4333  PAI=014
  BOU-DEV=004,006,019,031,023,031,025,029   DEV-AVG=021 NT     SWF=02:006
 XRAY-MAX= M1.6   @ 2310UT    XRAY-MIN= B7.3   @ 0139UT   XRAY-AVG= C1.1
NEUTN-MAX= +003%  @ 0610UT   NEUTN-MIN= -002%  @ 2345UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.1%
  PCA-MAX= +0.2DB @ 1645UT     PCA-MIN= -0.6DB @ 2000UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55424NT @ 0845UT   BOUTF-MIN=55381NT @ 1936UT  BOUTF-AVG=55411NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+107NT@ 1851UT   GOES7-MIN=N:-018NT@ 1228UT  G7-AVG=+064,+025,+008
GOES6-MAX=P:+124NT@ 1850UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-031NT@ 0852UT  G6-AVG=+082,-006,+027
 FLUXFCST=STD:165,160,160;SESC:165,160,160 BAI/PAI-FCST=025,025,020/025,025,015
    KFCST=3335 5334 3335 5334  27DAY-AP=009,025   27DAY-KP=2232 2233 4435 4432
 WARNINGS=*SWF;*PROTON
   ALERTS=**MINFLR:M1.4@1307UTC;**MINFLR:M1.6/2N@2310UTC,N11E76(7348)
!!END-DATA!!
From: jcj@tellabs.com (jcj)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: I can't see stars anymore at night with naked eye
Date: 19 Nov 92 14:42:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: tellab5.1992Nov19.144243.29344
Organization: We don't need no stinkin' organization!

Dana A. Bunner writes:

>>I haven't seen any stars at all for the past several months at night.

>... there are no more stars.  I haven't seen one since October 26th.
>The Supreme Being apparently vaporized all of them and now the sky is 
>continually filled with a thick, swirling nebula mist.  Even the Sun and
>Moon were taken, although by some miracle it does continue to brighten a bit
>each morning...

As an independent observer in Northern Illinois, my data agrees
completely with Dana's.  I'm afraid Swift-Tuttle has been vaporized
also.
-- 
		        jcj@tellabs.com
		      Carpe salsa et chips