A paper titled "The Lucifer Project" has recently emerged which claims that NASA is very likely to deliberately direct the Cassini space probe into Saturn's dense atmosphere where it will destruct. This is to take place soon after the termination of Cassini's four year monitoring mission in June 2008 when Cassini is in a polar orbit of Saturn (see: http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/lucifer-project.html ). The paper's author contends this will be a secret effort to use the Cassini's plutonium fuel rods as a fission device to generate a runaway nuclear fusion process on Saturn that would trigger the emergence of a new sun. The new sun would enable the moons of Saturn to be heated possibly making them suitable for colonization and other uses by humanity. On the other hand, the creation of a new sun would generate a shock wave of hydrogen and other particles that could have devastating effects on Earth. In order to fully evaluate the radical views presented in "The Lucifer Project" it is best to begin with Richard Hoagland's analysis of the Galileo space probe's controlled descent into Jupiter's equatorial region in 2003 where it was destroyed in a similar manner to what is projected for Cassini (see: www.enterprisemission.com/NukingJupiter.html ).
Hoagland argues that the appearance of a dark splotch a month after Galileo's descent on September 21, 2003 is circumstantial evidence for a far reaching theory proposed by a Dutch engineer, Jacco Van der Worp, that Galileo's plutonium power rods would implode due to the high pressures deep inside Jupiter's atmosphere. The implosion would create a highly efficient fission bomb that could trigger a runaway fusion effect that would ignite Jupiter into a new sun. In his original article, Van der Worp predicted that the hydrogen particles accompanying the initial blast from an ignited Jupiter would cause a catastrophic series of events on Earth that might qualify as an extinction level event (see: http://yowusa.com/space/2003/space-2003-09a/1.shtml ).
Hoagland's analysis of Van der Worp's thesis is quite thorough and he gives a good explanation for why it is feasible. Hoagland dealt with many of the scientific criticisms against Van der Worp's thesis and found they did not rule out the scenario predicted by Van der Worp. While the plutonium isotope (Pu-238) used to power the Galileo is not the same isotope used in making atomic bombs (Pu-239), the intense pressures in Jupiter's atmosphere and the spontaneous creation of (Pu-239) as Galileo used its Pu-238 over the 15 years since its launch in 1989, made it possible for a fission reaction to occur.
Hoagland also describes a plausible reason for why there was a time lag between the descent of Galileo on September 21, 2003 and the initial observation of the blotchy dark spot on Jupiter on October 19, 2003 by the astronomer Olivier Meeckers (see: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_dark_spot_031023.html ). Basically, after the destruction of most of the Galileo probe through burning up in the atmosphere, the high temperature resistant protective casing of the plutonium fuel rods would survive and continue to descend. Eventually, due to the thick atmosphere, the surviving plutonium rods would reach a terminal velocity of one mile per hour which would require close to a month for them to reach the critical depth upon which the atmospheric pressure would cause the plutonium rods to implode thereby generating a nuclear fission reaction. If Van der Worp and Hoagland are correct, Galileo's plutonium rods created a powerful fission device whose detonation dwarfed the Hiroshima bomb thereby causing the dark splotch on Jupiter observed by astronomers. Fortunately, the fission bomb did not cause a runaway nuclear fusion process that would have led to Jupiter becoming a new sun, and would have caused unimaginable catastrophic effects on Earth.
Van der Worp considered the controlled descent of Galileo to be an unnecessary risk on the part of NASA and an independent scientific board that did not properly consider the potential effects of triggering a runaway fusion process on Jupiter. NASA's decision to dispose of Galileo by sending it to Jupiter was confirmed by an independent science board in 2002 (see: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=2156 ). What Van der Worp did not consider was that a runaway nuclear fusion effect was in fact secretly planned by those ultimately responsible for the decision to direct Galileo into Jupiter.
Such a possibility was briefly mentioned by Hoagland at the conclusion of his paper who referred to the scenario in Arthur C. Clark's 2010 where Jupiter is ignited by a mysterious monolith into a new sun. The plan to create a new star in our solar system through artificial means has been termed the "Lucifer Project" since Clark called the new companion star Lucifer (see: http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/text/000txt23x.htm ). The Lucifer Project was first publicly mentioned by William Cooper in his 1991 book, Behold a Pale Horse (p. 72). Cooper stated that at the end of its mission, the Galileo probe would be sent into a controlled descent into Jupiter whereby its plutonium fuel rods would implode to create a fission bomb that would trigger the emergence of a new sun, Lucifer. The new sun would warm up the nearby moons of Jupiter possibly making them habitable for space colonization. Cooper claims he witnessed documentation for Project Lucifer back in the early 1970's when working on the intelligence briefing team for the Commander of the Pacific Fleet. What makes Cooper's 1991 claim astonishing is that at the time of its 1989 launch and subsequently, NASA was claiming that other options than a Jupiter hit were possible such as allowing Galileo fly off into deep space (see http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/jupfullx.htm ).
The circumstantial evidence pointed out by Hoagland suggests that the only destructive effect of the Galileo probe's descent was a large dark blotch the size of earth, perhaps the legacy of a failed effort to cause a runaway fusion process through a nuclear fission bomb. The evidence gives credence to Cooper's 1991 prediction and suggests that the Lucifer Project was real though ultimately unsuccessfully implemented at the end of the Galileo mission.
The recent paper mentioned earlier, "The Lucifer Project", discusses what appears to be either a new act of "unnecessary risk" taking on the part of NASA or a new attempt to implement the Lucifer Project. The anonymous author claims that NASA will target the Cassini probe into Saturn at the termination of its four year monitoring mission in June 2008. While NASA has not yet announced that it will destroy Cassini by sending it into Saturn, it is very highly likely that the same factors that led to Galileo being destroyed in Jupiter's atmosphere, will dictate that Cassini will be sent to Saturn for its eventual destruction. These factors revolve around the potential contamination of life bearing moons such as Titan if the Cassini mission were prolonged and the spacecraft were to malfunction while orbiting the Saturnian system. In a highly significant paper that created a powerful precedent for the environmental risks to future habitable planets or moons, a National Research Council committee in 2000 recommended that all efforts must be made to avoid possible contamination to Europa or Io by the Galileo space probe (see: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=175 ). This precedent is very likely to be applied in a decision to avoid any future risk to Titan by sending Cassini into Saturn's dense atmosphere after completing its mission.
Like the earlier Galileo probe, Cassini has plutonium fuel rods which upon implosion could create a powerful nuclear fission detonation on Saturn. Due to the 72 lbs of plutonium on Cassini, 50% more than the 48lbs on Galileo, and the less dense atmospheric pressures on Saturn which has only 30% of Jupiter's mass, Saturn is a better host for a runaway nuclear fusion process than Jupiter according to the author of "The Lucifer Project". If Saturn were to be ignited, it would create a gigantic pulse of hydrogen and other particles as up to 10% of its mass was cast off, and would eventually reach the Earth with possibly catastrophic consequences.
In conclusion, the potential for a runaway nuclear fusion process that would ignite Saturn as a new sun, Lucifer, appears to be a genuine concern. There is strong reason to believe that there was an attempt in 2003 to ignite Jupiter as the circumstantial evidence suggests. This attempt failed to do anything more than produce a dark spot over an area the size of the Earth than has been observed by astronomers. It may be that a new effort is underway using the Cassini mission as the cover for another attempt to implement the Project Lucifer. The author of "Project Lucifer" is alerting the public to such a possibility even though NASA has yet to announce its plans after Cassini completes its mission. If Cassini is targeted towards Saturn, any resulting catastrophic series of events and the novelty of a new sun being created might produce the right political and social circumstances for a significant erosion of individual liberties. The imposition of draconian national security procedures to deal with unfolding events would dwarf in proportion previous false flag operations such as 911 which have witnessed an undesirable increase in the influence of national security organizations as a result of catastrophic events (see: http://exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-12.htm ).
The general public is urged to familiarize themselves with the issues concerning the possible terraforming of Saturn's moons by an artificially contrived nuclear fusion process on Saturn itself. While there may be long term public benefit from terraforming Saturn's moons, such a policy needs to be publicly debated and not secretly implemented given the dangers involved. Furthermore, all information concerning Project Lucifer and the early unsuccessful effort to ignite Jupiter by the use of Galileo as a nuclear device needs to also be released to the public. The potential for catastrophic events to occur on Earth as a result of a successful effort to ignite Saturn should not be lightly dismissed due to 10% of Saturn's mass possibly being ejected in an initial blast. It is highly recommended that public pressure is applied on NASA officials not to approve the Cassini mission being deliberated targeted at Saturn for self-destruction, and that its mission is prolonged until a suitable way is found to safely dispose of the craft and its dangerous plutonium fuel.
Michael E. Salla, Ph.D