Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is author of "The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program's Nuclear Threat To Our Planet." writings back up what I've just posted. This rocketry space program stuff has MESMERIZED most people into believing that it is humanity's DESTINY to go into outer space.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
We can learn how to exercise our ability to DISCERN whether an endeavor is a good one or not.
As the 'patternman' JESUS once said, "You cannot get good fruit from a poison tree", and also that "You shall know them by their fruits". 'Peacetime rocketry'? Not possible, for it was born out of a warmongering era, and STILL wages war on the environment every single time there is a launch into space. To me, that is a BIG red flag that continually gets brushed aside, as humanity falls under the SPELL that NASA is casting forth.
Here is Prof. Karl Grossman's article on this eye-opening background information: http://www.spearboard.com/archive/index.php/t-24171.html
Here are some other pertinent articles to consider. I base all of my material upon facts and science.
The dangers of a plutonium 238 disbursement rocket launch accident:http://www.spearboard.com/archive/index.php/t-24171.html
-also this article: http://www.nationofchange.org/nuclear-power-space-pushed-1343834133
"Dr. Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear physicist and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, explains that Plutonium-238 is about 270 times more radioactive than Plutonium-239 per unit of weight. Thus in radioactivity, the 10.6 pounds of Plutonium-238 being used on Curiosity is the equivalent of 2,862 pounds of Plutonium-239. The atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki used 15 pounds of Plutonium-239. "
-which then links to an ENTIRE website dedicated to this crucial information: http://www.space4peace.org/
As far as what comes out the 'tail pipe' of a solid rocket fueled spacecraft, have you heard of a scientist named Helen Caldicott? Here's what she has to say about it: http://ringnebula.com/project-censored/1976-1992/1990/1990-story4.htm
I've read in chat rooms, etc. that people think it is mostly steam as the main rocket exhaust ingredient. Unfortunately, as with the environmentally disastrous Space Shuttle, the liquid H2 and liquid O2 were ONLY on the Shuttle itself, not in the solid rocket boosters that lifted it to orbit.
Why is that? There is much more 'BANG for the buck' using solid rocket fuel.
Take a moment to imagine a full beverage can being the solid rocket-fueled spacecraft. Then the PULL-TAB would represent the Space Shuttle payload.
Then there is Rockedyne's PERCHLORATE issue, from rocket fuel testing, that poisoned California's groundwater, http://www.enviroreporter.com/sinsofrocketdyne
which shut down 300+ wells in CA, and CONTINUES to poison the launch area of Cape Canaveral with every launch. http://www.organicconsumers.org/perchlorate.htm
And another eye-opening article: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-07-31-nasa-environmental-cleanup_n.htm
One more informational tidbit about Rocketdyne irresponsible practice. Did you know that they built the 10.5 lb. plutonium 238 nuclear reactor for the Curiosity Rover? http://www.enviroreporter.com/?s=rocketdyne&x=0&y=0
The fact of the matter is, that if WE THE PEOPLE decided once and for all, not to pursue this folly of BLASTING OFF from the Earth, then the reason to keep having all of this continuing pollution occur, and all of the HUMAN SUFFERING that it causes, also goes away!
For, an unlovely state will die for want of attention. And, these states might best be rubbed out by imagining "'beauty for ashes and joy for mourning. It's called, "Love your neighbor as you would want to be loved".
The rest is pretty much commentary for a full and happy life.