Continuous MIXT|i News Service | 8-Cambridge Since 1881 | | t V assachusetts| IVolume- 99, Numiber 9 Frdy Mac 9 197 " ews fr Jesuis me . Ad_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Lt update: comnplplainingI on three grounds." the space, it had to be mentioned 8 1 < \E.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~La~st night, D~r. Louis Menland He cilfted fraudulent advertising, in the ads. 1 ;>S>P~~~~~bil~~~i ~issued a statement from the depicti~tion of tlhe activity as a' "Secondly, the meeting is billed S S | i ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Provost's Office tathJesfrPurimnn celebration, and the prose- as a Purim celebration," continl- ng nature of Jews for Jesus uled Berez. "'This is quite different q l _ \~~~~~~~~~~~held 'tomorrow night, but can be as hiss reasons. than the purpose emnphasized by 11 M _ ivlr t ~~~~~~~heldat a date and place to be Thee grounds Weinstein cited Jerry Pi atz at -a meeting last M on- . .- .- _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~decided later. Thefosllowing article are sinmhilar to the reasons the Ex- dayi which is to educate the peo- _ 3 i ~~~~~~~~~~waswritten before yesterday's ecutivcve Committee of the Associ- ple in the beliefs of the Jews for . | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~decision ay witsade. For the official ationffor Student Activities (ASA) Jesus,"' he added. Platz, the MIT , - t R a>>;* F |~~~~tatementsfrom Menand and the gave itin its recommendation Mon-^ Seekers liason, said that the . < . yit-,-,t, , ~~~~~~~~MIT Seekers, please read the let- day nnight to the Facilities Use meeting was a Purim celebration - Hi ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ters on page 7. Cormnrnittee. The recommendation as well as an educational event. ,sted that the MIT Seekers Lastly, Berez said, "This cele- ,st for space should be re- bration~with its sponsorship has ed. tile potential for becoming a vola- ~ve Berez '80, president of the tile situation. This potential may ,said that the group included be a factor in the decision of the objections ill its recommen- Facilities Usc Committee." n. The first objection, Berez Ralph Giffonoe '82, a Jews for ined, was "that the '"adver- Jesus volunteer, said, "There is no ents for the event were mis- substance in the committee's ob- ng. Sponsorship of M IT jectionls." ,rs wasn't mentioned at all or He explained that, technically, in small letters. Since this {Pleasfe turn lo page 3) ;orship was used for getting By Sauiondapatte rsopoal l stgmeet animal~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~h facityof ntetofor aldJ6 Tewforojects ahchoarithuteosu hofp beganwill be last competed fall and In Junevity iilleeideterminedbtday by sciThe I 3yass aS AS penthouse-likeonthestrucureroof willhouse theVarious ciofd thriP~rovo8st wimeth Stev~before the spring brealk. rightly was a matter for the in- - handlingneededsytemsythe faciliy. (Photo byMarrecothis afternonbyitheFacilSASA,,, nman explained that the early vestment committee rather than ing is needed "even if we the A\CSR," while the Rocky ti eqestUs Comthtee the committee awlt i't received any proxies yet, Flats proposal fell into a category ,IT niernSalyi osbmbder to establish ground rules which he claims the ACSR "has irocedures for the Commit- consistently decided . are mat- The ACSR has not met since ters of public, rather than cor- 4, 1978, and Milne had p~orate policy; accordingly, the r indicated that it would not shareholder proponents should this year until after the first take their case to the public policy .iril. makers instead." e two-proxy resolutions cal- But M ilne's position is disputed )n Rockwell to prepare by the two students', who consider ilreports on the company's the statement symptomatic of a ltions at the Rocky Floits pooriy -defi ned decision-m akcinfg )rado) Nuclear Weapons pro~cess at the ACSR. "Without ty and on the "financial, passing on the substance of the n, physical-plant impacts" Ro)ckwell proxy, I question the e cancellation of the B-1 relevance of th~e past actio ns of er. Proponents of tile first the ACSR to the handling of cur- IresoU ition, which received about rent proxy questions," Saltzman By Kent Pitmnas which received favorable marks vard, Yale, Cornell, University of 4%J of Fthe vote at the company's said Wednesday. "ilf past prece-' MIT has the finiest engineering were Biology, Business, Chem- Chicago and Indiana University, Februuiary 15 meeting, claimed dents are to be binding on the pre- faculty in the nation, according to istry, Economics, Math2/Sta- The surveyors warned that the that thhe Rocky Flats facility conl- sent and future.ACSR's, then the a 1977 survey published recently tistics, Physics, and Political statistics might be misleading if stitutes,s a serious health hazard purpose of the committee is in The Chronicle of Higher Educa- Science. not interpreted in a proper per- and coontributed to the arms race. defleated.'".* tion. Eighteen departments other spective. "1t may take several In aajprepared statement issued Saltzman and DeMarco are ex-t The survey asked 4000 faculty than engineering were studied, years for people to realize that Truesdalay, Milne stated that the pected to ask Milne today for an members at 4-year colleges and and of these, eight colleges took ch~anges have taken place within a Executitive Committee's rejection Up-to-date list of M IT's universities to name the schools top -honors in at least one field. department," Lipset noted. But of the eRockwell proposals was stockholdings, a full description that they felt had the *'most'dis- Thle other "number one" schools he said -he hopes the study will based on previous ACSRK policy. o~f all shareholder proposals in tinguised faculties." The A',SCR secretary claimed that companies I - several in more than onie area provide an indication of "where in which M"IT is a part M IT was nam d as one of the - were Stanford, Berkeley, Har- academe is moving." the B-I*1resolution was "essential- owner, and a clear statement of rive best engineering schools by ly an economic question that the ACSR's charter. 63 percent of those completing the survey, and it was ranked best in the- field by 32 percent. Close .ovins predICts greater sof energ " 141low use behind in the polls were Stanford By Bob Wasserman ification, are dangerous in -the 'technological' fix needed for the with 57 and 1-4 percent, and What path energy? For Amory level of their centralization, ac-, .hard path. Berkeley with 56 and nine percent Lovins, America's energy needs cording to Lovins. Centralization, There is no place for nuclear in the same categories, respec- for the future can only be met ef- he reasoned, leads to political, power in Lovins' energy design, tively. ficiently by soft technologies such problems, including the hazards however.-"Nuclear energy is a Everett Ladd and Seymour as solar energy, wined power. and of blackouts due to easy failures techniology of the future whose Martin of the University of Conn- energy conservation. of large power systems,, and bat- time has past," said the speaker. ecticut, conductors of the survey, Lovins spoke on "Institutional tles between large cities over the N uclear energy fails, in Lovins' comnpared the results to those of Barriers to Soft Paths Implemen- siting of power facilities. view, in its inefficient conversion similar surveys made in past years, tation" last Wednesday at M IT to Soft technologies, on the other of energy and its low delivered concluding that the ";hierarchly a crowd of almost 300 people. hand, are diverse, renewable, and functions of power. has remained relatively stable" Lovins, the author- of Soft Energy' relatively simple for the users to *'"The government must stop since the most recent such study Paths, is a pioneer in the field of understand. spending large amounts on sub- before this in 1969. alternative technology. In Lovins projections for s id i es on large-scale Hard energy technologies, such energy use in the year 2000, soft technologies," warned Lovins, Other departments at MIT as nuclear power -and coal gas- technologies will virtually replace ''this is making the h~igh conventional sources such as oil, technologies look cheaper than gas, and coal. In contrast, Lovins they really are and reducing the depicts a "hard energy course" economic attractiveness of the Amory Lovins explains a point in which relies mostly on n uclear soft technologies." his talk last Wednesday evening. I ---- (Photo by Chuck Irwin) Despite several minor flaws, brillllant cast, Neil'LT-!I Simon'sC---- --- -, energy and diminishing sources of On current US energy policy ,-national service" may be an Chapter Two loses to an coal, oil, and gas, and necessitates Lovins said, "6We all agree on the soft energy paths in the early ideal whose time has come. unrealistic plot. Page 8. a three-fold increase in energy neccessa~ry use of renewable seventies, his predictions were Page 4. generation for 'the US. resources for the future." seen as unrealisticly low. Today, Lovins soft energy path would Sometimes, however, the UJS goes however, due to events such as the The women's basketball team The Madhouse Company of forecast a 'slight reduction in total about tapping these sources in the oil embargo, Lovins' original concluded its season with an 8- L ornon provides an evening- energy use for the year 200Q0 as wrong manner. predictions are higher than the 9 record. The team was paced ,of totally insane comedy in compared to today. Further, the The most interesting and telling ,most conservative figures of in- by Diane Ozeliu's '79,, whose their latest production, Silly lecturer said, "Present soft part of the lecture was a -table dustry , anid government. This graduation will leave a big Buggers. Page 9. technologies are more than ample shown by Lovins documenting proves, as Lovins insists 'that, hole for te team to rilal next for the world's future needs,"s projecti'ons of future energy use.