Return to Transcripts main page

Next@CNN

Thai Man Charged With Trying to Sell Radioactive Material; A Look at Military Uniform of the Future; Which U.S. City Has Dirtiest Tap Water?

Aired June 14, 2003 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Today on NEXT@CNN, a Thai man is charged with trying to sell radioactive material that could be used in a so-called dirty bomb. Just how big is the threat?
Also, high-tech uniforms and gear for the well-equipped soldier of the near future.

And which U.S. cities have the dirtiest tap water? A new report points some fingers. We'll cover those stories and much more in the next hour.

First, police in Thailand arrested a man in Bangkok Friday for trying to sell undercover agents the makings of a dirty bomb. The radioactive material confiscated from the bust is something called Cesium-137. That's a substance most of us know very little about. But experts say it's just the sort of stuff that's all too likely to fall into the hands of terrorists.

Henry Kelly, president of the Federation of American Scientists, is here to tell us more about dirty bombs and Cesium-137. Good to see you, Henry.

HENRY KELLY, PRESIDENT, FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: Good to be here.

WHITFIELD: All right. So what is Cesium-137, and how easy is it for anyone to get?

KELLY: Well, Cesium-137 is what you get when you split the atom, basically. So you get a lot of it produced with nuclear reactors. It turns out to be very valuable in things like measuring the thicknesses of metal and flow rates. So there's a lot of it in detectors that are in various parts of the economy.

WHITFIELD: All right, well, let's talk about dirty bombs, and that happens to be a key ingredient in making dirty bombs. All agree that dirty bombs are bad stuff. But it's nothing like a nuclear bomb in which it could decimate a huge area. So talk to us about why it is still very seriously in which to consider? Why is Cesium-137 falling into the wrong hands? Bad stuff.

KELLY: Well, first of all, you're certainly right. We've got to put this in perspective. A dirty bomb is nothing like a nuclear bomb. A nuclear bomb, if you can think about Hiroshima, where you're killing hundreds of thousands of people, devastating a city, making it uninhabitable for a significant period of time. That's not what we're talking about with the dirty bomb.

Dirty bomb is taking very dangerous radioactive material and scattering it around the landscape. Most people are not going to be affected if they get out of the way in time. It could have a huge effect on contaminating buildings and property and land and be an enormously expensive mess to clean up. So it would be a true terror weapon in that people would be traumatized by the event, but fortunately, with good preparation, not that many people should be killed by this event.

WHITFIELD: Traumatized in a concentrated area, for example, it is known that something like this happened, falling into the hands of the wrong people, particularly some children, in a Brazil town. What happened?

KELLY: Well, it was very tragic. This was a medical device that had Cesium in it, and Cesium is used for medical treatment, among other things. And the kids broke into it. It was a very attractive plaything. They smeared it on themselves. Unfortunately it was several days before people realized what had happened, and four people died. It contaminated, I believe, a couple of hundred people, and it required weeks and months to clean the facility up.

WHITFIELD: Is it...

KELLY: It spread all over.

WHITFIELD: Go ahead, sorry.

KELLY: It unfortunately was tracked around town, and it contaminated a number of the facilities that were supposed to be trying to help clean the area up.

WHITFIELD: Can Cesium be found in just about in any country? Is it that easy to obtain?

KELLY: Well, it's not that easy to obtain. You have to obtain it under license, and, of course, after 9/11 and the serious concern about dirty bombs, there's been a lot of tightening of the regulations and people -- the regulators in the U.S. have been particularly good at trying to track this material down. But we still do have a long way to go.

Obviously, this case in Thailand shows that there's material that isn't adequately secured. We need to really take measures here at home and also around the world to make sure we inventory this stuff, make sure it's under adequate protection.

And the dangerous material that has been abandoned by people who no longer have any use for it, we need to find out where that stuff is and make sure it's brought under secure, protected facilities.

WHITFIELD: And part of the danger is it can still be concealed rather easily, because it can be transported in small containers, and that's part of the problem, isn't it, or one of the challenges?

KELLY: It certainly is one of the challenges. The good thing about radiological materials and dirty bombs is at least this is something we can do something about. You can secure the materials, you should be able to detect its movement if you're clever. Obviously, you can shield it, and you need to shield, but there are ways of at least getting reasonably good probability detecting it.

So one of the things we need to do is both to look at ways of controlling the materials now out there, and another is to make sure that any new material that's put out into the economy here and abroad is kept under close control. One of my favorite proposals in this area is to follow up with what a lot of the European countries do, or some of them, which is to put a very significant deposit down before you take the materials, so you don't have an incentive to abandon it. You have an incentive to return it to the primary source.

WHITFIELD: Henry Kelly, thanks very much, of the Federation of the American Scientists. Good talking to you.

KELLY: Thank you. Good to be here.

WHITFIELD: Well, just in case you need a reminder, tomorrow is Father's Day. And you want to let dad in on the latest, hottest technology if he likes stuff like that? WI-FI, short for wireless fidelity, it allows people to connect to the Internet without being tied to their office or even an office building. Fred Katayama explains why WI-FI is hot.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FRED KATAYAMA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Lynn Walker's hot. So's he. She's not. No, we're not talking about looks. Lynn and the spiky-haired guy are hot because they're wirelessly connected to the Internet. This New York park is a hot spot. So is this street corner in Southern California. They sport antennas enabling high- speed access. The technology is called WI-FI, short for wireless fidelity.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What the Internet did was it opened the doors to an entire world of information that was not hindered by geography. And what wireless does is it unchains you from cords and all of a sudden allows you to access that information from wherever you are.

KATAYAMA: WI-FI uses radio waves. Antennas link a laptop as far as 300 feet away to a base station. You have to outfit your notebook PC with a receiver, a card selling for about 50 bucks. You can get free access at many community-based hot spots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is kind of like an outdoor office I've been using. It's great.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I work at home a lot. It was getting kind of lonely and depressing. So I bought a laptop, and so that I could come out into the Starbucks and into the parks. KATAYAMA: T-mobile provides access at Starbucks and Borders bookstores for $30 a month. No company offers complete nationwide coverage. But the number of hot spots in the United States has more than quadrupled in the past year to around 3,500.

(on camera): WI-FI antennas are sprouting up everywhere, from parks to airports, hotels and convention centers. As networks expand and hardware prices drop, the number of WI-FI users has mushroomed to roughly 18 million people.

Fred Katayama, CNN Financial News, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, and Fred Katayama joins us live. Fred, let's talk a little bit more about this. So where do we find out, how do we get access to this WI-FI in our communities?

KATAYAMA: Well, Fredricka, you can turn to the Internet. There are several Web sites that will tell you where the hot spots are. You can turn to, for example, wi-fizone.org. There's also hotspotlist.com and wifinder.com., among other places.

WHITFIELD: Now what about security? That's always a big issue, and that kind of keeps folks a little apprehensive about getting too courageous on the Internet.

KATAYAMA: It is a big issue, Fredricka. A security expert I spoke to said some networks can be easily broken into, and so the best way to protect yourself is to, one, buy a WI-FI card that's based on the more improved WPA protocol as opposed to the more common WET protocol. That provides better security.

Also, get encryption software. You can get it off the Internet for free, or you can buy it at a computer store. And finally, avoid sensitive commercial transactions and avoid sending sensitive e-mail on WI-FI.

WHITFIELD: Nothing comes for free. How much does it cost?

KATAYAMA: Well, it's free at certain places like public parks or places that set it up free, but there are a lot of commercial operators. For example, at T-mobile, they'll charge you anywhere from $30 to $40 for unlimited WI-FI access. You can also do it on a pay- as-you-go a la carte basis. That will cost you 10 cents a minute for 60 minutes.

Also if you happen to be a Verizon customer, they're offering it free, but only for existing DSL customers, those people who already have the high-speed Internet access at homes, via their wired phone service.

WHITFIELD: Now, is it going to kind of change the conventional wisdom of Internet access and use?

KATAYAMA: It certainly will, and it already has. As you saw in my story, there's that person at the park that said she comes out here because it's more sociable. Some people I noticed at the park were basically using the park as their offices. One person said he's out there all day, one, the access is free, and he can roam wherever he wants to.

WHITFIELD: All right. Fred Katayama, sounds like fun. Thanks a lot.

KATAYAMA: Sure.

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, a little later in the show ancient skulls give scientists new clues about how the human race began.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Well, the U.S. Army is teaming up with scientists at M.I.T. to reinvest and re-outfit tomorrow's soldier. The Objective Force Warrior and Future Warrior systems outlook the years 2010, 2025 and beyond.

Joining us now from Boston are the Army's own Dutch De Gay and Sergeant Raul Lopez. Thanks guys for joining us. All right, what are we talking about, re-outfitting? What's going to be different?

DUTCH DE GAY, ARMY EQUIPMENT SPECIALIST: Well, we're looking at the soldier and all those lessons learned, and Sergeant Lopez is a prime example in the system that he wears in how we want to completely change the overall system. We want to make it lighter, easier to use for the individual soldier, much more streamlined and give him more capability, essentially make him an F-16 on legs.

WHITFIELD: And what sort of technology is so different? I mean, I understand that even prior to the war in Iraq, some of the soldiers were outfitted with some pretty high-tech pieces to be much more portable? What's different this go-round?

DE GAY: Absolutely, Fredricka, if we were to look just at the helmet alone. Sergeant Lopez, if you could look down a little bit, on the left-hand side, there's a forward-looking infrared sensor that allows a soldier to see in infrared and thermal in the same sensor.

On the right-hand side is infrared target designator and locator, so essentially it's like a red-light pointer and flashlight in the infrared realm. And on the very top is a global-positioning radio antenna and on-board radio system that are all built into the helmet.

So it kind of becomes a command and control platform from the head for the individual soldier, before we even get to the uniform portion.

WHITFIELD: OK. Well, let's talk about some of the things that ordinarily they would carry maybe in a backpack or something similar to a backpack. This time they're able to carry on their person, aren't they?

DE GAY: Absolutely. One of the biggest things is the difference of electronics that a soldier would normally carry -- radios, global- positioning systems, those sensors that I just mentioned are normally stand-alone items that are either integrated or snapped onto the weapons system or carried in the backpack until they're needed, and then tied directly into that are the batteries that a soldier has to carry.

If we talk about the helmet, with the on-board radio system and all the other components that are on-board, the helmet as a subsystem replaces anywhere from 10 to 12 stand-alone items a soldier has to carry today in the field. And they're all powered off one battery.

WHITFIELD: Are these new, I guess, pieces of technology, the result of some feedback you got from soldiers or requests that were made from people who said, you know what? I could do my job more efficiently if I had this?

DE GAY: Absolutely. I mean, this system is being designed by the Natick Soldier Center in Natick, Massachusetts, and we do everything for the soldier from head to toe that they carry consume or wear. So we constantly go out and talk to soldiers and see what gear they have, what improvements we can make and what we can do to make the next generation of that system better for the soldier.

WHITFIELD: And this is mostly for the soldier. Is there similar modifications being made for the airman, for the sailor, even?

DE GAY: Well, currently the Objective Force Warrior is an Army- specific program, but with all of our major programs, the other services, or our sister services as we like to call them, are looking to see what technologies are applicable that they can use in their individual items.

WHITFIELD: Now, these are things that might be applied in 2010 or even 2025 and beyond. How about in the near future? Do you see some of these modifications that might be put into use sooner rather than later?

DE GAY: Sure. Absolutely. Some of the changes in the radio systems that are ongoing as we speak is moving to a better multi functional radio system that works off one battery that essentially is about the size probably of one of these pockets on Sergeant Lopez's body armor, and that would replace anywhere from three to four radios that the soldier would have to carry on the body; better interfaces to electronics that soldiers have to carry and then multi functional batteries that work for more than just one of the electronic systems.

So it's an incremental build as we change and revolutionize our soldiers.

WHITFIELD: All right. Dutch De Gay and Sergeant Raul Lopez. Sergeant Lopez getting an award, or at least a medal, for being so incredibly still there.

DE GAY: We're very lucky. He's an Afghanistan veteran, so he can be calm and cool at a moment's notice.

WHITFIELD: I almost thought it was a statue at first, but I see he's blinking, so I know he's real. All right, thanks a lot, Dutch.

DE GAY: Thank you very much.

WHITFIELD: Well, ripples continue to spread from the Shuttle Columbia disaster. NASA announced that the director of the Kennedy Space Center has been reassigned, and the investigation into what destroyed Columbia has turned up a new danger to the remaining shuttles. Kathleen Koch has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The two-foot long bolts fasten the solid rocket boosters to the shuttle's external fuel tank. Investigators say radar the day of the launch picked up debris falling away from the Space Shuttle Columbia seconds after the bolts separated, freeing the boosters. They warn the 40-pound bolt fragment could cause catastrophic damage to a shuttle, though they don't believe Columbia was struck.

MAJ. GEN. JOHN BARRY, INVESTIGATOR: Long story short is, you know this thing can cause some serious impact damage, if, in fact -- but there is no indication that it has hit the orbiter.

KOCH: But investigators do have evidence the bolts could threaten future space shuttles. They tested the dome that's supposed to catch the bolt when it comes apart. They found it wasn't strong enough and was never properly tested.

The top of that dome actually fractured in the static test that we did on the ground.

KOCH: Investigators continue to believe the foam that struck the Columbia 81 seconds after takeoff is the most likely primary cause of that disaster. They show new photos from a Friday test where a chunk of foam was fired at a shuttle wing, damaging the leading edge.

The photo showed cracks were longer and more wide spread than initially thought. Still, investigators stopped short of declaring with absolute certainty that such damage brought the Columbia down.

SCOTT HUBBARD, COLUMBIA INVESTIGATION BOARD: Getting the crack that we got established that this failure mechanism is at least plausible. Whether we go from plausible to highly likely, I think, will be determined somewhat by how the rest of these tests turn up.

KOCH: Still, the suspect bolt fragment is raising serious concerns since it is more than 20-times heavier than the foam that hit the Columbia. So, investigators say until the problem is fixed, the entire shuttle fleet should remain grounded.

Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, coming up in our next half hour, just how safe is the water that comes out of your tap? In some U.S. cities, not as safe as you might think, according to a new report. We'll find out where the problems are.

First, a quick break and a check of the headlines when we come right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: The next time you turn on your tap, you might think twice about what's coming out. In some cities, the list includes lead, bacteria, arsenic and pesticides.

CNN's Sharon Collins reports on a new study out this week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SHARON COLLINS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Drinking water in 19 U.S. cities was studied by the environmental action group, Natural Resources Defense Council, NRDC.

ERIK OLSON, NRDC: For most people in most cities, it's kind of OK. The problem is for anybody that's vulnerable to the contaminants like very young children or pregnant women or the frail elderly. Those are the people that we really need to worry about.

COLLINS: According to the report, the problem stems from a variety of sources. In Newark, the old pipes contaminate the water with high lead levels. In Atlanta, when the water system was put under stress from heavy rains, raw sewage ends up in the source water. And these cities received quality ratings of fair.

OLSON: Probably rounding out the bottom of the list of the cities we looked at was Fresno, California, which had a lot of pesticides and industrial chemicals, nitrates.

COLLINS: Also, at the bottom of the cities surveyed were Albuquerque, Boston, San Francisco and Phoenix, all of which received a poor rating. According to the study, some cities are violating federal regulations with the amount of contaminants in their water.

So are we better off with buying our water at a grocery store? A beverage-industry group says Americans spent $6.5 billion last year on bottled water. It raises the question: How much are taxpayers willing to pay to get clean drinking water from their faucets?

OLSON: The government estimates it will cost $300 billion to $500 billion to fix all these water-treatment plants, but we really have to make that investment. You can't not drink water. We don't have a choice not to use water.

COLLINS: Chicago was the only city to receive an excellent water- quality rating. The city committed to cleaning up its act 12 years ago, and has set aside $100 million a year to keep up the water system.

But even Chicago has water issues. Critics complain that now the Windy City just sends its pollution down the Mississippi for other communities to contend with. Sharon Collins, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, now joining us from our Washington bureau with more on our water worries is the author of the NRDC report, Erik Olson.

All right, Erik. First question, would you drink the tap?

OLSON: Well, I would drink tap water in most cities in the U.S. It's pretty safe. We're worried about some more vulnerable people especially.

WHITFIELD: And there are certain cities in particular where you have greater worries about those vulnerable people. Where are they?

OLSON: Well, among the cities we're most worried about are Albuquerque, New Mexico, which has a lot of arsenic in its drinking water; Fresno, California, which your piece earlier mentioned has pesticides, industrial chemicals; even Boston has problems with its water supply, and there are several others that have issues.

WHITFIELD: Well, if you know this and even some cities apparently have raw sewage in their tap water, then why aren't these cities or jurisdictions doing something about extracting these contaminants?

OLSON: Well, I think the big problem here is that cities have deferred their maintenance. They're procrastinating. They're not putting the money into the problem and it's building up, and over time it's getting to be a serious problem in many cities.

WHITFIELD: And apparently it costs a lot of money, right? Isn't that one of the big obstacles?

OLSON: It does cost a lot of money. But we just can't afford not to fix our water supplies. Everybody, even the people that drink bottled water, are taking showers, they're cooking with the water, they're using it for all sorts of purposes. And you can get exposed to many of these contaminants without ever drinking a drop.

WHITFIELD: That was actually my next question. I'm worried that if we're talking about arsenic, raw sewage and other pollutants that are in this water, we may not want to drink it, but that means we may not want to bathe in it either. So, what are we to do?

OLSON: That's right. The only real choice here is to fix our public water supplies. We really have got to do that. If you think about it, many cities -- water supplies date to the Lincoln administration, like here in Washington, D.C.

And in many other cities, we have pipes that are 100 years old or older. So what we've got to do is put the money into fixing it, and it's actually cheaper to fix these city water supplies than to drink bottled water. WHITFIELD: So in the meantime, are you encouraging us to drink bottled water, to cook with bottled water, and do we even need to resort to finding ways to bathe with bottled water?

OLSON: No. We're certainly not recommending that. That would be expensive. We actually looked at -- a couple years ago, we tested over 1, 000 bottles of water, and we found that a lot of the bottled water is no better than tap water. So really, again, the only real solution here is to invest in our public health, to invest in our cities, and fix our water supplies.

WHITFIELD: But in the meantime then, what do we do about checking labels on some of that bottled water? What can we do to protect ourselves?

OLSON: Well, the bottled-water industry is very poorly regulated. The Food and Drug Administration has about one person to regulate the entire bottled-water industry -- a $6.5 billion industry. So really, we don't have much of a regulatory program for bottled water. It's all pretty much a voluntary system.

WHITFIELD: All right, Erik Olson, you got me worried now.

OLSON: That's not my intent, but we can fix this problem. That's the good news.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks very much for the encouragement. Appreciate it.

OLSON: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: When we come back, we'll find out how the Smithsonian keeps an historic flag from crumbling in the dust.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: A dramatic scene off the coast of Oregon today: A charter vessel capsized, killing at least nine people. One person is missing. Seven other people were treated and released, and an aide remains hospitalized. The boat capsized in 10- to 15-foot swells near Oregon's Tillamook Bay.

A U.S. military official tells CNN today that the coalition's Operation Peninsula Strike has netted 2,300 Iraqis. The operation is targeting loyalists to Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath party. Also at this hour, another member of the deck of cards of the most wanted Hussein loyalists is in custody.

Monkeypox may have spread to the state of Missouri. Health officials there say the victim is a 38-year-old man who bought a prairie dog at Phil's Pocket Pet Store in Villa Park, Illinois. Several infected prairie dogs were sold at that Illinois store. The Missouri man began showing symptoms of monkeypox after his prairie dog became ill and died.

More top stories at the top of the hour. Now back to NEXT@CNN. Well, today it's Flag Day, a national holiday, since President Harry Truman designated it so in 1949, the original Star-Spangled Banner, the flag that flew over Fort Mahenry -- McHenry and inspired the National Anthem is still intact, but quite fragile. The flag is undergoing a painstaking conservation process at the National Museum of American History. The curator of that project is Marilyn Zoidis and she joins us, now, from a day full of Flag Day festivities in Washington.

Good to see you.

MARILYN ZOIDIS, CURATOR: Hi. Welcome to the National Museum of American history.

WHITFIELD: Well, thanks for letting us get a peek. I see that there are people -- what appear to be, laying down behind you, and they are taking part in this painstaking process of conserving or preserving the flag?

ZOIDIS: Yes. Those are members of our conservation team our, Star-Spangled Banner Conservation Team; they are working to save the Star-Spangled Banner for future generations of Americans. As you said, the flag is in fragile condition and it is our job here, at the Smithsonian to make sure that America's treasures are saved for future generations.

WHITFIELD: Well, you how are you doing that, because wasn't there an effort already made before to try and preserve this flag, but come to find out, those very efforts were helping to deteriorate the flag?

ZOIDIS: Well, I wouldn't put it quite that way. 1914 the Smithsonian embarked on a major preservation effort for the flag, it was state-of-the-art for the time. It was to sew a linen backing to the flag to give it support, the backing was attached to the flag was 1.7 million stitches, the work was done labor-intensively by a group 10 seamstresses and a woman named Amelia Fowler, who resuscitated flags all over the United States, including 172 at the Naval Academy in Annapolis.

WHITFIELD: Wow.

ZOIDIS: The process was very intense, and worked for many, many years. As our understanding of textile conservation has increased over the years, and the flag has become more fragile, just with age, we decided here at the National Museum of American History that we needed to take another look at preserving the Star-Spangled Banner. In 1998, we began the process of taking off the 1914 Fowler treatment, that is some of the work that the conservators were doing, as much in the position you now see them, behind me. Laying on their stomachs, they lean over the flag and remove the 1.7 million stitches on the front side of the flag, they then turn the flag over, took the 1.7 million stitches off the other side of the flag, and then very carefully peeled away the linen backing.

WHITFIELD: So Marilyn, while it appears as though the two pair of legs that we see behind you, while those people are actually laying on the flag, they're not really laying directly on the flag, are they? Can you explain exactly how they're doing this?

ZOIDIS: No, they're not laying on the flag, that's correct. They're actually mattresses on the gantry, and the conservators are on their stomachs laying over the flag or on their knees, depending on the work they're doing. You can imagine how tiring it is to remain in one position that long over the flag, so they change their positions, so either on their knees or on their stomachs, as they work over the flag.

WHITFIELD: And so Marilyn, the objective is not to make this flag look like new again, but you really want to preserve it in its state, and then it will eventually be on display for everyone to enjoy at the Smithsonian, right?

ZOIDIS: That's exactly right. We will not make the flag look new, that's not our aim. We don't restore the flag to look as it did when Francis Scott Key saw it on that glorious morning, but we will stabilize the flag so that it will not deteriorate further. We will keep it in a safe room environment, much like it is now, where we control for the light, temperature, and humidity. Then the American people will be able to see their flag for many, many years to come.

WHITFIELD: All right, the flag being treated as a jewel that it is. Marilyn Zoidis, thanks very much. Appreciate it. Thanks for the explanation, and hope...

ZOIDIS: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: ...with those folks in the back -- get a little break.

ZOIDIS: Thank you. Come and see the flag.

WHITFIELD: All right. Can't wait to see that.

All right. Well, scientists say three skulls discovered in Ethiopia are the oldest humans ever found, they say it's a new branch to the human family tree, a significant find and early humans looked and acted a lot like us. Science correspondent, Ann Kellan has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANN KELLAN, CNN SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is what many researchers now think our newest and oldest ancestor looked like, based on this 160,000-year-old skull discovered near a small village in Eastern Ethiopia by an international team of researchers led by University of California biologist, Tim White. The most intact fossil found was the skull of a 20 to 30-year-old man. a second adult skull was found in pieces, as was the skull of a 6 or 7-year-old child.

TIM WHITE, U.C. BERKELEY: Cleaning those specimens, putting them together, took years, but as the face emerged from the sediment, during this process, we came to see the face of an ancestor. KELLAN: According to White, these skulls belonged to a newly created subspecies called Homo sapiens idaltu, meaning "old man." It's a Homo sapiens, but with a slightly larger skull and braincase and large longer face than modern humans, Homo sapiens sapiens.

WHITE: Very, very large robust male, prominent brow ridges, prominent cheek bones, and this canine fossa, very strong neck muscle attachments on the cranium. These are features only seen in modern humans.

KELLAN: The skulls came from decapitated bodies.

WHITE: They were keeping the skulls of the dead around and modifying them, long after death, so it's some kind of an earlier ritual behavior that we've come across in these early African populations.

KELLAN: Near the skulls, white's group also uncovered tools, some he says used to hunt large game.

WHITE: We know from their implements that they were very sophisticated people making large cutting tools that they used to butcher things like hippos. It's opened a window on a time period that we previously had no knowledge in.

KELLAN: Ann Kellan, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: When we come back, panhandling in cyberspace, it's a new way to ask complete strangers for money and help. We'll find out if it works at all.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Authorities say an invasion of Mormon crickets sweeping Idaho, Navada and Utah could be the worst in recent history. The bugs are devouring acres of crops and rangeland, as well as, grossing out a whole lot of residents. Recent mild winters and current drought have provided ideal conditions for the insects. The Mormon cricket was named for an infestation in Utah in the 1800s and is actually a kind of katydid.

Well, they've done it again, the team that announced the world's first clone of a mule two weeks ago say a second clone has been born. This one is named Utah pioneer, both are males and both are cloned from a champion racing mule. The researchers from the University of Idaho and Utah State University say the second birth prove their cloning methods can be duplicated.

Sometimes you just don't know what's in store for you unless you ask. A while back a Brooklyn woman dug herself out of a $20,000 debt by simply asking for donations on the Internet. Her site inspired plenty of imitators. Our Jeanne Moos reports, you won't believe what some want money for.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It used to be, "Brother, can you spare me a dime?" But, now it's, "Need money for driving lessons," "$2,000 for artificial limbs," "Transsexual needs surgery to become a woman," at last check, the transsexual has received 6 bucks. Panhandling used to be so personal, but now there's cyber begging. "Fat girl trying to get surgery to get skinny. Seeking a gastric lap banding procedure."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's one of those embarrassing, but if you want people to donate, you've got to show them what they're donating to, so you've got to put pictures up.

MOOS: She needs almost 7,000 bucks, but after getting $18 from generous people, the first week, she got zip weeks two and three. Others have raked in thousands.

TODD ROSENBERG: A dollar. Thank you, all you guys for the dollars.

MOOS: Todd Rosenberg is better known from his web cartoons as "Odd Todd."

ROSENBERG: Personal budget cuts have really started affecting my social life and I...

MOOS: Odd Todd was a dot-commer who lost his job. His witty cartoons about unemployment woes, won him tips from strangers. $20,000 in tips. He's even publishing a book on things to do while unemployed.

ROSENBERG: For what it's worth, it beats fricking working.

MOOS: Even a site called "Buy Me a Drink" where the next round is on you says it has raked in over $140, "Here's five bucks, I hope your liver explodes."

Speaking of exploding, giveboobs.com has reached its goal of $4,500 for a breast implant procedure. A person going by the name Michel Wong showed a 34a photo and a simulated picture of what she could look like if the boob fund grows, so do the boobs, both apparently did. By now, according to an e-mail exchange, Michel should be the proud owner of implants. Her site was so entertaining, so musing, we started to have doubts. Was this a snow job about a breast job? After repeated requests for a phone interview, Michel answered, "Oh, for god's sake, just forget it, then. I carefully control image and my words." This is one dot-com that didn't go bust, though we may never know if her story is as false as the implants.

Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, tomorrow, on NEXT, we'll talk live with "Odd Todd," the one who did the cartoons and find out how his online requests helped launch a whole new career, that's at 5:00 Eastern on Sunday.

When we come back, "schwing" the long ball is getting even longer and club technology is playing a big part. But is it dulling the game's edge? We'll be right back with that.

This is a 2,000-year-old scroll, burnt beyond recognition now easier to read. How did that happen? Scientists at Brigham Young University say they used multi-spectral imaging, the same technology NASA uses to study rocks on mars. The ancient scrolls were excavated from the ruins of a villa in Pompeii, Italy. Buried thousands of years ago under 100 feet of volcanic ash during a major eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. The works ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle and poets like Virgil, could be contained the scrolls. For years it was almost impossible to tell the black paper from the black ink. With multi-spectral imaging, scientists subject the scrolls to infrared light, a frequency of light we can't see, but a type that is absorbed by the paper and reflected the ink. A computer picks up and enhances that reflection, so what's left of the scrolls may be easier to read. The university is now creating a digital library of these and other ancient texts, preserved for future generations to see.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC)

WHITFIELD: No doubt, it's a big day for pro-golf and our own Josie Karp is at round three of the U.S. Open in Olympia Fields, Illinois. Josie, what's going on there right now?

JOSIE KARP, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fredricka, just a few minutes ago Tiger Woods teed off and earlier in the week, Woods he sounded a little teed-off in an article in "USA Today," he questions how so many other players are getting such distance off the tee. Here's a guy, Tiger Woods, who used to be right up there in driving distance. He's been passed by some -- by some players who historically haven't had that kind of distance off the tee, and he didn't name any names, but he suggested that there's new technology out there with these so-called "hot-faced drivers." Essentially, these drivers more flexible and they allow longer distance off the tee.

There are regulations on tour that are supposed to regulate how these clubs are made, but there's no technology at this point in time to go on-site and test clubs at every single tour stop. That technology is going to be available as early as next year, we'll see testing on-site then. We're in Chicago, we should point out, this isn't something like Sammy Sosa's corked bat incident a couple weeks ago. It hasn't reached that level, yet, but it is something that Tiger Woods appears to be concerned about. He's the most visible person in this sport and you can bet that people in the golf world are going to listen to Tiger Woods -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: And how about any of the other players -- are any other players making noise about it?

KARP: It hasn't been a huge topic of conversation here, but again, it's something you don't get the feeling at a major championship like this that there are guys who have a band -- a club in their bag that would be illegal, but it's something -- there's so much new technology, Tiger Woods is out there this week with a new ball. Things are changing so rapidly that the USGA, the PGA, they're going to have to at some point make sure that the rules already in place are enforced and they have to get that technology to do it -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks a lot. Josie Karp.

Well, let's talk a little bit more about these hot-faced drivers, which have been manipulated to help give the club face more spring effect. Can they launch the ball a bit further than ever before? Some say yes. You heard Josie explain that Tiger says, yes and doesn't like it. Let's get a little more insight on this from Brian Katrek of PGAtour.com, who joins us now, in studio to show us how the club has evolved and how it's changing the face of golf.

Good to see you.

BRIAN KATREK, PGATOUR.COM: Well, it's good to see you, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, so we're already hearing there are some players, namely Tiger Woods, who don't like the idea of these hot- faced or illegal drivers. Can they, indeed, be to blame for these longer drives?

KATREK: Oh, without question. If you go back just a couple of years, you're looking at a Persimmon driver, an old wooden headed driver, and this is not that -- not that old. It's a solid block of wood and that's where the spring-like effect comes from, this is solid block wood, there's not much give and take, here. And you start looking at the new fangled drivers, this is the new Taylor Made driver. This is a hollow bodied Taylor -- titanium wood. This is hollow, there's room for this face, although I can't do it just by pushing on it with my hands, there's room for this face to give a little bit and that's what Josie was talking about. And, there is actually a test that they may be able to get in place and ironically enough, they were talking about having this test in place to test for spring-like effect at the Western Open, which is a couple of weeks from now, in Chicago.

WHITFIELD: Oh.

KATREK: But, they don't feel confident with it and there's no question that a lot of the drivers out on the PGA tour, right now, could fail that test and so they're going to hold off.

WHITFIELD: Well, if they're illegal, then who are some of the manufacturing companies coming up with this type of club?

KATREK: Well, even if a manufacturer has good intentions, and they all do, obviously, no matter what they try to do, you're going to send in -- the current testing process has each manufacturer sending in one head and then they manufacture a couple hundred thousand of the rest of them. Well, every head's not tested and this would test each head individually. No matter how meticulous you are in the manufacturing process, there could be little differences, and when you swing as hard as these guys do, little differences mean a lot.

WHITFIELD: So, it sounds like it's really to kind of boost ego, maybe, of amateur who wants to feel like they're hitting the long ball like a Tiger Woods.

KATREK: Well, that was one of the arguments that Callaway made a few years ago when this whole thing started and they talked about possibly having a couple sets of rules, but that's -- that's just not the way they're going.

WHITFIELD: All right, so show us how to put this -- I guess, the club in action.

KATREK: Well, this is, you know, we'll go ahead and hit the Taylor Made driver, it's the most popular driver on the PGA tour and we've got as a launch monitor here, from -- it's from the achiever launch monitor and everybody out there on the PGA tour has been hooked up this at one point or another, and all the major manufacturers are using them, and they're looking for a couple of different things, and we'll show you exactly how this -- how this looks when we get to hit a ball here.

Of course, what you're going to look at there, is all the different readings that the machine gives you, including the launch angle, and of course on the right-hand side of the screen, it is launch angle is one of the most important things and right below that it says, "the ball spin," the backspin. That was a pretty high launch angle, 15 degrees, especially for a nine and a half degree driver. The guys are looking for a launch angle of about 12 degrees and, of course, a little less spin is going to make the golf ball go a little farther also. So, pretty does -- it does get pretty technical.

That was a legal driver. I've got a couple of hot ones here also.

WHITFIELD: OK.

KATREK: If you want to see one.

WHITFIELD: Yeah, let's get a quick peek at one of them.

KATREK: All right, so that was -- and I don't remember exactly how far that went, but, you know, that was a pretty good strike of a golf ball, and this one, from a company called Sonar Tech that maybe goes a little farther.

You see on that one, you see on the carry distance on the last one was 211 yards.

WHITFIELD: OK.

KATREK: You know, there's a lot that has to be adjusted there. This driver, which is a little hotter, the carry distance there 215 yards. You see the launch angle is a little closer to the 12 degrees that everybody's looking for. The ball spin -- the backspin was a little less, also, and that will cause it to go a little farther. So, it's not much difference, but we saw a difference of four yards there, two balls that weren't exactly struck perfectly, weren't exactly struck by a pro.

WHITFIELD: Wow.

KATREK: And, of course, you see that, you know, my club had speed and was right around 100 miles an hour. Tiger's swing, 120 miles an hour, that makes an awful lot of difference.

WHITFIELD: Wow, well, it certainly does make a big difference. But clearly, Brian, you've got to be a good ball -- golf player anyway. And it just -- this just maybe raises you a notch or two and makes you even better looking.

KATREK: Oh, I'm just glad I didn't miss.

WHITFIELD: I'm glad for you. All right. Brian Katrek of PGAtour.com. Thanks very much and thanks for the demo.

KATREK: You got it.

WHITFIELD: Air France's Concorde fleet will fly no more. One of the graceful supersonic planes landed at Dulles Airport near Washington, D.C. on Thursday. On a one-way trip to a Smithsonian Institution display of historic aircrafts. British airways is also phasing out its Concordes, the first Concorde flight was in 1976 and all this, end of an era talk about our -- about the Concorde, got our Bruce Burkhardt to thinking about how technology has changed in 27 years.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRUCE BURKHARDT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Twenty-seven years ago, the first Cray supercomputer was introduced, weighed over 5,000 pounds, took up an entire room. Today a good laptop can do the same thing as the first Cray.

Twenty-seven years ago doctors were just experimenting with the new way for couples to have a child, test-tube babies, they were called. Today, in vitro fertilization's a routine procedure.

And, 27 years ago many of us were still actually dialing a phone. A phone that had, like, these wires, wires that went into the wall. Also around then, we used something called a pen to write something called letters, that was before e-mail.

And, back then, 27 years ago, it took three and a half hours to get from New York to Paris. Today it takes eight hours. Whoa, wait a minute, that's going backwards, isn't it? What if this trend continues?

(on camera): This is definitely subsonic transportation. I don't know if we're headed this far backwards, but still, with the passing of the Concorde, we're witnessing a rarity in human technological evolution -- de-evolution, progress in reverse.

(voice-over): And not just in technological terms, after all back then, 27 years ago, you could actually sit in an airline seat without need of a chiropractor afterwards. Progress doesn't always mean improve.

But, three and a half hours to Paris? That seemed to be an improvement. Sure, it could be argued that the Concorde was grounded by economics, not enough people willing to pay $7,000 for a one-way ticket. But, why didn't technology come up with a way to make it cheaper to fly at supersonic speeds and quieter? Some kind of silencer for that sonic boom.

So, maybe in some ways we are going backwards, either in spite of technology or because of it. 27 years ago, how many owner's manuals did you have? Nowadays we have a library full of them, for the cell phone, the computer, the printer, the DVD player, the cable box, the answering machine, et cetera, et cetera. Progress, in this case, means we spend more of our time figuring out how to do stuff rather than actually doing stuff.

(on camera): The poet Ogden Gnash died before the Concorde made its debut, but he could have been thinking of it when he said, "Progress might have been all right once, but it's gone on too long."

Bruce Burkhardt, CNN, Atlanta.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, that's all we have time for today, but next we'll be back tomorrow at 5:00 Eastern Time with another hour of news seen through the lens of science and technology. Hope you'll be watching and thanks for joining us, today.

Ahead on "CNN Live Saturday," coming up at the top of the hour, that's followed up by "People in the News" at 5:00 Eastern with a look at leaders in the Middle East who are trying to map out the road to peace and those who are standing in the way. Then, "CNN Saturday" at 6:00 Eastern Time.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





A Look at Military Uniform of the Future; Which U.S. City Has Dirtiest Tap Water?>


Aired June 14, 2003 - 15:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Today on NEXT@CNN, a Thai man is charged with trying to sell radioactive material that could be used in a so-called dirty bomb. Just how big is the threat?
Also, high-tech uniforms and gear for the well-equipped soldier of the near future.

And which U.S. cities have the dirtiest tap water? A new report points some fingers. We'll cover those stories and much more in the next hour.

First, police in Thailand arrested a man in Bangkok Friday for trying to sell undercover agents the makings of a dirty bomb. The radioactive material confiscated from the bust is something called Cesium-137. That's a substance most of us know very little about. But experts say it's just the sort of stuff that's all too likely to fall into the hands of terrorists.

Henry Kelly, president of the Federation of American Scientists, is here to tell us more about dirty bombs and Cesium-137. Good to see you, Henry.

HENRY KELLY, PRESIDENT, FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: Good to be here.

WHITFIELD: All right. So what is Cesium-137, and how easy is it for anyone to get?

KELLY: Well, Cesium-137 is what you get when you split the atom, basically. So you get a lot of it produced with nuclear reactors. It turns out to be very valuable in things like measuring the thicknesses of metal and flow rates. So there's a lot of it in detectors that are in various parts of the economy.

WHITFIELD: All right, well, let's talk about dirty bombs, and that happens to be a key ingredient in making dirty bombs. All agree that dirty bombs are bad stuff. But it's nothing like a nuclear bomb in which it could decimate a huge area. So talk to us about why it is still very seriously in which to consider? Why is Cesium-137 falling into the wrong hands? Bad stuff.

KELLY: Well, first of all, you're certainly right. We've got to put this in perspective. A dirty bomb is nothing like a nuclear bomb. A nuclear bomb, if you can think about Hiroshima, where you're killing hundreds of thousands of people, devastating a city, making it uninhabitable for a significant period of time. That's not what we're talking about with the dirty bomb.

Dirty bomb is taking very dangerous radioactive material and scattering it around the landscape. Most people are not going to be affected if they get out of the way in time. It could have a huge effect on contaminating buildings and property and land and be an enormously expensive mess to clean up. So it would be a true terror weapon in that people would be traumatized by the event, but fortunately, with good preparation, not that many people should be killed by this event.

WHITFIELD: Traumatized in a concentrated area, for example, it is known that something like this happened, falling into the hands of the wrong people, particularly some children, in a Brazil town. What happened?

KELLY: Well, it was very tragic. This was a medical device that had Cesium in it, and Cesium is used for medical treatment, among other things. And the kids broke into it. It was a very attractive plaything. They smeared it on themselves. Unfortunately it was several days before people realized what had happened, and four people died. It contaminated, I believe, a couple of hundred people, and it required weeks and months to clean the facility up.

WHITFIELD: Is it...

KELLY: It spread all over.

WHITFIELD: Go ahead, sorry.

KELLY: It unfortunately was tracked around town, and it contaminated a number of the facilities that were supposed to be trying to help clean the area up.

WHITFIELD: Can Cesium be found in just about in any country? Is it that easy to obtain?

KELLY: Well, it's not that easy to obtain. You have to obtain it under license, and, of course, after 9/11 and the serious concern about dirty bombs, there's been a lot of tightening of the regulations and people -- the regulators in the U.S. have been particularly good at trying to track this material down. But we still do have a long way to go.

Obviously, this case in Thailand shows that there's material that isn't adequately secured. We need to really take measures here at home and also around the world to make sure we inventory this stuff, make sure it's under adequate protection.

And the dangerous material that has been abandoned by people who no longer have any use for it, we need to find out where that stuff is and make sure it's brought under secure, protected facilities.

WHITFIELD: And part of the danger is it can still be concealed rather easily, because it can be transported in small containers, and that's part of the problem, isn't it, or one of the challenges?

KELLY: It certainly is one of the challenges. The good thing about radiological materials and dirty bombs is at least this is something we can do something about. You can secure the materials, you should be able to detect its movement if you're clever. Obviously, you can shield it, and you need to shield, but there are ways of at least getting reasonably good probability detecting it.

So one of the things we need to do is both to look at ways of controlling the materials now out there, and another is to make sure that any new material that's put out into the economy here and abroad is kept under close control. One of my favorite proposals in this area is to follow up with what a lot of the European countries do, or some of them, which is to put a very significant deposit down before you take the materials, so you don't have an incentive to abandon it. You have an incentive to return it to the primary source.

WHITFIELD: Henry Kelly, thanks very much, of the Federation of the American Scientists. Good talking to you.

KELLY: Thank you. Good to be here.

WHITFIELD: Well, just in case you need a reminder, tomorrow is Father's Day. And you want to let dad in on the latest, hottest technology if he likes stuff like that? WI-FI, short for wireless fidelity, it allows people to connect to the Internet without being tied to their office or even an office building. Fred Katayama explains why WI-FI is hot.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FRED KATAYAMA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Lynn Walker's hot. So's he. She's not. No, we're not talking about looks. Lynn and the spiky-haired guy are hot because they're wirelessly connected to the Internet. This New York park is a hot spot. So is this street corner in Southern California. They sport antennas enabling high- speed access. The technology is called WI-FI, short for wireless fidelity.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What the Internet did was it opened the doors to an entire world of information that was not hindered by geography. And what wireless does is it unchains you from cords and all of a sudden allows you to access that information from wherever you are.

KATAYAMA: WI-FI uses radio waves. Antennas link a laptop as far as 300 feet away to a base station. You have to outfit your notebook PC with a receiver, a card selling for about 50 bucks. You can get free access at many community-based hot spots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is kind of like an outdoor office I've been using. It's great.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I work at home a lot. It was getting kind of lonely and depressing. So I bought a laptop, and so that I could come out into the Starbucks and into the parks. KATAYAMA: T-mobile provides access at Starbucks and Borders bookstores for $30 a month. No company offers complete nationwide coverage. But the number of hot spots in the United States has more than quadrupled in the past year to around 3,500.

(on camera): WI-FI antennas are sprouting up everywhere, from parks to airports, hotels and convention centers. As networks expand and hardware prices drop, the number of WI-FI users has mushroomed to roughly 18 million people.

Fred Katayama, CNN Financial News, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, and Fred Katayama joins us live. Fred, let's talk a little bit more about this. So where do we find out, how do we get access to this WI-FI in our communities?

KATAYAMA: Well, Fredricka, you can turn to the Internet. There are several Web sites that will tell you where the hot spots are. You can turn to, for example, wi-fizone.org. There's also hotspotlist.com and wifinder.com., among other places.

WHITFIELD: Now what about security? That's always a big issue, and that kind of keeps folks a little apprehensive about getting too courageous on the Internet.

KATAYAMA: It is a big issue, Fredricka. A security expert I spoke to said some networks can be easily broken into, and so the best way to protect yourself is to, one, buy a WI-FI card that's based on the more improved WPA protocol as opposed to the more common WET protocol. That provides better security.

Also, get encryption software. You can get it off the Internet for free, or you can buy it at a computer store. And finally, avoid sensitive commercial transactions and avoid sending sensitive e-mail on WI-FI.

WHITFIELD: Nothing comes for free. How much does it cost?

KATAYAMA: Well, it's free at certain places like public parks or places that set it up free, but there are a lot of commercial operators. For example, at T-mobile, they'll charge you anywhere from $30 to $40 for unlimited WI-FI access. You can also do it on a pay- as-you-go a la carte basis. That will cost you 10 cents a minute for 60 minutes.

Also if you happen to be a Verizon customer, they're offering it free, but only for existing DSL customers, those people who already have the high-speed Internet access at homes, via their wired phone service.

WHITFIELD: Now, is it going to kind of change the conventional wisdom of Internet access and use?

KATAYAMA: It certainly will, and it already has. As you saw in my story, there's that person at the park that said she comes out here because it's more sociable. Some people I noticed at the park were basically using the park as their offices. One person said he's out there all day, one, the access is free, and he can roam wherever he wants to.

WHITFIELD: All right. Fred Katayama, sounds like fun. Thanks a lot.

KATAYAMA: Sure.

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, a little later in the show ancient skulls give scientists new clues about how the human race began.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Well, the U.S. Army is teaming up with scientists at M.I.T. to reinvest and re-outfit tomorrow's soldier. The Objective Force Warrior and Future Warrior systems outlook the years 2010, 2025 and beyond.

Joining us now from Boston are the Army's own Dutch De Gay and Sergeant Raul Lopez. Thanks guys for joining us. All right, what are we talking about, re-outfitting? What's going to be different?

DUTCH DE GAY, ARMY EQUIPMENT SPECIALIST: Well, we're looking at the soldier and all those lessons learned, and Sergeant Lopez is a prime example in the system that he wears in how we want to completely change the overall system. We want to make it lighter, easier to use for the individual soldier, much more streamlined and give him more capability, essentially make him an F-16 on legs.

WHITFIELD: And what sort of technology is so different? I mean, I understand that even prior to the war in Iraq, some of the soldiers were outfitted with some pretty high-tech pieces to be much more portable? What's different this go-round?

DE GAY: Absolutely, Fredricka, if we were to look just at the helmet alone. Sergeant Lopez, if you could look down a little bit, on the left-hand side, there's a forward-looking infrared sensor that allows a soldier to see in infrared and thermal in the same sensor.

On the right-hand side is infrared target designator and locator, so essentially it's like a red-light pointer and flashlight in the infrared realm. And on the very top is a global-positioning radio antenna and on-board radio system that are all built into the helmet.

So it kind of becomes a command and control platform from the head for the individual soldier, before we even get to the uniform portion.

WHITFIELD: OK. Well, let's talk about some of the things that ordinarily they would carry maybe in a backpack or something similar to a backpack. This time they're able to carry on their person, aren't they?

DE GAY: Absolutely. One of the biggest things is the difference of electronics that a soldier would normally carry -- radios, global- positioning systems, those sensors that I just mentioned are normally stand-alone items that are either integrated or snapped onto the weapons system or carried in the backpack until they're needed, and then tied directly into that are the batteries that a soldier has to carry.

If we talk about the helmet, with the on-board radio system and all the other components that are on-board, the helmet as a subsystem replaces anywhere from 10 to 12 stand-alone items a soldier has to carry today in the field. And they're all powered off one battery.

WHITFIELD: Are these new, I guess, pieces of technology, the result of some feedback you got from soldiers or requests that were made from people who said, you know what? I could do my job more efficiently if I had this?

DE GAY: Absolutely. I mean, this system is being designed by the Natick Soldier Center in Natick, Massachusetts, and we do everything for the soldier from head to toe that they carry consume or wear. So we constantly go out and talk to soldiers and see what gear they have, what improvements we can make and what we can do to make the next generation of that system better for the soldier.

WHITFIELD: And this is mostly for the soldier. Is there similar modifications being made for the airman, for the sailor, even?

DE GAY: Well, currently the Objective Force Warrior is an Army- specific program, but with all of our major programs, the other services, or our sister services as we like to call them, are looking to see what technologies are applicable that they can use in their individual items.

WHITFIELD: Now, these are things that might be applied in 2010 or even 2025 and beyond. How about in the near future? Do you see some of these modifications that might be put into use sooner rather than later?

DE GAY: Sure. Absolutely. Some of the changes in the radio systems that are ongoing as we speak is moving to a better multi functional radio system that works off one battery that essentially is about the size probably of one of these pockets on Sergeant Lopez's body armor, and that would replace anywhere from three to four radios that the soldier would have to carry on the body; better interfaces to electronics that soldiers have to carry and then multi functional batteries that work for more than just one of the electronic systems.

So it's an incremental build as we change and revolutionize our soldiers.

WHITFIELD: All right. Dutch De Gay and Sergeant Raul Lopez. Sergeant Lopez getting an award, or at least a medal, for being so incredibly still there.

DE GAY: We're very lucky. He's an Afghanistan veteran, so he can be calm and cool at a moment's notice.

WHITFIELD: I almost thought it was a statue at first, but I see he's blinking, so I know he's real. All right, thanks a lot, Dutch.

DE GAY: Thank you very much.

WHITFIELD: Well, ripples continue to spread from the Shuttle Columbia disaster. NASA announced that the director of the Kennedy Space Center has been reassigned, and the investigation into what destroyed Columbia has turned up a new danger to the remaining shuttles. Kathleen Koch has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The two-foot long bolts fasten the solid rocket boosters to the shuttle's external fuel tank. Investigators say radar the day of the launch picked up debris falling away from the Space Shuttle Columbia seconds after the bolts separated, freeing the boosters. They warn the 40-pound bolt fragment could cause catastrophic damage to a shuttle, though they don't believe Columbia was struck.

MAJ. GEN. JOHN BARRY, INVESTIGATOR: Long story short is, you know this thing can cause some serious impact damage, if, in fact -- but there is no indication that it has hit the orbiter.

KOCH: But investigators do have evidence the bolts could threaten future space shuttles. They tested the dome that's supposed to catch the bolt when it comes apart. They found it wasn't strong enough and was never properly tested.

The top of that dome actually fractured in the static test that we did on the ground.

KOCH: Investigators continue to believe the foam that struck the Columbia 81 seconds after takeoff is the most likely primary cause of that disaster. They show new photos from a Friday test where a chunk of foam was fired at a shuttle wing, damaging the leading edge.

The photo showed cracks were longer and more wide spread than initially thought. Still, investigators stopped short of declaring with absolute certainty that such damage brought the Columbia down.

SCOTT HUBBARD, COLUMBIA INVESTIGATION BOARD: Getting the crack that we got established that this failure mechanism is at least plausible. Whether we go from plausible to highly likely, I think, will be determined somewhat by how the rest of these tests turn up.

KOCH: Still, the suspect bolt fragment is raising serious concerns since it is more than 20-times heavier than the foam that hit the Columbia. So, investigators say until the problem is fixed, the entire shuttle fleet should remain grounded.

Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, coming up in our next half hour, just how safe is the water that comes out of your tap? In some U.S. cities, not as safe as you might think, according to a new report. We'll find out where the problems are.

First, a quick break and a check of the headlines when we come right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: The next time you turn on your tap, you might think twice about what's coming out. In some cities, the list includes lead, bacteria, arsenic and pesticides.

CNN's Sharon Collins reports on a new study out this week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SHARON COLLINS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Drinking water in 19 U.S. cities was studied by the environmental action group, Natural Resources Defense Council, NRDC.

ERIK OLSON, NRDC: For most people in most cities, it's kind of OK. The problem is for anybody that's vulnerable to the contaminants like very young children or pregnant women or the frail elderly. Those are the people that we really need to worry about.

COLLINS: According to the report, the problem stems from a variety of sources. In Newark, the old pipes contaminate the water with high lead levels. In Atlanta, when the water system was put under stress from heavy rains, raw sewage ends up in the source water. And these cities received quality ratings of fair.

OLSON: Probably rounding out the bottom of the list of the cities we looked at was Fresno, California, which had a lot of pesticides and industrial chemicals, nitrates.

COLLINS: Also, at the bottom of the cities surveyed were Albuquerque, Boston, San Francisco and Phoenix, all of which received a poor rating. According to the study, some cities are violating federal regulations with the amount of contaminants in their water.

So are we better off with buying our water at a grocery store? A beverage-industry group says Americans spent $6.5 billion last year on bottled water. It raises the question: How much are taxpayers willing to pay to get clean drinking water from their faucets?

OLSON: The government estimates it will cost $300 billion to $500 billion to fix all these water-treatment plants, but we really have to make that investment. You can't not drink water. We don't have a choice not to use water.

COLLINS: Chicago was the only city to receive an excellent water- quality rating. The city committed to cleaning up its act 12 years ago, and has set aside $100 million a year to keep up the water system.

But even Chicago has water issues. Critics complain that now the Windy City just sends its pollution down the Mississippi for other communities to contend with. Sharon Collins, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, now joining us from our Washington bureau with more on our water worries is the author of the NRDC report, Erik Olson.

All right, Erik. First question, would you drink the tap?

OLSON: Well, I would drink tap water in most cities in the U.S. It's pretty safe. We're worried about some more vulnerable people especially.

WHITFIELD: And there are certain cities in particular where you have greater worries about those vulnerable people. Where are they?

OLSON: Well, among the cities we're most worried about are Albuquerque, New Mexico, which has a lot of arsenic in its drinking water; Fresno, California, which your piece earlier mentioned has pesticides, industrial chemicals; even Boston has problems with its water supply, and there are several others that have issues.

WHITFIELD: Well, if you know this and even some cities apparently have raw sewage in their tap water, then why aren't these cities or jurisdictions doing something about extracting these contaminants?

OLSON: Well, I think the big problem here is that cities have deferred their maintenance. They're procrastinating. They're not putting the money into the problem and it's building up, and over time it's getting to be a serious problem in many cities.

WHITFIELD: And apparently it costs a lot of money, right? Isn't that one of the big obstacles?

OLSON: It does cost a lot of money. But we just can't afford not to fix our water supplies. Everybody, even the people that drink bottled water, are taking showers, they're cooking with the water, they're using it for all sorts of purposes. And you can get exposed to many of these contaminants without ever drinking a drop.

WHITFIELD: That was actually my next question. I'm worried that if we're talking about arsenic, raw sewage and other pollutants that are in this water, we may not want to drink it, but that means we may not want to bathe in it either. So, what are we to do?

OLSON: That's right. The only real choice here is to fix our public water supplies. We really have got to do that. If you think about it, many cities -- water supplies date to the Lincoln administration, like here in Washington, D.C.

And in many other cities, we have pipes that are 100 years old or older. So what we've got to do is put the money into fixing it, and it's actually cheaper to fix these city water supplies than to drink bottled water. WHITFIELD: So in the meantime, are you encouraging us to drink bottled water, to cook with bottled water, and do we even need to resort to finding ways to bathe with bottled water?

OLSON: No. We're certainly not recommending that. That would be expensive. We actually looked at -- a couple years ago, we tested over 1, 000 bottles of water, and we found that a lot of the bottled water is no better than tap water. So really, again, the only real solution here is to invest in our public health, to invest in our cities, and fix our water supplies.

WHITFIELD: But in the meantime then, what do we do about checking labels on some of that bottled water? What can we do to protect ourselves?

OLSON: Well, the bottled-water industry is very poorly regulated. The Food and Drug Administration has about one person to regulate the entire bottled-water industry -- a $6.5 billion industry. So really, we don't have much of a regulatory program for bottled water. It's all pretty much a voluntary system.

WHITFIELD: All right, Erik Olson, you got me worried now.

OLSON: That's not my intent, but we can fix this problem. That's the good news.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks very much for the encouragement. Appreciate it.

OLSON: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: When we come back, we'll find out how the Smithsonian keeps an historic flag from crumbling in the dust.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: A dramatic scene off the coast of Oregon today: A charter vessel capsized, killing at least nine people. One person is missing. Seven other people were treated and released, and an aide remains hospitalized. The boat capsized in 10- to 15-foot swells near Oregon's Tillamook Bay.

A U.S. military official tells CNN today that the coalition's Operation Peninsula Strike has netted 2,300 Iraqis. The operation is targeting loyalists to Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath party. Also at this hour, another member of the deck of cards of the most wanted Hussein loyalists is in custody.

Monkeypox may have spread to the state of Missouri. Health officials there say the victim is a 38-year-old man who bought a prairie dog at Phil's Pocket Pet Store in Villa Park, Illinois. Several infected prairie dogs were sold at that Illinois store. The Missouri man began showing symptoms of monkeypox after his prairie dog became ill and died.

More top stories at the top of the hour. Now back to NEXT@CNN. Well, today it's Flag Day, a national holiday, since President Harry Truman designated it so in 1949, the original Star-Spangled Banner, the flag that flew over Fort Mahenry -- McHenry and inspired the National Anthem is still intact, but quite fragile. The flag is undergoing a painstaking conservation process at the National Museum of American History. The curator of that project is Marilyn Zoidis and she joins us, now, from a day full of Flag Day festivities in Washington.

Good to see you.

MARILYN ZOIDIS, CURATOR: Hi. Welcome to the National Museum of American history.

WHITFIELD: Well, thanks for letting us get a peek. I see that there are people -- what appear to be, laying down behind you, and they are taking part in this painstaking process of conserving or preserving the flag?

ZOIDIS: Yes. Those are members of our conservation team our, Star-Spangled Banner Conservation Team; they are working to save the Star-Spangled Banner for future generations of Americans. As you said, the flag is in fragile condition and it is our job here, at the Smithsonian to make sure that America's treasures are saved for future generations.

WHITFIELD: Well, you how are you doing that, because wasn't there an effort already made before to try and preserve this flag, but come to find out, those very efforts were helping to deteriorate the flag?

ZOIDIS: Well, I wouldn't put it quite that way. 1914 the Smithsonian embarked on a major preservation effort for the flag, it was state-of-the-art for the time. It was to sew a linen backing to the flag to give it support, the backing was attached to the flag was 1.7 million stitches, the work was done labor-intensively by a group 10 seamstresses and a woman named Amelia Fowler, who resuscitated flags all over the United States, including 172 at the Naval Academy in Annapolis.

WHITFIELD: Wow.

ZOIDIS: The process was very intense, and worked for many, many years. As our understanding of textile conservation has increased over the years, and the flag has become more fragile, just with age, we decided here at the National Museum of American History that we needed to take another look at preserving the Star-Spangled Banner. In 1998, we began the process of taking off the 1914 Fowler treatment, that is some of the work that the conservators were doing, as much in the position you now see them, behind me. Laying on their stomachs, they lean over the flag and remove the 1.7 million stitches on the front side of the flag, they then turn the flag over, took the 1.7 million stitches off the other side of the flag, and then very carefully peeled away the linen backing.

WHITFIELD: So Marilyn, while it appears as though the two pair of legs that we see behind you, while those people are actually laying on the flag, they're not really laying directly on the flag, are they? Can you explain exactly how they're doing this?

ZOIDIS: No, they're not laying on the flag, that's correct. They're actually mattresses on the gantry, and the conservators are on their stomachs laying over the flag or on their knees, depending on the work they're doing. You can imagine how tiring it is to remain in one position that long over the flag, so they change their positions, so either on their knees or on their stomachs, as they work over the flag.

WHITFIELD: And so Marilyn, the objective is not to make this flag look like new again, but you really want to preserve it in its state, and then it will eventually be on display for everyone to enjoy at the Smithsonian, right?

ZOIDIS: That's exactly right. We will not make the flag look new, that's not our aim. We don't restore the flag to look as it did when Francis Scott Key saw it on that glorious morning, but we will stabilize the flag so that it will not deteriorate further. We will keep it in a safe room environment, much like it is now, where we control for the light, temperature, and humidity. Then the American people will be able to see their flag for many, many years to come.

WHITFIELD: All right, the flag being treated as a jewel that it is. Marilyn Zoidis, thanks very much. Appreciate it. Thanks for the explanation, and hope...

ZOIDIS: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: ...with those folks in the back -- get a little break.

ZOIDIS: Thank you. Come and see the flag.

WHITFIELD: All right. Can't wait to see that.

All right. Well, scientists say three skulls discovered in Ethiopia are the oldest humans ever found, they say it's a new branch to the human family tree, a significant find and early humans looked and acted a lot like us. Science correspondent, Ann Kellan has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANN KELLAN, CNN SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is what many researchers now think our newest and oldest ancestor looked like, based on this 160,000-year-old skull discovered near a small village in Eastern Ethiopia by an international team of researchers led by University of California biologist, Tim White. The most intact fossil found was the skull of a 20 to 30-year-old man. a second adult skull was found in pieces, as was the skull of a 6 or 7-year-old child.

TIM WHITE, U.C. BERKELEY: Cleaning those specimens, putting them together, took years, but as the face emerged from the sediment, during this process, we came to see the face of an ancestor. KELLAN: According to White, these skulls belonged to a newly created subspecies called Homo sapiens idaltu, meaning "old man." It's a Homo sapiens, but with a slightly larger skull and braincase and large longer face than modern humans, Homo sapiens sapiens.

WHITE: Very, very large robust male, prominent brow ridges, prominent cheek bones, and this canine fossa, very strong neck muscle attachments on the cranium. These are features only seen in modern humans.

KELLAN: The skulls came from decapitated bodies.

WHITE: They were keeping the skulls of the dead around and modifying them, long after death, so it's some kind of an earlier ritual behavior that we've come across in these early African populations.

KELLAN: Near the skulls, white's group also uncovered tools, some he says used to hunt large game.

WHITE: We know from their implements that they were very sophisticated people making large cutting tools that they used to butcher things like hippos. It's opened a window on a time period that we previously had no knowledge in.

KELLAN: Ann Kellan, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: When we come back, panhandling in cyberspace, it's a new way to ask complete strangers for money and help. We'll find out if it works at all.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Authorities say an invasion of Mormon crickets sweeping Idaho, Navada and Utah could be the worst in recent history. The bugs are devouring acres of crops and rangeland, as well as, grossing out a whole lot of residents. Recent mild winters and current drought have provided ideal conditions for the insects. The Mormon cricket was named for an infestation in Utah in the 1800s and is actually a kind of katydid.

Well, they've done it again, the team that announced the world's first clone of a mule two weeks ago say a second clone has been born. This one is named Utah pioneer, both are males and both are cloned from a champion racing mule. The researchers from the University of Idaho and Utah State University say the second birth prove their cloning methods can be duplicated.

Sometimes you just don't know what's in store for you unless you ask. A while back a Brooklyn woman dug herself out of a $20,000 debt by simply asking for donations on the Internet. Her site inspired plenty of imitators. Our Jeanne Moos reports, you won't believe what some want money for.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It used to be, "Brother, can you spare me a dime?" But, now it's, "Need money for driving lessons," "$2,000 for artificial limbs," "Transsexual needs surgery to become a woman," at last check, the transsexual has received 6 bucks. Panhandling used to be so personal, but now there's cyber begging. "Fat girl trying to get surgery to get skinny. Seeking a gastric lap banding procedure."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's one of those embarrassing, but if you want people to donate, you've got to show them what they're donating to, so you've got to put pictures up.

MOOS: She needs almost 7,000 bucks, but after getting $18 from generous people, the first week, she got zip weeks two and three. Others have raked in thousands.

TODD ROSENBERG: A dollar. Thank you, all you guys for the dollars.

MOOS: Todd Rosenberg is better known from his web cartoons as "Odd Todd."

ROSENBERG: Personal budget cuts have really started affecting my social life and I...

MOOS: Odd Todd was a dot-commer who lost his job. His witty cartoons about unemployment woes, won him tips from strangers. $20,000 in tips. He's even publishing a book on things to do while unemployed.

ROSENBERG: For what it's worth, it beats fricking working.

MOOS: Even a site called "Buy Me a Drink" where the next round is on you says it has raked in over $140, "Here's five bucks, I hope your liver explodes."

Speaking of exploding, giveboobs.com has reached its goal of $4,500 for a breast implant procedure. A person going by the name Michel Wong showed a 34a photo and a simulated picture of what she could look like if the boob fund grows, so do the boobs, both apparently did. By now, according to an e-mail exchange, Michel should be the proud owner of implants. Her site was so entertaining, so musing, we started to have doubts. Was this a snow job about a breast job? After repeated requests for a phone interview, Michel answered, "Oh, for god's sake, just forget it, then. I carefully control image and my words." This is one dot-com that didn't go bust, though we may never know if her story is as false as the implants.

Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, tomorrow, on NEXT, we'll talk live with "Odd Todd," the one who did the cartoons and find out how his online requests helped launch a whole new career, that's at 5:00 Eastern on Sunday.

When we come back, "schwing" the long ball is getting even longer and club technology is playing a big part. But is it dulling the game's edge? We'll be right back with that.

This is a 2,000-year-old scroll, burnt beyond recognition now easier to read. How did that happen? Scientists at Brigham Young University say they used multi-spectral imaging, the same technology NASA uses to study rocks on mars. The ancient scrolls were excavated from the ruins of a villa in Pompeii, Italy. Buried thousands of years ago under 100 feet of volcanic ash during a major eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. The works ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle and poets like Virgil, could be contained the scrolls. For years it was almost impossible to tell the black paper from the black ink. With multi-spectral imaging, scientists subject the scrolls to infrared light, a frequency of light we can't see, but a type that is absorbed by the paper and reflected the ink. A computer picks up and enhances that reflection, so what's left of the scrolls may be easier to read. The university is now creating a digital library of these and other ancient texts, preserved for future generations to see.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC)

WHITFIELD: No doubt, it's a big day for pro-golf and our own Josie Karp is at round three of the U.S. Open in Olympia Fields, Illinois. Josie, what's going on there right now?

JOSIE KARP, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fredricka, just a few minutes ago Tiger Woods teed off and earlier in the week, Woods he sounded a little teed-off in an article in "USA Today," he questions how so many other players are getting such distance off the tee. Here's a guy, Tiger Woods, who used to be right up there in driving distance. He's been passed by some -- by some players who historically haven't had that kind of distance off the tee, and he didn't name any names, but he suggested that there's new technology out there with these so-called "hot-faced drivers." Essentially, these drivers more flexible and they allow longer distance off the tee.

There are regulations on tour that are supposed to regulate how these clubs are made, but there's no technology at this point in time to go on-site and test clubs at every single tour stop. That technology is going to be available as early as next year, we'll see testing on-site then. We're in Chicago, we should point out, this isn't something like Sammy Sosa's corked bat incident a couple weeks ago. It hasn't reached that level, yet, but it is something that Tiger Woods appears to be concerned about. He's the most visible person in this sport and you can bet that people in the golf world are going to listen to Tiger Woods -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: And how about any of the other players -- are any other players making noise about it?

KARP: It hasn't been a huge topic of conversation here, but again, it's something you don't get the feeling at a major championship like this that there are guys who have a band -- a club in their bag that would be illegal, but it's something -- there's so much new technology, Tiger Woods is out there this week with a new ball. Things are changing so rapidly that the USGA, the PGA, they're going to have to at some point make sure that the rules already in place are enforced and they have to get that technology to do it -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks a lot. Josie Karp.

Well, let's talk a little bit more about these hot-faced drivers, which have been manipulated to help give the club face more spring effect. Can they launch the ball a bit further than ever before? Some say yes. You heard Josie explain that Tiger says, yes and doesn't like it. Let's get a little more insight on this from Brian Katrek of PGAtour.com, who joins us now, in studio to show us how the club has evolved and how it's changing the face of golf.

Good to see you.

BRIAN KATREK, PGATOUR.COM: Well, it's good to see you, Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, so we're already hearing there are some players, namely Tiger Woods, who don't like the idea of these hot- faced or illegal drivers. Can they, indeed, be to blame for these longer drives?

KATREK: Oh, without question. If you go back just a couple of years, you're looking at a Persimmon driver, an old wooden headed driver, and this is not that -- not that old. It's a solid block of wood and that's where the spring-like effect comes from, this is solid block wood, there's not much give and take, here. And you start looking at the new fangled drivers, this is the new Taylor Made driver. This is a hollow bodied Taylor -- titanium wood. This is hollow, there's room for this face, although I can't do it just by pushing on it with my hands, there's room for this face to give a little bit and that's what Josie was talking about. And, there is actually a test that they may be able to get in place and ironically enough, they were talking about having this test in place to test for spring-like effect at the Western Open, which is a couple of weeks from now, in Chicago.

WHITFIELD: Oh.

KATREK: But, they don't feel confident with it and there's no question that a lot of the drivers out on the PGA tour, right now, could fail that test and so they're going to hold off.

WHITFIELD: Well, if they're illegal, then who are some of the manufacturing companies coming up with this type of club?

KATREK: Well, even if a manufacturer has good intentions, and they all do, obviously, no matter what they try to do, you're going to send in -- the current testing process has each manufacturer sending in one head and then they manufacture a couple hundred thousand of the rest of them. Well, every head's not tested and this would test each head individually. No matter how meticulous you are in the manufacturing process, there could be little differences, and when you swing as hard as these guys do, little differences mean a lot.

WHITFIELD: So, it sounds like it's really to kind of boost ego, maybe, of amateur who wants to feel like they're hitting the long ball like a Tiger Woods.

KATREK: Well, that was one of the arguments that Callaway made a few years ago when this whole thing started and they talked about possibly having a couple sets of rules, but that's -- that's just not the way they're going.

WHITFIELD: All right, so show us how to put this -- I guess, the club in action.

KATREK: Well, this is, you know, we'll go ahead and hit the Taylor Made driver, it's the most popular driver on the PGA tour and we've got as a launch monitor here, from -- it's from the achiever launch monitor and everybody out there on the PGA tour has been hooked up this at one point or another, and all the major manufacturers are using them, and they're looking for a couple of different things, and we'll show you exactly how this -- how this looks when we get to hit a ball here.

Of course, what you're going to look at there, is all the different readings that the machine gives you, including the launch angle, and of course on the right-hand side of the screen, it is launch angle is one of the most important things and right below that it says, "the ball spin," the backspin. That was a pretty high launch angle, 15 degrees, especially for a nine and a half degree driver. The guys are looking for a launch angle of about 12 degrees and, of course, a little less spin is going to make the golf ball go a little farther also. So, pretty does -- it does get pretty technical.

That was a legal driver. I've got a couple of hot ones here also.

WHITFIELD: OK.

KATREK: If you want to see one.

WHITFIELD: Yeah, let's get a quick peek at one of them.

KATREK: All right, so that was -- and I don't remember exactly how far that went, but, you know, that was a pretty good strike of a golf ball, and this one, from a company called Sonar Tech that maybe goes a little farther.

You see on that one, you see on the carry distance on the last one was 211 yards.

WHITFIELD: OK.

KATREK: You know, there's a lot that has to be adjusted there. This driver, which is a little hotter, the carry distance there 215 yards. You see the launch angle is a little closer to the 12 degrees that everybody's looking for. The ball spin -- the backspin was a little less, also, and that will cause it to go a little farther. So, it's not much difference, but we saw a difference of four yards there, two balls that weren't exactly struck perfectly, weren't exactly struck by a pro.

WHITFIELD: Wow.

KATREK: And, of course, you see that, you know, my club had speed and was right around 100 miles an hour. Tiger's swing, 120 miles an hour, that makes an awful lot of difference.

WHITFIELD: Wow, well, it certainly does make a big difference. But clearly, Brian, you've got to be a good ball -- golf player anyway. And it just -- this just maybe raises you a notch or two and makes you even better looking.

KATREK: Oh, I'm just glad I didn't miss.

WHITFIELD: I'm glad for you. All right. Brian Katrek of PGAtour.com. Thanks very much and thanks for the demo.

KATREK: You got it.

WHITFIELD: Air France's Concorde fleet will fly no more. One of the graceful supersonic planes landed at Dulles Airport near Washington, D.C. on Thursday. On a one-way trip to a Smithsonian Institution display of historic aircrafts. British airways is also phasing out its Concordes, the first Concorde flight was in 1976 and all this, end of an era talk about our -- about the Concorde, got our Bruce Burkhardt to thinking about how technology has changed in 27 years.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRUCE BURKHARDT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Twenty-seven years ago, the first Cray supercomputer was introduced, weighed over 5,000 pounds, took up an entire room. Today a good laptop can do the same thing as the first Cray.

Twenty-seven years ago doctors were just experimenting with the new way for couples to have a child, test-tube babies, they were called. Today, in vitro fertilization's a routine procedure.

And, 27 years ago many of us were still actually dialing a phone. A phone that had, like, these wires, wires that went into the wall. Also around then, we used something called a pen to write something called letters, that was before e-mail.

And, back then, 27 years ago, it took three and a half hours to get from New York to Paris. Today it takes eight hours. Whoa, wait a minute, that's going backwards, isn't it? What if this trend continues?

(on camera): This is definitely subsonic transportation. I don't know if we're headed this far backwards, but still, with the passing of the Concorde, we're witnessing a rarity in human technological evolution -- de-evolution, progress in reverse.

(voice-over): And not just in technological terms, after all back then, 27 years ago, you could actually sit in an airline seat without need of a chiropractor afterwards. Progress doesn't always mean improve.

But, three and a half hours to Paris? That seemed to be an improvement. Sure, it could be argued that the Concorde was grounded by economics, not enough people willing to pay $7,000 for a one-way ticket. But, why didn't technology come up with a way to make it cheaper to fly at supersonic speeds and quieter? Some kind of silencer for that sonic boom.

So, maybe in some ways we are going backwards, either in spite of technology or because of it. 27 years ago, how many owner's manuals did you have? Nowadays we have a library full of them, for the cell phone, the computer, the printer, the DVD player, the cable box, the answering machine, et cetera, et cetera. Progress, in this case, means we spend more of our time figuring out how to do stuff rather than actually doing stuff.

(on camera): The poet Ogden Gnash died before the Concorde made its debut, but he could have been thinking of it when he said, "Progress might have been all right once, but it's gone on too long."

Bruce Burkhardt, CNN, Atlanta.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Well, that's all we have time for today, but next we'll be back tomorrow at 5:00 Eastern Time with another hour of news seen through the lens of science and technology. Hope you'll be watching and thanks for joining us, today.

Ahead on "CNN Live Saturday," coming up at the top of the hour, that's followed up by "People in the News" at 5:00 Eastern with a look at leaders in the Middle East who are trying to map out the road to peace and those who are standing in the way. Then, "CNN Saturday" at 6:00 Eastern Time.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





A Look at Military Uniform of the Future; Which U.S. City Has Dirtiest Tap Water?>