"Jordan" wrote in message
oups.com

The easiest explanation, given the differences between what was said on
the sites you referenced and what you claimed, is that you've confused
your units of radiation. And no, I'm _not_ going to ignore the data
gathered by the only organization that ever carried out Lunar landings
-- that would be insane.

Christ almighty on a stick, Jordan, I've been over and over this a
million times, and no matters how hard and/or how often you'd care to
stipulate that we've walked on that moon, there's simply no such
replicated proof (the required physics nor their supposed replicated
science simply isn't there to behold), not via any hocus-pocus
fly-by-rocket lander and especially not even via those absolutely wussy
retroreflectors that at best contribute fewer photons than any of their
Apollo impact craters that's subsequently coated with the vaporised
remains of whatever we'd sent to it's demise. Besides, that naked moon
of ours is simply and unavoidably too anticathode gamma and hard-X-ray
lethal, not to mention double-IR roasting by day and/or as continually
pulverised enough to vaporise salt. How end-user friendly do you
actually think the cosmic influx and of that solar wind actually is?

Do you folks actually think and/or want others to perceive that such
warm and fuzzy solar and cosmic influx is passive?

Do you folks expect others to perceive the raw/unfiltered solar
illumination influx is exactly as though derived from the spectrum of a
xenon lamp?

At merely an average of having been on the receiving end of obtaining
one wussy micron per year as collecting from all of that available space
debris and of meteorites and of their subsequent impact generated dust,
plus from whatever's subsequently contributed via those horrific
secondary impact shards; just how little dust should that moon have to
offer, and how otherwise fluffy or whatever clumping or otherwise
compacted should that supposedly old moon and of that fluffy moon-dust
that's apparently none reactive actually be?

Our pathetic NASA can't hardly even shine when their stuff finally/(sort
of) works.
For example; their old DC-X test flights / DeltaClipper.mov
http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/...ltaClipper.mov
http://www.orbitersim.com/v2/read.asp?id=19376
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/dcx.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-X

With 24,000+ kgf, it had actually worked with energy and thus payload to
spare, though I believe we still haven't been properly informed as to
the extent of their applied rocket-science, nor as to appreciating the
rather excessive amount of their GLOW or of their nearly 50% inert
portion thereof (that's without shielding and without live payloas of
crew nor of any expedition outfitting), much less as to the 9800 kg of
fuel which had been intended to last only a few minutes (I'm thinking
they should have used h2o2/RP-1 or better yet h2o2/c3h4o), nor sharing
as to whatever extent they'd instead relied upon highly advanced
computers plus so easily could have incorporated momentum reaction
wheels. The DC-X had otherwise proven that as of three decades after
our initial Apollo fiasco, in that we'd finally accomplished what it
would have taken (though still representing a rather hefty sucker,
flight time limited and never once drop tested) as a remote pilotted
and/or AI/robotic controlled fly-by-rocket capability.

Unfortunately, of having applied nearly three decades more advanced
rocket-science and under the ultimate of locally controlled conditions,
they had 7 out of 12 as failures. (not exactly a great confidence
builder, especially if it was your butt headed for that physically dark
and nasty moon)

In other words, our NASA had invested into another extremely spendy
effort that can't be openly touted nor much less shared for whatever the
truth it represents. As in no matters what, the public and of the
international science and of the space exploration groups within are
simply not allowed to realize the full potential and/or grief of
whatever the spendy learning curve, nor otherwise as to learning exactly
how badly snookered they have all been, as in summarily screwed, blued
and tattooed for life.

The NASA Delta Clipper was their best effort prototype of any such
fly-by-rocket spaceship/lander is essentially devoid of sufficient
internal specifics, whereas such expertise remains as somewhat
stealth/invisible as were those WMD in Iraq. Obviously the DC-X/DC-XA
had functioned at least part of the time, though apparently they'd
cheated by way of having eliminated those pesky pilot error factors by
way of being so extensively AI/computerised, and otherwise as having
spent their fun and games budget for the next decade on behalf of
accomplishing just that much.

Of course, attempting to honestly discuss anything remotely similar as
to those previous hocus-pocus NASA/Apollo fly-by-rocket landers that had
to deal with those pesky lunar mascons, plus hauling a fairly good
amount of live and accessory payloads, including sufficient fuel loads
that was unavoidably changing their CG by the second, and otherwise
having incorporated plenty of other unavoidable inert mass to deal with
(such as packing along their return-home package), though officially
never once having accomplished an actual prototype (reduced
mass/increased thrust) test craft on behalf of any honest efforts for
accomplishing the controlled task of an incoming, down-range and soft
landing of their very own, certainly not as directly astronaut pilotted
nor even as having been remote piloted, nor much less as fully
AI/robotically having acconmplished squat.

Yet supposedly never a single hitch within any of those controlled
deorbits from 100 km, of getting their butts safely down-range past each
of those lunar mascons and then maneouvered to each of their soft
landings where there wasn't hardly any depth of dust to be found, and
not even all that dusty nor all that dark of terrain for as far as their
EVAs and unfiltered Kodak eye could see, and all of that accomplished
without benefit of their landers having the sorts of computer interfaced
fly-by-wire management of flight stability via those above GC reaction
thrusters, nor having any of those airframe momentum reaction wheels as
likely incorporated within NASA's Delta Clipper.

It's as though all the good folks associated with those DC-X/DC-XA
flights were sworn to their usual cloak and dagger and otherwise lethal
nondisclosure policy (each having signed their soul to that internal
policy in their own blood) because, at all cost the truth simply
couldn't ever be told, much less publicly demonstrated at even a fully
secured (AKA need to know) air show without spilling a few too many
beans, such as our not even having so much as the unreliable
fly-by-rocket capability as of the Apollo era.

You folks that insist upon believing we've walked on that physically
dark and nasty moon, and somehow our astronauts and their Kodak film
that was near-UV and UV-a sensitive as well as easily prone to being
affected by radiation, as somehow having lived entirely unscaved as to
tell us about it, are either sick little puppies or you've become the
very worse of collaborating minions in support of whatever your LLPOF
Skull and Bones cult represents.

I for one totally agree that we need to focus our best talents and
resources upon those new and improved missions as per sending off the
sorts of sufficiently rad-hard robotic probes. However, what we have
here is a serious priority need of kicking Usenet butt, then as to kick
a few other sorry butts that have been nothing but mainstream liars and
systematic intellectual bigots of the worse possible kind.

Don't suppose there's any honest Usenet intentions of these insider
folks, as for their ever becoming the least bit open mindset, any more
so likely than hearing from our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) that his
actions and of those closely associated and of a few too many before his
administration were nothing short of having imposed their crimes against
humanity and of otherwise continually raping our global warming
environment to boot.

As to their excluding of whatever's evidence that doesn't happen to
please your mainstream status quo or bust mindset, whereas the
NASA/Apollo ruse of the century simply isn't working, now is it, any
more so than is their perpetual denial of denial being of any further
use. But then liars are in auto-default of their denial being in
auto-protect denial; so what's the difference?

We need to think along the lines of the somewhat mass produced and
thereby affordable and fully expendable rad-hard science for obtaining
those new and improved instruments and of deploying such as robotics
rather than pushing our frail DNA over the edge, along with all the
necessary applied technology that we simply do not have for sustaining a
mission with human crew. As of today's capability, of what micro-probes
and/or of relatively small robotics can obviously survive in the most
extreme of places, that are of places otherwise taboo/off-limits as to
even the most advanced forms of applied technology that's intended for
sustaining our frail DNA, and supposedly of returning it home as none
the worse off for wear, of which thus far simply can not be
accomplished.

For the old hocus-pocus Apollo gipper; Here's one more of my somewhat
dyslexic alternative reviews, at considering the cosmic radiation impact
upon your frail DNA while situated on or anywhere near that anticathode
moon of our's, thus making my argument for having the 50t/m2 available
to the CM/ISS abode as being within spec of what long-term survival at
even 60,000 km away from our physically dark and nasty moon has to
offer, as being not such a bad idea.

According to our NASA certified science with regards to the cosmic
influx of roughly one hit per second per cm2, the following is merely
extrapolated in order to estimate the lunar surface environment that's
without benefit of having a magnetosphere, therefore by rights I'm being
rather conservative, as if anything the naked moon unavoidably receives
more than it's fair share of merely one cosmic hit/cm2/sec.

However, at taking on merely those 36e6 cosmic hits/m2/hr, and for using
the conservative square root of that amount = 6e3 mrem or 6 rem/hr. A
TBI(total body irradiation) of .06 Sv/hr is obviously survivable for
several hours worth of exposure, that is if that were the one and only
amount of dosage your DNA had to worry about.

Humans living with gamma and of the unavoidable hard-X-rays isn't
exactly doable:
Of course, outer space and essentially that of our naked moon is not 2D,
but rather 3D/cubic, whereas your 3D body and of the 3D spacecrafe
and/or lunar terrain surrounding it is therefore not limited to the m2
worth of cosmic influx. Instead, your 3D body might be worth roughly
0.1 m3 which equals 100,000 cm3, making it into a cosmic target that's
10 fold as bad off. Therefore taking on 360e6 cosmic hits/hr, and if
we're using the same conservative conversion into mrem of taking the
square root makes that internal dosage of DNA trauma worthy of 19e3 mrem
or 19 rem/hr.

Unfortunately, you're never alone while moonsuit walking about, whereas
you're entire body and frail DNA within are continually surrounded by at
least 3.14e6 m2 of that physically dark and nasty lunar anticathode
terrain of physical matter, that's roughly half again as dense as
aluminum and otherwise better than 3 times the density of your body, and
thereby unavoidably more reactive in a bad sort of way of generating
those nastier forms of secondary/recoil energies of soft-gamma and
hard-X-rays.

Since the lunar atmosphere is supposedly so sparse (merely a little
sodium/salty by day), the amount of mass or atmospheric shield density
that's between yourself and any of those surrounding 3.14e6 m2 that are
naturally and unavoidably being anticathode at doing their thing, of
each m2 emitting humanly lethal dosage, whereas this outcome is not by
any means a good sign.

3.14e6 * 0.06 Sv = 188.4e3 Sv/hr, whereas if your body were only getting
0.1% of that surrounding dosage is still worth 188 Sv/hr. This is where
being a rad-hard robot gets to looking as a really good idea.

Of course, if we'd ever established those interactive science probes on
the lunar deck, or even having established that science platform as
efficiently station-keeping itself within the interactive LL-1 zone, as
such these efforts would have long ago eliminated all of the swag of
such speculations that myself and others have had to make do with. Thus
far we're not even getting the honest science about our moon from ACE
that once a month has a really good look-see, and not surprisingly our
moon was even banished by our MESSENGER flyby. It's as though our moon
is the most taboo/nondisclosure orb next to Venus and then Sirius,
whereas any of those three items are never getting the attention they
deserve, and subsequently generation after generation of students are
essentially having to learn via infomercial-crapolla-science instead of
the truth.

Unfortunately, each and every time I've taken the initiative upon
myself, as having suggested deploying extremely low cost alternatives,
for getting small/micro science probes or of those within my JAVELINs as
implanted into our moon, whereas this is when all the usual mainstream
status quo of their wag-thy-dogs to death of their infomercial flak
started to fly. Instead of getting a productive Usenet community
think-tank of folks honestly sharing in the best available science
that's replicated, and of sharing upon other viable ideas and/or
alternatives, instead we get MOS anti-think-tankism of their
insufferable Usenet naysayism in the forms of topic/author stalking,
bashings and wherever possible banishments applied, along with
whatever's the evidence that's shared on behalf of our constructive
arguments getting excluded if such evidence represents the least bit of
whatever rocks their good ship LOLLIPOP.

If that's not bad enough, we also get to receive an extra worth of PC
infecting dosage from their NOVA/GOOGLE/Usenet server accommodated
gauntlet, of delivering those absolutely pesky spermware/****ware to
continually deal with, plus that of our email accounts getting trashed
with further butt-loads of their worse possible infected files, and
otherwise for years I've had hundreds of those pesky hang-up phone calls
that are obviously intended to impose as much damage as possible by
remote means, that which our cloak and dagger MI/NSA spooks have
entirely at their disposal and within their intentions as to utilize
every means available without spilling any of their precious
nondisclosure beans (such as our perpetrated cold-wars that as of lately
have produced such extensive collateral damage and carnage of the
innocent).

In other words, there's apparently so much that I'm right about that
it's getting a wee bit hot and nasty to be sharing whatever without
involving yet another round of status quo flak. So, if you're at all
interested in our moon, Venus or our orbital association with the Sirius
star/solar system, as such I'd advise being prepared for taking on the
absolute worse of the worse sorts of nasty things to happen, and so much
so that it could become a whole lot safer for those Venusians or
visiting ETs as having existed/coexisted on Venus than it is for those
of us right here on this polluted and subsequently global warming Earth
that's about to go WW-III postal in order to further cover thy
perpetrated cold-war butts.

As I've said before, the geothermally active surface environment of
Venus is simply a whole lot safer than Earth when it comes down to the
solar/cosmic levels of Sv. That Venusian environment is obviously not
Earth like (more or less hell like), but as such it also isn't all that
humanly insurmountable if a gram of intelligent common sense gets
applied (a halfwit village idiot should be qualified). The ESA Venus
EXPRESS mission has been helping to prove this argument to be true,
especially once their PFS instrument gets into action (as by rights it
should), that will better map the surface of that geothermally active
terrain to a much greater resolution and extent than previously obtained
(as limited only by their highly elliptical polar orbit or otherwise
foiled by way of our spooks interfering with their to/from command
instructions and/or merely corrupting their mission data).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG