![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
PowerPost2000,
There's metric tonnes worth of gold in them thar hills. Meaning that on both sides of this perpetrated cold-war fence there were tens of thousands of jobs and seriously big-time financial and retirement benefit rewards for being encharge of such a grand collective, whereas such a hoax or not was all that counts, as otherwise keeping thousands of such highly paid positions at the top that simply would not have been created and/or sustained so long after WW-II, was clearly their priority No.1 objective. This is not even to mention upon all of their religious ruse factors that already had a long and bloody history of getting their way, or else. It's not that each side wasn't at the time honestly trying to get something to/from our extremely nearby moon. Once our first Apollo mission failed but was having to be hoaxed along in order to look as though we'd accomplish the task (else funding would have been cut), then it was just more of the same dry-runs, along with each effort obtaining more expertise and soft-science with regards to what human space travels and that task of having to eventually accomplish our moon actually represented, and therefore the learning curve of appreciating the daunting task of actually getting something/anything safely onto that nasty sucker was gradually becoming a reality, that should become doable as of today, or of at least the near furture of what sufficiently robust robotics can manage. Radiation, pesky meteorites and/or meters deep moon-dust or not, just their own Kodak moments has long since proven as a hard matter of physics fact that such unfiltered photos were not as such obtained while upon our dark and nasty moon. So, where's the argument? The likes of "tj Frazir" and of so many others as having been sufficiently correct about our moon being one extremely nasty radioactive plus cosmic/solar reactive place that our frail DNA simply can not have survived unscaved, but then why not collectively work together at terminating the likes of NASA once and for all? This Usenet of incest cloned "Art Deco" types being just another borg like brown-nosed collective part of their ongoing ruse/sting of the century, whereas their pagan religious and political skewed agenda has been clearly based upon a butt-loads of space-toilet infomercial crapolla, or much worse. Why are these folks pretending at being so all-knowing but otherwise so unable or unwilling to contribute to the actual task of informing the public, as to sharing the information as to how badly they've been snookered, and that far too many having died as a direct result of this perpetrated cold-war and the ongoing science ruse/sting of the century. tj Frazir; all these elements are charged by cosmic rays. tj Frazir; all these elements are in radioative constant. tj Frazir; How much radioactive thorium can you stand ? Russia/USSR since 1959 has in fact managed to have impacted our moon, and subsequently we've impacted that nasty sucker many times with some fairly big stuff, yet neither of us have thus far managed to establish a surviving robotic science package (not that we haven't tried every trick in the book) that's interactively contributing data as taken directly from the lunar surface. Unfortunately, survivable types of impactors having robust micro circuitry and thus being capable of such methods having provided suitable data from such science instruments simply haven't been allowed anywhere near our moon, and as far as anyone knows about fly-by-rocket landers that simply have not been up to the task of accommodating the necessary deorbit and down-range while dealing with lunar mascons, whereas the obvious thin atmosphere and terribly nasty surface environment limits our options of getting anything of size and mass safely deployed without such efforts involving some degree of final impact into the meters deep layers of salty and reactive moon dust, or having to termiate into a nearly solid basalt crater. Oddly, the ongoing exclusions of existing evidence, especially as to our moon's gamma and secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays, has thus far been the status quo of what has been excluded from their hard-science, as well as having been banished away from the remote soft-science as published for the rest of us village idiots to read about, just as were the similar gamma and other radiation spectrum readings as taken from our privately funded Lunar Prospector. In other words, it has been impossible that folks encharge of such instruments as having received these science readings about the existing gamma and hard-X-ray potential of our moon to have not known about such facts, as having been in fact playing along with our original perpetrated cold-war game plan, by way of having excluded whatever doesn't agree with the NASA/Apollo scriptures and political agenda. The same tactic goes for whatever Venus has had to offer. You'd think that this degree of skewed science as having lied it's butt(s) off and then having ever since been continually involved with covering thy butt(s) is as bad off as it gets, but it's not even the worse part of what such dastardly deeds have actually amounted to. The likes of "tj Frazir" have been sufficiently right from the very beginnings, yet having become somewhat diverted by way of these Usenet rusemasters and of their own mindset that wants certain things to be the case, when in fact so much of science and thus history is simply skewed beyond the point of no return. - Brad Guth |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Sy Liebergot "Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sy Liebergot ) writes:
Brad Guth dribbled more of his looniness and insanity: PowerPost2000, [....] - Brad Guth I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line" Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books to other people with "tin foil hats." Sy Liebergot "Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime" Mr. Liebergot, Brad Guth is a well known kook whose insanity only starts at " we never landed on the Moon ", but continues to goofy **** about Venus ( When he started, his first posted " map of Venus ", was actually one of *Mars* - really ) that makes lobotomy cases look like Einstein & Hawking in contrast. Pay him no mind, for he has none. Plonk the dip****, as most have learned to do, and everyone, save him, but who cares about him, will be the far far better for it. And, kudos for your real work, and the telling of same. Andre |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dear incest clond borg "Andre Lieven",
What can anyone that's the least bit human have to say about your pagan Third Reich buttology of skewed DNA on a stick that's so incest mutated? - Brad Guth |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dear incest cloned borg "Andre Lieven" and on behalf of the entire lot
of NASA's MIB/Usenet ****ologest, What can anyone that's still the least bit human have to share about your pathetic pagan Third Reich buttology of skewed DNA on a stick that's so incest mutated? - Brad Guth |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 9 May 2006 04:50:37 GMT, (Andre Lieven)
wrote: Mr. Liebergot, Brad Guth is a well known kook whose insanity only starts at " we never landed on the Moon " ....Pot. Kettle. Andre. RE-PLONK OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Sy Liebergot" wrote in message ... I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line" Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books to other people with "tin foil hats." Sy Liebergot "Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime" Amen Sy. Hmm, now of course I have yet another book to add to my reading list. -- Sy Liebergot |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of
you psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line" Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books to other people with "tin foil hats." Sy Liebergot "Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime" Thank you very much Sy, well said. I try to ignore this subject as well, it's just I can't help myself sometimes, I just have to say something. Great book too, thanks, yes, everyone must read it. Now, about that tour of JSC .... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sy Liebergot,
How many times and ways can you be called a LLPOF brown-nosed borg of the mainstream status quo? You and your kind absolutely suck and blow, at delivering nothing but disinformation and much worse. Our moon is more than sufficiently radioactive and otherwise it's rather reactive. The lunar surface environment is not only IR and secondary/recoil IR roasted to death by day and otherwise sub-frozen by night whereas Rn becomes LRn if not frozen solid, and it's also chuck full of nasty gamma and hard-X-rays (especially by day). Unlike yourself, Kodak film doesn't lie. The standard laws of physics and of multiple hard-science that's easily replicated proves that we haven't walked on that moon, not to mention that you have no such stinking fly-by-rocket lander, not even as of today. I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line" Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books to other people with "tin foil hats." Sy Liebergot "Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime" The only one here that's "off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin" are the brown-nosed borgs as having been incest cloned like yourself. Are you actually that snookered and subsequently dumbfounded? - Brad Guth |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Brad Guth wrote: Sy Liebergot, How many times and ways can you be called a LLPOF brown-nosed borg of the mainstream status quo? You and your kind absolutely suck and blow, at delivering nothing but disinformation and much worse. See? Although he brought back the "borg" reference and dropped "incest clone" this time. There isn't a lot of difference. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ISS needs to go to the MOON, with or w/o crew | Brad Guth | Policy | 1 | March 31st 05 12:58 AM |
Apollo | Buzz alDredge | Astronomy Misc | 5 | July 28th 04 10:05 AM |
The apollo faq | the inquirer | Misc | 4 | April 15th 04 04:45 AM |
significant addition to section 25 of the faq | heat | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 15th 04 01:20 AM |
The Apollo FAQ (moon landings were faked) | Nathan Jones | Misc | 8 | February 4th 04 06:48 PM |