Why is the moon BLUE ?

That moon of ours is not actually blue, except to the unfiltered
camera eye.

In addition to our physically dark, dusty and electrostatic charged
moon that's more than gamma saturated, as well as having to look as
though rather bluish to the naked/unfiltered Kodak eye, and especially
to the greater DR(dynamic range) of an unfiltered CCD eye, it's thin
atmosphere is also more than a wee bit hot and salty.

The Moon's Sodium Tail and the Leonid Meteor Shower http://sirius.bu.edu/moontail/

It seems that camera optics intended for depicting that close-up look-
see at our naked moon as to what the human eye would perceive once
outside of our polluted atmosphere, as such requires a quality applied
layer of a bandpass coating (as done for the JAXA/Selene mission) in
addition to such optics having a sufficient spectrum cutoff filter of
deep yellow or amber/orange (of which JAXA/Selene clearly did not
have) that'll greatly attenuate the unavoidable UV/black-light
generated affect of our unusually massive and nearby moon otherwise
appearing as though looking so gosh darn bluish if not somewhat deep
purple as recorded by way of the ongoing China/Chang'e mission.

As well, it seems those S8/sulphur acidic saturated clouds of Venus
that are rather reflective as well as unavoidably reactive to the raw
UV worth of cosmic and solar illumination, to the point of also
looking by way of the unfiltered camera eye as being somewhat of a
vibrant purple/violet spectrum, that's nicely reflecting roughly 80%
of the 2600+ w/m2 rather effectively, thus making Venus seem
unavoidably for its relative size as somewhat brighter looking than
Earth, is still an odd one in that our NASA/Apollo teams have simply
never once managed to get any part of that bright little orb within
any given FOV(field of view), as for otherwise being unavoidably right
there to behold from the standpoint of a given EVA or especially
unavoidably obvious from lunar orbit, as being clearly situated above
that physically dark lunar horizon and otherwise situated at times
within the very same FOV as though parked or rather passing near our
polluted and somewhat albedo dim Earth.

Most any real or computer simulated interactive 3D solar system
simulator more than proves as to exactly where the planet Venus was at
any given time, such as to each those Apollo missions of A-11, A-14
and A-16, yet all the very best of NASA's all-knowing wizards within
their uplink.space.com and/or of most any other internet science
forum, or even within the vast borg like community of Usenet can't
seem to manage to share any such 3D interactive orbital perspective,
even though they have always had access to the newest and best of our
public supercomputers along with all the very best of fully
interactive 3D simulation software that'll knock our virtual animation
socks off. Go figure.
- Brad Guth

Ask a really good question or much less suggest that we're not being
told the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and all the sudden the
lights of Usenet go out.
- Brad Guth -

BradGuth wrote:
That moon of ours is not actually blue, except to the unfiltered
camera eye.

In addition to our physically dark, dusty and electrostatic charged
moon that's more than gamma saturated, as well as having to look as
though rather bluish to the naked/unfiltered Kodak eye, and especially
to the greater DR(dynamic range) of an unfiltered CCD eye, it's thin
atmosphere is also more than a wee bit hot and salty.

The Moon's Sodium Tail and the Leonid Meteor Shower http://sirius.bu.edu/moontail/

It seems that camera optics intended for depicting that close-up look-
see at our naked moon as to what the human eye would perceive once
outside of our polluted atmosphere, as such requires a quality applied
layer of a bandpass coating (as done for the JAXA/Selene mission) in
addition to such optics having a sufficient spectrum cutoff filter of
deep yellow or amber/orange (of which JAXA/Selene clearly did not
have) that'll greatly attenuate the unavoidable UV/black-light
generated affect of our unusually massive and nearby moon otherwise
appearing as though looking so gosh darn bluish if not somewhat deep
purple as recorded by way of the ongoing China/Chang'e mission.

As well, it seems those S8/sulphur acidic saturated clouds of Venus
that are rather reflective as well as unavoidably reactive to the raw
UV worth of cosmic and solar illumination, to the point of also
looking by way of the unfiltered camera eye as being somewhat of a
vibrant purple/violet spectrum, that's nicely reflecting roughly 80%
of the 2600+ w/m2 rather effectively, thus making Venus seem
unavoidably for its relative size as somewhat brighter looking than
Earth, is still an odd one in that our NASA/Apollo teams have simply
never once managed to get any part of that bright little orb within
any given FOV(field of view), as for otherwise being unavoidably right
there to behold from the standpoint of a given EVA or especially
unavoidably obvious from lunar orbit, as being clearly situated above
that physically dark lunar horizon and otherwise situated at times
within the very same FOV as though parked or rather passing near our
polluted and somewhat albedo dim Earth.

Most any real or computer simulated interactive 3D solar system
simulator more than proves as to exactly where the planet Venus was at
any given time, such as to each those Apollo missions of A-11, A-14
and A-16, yet all the very best of NASA's all-knowing wizards within
their uplink.space.com and/or of most any other internet science
forum, or even within the vast borg like community of Usenet can't
seem to manage to share any such 3D interactive orbital perspective,
even though they have always had access to the newest and best of our
public supercomputers along with all the very best of fully
interactive 3D simulation software that'll knock our virtual animation
socks off. Go figure.
- Brad Guth

On Dec 21, 7:59 am, BradGuth wrote:
Ask a really good question or much less suggest that we're not being
told the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and all the sudden the
lights of Usenet go out.
- Brad Guth -


No, it is a more obvious reason.

You and your constant babbling about nothing is just being ignored,
just like MI-5's.

On Dec 21, 5:21 am, wrote:
On Dec 21, 7:59 am, BradGuth wrote:

Ask a really good question or much less suggest that we're not being
told the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and all the sudden the
lights of Usenet go out.
- Brad Guth -

No, it is a more obvious reason.

You and your constant babbling about nothing is just being ignored,
just like MI-5's.

In other words, your MI5/CIA boss that's likely standing directly
behind you (with a gun pointed at your empty head) is not going to
allow any Usenet chat about our unusually blue moon, or much less
about how NASA and of their Apollo wizards with all that right stuff
managed to hide Venus.

JAXA / SELENE (KAGUYA)
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communi...#NEW_20071214A

Notice their intentional color removal of the moon, and of those very
same images as otherwise depicting mother Earth in full color.

Notice down the page of those other full color images of just the moon
itself along with parts of the their spacecraft as depicted in such a
nifty bluish saturation hue. Remember that Selene's quality optics
had been bandpass coated in order to cut out the vast bulk of UV and
IR to start with.

Unfortunately their "KAGUYA Image Gallery" that's apparently forever
stuck with using the "Adobe(R) Flash Player(R)" is what seriously
sucks, as sharing far less than full resolution and otherwise running
extremely poorly on most computers w/o a super fast internet
connection and lots of extra PC memory.
- Brad Guth

wrote:
On Dec 21, 7:59 am, BradGuth wrote:
Ask a really good question or much less suggest that we're not being
told the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and all the sudden the
lights of Usenet go out.
- Brad Guth -


No, it is a more obvious reason.

You and your constant babbling about nothing is just being ignored,
just like MI-5's.

Jim, it appears to me that not only are you reading his posts, you are
responding to them.

On Dec 21, 6:47 am, kT wrote:

Jim, it appears to me that not only are you reading his posts, you are
responding to them.

How many tonnes of sodium is our moon losing per day, or per lunar
month?
- Brad Guth -

The Moon is not actually BLUE, except to the unfiltered eye. A good
orange/amber worth of optical filter, as added onto an otherwise
bandpass coated lens would have permitted a somewhat more natural
color looking moon, as though viewed from Earth using a good telescope
that's getting extensively filtered by our polluted atmosphere and
secondly by the rather extensive 8r worth of sodium atmosphere
associated with that moon.

However, it looks as though we're being lied to again and again. In
other words, it seems their MI5/CIA boss or MIB agent in charge of
damage control, that's likely standing directly behind each operator
of their spendy supercomputer work stations (with a loaded gun pointed
at each of their empty heads) is not about to allow any public Usenet
chat about our unusually blue moon, or much less about how their NASA
and of those rad-hard Apollo wizards, along with all that Semitic
Third Reich kind of right stuff as having so nicely managed to always
hide Venus.

JAXA / SELENE (KAGUYA)
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communi...#NEW_20071214A

Notice their intentional color removal of the moon, and of those very
same images as otherwise depicting mother Earth in full color.

Notice down the page of those other full color images of just the moon
itself along with parts of the their spacecraft as depicted in such a
nifty bluish saturation hue. Remember that Selene's quality optics
had been bandpass coated in order to cut out the vast bulk of UV and
IR to start with.

The rather impressive blue saturated hue is clearly an expected color
shift or tint, that's due to all of the raw secondary/recoil of what
most reactive items getting UV saturated should look like to such a
bandpass filtered CCD or especially to that of an unfiltered Kodak
film recorded image.

Unfortunately, their "KAGUYA Image Gallery" that's apparently forever
stuck with using the "Adobe(R) Flash Player(R)" is what seriously
sucks, as sharing far less than full resolution and otherwise running
extremely poorly on most computers w/o a super fast internet
connection and lots of extra PC memory.

The science from their "X-ray Spectrometer(XRS)" and "Gamma Ray
Spectrometer(GRS)" being equally saturated at much greater levels than
expected, as such may also have to become excluded from the public,
because of such data being so unexpectedly intense or off-scale that
an entirely new effort at obtaining such intended science about the
complex surface of our physically dark moon may have to wait for the
next available mission. Perhaps the lunar exploration efforts by
India will have adapted the necessary narrow bandpass of sufficient
optical filtering, as well as for having greater XRS/GRS scope in
order to properly deal with the unusual gamma and X-ray intensity of
what that naked and very anticathode moon actually represents.

KAGUYA/(SELENE) HDTV/CCD imaging getting its first full solar dosage
or skewed saturation of those pesky raw secondary photons, as for
looking rather deep blue.
http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/10/20071021_kaguya_e.pdf
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/index_e.htm
http://www.kaguya.jaxa.jp/en/
Notice as to all of those unavoidable UV secondary/recoil worth of
that bluish and/or extra purple/violet saturation that KAGUYA/(SELENE)
HDTV is having to deal with, even though their having incorproated a
sufficient UV spectrum cut-off filter and currently using not more
than a few percent worth of their HDTV dynamic range(DR), even so
having no problems with recording the physically dark moon along with
Earth that's not even half the albedo worth of Vemus which also has
greater than 2.6 kw/m2 to work with. Far better images are soon
enough going to be accomplished, especially with those other onboard
CCD instruments that'll far exceed what most previous science about
our extremely unusual moon.
- Brad Guth -


BradGuth wrote:
That moon of ours is not actually blue, except to the unfiltered
camera eye.

In addition to our physically dark, dusty and electrostatic charged
moon that's more than gamma saturated, as well as having to look as
though rather bluish to the naked/unfiltered Kodak eye, and especially
to the greater DR(dynamic range) of an unfiltered CCD eye, it's thin
atmosphere is also more than a wee bit hot and salty.

The Moon's Sodium Tail and the Leonid Meteor Shower http://sirius.bu.edu/moontail/

It seems that camera optics intended for depicting that close-up look-
see at our naked moon as to what the human eye would perceive once
outside of our polluted atmosphere, as such requires a quality applied
layer of a bandpass coating (as done for the JAXA/Selene mission) in
addition to such optics having a sufficient spectrum cutoff filter of
deep yellow or amber/orange (of which JAXA/Selene clearly did not
have) that'll greatly attenuate the unavoidable UV/black-light
generated affect of our unusually massive and nearby moon otherwise
appearing as though looking so gosh darn bluish if not somewhat deep
purple as recorded by way of the ongoing China/Chang'e mission.

As well, it seems those S8/sulphur acidic saturated clouds of Venus
that are rather reflective as well as unavoidably reactive to the raw
UV worth of cosmic and solar illumination, to the point of also
looking by way of the unfiltered camera eye as being somewhat of a
vibrant purple/violet spectrum, that's nicely reflecting roughly 80%
of the 2600+ w/m2 rather effectively, thus making Venus seem
unavoidably for its relative size as somewhat brighter looking than
Earth, is still an odd one in that our NASA/Apollo teams have simply
never once managed to get any part of that bright little orb within
any given FOV(field of view), as for otherwise being unavoidably right
there to behold from the standpoint of a given EVA or especially
unavoidably obvious from lunar orbit, as being clearly situated above
that physically dark lunar horizon and otherwise situated at times
within the very same FOV as though parked or rather passing near our
polluted and somewhat albedo dim Earth.

Most any real or computer simulated interactive 3D solar system
simulator more than proves as to exactly where the planet Venus was at
any given time, such as to each those Apollo missions of A-11, A-14
and A-16, yet all the very best of NASA's all-knowing wizards within
their uplink.space.com and/or of most any other internet science
forum, or even within the vast borg like community of Usenet can't
seem to manage to share any such 3D interactive orbital perspective,
even though they have always had access to the newest and best of our
public supercomputers along with all the very best of fully
interactive 3D simulation software that'll knock our virtual animation
socks off. Go figure.
- Brad Guth

On Dec 21, 7:06 am, BradGuth wrote:
The Moon is not actually BLUE, except to the unfiltered eye. A good
orange/amber worth of optical filter, as added onto an otherwise
bandpass coated lens would have permitted a somewhat more natural
color looking moon, as though viewed from Earth using a good telescope
that's getting extensively filtered by our polluted atmosphere and
secondly by the rather extensive 8r worth of sodium atmosphere
associated with that moon.

However, it looks as though we're being lied to again and again. In
other words, it seems their MI5/CIA boss or MIB agent in charge of
damage control, that's likely standing directly behind each operator
of their spendy supercomputer work stations (with a loaded gun pointed
at each of their empty heads) is not about to allow any public Usenet
chat about our unusually blue moon, or much less about how their NASA
and of those rad-hard Apollo wizards, along with all that Semitic
Third Reich kind of right stuff as having so nicely managed to always
hide Venus.

JAXA / SELENE (KAGUYA)http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communi...ion_e.htm#NEW_...

Notice their intentional color removal of the moon, and of those very
same images as otherwise depicting mother Earth in full color.

Notice down the page of those other full color images of just the moon
itself along with parts of the their spacecraft as depicted in such a
nifty bluish saturation hue. Remember that Selene's quality optics
had been bandpass coated in order to cut out the vast bulk of UV and
IR to start with.

The rather impressive blue saturated hue is clearly an expected color
shift or tint, that's due to all of the raw secondary/recoil of what
most reactive items getting UV saturated should look like to such a
bandpass filtered CCD or especially to that of an unfiltered Kodak
film recorded image.

Unfortunately, their "KAGUYA Image Gallery" that's apparently forever
stuck with using the "Adobe(R) Flash Player(R)" is what seriously
sucks, as sharing far less than full resolution and otherwise running
extremely poorly on most computers w/o a super fast internet
connection and lots of extra PC memory.

The science from their "X-ray Spectrometer(XRS)" and "Gamma Ray
Spectrometer(GRS)" being equally saturated at much greater levels than
expected, as such may also have to become excluded from the public,
because of such data being so unexpectedly intense or off-scale that
an entirely new effort at obtaining such intended science about the
complex surface of our physically dark moon may have to wait for the
next available mission. Perhaps the lunar exploration efforts by
India will have adapted the necessary narrow bandpass of sufficient
optical filtering, as well as for having greater XRS/GRS scope in
order to properly deal with the unusual gamma and X-ray intensity of
what that naked and very anticathode moon actually represents.

KAGUYA/(SELENE) HDTV/CCD imaging getting its first full solar dosage
or skewed saturation of those pesky raw secondary photons, as for
looking rather deep blue.http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/10/200...ya.jaxa.jp/en/
Notice as to all of those unavoidable UV secondary/recoil worth of
that bluish and/or extra purple/violet saturation that KAGUYA/(SELENE)
HDTV is having to deal with, even though their having incorproated a
sufficient UV spectrum cut-off filter and currently using not more
than a few percent worth of their HDTV dynamic range(DR), even so
having no problems with recording the physically dark moon along with
Earth that's not even half the albedo worth of Vemus which also has
greater than 2.6 kw/m2 to work with. Far better images are soon
enough going to be accomplished, especially with those other onboard
CCD instruments that'll far exceed what most previous science about
our extremely unusual moon.
- Brad Guth -

BradGuth wrote:
That moon of ours is not actually blue, except to the unfiltered
camera eye.

In addition to our physically dark, dusty and electrostatic charged
moon that's more than gamma saturated, as well as having to look as
though rather bluish to the naked/unfiltered Kodak eye, and especially
to the greater DR(dynamic range) of an unfiltered CCD eye, it's thin
atmosphere is also more than a wee bit hot and salty.

The Moon's Sodium Tail and the Leonid Meteor Shower http://sirius.bu.edu/moontail/

It seems that camera optics intended for depicting that close-up look-
see at our naked moon as to what the human eye would perceive once
outside of our polluted atmosphere, as such requires a quality applied
layer of a bandpass coating (as done for the JAXA/Selene mission) in
addition to such optics having a sufficient spectrum cutoff filter of
deep yellow or amber/orange (of which JAXA/Selene clearly did not
have) that'll greatly attenuate the unavoidable UV/black-light
generated affect of our unusually massive and nearby moon otherwise
appearing as though looking so gosh darn bluish if not somewhat deep
purple as recorded by way of the ongoing China/Chang'e mission.

As well, it seems those S8/sulphur acidic saturated clouds of Venus
that are rather reflective as well as unavoidably reactive to the raw
UV worth of cosmic and solar illumination, to the point of also
looking by way of the unfiltered camera eye as being somewhat of a
vibrant purple/violet spectrum, that's nicely reflecting roughly 80%
of the 2600+ w/m2 rather effectively, thus making Venus seem
unavoidably for its relative size as somewhat brighter looking than
Earth, is still an odd one in that our NASA/Apollo teams have simply
never once managed to get any part of that bright little orb within
any given FOV(field of view), as for otherwise being unavoidably right
there to behold from the standpoint of a given EVA or especially
unavoidably obvious from lunar orbit, as being clearly situated above
that physically dark lunar horizon and otherwise situated at times
within the very same FOV as though parked or rather passing near our
polluted and somewhat albedo dim Earth.

Most any real or computer simulated interactive 3D solar system
simulator more than proves as to exactly where the planet Venus was at
any given time, such as to each those Apollo missions of A-11, A-14
and A-16, yet all the very best of NASA's all-knowing wizards within
their uplink.space.com and/or of most any other internet science
forum, or even within the vast borg like community of Usenet can't
seem to manage to share any such 3D interactive orbital perspective,
even though they have always had access to the newest and best of our
public supercomputers along with all the very best of fully
interactive 3D simulation software that'll knock our virtual animation
socks off. Go figure.
- Brad Guth

Perhaps that NASA/Apollo certified passive(nonreactive) moon of ours
that just so happens via those unfiltered Kodak moments to look
exactly like a xenon arc lamp illuminated guano island, that isn't the
least bit physically dark, dusty or even electrostatic charged, is
only such a blue saturated hue as to those **** poor cameras and lousy
coated optics, as made in Japan and apparently of much worse quality
by those of China. What do you folks think?

- Brad Guth

On Dec 21, 7:06 am, BradGuth wrote:
The Moon is not actually BLUE, except to the unfiltered eye. A good
orange/amber worth of optical filter, as added onto an otherwise
bandpass coated lens would have permitted a somewhat more natural
color looking moon, as though viewed from Earth using a good telescope
that's getting extensively filtered by our polluted atmosphere and
secondly by the rather extensive 8r worth of sodium atmosphere
associated with that moon.

However, it looks as though we're being lied to again and again. In
other words, it seems their MI5/CIA boss or MIB agent in charge of
damage control, that's likely standing directly behind each operator
of their spendy supercomputer work stations (with a loaded gun pointed
at each of their empty heads) is not about to allow any public Usenet
chat about our unusually blue moon, or much less about how their NASA
and of those rad-hard Apollo wizards, along with all that Semitic
Third Reich kind of right stuff as having so nicely managed to always
hide Venus.

JAXA / SELENE (KAGUYA)http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communi...ion_e.htm#NEW_...

Notice their intentional color removal of the moon, and of those very
same images as otherwise depicting mother Earth in full color.

Notice down the page of those other full color images of just the moon
itself along with parts of the their spacecraft as depicted in such a
nifty bluish saturation hue. Remember that Selene's quality optics
had been bandpass coated in order to cut out the vast bulk of UV and
IR to start with.

The rather impressive blue saturated hue is clearly an expected color
shift or tint, that's due to all of the raw secondary/recoil of what
most reactive items getting UV saturated should look like to such a
bandpass filtered CCD or especially to that of an unfiltered Kodak
film recorded image.

Unfortunately, their "KAGUYA Image Gallery" that's apparently forever
stuck with using the "Adobe(R) Flash Player(R)" is what seriously
sucks, as sharing far less than full resolution and otherwise running
extremely poorly on most computers w/o a super fast internet
connection and lots of extra PC memory.

The science from their "X-ray Spectrometer(XRS)" and "Gamma Ray
Spectrometer(GRS)" being equally saturated at much greater levels than
expected, as such may also have to become excluded from the public,
because of such data being so unexpectedly intense or off-scale that
an entirely new effort at obtaining such intended science about the
complex surface of our physically dark moon may have to wait for the
next available mission. Perhaps the lunar exploration efforts by
India will have adapted the necessary narrow bandpass of sufficient
optical filtering, as well as for having greater XRS/GRS scope in
order to properly deal with the unusual gamma and X-ray intensity of
what that naked and very anticathode moon actually represents.

KAGUYA/(SELENE) HDTV/CCD imaging getting its first full solar dosage
or skewed saturation of those pesky raw secondary photons, as for
looking rather deep blue.http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/10/200...ya.jaxa.jp/en/
Notice as to all of those unavoidable UV secondary/recoil worth of
that bluish and/or extra purple/violet saturation that KAGUYA/(SELENE)
HDTV is having to deal with, even though their having incorproated a
sufficient UV spectrum cut-off filter and currently using not more
than a few percent worth of their HDTV dynamic range(DR), even so
having no problems with recording the physically dark moon along with
Earth that's not even half the albedo worth of Vemus which also has
greater than 2.6 kw/m2 to work with. Far better images are soon
enough going to be accomplished, especially with those other onboard
CCD instruments that'll far exceed what most previous science about
our extremely unusual moon.
- Brad Guth -





BradGuth wrote:
That moon of ours is not actually blue, except to the unfiltered
camera eye.

In addition to our physically dark, dusty and electrostatic charged
moon that's more than gamma saturated, as well as having to look as
though rather bluish to the naked/unfiltered Kodak eye, and especially
to the greater DR(dynamic range) of an unfiltered CCD eye, it's thin
atmosphere is also more than a wee bit hot and salty.

The Moon's Sodium Tail and the Leonid Meteor Shower http://sirius.bu.edu/moontail/

It seems that camera optics intended for depicting that close-up look-
see at our naked moon as to what the human eye would perceive once
outside of our polluted atmosphere, as such requires a quality applied
layer of a bandpass coating (as done for the JAXA/Selene mission) in
addition to such optics having a sufficient spectrum cutoff filter of
deep yellow or amber/orange (of which JAXA/Selene clearly did not
have) that'll greatly attenuate the unavoidable UV/black-light
generated affect of our unusually massive and nearby moon otherwise
appearing as though looking so gosh darn bluish if not somewhat deep
purple as recorded by way of the ongoing China/Chang'e mission.

As well, it seems those S8/sulphur acidic saturated clouds of Venus
that are rather reflective as well as unavoidably reactive to the raw
UV worth of cosmic and solar illumination, to the point of also
looking by way of the unfiltered camera eye as being somewhat of a
vibrant purple/violet spectrum, that's nicely reflecting roughly 80%
of the 2600+ w/m2 rather effectively, thus making Venus seem
unavoidably for its relative size as somewhat brighter looking than
Earth, is still an odd one in that our NASA/Apollo teams have simply
never once managed to get any part of that bright little orb within
any given FOV(field of view), as for otherwise being unavoidably right
there to behold from the standpoint of a given EVA or especially
unavoidably obvious from lunar orbit, as being clearly situated above
that physically dark lunar horizon and otherwise situated at times
within the very same FOV as though parked or rather passing near our
polluted and somewhat albedo dim Earth.

Most any real or computer simulated interactive 3D solar system
simulator more than proves as to exactly where the planet Venus was at
any given time, such as to each those Apollo missions of A-11, A-14
and A-16, yet all the very best of NASA's all-knowing wizards within
their uplink.space.com and/or of most any other internet science
forum, or even within the vast borg like community of Usenet can't
seem to manage to share any such 3D interactive orbital perspective,
even though they have always had access to the newest and best of our
public supercomputers along with all the very best of fully
interactive 3D simulation software that'll knock our virtual animation
socks off. Go figure.
- Brad Guth

Odd, there's not so much as one physics or scientific word of wisdom
coming from the likes of NASA's uplink.space.com or from their Third
Reich brown-nosed minions of those all-knowing Usenet Semitic kind, as
for sharing anything about our physically dark and blue moon as
clearly redocumented by way of what Japan and China have recently
accomplished independently of one another.

I know, it must be the fault of all those physics and science smart
Muslims, as always trying to trick us once again and again, just like
they did with having so well hidden all of those WMD and having before
accomplished so much on behalf of their backing Hitler (oops! wrong
global domination faith-based group).

- Brad Guth

The Moon is not actually BLUE, except to the unfiltered eye. A good
orange/amber worth of an optical spectrum filter (as added onto their
otherwise bandpass coated lens) would have permitted a somewhat more
natural color looking moon, as though viewed from Earth by using a
quality telescope that's getting extensively filtered by our polluted
atmosphere and secondly by the rather extensive 8r(8X radius) worth of
sodium atmosphere associated with that moon.

However, it looks as though we're still being lied to again and again
by NASA's rusemasters in charge of snookering humanity for all it's
worth. In other words, it seems their MI5/CIA boss or MIB agent in
charge of damage control that's likely standing directly behind each
operator of all those spendy supercomputer work stations (with a
loaded gun pointed at each of their empty heads) is not about to allow
any public Usenet chat about our physically dark and such an unusually
blue moon, or much less about how their NASA and of those rad-hard
Apollo wizards, along with all that Semitic Third Reich kind of right
stuff as having so nicely managed to always avoid those blue saturated
hues as well as their having always hidden Venus at the same time.

JAXA / SELENE (KAGUYA)
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communi...#NEW_20071214A

Notice their intentional color removal of the moon itself, and of
those very same images as otherwise depicting mother Earth in full
color. (it's quite easy to prove this being the case)

Down on the same page are those other original full color images of
mostly the moon itself along with parts of the their spacecraft as
depicted within such a nifty bluish saturation hue. Remember that
Selene's quality optics had been custom bandpass coated in order to
cut out the vast bulk of UV and IR to start with.

The rather impressive blue saturated hue or color skewed amount of
color tint is clearly that of an expected color shift or blue
saturated image result, that's unavoidably their CCD obtained result
of the raw secondary/recoil worth of what most such reactive items as
getting UV saturated should always look like to such a bandpass
filtered CCD w/o having the necessary color correction filter, as
otherwise especially blue saturated as to that of what any unfiltered
Kodak film recorded image (via NASA/Apollo) should have depicted.

Unfortunately, the JAXA "KAGUYA Image Gallery" that's apparently
forever stuck with using the "Adobe(R) Flash Player(R)" is what
seriously sucks, as sharing far less than full resolution and
otherwise running extremely poorly on most computers w/o a super fast
internet connection and lots of extra PC memory.

The science from their "X-ray Spectrometer(XRS)" and "Gamma Ray
Spectrometer(GRS)" as likely being equally saturated at much greater
levels than expected, as such may also have to become excluded from
the general public, because of such data being so unexpectedly intense
or off-scale, in that an entirely new effort at obtaining such
intended science about the complex surface of our physically dark moon
may have to wait for the next available mission. Perhaps the lunar
exploration efforts by India will have adapted the necessary narrow
bandpass of sufficient optical spectrum filtering with sufficient
color correction, as well as for their science instruments having
either greater XRS/GRS scope or much tighter resolution in order to
properly deal with the unusual gamma and X-ray intensity of what that
naked and very anticathode moon actually represents.

KAGUYA/(SELENE) HDTV/CCD imaging getting its first full solar dosage
or skewed saturation of those pesky raw secondary photons, as for
looking rather deep blue.
http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/10/20071021_kaguya_e.pdf
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/index_e.htm
http://www.kaguya.jaxa.jp/en/
Notice as to all of those unavoidable UV secondary/recoil worth of
that bluish and/or extra purple/violet saturation that KAGUYA/(SELENE)
HDTV is having to deal with, even though their having incorporated a
sufficient UV spectrum cut-off filter and currently using not more
than a few percent worth of their HDTV dynamic range(DR), even so
having no problems with recording the physically dark moon along with
Earth that's not even half the albedo worth of Venus which also has
greater than 2.6 kw/m2 to work with. Far better images are soon
enough going to be accomplished, especially with those other onboard
CCD instruments that'll far exceed what most previous science about
our extremely unusual moon.
- Brad Guth -