Less Apollo 11, more Thunderbird 11. Wires prove the Apollo moon landings were filmed on a set.

On Oct 12, 6:09 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 11, 1:14 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Tex wrote:
LOL. Oh dear. No doubt, be blames the Jews for his confusion

Worse yet... Nazi Jews. :-)

Pat

The Third Reich got so freaking smart and technologically advanced,
exactly how?

Did they learn their dirty tricks from Muslims? (I don't think so)

Having roughly 1% the necessary resources to work with, they certainly
were smart enough to kicked more than their fair share of butt, didn't
they.

What part of Germany wasn't Jewish?

The non-Jewish parts (ie. most of it)

In other words, you really don't know squat about much of anything, as
being why you can't possibly give an honest answer to much of
anything.

Before Hitler and his Jewish company of puppeteers went postal, them
smart Zion/Yids/Jews were essentially in charge of everything that
mattered within Germany, including the education of most others that
became their puppets of Hitler, the Third Reich or worse. However,
most all of the science and physics placed at the disposal of Hitler
was hard core Jewish (they sure as hell were not Muslims or hardly
even all that Catholic educated).
- Brad Guth -

"BradGuth" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 12, 6:09 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 11, 1:14 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Tex wrote:
LOL. Oh dear. No doubt, be blames the Jews for his confusion

Worse yet... Nazi Jews. :-)

Pat

The Third Reich got so freaking smart and technologically advanced,
exactly how?

Did they learn their dirty tricks from Muslims? (I don't think so)

Having roughly 1% the necessary resources to work with, they certainly
were smart enough to kicked more than their fair share of butt, didn't
they.

What part of Germany wasn't Jewish?

The non-Jewish parts (ie. most of it)

In other words, you really don't know squat about much of anything, as
being why you can't possibly give an honest answer to much of
anything.

LOL, says the "Jews are silencing us" conspiracy kook.

On Oct 12, 6:40 am, "Tex" wrote:

LOL, says the "Jews are silencing us" conspiracy kook.

Isn't denial an otherwise taking everything out of context a wonderful
thing, especially when there's not so much as any speck of remorse
getting in your way.

Without the likes of yourself, Hitler couldn't have accomplished 10%
of the collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, because it's the
perverted brown-nosed minion mindsets like your very own that makes it
possible for those Hitlers or GW Bush types to exist in the first
place.

Without boot camp, you would have fit right in as is.
- Brad Guth -

"BradGuth" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 12, 6:40 am, "Tex" wrote:

LOL, says the "Jews are silencing us" conspiracy kook.

Isn't denial an otherwise taking everything out of context a wonderful
thing, especially when there's not so much as any speck of remorse
getting in your way.

Without the likes of yourself, Hitler couldn't have accomplished 10%
of the collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, because it's the
perverted brown-nosed minion mindsets like your very own that makes it
possible for those Hitlers or GW Bush types to exist in the first
place.

Without boot camp, you would have fit right in as is.
- Brad Guth -

Your weird little rant aside, I notice you still haven't been able to find
any scientists who agree with your kook theories

In article .com,
BradGuth

Guthy Gander honked:

On Oct 11, 7:56 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Oct 10, 9:47 pm, wrote:

Do you have some explanation as to why not one scientist - anywhere on
earth - believes your fake-moon-landing-life-on-venus-covered-up-by-
Jews ravings?

It's called cover-thy-butt job security, as well as protecting your
very life from individuals like yourself.

rofl. Sure. Not one single dissenting opinion, anywhere on earth. Strangely
enough, the Big Mysterious Jew Conspiracy allows you to rant and rave all
you want. Funny that

BTW, I've only ranted and raved about those pesky bad Yids. How about
yourself? (got bad Yid?)

Nope. I think you need some new pills

Was that another Tex fart of denial?

Any honest scientist supports my side of this rant. Only your NASA
brown-nosed kind of scientist thinks otherwise.


Then, according to Guthy Gander ther must be *no* honest scientists?

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
In article .com,
BradGuth

Guthy Gander honked:

On Oct 11, 7:56 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Oct 10, 9:47 pm, wrote:

Do you have some explanation as to why not one scientist - anywhere
on
earth - believes your fake-moon-landing-life-on-venus-covered-up-by-
Jews ravings?

It's called cover-thy-butt job security, as well as protecting your
very life from individuals like yourself.

rofl. Sure. Not one single dissenting opinion, anywhere on earth.
Strangely
enough, the Big Mysterious Jew Conspiracy allows you to rant and rave
all
you want. Funny that

BTW, I've only ranted and raved about those pesky bad Yids. How
about
yourself? (got bad Yid?)

Nope. I think you need some new pills

Was that another Tex fart of denial?

Any honest scientist supports my side of this rant. Only your NASA
brown-nosed kind of scientist thinks otherwise.


Then, according to Guthy Gander ther must be *no* honest scientists?

The "Jews" are hiding them in the basement

On Oct 12, 7:16 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 12, 6:40 am, "Tex" wrote:

LOL, says the "Jews are silencing us" conspiracy kook.

Isn't denial an otherwise taking everything out of context a wonderful
thing, especially when there's not so much as any speck of remorse
getting in your way.

Without the likes of yourself, Hitler couldn't have accomplished 10%
of the collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, because it's the
perverted brown-nosed minion mindsets like your very own that makes it
possible for those Hitlers or GW Bush types to exist in the first
place.

Without boot camp, you would have fit right in as is.
- Brad Guth -

Your weird little rant aside, I notice you still haven't been able to find
any scientists who agree with your kook theories

Once again and again, we're being snookered and/or dumbfounded to
death by those having all the right stuff.

Do tell, as to why Jupiter and Io got depicted as so unusually
pastel? and where the heck are those pesky stars?
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/1..._100907_11.jpg
Jupiter isn't exactly getting well enough illuminated, nor is it all
that albedo/reflective, and that onboard camera of such nifty CCD
performance image processing being worth 16+db and having nothing but
the very best available optics isn't exactly wussy in the dynamic
range(DR) department. As for imaging the likes of Pluto will demand a
great deal of such CCD dynamic range, and most certainly that onboard
camera and terrific optics are in fact well suited for that task.

BTW, Venus as easily viewed from our physically dark and naked moon
was not ever a point source of any star like dim illumination, and
only those scientists willing to destroy their job security and/or any
future possibility of related employment would dare go on record as
sharing in this truth, although there have been many qualified
reputations that have fully supported the NASA/Apollo hoax, as for
exactly what it really was another part of our mutually perpetrated
cold-war, exactly as orchestrated along by those pesky Zion Yids that
made the likes of their Hitler into such a royal pain in the butt, and
now doing the same puppeteering on behalf of orchestrating our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

However, just like Messenger's absolutely **** poor image of Earth and
apparent inability to record our physically dark moon, the New Horizon
CCD image of Jupiter and Io had also been extremely DR limited, as to
offering not much better or even as good of DR than my free cell-phone
camera could provide (certainly far worse off than Kodak film). Why
would they only utilize 1% or less of their CCD Dynamic Range?

Do you think JAXA's Senene CCD images are going to be as intentionally
DR limited?

Kodak KAI-1003 has a DR of 70 DB
Kodak KAI-2020 has a DR of 68 DB
Kodak KAI-4011 has a DR of 60 DB
Fairchield's Condor CCD486 or CCD3041 are only that much better yet,
along with most of such cameras processing out any given 16 bit or 16
DB worth of that CCD's extended DR, means that it should be next to
impossible as to exclude stars unless having intentionally done so via
the firmware or subsequent software instructions. Of any given FOV or
composite image that offers the likes of Earth and our moon side by
side, under identical illumination and using the very same exposure
scan is less than child's play for this generation of impressive
instruments, and anything Kodak or Fairchield can muster is certianly
matched or surpassed by whatever Sony, Fuji or others are capable of
doing.
- Brad Guth -

On Oct 12, 6:07 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

oups.com...


On Oct 11, 7:56 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

roups.com...

On Oct 10, 9:47 pm, wrote:

Do you have some explanation as to why not one scientist - anywhere on
earth - believes your fake-moon-landing-life-on-venus-covered-up-by-
Jews ravings?

It's called cover-thy-butt job security, as well as protecting your
very life from individuals like yourself.

rofl. Sure. Not one single dissenting opinion, anywhere on earth.
Strangely
enough, the Big Mysterious Jew Conspiracy allows you to rant and rave all
you want. Funny that

BTW, I've only ranted and raved about those pesky bad Yids. How about
yourself? (got bad Yid?)

Nope. I think you need some new pills

Was that another Tex fart of denial?

Denial of what?

Denials of everything under that sun which orbits your flat Earth,
especially as to whatever is rocking your good ship LOLLIPOP.


Any honest scientist supports my side of this rant.

So why can't you find any?

Once again and again, we're being continually snookered and/or
dumbfounded to death by those having all the right stuff.

Do tell, as to why Jupiter and Io got depicted as so unusually
pastel? and where the heck are those pesky stars?
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/1..._100907_11.jpg
Jupiter isn't exactly getting well enough illuminated, nor is it all
that albedo/reflective, and that onboard camera of such nifty CCD
performance image processing being worth 16+db and having nothing but
the very best available optics isn't exactly wussy in the dynamic
range(DR) department. As for imaging the likes of Pluto will demand a
great deal of such CCD dynamic range, and most certainly that onboard
camera and terrific optics are in fact well suited for that task.

BTW, Venus as rather easily viewed from our physically dark and naked
moon was not ever a point source of any star like dim illumination,
and only those scientists willing to destroy their job security and/or
any future possibility of related employment would dare go on record
as sharing in this truth, although there have been many qualified
reputations that have fully supported the NASA/Apollo hoax, as for
exactly what it really was another part of our mutually perpetrated
cold-war, exactly as orchestrated along by those pesky Zion Yids that
made the likes of their Hitler into such a royal pain in the butt, and
now doing the same puppeteering on behalf of orchestrating our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

However, just like Messenger's absolutely **** poor image of Earth and
apparent inability to record our physically dark moon, the New Horizon
CCD image of Jupiter and Io had also been extremely DR limited, as to
offering not much better or even as good of DR than my free cell-phone
camera could provide (certainly far worse off than Kodak film). Why
would they only utilize 1% or less of their CCD Dynamic Range?

Do you think JAXA's Senene CCD images are going to be as intentionally
DR limited?

Kodak KAI-1003 has a DR of 70 DB
Kodak KAI-2020 has a DR of 68 DB
Kodak KAI-4011 has a DR of 60 DB
Fairchield's Condor CCD486 or CCD3041 are only that much better yet,
along with most of such cameras processing out any given 16 bit or 16
DB worth of that CCD's extended DR, means that it should be next to
impossible as to exclude stars unless having intentionally done so via
the firmware or subsequent software instructions. Of any given FOV or
composite image that offers the likes of Earth and our moon side by
side, under identical illumination and using the very same exposure
scan is less than child's play for this generation of impressive
instruments, and anything Kodak or Fairchield can muster is certianly
matched or surpassed by whatever Sony, Fuji or others are capable of
doing.
- Brad Guth -

How do you feel about fluoridated water?

And do you believe the Bali bombing was a micronuke?

(Just trying to find your correct "crank index").

"BradGuth" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 12, 7:16 am, "Tex" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 12, 6:40 am, "Tex" wrote:

LOL, says the "Jews are silencing us" conspiracy kook.

Isn't denial an otherwise taking everything out of context a wonderful
thing, especially when there's not so much as any speck of remorse
getting in your way.

Without the likes of yourself, Hitler couldn't have accomplished 10%
of the collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, because it's the
perverted brown-nosed minion mindsets like your very own that makes it
possible for those Hitlers or GW Bush types to exist in the first
place.

Without boot camp, you would have fit right in as is.
- Brad Guth -

Your weird little rant aside, I notice you still haven't been able to
find
any scientists who agree with your kook theories

Once again and again, we're being snookered and/or dumbfounded to
death by those having all the right stuff.

Do tell, as to why Jupiter and Io got depicted as so unusually
pastel? and where the heck are those pesky stars?
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/1..._100907_11.jpg
Jupiter isn't exactly getting well enough illuminated, nor is it all
that albedo/reflective, and that onboard camera of such nifty CCD
performance image processing being worth 16+db and having nothing but
the very best available optics isn't exactly wussy in the dynamic
range(DR) department. As for imaging the likes of Pluto will demand a
great deal of such CCD dynamic range, and most certainly that onboard
camera and terrific optics are in fact well suited for that task.

BTW, Venus as easily viewed from our physically dark and naked moon
was not ever a point source of any star like dim illumination, and
only those scientists willing to destroy their job security and/or any
future possibility of related employment would dare go on record as
sharing in this truth, although there have been many qualified
reputations that have fully supported the NASA/Apollo hoax, as for
exactly what it really was another part of our mutually perpetrated
cold-war, exactly as orchestrated along by those pesky Zion Yids that
made the likes of their Hitler into such a royal pain in the butt, and
now doing the same puppeteering on behalf of orchestrating our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

However, just like Messenger's absolutely **** poor image of Earth and
apparent inability to record our physically dark moon, the New Horizon
CCD image of Jupiter and Io had also been extremely DR limited, as to
offering not much better or even as good of DR than my free cell-phone
camera could provide (certainly far worse off than Kodak film). Why
would they only utilize 1% or less of their CCD Dynamic Range?

Do you think JAXA's Senene CCD images are going to be as intentionally
DR limited?

Kodak KAI-1003 has a DR of 70 DB
Kodak KAI-2020 has a DR of 68 DB
Kodak KAI-4011 has a DR of 60 DB
Fairchield's Condor CCD486 or CCD3041 are only that much better yet,
along with most of such cameras processing out any given 16 bit or 16
DB worth of that CCD's extended DR, means that it should be next to
impossible as to exclude stars unless having intentionally done so via
the firmware or subsequent software instructions. Of any given FOV or
composite image that offers the likes of Earth and our moon side by
side, under identical illumination and using the very same exposure
scan is less than child's play for this generation of impressive
instruments, and anything Kodak or Fairchield can muster is certianly
matched or surpassed by whatever Sony, Fuji or others are capable of
doing.

So, in other words, you still can't find a single scientist who supports
your crank theories. I guess they must have all been microchipped by The
Jews.