A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Brad Guth is......



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 26th 03, 08:44 PM
Tarapia Tapioco
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

-A 20th century man... The guy has no future.
-A barnacle on the ship of progress.
-A hop, skip, and jump from success, but to get there hed have to give up chewing gum.
-A natural talent for finding subliminal messages in ice cubes.
-A prime candidate for natural deselection.
-A real rocket scientologist.
-A standard deviant.
-A titanic intellect... In a world full of icebergs.
-Adult child of alien invaders.
-All Preparation, no H.
-An early example of the Peter Principle.
-An ego like a black hole.
-An example of how the dinosaurs survived for millions of years with walnut-sized brains.
-An experiment in Artificial Stupidity.
-Any connection between his reality and ours is purely coincidental.
-As useful as a mint-flavored suppository.
-Been napping in front of the ion shield again.
-Can discern facts and form predictions with the acumen of an economist.
-Couldnt get a clue during clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if he smeared his body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance.
-Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
-Doesnt need to worry about excess knowledge.
-Dont blame him, hes from Uranus.
-Foreign substances float in his cranial fluids.
-God might still use him for miracle practice.
-Got in touch with reality, but it was a bad connection.
-Has a one-way ticket on the Disoriented Express.
-Has his solar panels aimed at the moon.
-Has nothing to say, but delights in saying it.
-Hes not a complete idiot -- some parts are missing.
-Hes so dense, light bends around him.
-Keywords: generalizations clue get
-Needs his sleeves lengthened by a couple of feet so they can be tied in the back.
-One dimension short of reality.
-The aliens forget to remove his anal probe.
-The worlds foremost collector of ignorance.
-Renewable energy source for hot air balloons.

  #2  
Old December 29th 03, 03:48 PM
Brad Guth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

In recent additions to my MAZDA like "Internal Rocket Rotary
Combustion Engine (IRRCE sfc = 15+KW/kg)", there seems we also have a
wee bit of lunar He3 to burn off.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-h2o2-irrce.htm


"Venus still offers life; via moon He3 could turn the trick"
I've got a few more words of wisdom to offer on behalf of the ARTEMIS
PROJECT (lunar He3) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-he3.htm


The following isn't entirely related to energy so much as it relates
to truth or consequences. Such as for this topic that's about myself
is obviously made up of those anti-humanity folks, that couldn't care
if the entire world was destroyed by their resident warlord. Perhaps
you folks can get your future funding from the same source as Bush,
Salem Laden.

Making policy look like happenstance, and/or vice versa, is key to
snookering folks. http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm


Though as for we humans need not, and perhaps should not venture
ourselves much beyond Venus L2 (VL2). Wouldn't want to contaminate a
perfectly good planet with our inferior DNA nor lack of morals,
especially of this group that's bashing honest research just out of
spite. Besides, their stealth donkey-carts could be far more lethal
than what our WMD donkey-carts can manage.

As far as human physiology being adaptable to pressure. Under such
pressure things are not nearly as hot as we've been told, and you wont
need but a fraction of a percent of O2. Of course, that degree of
adaptation might have to be at a modus rate of a few bars per day.
Http://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-air.htm

I have a few other recent/ongoing comments on H2O2/C12H26 and of He3:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-irrce.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-hybrid-irc.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lm-1.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/radio-maybe.htm

How about honest folks considering the likes of combusting
h2o2/c12h26?

How about honestly considering frozen h2o2; as for how safe is that?

I forgot, none of you actually gives a flying puck about anything
that's not supporting your pagan God and resident warlord.
  #4  
Old January 25th 04, 01:32 AM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......


"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...


Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.


  #5  
Old January 31st 04, 10:18 PM
Guth/IEIS~GASA
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message ...
"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...


Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.


Too bad the only news from Mars remains old news, at least there's NO
new science to being had, unless it's the science of blowing another
billion.

Not that you'd care to know this following;
Not only is the moon an absolutely bone dry sort of moon, but of a
very unclumping sort of moon dirt (actually that moon dirt should have
been nearly everything except moon dirt) that's supposedly dark basalt
and thereby sufficiently dence to being highly reactive, and not
because of any dark color, as that aspect is only making it +250F
upon average (actually much hotter for anything that's not
sufficiently pure white and or bright aluminum reflective), but due to
it's molecular density is what reacting with whatever solar and cosmic
influx, thereby creating loads of those nasty hard x-rays. Being
highly reactive isn't the same as for being photon reflective, thus
the average lunar reflective index of 11% should still hold true,
except for all those Apollo photos that can't seem to locate any such
basalt composites, much less of darker meteorite shards.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

Assembled lunar panoramic photo: is it real, or is it Memorex?
"Taken by Apollo 16 commander John Young, this pan of Flag and Plum
craters shows Lunar Module Pilot Charlie Duke, twice as he moved while
the pan was being captured!" http://moonpans.com/a16flag.htm

If you're looking for truth in all the right places, unfortunately
there's NO such luck in the above photo, as just going by the skewed
illumination reflection index alone is so freaking way off, and
there's still absolutely insufficient meteorites and their shards
strewn about what should have been a rather sharp mixture of
relatively dark basalt composite like lunar substances and of equally
if not darker meteorite surfaces, along with at least a few dim stars,
though the likes of Sirius isn't hardly a dim star, much less that of
Venus. Take another look-see at those Mars images, and do remember
that Mars actually offers an atmosphere that eliminates a great number
of those micro-meteorites from ever reaching the surface in the first
place, and of those that penetrate aren't impacting at nearly the
velocity of what contacts our lunar surface, that being because of the
Mars atmosphere offering but 1% of Earth, but on the other hand
10,000% greater atmosphere than what our moon has to offer.

BTW: if you so happen to need a solar reflective index to work from,
try using any of those moon suits at being roughly 80%, or of certain
pristine ultra white parts of the lander at 85%, which clearly makes
their lunar surroundings that we're seeing as roughly 55% being a wee
bit skewed, not to mention having those shadows trekking off in nearly
45 from each other, which simply places the illumination source
relatively close by. If such an expanse of the lunar surface actually
reflected that much, the likes of you and I couldn't safely look at it
from Earth, especially at night, without getting those blinding spots
affecting our vision.

Of course, if going by what these privet photo rusemasters are capable
of doing, there's actually not all that much left for the imagination,
as essentially anything can be morphed and/or skewed into looking
exactly like whatever you want, thus what we see has absolutely
nothing whatsoever to do with reality, as everything becomes someones
contrived illution, even though just having those raw images should
way more than knock your socks off, as is. So why should there even be
any need to otherwise influence the outcome?

I don't really know what all the photographic fuss is all about, since
the original film supplier was KODAK and the majority of those still
cameras were Hasselblad, as these are by far the real experts. Now
even though these Apollo photos are supposedly the ultimate
photographic achievement to date (ten fold bar none), it seems that
neither KODAK nor Hasselblad wants to boost about, much less discuss
any aspects of them. This seems rather odd since the only folks that
should know photographic jack, are these two highly respected
companies. You'd also think of any tightly rolled film that could have
withstood the thermal extremes plus radiation and come through
entirely unscaved would still be touted as for being absolute
photographic rocket science on steroids, especially since we can't
seem to manage nearly as well right here on Earth, and the same
factors should apply to those wonderful Hasselblad cameras, and of
their thin metal construction, along with synthetic composites
throughout, yet the +/- 250F never gave a bit of trouble nor induced
distortions, and over that much thermal range of 500F worth, still
seems like a rather neat trick.

Just thermally speaking; on the moon it's either hot or it's not, and
we're not talking about any hour or even minutes between such cycles,
but mere seconds from the film or whatever roasting at +260F to
becoming something -240F if not colder, and of cycling in that manner
perhaps dozens of times per hour afer houur on end, as they moved
those cameras and their film packs about the lunar surface. Again
that's one heck of a neat sort of trick for the likes of plastic film,
especially of tightly rolled format film, not to mention for the
camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
some 70 mm wide view capturing camera, as that's half again the cross
sectional area per frame. Personally, I never knew of film that was so
freaking tolerant, much less immune to such horrific levels of
radiation, as even ASA-25 film would have detectably recorded such
radiation, though the amount of photographic deterioration might have
been minimal, though regardless of film speed, that -240F would have
likely cracked such film upon rolling it through the camera, and
otherwise the +250F would have swollen and/or buckled the same
(either causing irregular focus issues).

Of course, as for this next "moon or bust" time around, as for
taxpayers sending our very own warlord "GW Bush" to the moon, our NASA
is going to be starting off from near scratch, as so far there's
absolutely nothing that's been documented from our past nor of what's
in current inventory that has ever worked as a purely rocked engine
performing lander, much less having potential for getting mankind
to/from any ET surface, much less of the nastier lunar surface. Christ
almighty, half the time we still can't even get our miniature probes
down onto another surface as planned, and even when we do, stuff
breaks.

Even though Boeing can't seem to keep their V-22 Osprey in the air,
I'm entirely confident that with appropriate application of airframe
mass gyros, of having 10:1 modulated rocket engines, and all sorts of
proven fly-by-wire sensors and multiple computers of today, there's a
darn good chance that Boeing's Phantom Works can pull this one off,
even though the overall mass per astronaut kg may have to be nearly
twice greater, making their fully outfitted and lunar environment
survivable 2-man crew replacement lander touching down at something
greater than 10,000 lbs rather than 6,000 lbs.

I've got just a couple hundred thousand other words to offer about our
resident warlord taking us back to the moon, as I feel somewhat most
strongly like following within his educational "high standards and
accountability" foot steps, that's only being recently superseded by
his "so what's the difference" policy.

For starters, it's all about time and/or timing, whereas actually for
the first time we'd be actually doing humanity a terrific sort of
favor, especially if we can get our fearless leader to ride in one of
those original Apollo landers and strut about for 36 hours in one of
those Apollo moon suits, as that way we'd stand our best chance ever
of getting rid of the *******, once and for all.

Otherwise I'm all for investing into whatever it takes in establishing
ourselves and of the LSE-CM/ISS on the moon, before others take
possession of all that nifty He3, and subsequently homestead upon the
one and only accommodation for the lunar space elevator.

Unlike anything Mars, I squarely believe the moon well return a profit
within the first year, with many benefits that'll include astronomy,
though of interplanetary communications is by far the sort of outreach
that's been needed for the past three decades. Of privet enterprise
potential is of what others make of it, nothing more, nothing less.

These pages are more or less focused upon mortal creationism than not;
of what the heck happened when the likes of Sirius illuminated our
nighttime.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-venus-sirius.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/sirius-co2.htm
(latest entry) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

BTW; There's simply more than a darn good chance of there being other
life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

David Sereda (ideas and notions of UV energy), for best impact on this
one, you really need to barrow his video tape: http://www.ufonasa.com

Good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA
  #6  
Old February 1st 04, 02:29 AM
Scott Hedrick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

After trimming the manure from Brad Guth's post, this was all that was left:

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message

...
"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...


Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.



  #7  
Old February 2nd 04, 06:42 PM
Jay Windley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......


"Guth/IEIS~GASA" wrote in message
om...
|
| Not that you'd care to know this following;
| Not only is the moon an absolutely...

Let me know when you're ready to discuss this instead of regurgitating it on
cue.

| Assembled lunar panoramic photo: is it real, or is it Memorex?
| "Taken by Apollo 16 commander John Young, this pan of Flag and Plum
| craters shows Lunar Module Pilot Charlie Duke, twice as he moved while
| the pan was being captured!" http://moonpans.com/a16flag.htm

Do you understand how those pans were taken?

| ...you and I couldn't safely look at it
| from Earth, especially at night, without getting those blinding spots
| affecting our vision.

Let me know when you're ready to discuss photometry.

| it seems that
| neither KODAK nor Hasselblad wants to boost about, much less discuss
| any aspects of them.

Not according to Kodak or Hasselblad. Just try to get them to shut up about
it.

| You'd also think of any tightly rolled film that could have
| withstood the thermal extremes plus radiation and come through
| entirely unscaved would still be touted as for being absolute
| photographic rocket science on steroids

That would be true if the conspiracy theorists' predictions of thermal and
radiological stress had any basis whatsoever in reality.

| Just thermally speaking; on the moon it's either hot or it's not

Nope. Try basic thermodynamics.

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

| I've got just a couple hundred thousand other words to offer...

I'm sure you do. Unfortunately your verbal compost is tiresome, since you
don't actually seem able to discuss any of it.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

  #8  
Old February 2nd 04, 09:03 PM
Guth/IEIS~GASA
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

Hmmmmm; still there's nothing from Mars that's new, just lots more of
the same old stuff. When's the NEW science supposed to be arriving?

On the other hand, why don't you and all of your friends try trashing
GW Bush, after all, at least he's personally responsible for killing
perhaps 10,000 nice folks, as you'll have to start off with his
preemptive notion of overthrowing Iraq from the very get go, which
sort of triggered 9/11 and perhaps flight-800 that was actually
supposed to have been the Tel Aviv flight.

At least I've discovered that the notions and/or task of terraforming
the likes of Venus would have been so much easier 40,000 years ago, as
for much of their CO2 count could have been indirectly reduced by the
photosynthesis being delivered and/or induced by the likes of Sirius.

(latest Sirius entry) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

Consider if you well; upon the very nature of any planet capable of
hosting a sufficient degree of cloud cover, especially if that cloud
cover could be artificially made to include additional filtering
agents, such as sulphur. As now you've created a global environmental
shield that's not only become nearly meteorite proof but also nicely
filtering out a good deal of those bad UV spectrums, but allowing more
than a sufficient spectrum bandwidth of 350~450 nm to slip through,
giving the much needed surface illuminations while essentially
blocking the direct impact of the horrific IR as well as for
diminishing the undesirable influx of UV/abc to a point where
sufficiently advanced life become survivable, in spite of the horrific
side effects of creating a rather massive greenhouse.

Without such a dense atmosphere and cloud cover, sunrise on Venus
wouldn't represent the mere 5% increase in their ambient, but more
than likely several hundred percent, creating an intolerable infernal
differential that even highly educated folks would be hard pressed to
deal with. In addition to those wild thermal variation, there'd be a
horrifically wide spectrum influx of solar radiation to fend off.

If our solar system can manage to host such a clouded planet like
Venus, then it's entirely possible that something created and/or
modified for the likes of Sirius could have survived in spite of our
ignorance.

BTW; There's still more than a darn good chance of there being other
life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Some good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

David Sereda (honest ideas and notions of UV energy), for best impact
on this one, you really need to barrow or purchase his video tape:
http://www.ufonasa.com

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message . ..
After trimming the manure from Brad Guth's post, this was all that was left:

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message

...
"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...

Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.

  #9  
Old February 3rd 04, 12:23 AM
Coridon Henshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.


In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

--
Coridon Henshaw - http://www3.telus.net/csbh - "I have sadly come to the
conclusion that the Bush administration will go to any lengths to deny
reality." -- Charley Reese
  #10  
Old February 3rd 04, 01:01 AM
Herb Schaltegger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Brad Guth is......

chenshawREMOVE@(TH+ESE wrote:

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.


In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

Not when you're referring to the size of the film stock.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Remove invalid nonsense for email.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Brad Guth is........ edo Space Shuttle 1 December 30th 03 10:41 AM
Brad Guth is...... Nomen Nescio Space Station 0 December 26th 03 08:00 PM
Brad Guth is...... Anonymous Space Station 0 December 26th 03 07:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.