|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
Tonight, I caught a bit of a French made documentary type
thing run on CBC Newsworld's " The Passionate Eye ". It was called " Dark Side Of The Moon ", and as I came in to it in mid stream, I was scandalised as to not another conspiracy whacko thing. Turned out is was a *mock*umentary, made to show the idea that media cutting, and selective uses of clips could make almost any often filmed/interviewed public official appear to be supporting anything that the filmmakers wanted them to appear to be. Fwew ! Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
John Beaderstadt ) writes:
I was reading in the bathroom when I ran across an item written by (Andre Lieven) on 17 Nov 2003 05:57:06 GMT, which said: Tonight, I caught a bit of a French made documentary type thing run on CBC Newsworld's " The Passionate Eye ". It was called " Dark Side Of The Moon ", and as I came in to it in mid stream, I was scandalised as to not another conspiracy whacko thing. Turned out is was a *mock*umentary, made to show the idea that media cutting, and selective uses of clips could make almost any often filmed/interviewed public official appear to be supporting anything that the filmmakers wanted them to appear to be. Damn! Mrs Beady and I went to see "Master and Commander" last night, and missed it. Could have taped it, though, if I'd known. Ah. You get Newsworld as well as regular CBC teevee ? Andre, if it comes 'round again, see if you can give a holler. I bumped into it by channel surfing ( Why ? 'Cause I'm a guy g ), but a search on the CBC site under the title of the series that runs such documentaries, " The Passionate Eye ", and then, the program title, " Dark Side Of The Moon ", might turn something useful up for you. Thats at cbc.ca, of course. Otherwise, I was watching some of the Dune DVD series, just before that. Say, on an aside note, I see that theres a new DVD release of " Marooned " out now, but has anyone found anything on a DVD re-release of " Doppleganger " aka " Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun " ? My searches to date found " out of print ". Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
John Beaderstadt ) writes:
I was reading in the bathroom when I ran across an item written by (Andre Lieven) on 18 Nov 2003 01:43:08 GMT, which said: Say, on an aside note, I see that theres a new DVD release of " Marooned " out now, but has anyone found anything on a DVD re-release of " Doppleganger " aka " Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun " ? My searches to date found " out of print ". Not surprising. No one I've talked to understands how titles are scheduled for DVD release. You can buy all kinds of Gene Autry, but movies like Schindler's List, the African Queen and Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines aren't even on the horizon. Its a weird industry, thats for sure. I also heard, on another newsgroup, that was discussing Babylon 5 DVD sales, that the reason we've not seen a second season box set of The Mary Tyler Moore Show, is that the first one didn't seel very well. Given that show's popularity, between re-runs and all, thats also a surprise from the marketplace. But, I'd really like a copy of Doppleganger.... :-) For that matter, now that all the Gerry Anderson Supermarionation shows are out on DVD, whats the hold up for the two 1960s T'birds movies, Thunderbirds Are Go and Thunderbird 6 ? Andre ( Waiting for delivery of Canada A People's History and The West Wing on DVD... ) -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
More On Moon Hoaxes...
From: (Henry Spencer)
"Some of Hubble's instruments (notably the now-retired Faint Object Camera) could not tolerate looking at the Moon, but some can." Absolute horse pucky, you NASA Borg. Imaging of an illumination reflection index of roughly 11%, especially via good old earthshine offers an ideal illumination for the likes of Hubble. Taking a few dozen or even 100 such images (possibly at most one hour worth of Hubble resources) and then stacking the best of those via good digital photo software, including some applied resampling and "unsharp" filtering in order to bring additional pixel information into focus, for those of you that are legally blind, is not rocket science. If that doesn't obtain 0.1 meter resolution (1 meter raw) than your Borg programming is running itself amuck. BTW; just in case some nice folks haven't discovered what the likes of wizard Jay is all about, checkout some of the following and be sure to reflect upon those two quotes offered by Lord Jay Windley. "The moon, the Apollo ruse/sting, the snookered fools we are" The lunar environment is obviously not moderated by any significant atmosphere nor Van Allen belt, thus of the solar/cosmic, cosmic and gamma ray exposures are unimpeded, and as such the radiation environment is hardly being stabilized nor averaged over time. It's either too damn hot or too damn cold or too freaking lethal unless you're enjoying all of it by earthshine, though not to mention having to avoid the somewhat pesky issue of it raining micro meteorites. The space/solar weather of such nasty stuff includes a great deal of the relatively passive warmth of IR, on into the somewhat lethal UV spectrums, either of which can be fended off by relatively low technology, although UV/c can start to be a bit penetrating unless there's an artificial barrier of sufficient solids, such as any good moon suit will suffice. Higher frequency and thus high energy is not so easily stopped by any moon suit, and of what is being slowed down and/or partially absorbed by the suit, or by way of most any substance, is what creates those hard x-ray class radiation issues. Actually the greater the material density the greater the secondary impact becomes, especially at the thickness and/or density per square centimeter of what our Apollo mission had to work with. Of too little shielding and you're affected by the direct radiation impact, of thicker shield and/or of greater density obviously blocks more of the primary influx while creating greater and even somewhat more lethal hard x-ray class dosage. Depending upon what sort of influx or solar flak is hitting your exterior environment, such as cosmic and/or gamma can obviously make a rather tremendous difference of mostly negative issues as far as protecting life as we know it. Just like our sun can deliver relatively passive and low energy dosages, while at times the solar output offers the capability and/or intensity of exceeding several thousand rads per hour, which is not a serious exposure problem if you've got a healthy Van Allen zone plus tonnes of atmosphere per m2 as your shield, and not that thousands of folks don't go about expiring each and every year specifically due to their receiving too much solar and cosmic radiation. When those several thousand rads per hour impact a substance such as clumping moon dirt, a matrix of many things that should represent 3.4+g/cc, this is where the somewhat lethal solar flux that's just plain old nasty becomes downright lethal within an hour's worth of exposure. Thus the lunar surface exposed to a passive solar environment might lull itself into creating a mere 100 rads (1 Sv) per day (24 hours or a respectable 4.17 rads/hr), although the sun wasn't in any passive mode nor was the solar activity sufficient as to fend off the cosmic and gamma ray aspects, thus the combined surface impact for whatever and/or whomever was certainly capable of creating 360 rads per day (15 rads/hr), that is if you're honestly accounting for the secondary contributions of what the lunar surface itself was capable of creating. Your standard issue moon suit can cut the likes of direct solar radiation, mostly because at least for some of the passive/thermal solar event timeline isn't itself of lethal hard x-ray class, although of whatever does impact the suit and mostly of what impacts the lunar surface will be creating a fairly large TBI worthy dosage. More recent solar events such as those of October/November 2003 were off the scale, so strong that of our best instruments were essentially blown away. Fortunately there were only much smaller ongoing solar events during the Apollo mission era, which was a good thing as for fending off some of the cosmic class radiation, though representing a truly bad sort of thing as for any space expedition that's as close as we were to our sun. As for being further away from the sun, such as Mars, offers a solar environment safety improvement, though somewhat worse off as for allowing more cosmic radiation to impact and subsequently interact with whatever and/or whomever is anywhere near and/or situated behind a substance that's not sufficiently thick enough as to block and otherwise absorb all of the influx, plus having to subdue secondary hard x-ray class radiation before it gets to your butt. It seems we currently have a wee bit of a problem in placing sufficient mass into orbit, much less headed off to places like the moon or Mars, thus our manned missions off to whatever is residing outside our Van Allen zone of death are essentially unresolved issues as of today, though not insurmountable. The absolute proof that it's truly nasty beyond our Van Allen zone of death is in the pudding, in the fact that there's been an effort to skew and/or cloak the truthful data, as for example in providing absolutely no access to any of the original negatives or film transparencies of these Apollo missions. At this point I'm not even suggesting upon obtaining an actual image frame, but merely of the leader and/or trail which couldn't possibly have betrayed and/or impacted upon one of those infamous images, of which there are 10's of thousands of said frames to select from, of which the public has viewed copies and/or prints from less than 1%, leaving 99% of those available frames (stills and movie film) nonutilized, perhaps because those weren't all that great to look at, though of what the image contains is rather insignificant as for otherwise determining radiation, of which just about any portion of film, from an actual frame or of what's between or of the leader/trailer portions would have done just fine and dandy. Though sadly, at this late time, there'd be no way of identifying the film as for being actual Apollo related, unless those were of viable lunar landscape images included. As for obtaining a trailer/leader portion of processed film would simply be unreliable and entirely meaningless since there'd be no certainty of it actually being what it is. Using an electron microscope, or even a sufficiently good digital scan of a section of even a film leader and/or trailer could have revealed the exact dosages of radiation exposure, down to the individual millirad or millirem level, as even a single millirad worth of recorded dosage could have been detected, though this would have taken 100+ millirad in order to have become observed to the human eye, of which all such Apollo mission film should have received at least several rads/rems if not hundreds. Human cells will for the most part recover from such TBI dosages, though film offers a one-way recording of the radiation accumulation, with or without ever being exposed to taking pictures. Of course at this point there's no simple and/or definitive method of identifying a primary radiation impact from that of a secondary, although the electron microscope could help to determined the various wavelength differences affecting those film emulsion crystals. Film crystals being mostly analog, but also somewhat digital in that every individual crystal or photon bucket can be affected to a differing degree, as there are far more of those emulsion crystals (photon buckets) per square mm than our finest CCD technology of even today, thus a great deal of information has always been available, far exceeding the optical lens resolution, including the detection of mostly near UV starlight upon those crystals. But oddly all access has been avoided for the rather obvious reasons, of reasons that must include the fact of such imaging wasn't necessarily accomplished on the lunar surface. This doesn't represent that our Apollo missions didn't for a time exit the Van Allen zone of death, possibly even to orbit the moon and of robotically deploying any number of experiments, as even a lunar orbit would have been quite risky business and of itself somewhat TBI worthy, although nowhere as bad off as for the actual solar and cosmic irradiated surface. Since there's supposedly been absolutely nothing for NASA or as for those worshiping of Apollo folks to fear nor lose, absolutely no possible damage to an original frame of their precious film, the only remaining fact of the matter becomes rather too obvious. Not that there's plenty of image contents worth arguing about, like the 50+% reflective index that's clearly observed within so may of the images, and for the rather odd lack of sufficient meteorites and various impact shards strewn about the lunar morgue, of a fully exposed surface which should have been at least as covered by such debris as Mars is, if not a whole lot more so. Actually, the ongoing numbers of micro meteorites impacting the lunar surface at 5+km/s should have been at least one per m2/day, although one per m2/hour shouldn't have been unexpected, and of any suitable lander constructed as for fending off such an influx. We now realize that the lander was anything but sufficiently constructed as to fend off much more than clumping moon dirt, among many other deficiencies which included radiation abatement that obviously wasn't worth squat, except for avoiding a UV class sun burn. Jay Windley wrote: "It is simply not necessary to follow all lines of investigation to some absolute standard of completeness in order to draw reliable conclusions." and "The search for truth is not a game in which evidence is doled out according to some strategy. It is based on full and accurate disclosure of the facts for examination." Jay Windley's first quote is quite true to life, although his second quote is surely from another planet besides Earth, perhaps from another dimension to boot. I guess I'm still the village idiot that's thinking way outside the box, as for our going back to the moon (if ever) may have to be for robots, not for mankind. At least not until we have obtained a sufficiently astronaut pilot documented and thus working lander of sufficient shielding as for radiation as well as for fending off all those pesky micro meteorites. LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator plus Counter Mass and new ISS) or GMDE (Guth Moon Dirt Express), plus there's lots of other related stuff, with more on the way (incorrect math, poor grammar and my dyslexic syntax to boot); http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-hybrid-irc.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-h2o2-irrce.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lm-1.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-basalt.htm Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA begins moon return effort | Steve Dufour | Policy | 24 | August 13th 04 10:39 PM |
The [political] Battle for the Moon | Steve Dufour | Policy | 0 | July 20th 04 03:42 PM |
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? | TKalbfus | Policy | 265 | July 13th 04 12:00 AM |
NEWS: The allure of an outpost on the Moon | Kent Betts | Space Shuttle | 2 | January 15th 04 12:56 AM |