Apollo moon landings : why is this Mailgate banished?

"The_Man" wrote in message
oups.com

Venus would be easy to pick up - IF THAT WERE THE ONLY THING in the
picture. You poseted earlier about taking pictures of Venus in
daylight - but NOT pictures o VEnus plus something in the foreground
that is extremely BRIGHT.

Now you are a proven born-again liar to boot. Way to go, directly into
the nearest space toilet.

The surface of the moon is nearly dark and nasty as coal. It's sooty
like coated with an electrostatic layer of iron, titanimum, some
cobalts, carbon and of a few other hard elements that are of solar and
cosmic debris, plus its own basalt and cash of dirty sodium which simply
isn't of a light colorless gray.


I know this "brightness thing" seems to give you a lot of trouble,
being that you are NOT TOO BRIGHT yourself. But, yet again, you don't
know anything about photography. I would have thought that you would
get tired of having me ram this down your throat repeatedly. If I got
bitch-slapped that much, I would go out and learn something. Though,
that is already the difference between me and you.

I have those pictures plus all of Kodak on my side, as well as the
regular laws of physics, whereas you folks clearly have less than squat.


But then, I suppose that your fully interactive 3D solar system
simulator doesn't work either.

And I suppose you won't tell us how little education you have. Did you
get your GED from a prestigious online website?

That's what we all thought, that you're all phony baloney, if not worse.

But then by all possible means, please do tell the rest of us village
idiots, as to where the heck Venus was hiding itself as of missions A11,
A14 and A16.

While you're at it;

Why no solar UV?

Why no electrostatic anything?

Why no hard-X-rays?

Why no local Gamma?

Why no sodium?

Why so damn little argon?

Why so guano island passive and reflective like?

Got that 60:1 rocket/payload ratio, at nearly 30% inert GLOW, as packing
along each of those unproven (zero prototype) fly-by-rocket landers w/o
momentum reaction wheels?

BTW; Where's any of their actual film, and of those original video
tapes.

Besides less than Jewish squat to show us, what exactly do you folks
actually have that can't be so easily excluded?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Freddie Cooke wrote:
Believe me the inane and incredulous
subject of these posts is a load of juvanile B--l--ks.


Actually in the U.S., you can say "********" and not be arrested.
This is because we have freedom of speech, and it's mighty bloody lucky
we have it.
We can say or write anything we want.... I, for instance, could write
nigg... never mind. ;-)

Pat

Bart Sibrel shows that Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins were
circling the earth at the time they were supposedly halfway to the moon.

How could one explain the numerous amatuers that photographed the
Apollo spacecraft enroute to the moon?

http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/space/apollo.html

In sci.physics, theCase

wrote
on 12 Mar 2007 15:26:03 -0700
om:
Bart Sibrel shows that Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins were
circling the earth at the time they were supposedly halfway to the moon.

How could one explain the numerous amatuers that photographed the
Apollo spacecraft enroute to the moon?

http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/space/apollo.html


How indeed? Good stuff. :-) They even got the Apollo
13 O2 cloud after the explosion, though admittedly
the lettering is far larger than the actual cloud,
apparently... :-) However, they also got the S-IVB booster
on film, and mention that the Chabot Observatory was
critical in establishing precisely where the craft was at
a certain point, in order to fire the burn that would get
it safely home.

Did FOX have this info? They should have...

--
#191,
Useless C++ Programming Idea #2239120:
void f(char *p) {char *q = p; strcpy(p,q); }

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
How indeed? Good stuff. :-) They even got the Apollo
13 O2 cloud after the explosion, though admittedly
the lettering is far larger than the actual cloud,
apparently... :-) However, they also got the S-IVB booster
on film, and mention that the Chabot Observatory was
critical in establishing precisely where the craft was at
a certain point, in order to fire the burn that would get
it safely home.


I remember live footage of the four jettisoned S-IVB panels flashing in
the sun as they rotated that was broadcast from some observatory.

Pat

None of which prove that the flight was actually manned- did you actually
see moving people onboard from that distance?

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
How indeed? Good stuff. :-) They even got the Apollo
13 O2 cloud after the explosion, though admittedly
the lettering is far larger than the actual cloud,
apparently... :-) However, they also got the S-IVB booster
on film, and mention that the Chabot Observatory was
critical in establishing precisely where the craft was at
a certain point, in order to fire the burn that would get
it safely home.


I remember live footage of the four jettisoned S-IVB panels flashing in
the sun as they rotated that was broadcast from some observatory.

Pat

Scott Hedrick wrote:
None of which prove that the flight was actually manned- did you actually
see moving people onboard from that distance?


Yes they could...they were using Herschel's giant Moon telescope:
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/moonhoax.html

Pat

In sci.physics, Pat Flannery

wrote
on Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:08:39 -0600
:


Scott Hedrick wrote:
None of which prove that the flight was actually manned- did you actually
see moving people onboard from that distance?


Yes they could...they were using Herschel's giant Moon telescope:
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/moonhoax.html

Pat

Erm, is that a giant telescope on the moon, or a telescope viewing a
giant moon? :-) Compared to the rest of the solar system the Moon *is*
a giant, when compared to what it orbits around:

Moon/Earth: 0.0123
Titan/Saturn: 0.000237

and for completeness:

Jupiter/Sol: 0.0009548

Interesting notion, though: sentient biped beavers and blue unicorns.

--
#191,
Useless C++ Programming Idea #23291:
void f(item *p) { if(p != 0) delete p; }

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
...Compared to the rest of the solar system the Moon *is*
a giant, when compared to what it orbits around:
Moon/Earth: 0.0123
Titan/Saturn: 0.000237
and for completeness:
Jupiter/Sol: 0.0009548

Don't forget Charon/Pluto, at 0.145. The idea that the Moon is unique and
remarkable is long dead. Unusual, yes, but not unique.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In sci.physics, Henry Spencer

wrote
on Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:46:02 GMT
:
In article ,
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
...Compared to the rest of the solar system the Moon *is*
a giant, when compared to what it orbits around:
Moon/Earth: 0.0123
Titan/Saturn: 0.000237
and for completeness:
Jupiter/Sol: 0.0009548

Don't forget Charon/Pluto, at 0.145. The idea that the Moon is unique and
remarkable is long dead. Unusual, yes, but not unique.

Ah, an interesting counterexample; thank you. :-) Of course, our Moon
*is* unique in that it's our Moon...but other than that, I'm not sure
what to think anymore.

Apart from the fact that there is no telescope thereon, anyway. (Yet.
The far side of the moon would be a lovely place for a large radio
array; no noise from the Earth, you see. :-) Wouldn't be too bad for
optical, X-ray, and other such either.)

--
#191,
Murphy was an optimist.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com