|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
"Jon Berndt" wrote in message news:400b547d$0$41120
Gregg Easterbrook is at it again. http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101...sterbrook.html I wonder if this column is as error filled as his shuttle OpEds? (I haven't read this one, yet). Jon --- Error #1: Easterbrook: "Rather than spend hundreds of billions of dollars to hurl tons toward Mars using current technology, why not take a decade-or two decades, or however much time is required-researching new launch systems and advanced propulsion?" GWB: "Our third goal is to return to the moon by 2020. ... With the experience and knowledge gained on the moon, we will then be ready to take the next steps of space exploration: human missions to Mars and to worlds beyond." [some estimates put the hoped-for Mars mission around 2030 -- over *two and a half decades away*] Additionally, the Prometheus project is doing just such related research today. --- Easterbrook is absolutely *infamous* for not checking his facts before publication -- and this is well-known and commented on publicly even by his *friends*. It throws into question what this guy is basing his pronouncements on. Are all "Brookings Scholars" this sloppy on such key points? --- Misleading statement: Easterbrook: "And Mars as a destination for people makes absolutely no sense with current technology." This is true. Did anyone claim that we'd go to Mars in 2030 with 2004 technology? --- Easterbrook: "Present systems for getting from Earth's surface to low-Earth orbit are so fantastically expensive that merely launching the 1,000 tons or so of spacecraft and equipment a Mars mission would require ..." Where did he get his 1,000 tons figure? Does this sound right? --- Easterbrook: "Space-exploration proponents deride as lack of vision the mention of technical barriers or the insistence that needs on Earth come first. Not so. The former is rationality, the latter the setting of priorities." The pittance that NASA receives compared to that of social programs is a drop in the bucket. The priorities have already been set. If we want the Mars part of the vision to be accomplished, it will require that breakthroughs and cost reductions be made during the lunar phase, or else it will be canceled before it starts. The cost figures cited by Easterbrook and others are thus invalid. --- Easterbrook: "The drive to explore is part of what makes us human, and exploration of the past has led to unexpected glories. Dreams must be tempered by realism, however. For the moment, going to Mars is hopelessly unrealistic." Did he not listen to the President?: Bush: "Returning to the moon is an important step for our space program. Establishing an extended human presence on the moon could vastly reduce the costs of further space exploration, making possible ever more ambitious missions. ... With the experience and knowledge gained on the moon, we will then be ready to take the next steps of space exploration: human missions to Mars and to worlds beyond." --- Easterbrook: "... which calls for "reprogramming" some of NASA's present budget into the Mars effort, might actually lead to a reduction in such unmanned science-the one aspect of space exploration that's working really well." Did he not listen to the President?: Bush: "Robotic missions will serve as trailblazers -- the advanced guard to the unknown." --- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
In article , Jon Berndt wrote:
Easterbrook: "Present systems for getting from Earth's surface to low-Earth orbit are so fantastically expensive that merely launching the 1,000 tons or so of spacecraft and equipment a Mars mission would require ..." Where did he get his 1,000 tons figure? Does this sound right? It's big, but not insanely so. Mars Direct is specced for two HLV lanches per crew, or about 300t to LEO. The Mars Reference Mission, for comparison, seems to want three per crew plus additional hardware (eg, a common surface lab). It assumes 200t-to-LEO capacity, though; Mars Direct works on 140t. The first Mars flight under the Reference Mission will take three dedicated launches, plus a possible lab, but then there's also the next two bits of hardware flying out as backups/staging for Ares 2. So, depending on how generous you're being, anything from six to twelve hundred tonnes to LEO there. -- -Andrew Gray |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
In article ,
Andrew Gray wrote: Easterbrook: "Present systems for getting from Earth's surface to low-Earth orbit are so fantastically expensive that merely launching the 1,000 tons or so of spacecraft and equipment a Mars mission would require ..." Where did he get his 1,000 tons figure? Does this sound right? It's big, but not insanely so. Moreover, the more generous you are with mass to LEO, the easier it becomes to design the vehicles that are going to Mars. It's very likely that you could get substantial net savings on a modest program of Mars expeditions by doubling the mass into LEO, despite the extra launch costs. -- MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
Henry Spencer wrote: In article , Andrew Gray wrote: Easterbrook: "Present systems for getting from Earth's surface to low-Earth orbit are so fantastically expensive that merely launching the 1,000 tons or so of spacecraft and equipment a Mars mission would require ..." Where did he get his 1,000 tons figure? Does this sound right? It's big, but not insanely so. Moreover, the more generous you are with mass to LEO, the easier it becomes to design the vehicles that are going to Mars. It's very likely that you could get substantial net savings on a modest program of Mars expeditions by doubling the mass into LEO, despite the extra launch costs. -- Unfortunately, mass minimization is virtually a religion at NASA. They would never believe anything so heretical. MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
I thought this topic was about why we should NOT goto Mars?
Good grief folks, don't we have enough problems right here on Earth that we can't presently afford to fix. Seems like adding several hundred billion into another space toilet adventure is just a wee bit unwise, if not downright pathetically stupid. The ESE or bust stands a better chance. Moon He3/3He is there for the taking, our wonderful GW Bush is super terrific at such taking. For that alone I'll back the Moon or Bust notions long before there'll be any sympathy for the likes of a frozen and irradiated to death Mars. Truth is in the eyes of the blind beholder, as snookered Americans perhaps. Though the Moon is apparently all ours for the taking, and take He3 we well. The GW Bush moon or bust; or just how incredibly happenstance is our moon? Of ET life and consequences, besides O'Neill or Salem bin Laden, there's our nifty moon, just sitting there, overloaded with He3 or 3He. Sorry about the initial overload, but trust me, it's worth it. The absolute truth(s) about history, as well as for what's current and of what's to come, has been and well continue being skewed in order to suit those in power, much like religion and of evolution is all about lies, of liars telling whatever lies suit their hidden agendas and ulterior motives. Whereas a better form of government, and thereby science, would obviously be truth; go fish! For an example; pure evolution isn't worth squat up against terraforming, only as an afermarket adaptation in order to survive in spite of mistakes made by your creator, DNA/RNA or whatever. Such as, I'd certainly evolve myself along and adapt if my planet were going greenhouse, though to listen to the pro-NASA folks with regard to anything Venus, that's just not going to happen, even though for perfectly odd reasons (I think money and job security), just the opposit seems to apply towards Mars. Unfortunately, much like Hitler, or much worse being the Pope/Cathar fiasco, the GW Bush space initiative represents yet another for-real threat to humanity, and of whatever natural evolution isn't going to fix that unless evolution somehow manages the extinction of GW Bush on behalf of humanity, as otherwise the future threat is as real as his personal war in Iraq, and it'll soon get as bloody as need be. Thereby the Bush space initiative is a thoroughly bad notion, although the notion of going for our moon on behalf of humanity isn't such a bad notion, in fact it's a darn good idea that's way past due. There's been the rather unfortunate tit for tats that created the likes of 9/11 and of flight-800, plus another ongoing and rather pesky and costly war in Iraq, all because of Salem bin Laden and of the close business associations with our resident warlord "GW Bush". It's all about the hoarding of energy as well as future applied technologies, possibly even ET technology. It's absolutely imperative as to keeping this oil off the spot market, especially of oil that's been outside the American cartel. Of ET life and consequences, besides O'Neill or Salem bin Laden, there's a light at the end of this tunnel. It seems a few too many folks have overlooked an important truth or self right, that of following a lying ******* and hiding within a collective of energy sucking Borgs is obviously become the moral right of every snookered American, yet no one owes us that right. The GW Bush moon; or just how incredibly happenstance is our moon? At least the ulterior lunar focus for the moment should draw deeply our dastardly attentions away from Cuba, if nothing else it'll drain whatever reserves for NSA/DoD agendas, while giving us folks a great deal to think about, and of others to worry about. The GW Bush moon-base odds are actually relatively **** poor. Just for starters, we all realize that our resident warlord "GW Bush" lied as usual (covering some privet agenda plus whatever ulterior motives), such as about all those WMD, just like those of his educational "high standards and accountability" lies, that's only been superseded by his ultimate "so what's the difference" policy (he must have been referring to all those dead Iraqi souls that don't matter, as well as the Trade Towers fiasco that he and of his close Salem bin Laden business partner had supposedly absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with). Notice how the "all knowing" Dr. H.K. has vanished into thin air ever since 9/11. Just because our moon has become the most recent GW Bush topic of the hour, I'm not switching myself from the far greater importance of discoveries on Venus over to any moon tactic for the mere sport of it, as I've been there and done that for a good year's worth of trying to focus folks (snookered fools) away from the ESE fiasco, over to the obtainable and doable LSE-CM/ISS alternative, as of what the moon offers is simply an incredibly terrific gateway to other worlds, such as Mars and Venus, as well as for providing Earth sciences plus a bloody jackpot worth of He3/3eH energy that's just sitting there, waiting to being scooped up and shipped off to mother Earth. Speaking just a little off topic; of other life within our universe that doesn't have to continually lie; Sirius is certainly not only within our universe, but I believe 80,000 years ago it was situated damn close by. Within the following rant, I've stipulated upon quite a number of "what ifs" pertaining greatly to other life on Venus, among accomplishing a few essential lunar things along the way. Elsewhere are links to specific LSE-CM/ISS issues, although you'll have to disconnect from your Borg collective before reading such, as otherwise the collective may have to terminate your node, and that could hurt worse than the "Blue Screen of Death". "Sirius, Earth, Moon and Venus, preferably without GW Bush" In that order, and in that priority. In other words, first came Sirius, then we manage to screw up Earth (almost got that one nailed), then onto our moon for a little He3/3He snatching, and finish off our supper with the pillaging of Venus. We don't much have to include the likes of Mars because, it's way to spendy as well as too CO2 generating upon Earth as for sustaining any significant to/from enterprise of pillaging, and besides it's already a thoroughly dead horse (not that folks hadn't managed to live there once upon a time), except for the remains of some highly advanced/mutant microbes of which sub-freezing them into dry-ice and of irradiating those to death probably hasn't quite serialized their innards, and of those pesky diehard Mars microbes (in our infinite wisdom or lack thereof), we'll likely be bringing those suckers back to Earth via some future probe in order to prove how pathetically stupid we actually are, so go figure. Never to fear; as if it should perchance turn out that I'm the least bit wrong about the sanity or perhaps utter insanity, of some folks going to Mars that is, as then I'll simply impose our resident warlord's approved "so what's the difference" policy. As certainly whatever's left of Earth's humanity wont be any worse off for ware, after all, of my previous efforts at stipulating "I told you so" about how thoroughly frozen and irradiated to death Mars is, if that simply hasn't sunk in, nor about how little free energy awaits those arriving at Mars, but what the hell do I know? If I were as dumbfounded, and as much of a total moron ******* as our resident warlord, I guess I'd certainly have Earth's humanity headed for the likes of Mars. After all, from all of the previous probe information and of what's new, well, there really isn't anything new, other than it's still damn cold and thoroughly irradiated to death, as well as sufficiently strewn with all the expected meteorites and shards, and as always, being of the most time consuming and spendy as all get out for just getting there, much less for the task of our retrieving anything. Our Unique Moon; It's rather unfortunate how freaking little we seem to know about our extremely unique moon, of why it's even where it is, and of it's mass being so entirely different than Earth, yet thermal nuclear heated from within and of so influencing Earth in such an entirely positive sort of way, as well as somewhat intentionally contributing to our well being as a human race, yet it's been taking advantage of tidal forces so as to insure that it's never going to come crashing down, not in a trillion-billion years, not even if we devised a way of pulling out 5 terawatts continuously between us, as that's merely one form of unique force that's been so special about our uniquely synchronized moon. This one-of-a-kind moon offers us an incredibly stable gravity-well null point, as an ideal LSE-CM/ISS accommodation that's obviously situated between Earth and the moon, at roughly 84% of the distance from Earth, or 16% of the distance towards Earth, with a mere 2.25% variance at that. It's also the one and only recorded moon that's rotating itself in perfect harmony, as in absolute synchronization with it's mother World. All and all, that's better than rolling different dice on every shot and getting exactly the very same 4&3 as 7's a million times in a row. Not such bad odds. I mean, how incredibly happenstance is that? Finding water on the moon isn't such a big factor. With Earth's global warming, expedited along by GW Bush himself, we'll soon have way more water than you can possibly shake a flaming stick at, and thankfully today we've got numerous ways of robotically delivering terrific amounts of said water to the moon. Actually sending it as pure h2o2 would do lunar and LSE-CM/ISS operations a lot more good. In the good old days of Apollo, if speaking of a one-way ticket, we could deliver 36,000 lbs worth of whatever, whereas today that figure should be 72,000 lbs worth. And BTW; the lunar environment is absolutely ideal for that water being in the stabile form of frozen h2o2, whereas receiving whatever He3 infusions couldn't hurt. The next issue or topic of worth is that of Venus, of it's environment being what it is, greenhouse hot and nasty, though not by a long shot being outside the ballpark of supporting intelligent life, unless you're only considering upon the pathetic slim-mold based forms of bigoted life that's here on Earth, especially of those that can no longer think for themselves, having to depend upon their pagan worship of skewed as well as conditional laws of physics, as well as reliance upon numerous toilet bowl morals, as such being easily snookered and thereby representing the crude forms of life that can't hardly survive here on Earth without doing far more harm than good, much like dumb and dumber except on steroids. Fortunately, the thick and robust atmosphere of Venus is simply chuck full of benefits, as well as raw energy via thermal as well as powerful kinetics from just their vertical differentials, then there are simply loads of surface geothermals and of most likely a crust that holding onto all sorts of mineral deposits. Those relatively cool nighttime clouds contain megatonnes of H2SO4, thus H2O, thereby all sorts of chemical and subsequent reaction cocktails of various outcomes are possible. With said energy and of the sorts of natural element resources available, only an absolute idiot moron couldn't make a go of it. Of course, it only adds further insult to all the previous injuries by way of my uncovering a rather significant group of structures, of a significant community that's way too rational, as in being potentially life supportive functional as having been established as artificial (as in man made or perhaps more likely lizard folk made), hardly being the least bit natural unless those pesky laws of physics as well as for gravity took a hike for at least a few hundred years, which according to our NASA community of "all knowing" Borg wizards is absolutely suggesting what must have happened, somewhat like why all those Apollo moon pictures are so skewed and why their lunar reflective index was so incredibly bright, as well as for why there's so few meteorites and of their shards strewn about, much less there being any recent contributions of micro-meteorites to deal with, nor is there more radiation exposure than for taking a distant walk around Chernobyl. Of another keen interest is that of Sirius may not be so happenstance, though 80,000 years ago it was certainly darn close, thus extremely bright and most likely the biggest thing in our sky, bar none, as in illumination appearing at least as big as our sun but so much brighter, and that's certainly damn big, though 80,000 years is a mere geological drop in the bucket. Since then it's been moving away at roughly 20 miles per second, whereas today it's over 8.5 lightyears off, and still Sirius represents the next biggest and baddest star(s) in our sky, and since it's so bright and far away, our best instruments can only detect the Sirius/a&b, as Sirius/c and of whatever planets are only known to the Dogon. Go figure that one out. Seems as though it is as likely as not that planets within the zone of life, like Mars, Earth and Venus could have been those terraformed by creators, thus by well intending folks that did whatever they could, to see that their efforts were not in vain. Natural disasters and perhaps creator mistakes (no one's perfect) may have plaid a role, but mankind has more than influenced if not sealed the fate of Earth, especially of lately, with our frequent energy wars and of pagan worshipings, now we're off snipe hunting for those WMD in order to justify our warlords taking of thousands of innocent lives. At least the only one of us that should feel better off is the Pope, as for what their Catholic church did to those nice Cathars was truly despicable, as certainly representing nothing at all like what any reasonable terraforming creators would have intended. As how freaking sick would you have to be if you were some creator that intentionally constructed such god offal DNA/RNA and/or manipulated your beings for such a horrific task. So obviously, mankind is 99% responsible for our own fate, as there's only so much that a remote world of creators can accomplish from afar, especially from as far away as Sirius. I know, I know, there I go again, slipping myself way off the deep end by suggesting that I'm sufficiently right and that you're the one that's been snookered and subsequently skewed so way off base. Well, what can I say, short of getting myself entirely reprogrammed and connected back into your Borg collective, so that I'll follow our fearless WMD snipe hunting leaders off the nearest cliff, or back into their cesspool of life, is always an option. The fact that privet agendas and ulterior motives have been in full swing for decades, most recently based entirely upon our dwindling global energy reserves, our leaders having fought many wars (hot and cold) over whom has what and of most importantly of whom gets access to it, and/or selectively partitioning out shares of profits from the spoils of said energy. This lethal tug-of-war is simply what's been responsible for the most recent waves of carnage and of collateral damage, with the undertow of powers struggling to grasp all the energy rings and then some. Well guess what, the moon has become the next best thing on the map, as energy wise the moon is by far offering the biggest energy pot and simultaneous strategic starwars outpost over the entire Earth, so much so that it'll likely supersede our need of taking Cuba, of which we've previously tried seven times and badly failed seven times. Although, with the LSE-CM/ISS tether dipole element reaching to within 50,000 km of Earth, hosting a few of those 100 GW 0.5 milliradian laser cannons, we could light off an individual Cuban cigar if we wanted to. If you think you can contribute to these issues, or to this novel of life and consequences, I'm all ears, though I've been told that there's not all that much between them ears because, my Borg collective interface has been broken down for at least the past three years and counting, though your's is probably still fully functioning and synchronized to the collective. Some good but difficult 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
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
"Brad Guth" wrote in message om... I thought this topic was about why we should NOT goto Mars? Moon He3/3He is there for the taking, our wonderful GW Bush is super terrific at such taking. For that alone I'll back the Moon or Bust notions long before there'll be any sympathy for the likes of a frozen and irradiated to death Mars. He3 is not free power. Go do some homework. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
So, depending on how generous you're being, anything from six to twelve
hundred tonnes to LEO there. -- -Andrew Gray Those who don't want a Mars mission the most are very generous in allocating tonnage for the mission. When I first heard the $1 trillion figure for going to Mars, I was wondering what George Bush was planning? Sending 100 men and women to Mars? Apparently George Bush didn't specify a specific amount, the $1 trillion figure was put out by anti-Mars people hoping that it will generate opposition by a more frugal public, then they marshal some scientists who want nothing but scientific gobbledegook comming from space, they want to send out boring probes ad infinitum until public enthusiasm wanes and they can get back to their ground based telescopes. Tom |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why We Shouldn't Go To Mars
Obviously nothing is free, unless of course you happen work for and/or
along side of NASA/NSA/DoD (Halburton), as that's certainly become a free ride if there ever was. I've been thinking (all three brain cells worth) all along that, if there ever was a viable other home-world worthy of reptilian folks (besides Venus), that consideration might have to be Sirius/c, or of whatever's within the neighborhood. Though of being nearly 9 ly distant and roughly another 66,660+ years before our solar system once again becomes so greatly UV illuminated by the Sirius group, thus we obviously have sufficient time to think about doing something with respect to our very unique moon. Unfortunately, the greater potential for Earth upon obtaining the likes of He3 or 3He, or most certainly of anything whatsoever ET worthy, can just as soon get much worse, with the likes of anti-everything contributions from the likes of OM and of Jay Windley for starters, then there's an entire collective of their incest cloned Borgs of "spin" and "damage control" folks backing them up. Of course, you may soon have to suddenly switch pagan Gods in mid-stream, as I happen believe the sort of God associated with the likes of Sirius can seriously kick butt. Here's another of my positive contributions as for doing our moon first, instead of Mars or even Europa, though I'll certainly favor any honest thoughts upon the likes of Venus, of just interplanetary communications with those surviving lizard folk heathens, of which I'm fairly certain that the likes of GW Bush and his Halburton partners can eventually mange to pillage with minimal risk. "Moon, Mars, Venus, Sirius and Earth (so what's the difference?)" Our Apollo moon only stinks to high heaven, while Mars sucks away at critical expertise as well as limited resources, and otherwise extracting billions away from intellectually as well as physically starving folks. I wonder which is worse off, being a Cathar or another NASA hugger that's intent upon skewing morality as well as physics into the nearest space toilet. I don't mean to be such a total pest about our unique moon but, even those moons of Mars rotate as unsynchronized about their home world, as do all other recorded moons, except for the one orbiting Earth. Now, I wouldn't be having to do this if folks weren't so absolutely opposing the notions of there being other life besides what's existing on this Earth. I mean, give me a break, are these folks actually that pathetic and anti-life or what? Phobos mean radius: 21 km (13 mi) Distance from Mars: 9,380 km (5,830 mi) Period of Rotation: 0.3188 days Deimos mean radius: 12 km (8 mi) Distance from Mars: 23,460 km (14,580 mi) Period of rotation: 1.2625 days BTW; the mean density of Mars is: 3.95 grams/cm³ which in itself seems is a whole lot more like the composition of our moon than Earth. Jupiter's rotation Period: 9.92 hours Of the 5 primary and 12 or so other moons of Jupiter, even though there should have been if not concurrently tidal forces at play, yet there seems to be none of these moons in synchronization with their home world. Thus once again our unique moon seems somewhat out of step with the trend of such things. Another nagging consideration upon those meteorites and shards strewn about the surface of Mars, considering the entire lack of any atmospheric buffer zone associated with our moon, surely the lunar surface environment must be considerably more intensified with the same sorts of debris, as clearly similar if not worse to what was imaged by the Mars pathfinder mission, and only recently being confirmed by what's being imaged as we speak. As I've stipulated on other pages, the odds of yourself being impacted by at least a dust-bunny or a gram worth of micro meteorite of something that's obviously unimpaired from colliding with the moon is actually quit good, whereas I've averaged those sorts of impacts at 10 km/s, as you must realize that our moon is traveling through space at roughly 30 km/s (+/- lunar velocity with respect to Earth) thereby colliding with numerous debris in addition to that which is simply targeting the moon and being accelerated at the 1.6 m/s/s as captured by lunar gravity. So, according to those Apollo images, that are of potentially far better resolution than even the most recent Mars images, especially if those quality negatives and/or transparencies were to be scanned at 9600 dpi or even 19,200 dpi, even though somehow these terrific frames recorded such damn few meteorites and shards, but mostly that of a desert like surface reflecting average illumination quite nicely at roughly 55%, without any perceptible mineral colors at that. So, the question is, which of these two sources of images (Mars/moon) is true to life, as surely one of them is skewed. Mars images: http://www-k12.atmos.washington.edu/k12/mars/graphics/ http://www-k12.atmos.washington.edu/...s/80894_fu.jpg Moon images: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/pla...tt_boulder.jpg http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...h_40_5886.html http://home.arcor.de/yoiks/mondbilde...-107-17446.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/as16-107-17446.jpg There are certainly far better and worse Apollo lunar photo examples (depending upon what you're looking for), though you'll still need to consistantly disregard the total lack of any blast crater, as well as for those illumination hot spot issues, never minding that for some unexplained reasons not even the star Sirius could have been imaged, though apparently careful attention was always given to exclude upon such horrifically bright stars, not to mention avoiding Venus like the plague (Venus must have always been on the other side of the sun), and especially avoiding any of those frames from including Earth along with a lunar landscape with an astronaut were taboo. Notice how the final redo issued by NASA on the as16-107-17446.jpg is rather significantly lesser image quality than of their original, of which the original includes that infamous "C" rock among a few other tidbits, but also notice how the background terrain is suddenly so entirely devoid of meteorite debris, and so nicely illuminating at that, without ever a single dark basalt rock anywhere within the image to be seen, much less of any hint of even a vibrant star that still should have been recorded as a relatively dim point of illumination (most stars being highly UV worthy and there being no atmosphere to block/filter such intense UV photons). http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/ Notice how much reflective brightness the lunar surface continually offers in respect to those 80% reflective moon suits, then notice how the majority of rocks are actually brighter than their suroundings. I could certainly go on and on but, what's the point, or perhaps this is also where we should apply our "high standards and accountability" and "so what's the difference" factor. Apparently the fact that there were so few, and otherwise relatively minimal meteorites and shards strewn about isn't supposed to suggest anything either. Although, if you'd care to go through any number of other Apollo images, of which we've all see more than our fair share, please do offer your notions as to why there's so damn few of those meteorites and shards, especially when the overall lunar surface had been so much more so mega impact pulverised and has remained entirely vulnerable than even Mars. The fact that the lunar surface as portrayed by those Apollo images seemed to be so darn reflective is yet another skewed avenue of something that's never been resolved because, if there were the expected average of 11% reflective index involved (darkish basalt and meteorite strewn and all), as then the imaging of those absolutely vibrant stars would have been a rather simple task, and even somewhat difficult to have avoided and/or pass up, unless you were an absolute village idiot moron on drugs. Of course, there's always been a few dozen other pesky issues, as well as far better qualified folks having their say, where all of which must be disregarded about their opposing those infamous Apollo missions on more grounds than I ever imagined. So, all you'll need to do is skew those laws of physics and to apply whatever conditional parameters whenever necessary, and lo and behold, as in right out of that space toilet, in spite of the total lack of whatever rational sciences, much less independent or even technical expertise support for those missions, somehow they all happened exactly like our NASA stipulated, and the last time I'd checked under my pillow, the tooth fairy left me a million bucks, plus another million of those Halburton stock options. Besides all of this pathetically stupid Apollo "yes we did", "no they didn't" crap, why don't we just cut to the chase by utilizing our resident warlord's "so what's the difference" WMD policy, and call it good. Latest Sirius entry, along with graphics (Feb. 03, 2004): ****** http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm * http://guthvenus.tripod.com/synchronized-moon.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-earth-venus.htm Calling Venus; If you're perchance the least bit interested in the truly hot prospect of achieving interplanetary communications, as for that quest I've added lots into this following page; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm BTW; There's still way 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 (loads of his honest ideas and notions upon UV energy), for best impact on this one, you'll really need to barrow his video: 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/moon-04.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm Regards. Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA "Dosco Jones" wrote in message thlink.net... "Brad Guth" wrote in message om... I thought this topic was about why we should NOT goto Mars? Moon He3/3He is there for the taking, our wonderful GW Bush is super terrific at such taking. For that alone I'll back the Moon or Bust notions long before there'll be any sympathy for the likes of a frozen and irradiated to death Mars. He3 is not free power. Go do some homework. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mars: meaningless step for man, giant waste for mankind | geo | Space Science Misc | 0 | April 3rd 04 02:09 PM |
Mars Exploration 'By Mind Alone': Project for High SchoolStudents | Cameron M. Smith | Space Science Misc | 3 | January 30th 04 05:40 AM |
Space Shuttle Columbia crew memorialized on Mars | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 2 | January 19th 04 04:28 PM |
Can Nozomi enter Mars orbit? | Jim Kingdon | Space Science Misc | 5 | November 29th 03 07:06 PM |
Mars | Gordon Muir | Space Shuttle | 1 | August 15th 03 04:29 PM |