A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

...House Science Committee Chair calls Nasa a "TRAIN WRECK"!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old May 14th 07, 06:21 PM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy,sci.astro
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default ...House Science Committee Chair calls Nasa a "TRAIN WRECK"!

....House Science Committee Chair calls Nasa a "TRAIN WRECK"!

Trust me, it has gotten far worse than you can possibly imagine.

That physically dark, rather nasty and otherwise unavoidably anti-
cathode reactive moon of ours is also extensively soft (a touch salty,
better than bone dry and loads softer than Earth), and otherwise I
very much like what this honest contributor had to say.
Androcles:
Venus has a brighter albedo than the Moon, clouds reflect better'n dirt
and it gets more sunlight per unit area.
Venus would be brighter than Earth, too.


Venus actually gets more than 4 kw/m2 of peak solar spectrum energy to
work with, as well as Venus is also highly reflective of what's also
right at the peak sensitivity of that Kodak film. Go figure all that
you care, as to how it's even remotely possible to have excluded
Venus.

Notice how all the damage-control MI/NSA spooks and moles vanish into
less than thin air whenever put to any real test. Such as asking
those silly rusemasters to put up their 3D simulator clips as proof
that their hocus NASA/Apollo missions had no supposed way of their
ever including Venus within any unfiltered Kodak FOV(field of view).

I have many other Kodak (B&W as well as color) film dynamic range(DR)
and color saturation or spectrum sensitive issues with the rather
unusual amount of raw UV energy that by rights and of all the known
laws of physics should have existed, and of the unavoidable secondary/
recoil affect of such cameras having easily recorded those near-blue
photons of what such intense UV/black-light generates.

Do we actually need more proof as to how freaking bright the crescent
illuminated orb of Venus is, compared to the physically dark and nasty
moon itself. (I don't think so)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061030.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ima...n_eder_big.jpg
Remember folks, this was a terrestrial obtained and thus extensively
UV filtered shot. Would any of you silly folks like to see lots of
other (moon + planet) pictures?

Would any of you folks rather talk about those MESSENGER/Earth flyby
examples of what's totally skewed into the nearest space toilet.

In other words, their mutually perpetrated cold war and subsequent
hocus-pocus infomercial spewing jig is up.
-
Brad Guth

 




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
...House Science Committee Chair calls Nasa a "TRAIN WRECK"! Jonathan Policy 9 May 14th 07 06:21 PM
...House Science Committee Chair calls Nasa a "TRAIN WRECK"! Jonathan History 11 May 14th 07 06:21 PM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Jim Oberg Policy 69 February 19th 06 02:10 AM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Eric Chomko Space Science Misc 0 February 15th 06 09:21 AM
Article on supposedly "unprecedented" heights of White House interference at NASA Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 0 February 12th 06 05:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM.


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.