If the moon landing was faked...

Originally Posted by Brad Guth

PowerPost2000,
There's metric tonnes worth of gold in them thar hills. Meaning that
on both sides of this perpetrated cold-war fence there were tens of
thousands of jobs and seriously big-time financial and retirement
benefit rewards for being encharge of such a grand collective, whereas
such a hoax or not was all that counts, as otherwise keeping thousands
of such highly paid positions at the top that simply would not have
been created and/or sustained so long after WW-II, was clearly their
priority No.1 objective. This is not even to mention upon all of their
religious ruse factors that already had a long and bloody history of
getting their way, or else.

It's not that each side wasn't at the time honestly trying to get
something to/from our extremely nearby moon. Once our first Apollo
mission failed but was having to be hoaxed along in order to look as
though we'd accomplish the task (else funding would have been cut),
then it was just more of the same dry-runs, along with each effort
obtaining more expertise and soft-science with regards to what human
space travels and that task of having to eventually accomplish our moon
actually represented, and therefore the learning curve of appreciating
the daunting task of actually getting something/anything safely onto
that nasty sucker was gradually becoming a reality, that should become
doable as of today, or of at least the near furture of what
sufficiently robust robotics can manage.

Radiation, pesky meteorites and/or meters deep moon-dust or not, just
their own Kodak moments has long since proven as a hard matter of
physics fact that such unfiltered photos were not as such obtained
while upon our dark and nasty moon. So, where's the argument?

The likes of "tj Frazir" and of so many others as having been
sufficiently correct about our moon being one extremely nasty
radioactive plus cosmic/solar reactive place that our frail DNA simply
can not have survived unscaved, but then why not collectively work
together at terminating the likes of NASA once and for all?

This Usenet of incest cloned "Art Deco" types being just another borg
like brown-nosed collective part of their ongoing ruse/sting of the
century, whereas their pagan religious and political skewed agenda has
been clearly based upon a butt-loads of space-toilet infomercial
crapolla, or much worse.

Why are these folks pretending at being so all-knowing but otherwise so
unable or unwilling to contribute to the actual task of informing the
public, as to sharing the information as to how badly they've been
snookered, and that far too many having died as a direct result of this
perpetrated cold-war and the ongoing science ruse/sting of the century.
tj Frazir; all these elements are charged by cosmic rays.
tj Frazir; all these elements are in radioative constant.
tj Frazir; How much radioactive thorium can you stand ?
Russia/USSR since 1959 has in fact managed to have impacted our moon,
and subsequently we've impacted that nasty sucker many times with some
fairly big stuff, yet neither of us have thus far managed to establish
a surviving robotic science package (not that we haven't tried every
trick in the book) that's interactively contributing data as taken
directly from the lunar surface.

Unfortunately, survivable types of impactors having robust micro
circuitry and thus being capable of such methods having provided
suitable data from such science instruments simply haven't been allowed
anywhere near our moon, and as far as anyone knows about fly-by-rocket
landers that simply have not been up to the task of accommodating the
necessary deorbit and down-range while dealing with lunar mascons,
whereas the obvious thin atmosphere and terribly nasty surface
environment limits our options of getting anything of size and mass
safely deployed without such efforts involving some degree of final
impact into the meters deep layers of salty and reactive moon dust, or
having to termiate into a nearly solid basalt crater.

Oddly, the ongoing exclusions of existing evidence, especially as to
our moon's gamma and secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays, has thus
far been the status quo of what has been excluded from their
hard-science, as well as having been banished away from the remote
soft-science as published for the rest of us village idiots to read
about, just as were the similar gamma and other radiation spectrum
readings as taken from our privately funded Lunar Prospector. In other
words, it has been impossible that folks encharge of such instruments
as having received these science readings about the existing gamma and
hard-X-ray potential of our moon to have not known about such facts, as
having been in fact playing along with our original perpetrated
cold-war game plan, by way of having excluded whatever doesn't agree
with the NASA/Apollo scriptures and political agenda. The same tactic
goes for whatever Venus has had to offer.

You'd think that this degree of skewed science as having lied it's
butt(s) off and then having ever since been continually involved with
covering thy butt(s) is as bad off as it gets, but it's not even the
worse part of what such dastardly deeds have actually amounted to. The
likes of "tj Frazir" have been sufficiently right from the very
beginnings, yet having become somewhat diverted by way of these Usenet
rusemasters and of their own mindset that wants certain things to be
the case, when in fact so much of science and thus history is simply
skewed beyond the point of no return.
-
Brad Guth

I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line" Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books to other people with "tin foil hats."
Sy Liebergot
"Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime"

The best materials to shield against beta particles have lots of
hydrogen atoms in them. The material of choice for particle shielding
today is Polyethylene, not lead !!! Metals can be used but they are
not ideal. Aluminum is a better choice than lead because it generates
fewer X-rays than lead due to less Bremsstrahlung.
Using lead to shield against Van Allen belt radiation is one of the
worst ways to attempt.
This tells us the Apollo CM spacecraft was perfectly capable of
traveling through the Van Allen belts and beyond, especially if you go
around the majority of, rather than going through the belts, like the
Apollo missions did.
" The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining
assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the
Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one
example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

What I mean by you only perpetuating you own cause is you only want to
make money off all your naysaying (if that's even a word ). You're
just looking for a way to make all this nonsence pay off. You're
just hoping that someone asks you for a TV interview or something and
therefore you can get your name out there and make some cash. If they
ask me for my opionin of your nonsence I'm sure we all know what I
will be telling them.
Brad wrote:
Donations of technology or gifts of cold hard cash are certainly
welcome and entirely legal as long as I've acknowledged my having
received such, or perhaps taking the "high standards and
accountability" road of our "so what's the difference" ( pure nonsence deleted) ....
Send your support directly to my attention: 4410 SE Nelson Rd. Olalla
WA 98359-8517 or just call: (253) 8576061 and I'll put your name along
with others as listed on my lose-cannon notch/kill plate

Sy Liebergot ) writes:
Brad Guth dribbled more of his looniness and insanity:
PowerPost2000,
[....]
-
Brad Guth

I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you
psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's
formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line"
Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for
the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did
indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to
Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe
otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are
communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books
to other people with "tin foil hats."
Sy Liebergot
"Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime"

Mr. Liebergot, Brad Guth is a well known kook whose insanity only
starts at " we never landed on the Moon ", but continues to goofy
**** about Venus ( When he started, his first posted " map of Venus ",
was actually one of *Mars* - really ) that makes lobotomy cases look
like Einstein & Hawking in contrast.

Pay him no mind, for he has none. Plonk the dip****, as most have
learned to do, and everyone, save him, but who cares about him,
will be the far far better for it.

And, kudos for your real work, and the telling of same.

Andre

Cranny Dane wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
oups.com...
et having become somewhat diverted by way of these Usenet

rusemasters and of their own mindset that wants certain things to be
the case, when in fact so much of science and thus history is simply
skewed beyond the point of no return.
-
Brad Guth



Hey Brad, get any tail at your moon hoax conventions ?

Or where they fake chicks as well ?

"Fake chicks"?

I guess that'd be a kind of a "blow job", huh?

--

..

"Though I could not caution all, I yet may warn a few:
Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools!"

--grateful dead.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Mike Flugennock, flugennock at sinkers dot org
"Mikey'zine": dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org

"Sy Liebergot" wrote in message
...

I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you
psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's
formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line"
Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for
the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did
indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to
Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe
otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are
communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books
to other people with "tin foil hats."
Sy Liebergot
"Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime"



Amen Sy.

Hmm, now of course I have yet another book to add to my reading list.



--
Sy Liebergot

I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of
you
psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's
formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line"
Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for
the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did
indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to
Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe
otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are
communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books
to other people with "tin foil hats."
Sy Liebergot
"Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime"

Thank you very much Sy, well said. I try to ignore this subject as
well, it's just I can't help myself sometimes, I just have to say
something.

Great book too, thanks, yes, everyone must read it.

Now, about that tour of JSC ....

Sy Liebergot,
How many times and ways can you be called a LLPOF brown-nosed borg of
the mainstream status quo?
You and your kind absolutely suck and blow, at delivering nothing but
disinformation and much worse.

Our moon is more than sufficiently radioactive and otherwise it's
rather reactive. The lunar surface environment is not only IR and
secondary/recoil IR roasted to death by day and otherwise sub-frozen by
night whereas Rn becomes LRn if not frozen solid, and it's also chuck
full of nasty gamma and hard-X-rays (especially by day). Unlike
yourself, Kodak film doesn't lie.

The standard laws of physics and of multiple hard-science that's easily
replicated proves that we haven't walked on that moon, not to mention
that you have no such stinking fly-by-rocket lander, not even as of
today.

I normally ignore this provocative subject, since there are some of you
psuedo-scientists and engineeers bloviating here that haven't a year's
formal science training or common sense among you. As a "front-line"
Flight Controller in Mission Control and an integral participant for
the entire Apollo Program, I will tell you unequivocally that we did
indeed sucessfully land humans on the Moon and return them safely to
Earth on all the missions so reported. If you continue to believe
otherwise, then I can only assume that you're off your meds or are
communicating from some loony bin. Or perhaps you desire to sell books
to other people with "tin foil hats."
Sy Liebergot
"Apollo EECOM: Journey of a lifetime"

The only one here that's "off your meds or are communicating from some
loony bin" are the brown-nosed borgs as having been incest cloned like
yourself. Are you actually that snookered and subsequently
dumbfounded?
-
Brad Guth

Dear incest clond borg "Andre Lieven",
What can anyone that's the least bit human have to say about your pagan
Third Reich buttology of skewed DNA on a stick that's so incest
mutated?
-
Brad Guth

Dear incest cloned borg "Andre Lieven" and on behalf of the entire lot
of NASA's MIB/Usenet ****ologest,
What can anyone that's still the least bit human have to share about
your pathetic pagan Third Reich buttology of skewed DNA on a stick
that's so incest mutated?
-
Brad Guth

The best materials to shield against beta particles have lots of
hydrogen atoms in them. The material of choice for particle shielding
today is Polyethylene, not lead !!!
Aluminum is a better choice than lead because it generates fewer X-rays
than lead due to less Bremsstrahlung.
Secret237,
I totally agree (as I always have), whereas it takes considerably
greater volume with the likes of utilizing UHMW/Polyethalene or
somewhat better is H2O that results in even less secondary/recoil
dosage of hard-X-rays. 160 meters worth of SL atmosphere is certainly
much better off than 18 mm of lead per obtaining a given half dosage
(obviously the task of moderating gamma down to a dull roar takes more
distance or depth of atmosphere than attenuating the kick out of
hard-X-rays).

If you're going for a 1024:1 reduction of otherwise lethal TBI dosage,
just multiply whartever you're using for accomplishing each 50%
reduction by a factor of 10. That's actually pretty much simple math.

This tells us the Apollo CM spacecraft was perfectly capable of
traveling through the Van Allen belts and beyond, especially if you go
around the majority of, rather than going through the belts, like the
Apollo missions did.
Now we get the usual wag-thy-dog worth of your incest buttology that's
telling us those lies again. Aluminum is nearly transparent to gamma,
whereas even if given quiet a few mm worth of it isn't hardly worth
squat against the lunar gauntlet of such nasty gamma and hard-X-rays,
nor against whatever the Van Allen zone has to offer, and it's
especially true if in fact it takes the likes of 18 mm worth of good
old lead in order to effectively accomplish each 50% reduction in TBI
dosage.

Our naked moon is clearly an orb of what's more than sufficiently
radioactive and otherwise it's rather reactive (as it should be). The
harsh lunar surface environment is not only being IR and
secondary/recoil IR roasted to death by day and otherwise getting
seriously sub-frozen by night, whereas Rn becomes LRn if not frozen
into a glowing solid, and as I'd said that it's having been well
documented as being absolutely chuck full of nasty gamma and
hard-X-rays (especially nasty by day). In addition to and so unlike
yourself, Kodak film (B&W or color) simply doesn't lie.

The standard laws of physics and of multiple hard-science that's easily
replicated is exactly what more than proves that we haven't walked on
that dark and nasty moon, not to mention that you folks had no such
stinking fly-by-rocket lander that was usable for the task at hand, of
certainly not way back then and lo and behold, not even as of today.

What I mean by you only perpetuating you own cause is you only want to
make money off all your naysaying (if that's even a word ).
Now you're into calling hard-science that's easily replicated as being
bogus, as well as you're calling the regular laws of physics as
"naysaying"?

Your Dr. Van Allen is part of the hoax, just like Einstein has been
made into a part of the Jewish hoax. The TRW/Raytheon Space Data
Report has the GSO dosage as situated behind a 2 g/cm2 worth of
aluminum at 2e3 Sv/year. Do the Math.

BTW; NASA's Apollo did not take a sufficiently polar exit/return
route. Although, it doesn't matter since the moon itself represents
such a downright lethal gamma/x-ray environment that's way more than
nasty enough just for surviving the task of having to orbit that
physically dark and TBI nasty sucker.
-
Brad Guth