What if (Craters)

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

These rocks are older than the Earth. Their craters show their ancient
history. They were formed not out of the hydrogen cloud that formed our
sun,but came into our solar system from the Oort cloud. One look at
them tells it all. They are the ancient space mariners of another
spacetime. Reality is 7.5 billion years ago they were much bigger,but
space has worn them down to what we see today Phoebe is a great help to
this theory Bert


Back to school Beert.

He's starting to sound like Guthball now.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Of doing Venus in person would obviously incorporate a composite
rigid airship, along with it's internal cache of frozen pizza and
ice cold beer."
-- Brad Guth, bigoted racist

"You really are one of the litsiest people I know, Mr. Deco."
--Kali, quoted endlessly by David Tholen as evidence of "something"

"Art Deco" wrote in message

He's starting to sound like Guthball now.

You're starting to sound like a Goofball now.

HJ

"face on mars" looks quite differet on high detail pictures, and dosn't look
anything like a face

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-cont...6-0921mars.jpg

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/..._may2001/face/

only on bad low detail pictures i looks like a face:
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/20..._300x337,0.jpg


"G=EMC^2 Glazier" skrev i en meddelelse
...
Always liked looking at craters on the Moon,Mercury and now on comets.
Gas planets,and Jupiter must have been hit the hardest,and could be the
reason Jupiter has the biggest rock core in the solar system(5 times
bigger than the Earth.). Its to bad we can't tell what type of object
made the craters. We used a heavy all cooper projectile to create a
crater on Tempel1 It added a lot of dust in space. So it was cooper
dust and rock dust. Will this dust be of any hazard to a rocket ship of
the future? Mars craters are pretty much covered up by sand.,but
there are a lot of them around the "Face on Mars" taken by the Viking
orbiter. Did meteorites help cave out the image. Eyes nose and mouth fit
well.as these craters do tricks with light(shadows) Be nice if the
nose was an active volcano with fire coming out of it. We would call
it the face of the devil.,and it would be worshipped by warlocks.
Craters tell us a lot about the early universe,but need a lot more
thinking about. Arizona has the most recent and best one. Bert

Be nice if the
nose was an active volcano with fire coming out of it. We would call
it the face of the devil.,and it would be worshipped by warlocks.

Excellent. We will script this into the Martian sub-program. Expect it
soon.

On May 11, 10:42 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Guth Moon and Mars are sand traps. Bert.

I agree, as in tens of meters deep in very moon vacuum bone dry sand
traps of carbon, iron, titanium, salt(s), basalt and you name it, with
hardly any surface clumping tension for supporting a given moonboot,
wouldn't you say.

Of whatever slight trace of h2o binder is within that Mars sand, there
isn't 0.1% of even that much within our moon's sand, or rather
electrostatic powder.

Unless you're talking about horrific compression and/or of extremely
cold and thus LCO2, dry-ice simply doesn't clump or otherwise bind
anything.
-
Brad Guth

On May 12, 7:49 am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
These rocks are older than the Earth. Their craters show their ancient
history. They were formed not out of the hydrogen cloud that formed our
sun,but came into our solar system from the Oort cloud. One look at
them tells it all. They are the ancient space mariners of another
spacetime. Reality is 7.5 billion years ago they were much bigger,but
space has worn them down to what we see today Phoebe is a great help to
this theory Bert

I agree, that stuff of this somewhat less than forever expanding
universe keeps naturally aging (as it should), as well as imploding/
exploding or simply smacking into one another, and/or getting too
close to a given star and thus having vaporised whatever h2o and a
good many other potential fluids and/or substances (such as salt) into
a whole lot less than thin air.

If a sufficient orb, say one of 7.35e22 kg, were to be covered by 262
km of salty ice that'll make your icy instellar transporter worth
7.46e22 kg, whereas now you've got yourself a perfectly viable
interstellar craft that'll rather nicely protect whatever DNA/RNA is
sequestered within that ice.
-
Brad Guth

On May 12, 8:56 am, "Starman" wrote:
"face on mars" looks quite differet on high detail pictures, and dosn't look
anything like a face

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-cont.../2006-0921mars...

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/..._may2001/face/

only on bad low detail pictures i looks like a face: http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/20...narrowweb__300...

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" skrev i en ...



Always liked looking at craters on the Moon,Mercury and now on comets.
Gas planets,and Jupiter must have been hit the hardest,and could be the
reason Jupiter has the biggest rock core in the solar system(5 times
bigger than the Earth.). Its to bad we can't tell what type of object
made the craters. We used a heavy all cooper projectile to create a
crater on Tempel1 It added a lot of dust in space. So it was cooper
dust and rock dust. Will this dust be of any hazard to a rocket ship of
the future? Mars craters are pretty much covered up by sand.,but
there are a lot of them around the "Face on Mars" taken by the Viking
orbiter. Did meteorites help cave out the image. Eyes nose and mouth fit
well.as these craters do tricks with light(shadows) Be nice if the
nose was an active volcano with fire coming out of it. We would call
it the face of the devil.,and it would be worshipped by warlocks.
Craters tell us a lot about the early universe,but need a lot more
thinking about. Arizona has the most recent and best one. Bert- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Zoom in on most anything, and of whatever had looked artificial to
begin with will in fact end up looking as though of absolutely nothing
that's the least bit artificial. Even a good enough zoom-in on your
butt wouldn't end up looking the least bit butt like.

Haven't any of you silly naysay folks heard of observationology?
(didn't think so)
-
Brad Guth

In article . com,
BradGuth wrote:


Zoom in on most anything, and of whatever had looked artificial to
begin with will in fact end up looking as though of absolutely nothing
that's the least bit artificial. Even a good enough zoom-in on your
butt wouldn't end up looking the least bit butt like.

Haven't any of you silly naysay folks heard of observationology?
(didn't think so)


Brad likes to make molehills out of mountains.

--
COOSN-174-07-82116: Official Science Team mascot and alt.astronomy's favourite
poster (from a survey taken of the saucerhead high command).

Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.