"rick_sobie" wrote in message
ups.com

Downright impossible, I'd say and wouldn't these tiny pebbles have
been dislodged by the thrust needed to softly land what would be the
equivalent of 2700 pounds on earth?
http://www.dave.co.nz/space/moon-hoa...11-40-5921.jpg
Especially testy without incorporating a good set of powerful momentum
reactions wheels, and having several really good rad-hard computers
running on behalf of managing each of those reaction thrusters that were
situated well above their CG (a CG that was continually changing as
their deorbit and down-range fuel was getting consumed, and otherwise
while passing all of those pesky local mascons along their down-range
path).


If you had a jet engine, and wanted to suspend a Volkswagen
Beetle, 3 feet off the ground, would the subsequent jet beneath
said beetle, dislodge those pebbles?
There's good enough evidence of in places there being tens of meters in
highly electrostatic and otherwise downright nasty dust to deal with,
and we know of the exhaust exit velocity of that rocket engine, which is
only adding further insult to injury because of all that magic moon dust
that remained directly below such a substantial exhaust flow, and oddly
no other indications of any down-range disturbance of said dust that was
somehow rather paper tin in most places and otherwise offing a rather
terrific amount of bone dry yet rather nicely clumping surface tension.

Try that R&D/prototype fly-by-rocket moon landing and EVA walk on a
terrestrial dry desert and lets see what happens. (there's all sorts of
viable ways to match the 1/6th mass)

Perhaps said immovable moon dust was all of titanium or perhaps U238.


Thats is what many are saying. That in order to support the weight
of the LM, with rover and junk they say it would make a crater,
in that lunar surface.
http://www.spacedaily.com/2002/02112....il1d2lsj.html
I'd say a very deep and downright dusty crater, you'd think. But then
they didn't actually have a sufficiently rad-hard working lunar lander,
now did they. So what's the difference?


When in fact, they filled their pockets with dough, for such things
as hundreds of millions of dollars on a dune buggy, 6 billion, per
LM, which is little more than a prop.
And etc.
That's pretty much exactly what mutually perpetrated cold-wars are all
about, is the money and/or essentially unlimited job security along with
full family benefits.

Sadly, those MI/NSA MIB are big-time into doing all they can to
terminate my poor old PC, so I have to frequently reboot in order to
continue. Sorry about that.
-
Brad Guth


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

"rick_sobie" wrote in message
ups.com

Well, you can just imagine, all the high res cameras going to the
moon next year and just how stupid, a lot of people are going to
look, when there is no sign of a flag, no tracks, from the rover,
no footprints, no pieces left behind from the LMs and just a bunch
of embarrassed looking people, in Washington, trying to explain to
the world about the cold war, and how telling the people that by
sending men to the moon, somehow they made that better.

It'll only cost us a few hundred billion of our having to revise
history, that's all. You don't mind paying, do you?

What has gotten deployed via impact methods, such as those highly
reflective substances (including a few sheets of retroreflectors that
should have been doable) by which we then manage to get those reflected
laser photons from, is about as good of remote science as it gets.

With a sufficient impact deployed deposit of whatever's the most
reflective substance, is why we'll get those reflected laser photons
because, the rest of that physically dark and nasty moon is simply not
offering a very good reflector of the visual spectrum, and a rather ****
poor albedo of perhaps as poor as 0.02 for much of the UV spectrum (most
UV getting absorbed rather than reflected).

However, as little as a 2 km (3.14e6 m2) zone that's getting IR laser
illuminated will in fact return a few of those range finding photons
because, the IR albedo of our moon is often better than 0.33 (perhaps as
great as 0.5 in places).
-
Brad Guth


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

(Version 2)

"That's one small step for a man, one Giant Bunny hop for......

OH MY GOD MY KNEECAP ITCHS. DARN. THIS HAS TO HAPPEN RIGHT NOW
WHILE MY VOICE IS BEING BROADCAST TO 99% OF
THE WORLD'S POPULATION, HAVE ANY OF YOU OUT THERE EVER TRIED
(INCLUDING YOU WOMEN) TO SCRATCH YOUR KNEECAP THROUGH A SPACE SUIT?
JUST GO TRY IT RIGHT NOW. WHAT'S A HERO TO DO??? BUZZ, LETZ FIRE
THIS GUY BACK UP AND
HEAD BACK TO THE EARTH WHERE I CAN GO TO MY FARM AND
JUST SCRATCH MY KNEECAP OUT OF SIGHT OF 99% OF THE GLOBAL BRAIN'S
VIEW:


http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/SUPORGLI.html


AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN COME BACK HERE AND I CAN GIVE A DIGNIFIED SPEECH
JUST LIKE IN THE "ASTRONAUT FARMER" MOVIE, WHICH IS PRETTY GOOD, BTW.

On Feb 26, 1:07 pm, "Don Stockbauer"
wrote:
(Version 2)

"That's one small step for a man, one Giant Bunny hop for......

Which reminds me: what is then the standard response from the Moon
hoaxers to the question: "Who then put the laser reflector on Moon's
surface in the area of the landings (claimed to have never occurred) -
the one used every day for lunar ranging?"

--
Jan Bielawski

"JanPB" wrote in message oups.com...
On Feb 26, 1:07 pm, "Don Stockbauer"
wrote:
(Version 2)

"That's one small step for a man, one Giant Bunny hop for......

Which reminds me: what is then the standard response from the Moon
hoaxers to the question: "Who then put the laser reflector on Moon's
surface in the area of the landings (claimed to have never occurred) -
the one used every day for lunar ranging?"

--
Jan Bielawski

Beats me. They never heard of Apollo 8, man's first trip to the Moon
and back. What's the big deal about landing when you've seen the far side,
the British Harrier was first in vertical thrust after the flying bedstead.

The first Flying Bedstead was the British Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig which flew in 1953 at Hucknall aerodrome, Nottinghamshire, England

The second aircraft known as the Flying Bedstead was the LLRV (Lunar Landing Research Vehicle) developed by the United States in the 1960s as part of the Apollo program

Apollo 9 was Earth orbit docking manoeuvres, Apollo 10 was "Snoopy"
and "Charlie Brown". It was all tested before 11 was tried.
All it took was balls, there are plenty of those.

"JanPB" wrote in message oups.com...
On Feb 26, 1:07 pm, "Don Stockbauer"
wrote:
(Version 2)

"That's one small step for a man, one Giant Bunny hop for......

Which reminds me: what is then the standard response from the Moon
hoaxers to the question: "Who then put the laser reflector on Moon's
surface in the area of the landings (claimed to have never occurred) -
the one used every day for lunar ranging?"

--
Jan Bielawski

Beats me. They never heard of Apollo 8, man's first trip to the Moon
and back. What's the big deal about landing when you've seen the far side?
The British Harrier was first in vertical thrust after the flying bedstead.

The first Flying Bedstead was the British Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig which flew in 1953 at Hucknall aerodrome, Nottinghamshire, England -- Wackypedia
I remember it from Pathe News at the cinema.

The second aircraft known as the Flying Bedstead was the LLRV (Lunar Landing Research Vehicle) developed by the United States in the 1960s as part of the Apollo program. -- Wackypedia

Apollo 9 was Earth orbit docking manoeuvres, Apollo 10 was "Snoopy"
and "Charlie Brown". It was all tested before 11 was tried.
All it took was balls, there are plenty of those round.
Given the chance, I'd have gone. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
The hoax brigade are a bunch of spineless ignorant cowards.

On Feb 26, 2:14 pm, "Androcles"
wrote:
"JanPB" wrote in ooglegroups.com...
On Feb 26, 1:07 pm, "Don Stockbauer"
wrote:
(Version 2)

"That's one small step for a man, one Giant Bunny hop for......

Which reminds me: what is then the standard response from the Moon
hoaxers to the question: "Who then put the laser reflector on Moon's
surface in the area of the landings (claimed to have never occurred) -
the one used every day for lunar ranging?"

--
Jan Bielawski

Beats me. They never heard of Apollo 8, man's first trip to the Moon
and back. What's the big deal about landing when you've seen the far side,
the British Harrier was first in vertical thrust after the flying bedstead.

The first Flying Bedstead was the British Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig which flew in 1953 at Hucknall aerodrome, Nottinghamshire, England

The second aircraft known as the Flying Bedstead was the LLRV (Lunar Landing Research Vehicle) developed by the United States in the 1960s as part of the Apollo program

Apollo 9 was Earth orbit docking manoeuvres, Apollo 10 was "Snoopy"
and "Charlie Brown". It was all tested before 11 was tried.
All it took was balls, there are plenty of those.


Yes, that's why I don't understand how anybody can think seriously
even for a second that this was a hoax: so many people involved, there
is no way to guarantee someone won't leak the information. And
remember, this was all in the Soviet era, and the Soviets would pay
UNTOLD AMOUNT OF MONEY to ANYONE with any sort of "inside knowledge"
of that sort. The propaganda effect would have been worth hundreds of
millions of dollars to them.

All this would obviously have to be on the minds of the supposed "hoax
schemers" - how to make sure that absolutely NO-ONE INVOLVED (all it
would take is JUST ONE janitor at the right place) would cave in to
the enormous and obvious Soviet multimillion financial pressure??? Not
even in 1969 but anytime afterwards until the Gorbachov era??? Let
alone the more prosaic leaking that would eventually have to happen to
the embvarrassment of everyone - at a totally unpredictable time! -
and perhaps even prison terms for fraud? I mean, the whole hoax idea
is ridiculous literally everywhere one looks. Everywhere.

--
Jan Bielawski

On Feb 26, 3:17 pm, "JanPB" wrote:

Yes, that's why I don't understand how anybody can think seriously
even for a second that this was a hoax:

There are just plenty of anomalies.

so many people involved, there
is no way to guarantee someone won't leak the information.

So, you must believe that classified information can easily be leaked
out. Apparently, you have never worked in a defense program.

And
remember, this was all in the Soviet era, and the Soviets would pay
UNTOLD AMOUNT OF MONEY to ANYONE with any sort of "inside knowledge"
of that sort.

Why would the Soviets waste any money to do that? Their own space
program was plagued with the same type of hoaxes. Did they really
send the first man into space?

The propaganda effect would have been worth hundreds of
millions of dollars to them.

Not really. Their own hyped program would be exposed.

All this would obviously have to be on the minds of the supposed "hoax
schemers" - how to make sure that absolutely NO-ONE INVOLVED (all it
would take is JUST ONE janitor at the right place) would cave in to
the enormous and obvious Soviet multimillion financial pressure???

Again, you have under-estimated the secrecy of classified works.
shrug

Not
even in 1969 but anytime afterwards until the Gorbachov era???

If you picture in their shoes, they really don't care. One day we
will find out. The very difficulties to "send man back to the moon"
currently pose a tremendous challenge today given with infinitely
better technology. This should be an alarm to anyone.

Let
alone the more prosaic leaking that would eventually have to happen to
the embvarrassment of everyone - at a totally unpredictable time!

It is happening.

and perhaps even prison terms for fraud?

Yes, it is. Thus, it must be covered up at all cost. As I said, one
day we will find out the truth, and these guys will be gone. The jail
time should apply to any NASA management. If they cover up for their
predecessors, they are just as guilty. They cannot use the excuse
that they don't know about the fraud their predecessors had committed.

I mean, the whole hoax idea
is ridiculous literally everywhere one looks.

The same analogy is the Newtonian physics. If it works so well, why
change it. Questioning Newtonian physics is not stupid because of the
observed anomalies. Similarly, the Apollo program brought a
tremendous technological advancement. Why question its validity? Not
until you start to find out the laws of physics would break down in
the process. Not only that, with a great difficult of returning
manned missions back to the moon, it represents a technological de-
evolution and backward progress in engineering. The validity of
Apollo program just does not make any sense.

wrote:

You can over develop film to a certain degree which has the same effect
(almost) as increasing the exposure.

More to the point, one can take the original negatives and print them at
higher contrast (remember Agfa #6) or scan them and jack the living ****
out of exposer/contrast (or better, curves) and STILL if the points are
not recorded, not jack**** will show up.

Yeah. It's late in history to revise it. (Did you know that you can
actually redevelop silver halide film?)

It's all gone.

Thank gawd.

Beats me. They never heard of Apollo 8, man's first trip to the Moon
and back. What's the big deal about landing when you've seen the far side?

What proof do you have this was faked, when Russia had already been
in
orbit and sent back images of the far side?

Are you suggesting NASA could just whip together a manned mission to
the moon in 4 months?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_8

Hell lets go then, get er done boys and lets film that flag for
America, and put an end to all
this. In fact, land and retrieve some stuff, like a Soviet rover, so
we have some real proof.
Leave some satellites in orbit as well, from countries like India,
Saudi Arabia, Germany
and others who are waiting for a ride,


The British Harrier was first in vertical thrust after the flying bedstead.

The first Flying Bedstead was the British Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig which flew in 1953 at Hucknall aerodrome, Nottinghamshire, England -- Wackypedia
I remember it from Pathe News at the cinema.

The second aircraft known as the Flying Bedstead was the LLRV (Lunar Landing Research Vehicle) developed by the United States in the 1960s as part of the Apollo program. -- Wackypedia

Apollo 9 was Earth orbit docking manoeuvres, Apollo 10 was "Snoopy"
and "Charlie Brown". It was all tested before 11 was tried.
All it took was balls, there are plenty of those round.

Right. lol



Given the chance, I'd have gone. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
The hoax brigade are a bunch of spineless ignorant cowards.