did you just call me a Yid, again -- **** **** !?!

your problem is the opposite to the fact that
Venus if the aviator's most-cited UFO --
except that you *always* see it from your SIMchairsuit,
sort of like a virtual quasar in the machinery.

Moon is the *only* nonsolar object in system Sol,
that is visible during the daytime on Earth; likewise,
it may be that Earht is the only planet that is visible
from Moon, during lunar daytime --
without special equipment or photographical enhancement.

your little fanclub, here, is only trying to show that
you are making the putative yids look even smarter than they are,
at least in comparison -- you never engage our arguments!

Venus is *only* visible in the sky,
no matter how much atmosphere, if Sun is blocked by some thing,
such as Earth (or Moon, itself, before Sun "rises," but
all Apollo landings were made approx. at lunar noontime, so...) --
including reflected solar light, like those bright suits.

so, just say, "Duh --
I can see it in my SIMSulations!"

The NASA/Apollo lack of Venus is just one of a good dozen other issues
that simply do not add up for others according to the limitations of
your Yiddish holy grail.

Those naked Kodak moments were unfiltered. Do the math and offer up
the science. Do the 3D interactive orbital simulator, and share.
Otherwise, do offer us whatever examples as to how the heck Venus was
so good at hiding itself while above that physically dark horizon.

why is it *not* the morningstar or
eveningstar vis-a-vuMoon?

all of us who've exposed film and
developed it & printed the results,
with varying degrees of contrast, know this
for an absolute surety --
it's all relative, even though
I've never tried to photograph stars!

see the current *Skeptical Enquirer*,

thus:
ipso facto summa cum laud quad erat demonstrandum!

thus quoth:
Book Review:
The Colonel: The Life and Wars of Henry Stimson 1867-1950
Godfrey Hodgson
Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1992 402 pages, paperbound

There never was, and never will be any conceivable military
justification for the August 1945 U.S. nuclear-bombing of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. Among all the evidence available on this matter, the
documentary record compiled by several among the relevant primary
sources, including the signed confessions of U.S. Secretary of War
Henry Stimson himself, is more than sufficient to justify this
conclusion. Nonetheless, the witless litany, the lie that that bombing
"saved the lives of a million Americans," has widespread credulity to
this day.

The most notable recent public furor over the myth of the "million
American lives saved," erupted in 1994-95, when the Smithsonian
Institution launched an exhibition on the "Enola Gay,"[1] the B-29
which delivered the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima. The lobbyists for the
litany prevailed, once again, on that occasion, and the truth about
the Hiroshima bombing was once again kicked into the ashcan.

So, that Big Lie rolls on, another of those sanctimonious, so-called
"patriotic" lies, which continues to contribute so much to the follies
of that aberrant species of post-Douglas MacArthur sand-box
strategists represented by today's Gore-Cohen-Shelton-Fuerth-Albright
Principals Committee.
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/199...mson_2611.html

Well, there was a blockade around Japan in 1945, and it was pretty
successful, but I don't think MacArthur had much to do with it.

and they were already
negotiating the inevitable through the OSS
and the Vatican Special Office (?).

That is incorrect. There were never any negotiations.

--n~nerfman~n!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07073...each_dick.html
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07080...tors_call.html
14 Italian Senators Call for Cheney Impeachment
Aug. 1, 2007 (EIRNS)-
The Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee
(LPAC) issued the following release today.
Fourteen members of the Italian Senate have signed a call "to the
Members of Congress to support Rep. Kucinich's House Resolution 333
for the Impeachment of Dick Cheney."
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07080...tors_call.html

proviso:
Venus as "evening star" must be easier to see,
than the morningstar; eh?

thus quoth:
Only fragments of these remarks have been reported in the West, while
in Russia RIA Novosti gave its readers a headline ("Clinton supports
placement of BMD in Poland and the Czech Republic") that was directly
opposite to what President Clinton said.
http://larouchepub.com/other/2007/34..._at_yalta.html

--n~nerfman~n!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07073...each_dick.html
14 Italian Senators Call for Cheney Impeachment
Aug. 1, 2007 (EIRNS)-
The Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee
(LPAC) issued the following release today.
Fourteen members of the Italian Senate have signed a call "to the
Members of Congress to support Rep. Kucinich's House Resolution 333
for the Impeachment of Dick Cheney."
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07080...tors_call.html

proviso:
the proof is in the nude Kodak moments,
where the astronauts are sunbathing in the Mojave moviesetting.

seriously,
what we were merely saying was that,
wherever Venus is in deed visible in these pix,
such as just before lunar-orbiter "sunrise" or
just after "sunset," then other foreground objects,
if they were included accidentally by the astrophotog,
would be completely washed-out (unless
it was just the shadowed side of the orbiter or
Earth e.g.).

think about this, before you persist with your attempts
to convert us all to Judaism!

thus quoth:
Only fragments of these remarks have been reported in the West, while
in Russia RIA Novosti gave its readers a headline ("Clinton supports
placement of BMD in Poland and the Czech Republic") that was directly
opposite to what President Clinton said.
http://larouchepub.com/other/2007/34..._at_yalta.html

--n~nerfman~n!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07073...each_dick.html
14 Italian Senators Call for Cheney Impeachment
Aug. 1, 2007 (EIRNS)-
The Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee
(LPAC) issued the following release today.
Fourteen members of the Italian Senate have signed a call "to the
Members of Congress to support Rep. Kucinich's House Resolution 333
for the Impeachment of Dick Cheney."
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07080...tors_call.html

sorry, but the Mac store has sabotaged my aggess to later entries, so
that
I can't reply to monsieur Guth's latest pro-hominemania --
he's obviously a born-again Semite!

anyway, you should, at least, not support his inane armchairism
about relative contrast, such as with a pedagogic dyscussion
of "f-stops;" one must have recourse to an old camera!

in a good simulation, you can see Venus in occultation
by Sun; yeeha -- it's a God-am quasar on my Doo-toob!

the MAA journals are fantastic, aimed at all levels of know-how;
htat's how I got started with then, with the subscription
at my community college to *Mathematics Magazine*;
universites have the backmatter online, and
this is a trove of stuff!

I gave a 15' talk at the first joint meeting
of the N and S California chapters in '95;
some body stole my poster on same at the poster session!

thus:
is it true, that only LaRouchiacs know that
Leo Szilard was the foundational model for Dr. Strangleove?
if you don't believe that,
watch a few episodes of Sagan's PBS biopic,
"The Weaponeers" -- except that
Szilard was his mentor, so!

of course, there were probably compositional elements
of Sir Henry of Kiss.Ass., Macnamara, Chomsky et al
ad vomitorium from the Ayn RAND Corp.

There is nothing to rationalize. The Japs started it. We finished it.

thus quoth:
Only fragments of these remarks have been reported in the West, while
in Russia RIA Novosti gave its
readers a headline ("Clinton supports placement of BMD in Poland and
the Czech Republic") that was
directly opposite to what President Clinton said.
http://larouchepub.com/other/2007/34..._at_yalta.html

--n~nerfman~n!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07073...each_dick.html
14 Italian Senators Call for Cheney Impeachment
Aug. 1, 2007 (EIRNS)-
The Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee
(LPAC) issued the following release today.
Fourteen members of the Italian Senate have signed a call "to the
Members of Congress to support Rep. Kucinich's House Resolution 333
for the Impeachment of Dick Cheney."
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2007/07080...tors_call.html

On Aug 9, 2:12 pm, Major Quaternion Dirt Quantum
wrote:
did you just call me a Yid, again -- **** **** !?!

your problem is the opposite to the fact that
Venus if the aviator's most-cited UFO --
except that you *always* see it from your SIMchairsuit,
sort of like a virtual quasar in the machinery.

Moon is the *only* nonsolar object in system Sol,
that is visible during the daytime on Earth; likewise,
it may be that Earht is the only planet that is visible
from Moon, during lunar daytime --
without special equipment or photographical enhancement.

You are such a Yiddish born-again pretend atheist liar, as well as an
infomercial spewing bigot.

Besides the dozens of links to images posted that proves otherwise,
how many official Kodak images of our moon and other items such as
Venus would you like?

Do you folks also lie about molesting your own kids? (apparently so)
- Brad Guth

On Aug 7, 7:48 am, "Geoman" wrote:
"Androcles" wrote in message

.. .







"mike3" wrote in message
oups.com...
: On Jul 5, 10:51 am, "Androcles" wrote:
: "malibu" wrote in message
:
: oups.com...
: : On Jul 5, 10:02 am, "Androcles" wrote:
: : "Ian Parker" wrote in message
: :
: : roups.com...
: : : On 5 Jul, 01:38, wrote:
: : : http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html
: : :
: : : Those who were deceived by the Apollo Hoax will be remembered,
for
: : : eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the
surface
of
: : : this planet.
: : :
: : : There is a conspiracy theory calculus. Basically the more people
who
: : : conspire the greater the possibility of a leak. With the large
number
: : : of people who participated in Apollo a leak would be virually
certain.
: : :
: : : Conspiracies are posible iff (2 fs deliberate) you have a very
small
: : : tightly knit group of people.
: : :
: : :
: : : - Ian Parker
: :
: : Or to put it another way, two people can keep a secret iff one of
: : them is dead.
: :
: :
: :
: : The film "Alien Autopsy" claimed to be based
: : on actual footage that had
: : gone astray.
: : It was deemed a hoax. The film approached
: : it from the angle of 'could anyone hoax this autopsy?'
: :
: : The consensus was it shoulda got an Oscar, if it
: : was a hoax, cause it sure looked absolutely real.
: :
: : In the more current happening, the film
: : "A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon",
: : an amount of footage got into the moon videos that wasn't
: : supposed to. It shows Armstrong with the camera
: : set up to make the Earth appear to be as far away
: : as possible (shooting Earth through the porthole from the
: : *opposite* side of the capsule with all the lights off.)
: : We get to see Armstrong himself (unless its a hoax and
: : someone used a stand-in double- YOU look at
: : the film and decide) as the lights come back on, adjusting the
: : camera. The other astronaut
: : is adjusting the tape that stretches across part
: : of the porthole that is making this shot look
: : like "Earthrise". The date on the tape is exactly when
: : they were supposed to be approaching the moon and
: : they are obviously still in low earth orbit.
: :
: : **********WAS********** it Armstrong?
: :
: : Watch that movie- it's easily available
: : on the web- if you're scared to,
: : it just means you have too much invested in
: : the fantasy.
: :
: : Warning, jumping ship earlier is better than later
: : when the ship is going down.
: : And this one is going down.
: :
: : John
: : Galaxy Model
: :
: : Every atom has at least ONE of you.
: : And me.
: :
: I don't need to watch any movie, I was alive and sentient in 1969.
: Since then I've watched shuttles launch from Cape Canaveral. Live.
:
: Point ends here.

: Any idiot that hallucinates a launch is not for real has to be a
complete
: and total ****head. Scepticism is healthy, blind stupidity is sick.
: But then, that's just what you are. Sick.
:
: One star, I rate this post, for it's terrible lack of civility and
: morals.
: Your point is right, but the thing above is not necessary nor is it
: good. You like to insult people -- HURT THEIR FEELINGS -- instead
: of simply refuting their argument. Their feelings do not need to be
: hurt, their argument just needs to be refuted.

**** 'em. I never claimed to be good, just logical.
You can't hurt my feelings, many try but I have the skin
of a rhinoceros and I'm not looking for stars from you,
the sky has more than I need.

I insult those that insult the intelligence of others, especially mine.

If Ian Parker or "malibu" want to swallow and spout hoax theories
they've heard of and latched onto then they are trying to hurt the
feelings of the kinfolk of those who dedicated (and lost) their lives
in the pursuit of science.

http://www.vibrationdata.com/space/deaths.htm

I'll kick their inconsiderate and stupid ****in' arses anytime.
Why the **** should I care about their films or your ratings?

Your ploy to substitute patriotism to cover the revelation of your total
ineptness to discuss any reasonable fact only reveals just how shallow you
really are. You try to cover up your defeat of 'wits' with a display of
superiority in humanitarianism, which is pure nonsense. A true humanitarian
would not have to threaten others with different views to propagate their
agenda. Also, are you so ill informed as to believe those who are dead
really care what is said on this board? There are other things more
honoring than respecting the dead, like treating those who are ALIVE with
respect, something you severely lack.


Does this post contain any sort of respect? As if it doesn't, then
you are practicing hypocrisy -- saying someone else should respect
and not respecting them. Do you, just out of curiosity, think that he
would be capable of, if he WANTED to, *become* apt enough to discuss
reasonable fact? Ie, do you think it has to do with him not WANTING
to change, as that is in fact why he does not, since everyone is
capable of changing themselves (who else is, except that person,
themself?), it's just that some don't WANT to change?

On Jul 9, 1:01 am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 4, 5:38 pm, wrote:

http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

Those who were deceived by the Apollo Hoax will be remembered, for
eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the surface of
this planet.

Just keep asking; where's Venus? where's Venus? where's Venus?

Venus was big, it was bright and it was certainly nearby. I even have
a pathetic VGA cellphone camera with sufficienr DR for having recorded
Venus and that of our physically dark moon within the same FOV.
-
Brad Guth

Now take a film camera, capable of taking pictures of the stars
at night. Set it up for such a shot, and then do such a shot --
only in broad daylight. Now set the camera up as you would for a
broad daylight shot, only try shooting a pic of Venus at night
with those settings. Tell me the results of this experiment, and
how well it agrees with the Moon Hoax theory.

On Jul 9, 9:05 am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 9, 6:38 am, John Boy wrote:

BradGuth wrote:
[...] I even have
a pathetic VGA cellphone camera with sufficienr DR for having recorded
Venus and that of our physically dark moon within the same FOV.

Shine a flashlight into the lens while you make the same picture. Venus
will not show up, providing the toy camera has exposure control. It will
shutter down to accomodate the flashlight image.

Silly Jewspeak. I see that incest cloning hasn't been exactly kind to
your family tree.


INSULTING him is not going to prove your point. That's one ad hominem
fallacy to your credit, which means you have failed to refute his
claim, and you also employ a sad fallacy of thinking people's
behaviors
or viewpoints are strictly tied to genetics.

There are many posted examples of our moon and Venus sided by side,
meaning within the very same FOV and using the very same exposure.
There are even official satellite images having accomplish such.
Obviously we have those NASA/Apollo images of our moon along with the
very darkest portions of Earth as recorded within the same frame, as
exposed onto the very same Kodak film.


But now then why, why, why, if the surface of the Earth is so much
dimmer than the moon, do we have different settings and cameras for
broad-daylight photography and night photography? Try reversing the
roles of a night-photo camera and a day-photo one and tell me how it
works out. Oh and point it at the ground, by the way, if you think
Earth's albedo is so bad.

Oddly, Venus wasn't all that far away, and of its illuminated clouds
were most certainly a whole lot brighter than the darkest portions of
Earth that recorded just fine and dandy. Those photons derived from
Venus also included a whole lot mome near-blue, violet and UV photons
to boot than given off by Earth's wussy albedo, of which the
unfiltered Kodak eye was in fact highly sensitive to.


And yet Earth's "wussy" albedo is enough to necessitate setting the
camera differently for day/night shots, as the experiment I outlined
above demonstrates. Now imagine what the MOON, with even MORE albedo,
does.

Why are you and so many others of your Zion kind such dumnbfounded
fools and/or such born-again liars?

More insults. But those add zero points to your argument. And as you
know, 0+0 = 0, so two insults are no better than one.

-
Brad Guth

On Jul 9, 7:53 pm, Jew stop.right.there.net wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 9, 6:38 am, John Boy wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
[...] I even have
a pathetic VGA cellphone camera with sufficienr DR for having recorded
Venus and that of our physically dark moon within the same FOV.
Shine a flashlight into the lens while you make the same picture. Venus
will not show up, providing the toy camera has exposure control. It will
shutter down to accomodate the flashlight image.

Silly Jewspeak. I see that incest cloning hasn't been exactly kind to
your family tree.

Your so-called range of exposure has to include the intent to gather
fine detail. We do no such thing with astro shots.

Ah, why do I bother with friggin genetically inferior white people like
your sorry ass, I'll never know but it stops here. You are a dead-end of
humanity.

Then you're just as wrong TOO since you think your race is superior,
genetically. With that attitude you're just asking for more war.
Racism is racism, discrimination is discrimination, plain and simple
REGARDLESS of what race it goes from or to. And it's sickening to see
so many people give this post 5 stars.

On Jul 10, 12:16 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 10, 6:12 am, jj stop.right.there.net wrote:

BradGuth wrote:
An unfiltered Kodak eye always sees so much more of the available
spectrum than the human eye,

No it absolutely DOES NOT. Consumer film is made to approximate the
human eye's color response. There are a couple colors that the eye does
not 'see' properly, depending upon adjacencies and background, but it
doesn't matter whether it's IRL or on a print.

That's very Jewspeak LLPOF, especially about the film utilized by our
not so rad-hard NASA/Apollo rusemasters and of their xenon arc lamp
spectrum of illuminations which created very little (less than
terrestrial) UVa. Perhaps guano islands just arn't what they used to
be.


Insults = 0 points to your argument.

Would you like to talk about those pesky red, white and blue color
saturations. How about those near-blue ones of pesky secondary/recoil
photons, of what such raw UVa unavoidably generates.


And how does this change the simple fact that the surface of the
Moon drowns out Venus by a great deal of magnitude?! That's all
about sheer raw INTENSITY of the light, not the FREQUENCY.

BTW, where's Venus? (perhaps hiding along with all of those Muslim WMD
and Usama bin Laden?)

It's there, the camera just wasn't set up to record that. If it
was the Moon's surface would look like a big white splotch -- no
fine details. That's the rub -- FINE DETAIL.

-
Brad Guth