PROOF FIRST MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX

Intrepid

unread,

May 22, 2012, 8:37:51 AM5/22/12

to

<
Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
<
Did NASA Fake image of U.S. Flag and the Earth?
<
U.S. flags on the Moon were made from nylon cloth, but no flags
on Earth show anomalies like these:
<
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=30&f=1044315525&p=78
<
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo17.jpg
<
Was the Earth real in the photo?
<
Read more at . . .
<
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0
<
==========
<
WORLD'S LARGEST NEWSPAPERS
Rank Country Circulation
1. Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan) 14,532,694
2. Asahi Shimbun (Japan) 12,601,375
3. Sichuan Ribao (China) 8,000,000
4. Mainichi Shimbun (Japan) 5,845,857
5. Bild (Germany) 5,674,400
6. Chunichi Shimbun (Japan) 4,323,144
7. Sun (England) 3,718,354
8. Renmin Ribao (China) 3,000,000
9. Sankei Shimbun (Japan) 2,890,835
10. Nihon Keizai Shimbun Japan 2,705,877
11. Gongren Ribao (China) 2,500,000
12. Daily Mail (England) 2,387,867
13. Daily Mirror (England) 2,339,001
14. Chosun Ilbo (South Korea) 2,225,000
15. Dong-A Ilbo (South Korea) 2,150,000
16. Hokkaido Shimbun (Japan) 1,962,666
17. Eleftherotypia (Greece) 1,858,316
18. Xin Min Wan Bao (China) 1,750,000
19. Wall Street Journal (U.S.) 1,740,450
20. Yangcheng Wanbao China 1,730,000
21. Kerala Kaumudi (India) 1,720,000
22. Wen Hui Bao Daily (China 1,700,000
23. USA Today (United States) 1,653,428
24. Joong-Ang Ilbo (S. Korea) 1,550,000
25. Economic Daily (China) 1,500,000
26. Rodong Sinmun (N. Korea) 1,500,000
27. Kyung-Hyang Daily News 1,478,537
28. Sports Nippon (Japan) 1,452,699
29. Shizuoka Shimbun (Japan)) 1,442,310
30. Sankei Sports (Japan) 1,367,734
31. Deutche Allgemeine Germ 1,313,400
32. United Daily News (Taiwan ) 1,300,000
33. China Times (Taiwan) 1,270,000
34. O Estado de Sao Paulo Brazil) 1,230,160
35. Jang Daily (Pakistan) 1,200,000
36. Jang Lahore (Pakistan) 1,200,000
37. Akhbar El Yom (Egypt) 1,159,339
38. Hankook Ilbo (South Korea) 1,156,000
39. Hochi Shimbun (Japan) 1,119,031
40. Daily Express (England) 1,118,981
41. Los Angeles Times (U.S.) 1,067,540
42. New York Times (U>S) 1,066,540
43. Tokyo Shimbun (Japan 1,062,080
44. Daily Telegraph (England) 1,047,861
45. Nishinippon Shimbun Japan 1,041,104
46. Jiefang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
47. Nanfang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
48. Nongmin Ribao (China) 1,000,000
49. Zhongguo Qingnian Ribao China 1,000,000
50. Nikkan Sports (Japan) 984,058
51. Al Akhbar (Egypt) 980,000
52. Guangming Ribao (China) 950,000
53. Al Ahram (Egypt) 900,000
54. Al Goumhouriya (Egypt) 900,000
55. Seoul Shinmun (S. Korea) 900,000
56. Xin Hua Ribao (China) 900,000
57. Verdens Gang (Norway) 870,267
58. Corriere della Sera (Italy) 868,266
59. Kyoto Shimbun (Japan) 839,499
60. Chugoku Shimbun (Japan) 820,000
61 Kobe Shimbun Japan 820,000
62. Times of India (India) 813,000
63. Kobe Shimbun (Japan) 810,353
64. Beijing Wanbao (China) 800,000
65. Hubei Ribao (China) 800,000
66. Jiefangjun Ribao (China) 800,000
67. Trybuna Slaska (Poland) 800,000
68. La Gazzetta dello Sport Italy 798,243
69. Ouest-France (France) 790,133
70. Holos Ukrainy (Ukraine) 768,000
71. The Times (England) 766,999
72. ABC (Spain) 765,668
73. Washington Post (U.SSS>) 759,122
74. La Repubblica (Italy) 754,930
75. De Telegraf (Netherlands) 751,400
76. Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) 750,000
77. Zero Hora (Brazil) 727,188
78. Diario dos Campos (Brazil) 725,000
79. New York Daily News (U.S.) 723,143
80. Sabah (Turkey) 722,950
81. Jornal da Tarde (Brazil) 709,793
82. Beijing Ribao (China) 700,000
83. Chongqing Ribao (China) 700,000
84. Clarin (Argentina) 700,000
85. Thai Rath (Thailand 700,000
86. Zhejiang Ribao (China) 700,000
87. Diario Insular (Portugal) 684,143
88. Granma Internacional (Cuba) 675,000
89. Chicago Tribune (U.S.) 673,508
90. Daily Record (Scotland) 671,267
91. China Daily News (Taiwan) 670,000
92. The Daily Star (England) 650,406
93. Guangxi Ribao (China) 650,000
94. Malayala Manorama (India) 630,068
95. La Nacion (Argentina) 630,000
96. Hurriyet (Turkey) 615,579
97. Herald Sun (Australia) 600,000
98. Hurriyet (Pakistan) 600,000
99. Liaoning Ribao (China) 600,000
100. Oriental Daily News (Hong Kong) 600,000
<
LARGEST U.S. NEWSPAPERS
Circulation
1. USA Today (Arlington, Va.) 2,154,539
2. Wall Street Journal (NY N.Y.) 2,091,062
3. Times (New York, N.Y.) 1,118,565
4. Times (Los Angeles) 914,584
5. Post (Washington, DC) 732,872
6. Daily News (New York, N.Y.) 729,124
7. Tribune (Chicago) 680,879
8. Post (New York, N.Y.) 652,426
9. Newsday (Long Island, N.Y.) 580,069
10. Chronicle (Houston) 553,018
11. Chronicle (San Francisco) 512,640
12. Morning News (Dallas) 510,133
13. Sun-Times (Chicago) 481,798
14 Globe (Boston) 450,538
15. Arizona Republic (Phoenix) 432,284
16. Star-Ledger (Newark, N.J.) 408,672
17. Star Tribune (Minneapolis) 380,354
18. Inquirer (Philadelphia) 376,493
19. Journal-Constitution (Atlanta) 371,853
20. Plain Dealer (Cleveland) 365,288
21. Free Press (Detroit) 352,714
22. Oregonian (Portland) 342,789
23. Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.) 334,742
24. Union-Tribune (San Diego) 328,531
25. Herald (Miami) 315,850
26. Register Orange County CA 302,864
27. Sun (Baltimore) 301,186
28. Bee (Sacramento, Calif.) 289,905
29. Post (Denver) 288,937
30. Rocky Mtn. News Denver 288,889
31. Post-Dispatch (St. Louis) 285,869
32. Mercury News San Jose CA 271,997
33. Star (Kansas City, Mo.) 267,273
34. Sentinel (Orlando, Fla.) 257,222
35. Times-Picayune N Orleans 253,610
36. Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) 252,564
37. Star (Indianapolis) 249,891
38. Journal Sentinel Milwaukee 244,288
39. Post-Gazette Pittsburgh Pa 242,546
40. Herald (Boston) 241,457
41. Sun-Sentinel (Ft L'dale, Fla ) 233,634
42. Times (Seattle) 231,505
43. News (Detroit) 227,392
44. Observer (Charlotte, N.C.) 226,849
45. Tribune (Tampa, Fla.) 224,220
46. Express-News S Antonio Tx 222,536
47. Investor's Business Daily LA 2 5,788
48. Star-Telegram Ft Worth, TX) 215,452
49. Courier-Journal L'ville Ky 213,176
50. News (Buffalo, N.Y.) 207,989
51. Daily Oklahoman Okla City 207,538
52. Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, Va.) 201,141
53. World-Herald Omaha Neb. 192,075
54. Pioneer Press(St Pau, Minn 190,392
55. Times-Dispatch Richmond 188,540
56. Courant (Hartford, Conn.) 185,570
57. Press-Enterprise R'side CA 183,974
58. Democrat-Gazette (L'l Rock 183,343
59. American-Statesman Austin 183,312
60. Contra Costa Times (Calif.) 182,541
61. Enquirer (Cincinnati) 182,176
62. Record (Bergen County, N.J.) 179,270
63. Daily News (Los Angeles) 178,360
64. Democrat (Rochester, N.Y.) 173,900
65. Tennessean (Nashville) 172,149
66. Post (W. Palm Beach, Fla.) 168,147
67. Times-Union(Jacksonville Fla 167,851
68. Journal (Providence, R.I.) 167,609
69. Asbury Park Press (N.J.) 167,284
70. News & Observer Raleigh NC 163,769
71. Review-Journal (Las Vegas) 160,391
72. Bee (Fresno, Calif.) 158,651
73. Commercial Appeal Memphis 157,820
74. Register (Des Moines, Iowa) 150,851
75. Post-Intelligencer (Seattle) 150,851
76. Daily Herald (Chicago) 150,364
77. News (Birmingham, Ala.) 148,938
78. Daily News (Philadelphia) 143,631
79. Journal News Westchester NY 142,873
80. Advertiser (Honolulu) 142,025
81. Blade (Toledo, Ohio) 139,520
82. World (Tulsa, Okla.) 139,383
83. Press (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 138,620
84. Tribune (Salt Lake City) 134,985
85. Beacon Journal (Akron, Ohio 128,511
86. News Tribune Tacoma Wash 128,511
87. Daily News (Dayton, Ohio) 126,642
88. La Opinion Los Angeles Calif 124,692
89. Post-Standard Syracuse, N.Y. 120,701
90. Tribune-Review (Greensburg Pa 119,646
91. News Journal (Wilmington, Del.) 116,398
92. News-Sentinel (Knoxville Tenn) 114,593
93. State (Columbia, S.C.) 114,442
94. Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.) 111,594
95. Journal (Albuquerque) 109,693
96. Herald-Leader (Lexington, Ky.) 106,941
97. Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, Fla.) 105,636
98. News-Journal (Daytona Fla.) 104,654
99. Telegram (Worcester MA) 102,592
100. Times (Washington, DC) 102,255
<
WORLDWIDE NEWS AGENCIES
Associated Press AP
African Eye News Service
Agence France Presse
APTN
Bloomberg
Cable News Network
EFE News
Indo Asian News Service
Iran Press Service
Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA)
Iraq Press
IRIN News
Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA)
Inter Press Service
Itar-Tass -- Russia
Latin American Press
Middle East News Agency
Pravda -- Russian News and Analysis
Prima News Agency
Reuters
Television News Archive
United Nations News Wire Service
United Press International UPI
Xinhua News Agency -- China
=========
Agence France Press, AFP
Agencia EFE, EFE
Agencia Estado
Agencia Lusa
Agency Telegraphique Belge De Press, AGNECE BELGA
Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata, ANSA
Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, AGI
Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau, ANP
Albanian Telegraphic Agency, ATA
Alternativna Informativna Mreza, AIM
Anadolu News Agency
Armanian News Agency, NOYAN TAPAN
ArmenPress
Asbar News Agency
Associated Press, AP
Athens News Agency, APE
ATH news agency - Kharkov, Ukraine
Atlantic News Service
Austria Press-Agentur, APA
Australian Associated Press, AAP
Baltic News Service, BNS
Bolivia Web - News from the ERBOL News Agency
Bulgarian Telegraph Agency, BTA
Canadian Press, CP
Central News Agency, CNA
Ceskolovenska Tiskova Kancelat, CTK
China News Service
COMPASS Media, Inc.
Cubapress
Cyprus News Agency, CNA
Deutsche Presse - Agentur Gmbh , DPA
ELTA - Lithuanian news agency
Eesti Teadete Agentur, ETA
H.K China News Agency
Hrvatska Izvjestajna Novinska Agencija, HINA
Indonesian National News Agency, ANTARA
Interfax News Agency
Islamic Republic News Agency, IRNA
Jiji Press (Jiji Tsushin-Sha)
Korean Central News Agency, KCNA
Kyodo News Service
LETA News Agency
MIA - Macedonian Information Agency
Makfax - Macedonian News Agency
Reality Macedonia
Magyar Tavirati Iroda, MTI
Malaysian National News Agency - BERNAMA
Mediafax - Romanian News Agency
Mercopress News Agency
Montsame News Agency, SABA
New Zealand Press Association, NEPA
Official Jordania News Agency, PETRA
Oman News Agency
Pakistan Press International, PPI
Panafrican News Agency
Polska Agencja Prasowa, PAP
Prensa Latina
Press association
Prime-TASS Economic News Agency
Reuters
Russian Information Agency, Ria "Novosti"
Schweizerische Depeschen Agentur, SDA
Serbian Press Agency, SRNA
Slovene Press Agency, STA
SNARK News Agency
Suomen Tietotoimisto
Tanjug News Agency
Telegrafnoye Agnetstvo Sovietskogo Snyuza, TASS
Tidningranas Talegrambyra, TT
Tlacova agentura Slovenskej republiky, TASR
Vietnam News Agency
Yemen News Agency, SABA
Yonhap News Agency
Xinhua News Agency
<

Legally....@hotmail.com

unread,

May 22, 2012, 3:39:05 PM5/22/12

to

On May 22, 8:37 am, Intrepid <tickle.my.fancy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
PROOF FIRST MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX
>
It doesn't surprise me, not after I found this X-rated
video while I was rooting through NASA's garbage
at Cape Canaveral back in April of '69.
<
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mouUUWpEec0
<
< -- Ed Conrad

Robert Fitzgerald

unread,

May 22, 2012, 4:52:23 PM5/22/12

to

All I can say is, yes, the moon landing was a hoax. Everybody knows that.

However, for it's time, it was very well done and deserves credit for
that. Today, it seems amateurish when we compare it to something like
the WTC attacks, or even the take-down of Osama Bin Ladin.

Given the technology they had to work with then, it's amazing.

--
Bobby

Warhol

unread,

May 22, 2012, 5:20:36 PM5/22/12

to

Op 22-5-2012 22:52, Robert Fitzgerald schreef:

Give to Cesar what belongs to Cesar...

BDK

unread,

May 22, 2012, 7:07:32 PM5/22/12

to

In article <wfudnWskbo0aYSbS...@giganews.com>,
rob...@fizmarkianbobo.com says...

It's time for you to get back on your meds. Side effects be damned.

--
BDK- Head FUD-Master Blaster.

bobo fizmarkian

unread,

May 22, 2012, 9:34:29 PM5/22/12

to

I always thought that the CIA and NASA should have received a secret
Academy Aware for that work.

OTOH, they well might have, if it was secret. Maybe they just didn't
tell me about it..

--
Bobo

4HEAD

unread,

May 22, 2012, 9:51:16 PM5/22/12

to

On 5/22/2012 7:37 AM, Intrepid wrote:

[...]

I see NO proof of a 'hoax'. Who knows where these images of
yours came from or what's been done to them by you or someone
else. All I really see proof of is a hoaxster amateurishly trying to
produce evidence of a hoax! America went to the moonPERIOD
(( {:->/

joeturn

unread,

May 22, 2012, 10:46:12 PM5/22/12

to

No they did not,once a rocket passes through the van allen belt it is
overwhelmed by cosmic radiation at which point it looses its guidence
system.RF communications wont work anymore and the thingy will just
explode,they were all equipted with self destruct mechanisms incase
they lost control.The moment they reached the van allen belt they lost
control.Even if it had inetia the temperature would freeze its thrust
engines and it would break to bits on its own!.Do you know how cold it
gets 5 miles above the earths surface,now imagine 250,000 times that!

jacob navia

unread,

May 23, 2012, 6:46:49 AM5/23/12

to

Le 22/05/12 22:52, Robert Fitzgerald a écrit :

Yes, all that is amazing. Even more amazing is that they managed to
bounce laser rays from (obviously faked too) mirrors in the moon
without anyone discovering a problem. Amazing, really amazing.

And after more than half a century new satellites that photograph
with much improved resolution the landing site discover the tracks
of those machines still there. All that is faked of course, as you say.

The faked photographs are coherent with their faked landings though.
Amazing.

And now Amazon chief Bezos discovers one of the rockets that went
in the first part of the faked trip in the ocean, as it should
have been. Amazing how much budget they continue to spend in
faking everything isn't it?

Imagine, you have to throw the faked rocket and fake 50+ years
in the sea. Incredibly amazing.

But what is even more amazing is that the mirrors left in the
moon continue to bounce back the lasers. Even you could bounce
your laser from them, since they will intercept all lasers from the
earth, calculate how long they will take to bounce, and with a
magically amazing system of mirrors they will give you your laser
bouncing back as if it was reflected from the moon.

Amazing, really amazing.

jacob navia

unread,

May 23, 2012, 8:14:40 AM5/23/12

to

Le 22/05/12 21:39, Legally....@hotmail.com a écrit :

HVAC

unread,

May 23, 2012, 8:28:22 AM5/23/12

to

On 5/22/2012 7:07 PM, BDK wrote:
>
> It's time for you to get back on your meds. Side effects be damned.

I thought we WERE witnessing the side effects....

--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

Warhol

unread,

May 23, 2012, 2:35:58 PM5/23/12

to

Op 23-5-2012 14:14, jacob navia schreef:

> But what is even more amazing is that the mirrors left in the
> moon continue to bounce back the lasers. Even you could bounce
> your laser from them, since they will intercept all lasers from the
> earth, calculate how long they will take to bounce, and with a
> magically amazing system of mirrors they will give you your laser
> bouncing back as if it was reflected from the moon.

there are no mirrors left since the fact is they never got there... that
bouncing of laser light is a giant lie too... better look at the fact as
they are... you have been living 50 years in giant lie...

Fact remains there is no such thing as space travel or exploration...

Second have you ever seen a laser dot on the Moon... well no man has
until now... simply because there ain't yet a laser powerfull enough to
light up the Moon and bounce back the light back to Earth... this only
one of the problems...

And I have hint for you too... why don't you go look in the depths of
the oceans... you would amazed by machines you find there... machines
supposed to be in space...

Brad Guth

unread,

May 23, 2012, 4:12:30 PM5/23/12

to

Actually, between the moon and Earth you tend to get roasted to death
(especially if the moon were more than half illuminated towards the
spacecraft. Getting rid of surplus heat is actually highly
problematic for space travel, especially when fully solar illuminated
plus receiving the IR of planetshine and moonshine in addition to
internal body and systems heat that must be radiated away unless using
up LOx or evaporating water for cabin cooling.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

jacob navia

unread,

May 23, 2012, 5:22:38 PM5/23/12

to

Le 23/05/12 20:35, Warhol a écrit :

> Op 23-5-2012 14:14, jacob navia schreef:
>> But what is even more amazing is that the mirrors left in the
>> moon continue to bounce back the lasers. Even you could bounce
>> your laser from them, since they will intercept all lasers from the
>> earth, calculate how long they will take to bounce, and with a
>> magically amazing system of mirrors they will give you your laser
>> bouncing back as if it was reflected from the moon.
>
>
> there are no mirrors left since the fact is they never got there... that
> bouncing of laser light is a giant lie too... better look at the fact as
> they are... you have been living 50 years in giant lie...
>

Yes, yes, of course. All people that see the laser, receive
the bounced light after 2 seconds, they are all part of the conspiracy
of course...

> Fact remains there is no such thing as space travel or exploration...
>

Sure, all those images of Saturn, Jupiter, Neptune, Mercury, Venus
have been faked to make us believe that there are rockets, space
travel, etc. Sure. Yesterday, for instance, that rocket that lifted
off from Florida was of course a fake.

> Second have you ever seen a laser dot on the Moon... well no man has
> until now... simply because there ain't yet a laser powerfull enough to
> light up the Moon and bounce back the light back to Earth... this only
> one of the problems...
>

Of course, if you say so, it must be true since you are not nuts. You
are the only sane person in the world isn't it? All others are part
of the conspiracy.

> And I have hint for you too... why don't you go look in the depths of
> the oceans... you would amazed by machines you find there... machines
> supposed to be in space...

Of course, they do not go to space but to the ocean floor. Sure.

Thanks for the hint then. I will take it to my heart.

Warhol

unread,

May 23, 2012, 7:33:38 PM5/23/12

to

Op 23-5-2012 23:22, jacob navia schreef:

> Le 23/05/12 20:35, Warhol a écrit :
>> Op 23-5-2012 14:14, jacob navia schreef:
>>> But what is even more amazing is that the mirrors left in the
>>> moon continue to bounce back the lasers. Even you could bounce
>>> your laser from them, since they will intercept all lasers from the
>>> earth, calculate how long they will take to bounce, and with a
>>> magically amazing system of mirrors they will give you your laser
>>> bouncing back as if it was reflected from the moon.
>>
>>
>> there are no mirrors left since the fact is they never got there... that
>> bouncing of laser light is a giant lie too... better look at the fact as
>> they are... you have been living 50 years in giant lie...
>>
>
> Yes, yes, of course. All people that see the laser, receive
> the bounced light after 2 seconds, they are all part of the conspiracy
> of course...
>
>

prove your words... I have never seen the Moon illuminated by any light...

>> Fact remains there is no such thing as space travel or exploration...
>>
>
> Sure, all those images of Saturn, Jupiter, Neptune, Mercury, Venus
> have been faked to make us believe that there are rockets, space
> travel, etc. Sure. Yesterday, for instance, that rocket that lifted
> off from Florida was of course a fake.
>

Ha ha ha all what lifted up from Florida lays now deep on the ocean
floor... there is the final destination of the Lunatics, the place where
no man went before... deep in the ocean, the graveyard of man space
exploration...

>> Second have you ever seen a laser dot on the Moon... well no man has
>> until now... simply because there ain't yet a laser powerfull enough to
>> light up the Moon and bounce back the light back to Earth... this only
>> one of the problems...
>>
>
> Of course, if you say so, it must be true since you are not nuts. You
> are the only sane person in the world isn't it? All others are part
> of the conspiracy.
>
>> And I have hint for you too... why don't you go look in the depths of
>> the oceans... you would amazed by machines you find there... machines
>> supposed to be in space...
>
> Of course, they do not go to space but to the ocean floor. Sure.
>
> Thanks for the hint then. I will take it to my heart.
>

My question was, Have you ever seen a laser dot on the moon???

Of course; why don't you simply start to answer the question?

And by what science they get their beam reflected back to them... Maybe
you don't know yet but earth atmosphere breaks light to another
directions... the Moon or the star is not there where you see them...

http://images.tutorvista.com/content/light-refraction/atmospheric-refraction.jpeg

http://images.tutorvista.com/content/light-refraction/atmospheric-refraction-at-sunrise-sunset.jpeg

http://images.tutorvista.com/content/refraction-light/atmospheric-refraction-star-apparent-position.jpeg

this refraction are known

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_5/May_1874/The_Crooked_Courses_of_Light

Now why don't you simply explain how the Laser light beam is reflected
from to moon back to its emitting base... knowing it would be refracted
by earth atmosphere to breakpoint where the beam can't be bounced back
to its source... Show us how they bounce their light on the moon? a
simple question no???

provide evidence if you want to harden your weak claims... would be my
answer to you... no truth or facts is yet found in your words. only
deceive and words of parrots... but nothing of your own.

BDK

unread,

May 23, 2012, 10:05:25 PM5/23/12

to

In article <jpil55$mn1$1...@hvac.motzarella.org>, mr....@gmail.com says...

>
> On 5/22/2012 7:07 PM, BDK wrote:
> >
> > It's time for you to get back on your meds. Side effects be damned.
>
> I thought we WERE witnessing the side effects....

We probably couldn't tell the difference anyway. Loon behavior and a
reaction to a drug seem pretty similar.

It might be fun to see it though..

jacob navia

unread,

May 24, 2012, 1:27:57 AM5/24/12

to

Le 24/05/12 01:33, Warhol a écrit :

> My question was, Have you ever seen a laser dot on the moon???
>
> Of course; why don't you simply start to answer the question?

Of course, as you wish Sir:

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=605

<quote>

The McDonald Observatory in Western Texas and a second observatory near
the city of Grasse in southern France regularly send a laser beam
through an optical telescope to hit one of the reflectors. The
reflectors are too small to be seen from Earth, so even when the beam is
correctly aligned in the telescope, actually hitting a lunar reflector
is quite challenging. At the Moon's surface, the beam is a few
kilometers or miles wide and scientists liken the task of properly
aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime 3.2 kilometers
(two miles) away.

Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the observatories
use sensitive filtering and amplification equipment to detect any return
signal. The reflected light is too weak to be seen with the human eye,
but under good conditions, one photon -- the fundamental particle of
light -- will be received every few seconds.

The lunar laser ranging experiment is the only lunar investigation
continuously operating since the Apollo project. Improvements in lasers
and electronics over the years have led to measurements currently
accurate to about 2 centimeters (less than one inch).

Scientists know the average distance between the centers of the Earth
and the Moon is 385,000 kilometers (239,000 miles), implying that the
modern lunar ranges have relative accuracies of better than one part in
10 billion. This level of accuracy represents one of the most precise
distance measurements ever made and is equivalent to determining the
distance between Los Angeles and New York to one hundredth of an inch.

"Technical improvements at the observatories rejuvenate the lunar laser
ranging effort," Williams said. "When the range accuracy improves, it is
like getting a new experiment on the Moon."

To this end, a new lunar ranging instrument with significantly improved
accuracy is being constructed at Apache Point Observatory in New Mexico
by the University of California at San Diego and the University of
Washington.

<end quote>

But of course all those scientists are part of the conspiracy anyway.
43 years later they go on conspiring and are building an even better
observatory. Amazing, amazing.

jacob navia

unread,

May 24, 2012, 1:51:02 AM5/24/12

to

Le 24/05/12 01:33, Warhol a écrit :

> Now why don't you simply explain how the Laser light beam is reflected
> from to moon back to its emitting base... knowing it would be refracted
> by earth atmosphere to breakpoint where the beam can't be bounced back
> to its source... Show us how they bounce their light on the moon? a
> simple question no???

Yes. This question is addressed for instance in the following
scientific paper:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1974Moon...11....3A/0000004.000.html
Group velocity correction to lunar laser ranging
B. AtwoodetD. R. Curott

I quote from the abstract:

The dispersive correction to the round trip lunar ranging distance is
presented as a function of wavelength and humidity. For example, at 6943
Å (ruby laser line), 11. secz cm must be subtracted from the refractive
distance. The refractive correction decreases with humidity whereas the
dispersive correction increases.

There are many other factors that conspiracy scientists have
investigated. For instance, besides refraction, there is the effect
of turbulence that changes the refraction index. See:
http://cddis.gsfc.nasa.gov/lw13/docs/papers/atmos_xiong_1m.pdf
Modification of Laser Ranging Equation
Xiong Yaoheng* Feng Hesheng*
Yunnan Observatory, National Astronomical Observatories, CAS Kunming
650011, P.R.China

Of course the chinese are ALSO members of the conspiracy.

To learn about the history of this experiment see the
following conspiracy scientists:

http://www.csr.utexas.edu/mlrs/dda.html
Lunar Laser Ranging at McDonald Observatory:
Beginning the Second Quarter Century
P. J. Shelus, R. L. Ricklefs, J. G. Ries, A. L. Whipple, and J. R. Wiant
McDonald Observatory
University of Texas at Austin

http://www.csr.utexas.edu/mlrs/history.html
History of Laser Ranging

In the 1950's, a small group of students and researchers, working at
Princeton University under Robert H. Dicke, probably first gave
substance to the concept of what would become the technique of optical
laser ranging [Alley, 1972]. In an attempt to probe the fundamentals of
gravity, they suggested that powerful, pulsed searchlights on the Earth
be used to illuminate optical corner retroreflectors placed upon an
orbiting artificial Earth satellite. One could then precisely analyze
the orbital characteristics of that satellite's motion by photographing
its position against the background of fixed stars. The invention of the
laser, with its precise wavelength and beam divergence characteristics,
coupled with the technique of Q-Switching to produce laser pulse lengths
on the order of only a few nanoseconds, caused a re-thinking of the
artificial satellite photography experiment and ushered in the era of
optical laser ranging. Procedures similar to those which were performed
with microwave radars were upgraded to provide optical range
measurements that had remarkable precision and accuracy. The initial
such laser-to-target-and-return time-of-flight experiments were made at
the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland in the
mid-1960's. Degnan [1993] has recently reviewed U. S. artificial
satellite ranging efforts.

The concept of receiving laser light echoes from the lunar surface
proceeded more or less in parallel with the artificial satellite
experiments. However, the spreading of a beam of outgoing laser light as
it interacted with, and was reflected by, the moon's rough topography
made ultra-precise distance determinations, as was done with artificial
satellites, an impossibility. A number of such lunar experiments had
been performed in the early 1960's, both at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology and in the former Soviet Union, but with little success. A
later, more refined concept recommended the deployment of a corner
retroreflector package on the lunar surface as a part of one of the
unmanned, soft-landing Surveyor missions. This was never brought to
fruition, however. It was only in the late 1960's, with the birth of the
NASA Apollo project for landing an astronaut safely on the moon, that
the concept of laser ranging to a lunar surface corner retroreflector
package became a reality. The first deployment of such a package on the
lunar surface took place during the Apollo 11 mission in the summer of
1969 and lunar laser ranging (LLR) became a reality [Bender et al.,
1973]. Additional retroreflector packages were landed on the lunar
surface by NASA during the Apollo 14 and Apollo 15 missions. Two
French-built retroreflector packages were soft-landed on the lunar
surface by Soviet landers [Barker et al., 1975].

For historical completeness, it should be mentioned that the very first
lunar laser ranging observations of the Apollo 11 retroreflector package
were made with the 3.1-m telescope at Lick Observatory [Faller et al.,
1969]. However, the ranging system at Lick was designed solely for quick
acquisition and confirmation, rather than for an extended program. In
those very early days, successful lunar laser range measurements were
also reported by the Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories Lunar
Ranging Observatory in Arizona [AFCRL, 1969] the Pic du Midi Observatory
in France [Calame et al., 1970] and the Tokyo Astronomical Observatory
[Kozai, 1972]. Over the past almost 30 years, lunar laser ranging has
also been accomplished by stations in Maui, the former Soviet Union,
Australia, and Germany. A new lunar capable station is being built by
researchers in Italy. However, the only stations to produce these
observations in a routine and continuous way are the McDonald station in
the United States and the CERGA station in France. A paper describing
the early efforts of the CERGA station can be found elsewhere in this
volume [Veillet et al., 1993].

Warhol

unread,

May 24, 2012, 1:51:16 AM5/24/12

to

Op 24-5-2012 7:27, jacob navia schreef:

> Le 24/05/12 01:33, Warhol a écrit :
>> My question was, Have you ever seen a laser dot on the moon???
>>
>> Of course; why don't you simply start to answer the question?
>
> Of course, as you wish Sir:
>
> http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=605
>
> <quote>
>

> <end quote>
>
> But of course all those scientists are part of the conspiracy anyway.
> 43 years later they go on conspiring and are building an even better
> observatory. Amazing, amazing.
>

I see the lie... but I don't see any explication of how they do it...

THE CROOKED COURSES OF LIGHT.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Popular_Science_Monthly/Volume_5/May_1874/The_Crooked_Courses_of_Light

Now why don't explain us with simple words how they do reflect the laser
back to its source of emitting...

Imagine your self in a glass of water, for a second, with laser pointer
in your hand... and you have a reflector out side the Glass... now how
do you reflect back the light...

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:PSM_V05_D044_Reflection_of_water.jpg

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:PSM_V05_D048_Refraction_through_prism.jpg

yeah... our atmosphere is a glass of water so to say... now i am
awaiting your technical explication how you achieve the bouncing of
laser light back from the moon...

Alt.conspiracy restored, since we are in conspiracy domain here

Warhol

unread,

May 24, 2012, 2:46:33 AM5/24/12

to

Op 24-5-2012 7:51, jacob navia schreef:

Und??? your link doesn't work and the quoted text is BS of words without
providing any truth... and since when is RADAR connected to light
emitting device??? and since when has light a wavelength??? please don't
come with bullshit of Dick or NASA has landed...

I ask again the question... How do they bounce back the light of the
moon while their light is refracted elsewhere???... simple quest...ion.

how???

Government Shill #2

unread,

May 24, 2012, 3:02:09 AM5/24/12

to

On Tue, 22 May 2012 19:46:12 -0700 (PDT), joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On May 22, 9:51 pm, 4HEAD <u...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
>> On 5/22/2012 7:37 AM, Intrepid wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> I see NO proof of a 'hoax'. Who knows where these images of
>> yours came from or what's been done to them by you or someone
>> else. All I really see proof of is a hoaxster amateurishly trying to
>> produce evidence of a hoax! America went to the moonPERIOD
>> (( {:->/
>
>No they did not,once a rocket passes through the van allen belt it is
>overwhelmed by cosmic radiation at which point it looses its guidence
>system.RF communications wont work anymore and the thingy will just
>explode,they were all equipted with self destruct mechanisms incase
>they lost control.The moment they reached the van allen belt they lost
>control.Even if it had inetia the temperature would freeze its thrust
>engines and it would break to bits on its own!.

Pure bullshit. Amusing, but still bullshit.

>Do you know how cold it gets 5 miles above the earths surface,

Yes. 5 miles is 26,400 feet, Air temperature at that altitude is about -40C
(-40F and 233K)
http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/

>now imagine 250,000 times that!

250,000 times that? You idiot!

The coldest temperature *anywhere* is zero degrees Kelvin (0K). 0K is equal to
-273.15C or -459.666F. That's it!.

Wanker!

Shill #2
--
America: [313] million wankers living in a country with no word for wanker.
Jeremy Clarkson

jacob navia

unread,

May 24, 2012, 3:05:58 AM5/24/12

to

Le 24/05/12 08:46, Warhol a écrit :

> and since when has light a wavelength???

Ahh OK. Light has no wavelength.

But it has refraction according to you.

> How do they bounce back the light of the moon while their light is
> refracted elsewhere???

Atmospheric refraction is zero in the zenith, less than 1′ (one
arcminute) at 45° apparent altitude, and still only 5.3′ at 10° altitude.

They reflect the laser when the moon is high in the sky!
The refraction is taken into account. There are only a few
photons coming back exactly at the place where they started
the journey.

Warhol

unread,

May 24, 2012, 4:05:17 AM5/24/12

to

Op 24-5-2012 9:05, jacob navia schreef:

> Le 24/05/12 08:46, Warhol a écrit :
>> and since when has light a wavelength???
>
> Ahh OK. Light has no wavelength.
>

Light is a ray and NOT a wave... and rays travels in straight line,
waves not...

> But it has refraction according to you.
>

ha ha ha ... yeah rays can be refracted by glass, water, gas, air and
mirrors

>
> > How do they bounce back the light of the moon while their light is
> > refracted elsewhere???
>
> Atmospheric refraction is zero in the zenith, less than 1′ (one
> arcminute) at 45° apparent altitude, and still only 5.3′ at 10° altitude.
>
> They reflect the laser when the moon is high in the sky!
> The refraction is taken into account. There are only a few
> photons coming back exactly at the place where they started
> the journey.
>

So you want me to believe this BS... please... tell this to ignorant kids.

During their first moonwalk in July 1969, the Apollo 11 astronauts
placed a retroreflector package, a *complex mirror system* , on the
moon’s surface. A laser beam directed from Earth at the retroreflector
would bounce off of it and back to Earth. The 240,000-mile round trip
takes about 2.5 seconds.

Apollo 11 Laser Ranging Retroreflector Experiment Retroreflector Experiment
These reflectors can be illuminated by laser beams aimed through large
... of the beam that it is about 7 kilometers in diameter when it
reaches the Moon and 20 ...

for me this remains fairytale... the Magic Mirror on the Moon
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1768.html

ha ha ha... yeah bouncing back... and if you watch good the image they
provide... the light ray ain't refracted by the moon but by the
atmosphere to a complete different direction than the Moon location...
its bounced back to earth by the ionosphere, see red line following link

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/optics/lightandcolor/images/refractionfigure4.jpg

But dont ask for technical evidence... that NASA or any other agency
can't provide...

Remember you are still in that glass of water...

I wonder what the dissipation of a laser beam is over 480,000 miles and
after its exit and re-entrance through a fairly murky atmosphere.... to
say nothing about locating this tiny object over such a distance on a
whizzing ball.

Brad Guth

unread,

May 24, 2012, 10:17:21 AM5/24/12

to

> for me this remains fairytale... the Magic Mirror on the Moonhttp://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1768.html

>
> ha ha ha... yeah bouncing back... and if you watch good the image they
> provide... the light ray ain't refracted by the moon but by the
> atmosphere to a complete different direction than the Moon location...
> its bounced back to earth by the ionosphere, see red line following link
>

> http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/optics/lightandcolor/images/refractionfig...

>
> But dont ask for technical evidence... that NASA or any other agency
> can't provide...
>
> Remember you are still in that glass of water...
>
> I wonder what the dissipation of a laser beam is over 480,000 miles and
> after its exit and re-entrance through a fairly murky atmosphere.... to
> say nothing about locating this tiny object over such a distance on a
> whizzing ball.

According to most of the NASA/Apollo images recorded on unfiltered
Kodak film, large expansive areas of our moon surface offers a very
light pastel gray monochrome hue of a highly reflective albedo of .65+

So why is there any need of those laser beam reflectors if a 2+ km
diameter illuminated area can reflect photons all by itself? (not to
mention any large items of white painted or bright aluminum surfaces
of those Apollo missions would be considerably larger targets than any
little and unavoidably dusty reflectors)

Warhol

unread,

May 24, 2012, 12:54:18 PM5/24/12

to

Op 24-5-2012 16:17, Brad Guth schreef:

yeah a good remark... why use mirrors when the surface of the moon can
do the job of reflector...

But the problem here is they tell us they measure the distance between
Earth and Moon... while in reality they are in the impossibility to
reflect their light back to its source, due to the refractions and
reflections in the atmosphere

And Still they dare to claim they went to the Moon... But don't ask for
evidence...

Can Kodak Film survive the hoarse conditions in space... I ones asked
the question to NASA and their shills here... guess... they had no
answer neither to the question of Kodak film in extreme heat or cold.

joeturn

unread,

May 24, 2012, 2:15:37 PM5/24/12

to

On May 24, 3:02 am, Government Shill #2 <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012 19:46:12 -0700 (PDT), joeturn <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On May 22, 9:51 pm, 4HEAD <u...@localhost.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 5/22/2012 7:37 AM, Intrepid wrote:
>
> >> [...]
>
> >> I see NO proof of a 'hoax'. Who knows where these images of
> >> yours came from or what's been done to them by you or someone
> >> else. All I really see proof of is a hoaxster amateurishly trying to
> >> produce evidence of a hoax! America went to the moonPERIOD
> >> (( {:->/
>
> >No they did not,once a rocket passes through the van allen belt it is
> >overwhelmed by cosmic radiation at which point it looses its guidence
> >system.RF communications wont work anymore and the thingy will just
> >explode,they were all equipted with self destruct mechanisms incase
> >they lost control.The moment they reached the van allen belt they lost
> >control.Even if it had inetia the temperature would freeze its thrust
> >engines and it would break to bits on its own!.
>
> Pure bullshit. Amusing, but still bullshit.
>
> >Do you know how cold it gets 5 miles above the earths surface,
>
> Yes. 5 miles is 26,400 feet, Air temperature at that altitude is about -40C

> (-40F and 233K)http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/

>
> >now imagine 250,000 times that!
>
> 250,000 times that? You idiot!
>
> The coldest temperature *anywhere* is zero degrees Kelvin (0K). 0K is equal to
> -273.15C or -459.666F. That's it!.
>
> Wanker!
>
> Shill #2
> --
> America: [313] million wankers living in a country with no word for wanker.

> Jeremy Clarkson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thank you shit 2 for your keen eye.You have solveded another missile
crisis.Missiles/rockets wont work at -459.666F

joeturn

unread,

May 24, 2012, 2:24:27 PM5/24/12

to

> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Well there you have it,an anomily will occur,not only will the said
astronuts roast alive the rocket fuel will become overheated enough to
explode!

Warhol

unread,

May 24, 2012, 3:53:50 PM5/24/12

to

Op 24-5-2012 20:15, joeturn schreef:

Very good observation Joeturn... Bravo... too cold for rockets to
function... one more point which will be neglected by Never A Straight
Answer boys...

george152

unread,

May 24, 2012, 4:06:07 PM5/24/12

to

joeturn wrote:

> No they did not,once a rocket passes through the van allen belt it is
> overwhelmed by cosmic radiation at which point it looses its guidence
> system.RF communications wont work anymore and the thingy will just
> explode,they were all equipted with self destruct mechanisms incase
> they lost control.The moment they reached the van allen belt they lost
> control.Even if it had inetia the temperature would freeze its thrust
> engines and it would break to bits on its own!.Do you know how cold it
> gets 5 miles above the earths surface,now imagine 250,000 times that!

Spell checker required along with a suspended belief system..
And then the decoder ring to mop up the diarrhea of words

george152

unread,

May 24, 2012, 4:09:27 PM5/24/12

to

Government Shill #2 wrote:

> Yes. 5 miles is 26,400 feet, Air temperature at that altitude is about -40C
> (-40F and 233K)
> http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/
>
>
>> now imagine 250,000 times that!
>
> 250,000 times that? You idiot!
>
> The coldest temperature *anywhere* is zero degrees Kelvin (0K). 0K is equal to
> -273.15C or -459.666F. That's it!.
>
> Wanker!
>
>

No fair using facts

george152

unread,

May 24, 2012, 4:10:19 PM5/24/12

to

joeturn wrote:

> Thank you shit 2 for your keen eye.You have solveded another missile
> crisis.Missiles/rockets wont work at -459.666F

Pure stupidity on the hoof

Government Shill #2

unread,

May 24, 2012, 5:17:57 PM5/24/12

to

I'm sure slowjoe will fail to understand them and come back with something even
more stupid.

Shill #2
--
A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can
never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates
what he hears into something he can understand.
Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)

Government Shill #2

unread,

May 24, 2012, 5:20:32 PM5/24/12

to

"solveded"?

Just goes to show, you are completely happy fabricating figures and publishing
them as "facts". In short, you are a liar. 250,000 times? Liar!

Shill #2
--
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Me

Tom McDonald

unread,

May 24, 2012, 7:36:04 PM5/24/12

to

AIUI, he's right; But the poor boy is confusing temperature with heat.

And he's forgetting that rockets aren't at absolute zero, especially in
space, where they are regularly subjected to direct sunlight, which is
decidedly not at absolute zero, and will warm any surface that isn't a
perfect reflector of light.

Please feel free to correct anything I've written that is just stupid.
Or even wrong.

george152

unread,

May 24, 2012, 8:16:40 PM5/24/12

to

THe stupid thing we do is try to explain what and how the world works
knowing that tomorrow he'll be posting the same nonsense

Tom McDonald

unread,

May 24, 2012, 8:40:08 PM5/24/12

to

But what would I do with my sharp loon-poking stick?

george152

unread,

May 25, 2012, 12:58:43 AM5/25/12

to

Perhaps a little stirring of those we have previously encountered ?
My kook poking stick needs a wipe off before I go back to prodding pillocks

Message has been deleted

joeturn

unread,

May 25, 2012, 3:49:57 AM5/25/12

to

> Answer boys...- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes there is the agument that heat will overcome the rocket before the
cold will but I differ in that perspective.Sunlight is collected by
the the moon and the earth and this heat is warming up the
atmosphere(the sphere we live in).The farher away from the Earths
surface the colder it becomes.At -40F at 1 mile high above the Earths
crust compared to 250,000 miles away it gets,the colder it gets.The
moon collects a smaller amount of heat because of its surface area.If
an astranut should manage to get there he would have to burrow into
the surface a minimum of 3 feet so as not to freeze to death.To do
that he would have to carry an axe pick to make a dent into the frozen
moons surface! Half way between the two is colder than the moons
surface!

Keep in mind it was susposed to take three nights to get there,even
old Warner von Braun told them it would take a three staged rocket
taller than the Empire State Building to hold enough fuel to make the
trip and soo far the tallest rocket is only one tenth that size!

jacob navia

unread,

May 25, 2012, 4:12:29 AM5/25/12

to

Le 23/05/12 23:22, jacob navia a écrit :

> Fact remains there is no such thing as space travel or exploration...

Excuse me but the international space station is visible to the naked
eye.

Is that also a fake?

Warhol

unread,

May 25, 2012, 2:23:55 PM5/25/12

to

Op 25-5-2012 10:12, jacob navia schreef:

yes fake...
you only see a light flying... much to low for a ISiS...

jacob navia

unread,

May 25, 2012, 3:49:07 PM5/25/12

to

Le 25/05/12 20:23, Warhol a écrit :

Well, you can see the international space station in the sky most
of the time

In this site you find a table with the data needed:

http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET

There is absolutely no equipment needed. Just look at the sky and
you will see it but of course:

There is no blinder person as the one that doesn't want to see.

Warhol

unread,

May 25, 2012, 5:14:48 PM5/25/12

to

Op 25-5-2012 9:49, joeturn schreef:

Fantasy is an ancient genre...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_oWilVaFi3Jc/S6sXpzgW3FI/AAAAAAAABEY/kC2x96eC-NA/s1600/luz34.jpg

Flying serpents and Dragons, The story of mankind's il-LUZ-ion...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X080415PNt8

So the final gate is within.

Knowledge provides concepts, paths, and meanings not easily understood.
And even more difficult to incorporate, to become.

Everything is gained upon this course of endeavor.

Except the very heart and soul will have to choose to cross that abyss,
to open that gate of Light(LUZ).

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/23119115

*Warhol-X*

Androcles

unread,

May 25, 2012, 6:18:25 PM5/25/12

to

"jacob navia" <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote in message
news:jponng$2ja$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> Le 25/05/12 20:23, Warhol a icrit :

>> Op 25-5-2012 10:12, jacob navia schreef:

>>> Le 23/05/12 23:22, jacob navia a icrit :

>>>> Fact remains there is no such thing as space travel or exploration...
>>>
>>> Excuse me but the international space station is visible to the naked
>>> eye.
>>>
>>> Is that also a fake?
>>>
>>
>>
>> yes fake...
>> you only see a light flying... much to low for a ISiS...
>>
>>
>
> Well, you can see the international space station in the sky most
> of the time
>
> In this site you find a table with the data needed:
>
> http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET
>
> There is absolutely no equipment needed. Just look at the sky and
> you will see it but of course:
>
> There is no blinder person as the one that doesn't want to see.

Bad site: try this one in real time, you'll know where and when
to look up.
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/tracking/

>
>

Brad Guth

unread,

May 25, 2012, 7:12:28 PM5/25/12

to

But within the same time-frame of getting that payload tonnage and its
crew safely to/from the EML1 is quite doable, even today with a much
smaller rocket is efficiently doable as long as you're in no special
hurry.

Warhol

unread,

May 25, 2012, 7:25:51 PM5/25/12

to

Op 26-5-2012 0:18, Androcles schreef:

yeah.... its remains fake... that light we see ain't the ISiS...

hoax... Fake fake fake... where is the video material... let us see what
you got so far... as ISS documentation

Find me the best videos you can find and I will tell what is wrong with
what you see... its a...

Il-LUZ-ion... Fatamorgana... a distant Light and smoke...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eOHsungnEEI/T4Hd0xUobvI/AAAAAAAABFg/L_m-RtCN9rU/s400/ManoLuz%255B1%255D.jpg

All that glitters is not gold... DeMolay Ahmad Al Mansor Al Dhahabi

joeturn

unread,

May 25, 2012, 9:28:53 PM5/25/12

to

> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

You have been watching too much star trek

Government Shill #2

unread,

May 25, 2012, 9:49:24 PM5/25/12

to

You have been drinking too much Thunderbird.

Shill #2
--
slowjoe's theme http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo

Odysseus

unread,

May 26, 2012, 11:20:22 PM5/26/12

to

In article <jhmrr7p1v3ag4lp8i...@4ax.com>,
Government Shill #2 <gov....@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012 19:46:12 -0700 (PDT), joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:

<snip>

> >Do you know how cold it gets 5 miles above the earths surface,
>
> Yes. 5 miles is 26,400 feet, Air temperature at that altitude is about -40C
> (-40F and 233K)
> http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/

> >now imagine 250,000 times that!
>
> 250,000 times that? You idiot!
>
> The coldest temperature *anywhere* is zero degrees Kelvin (0K). 0K is
> equal to -273.15C or -459.666F. That's it!.

Well, one could reasonably interpret "250,000 times colder" as "having
1/250,000 the temperature", here 233 kelvins / 250,000 = 0.00093 K. Of
course the temperature of the atmosphere isn't inversely proportional to
altitude as joeturn appears to believe; indeed the various named regions
(troposphere, stratosphere, &c.) are divided by the altitudes of local
minima & maxima in temperature. The coldest point is the mesopause, at
an altitude of about 85 km or 280,000 feet, where the temperature is 190
K or even lower; from there to the top of the thermosphere temperatures
increase.

--
Odysseus

joeturn

unread,

May 30, 2012, 8:57:40 PM5/30/12

to

On May 26, 11:20 pm, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
> In article <jhmrr7p1v3ag4lp8i3ijjd7pl6cjf10...@4ax.com>,
> Government Shill #2 <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 22 May 2012 19:46:12 -0700 (PDT), joeturn <joeturn2...@yahoo.com>

> > wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > >Do you know how cold it gets 5 miles above the earths surface,
>
> > Yes. 5 miles is 26,400 feet, Air temperature at that altitude is about -40C
> > (-40F and 233K)
> >http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/
> > >now imagine 250,000 times that!
>
> > 250,000 times that? You idiot!
>
> > The coldest temperature *anywhere* is zero degrees Kelvin (0K). 0K is
> > equal to -273.15C or -459.666F. That's it!.
>
> Well, one could reasonably interpret "250,000 times colder" as "having
> 1/250,000 the temperature", here 233 kelvins / 250,000 = 0.00093 K. Of
> course the temperature of the atmosphere isn't inversely proportional to
> altitude as joeturn appears to believe; indeed the various named regions
> (troposphere, stratosphere, &c.) are divided by the altitudes of local
> minima & maxima in temperature. The coldest point is the mesopause, at
> an altitude of about 85 km or 280,000 feet, where the temperature is 190
> K or even lower; from there to the top of the thermosphere temperatures
> increase.
>
> --
> Odysseus

I differ here I say the temperature continues to get colder the futher
aay from the warm surface of the earth and it is unmeasurable by any
scale.
If you were to compare the size of an object compared to its heat
collecting ability hince the eartn being eight times larger than the
moon is 1/8

Only when you get within 31,250 miles of the moon does the temperature
start to warm!

george152

unread,

May 30, 2012, 10:06:42 PM5/30/12

to

joeturn wrote:

> I differ here I say the temperature continues to get colder the futher
> aay from the warm surface of the earth and it is unmeasurable by any
> scale.

Ever heard of Kelvin ?

Odysseus

unread,

May 31, 2012, 12:49:31 AM5/31/12

to

In article
<c6cb5075-826f-4aca...@a1g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On May 26, 11:20 pm, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:

<snip>

> > [...] Of course the temperature of the atmosphere isn't inversely

> > proportional to altitude as joeturn appears to believe; indeed the
> > various named regions (troposphere, stratosphere, &c.) are divided
> > by the altitudes of local minima & maxima in temperature. The
> > coldest point is the mesopause, at an altitude of about 85 km or
> > 280,000 feet, where the temperature is 190 K or even lower; from
> > there to the top of the thermosphere temperatures increase.

> I differ here I say the temperature continues to get colder the futher
> aay from the warm surface of the earth and it is unmeasurable by any
> scale.

Atmospheric temperatures have been measured at all altitudes, and the
measurements show that from 85 km up it gets hotter and hotter -- albeit
thinner and thinner -- eventually merging with the plasma of the
interplanetary medium & solar wind.

See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere> .

--
Odysseus

joeturn

unread,

May 31, 2012, 1:03:01 PM5/31/12

to

On May 31, 12:49 am, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
> In article

> <c6cb5075-826f-4aca-9218-527704d75...@a1g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

I understand where your coming from howwever there has been no
temperatures measured at any altitude above the van allen belt.There
is no means of comunicating such a collection of data back to the
earth,Simply think its all another NASA exclusive just lies to
convince the herd to spend government funding on their research.$$$$$

NO body has made it past the radiation belt and RF comunications are
overwhelmed by solar/cosmic radiation and reduced to distortion so
such imformation is completely impossible to obtain.

First.Post

unread,

May 31, 2012, 1:09:19 PM5/31/12

to

joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:eb84ff93-c737-499b-9353-
6b71a9...@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:

The Fluttering Flag

Claim: The planted US flag waves in the wind, which is impossible without
an atmosphere.

Why it's nonsense: The flag doesn't move in any of the videos except when
touched by Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin. But then the lack of atmosphere
and friction stops it settling quickly, as it would on Earth. "If it
moved it would have kept moving. No wind is needed," says Doug Millard at
the Science Museum in London.

The shifty shadows

Claim: Pictures show shadows cast by objects on the surface at different
angles. There must have been multiple light sources, such as in a TV
studio.

Why it's nonsense: A low sun and uneven surface can distort the angles of
shadows in images. But if there were multiple light sources, why does
each object cast only one shadow? "The moon is an alien place and people
who raise these questions simply aren't in a position to comment about
what we should expect there," Millard says. "Only 12 guys have been there
and know this stuff for real."

The phantom photographers

Claim: Images taken of astronauts arriving on the moon and blasting off
again would need someone else there with a camera.

Why it's nonsense: Armstrong's small step was shot by a camera mounted on
the outside of the Eagle lander. Still photos of his arrival taken from
further away are actually of Aldrin, snapped by Armstrong. Remote cameras
left on the moon could easily track departures.

The killer radiation

Claim: Apollo astronauts could not have travelled to the moon as a giant
belt of lethal space radiation would have frazzled them.

Why it's nonsense: These so called Van Allen belts, where the Earth's
magnetic field collects solar radiation, would be dangerous only if
people were to hang out there for several days. The astronauts whizzed
through in a matter of hours, and received a radiation dose similar to an
X-ray. "You can pass through quite safely as long as you don't linger too
long," Millard says.

The missing flame

Claim: There was no exhaust flame from the lunar module when it blasted
back off the moon. Therefore, it was a model pulled up on a wire.

Why it's nonsense: The Saturn V rocket burnt liquid oxygen and kerosene
on blast-off, which provides a fiery plume. The lunar lander ran on
nitrogen tetroxide and Aerozine 50, which doesn't. Its exhaust gases were
transparent.

The absent stars

Claim: Space is full of stars, so why do they not appear in photographs
taken on the moon?

Why it's nonsense: The astronauts took pictures of brightly lit, shiny
white objects. In these conditions, cameras need a fast exposure time and
small aperture, making it impossible to capture faint background objects.
Guardian photographer Graeme Robertson says: "They would have used a
really fast shutter speed so everything in the background would just be
black."

The faked footprint

Claim: The famous footprints on the lunar surface needed water to form.
Otherwise they would settle out, as they do in dry sand.

Why it's nonsense: Moon dust is a different size and shape from sand and
doesn't need moisture to hold a compressed shape. Many powders on Earth
can behave in the same way. Walk in spilt talcum powder and see.
The coke bottle

HVAC

unread,

May 31, 2012, 1:10:18 PM5/31/12

to

On 5/31/2012 1:03 PM, joeturn wrote:
>
> I understand where your coming from howwever there has been no
> temperatures measured at any altitude above the van allen belt.There
> is no means of comunicating such a collection of data back to the
> earth,Simply think its all another NASA exclusive just lies to
> convince the herd to spend government funding on their research.$$$$$
>
> NO body has made it past the radiation belt and RF comunications are
> overwhelmed by solar/cosmic radiation and reduced to distortion so
> such imformation is completely impossible to obtain.

Joe...You, much like Bert, are fantastic candidates for Web TV.
You're the type of people it was designed for.

--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

First.Post

unread,

May 31, 2012, 1:22:38 PM5/31/12

to

HVAC <mr....@gmail.com> wrote in news:jq88kk$mq1$2...@hvac.motzarella.org:

> On 5/31/2012 1:03 PM, joeturn wrote:
>>
>> I understand where your coming from howwever there has been no
>> temperatures measured at any altitude above the van allen belt.There
>> is no means of comunicating such a collection of data back to the
>> earth,Simply think its all another NASA exclusive just lies to
>> convince the herd to spend government funding on their research.$$$$$
>>
>> NO body has made it past the radiation belt and RF comunications are
>> overwhelmed by solar/cosmic radiation and reduced to distortion so
>> such imformation is completely impossible to obtain.
>
>
> Joe...You, much like Bert, are fantastic candidates for Web TV.
> You're the type of people it was designed for.
>

You're just saying that becaue the chemicals that the government is
exposing you to via jet contrails are affecting your thinking. :-)

joeturn

unread,

May 31, 2012, 1:35:31 PM5/31/12

to

On May 31, 1:09 pm, "First.Post" <OccupierDumberThanD...@invalid.org>
wrote:
> joeturn <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:eb84ff93-c737-499b-9353-
> 6b71a9edc...@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:

> The coke bottle- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

you cant wish this out into the cornfield First Pest.I saw the
lighting fixtures fall on their first take so the astronut had to do
another take.Watch closely at the first take it was very flustrating
for these amature actors to pull off.Stanley Kubric had to do lots of
editing to get the final release

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFAZoVGxqY4

HVAC

unread,

May 31, 2012, 3:00:14 PM5/31/12

to

On 5/31/2012 1:22 PM, First.Post wrote:
>
>> Joe...You, much like Bert, are fantastic candidates for Web TV.
>> You're the type of people it was designed for.
>>
>
> You're just saying that becaue the chemicals that the government is
> exposing you to via jet contrails are affecting your thinking. :-)

What's this? A new passenger on the USS Fucknuts?

Move over Bert, Bast, Guth, Warhole and Joesturn...

george152

unread,

May 31, 2012, 3:52:55 PM5/31/12

to

joeturn wrote:

> you cant wish this out into the cornfield First Pest.I saw the
> lighting fixtures fall on their first take so the astronut had to do
> another take.Watch closely at the first take it was very flustrating
> for these amature actors to pull off.Stanley Kubric had to do lots of
> editing to get the final release

Decoder ring time

First.Post

unread,

May 31, 2012, 4:03:02 PM5/31/12

to

HVAC <mr....@gmail.com> wrote in news:jq8f2o$3ke$2...@hvac.motzarella.org:

> On 5/31/2012 1:22 PM, First.Post wrote:
>>
>>> Joe...You, much like Bert, are fantastic candidates for Web TV.
>>> You're the type of people it was designed for.
>>>
>>
>> You're just saying that becaue the chemicals that the government is
>> exposing you to via jet contrails are affecting your thinking. :-)
>
>
> What's this? A new passenger on the USS Fucknuts?
>
> Move over Bert, Bast, Guth, Warhole and Joesturn...
>

Not big on sarcasm eh?

You won't be laughing once you're behind the fence at one of those FEMA
death camps around the country.

ROFL.

Odysseus

unread,

Jun 1, 2012, 10:52:47 PM6/1/12

to

In article
<eb84ff93-c737-499b...@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

> [... T]here has been no temperatures measured at any altitude above
> the van allen belt.

Even if that were true, what relevance would it have to atmospheric
temperatures?

> There is no means of comunicating such a collection of data back to
> the earth,Simply think its all another NASA exclusive just lies to
> convince the herd to spend government funding on their research.$$$$$

Sure, and the ESA, not to mention the Russian, Japanese, et al. must all
be liars too.

> NO body has made it past the radiation belt and RF comunications are
> overwhelmed by solar/cosmic radiation and reduced to distortion so
> such imformation is completely impossible to obtain.

So how do we observe astronomical objects in RF? Are radio-astronomers
all liars too, or just sadly deluded?

BTW the ALMA project recently released remarkably detailed images of the
Fomalhaut system, made using just 15 of the planned 66 instruments. See
e.g.

<http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/New-ALMA-Images-Stoke-Exoplanet
-Flame-146815745.html> (watch for linkwrap).

--
Odysseus

joeturn

unread,

Jun 2, 2012, 8:45:22 AM6/2/12

to

On Jun 1, 10:52 pm, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
> In article

> <eb84ff93-c737-499b-9353-6b71a9edc...@h10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,

The distortion of RF frequency is filtered out and the lesser
distorted image is what is left.The image like the moon in moon bounce
blocks the solar/cosmic radiation and what is not overwhelmed is
inhanced to video where as moon bounce is audio bounced off the
ionosphere,not the moon,that has not been completely distorted by
cosmic/solar radiation,because the moon filters out the distortion
from cosmic/solar radiation.

If rf transmissions could get past the radiation belt then you could
receive audio being reflected back from the stellar locations.they
have been listening for years and to date have not received anything
coming back.Check Woodpecker and the US thingy they recently quit
financing after 20 years because they cant receive bounced back RF
audio transmissions.

george152

unread,

Jun 2, 2012, 4:07:26 PM6/2/12

to

joeturn wrote:

> If rf transmissions could get past the radiation belt then you could
> receive audio being reflected back from the stellar locations.they
> have been listening for years and to date have not received anything
> coming back.Check Woodpecker and the US thingy they recently quit
> financing after 20 years because they cant receive bounced back RF
> audio transmissions.
>

That has to be the strangest way to describe SETI and to ignore all the
worlds Radio Telescopes currently working...

joeturn

unread,

Jun 2, 2012, 5:02:53 PM6/2/12

to

I told you how the radio telescopes work.They use a series of
recievers that recieve the distorted RF either side of a stellar
target,with that privy they can distingquish the size and shape,maybe
even craters on a stellar object but they cant determine the color
using distorted radio frequency.

Your pictures of venus and jupiter are fake only the size and shape
can be determined using radio telescopy!

They have hyped up the farse to get Free Government finacing for the
sham$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Government Shill #2

unread,

Jun 2, 2012, 7:36:20 PM6/2/12

to

On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 14:02:53 -0700 (PDT), joeturn <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jun 2, 4:07 pm, george152 <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>> joeturn wrote:
>> > If rf transmissions could get past the radiation belt then you could
>> > receive audio being reflected back from the stellar locations.they
>> > have been listening for years and to date have not received anything
>> > coming back.Check Woodpecker and the US thingy they recently quit
>> > financing after 20 years because they cant receive bounced back RF
>> > audio transmissions.
>>
>> That has to be the strangest way to describe SETI and to ignore all the
>> worlds Radio Telescopes currently working...
>
>I told you how the radio telescopes work.They use a series of
>recievers that recieve the distorted RF either side of a stellar
>target,with that privy they can distingquish the size and shape,maybe
>even craters on a stellar object but they cant determine the color
>using distorted radio frequency.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Craters on a stellar object? Colour?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

You have absolutelty no idea, do you?

Shill #2
--
Roses are red,
violets are blue,
one of us is a moron,
I think that it's you.

Brad Guth

unread,

Jun 3, 2012, 9:50:24 PM6/3/12

to

Privately collected moon rocks as easily found upon Earth are being
systematically stalked and collectively disqualified by those we
public fund to help science, that instead having systematically
conspired against outsiders.

Science fraud profile updated:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d7561fbc5#

Worth further noting, that with far superior dynamic range to that of
Kodak film, here we see that shadow areas are absolutely black and
thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak film
recorded images that had no problems with recording details in areas
of full shade.

Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
from LRO
http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tycho-crater-blocks-boulders.html

Within the moon could be all sorts of brine.
Moon hoax exposed by Soviet find of water on the Moon
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/52c530c0ae97ad46/b038c19660778bdc#b038c19660778bdc

Too bad we still haven’t a clue as to how anyone can safely get to/
from the naked and physically dark surface of our moon.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/Guth Venus

On May 22, 5:37 am, Intrepid <tickle.my.fancy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <
> Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
> User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
> <
> Did NASA Fake image of U.S. Flag and the Earth?
> <
> U.S. flags on the Moon were made from nylon cloth, but no flags
> on Earth show anomalies like these:
> <http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=30&f=1044315525&p=78
> <
> Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo17.jpg
> <
> Was the Earth real in the photo?
> <
> Read more at . . .
> <http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0
> <
> ==========
> <
> WORLD'S LARGEST NEWSPAPERS
> Rank Country Circulation
> 1. Yomiuri Shimbun (Japan) 14,532,694
> 2. Asahi Shimbun (Japan) 12,601,375
> 3. Sichuan Ribao (China) 8,000,000
> 4. Mainichi Shimbun (Japan) 5,845,857
> 5. Bild (Germany) 5,674,400
> 6. Chunichi Shimbun (Japan) 4,323,144
> 7. Sun (England) 3,718,354
> 8. Renmin Ribao (China) 3,000,000
> 9. Sankei Shimbun (Japan) 2,890,835
> 10. Nihon Keizai Shimbun Japan 2,705,877
> 11. Gongren Ribao (China) 2,500,000
> 12. Daily Mail (England) 2,387,867
> 13. Daily Mirror (England) 2,339,001
> 14. Chosun Ilbo (South Korea) 2,225,000
> 15. Dong-A Ilbo (South Korea) 2,150,000
> 16. Hokkaido Shimbun (Japan) 1,962,666
> 17. Eleftherotypia (Greece) 1,858,316
> 18. Xin Min Wan Bao (China) 1,750,000
> 19. Wall Street Journal (U.S.) 1,740,450
> 20. Yangcheng Wanbao China 1,730,000
> 21. Kerala Kaumudi (India) 1,720,000
> 22. Wen Hui Bao Daily (China 1,700,000
> 23. USA Today (United States) 1,653,428
> 24. Joong-Ang Ilbo (S. Korea) 1,550,000
> 25. Economic Daily (China) 1,500,000
> 26. Rodong Sinmun (N. Korea) 1,500,000
> 27. Kyung-Hyang Daily News 1,478,537
> 28. Sports Nippon (Japan) 1,452,699
> 29. Shizuoka Shimbun (Japan)) 1,442,310
> 30. Sankei Sports (Japan) 1,367,734
> 31. Deutche Allgemeine Germ 1,313,400
> 32. United Daily News (Taiwan ) 1,300,000
> 33. China Times (Taiwan) 1,270,000
> 34. O Estado de Sao Paulo Brazil) 1,230,160
> 35. Jang Daily (Pakistan) 1,200,000
> 36. Jang Lahore (Pakistan) 1,200,000
> 37. Akhbar El Yom (Egypt) 1,159,339
> 38. Hankook Ilbo (South Korea) 1,156,000
> 39. Hochi Shimbun (Japan) 1,119,031
> 40. Daily Express (England) 1,118,981
> 41. Los Angeles Times (U.S.) 1,067,540
> 42. New York Times (U>S) 1,066,540
> 43. Tokyo Shimbun (Japan 1,062,080
> 44. Daily Telegraph (England) 1,047,861
> 45. Nishinippon Shimbun Japan 1,041,104
> 46. Jiefang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
> 47. Nanfang Ribao (China) 1,000,000
> 48. Nongmin Ribao (China) 1,000,000
> 49. Zhongguo Qingnian Ribao China 1,000,000
> 50. Nikkan Sports (Japan) 984,058
> 51. Al Akhbar (Egypt) 980,000
> 52. Guangming Ribao (China) 950,000
> 53. Al Ahram (Egypt) 900,000
> 54. Al Goumhouriya (Egypt) 900,000
> 55. Seoul Shinmun (S. Korea) 900,000
> 56. Xin Hua Ribao (China) 900,000
> 57. Verdens Gang (Norway) 870,267
> 58. Corriere della Sera (Italy) 868,266
> 59. Kyoto Shimbun (Japan) 839,499
> 60. Chugoku Shimbun (Japan) 820,000
> 61 Kobe Shimbun Japan 820,000
> 62. Times of India (India) 813,000
> 63. Kobe Shimbun (Japan) 810,353
> 64. Beijing Wanbao (China) 800,000
> 65. Hubei Ribao (China) 800,000
> 66. Jiefangjun Ribao (China) 800,000
> 67. Trybuna Slaska (Poland) 800,000
> 68. La Gazzetta dello Sport Italy 798,243
> 69. Ouest-France (France) 790,133
> 70. Holos Ukrainy (Ukraine) 768,000
> 71. The Times (England) 766,999
> 72. ABC (Spain) 765,668
> 73. Washington Post (U.SSS>) 759,122
> 74. La Repubblica (Italy) 754,930
> 75. De Telegraf (Netherlands) 751,400
> 76. Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland) 750,000
> 77. Zero Hora (Brazil) 727,188
> 78. Diario dos Campos (Brazil) 725,000
> 79. New York Daily News (U.S.) 723,143
> 80. Sabah (Turkey) 722,950
> 81. Jornal da Tarde (Brazil) 709,793
> 82. Beijing Ribao (China) 700,000
> 83. Chongqing Ribao (China) 700,000
> 84. Clarin (Argentina) 700,000
> 85. Thai Rath (Thailand 700,000
> 86. Zhejiang Ribao (China) 700,000
> 87. Diario Insular (Portugal) 684,143
> 88. Granma Internacional (Cuba) 675,000
> 89. Chicago Tribune (U.S.) 673,508
> 90. Daily Record (Scotland) 671,267
> 91. China Daily News (Taiwan) 670,000
> 92. The Daily Star (England) 650,406
> 93. Guangxi Ribao (China) 650,000
> 94. Malayala Manorama (India) 630,068
> 95. La Nacion (Argentina) 630,000
> 96. Hurriyet (Turkey) 615,579
> 97. Herald Sun (Australia) 600,000
> 98. Hurriyet (Pakistan) 600,000
> 99. Liaoning Ribao (China) 600,000
> 100. Oriental Daily News (Hong Kong) 600,000
> <
> LARGEST U.S. NEWSPAPERS
> Circulation
> 1. USA Today (Arlington, Va.) 2,154,539
> 2. Wall Street Journal (NY N.Y.) 2,091,062
> 3. Times (New York, N.Y.) 1,118,565
> 4. Times (Los Angeles) 914,584
> 5. Post (Washington, DC) 732,872
> 6. Daily News (New York, N.Y.) 729,124
> 7. Tribune (Chicago) 680,879
> 8. Post (New York, N.Y.) 652,426
> 9. Newsday (Long Island, N.Y.) 580,069
> 10. Chronicle (Houston) 553,018
> 11. Chronicle (San Francisco) 512,640
> 12. Morning News (Dallas) 510,133
> 13. Sun-Times (Chicago) 481,798
> 14 Globe (Boston) 450,538
> 15. Arizona Republic (Phoenix) 432,284
> 16. Star-Ledger (Newark, N.J.) 408,672
> 17. Star Tribune (Minneapolis) 380,354
> 18. Inquirer (Philadelphia) 376,493
> 19. Journal-Constitution (Atlanta) 371,853
> 20. Plain Dealer (Cleveland) 365,288
> 21. Free Press (Detroit) 352,714
> 22. Oregonian (Portland) 342,789
> 23. Times (St. Petersburg, Fla.) 334,742
> 24. Union-Tribune (San Diego) 328,531
> 25. Herald (Miami) 315,850
> 26. Register Orange County CA 302,864
> 27. Sun (Baltimore) 301,186
> 28. Bee (Sacramento, Calif.) 289,905
> 29. Post (Denver) 288,937
> 30. Rocky Mtn. News Denver 288,889
> 31. Post-Dispatch (St. Louis) 285,869
> 32. Mercury News San Jose CA 271,997
> 33. Star (Kansas City, Mo.) 267,273
> 34. Sentinel (Orlando, Fla.) 257,222
> 35. Times-Picayune N Orleans 253,610
> 36. Dispatch (Columbus, Ohio) 252,564
> 37. Star (Indianapolis) 249,891
> 38. Journal Sentinel Milwaukee 244,288
> 39. Post-Gazette Pittsburgh Pa 242,546
> 40. Herald (Boston) 241,457
> 41. Sun-Sentinel (Ft L'dale, Fla ) 233,634
> 42. Times (Seattle) 231,505
> 43. News (Detroit) 227,392
> 44. Observer (Charlotte, N.C.) 226,849
> 45. Tribune (Tampa, Fla.) 224,220
> 46. Express-News S Antonio Tx 222,536
> 47. Investor's Business Daily LA 2 5,788
> 48. Star-Telegram Ft Worth, TX) 215,452
> 49. Courier-Journal L'ville Ky 213,176
> 50. News (Buffalo, N.Y.) 207,989
> 51. Daily Oklahoman Okla City 207,538
> 52. Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, Va.) 201,141
> 53. World-Herald Omaha Neb. 192,075
> 54. Pioneer Press(St Pau, Minn 190,392
> 55. Times-Dispatch Richmond 188,540
> 56. Courant (Hartford, Conn.) 185,570
> 57. Press-Enterprise R'side CA 183,974
> 58. Democrat-Gazette (L'l Rock 183,343
> 59. American-Statesman Austin 183,312
> 60. Contra Costa Times (Calif.) 182,541
> 61. Enquirer (Cincinnati) 182,176
> 62. Record (Bergen County, N.J.) 179,270
> 63. Daily News (Los Angeles) 178,360
> 64. Democrat (Rochester, N.Y.) 173,900
> 65. Tennessean (Nashville) 172,149
> 66. Post (W. Palm Beach, Fla.) 168,147
> 67. Times-Union(Jacksonville Fla 167,851
> 68. Journal (Providence, R.I.) 167,609
> 69. Asbury Park Press (N.J.) 167,284
> 70. News & Observer Raleigh NC 163,769
> 71. Review-Journal (Las Vegas) 160,391
> 72. Bee (Fresno, Calif.) 158,651
> 73. Commercial Appeal Memphis 157,820
> 74. Register (Des Moines, Iowa) 150,851
> 75. Post-Intelligencer (Seattle) 150,851
> 76. Daily Herald (Chicago) 150,364
> 77. News (Birmingham, Ala.) 148,938
> 78. Daily News (Philadelphia) 143,631
> 79. Journal News Westchester NY 142,873
> 80. Advertiser (Honolulu) 142,025
> 81. Blade (Toledo, Ohio) 139,520
> 82. World (Tulsa, Okla.) 139,383
> 83. Press (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 138,620
> 84. Tribune (Salt Lake City) 134,985
> 85. Beacon Journal (Akron, Ohio 128,511
> 86. News Tribune Tacoma Wash 128,511
> 87. Daily News (Dayton, Ohio) 126,642
> 88. La Opinion Los Angeles Calif 124,692
> 89. Post-Standard Syracuse, N.Y. 120,701
> ...
>
> read more »

Brad Guth

unread,

Jun 3, 2012, 11:20:28 PM6/3/12

to

Privately collected moon rocks as easily found upon Earth are being
systematically stalked and collectively disqualified by those we
public fund to help science, that instead having systematically

conspired against outsiders when there’s any chance of conflicting
science with that our NASA/Apollo era of moon rocks. This is not all
that unlike what Ed Conrad and others like myself get to put up with.

Science fraud profile updated:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d7561fbc5#

Worth further noting, is that with far superior dynamic range to that
of any Kodak film, here we get to see that shadow areas are absolutely

black and thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak
film recorded images that had no problems with recording details in

areas of full shade without overexposing the fully illuminated
surfaces.

Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
from LRO
http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tycho-crater-blocks-boulders.html

Within the physically dark moon of a fused basalt crust could be all
sorts of brines (mineral saturated water).

Brad Guth

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 8:39:01 AM6/4/12

to

Privately collected moon rocks, as should be easily found upon Earth,
as such are being systematically stalked and collectively disqualified
by those we public fund to help expedite science, that instead of
deductive interpreting for the greater good and understanding having
systematically conspired against outsiders whenever there’s any remote

chance of conflicting science with that our NASA/Apollo era of moon

rocks. This policy is not all that unlike what Ed Conrad and a few
others like myself which get to put up with this intellectual stoning
whenever there’s any risk of making our public funded wizards looking
even worse than they really are.

Science fraud profile updated:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d7561fbc5#

Worth further noting, is that with far superior dynamic range to that
of any Kodak film, here we get to see that shadow areas are absolutely
black and thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak
film recorded images that had no problems with recording details in
areas of full shade without overexposing the fully illuminated
surfaces.

Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
from LRO
http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tycho-crater-blocks-boulders.html

Within the physically dark moon of such a fused basalt crust could be
all sorts of geode pockets containing brines (mineral saturated
water). Obviously there’s an ongoing process generating various
gasses that continually leak or diffuse out of our moon.

Moon hoax exposed by Soviet find of water on the Moon
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/52c530c0ae97ad46/b038c19660778bdc#b038c19660778bdc

Too bad we still haven’t a clue as to how anyone can safely get to/

from the naked and physically dark surface of our moon, so as to
exploit it.

BDK

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 10:33:44 AM6/4/12

to

In article <673a9a7b-c46d-4b95-bbf9-
86c2e6...@qs4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, brad...@gmail.com says...

>
> Privately collected moon rocks as easily found upon Earth are being
> systematically stalked and collectively disqualified by those we
> public fund to help science, that instead having systematically
> conspired against outsiders.
>
> Science fraud profile updated:
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d7561fbc5#
>
> Worth further noting, that with far superior dynamic range to that of
> Kodak film, here we see that shadow areas are absolutely black and
> thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak film
> recorded images that had no problems with recording details in areas
> of full shade.
>
> Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
> from LRO
> http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tycho-crater-blocks-boulders.html
>
> Within the moon could be all sorts of brine.
> Moon hoax exposed by Soviet find of water on the Moon
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/52c530c0ae97ad46/b038c19660778bdc#b038c19660778bdc
>

> Too bad we still haven?t a clue as to how anyone can safely get to/

> from the naked and physically dark surface of our moon.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/Guth Venus

It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after the
light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
appears on Earth?

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

--
BDK- Head FUD-Master Blaster.

BDK

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 10:35:55 AM6/4/12

to

In article <930711f2-0a24-4f0e-8792-b1511c6876e8
@st3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, brad...@gmail.com says...

>
> Privately collected moon rocks, as should be easily found upon Earth,
> as such are being systematically stalked and collectively disqualified
> by those we public fund to help expedite science, that instead of
> deductive interpreting for the greater good and understanding having

> systematically conspired against outsiders whenever there?s any remote

> chance of conflicting science with that our NASA/Apollo era of moon
> rocks. This policy is not all that unlike what Ed Conrad and a few
> others like myself which get to put up with this intellectual stoning

> whenever there?s any risk of making our public funded wizards looking

> even worse than they really are.
>
> Science fraud profile updated:
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d7561fbc5#
>
> Worth further noting, is that with far superior dynamic range to that
> of any Kodak film, here we get to see that shadow areas are absolutely
> black and thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak
> film recorded images that had no problems with recording details in
> areas of full shade without overexposing the fully illuminated
> surfaces.
>
> Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
> from LRO
> http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tycho-crater-blocks-boulders.html
>
> Within the physically dark moon of such a fused basalt crust could be
> all sorts of geode pockets containing brines (mineral saturated

> water). Obviously there?s an ongoing process generating various

> gasses that continually leak or diffuse out of our moon.
>
> Moon hoax exposed by Soviet find of water on the Moon
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/52c530c0ae97ad46/b038c19660778bdc#b038c19660778bdc
>

> Too bad we still haven?t a clue as to how anyone can safely get to/

> from the naked and physically dark surface of our moon, so as to
> exploit it.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/Guth Venus
>
>
> On May 22, 5:37 am, Intrepid <tickle.my.fancy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > <
> > Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
> > User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
> > <
> > Did NASA Fake image of U.S. Flag and the Earth?
> > <
> > U.S. flags on the Moon were made from nylon cloth, but no flags
> > on Earth show anomalies like these:
> > <http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=30&f=1044315525&p=78
> > <
> > Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo17.jpg
> > <
> > Was the Earth real in the photo?
> > <
> > Read more at . . .
> > < http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0

Your needle is stuck again. It's on the track called "Nonsensical moon
landing ravings".

Tom McDonald

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 10:45:44 AM6/4/12

to

From what I can find, the albedo of the Moon is about .12, so it is
reasonably dark. There are other considerations (the term "Lambert"
comes up, though I don't follow the discussion of its meaning well), but
on albedo alone, the moon is not particularly reflective. And, of
course, many parts of the moon are a pretty dark gray (e.g. the 'Man in
the Moon'), which probably means that the albedo of the lighter parts is
higher than .12.

Could be wrong, but ISTM that bright and dark in this discussion are
imprecise and variable terms.

HVAC

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 11:59:25 AM6/4/12

to

On 6/4/2012 10:33 AM, BDK wrote:
>
> It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
> the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after the
> light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
> atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
> appears on Earth?
>
> BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

And not only is it dark....It's naked!

BDK

unread,

Jun 4, 2012, 11:17:54 PM6/4/12

to

In article <jqim0r$7cu$4...@hvac.motzarella.org>, mr....@gmail.com says...

>
> On 6/4/2012 10:33 AM, BDK wrote:
> >
> > It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
> > the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after the
> > light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
> > atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
> > appears on Earth?
> >
> > BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
>
>
> And not only is it dark....It's naked!

And absolutely shameless!

HVAC

unread,

Jun 5, 2012, 6:32:07 AM6/5/12

to

On 6/4/2012 11:17 PM, BDK wrote:
>
>>> It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
>>> the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after the
>>> light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
>>> atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
>>> appears on Earth?
>>>
>>> BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>>
>>
>>
>> And not only is it dark....It's naked!
>
> And absolutely shameless!

Must be due to all that metalasticity.

george152

unread,

Jun 5, 2012, 3:55:18 PM6/5/12

to

HVAC wrote:
> On 6/4/2012 11:17 PM, BDK wrote:
>>
>>>> It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
>>>> the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after
>>>> the
>>>> light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
>>>> atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
>>>> appears on Earth?
>>>>
>>>> BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And not only is it dark....It's naked!
>>
>> And absolutely shameless!
>
>
> Must be due to all that metalasticity.

This afternoon I'm off to an amateur astronomer friends to watch the
transit of Venus and sample some liquids of quality..
I won't repeat here what he thinks of slowjoe et al

HVAC

unread,

Jun 6, 2012, 6:53:32 AM6/6/12

to

On 6/5/2012 3:55 PM, george152 wrote:
>
>>>> And not only is it dark....It's naked!
>>>
>>> And absolutely shameless!
>>
>>
>> Must be due to all that metalasticity.
>
> This afternoon I'm off to an amateur astronomer friends to watch the
> transit of Venus and sample some liquids of quality..
> I won't repeat here what he thinks of slowjoe et al

Well, Goth has been crazy for years...Now it's Joesturn.

Brad Guth

unread,

Jun 6, 2012, 11:56:42 AM6/6/12

to

On Jun 4, 7:45 am, Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2...@charter.net> wrote:
> On 6/4/2012 9:33 AM, BDK wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article<673a9a7b-c46d-4b95-bbf9-

> > 86c2e6bdc...@qs4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...

>
> >> Privately collected moon rocks as easily found upon Earth are being
> >> systematically stalked and collectively disqualified by those we
> >> public fund to help science, that instead having systematically
> >> conspired against outsiders.
>
> >> Science fraud profile updated:

> >> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3765af8d...

>
> >> Worth further noting, that with far superior dynamic range to that of
> >> Kodak film, here we see that shadow areas are absolutely black and
> >> thus extremely contrasty (totally unlike those Apollo/Kodak film
> >> recorded images that had no problems with recording details in areas
> >> of full shade.
>
> >> Sunrise at Tycho Crater: Blocks, Boulders And Impact Melt Textures
> >> from LRO

> >> http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2011/07/sunrise-at-tych...

>
> >> Within the moon could be all sorts of brine.
> >> Moon hoax exposed by Soviet find of water on the Moon

> >> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/52c...

>
> >> Too bad we still haven?t a clue as to how anyone can safely get to/
> >> from the naked and physically dark surface of our moon.
>
> >> http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> >> http://translate.google.com/#
> >> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/Guth Venus
>
> > It always cracks me up that you insist that the moon is dark, yet when
> > the moon is full, or even close to it, it's quite bright, even after the
> > light travels about a quarter million miles and passes through our
> > atmosphere. So you're claiming it's darker on the surface than it
> > appears on Earth?
>
> > BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
> From what I can find, the albedo of the Moon is about .12, so it is
> reasonably dark. There are other considerations (the term "Lambert"
> comes up, though I don't follow the discussion of its meaning well), but
> on albedo alone, the moon is not particularly reflective. And, of
> course, many parts of the moon are a pretty dark gray (e.g. the 'Man in
> the Moon'), which probably means that the albedo of the lighter parts is
> higher than .12.
>
> Could be wrong, but ISTM that bright and dark in this discussion are
> imprecise and variable terms.

With the average angle of the sun being anything but high noon to
those walking on its naked surface, the average albedo of our
physically dark moon is closer to 7% and thus extremely contrasty for
any of those Kodak moments.

4HEAD

unread,

Jun 12, 2012, 12:09:02 AM6/12/12

to

On 5/22/2012 7:37 AM, Intrepid wrote:
> <
> Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
> User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
> <

I've already informed and instructed you dreamers that
YOU'RE WRONG. There, that settles it.
(( {:->/

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 8, 2012, 12:50:08 AM7/8/12

to

On May 22, 5:37 am, Intrepid <tickle.my.fancy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <
> Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
> User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
> <

> Did NASA Fake image of U.S. Flag and the Earth?
> <
> U.S. flags on the Moon were made from nylon cloth, but no flags
> on Earth show anomalies like these:
> <http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=30&f=1044315525&p=78
> <
> Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo17.jpg
> <
> Was the Earth real in the photo?
> <
> Read more at . . .
> <http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0
> <

> ==========
> <
These mainstream FUD-masters still don't get it.

Is it even geologically possible that your coal deposit isn't 300
million years old?

george152

unread,

Jul 9, 2012, 12:04:22 AM7/9/12

to

What're you smoking ?

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 9, 2012, 1:00:00 AM7/9/12

to

Why are you replying to this question?

As long as you're here, do tell us how old is coal supposed to be?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

george152

unread,

Jul 9, 2012, 4:13:16 PM7/9/12

to

Brad Guth wrote:
> On Jul 8, 9:04 pm, george152<gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>> Brad Guth wrote:
>>> On May 22, 5:37 am, Intrepid<tickle.my.fancy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> <
>>>> Originally Posted by Lin Liangtai of Taipei, Taiwan
>>>> User Name on Google -- Wretch Fossil
>>>> <
>>>> Did NASA Fake image of U.S. Flag and the Earth?
>>>> <
>>>> U.S. flags on the Moon were made from nylon cloth, but no flags
>>>> on Earth show anomalies like these:
>>>> <http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=30&f=1044315525&p=78
>>>> <
>>>> Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo17.jpg
>>>> <
>>>> Was the Earth real in the photo?
>>>> <
>>>> Read more at . . .
>>>> <http://www.wretch.cc/blog/lin440315&category_id=0
>>>> <
>>>> ==========
>>>> <
>>> These mainstream FUD-masters still don't get it.
>>
>>> Is it even geologically possible that your coal deposit isn't 300
>>> million years old?
>>
>> What're you smoking ?
>
> Why are you replying to this question?
>
> As long as you're here, do tell us how old is coal supposed to be?
>

ASgain. What are you smoking ?
Your question is about geology

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 9:56:40 AM7/10/12

to

Yes it is a geology question, so why didn't you tell us how old our
coal typically is.

Are you suggesting that the material which became coal was not of a
world populated by any form of humanoids of that same era?

Aunt Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Other of the Borg

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 10:46:50 AM7/10/12

to

In article <a7422d84-95cf-449e...@po9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

Do you regard trilobites as humanoids?

--
Aren't you special. Tell me your problems.

jacob navia

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 11:41:52 AM7/10/12

to

Le 10/07/12 16:46, Aunt Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Other of the
Borg a écrit :

Of course the trilobites were Guth-like!

1) They had the same IQ as Brad Guth!
2) They loved to crawl in the mud just as Brad Guth

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 12:31:21 PM7/10/12

to

On Jul 10, 7:46 am, Aunt Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Other of the
Borg <six-n...@borgcollective.gov> wrote:
> In article <a7422d84-95cf-449e-b130-1761b75d7...@po9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 9, 1:13 pm, george152 <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
> > > Brad Guth wrote:
> > > > Why are you replying to this question?
>
> > > > As long as you're here, do tell us how old is coal supposed to be?
>
> > > ASgain. What are you smoking ?
> > > Your question is about geology
>
> > Yes it is a geology question, so why didn't you tell us how old our
> > coal typically is.
>
> > Are you suggesting that the material which became coal was not of a
> > world populated by any form of humanoids of that same era?
>
> Do you regard trilobites as humanoids?
>
> --
> Aren't you special. Tell me your problems.

Not according to what Ed Conrad found in coal that was 300+ million
years old.

BDK

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 2:17:01 PM7/10/12

to

In article <f3f77c81-56d5-445e-98d3-1105f9ece15c@
2g2000pbv.googlegroups.com>, brad...@gmail.com says...

BWHAHAHAHA! You believe in Ed'd ravings? You're a bigger nutjob than I
thouht, Guthball.

HVAC

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 2:21:39 PM7/10/12

to

On 7/10/2012 2:17 PM, BDK wrote:
>
>> Not according to what Ed Conrad found in coal that was 300+ million
>> years old.
>
> BWHAHAHAHA! You believe in Ed'd ravings? You're a bigger nutjob than I
> thouht, Guthball.

Goth is willing to believe ANYONE that will not laugh at him.
Of course, this sub-set of humans is vanishingly small.

george152

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 3:53:58 PM7/10/12

to

Brad Guth wrote:

> Yes it is a geology question, so why didn't you tell us how old our
> coal typically is.
>
> Are you suggesting that the material which became coal was not of a
> world populated by any form of humanoids of that same era?

Yup.
And by the way you're going to have to work harder at being a kook.
Just come across some-one who claims that the Olympics will be called
off because 200,000,000 Chinese are going to invade somewhere on a
Wednesday and there will be a 'worldwide nuclear bombardment' that's
going to last for weeks but if you put a draft excuder under your door
the radiation wont get in..
You must try harder

george152

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 3:54:55 PM7/10/12

to

Ah. Kook quoting kook

Aunt Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Other of the Borg

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 4:02:47 PM7/10/12

to

In article <f3f77c81-56d5-445e...@2g2000pbv.googlegroups.com>,

Coal dates back to something like 800 million years, shortly after the invention
of eukaryotes. Even at the 300 million years the mist humanoid animal might be
frogs.

Government Shill #2

unread,

Jul 10, 2012, 5:17:28 PM7/10/12

to

Wow!

That does almost make Guth look sane by comparison.

Of course, we know better.

Shill #2
--
Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman. Believing what he read made him mad.
- George Bernard Shaw

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 11, 2012, 12:32:59 AM7/11/12

to

On Jul 10, 1:02 pm, Aunt Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Other of the
Borg <six-n...@borgcollective.gov> wrote:
> In article <f3f77c81-56d5-445e-98d3-1105f9ece...@2g2000pbv.googlegroups.com>,

But Ed Conrad's "man of coal" (taken out of 300+ million year old
coal) isn't the least bit frog like.

joeturn

unread,

Jul 17, 2012, 7:22:05 AM7/17/12

to

> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

http://dsc.discovery.com/show-news/mermaids-the-body-found.html

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 17, 2012, 8:29:12 AM7/17/12

to

On Jul 17, 4:22 am, joeturn <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> http://dsc.discovery.com/show-news/mermaids-the-body-found.html

? mermaids ?

Are we suggesting there's an actual humanoid link to a creature of the
sea?

Ed's "man of coal" that's verified as 300+ million years old, as such
might suggest that human evolution is simply either much older than
anyone ever thought, or that it had been introduced to this planet as
of 300+ million years ago.

More than likely there will eventually be the remains of ice people
(perhaps similar to native Eskimos) that arrived upon Earth from their
icy planetoid that was captured as a moon. As otherwise, why would
any humans intentionally migrate towards ice and proceed to habitat
where it's mostly frozen solid, unless they already knew exactly what
they were doing and preferred only the coldest climate.

Otherwise, there's always the extremely nearby pressure cooker
environment of Venus to consider, as perfectly viable for those of us
smarter than a 5th grader.

“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5629579402364691314

Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

BDK

unread,

Jul 17, 2012, 11:32:09 AM7/17/12

to

In article <f8f48dbf-f755-45a2-a6a7-
96bb4b...@g5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, brad...@gmail.com says...

>
> On Jul 17, 4:22 am, joeturn <joeturn2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > http://dsc.discovery.com/show-news/mermaids-the-body-found.html
>
> ? mermaids ?
>
> Are we suggesting there's an actual humanoid link to a creature of the
> sea?
>
> Ed's "man of coal" that's verified as 300+ million years old, as such
> might suggest that human evolution is simply either much older than
> anyone ever thought, or that it had been introduced to this planet as
> of 300+ million years ago.
>
> More than likely there will eventually be the remains of ice people
> (perhaps similar to native Eskimos) that arrived upon Earth from their
> icy planetoid that was captured as a moon. As otherwise, why would
> any humans intentionally migrate towards ice and proceed to habitat
> where it's mostly frozen solid, unless they already knew exactly what
> they were doing and preferred only the coldest climate.
>
> Otherwise, there's always the extremely nearby pressure cooker
> environment of Venus to consider, as perfectly viable for those of us
> smarter than a 5th grader.
>

> ?Guth Venus? 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:
> https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5629579402364691314
>
> Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
> Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> http://translate.google.com/#

> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/?Guth Venus?

Guthballian lOOnacy pages,number 4,5, and 6.