LRO; Apollo impacts and their debris soon to be identified

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 18, 2009, 7:28:38 PM6/18/09

to

LRO is up and away. Finally, absolutely no excuse whatsoever for not
detecting each and every significant Apollo item that’s bright and
shiny while situated upon such a naked surface that’s crystal dry,
electrostatic charged, generally reactive and nearly dark as coal.
The undisclosed dynamic range of their primary imager should knock our
socks off, whereas even earthshine illumination should be entirely
sufficient, as well as whatever desired color/hue saturation at less
resolution shouldn’t be a problem unless they intentionally assign
false colors.

At the altitude of 50 km (30–70 km polar orbit) it should offer >0.5
meter resolution. Better resolution may have to remain restricted, as
well as other science data may have to be need-to-know (same as the
JAXA and ISRO missions).

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 19, 2009, 7:21:12 PM6/19/09

to

We'll see if they make it. Right now, they can't figure out how they
made it the first time. No doubt.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 19, 2009, 7:39:54 PM6/19/09

to

I'd bet there's some kind of technical malfunction that limits or
restricts their camera resolution, just enough to make it difficult or
nearly impossible to clearly identify the remains of our Apollo stuff.

As I'd said before, I'll buy into those robotic one-way hard landings,
but that's about it as long as so much of our Apollo R&D plus
subsequent documentation is missing in action, so to speak.

The search for surface or near surface ice is just another ruse.
However, within that unusually thick and mascon populated crust should
be a few geode pockets of some kind of mineral brines, and of course
the solid basalt itself should still contain microscopic amounts (<46
ppm) of water, or one tonne of water from 46 million tonnes worth of
vaporized basalt.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 21, 2009, 12:19:23 PM6/21/09

to

JAXA and ISRO are not certain of anything, and China is just into
keeping most everything of their lunar mission a big dark secret,
although they each suspect via remote instruments that frozen water
could still exist on our naked and unavoidably reactive moon. Oddly
99.9999% of their public funded mission science isn’t publicly
accessible, and of what little has been published isn’t of their best
data nor well enough presented. It’s as though JAXA and ISRO simply
do not know how best to organize their public funded data and how to
best utilize the www as their public science archive.

However, our very own LRO and LCROSS missions do not seem to be of any
interest to those claiming we’re been there and done that Apollo
thing.

“LRO; Apollo impacts and their debris soon to be identified”
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/2201e1417c4ad633?hl=en#

The LROC of 0.5 meter resolution should more than do the trick,
especially with having such a wide spectrum for detecting lunar
minerals, deposits and with extreme dynamic range giving more than
enough earthshine illumination sensitivity for even the mostly dark as
coal surface. Of whatever the optical cameras of LRO do not pick up,
the SAR imaging and multiple other instruments will.

Even if there’s scant amounts of solid water or any damp/frozen
crystals of mineral saturations hiding within deep and continually
dark polar craters shouldn’t go unnoticed, although at 3e-15 bar I’d
have my doubts, in that anything resembling raw ice or frozen brine is
more likely going to have to be sequestered deep within geode pockets
having solid (vapor tight) shells.

Too bad that after 4 decades of our best hocus-pocus and supposed
technological advances, we still do not have any viable fly-by-rocket
lander that can safely manage a controlled decent, downrange and soft
landing. Instead we get yet another spendy impactor kind of probe,
and at that not even a LUNAR-A kind of surface penetration probe, or
any other capable kind of surviving impactor.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 21, 2009, 11:25:30 PM6/21/09

to

where is that Japanese probe that was entented to crash on the moon
one of this days? would we see that explosion from Earth?

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 12:09:22 AM6/22/09

to

I'll have to recheck and see exactly what happened. Their intended
impact should have been in plain view, and a fairly impressive impact
at that.

At just one degree, it should have bounced a few times. Instead it
just kind of sank out of sight.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 1:12:48 PM6/22/09

to

I'll have to recheck and see exactly what happened. Their intended
impact should have been within plain view, and having generated a

fairly impressive impact at that. At just one degree, it should have

bounced a few times, whereas instead it just kind of went thud and
sank out of sight.

The recent made for TV stuff isn't offering very good physics or
science, but it's certainly terrific eye-candy and what-if food for
thought.

An icy Selene becoming our moon could have sucker punched Eden/Earth
without destroying all life. If it happened today, perhaps at least
1% of the human species could be saved, and the lower 99% would likely
parish. However 12,600 some odd years ago, perhaps 10% of the
primitive humanity of that era should have survived because of their
having already survived in the nude and off the land as is.

Today, most folks might die off if they lost use of their cell phone,
Blackberry or iPod.

~ BG

Dave

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 2:39:50 PM6/22/09

to

On Jun 18, 6:28 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> LRO is up and away. Finally, absolutely no excuse whatsoever for not
> detecting each and every significant Apollo item that’s bright and
> shiny while situated upon such a naked surface that’s crystal dry,
> electrostatic charged, generally reactive and nearly dark as coal.

Won't you just claim that the pictures were doctored or faked when LRO
imagery DOES show Apollo landers on the moon?

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 3:30:32 PM6/22/09

to

I invented the science of observationology, of deductively
interpreting whatever's potentially there that's most likely
artificial as opposed to being of whatever should otherwise be
perfectly natural. Too bad that most of the higher resolution via
LORC imaging is limited to monochrome, whereas otherwise at least
eight fold better image interpretations could be accomplished.

The adding or subtracting of pixels per given image is nowadays 5th
grade capability, so thereby it's entirely possible to produce and/or
fudge whatever image you like, as well as including or excluding
whatever color/hue of the visual spectrum that makes you a happy
camper. Without public access to the original unprocessed images,
there's no valid objective way of anyone telling truth from fiction.
I wonder if the public is even going to see more than 0.1% of the
obtained science from these two probes, because in the past it hasn't
always been the case.

What could have been and should have been done as of our Apollo era,
that would have easily made everything objectively and independently
as peer proof-positive that we were in fact standing upon our
physically dark and unavoidably reactive moon, is a downright shame on
us. Perhaps only in America can so much of our best ever R&D plus 700
large boxes of mission data get so discarded and/or lost, as though it
had little if any meaning.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 9:17:26 PM6/22/09

to

Apparently the LRO/LCROSS missions are in some kind of media stealth
mode, similar to our media breath holding and turning blue, because
apparently there’s no sure thing of this spendy mission locating and
imaging our Apollo mission remainders of sufficiently large, bright
and shiny stuff that’s situated upon the nearly dark as coal surface
of our naked and dusty old moon.

JAXA and ISRO have not been certain of anything, and China is just
into keeping most everything of their lunar mission as a big dark

secret, although they each suspect via remote instruments that frozen
water could still exist on our naked and unavoidably reactive moon.

Oddly 99.9999% of their public funded mission science has been need-to-
know (meaning we get to see all of one bit out of a million), and of

what little has been published isn’t of their best data nor well
enough presented. It’s as though JAXA and ISRO simply do not know how
best to organize their public funded data and how to best utilize the
www as their public science archive.

However, our very own LRO and LCROSS missions of sufficient resolution
do not seem to be of any interest to those of Usenet/newsgroups
claiming we’ve been there and done that Apollo thing as of 40 years
ago.

The LROC of 0.5 meter resolution should more than do the trick,

especially with having such a wide spectrum capability for detecting

lunar minerals, deposits and with extreme dynamic range giving more
than enough earthshine illumination sensitivity for even the mostly

dark as coal surface without benefit of sunlight. Of whatever the

optical cameras of LRO do not pick up, the SAR imaging and multiple
other instruments will.

Even if there’s any scant amounts of solid water or even damp/frozen

crystals of mineral saturations hiding within deep and continually
dark polar craters shouldn’t go unnoticed, although at 3e-15 bar I’d

seriously have my doubts, in that anything resembling raw ice or

frozen brine is more likely going to have to be sequestered deep

within geode pockets as having solid (vapor tight) shells.

Too bad that after 4 decades of seeing our best hocus-pocus and

supposed technological advances, we still do not have any viable fly-

by-rocket lander that can safely manage a controlled decent, downrange

and soft landing. Instead we get yet another spendy impactor kind of
probe, and at that not even a LUNAR-A kind of surface penetration

probe, or any other capable kind of surviving hard landing probe.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 10:45:52 PM6/22/09

to

it crashed on the dark side of the Moon...

Last footage of Japan's Satellite as it Crashes Into the Moon
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f48_1245714968

this is the Japanese proof that they went too the Moon... While I am
still wondering how they got throe the Van Allen belt... Van Allen
Belt radiation would destroy all electronics...

It seems the Chinese also crashed a space vehicle on the Moon a few
months ago... and now the Nasa promised us to do the same in search
for water...

Well I can already tell them(NASA) there aint no water on the moon...

Conclusion: Space travel and science remains a fake Miracle... a world
wide Hoax.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 11:53:11 PM6/22/09

to

On Jun 22, 7:45 pm, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> it crashed on the dark side of the Moon...
>
> Last footage of Japan's Satellite as it Crashes Into the Moon
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f48_1245714968
>
> this is the Japanese proof that they went too the Moon... While I am
> still wondering how they got throe the Van Allen belt... Van Allen
> Belt radiation would destroy all electronics...

2e3 Sv/year is not all that insurmountable for robust and rad-hard
electronics. However, double IR heating is another consideration
that's not as easily resolved unless the electronics are either
artificially shaded and/or artificially cooled.

>
> It seems the Chinese also crashed a space vehicle on the Moon a few
> months ago... and now the Nasa promised us to do the same in search
> for water...
>
> Well I can already tell them(NASA) there aint no water on the moon...

I agree, although within the moon is entirely another matter.

>
> Conclusion: Space travel and science remains a fake Miracle... a world
> wide Hoax.

The WWH is perhaps true to some extent, especially of their Apollo era
that employed smoke and mirrors more than anything else.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 12:33:45 AM6/23/09

to

It was fake in 1969. They boxed themselves into a corner, 40 years
later.

They couldnt go then, and cant go now.

No amount of astronauts being held up by wires in movie sets will
change that.

All of what NASA supposedly does is all faked.

Read the NASA Act of 1958:
Search in Google: The National Aeronautics and Space Act

You will find buried written in this Act:
"TITLE I--SHORT TITLE, DECLARATION OF POLICY, AND DEFINITIONS
SHORT TITLE"

"DECLARATION OF POLICY AND PURPOSE"

Sec. 102. (f) The Congress declares that the general welfare of the
United States requires that the unique competence of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration in science and engineering
systems be directed to assisting in bioengineering research,
development, and demonstration programs designed to alleviate and
minimize the effects of disability.
---------------------

These words, "The Congress declares that the general welfare of the
United States requires that.......demonstration programs designed to
alleviate and minimize the effects of disability."

People may on the surface of it, may take this reference to mean one
of the Main aims of NASA is to help develop technology to help
disabled people with new technology. But this reference in this NASA
foundation document would be absurd.

The real meaning of the above reference is that "demonstration programs
(Fake Simulations) designed to alleviate and minimize the effects of
disability"(making NASA appear that they can do, and achieve much more
than they are actually capable of)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6jRPpHzwCE

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 12:47:27 AM6/23/09

to

People should stop dreaming of space travel... since it does not
exist... the only truth is that science is a fake miracle ... based on
Hoax on Hoax.

Here we have the ISS with bubbles.

International Space Station Hoax : Space Walks Simulated in A Massive
Water Pool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38ynHKGzplQ&feature=channel

See it is basic facts like this, that make the space travel believers
look really stupid and lacking basic common scientific sense, I feel
sorry for them, I really do. Living in a delude fantasy world must be
quite lonely for them.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 12:56:10 PM6/23/09

to

> Water Poolhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38ynHKGzplQ&feature=channel

>
> See it is basic facts like this, that make the space travel believers
> look really stupid and lacking basic common scientific sense, I feel
> sorry for them, I really do. Living in a delude fantasy world must be
> quite lonely for them.

Unfortunately for your mindset, LEO stuff does exist, as well as L1,
L2 and polar orbits and those off-world explorations are in fact
taking place. As I'd said before, you really need to get out of your
confinement/isolation cell a little more often.

At the very least, you've got a secure job at DARPA, NSA, CIA or even
within the FBI as a triple agent kind of spook/mole. If you didn't
already exist, they'd have to invent a Warhol as well as the likes of
Art Deco, Saul Levy and even William Mook to boot. Try to remember
that 99.9% of Usenet/newsgroups are in fact populated with bogus folks
doing their best cloak and dagger and brown-nosed clown stuff of
spewing disinformation and otherwise obfuscating their Bog like butts
off.

~ BG

Hagar

Jun 23, 2009, 8:22:38 PM6/23/09

to

GPS works through a system of towers, planes, and high altitude blimps

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_tracking

Mobile phone tracking tracks the current position of a mobile phone
even on the move. To locate the phone, it must emit at least the
roaming signal to contact the next nearby antenna tower, but the
process does not require an active call. GSM localisation is then done
by multilateration based on the signal strength to nearby antenna
masts.[1]

Mobile positioning, i.e. location based service that discloses the
actual coordinates of a mobile phone bearer, is a technology used by
telecommunication companies to approximate where a mobile phone, and
thereby also its user (bearer), temporarily resides. The more properly
applied term locating refers to the purpose rather than a positioning
process. Such service is offered as an option of the class of location-
based services (LBS)[2].

It's impossible to put a satelite into space due to UA. Contrary to
unpopular belief, it is very expensive to do the impossible.

Why is it so easy for you to accept what you are told?

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 8:39:56 PM6/23/09

to

a.. new rigorous defeat....
..the "Moon-Marionettes".

People argue when they disagree. When they agree they don't say too
much. In other words your work is bringing the truth to the masses and
they like it and believe you. You should be happy when a thread gets
quiet like this. Especially when it is jam packed with truth.

What can the shills do? Every time they open their trap they sink
further into the quicksand. Thanks to the work done in this thread the
moonlanding claims have become indefensible.

Now, there are a lot of people with egg on their faces that would like
to see this gem slide off the cliff in the kill file.

That is the crossroads we are at in this thread. A killer thread on a
tyrant's boards. Not a good combination.

Of course I appreciate the opportunity to express my thoughts on this
hoax but this is not a privilige they give me because they cherish
free speech. They wanted to see this thread in it's fullest content so
they can get shills working on the next generation of lies to thwart
the skeptics.

In other words they wanted to see our hand before folding the thread
and disposing of it. You watch and see BG. They have the IPs of every
computer that latched on to this thread so they have a precise fix on
the body of skepticism out there.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 8:51:51 PM6/23/09

to

Here whats its all about
"A Frog on the Moon" original NASA video

if you watch closely, starting on the right side of the astronaut, you
can see the frog hoping left to right of the screen as the astronaut
comes closer. Oops!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=281_1188609464

...so now ..the Naza has.. the irrefutable evidence..that..
there is life on the Moooonn..........

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:07:40 PM6/23/09

to

Double IR worthy and rad-hard DNA to boot. There's actually a certain
terrestrial island that was ideal for hosting this kind of spoof
project, and no doubt there were frogs on that island.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:17:50 PM6/23/09

to

I believe that we've accomplished better than LEO, although not all
that much of anything manned. Possibly A-13 accomplished that one
lunar orbit, and otherwise they went to/from the Earth-moon L1 (Selene
L1). It's actually pretty hard to tell when so much of our spendy R&D
plus Apollo mission and science data is oddly taboo and/or missing in
action, so to speak.

Next they're going to say that some sneaky bastard (most likely from
another Muslim sleeper cell) absconded with all of their original
Kodak film.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:24:19 PM6/23/09

to

I wouldn't exactly give our NASA as much credit as being the Anti
Christ. They've made far too many human mistakes for being Anti
Christ worthy.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:33:14 PM6/23/09

to

At times (much of the time) his bipolar and schizophrenia medications
fail to muster up sufficient dopamine. Otherwise, he has a few weird
notions and zingers that are not half bad for a person that so often
excludes physics and science. However, at times he does have a valid
point or interpretation to share.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:45:57 PM6/23/09

to

one word only FEAKE..

....FREAKING FAKE AND NOTHING ELSE

Sjouke Burry

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 9:44:30 PM6/23/09

to

Tskk... wierdo defending schizo....

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 10:00:32 PM6/23/09

to

..so how much is myth & how much is true...?...

..anybody seen or heard of this...

This is a invitation to the atom bomb believers to post a rebuttal to
the points I will list below illustrating some the reasons I believe
atom bombs are a bogus science and a shameless hoax.

here is the list:

Item 1)

The historical seismograms of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have mysteriously
vanished. If not only for the sake of war-era memorabilia, that
information should have been everywhere in the museums and in the
press. Hiroshima is located in a highly volcanic zone called the
Honshu Arc and those active volcanoes were under constant
seismographic surveillance during that period and log before that. The
so-called atomic blast at hiroshima was estimated to be the equivalent
of 6.2 on the Richter Scale but no seismological outpost in the world
appears to have noted it. The Russians said they exploded the biggest
atomic bomb ever made (50 megatons) at Novaya Zemlya in northern
Russia. That is hundreds of thousands of times more powerful than what
they say exploded over Hiroshima yet again, not one seismic needle
moved at all. How is that possible I ask?

Item 2)

In 1942 Hitler's Lufftwaffe had a plan to bomb Lower Manhatten in New
York City USA. This plan included a special transport behemouth to fly
the package across the Atlantic and deliver it to the target. This is
fully 3 years before Hiroshima yet the so-called atom bomb they said
they were using is the exact yield and deployed at the same height as
the one they say they dropped on Hiroshima. This suggests to me that
the atomic hoaxsters were shopping for a spot to nest the hoax. What
other possible explanation can there be? When the US started using
what they call atom bombs the used the uranuim hammer configurations
but the Hitler model is not specific at that level. So, what is Hitler
doing planning atom bomb attacks before he even had the facilities or
infrastructure to even start planning such late strategies. They never
said what they would replace that bomb with if it fell into the ocean
with the plane. Why would he not have delivered the package by boat
instead. How do we explain these contradictions?

Item 3)

The so-called nuclear industry, be it weapons or so-called
commercially viable nuclear reactors is the hoaxster's paradise. The
whole ripoff scheme is shrouded in national security protocols and
security bonding which means you can't discuss your work outside the
plant if you don't want to incur the wrath of the NSA and risk
jailtime for attempted so-called nuclear terrorism. The whole scam is
compartmentalized so Sam doesn't know what George is up to. Perfect
cover for the atom bomb hoax clusters. So perfect in fact that I
believe the jews could not resist pulling off those massive long-cons
on the people of the world. How can they NOT have done it when the
opportunities, the means and the motives were all there for them to
exploit?

Item 4)

During the so-called billion-dollar east coast of the United States
blackout a good portion of that area was completely without power. How
is this possible when so many so-called nuclear reactors were supposed
to have autonomy? How is that possible that people can shell out 5
billion dollars to build a reactor and it can't light a lightbulb when
the grid goes down. My contention is that the reason the power failure
is so absolute is because the conventional sources are fueling the
hoax reactors. Who would build a distribution grid for electricity
like a superhighway that cloggs up when two cars collide on a country
road? Nobody would design a grid where a reactor can't support it's
customers when the other grid elements are compromised. I say this is
further evidence of the hoax. How can it be otherwise?

Item 5)

The mushroom cloud thermodynamics of the atom bomb hoax have also been
examined. The first problem the competant examiner notices with the
mushroom cloud photographed on the day Hiroshima was attacked is that
the sun is shining brightly overhead at the noon position. The bombing
was said to have been at 8:15 am. I have heard it argued that this was
the Nagasaki cloud but it has been used by the hoaxsters themselves
for Hiroshima and Justin Raimondo had this exact cloud for his essay,
Hiroshima, Mon Amour. Why would the jews want to say it is Nagasaki if
they have nothing to hide? I went to the public library in downtown
Montreal as a youth and I looked at microfilm of newspapers for that
day in 1945 and the picture I enlarged taken from the microfilm was
the cloud at noon and it was Hiroshima indeed. So, more evidence of a
hoax?

Item 6)

The firebombing of Tokyo March 9-10, 1945-100,000 dead. M-69 aimable
cluster firebombs reduced 26 square kilometers of that city to ash
using a few hundred U.S. Air Force B-29 bombers. Aside the cost of the
aircraft when initially built the cost of destroying all that section
of Tokyo was a little more than a million dollars. So, why build
anything that costs billions to destroy a fraction of the land those
B-29 bombers could have destroyed in under less than a million
dollars? Because the atom bomb was a lie and those cities reduced to
ash by M-69 firebombs and that also explains the mysterious vanishing
of the historical seismograms of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Are they
hiding the fact that there was no shock wave? Is that why the trees
were still standing charred and many building facades still standing?

Item 7)

Hiroshima was not evacuated and life came back to normal very quickly.
This is inconsistent with the models presented by the experts that
said nothing would grow for 70 years and nobody could live there for a
very long time. One week after the so-called atom bomb, oleanders were
growing everywhere. The hoaxsters started stories of a miracle. More
contradiction and nonsense from the jewish hoaxsters.

Item 8)

The pilot of the B-29 they said dropped the so-called atom bomb on
Hiroshima is a known Hollywood insider and his B-29 crew was totally
segregated on an island with the pilot Commander Tibbits fully in
charge of security and everything. He had full autonomy and
discretion. I believe his crew of talmudic cowards was near 200
aircraft when they sortie'd on Hiroshima then later on Nagasaki.
Another brilliant example of the secrecy and security shroud of
compartmentalization over the whole hoax. Why would this dumbass put
his mother's name on an instrument of utter genocide if it were not
that his mother gloats without end at jewish hoax accomplishments and
mass murder that she would be pleased to figure prominently on the
nose of that beast of destruction and mass murder. How can anyone
believe such a mess of contradictions when it is obvious they would
have been nuts not to exploit the means they had at their disposal
under those circumstances. They pulled it off while everyone on earth
was in a state of shock and would have believed anything the jews said
just to stop the ignited gasoline showers?

Item 9)

Items said to be radioactive have in fact been doped with x-ray
radiation for periods of time corresponding to the hoax expectations.
At the Pantex assembly plant in Amarillo Texas they have a very
powerful x-ray machine they say they use to look inside decomissioned
so-called atom bombs before they open them up. That is totally
rediculous because why would anything be wrong inside a bomb watched
by the military night and day. I say the x-ray machine is there to
dope the materials they assemble so that the x-ray detectors they call
rad meters can read something expected from the mathematical models.
When a rad meter is picking up x-ray radiation it is seemlessly and
logarithmically converting this sampled energy and reporting the
results as rads instead of x-ray energy that it is. When a student
examines a sample said to be radioactive it is a sample irradiated
prior using a high intensity x-ray machine. Again compartmentalization
plays a key role here at the Pantex plant. Coincidentally they are the
only plant in the US authorized to make the final assemblies of so-
called nuclear bombs. What else could they be using that huge x-ray
machine at Pantex if it is not to create illusions of atomic
radioactivity?

Item 10)

Einstein the plagerist. At least a few links provided at my Hiroshima
thread deal with the question of Einstein's honesty in claiming the
authorship of a lot of his predecessor's work. Some say his wife was
more the mathematical genius and coached him a lot. Anyways the
original and official story of the creation of the first so-called
atom bomb says that Einstein gave the letter he wrote to the president
of the United States to a financier in New York that bounced it around
town for a week before giving it to the president. This was a letter
explaining in terms a president could understand that atom bombs can
be made. The story says that everyone was paranoid that Hitler would
discover the plan to build a bomb yet they let the letter concerning
it's so-called feasibility float around town for a week. More
contradiction.

Item 11)

The question of the Tribally Affiliated. Can anyone deny that the
global congregations of tribally affiliated had the means, the
motives, and the opportunities to hoax the world with fake atom bombs
and fake CVNEs and fake DU and the fake nuclear navy? They even faked
moonlandings and NAZIS holocausts. They call their genocides wars and
failed diplomacy. They faked the dinosaurs too it would appear.

Item 12)

Iraq, why did they not find so-called atom bombs there?

Item13)

Suicide bombers, since when can't the underworld aquire atom bombs for
suicide missions if they are not bogus?

Item 14)

Why 60 years without so-called atom bomb accidental explosions or
terrorist explosions? Everything the jews running the government do is
sloppy and anyone with entry level skills can steal a package from the
military and configure it to their likings. Why has this never
occurred with the so-called atom bomb?

Item 15)

The global conspiracy in negotiable instruments run by the jews and
indoctrinated into the minds of the poor youth abandoned to those
pathetic indoctrination centers called public schools worldwide is a
very important factor in the widespread acceptance of the hoax
clusters of the atomic variety by the mainsteam public. The tribal
affiliates monopoly on the mainstream media is also another great
element used to ram the hoax down our throats while we are still very
young and vulnerable to fear. The gobal ring of tribally affiliated
running all the governments of the world and controlling all the
military forces of the planet make the hoax possible also. Who can
deny the influence of the tribe in every country?

Item 16)

So-called nuclear reactors- The buildings and structures as they
appear to the human eye in as much as one is permitted to examine
without special clearance are real enough and cost real money if we
can pretend the money supply is really backed with anything of any
real value. Billions of dollars to build each one. I have worked
building a pair of reactors in Gentilly Quebec so that appeared real
enough at the surface at least. Many people are salaried to work in
these buildings and monitor security, supply and maintenance. All
this, of course, is to be expected if you want anyone to believe the
hoax it has to have at least the appearance of function and form. The
real sham starts in the control room. What is a control room anyways
you might ask, well, it is a representation of variables said to be
operating to achieve the potential predicted in the mathematical
models. The truth is that the control panel is an advanced simulator
running on highly specific top-secret application software developed
secretly a long time ago and refined many times since. So, the
unsuspecting employees work all day monitoring variables fed to them
by sophisticated digital processors geared to simulate a fully
functional reactor core and cooling elements. The fake reactor is
tethered to the grid and the energy from conventional sources is fed
to the brushes of the generators making them instantly motors instead
that circulate the water and perhaps also heat it for effect and
steam. The instruments reading the output from the reactor is actually
reversing the reading of the power pouring in. Who can deny that such
simulator technology was not possible at the time they started those
hoaxes?

Item 17)

The money- now there's a good motive for hoaxing these clusters of
deceit. How many people making big money in that fake industry feel
like letting it all go so the truth be known? They will fight to the
death to keep that salary and income no matter how bogus the industry
is proven to them to be. Who can deny that important obstacle to the
truth? The money stolen because of these hoax clusters is beyond
understanding.

Item 18)

Mushroom clouds do not grow out of radial airbrust explosions. The
mushroom cloud needs to be seeded from the ground. The thermodynamic
conditions caused by a circumferential airburst explosion would
superheat the air all around and send radial shock waves emanating
from the center outwards like the popular festivity fireworks and that
would negate the conditions required for a mushroom cloud to grow
normally. A mushroom cloud grows from the ground up in a predictable
circular pattern that develops and flows through a relatively cool and
stable upper air mass because the explosion was at the ground level.
Who can deny that mushroom clouds can't grow out of radial airburst
explosions?

Item 19)

A total absence of dead birds in all the documentation and photos
related to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Reports claim that
people saw birds exploding in mid-air when the bomb went off yet all
should have been blinded by the incredible flash of light that
preceded the blast.

These are just a sample of the reasons I think the world has been had
by that tribe of compulsive liars and their affiliates worldwide.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 10:03:09 PM6/23/09

to

They LIE... as their Father the Master of all LIES.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 23, 2009, 10:39:01 PM6/23/09

to

Will someone please explain to me what in Gods' names a frog would be
doing on a Moon hoax set?

Great expectations forever unfulfilled
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/25/20090519073419.jpg

So, now the yellow affiliates are getting in on the treasury bleeding
game:
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/1589/20090518095808.jpg

Their space shuttle plans are remarkably sophisticated:
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/5841/20090519061400.jpg

But doesn't paper catch on fire as it re-enters the atmosphere? Isn't
that typical of the frugal Japanese space program to want to save the
people a lot of money by using paper in their space shuttle designs.
Or will they charge the public for a regular full sized shuttle made
of all the so-called required material and send up a paper shuttle
instead? So many questions.

Message has been deleted

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 12:46:18 AM6/24/09

to

Our USAF could have proved otherwise as of nearly 40 years ago, using
a quality satellite spy camera and super telephoto lens could have
resolved 0.1 meter, and having accomplished such for 10% the cost of
one Apollo mission.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 9:51:35 AM6/24/09

to

Remember those Spanish kids with their 100$ camera and a few Balloons
produced more better quality pictures then Nasa ever has done with
Billions of $...

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 10:21:33 AM6/24/09

to

That's not entirely true. Those spendy cameras of what our NASA and
USAF get to play with are far better than we're being allowed to
realize. The amount of spectrum which exceeds human vision, and their
superior dynamic range, along with nifty optics that are truly
exceptional to say the least, is what simply can not be so easily
ignored.

I will not bother you with the difference in their technical
specifics, because you don't believe in physics or science. Nor
should I repeat as to why we're only allowed to see limited results in
order to exclude certain visual and/or scientific information that
could upset the mainstream status quo.

What I'm saying is that we've been selectively lied to by those of us
having "the right stuff". What you are saying is that your perverted
God was in charge of allowing such lies.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 10:32:51 AM6/24/09

to

> Great expectations forever unfulfilledhttp://img141.imageshack.us/img141/25/20090519073419.jpg

>
> So, now the yellow affiliates are getting in on the treasury bleeding
> game:http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/1589/20090518095808.jpg
>
> Their space shuttle plans are remarkably sophisticated:http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/5841/20090519061400.jpg
>
> But doesn't paper catch on fire as it re-enters the atmosphere? Isn't
> that typical of the frugal Japanese space program to want to save the
> people a lot of money by using paper in their space shuttle designs.
> Or will they charge the public for a regular full sized shuttle made
> of all the so-called required material and send up a paper shuttle
> instead? So many questions.

Life is just plain silly, isn't it.

Perhaps it's your lack of physics and science that's in charge of
those things, as why would other folks be any different than yourself?

The Boeing 787 composite aircraft is getting further delayed because
of using paper/(carbon fibers), so to speak. So, perhaps we should
remain focused upon terrestrial matters that'll save lives and
otherwise improve our quality of life.

BTW, would your God ever permit intelligent life to exist/coexist on
Venus, or on any other planet or moon?

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:13:07 AM6/24/09

to

You right BG time to focus terrestrial matters... we still have to
spend some time in this world... but...

In 22 millions years the virgin Venus shall be terraformed and then we
all will go to live on Venus... when we leave this doomed world for
ever, just like we left Mars for this Mother Earth 244.000 years ago
by Star Gates.

The Moon is a dead born world... and Gran'Da'Dy used its reflection
only to fight darkness...

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:22:40 AM6/24/09

to

But you do not believe on the laws of physics, much less in science.
So, who are you kidding, but yourself.

What about right now and/or before now as having intelligent ETs
living/working on Venus?

You do believe that your God created intelligent life other than just
upon Eden, don't you?

You do believe that other intelligent ET life couldn't possibly be as
corrupted, snookered and dumbfounded as humanity, don't you?

But why of course, since them pesky laws of physics are apparently
meaningless and you don't believe in science is a wee bit of a
problem, isn't it.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:33:59 AM6/24/09

to

I can't entirely argue against that, as old and modern day humans tend
to protect their own kind regardless of the mostly negative
consequences to others. However, from time to time there is a glimmer
of hope and truth to behold. You just have to be vaguely smart enough
and open minded in order to extract those few and far between truths.
Your mindset is however rather closed and otherwise on an extremely
narrow set of faith-based tracks that simply can't see the obvious
means to the grand solution that's at hand and otherwise before our
mostly heathen eyes.

In other words, with the warm and fuzzy likes of yourself in charge,
we'd still be naked and living in caves.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:58:19 AM6/24/09

to

What I know we only have technology to stay stuck on this low fallen
world... All what is shot up comes down... the only laws of physics I
heave learned so far...

> What about right now and/or before now as having intelligent ETs
> living/working on Venus?
>

Its still to hot on Venus BG... Man can't survive the High
Temperatures

> You do believe that your God created intelligent life other than just
> upon Eden, don't you?
>

Of Course... that means yes, on every solar system there is Life...
Our Solar system isn't unique.

> You do believe that other intelligent ET life couldn't possibly be as
> corrupted, snookered and dumbfounded as humanity, don't you?
>

In the Holy Writings they Talk about 666 low fallen worlds that
revolted against the Lord of Heaven... So now there are 666 worlds
under embargo from heaven, because man has fallen very low, without
grace, even consorting to lies and murder... Now they are like
prisoners stuck on the rock of Alqsar till Judgment Day

> But why of course, since them pesky laws of physics are apparently
> meaningless and you don't believe in science is a wee bit of a
> problem, isn't it.
>
> ~ BG

Man left Eden by a Star Gate and populated the universe by Star
Gates... and this technology is Hidden from our eyes by the ancient of
time, till the Lord of the Universe will show up and send the evil
ones into the Lake of Fire with his Plank.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 12:25:00 PM6/24/09

to

Everything is in a natural orbit around something. Artificially we
can force a satellite or probe to ignore gravity for as long as the
onboard cache of fuel or whatever propulsion energy holds out, after
which the item in space travel simply falls back into the natural
realm of orbiting something, including possibly returning to Earth
unless some other source of gravity and/or electrostatic force takes
over.

>
> > What about right now and/or before now as having intelligent ETs
> > living/working on Venus?
>
> Its still to hot on Venus BG... Man can't survive the High
> Temperatures

It's only too hot and otherwise nasty for naked heathens of the most
snookered and dumbfounded kind. Besides, you don't believe in the
regular laws of physics or in the best available science, so how the
hell would you know that it's too insurmountably hot for even
intelligent folks to cope with?

You do realize that with such a terrific local cache of mostly
renewable energy and every bit the same or better minerals and
elements than Eden has to offer, that pretty much anything you or I
could imagine is technically possible, don't you? (or doesn't your
faith believe in energy?)

>
> > You do believe that your God created intelligent life other than just
> > upon Eden, don't you?
>
> Of Course... that means yes, on every solar system there is Life...
> Our Solar system isn't unique.

Terrific, as by rights that should fairly apply to other planets and
moons within our solar system that are technically survivable and even
eventually livable. However, you do realize that the regular laws of
physics and science has to get involved, don't you?

>
> > You do believe that other intelligent ET life couldn't possibly be as
> > corrupted, snookered and dumbfounded as humanity, don't you?
>
> In the Holy Writings they Talk about 666 low fallen worlds that
> revolted against the Lord of Heaven... So now there are 666 worlds
> under embargo from heaven, because man has fallen very low, without
> grace, even consorting to lies and murder... Now they are like
> prisoners stuck on the rock of Alqsar till Judgment Day

No argument there. We're kind of stuck here, and there's terrestrial
folks in charge of making damn certain that none of us ever escapes
this world (mentally or physically). You seem to be one of those in
charge of keeping us snookered and dumbfounded.

>
> > But why of course, since them pesky laws of physics are apparently
> > meaningless and you don't believe in science is a wee bit of a
> > problem, isn't it.
>
> > ~ BG
>
> Man left Eden by a Star Gate and populated the universe by Star
> Gates... and this technology is Hidden from our eyes by the ancient of
> time, till the Lord of the Universe will show up and send the evil
> ones into the Lake of Fire with his Plank.

Don't need no stinking "Star Gate" or special conditional laws of
physics or any hocus-pocus science in order to get safely to/from
Venus. So, what's your God's excuse for that one?

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 12:54:59 PM6/24/09

to

BradGuth a ï¿½crit :

> On Jun 24, 8:58 am, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 24, 5:22 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 24, 8:13 am, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 24, 4:32 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 23, 7:39 pm, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 24, 3:07 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jun 23, 5:51 pm, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jun 22, 8:39 pm, Dave <dave.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 6:28 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> LRO is up and away. Finally, absolutely no excuse whatsoever for not

>>>>>>>>>> detecting each and every significant Apollo item thatï¿½s bright and
>>>>>>>>>> shiny while situated upon such a naked surface thatï¿½s crystal dry,

The Star Gate is the fastest way to over bridge two distant points...
true no need for a Star Gate to go to Venus, but do you have the engines
that have the propulsion force to leave earth's attraction... let me say
till today the sky is the limit... beyond that we dont have the engines
to do so.

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1917/proof.html

argument consists of two parts:

1. No object weighing 1 kg or more has ever moved with a greater
speed than 4,000 km/h.
2. Speeds of at least 28,000 km/h are required for space travel.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 3:41:21 PM6/24/09

to

On Jun 24, 9:54 am, Warhol <Mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> The Star Gate is the fastest way to over bridge two distant points...
> true no need for a Star Gate to go to Venus, but do you have the engines
> that have the propulsion force to leave earth's attraction... let me say
> till today the sky is the limit... beyond that we dont have the engines
> to do so.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1917/proof.html
>
> argument consists of two parts:
>
> 1. No object weighing 1 kg or more has ever moved with a greater
> speed than 4,000 km/h.
> 2. Speeds of at least 28,000 km/h are required for space travel.

Exceeding 7.8 km/sec is certainly not a problem. Just ask any of our
DARPA Zionist Nazis that got loads of stuff into orbiting and
impacting our naked moon. Many other probes have since gone off to
other worlds and their many moons, as such each had to escape the
gravity of this wussy little insignificant planet we call Eden/Earth
and manage to pull away from the sun unless headed inward, and most of
those missions have obviously far exceeded 11 km/s. At 10,000 km up,
the escape velocity falls off to roughly 7 km/sec, but the fly-by-
rocket trick is always of how to first get whatever craft or probe to
that altitude of 10,000 km to begin with.

In order to escape the gravity of our sun is quite another matter, in
need of 42+ km/s to start off with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity

~ BG

radian

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 5:57:09 PM6/24/09

to

Warhol wrote:

I can think of a lot better uses for the computing machine
emulating a human poster "Warhol." Sorting mail, perhaps?

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 8:44:15 PM6/24/09

to

Don't knock that sorting of the US Mail, because those errors are few
and far between. I keep getting my unsolicited and public subsidized
junk mail like clockworks, with almost the annoying efficiency as
those illegal robo-phone calls that we private citizens also get to
subsidize, as well as wasting our precious time answering. Only in
America can a private citizen be so systematically screwed by their
own government, attached along with a customary smiley ‘happy face’,
exactly like the SEC kind of happy face that was in charge of allowing
Ponzi Madoff to rip everyone off for more than a decade.

~ BG

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:49:58 PM6/24/09

to

On Jun 22, 10:45 pm, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> this is the Japanese proof that they went too the Moon... While I am
> still wondering how they got throe the Van Allen belt... Van Allen
> Belt radiation would destroy all electronics...

Everything anyone ever sent into deep space
made it through just fine.

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:52:37 PM6/24/09

to

On Jun 23, 7:16 pm, Warhol <mol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Never did any Soviet Union or US "spacecraft" leave the orbit of the
> Earth.

Not a problem.
If you can make it into orbit, all you need to do to
leave is to lightly tap the gas pedal.

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 24, 2009, 11:56:21 PM6/24/09

to

On Jun 22, 9:17 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Apparently the LRO/LCROSS missions are in some kind of media stealth
> mode, similar to our media breath holding and turning blue, because
> apparently there’s no sure thing of this spendy mission locating and
> imaging our Apollo mission remainders of sufficiently large, bright
> and shiny stuff that’s situated upon the nearly dark as coal surface
> of our naked and dusty old moon.

2nd brightest object in the sky.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 12:16:29 AM6/25/09

to

Exactly as a mostly dark basalt plus meteorite and carbonado dust
covered orb that's nearly as sooty dark as coal should look.

Moon albedo = .11
Coal albedo = .1

Imagine what a large Apollo item as having an albedo of .80<.9 should
look like against such a relatively dark average surface of .11 (11%
reflective), especially at solar angles below 45 degrees.

~ BG

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 2:05:08 AM6/25/09

to

The copper foil sheathing the lander would produce
a recognizable spot of color.

Androcles

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 2:45:55 AM6/25/09

to

"Father Haskell" <father...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:45c34b94-82ca-4f26...@s16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...

======================================
I'm seem to recall the lander isn't there anymore, it was used to
bring the astronauts back to the command module. Perhaps you
should look elsewhere for it. Try Earth, white clouds have a fairly
good albedo...

Richard Tobin

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 9:08:44 AM6/25/09

to

[Newsgroups restored]

In article <G2F0m.57139$kh1....@newsfe07.ams2>,
Androcles <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:

>The copper foil sheathing the lander would produce
>a recognizable spot of color.

>I'm seem to recall the lander isn't there anymore, it was used to

>bring the astronauts back to the command module.

No, just the top half. There's a video on this page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Lunar_Module

showing that the lower half (with the copper foil) of Apollo 15's LEM
appears to be reasonably intact after the ascent stage takes off.

Androcles, it would make more sense if you sent your own posts to
alt.morons rather than trying to redirect followups there.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 9:18:31 AM6/25/09

to

The question is that none has ever delivered the proof is that they
can obtain the speed needed to escape earth attraction... and the
velocity of the
space shuttle does NOT EXCEED 300mph... although a velocity of
17000mph
is needed for space-travel around the earth.

what is it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE&feature=related

Bubbles in Space?

its all a hoax, there was no moon landing or space travel! A
monolithic lie!!!

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 9:53:04 AM6/25/09

to

Very much so, and with a narrow bandpass filter would make that kind
of highly reflective foil stand out like a sore thumb or a diamond
gleaming in the sun against a relatively dark background. But then,
that could have been accomplished as of four decades ago, such as with
their very own metric terrain format camera, and a whole lot better
resolution via USAF spy/reconnaissance camera and terrific telephoto
lens of that era that could have been flown independently at less than

10% the cost of one Apollo mission.

"The Apollo Mapping (or Metric) camera flew on three missions, Apollos
15, 16, and 17"

http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/browse/thumbnails.php?mission=AS15&cam=metric

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/metric/

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 10:00:23 AM6/25/09

to

> what is it...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG4Z_r38ZDE&feature=related

>
> Bubbles in Space?
>
> its all a hoax, there was no moon landing or space travel! A
> monolithic lie!!!

As I said before, if you didn't already exist they'd have to invent a
Warhol, as another part of their ruse/sting on behalf of our mutually
perpetrated cold-war. You do appreciate that our cold-war was
entirely bogus (Zionist contrived) though becoming somewhat testy and
spendy on both sides, don't you?

~ BG

Androcles

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 10:04:57 AM6/25/09

to

"Richard Tobin" <ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:h1vsss$30a7$1...@pc-news.cogsci.ed.ac.uk...

Ok, I'll stand corrected. That's more than you'll ever admit to.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 11:12:10 AM6/25/09

to

Every hoax has it's museum. The dinosaurs, the atom bomb, the nuclear
reactors, the holocaust, and the moon landings:

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/3097/20090517091226.jpg

Oh yeah, before I forget, you have a telegram from the moon:
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8069/20090517024717.jpg

It's in Lunar Alphabet so you will need the Lunar Alphabet Chart:
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/3373/20090517025033.jpg

If you want to send them back a reply you can use my NASA-approved
lunar typewriter:
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/4554/20090517025245.jpg

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 11:19:01 AM6/25/09

to

At least you've got a terrific sense of humor, which is a whole lot
more than most have going.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 12:10:45 PM6/25/09

to

Thank BG... He is the man who can formulate with accuracy..the..
motives of and the exact interpretation by sources I`ve linked to...
and brought ... copied & pasted... here of Studies conducted and
researched by dedicated scientist... BG... is the main man who should
have the credit... of
spreading the message of The Fake of Century...

BG, Usenet readers have decided that you deserve a little something
for your great work in the service of truth in the question of the so-
called moon landings. You will be the first skeptic to be paid in
Lunar Dollars, congratulations man. If I were you I would frame my
first lunar dollars cause that's all you will ever get from there...
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8770/20090517022309.jpg

radian

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 12:18:27 PM6/25/09

to

Warhol wrote:

> Every hoax has it's museum.

So now you're a museum?

And here I had thought you were merely a
run-of-the-mill troll.

Got your 501c3 forms up to date? Here's a
little contribution I send your way.

*<BURP>*

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 1:33:28 PM6/25/09

to

With corruption and inflation as bad off as it is, what’s a lunar
dollar worth?

As undeniably fakey and otherwise special interest unpoliced as this
century has become, what’s next?

How about forking over another fake God, or perhaps several. (they’re
all tax exempt)

If your God had any remote sense of decency and a gram worth of
remorse for having screwed up Eden, he/she or his/her partners in
crimes against humanity would have been right here kicking those
Zionist Nazi butts as of decades ago, as well as long before then.

What’s with all the hocus-pocus delay? (is your God too busy screwing
up other worlds and civilizations?)

Are you and others of your faith-based kind waiting to be nailed to a
stick, so that we can worship your sorry dead asses? (it kind of
worked for those Zionist Jews, didn’t it?)

Perhaps worshiping the almighty dollar is the only right kind of faith-
based thing to be doing. Perhaps we should all become Rothschilds and
Ponzi Madoffs, protected by our very own Zionist Nazi SEC and the
private/cabal Federal Reserve. (what could possibly go wrong if the
rich and powerful keep getting richer and more powerful?)

Other than persistently posting doom and gloom (most of which doesn’t
seem to materialize), do you have any better plan other than getting
great glee from the traumatizing and suffering of others?

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 3:24:28 PM6/25/09

to

On Jun 18, 4:28 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> LRO is up and away. Finally, absolutely no excuse whatsoever for not

> detecting each and every significant Apollo item that’s bright and
> shiny while situated upon such a naked surface that’s crystal dry,

> electrostatic charged, generally reactive and nearly dark as coal.

> The undisclosed dynamic range of their primary imager should knock our
> socks off, whereas even earthshine illumination should be entirely
> sufficient, as well as whatever desired color/hue saturation at less
> resolution shouldn’t be a problem unless they intentionally assign
> false colors.
>
> At the altitude of 50 km (30–70 km polar orbit) it should offer >0.5
> meter resolution. Better resolution may have to remain restricted, as
> well as other science data may have to be need-to-know (same as the
> JAXA and ISRO missions).
>
> ~ BG

LRO = 1965 kg? (perhaps with fairing)
Deployment rocket at liftoff (GLM) = 546,700 kg
Time of 4.5 days getting this package into lunar orbit.
LRO 1846 + 1043 (upper stage) = 2889 kg
2889/546700 = .528%

Why are such modern rockets so terribly inefficient? (Saturn 5 wasn’t)

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 6:07:44 PM6/25/09

to

We are "getting closer", they'll come! ...

patience is one of the most valuable virtues of life.... It has never
been easy to be patient, but it's probably harder now than at any time
in history.

The Quran states that "It is not righteousness that you turn your
faces towards East or West. But it is righteousness to believe in
Gran'Da'Dy and the Last Day,

The imminent arrival of the end is clear in James 5:7-9. Be patient …
until the coming of the Lord. Like the farmer we must wait, but the
wait is short—the judge is standing at the doors. Likewise, it is
common to consider the crown of life in James 1:12 to be a future
prize, promised to those who endure trials, but promised at some
future time. In the last part of Revelation 2:10: Be faithful until
death, and I will give you the crown of life. Here it is clear that
endurance, even unto death, will be rewarded later with the crown.

And this is no science fiction film.

All things will work in perfect timing with Gran'Da'Dy's plan and so I
will be patient as I keep watch.

You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 6:14:19 PM6/25/09

to

All the Saturn Rockets have fallen into the Atlantic Ocean... I heave
heard ones in Tanger, my Home town, that a American Saturn Rocket had
fallen not far from the town... thats how far those Saturn Spaceship
ever got.

Double-A

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 6:25:43 PM6/25/09

to

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To
visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep
himself unspotted from the world." -- James 1:27.

Double-A

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 7:08:07 PM6/25/09

to

In other words, I shouldn't be holding my breath. Whenever it gets
right down to it, it seems that you're really no fun at all.

Does this Lord/God of ours do zingers? or is there no sense of humor
in the vast cosmic realm that he/she/it created, or rather messed up.

~ BG

Message has been deleted

Double-A

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 7:22:32 PM6/25/09

to

God does have a sense of humor. After all, he created you!

Double-A

jason

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 7:37:39 PM6/25/09

to

> this is the Japanese proof that they went too the Moon... While I am
> still wondering how they got throe the Van Allen belt... Van Allen

I think in organic material can get through just fine. it is the organic
that you need to be wondering about. did the use ever really go to the moon?

--

God is really a pink elephant with television rabbit ears.... think I am
wrong?
Prove it

Assume nothing; expect everything

--

God is really a pink elephant with television rabbit ears.... think I am
wrong?
Prove it

Assume nothing; expect everything

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 8:14:44 PM6/25/09

to

> ever got.- Hide quoted text -

That's just the booster. There were 2 more stages,
plus the command, service, and landing module
stack. They made it to the moon. The service
module and capsule made it back home.

Most of the launch mass was fuel and fuel tank.
Once the fuel was burned off, they were dead
weight, and jettisoned.

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 8:18:06 PM6/25/09

to

New Horizons crossed lunar orbit within 12 hrs
of launch.

Efficiency really isn't that important. Once you're
up to speed, cut the engines and coast, and let
momentum push you the rest of the way.

Warhol

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 8:22:25 PM6/25/09

to

thats the great wisdom Double-A...

Something to think about, I am curious to see what the minds of Usenet
come up with.

Plus the moon thing, damn, life is weird.

remember all, rise out of the compartmentalized conditioning.

Look at the bigger picture.

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 8:48:28 PM6/25/09

to

Never they went farther then that one accident when Saturne V
practically felt on the roof of my Family house in Tanger... the rest
they did was cheap Magic that made you believe what you shaw on the
screen of your TV set is the reality...

NASA's "Vomit Comet"
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/8060/20090515121852.jpg

NASA uses this airplane to simulate outer space "zero gravity"
conditions on earth. They say they use it to train future astronauts.
The name "Vomit Comet" was given to this airplane because the zero "g"
parabolic flight manouvres induce motion sickness.

Here is a graph showing the dynamics of this zero-"g" flight pattern:
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9890/20090515122523.jpg

The formula:
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5613/20090515122845.jpg

The effect...in the picture below we see Mercury astronauts training
onboard NASA's zero-"g" simulator aircraft, the Vomit Comet:
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9730/20090515122752.jpg

Next we see the zero-"g" aircraft used as a movie set:
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/8301/20090515123053.jpg

This the way they fake shuttle and space station videos and media
clips where we see astronauts they say are in space? The readers can
correct me if I'm wrong here but as I recall the video clips I saw
over the years where the astronauts are floating around inside the
shuttle or space station never seemed to last more than a few seconds
before ending or switching scenes. Each clip or delay between scene
cuts corresponding with the zero-"g" aircraft parabolic arcing
summits. Do they make a spacecraft mockup inside those zero-"g"
aircraft and stage the space exploit from there? One thing for certain
is that it is very doable, they have the technology to make earthbound
simulator flights look like outer space.

Father Haskell

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 8:57:28 PM6/25/09

to

Newton's first law of motion, accepted since
1687.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 9:14:41 PM6/25/09

to

Why would the USAF fake anything?

Unless they too happen to like Zionist Nazis, what would be their
motive?

Since the original large format film (undeveloped) would have been
handed over to a composite team of private and peer qualified
individuals that we'd all trust with our lives, what on Earth could
possibly go wrong?

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 25, 2009, 9:17:11 PM6/25/09

to

On Jun 18, 4:28 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> LRO is up and away. Finally, absolutely no excuse whatsoever for not
> detecting each and every significant Apollo item that’s bright and
> shiny while situated upon such a naked surface that’s crystal dry,
> electrostatic charged, generally reactive and nearly dark as coal.
> The undisclosed dynamic range of their primary imager should knock our
> socks off, whereas even earthshine illumination should be entirely
> sufficient, as well as whatever desired color/hue saturation at less
> resolution shouldn’t be a problem unless they intentionally assign
> false colors.
>
> At the altitude of 50 km (30–70 km polar orbit) it should offer >0.5
> meter resolution. Better resolution may have to remain restricted, as
> well as other science data may have to be need-to-know (same as the
> JAXA and ISRO missions).

Any time now, our NASA and their LRO team are going to finally
identify each of those Apollo sites, as remainders of landers plus
various equipment, and/or as nifty impact craters as they scan that
moon to death, looking for minerals and elements that we already know
are there, and water/ice that we already know can’t possibly be there
without looking deep underground.

LRO = 1965 kg? (perhaps with fairing)
Deployment rocket at liftoff (GLM) = 546,700 kg
Time of 4.5 days getting this package into lunar orbit.

LRO 1846 + 1043 (upper spent stage) = 2889 kg
2889/546700 = .528%

This pathetic payload ratio is even worse if the specified GLM of
546700 kg didn’t happen to include the payload mass of 1965 kg.

Why are such modern and supposedly advanced rockets getting so
terribly inefficient? (Saturn 5 certainly wasn’t)

Saturn V(5) GLM = 3,038,500 kg (+ a few tonnes of ice loading)
Payload delivered into lunar orbit = 47,000 kg.
Time of <3.5 days getting this hefty package into lunar orbit.
47000/3038500 = 1.547% (not incl. spent upper stage of 14.7 t)
incl. spent upper stage becomes 47000+14700/3038500 = 2.031%
The overall GLM inert ratio of Apollo was worth roughly 30%

It seems Saturn 5 was on fly-by-rocket steroids by offering 4 times
more all-inclusive payload efficiency, as well as having cut roughly
more than a day off the trip to boot, of which takes a great deal more
energy to go there faster and then having reserve energy in order to
slow down once arriving at the moon.

If this LROC is half of what it’s cracked up to be, it should be
capable of resolving those upper stage impact craters in terrific
resolution, because smacking that lunar surface with 14.7 tonnes (of
mostly bright aluminum and one powerful rocket engine) has got to
leave quite a substantial mark as it encounters that physically dark,
crystal dry, electrostatic charged and otherwise extremely dusty old
surface at 2.6 km/s or better, as it vaporizes and coats everything
within at least km or more with all of that aluminum. How hard can a
2 km wide crater that has exposed those brighter lunar minerals plus
having coated everything with aluminum, be to find?

It seems a little off that terrestrial astronomy observations can’t
seem to identify any such horrific impact sites, even though our best
having near100 meter resolution. Our National Science Foundation's
(NSF) Arecibo Telescope in Arecibo, plus the Green Bank telescope
offers 13 cm radar obtained images of 20 meter resolution, as having
existed since early 2005, with that resolution capability existing as
of years before then.

Apparently our recently serviced and extensively camera upgraded
Hubble is dead to us, because otherwise it too could perform rather
nicely via earthshine illuminating those Apollo related sites, and
especially of impact craters that apparently Muslims have hidden from
view.

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 12:33:22 AM6/26/09

to

Yes, though mostly vaporized unless they plowed into 100+ meters of
lose soil and crystal dry dust. A good many newish craters are in
fact deeper than they are wide, suggesting a relatively soft or lose/
uncompacted surface layer of considerable depth.

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 3:13:46 AM6/26/09

to

This one goes out to all those propaganda spewing Apollogists out
there in OZ!!

ALL NASA FOOTAGE USED IN THIS FILM IS PUBLIC DOMAIN. THE USE OF ANY
COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL IS USED UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF "FAIR USE" IN
TITLE 17 § 107 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE. SUCH MATERIAL REMAINS THE
COPYRIGHT OF THE ORIGINAL HOLDER AND IS USED HERE FOR THE PURPOSES OF
EDUCATION, COMPARISON, AND CRITICISM ONLY. NO INFRINGEMENT OF
COPYRIGHT IS INTENDED.

Category: Komedi.........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNEurUZ15zw

...the next pics comes from a finnish site...

Quote:
..*..Sionistit kuvasivat Apollo-lennot studiossa
http://www.erichufschmid.net/Finnish/Apollo-inisde-job-1FI.jpg

http://www.erichufschmid.net/Finnish/Apollo-inisde-job-2FI.jpg

heading= *...(..."zionist pictured Apollo-flyings at Studio..)..

Warhol

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 3:24:15 AM6/26/09

to

They went nowhere BG...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYwlRH7R6DE

...OOhh...what..I forgot...

Quote:
Do we need protection from ultraviolet light?

Without an atmosphere to remove the high frequency ultraviolet light
from the sunlight, human skin and eyes would be damaged quickly.
However, one of NASA's videos show an astronaut wandering around on
the moon in the sunlight without his tinted visor.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/a17v_1650025_VisorNotInUse.JPG

You can see this and other videos at the NASA web site.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17.html

Eventually somebody at the control center on earth suggests that he
lower his tinted visor.

Many visitors to Tanger are more concerned about ultraviolet light
than the astronauts. The astronauts were behaving as if they were on a
theater stage, not in a mysterious and potentially dangerous
environment.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 9:43:17 AM6/26/09

to

> They went nowhere BG...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYwlRH7R6DE

>
> ...OOhh...what..I forgot...
>
> Quote:
> Do we need protection from ultraviolet light?
>
> Without an atmosphere to remove the high frequency ultraviolet light
> from the sunlight, human skin and eyes would be damaged quickly.
> However, one of NASA's videos show an astronaut wandering around on
> the moon in the sunlight without his tinted visor.
>
> http://www.erichufschmid.net/a17v_1650025_VisorNotInUse.JPG
>

> You can see this and other videos at the NASA web site.http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17.html

>
> Eventually somebody at the control center on earth suggests that he
> lower his tinted visor.
>
> Many visitors to Tanger are more concerned about ultraviolet light
> than the astronauts. The astronauts were behaving as if they were on a
> theater stage, not in a mysterious and potentially dangerous
> environment.

I agree, but for a few different technical reasons that involve those
basic laws of physics, and otherwise involves the best available
science that simply doesn't support the Apollo scripted version.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 12:13:11 PM6/26/09

to

> ..*..Sionistit kuvasivat Apollo-lennot studiossahttp://www.erichufschmid.net/Finnish/Apollo-inisde-job-1FI.jpg

>
> http://www.erichufschmid.net/Finnish/Apollo-inisde-job-2FI.jpg
>
> heading= *...(..."zionist pictured Apollo-flyings at Studio..)..

Studio and/or remote/isolated guano island (Nauru) filming and their
use of xenon lamp illumination was a dead giveaway, not to mention no
sign whatsoever of Venus or any other planet except Earth.

Our moon does not have an average surface albedo of .65, as so often
depicted and otherwise much less having any surface that's remotely
close to an albedo of .75, as many frames of their unfiltered and
apparently rad-hard plus thermally immune Kodak film recorded.

Those white moonsuits of 0.85 albedo are simply another dead giveaway
as to their artificial lunar surroundings, not to mention a total lack
of any UV reactive fluorescence as to anything natural or artificial.

Where the hell did the raw/naked solar UV energy go?

~ BG

Warhol

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 12:24:49 PM6/26/09

to

Look at this sentence:

Man did not go to the moon because he failed to prove irrefutably his
claim by placing a visual beacon on the lunar surface we can see from
earth.

That is a little one liner that says a lot.

How about this one now:

If man could survive the rigors of space travel and make it to the
moon with a camera could he take pictures of the lunar silhouette from
the night side looking into the day side and capture the bright
clusters of stars in the same picture?

That was one sentence too.

You see its when the shills take the model of simplicity and ask you
to elaborate for clarity you have to go above warholian protocol of 3
sentences. No choice. Does not mean a person is clueless. Not in the
least. They say the devil is in the details not in the warhol's arse.

The teaching how to condense the complexity of the world into 3
sentences or less and quite frankly I'm having fun...

If atom bombs really existed man would have detonated one near the
face of the moon to create a light we could see from earth and prove
irrefutably that he was there near the moon and the atom bombs really
exist.

See, just one sentence. If you add up these one liners you get three
and that is within the warhol zone of compliance. I'm starting to
think this fish is onto something.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 2:33:54 PM6/26/09

to

There's all sorts of better science that would have been totally
objective, as well as easily independently peer replicated if we'd in
fact walked twelve brave men for a total of multiple days on our
physically dark moon.

Speaking of dirt cheap, quick and downright nifty missions that could
have been and should have been. It seems we already own the shuttle
bay SAR imaging equipment, that with minor upgrades and getting that
already spendy sucker deployed around Venus could yield 0.75 meter
resolution (100 fold better than the original Magellan mission, plus
two fold improved dynamic range), or perhaps as good as 0.15 meter if
doing our moon from 50 km.

Lord forbid we should merely scrap everything that’s bought and paid
for with our hard earned loot, instead of reutilizing, because we sure
as hell wouldn’t want the general public that’s paying for everything
and in debt to the tune of trillions, to ever get their hard earned
moneys worth.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 26, 2009, 6:59:06 PM6/26/09

to

Here’s a better reply (nothing personal), that others might get a kick
out of.

With corporate and government corruption and their systematic global
inflation as bad off as it is, what’s a lunar dollar worth nowadays
days?

As undeniably fakey and otherwise special interest unpoliced as this

century has become, what’s next? Are we going to have to put another
dark-skinned Jew on a stick, or perhaps gang pillage, plunder and rape
Mother Teresa, then use Gondi as our toilet paper? In other words,
how far below the surface of our intellectual cesspool are we striving
for?

As long as our Lord is apparently never coming to our direr salvation,
how about forking over another fake God, or perhaps several. (after
all, they’re all as equally tax exempt as any offshore banking account
or SEC approved Ponzi Madoff scam)

If this Lord/God of ours had any remote sense of common decency, and a
gram worth of remorse for having screwed up Eden, he/she/it or his/her/
whatever partners in crimes against humanity would have been right

here kicking those Zionist Nazi butts as of decades ago, as well as

long before then. Does our Lord/creator get pleasure out of seeing so
much avoidable collateral damage and carnage of the innocent?

What’s with all the same old hocus-pocus delay? (is this Lord/God/
creator of doom and gloom too busy screwing up other worlds and
civilizations?)

Are you and others of your faith-based kind waiting to be nailed to a

stick, so that the rest of us can worship your sorry dead asses? (it

kind of worked for those Zionist Jews, didn’t it?)

Perhaps worshiping the almighty dollar is the only right kind of faith-
based thing to be doing. Perhaps we should all become Rothschilds and
Ponzi Madoffs, protected by our very own Zionist Nazi SEC and the

private/cabal Federal Reserve that gets to do anything it wants in
total exclusive privacy, and thus what could possibly go wrong if the

rich and powerful keep getting richer and more powerful?

Other than yourself persistently posting such holy doom and devout
gloom (most of which doesn’t seem to materialize) do you have any
better terrestrial plan of action (other than getting great personal
glee from the traumatizing and suffering of others)?

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 27, 2009, 12:25:44 AM6/27/09

to

A public funded 60 day commissioning phase seems more than a bit odd,
more like another tactic of public media damage control, of moderating
each and every image and scientific measurement to death and/or
obfuscating as to whatever doesn't comply to their Apollo script.

Means, motive and opportunity all rolled up in one. Once again we'll
be lucky to see 0.1% of the science.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 27, 2009, 9:14:00 PM6/27/09

to

There you go again with the apples and oranges thing. Anything with a
budget for sufficient boosters and packing the least amount of inert
payload can get to the point of zooming past that moon within 12
hours. With a nuclear rocket we could do it within one hour, plus if
given an Earth assist plus a sufficient array of Rn222 ion thrusters
might get this trek down to a few minutes. So, what's your point?

~ BG

Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Oher

unread,

Jun 27, 2009, 9:20:25 PM6/27/09

to

The radiation belts are movie myth. The idea of gamma rays being
'trapped' is lubricous; can you trap light in jar of water? There is
an electric current between the Earth and Moon, but not these silly
radiation belts.

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 27, 2009, 9:45:24 PM6/27/09

to

On Jun 27, 6:20 pm, Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Oher

True, as it takes some kind of reactive mass in order that secondary/
recoil photons to emerge, similar to an anticathode is necessary for
the likes of gamma and X-rays to materialize out of nowhere, so to
speak.

Those Van Allen badlands can give you 2e3 Sv/year(23 rads/hr) while
shielded by 5/16" aluminum, and it should be as every bit bad off or
worse while on the naked moon, because the surrounding moon surface
itself provides the necessary anticathode.

A thick layer of low density or fluffy kind of uncompacted dust is
what moderates that gamma and X-rays down to a dull roar of perhaps at
least a few rads/hr of gamma and X-rays, unless it's a bad kind of
halo CME day that'll terminate the bulk of your frail DNA within an
hour.

~ BG

BradGuth

unread,

Jun 28, 2009, 11:58:51 AM6/28/09

to

LRO is up and away. Finally, there's absolutely no excuse whatsoever

for not detecting each and every significant Apollo item that’s bright
and shiny while situated upon such a naked surface that’s crystal dry,
electrostatic charged, generally reactive and nearly dark as coal. The

undisclosed dynamic range of their primary imager should by rights

knock our socks off, whereas even earthshine illumination should be
entirely sufficient, as well as whatever desired color/hue saturation
at less resolution shouldn’t be a problem unless they intentionally
assign false colors.

At the altitude of 50 km (30–70 km polar orbit) it should offer >0.5
meter resolution. Better resolution may have to remain restricted, as
well as other science data may have to be need-to-know (same as the
JAXA and ISRO missions).

Any time now (starting as of 60 days from now), our NASA and their LRO
team of crack observationology wizards are going to finally identify
each of those Apollo sites, as hosting remainders of all those bright
and shiny landers plus various other substantial equipment, and/or at
leas as nifty impact craters as they proceed to scan that moon to

death, looking for minerals and elements that we already know are

there, and the great hunt for water/ice that we already know can’t
possibly be there without having to look deep underground.

LRO = 1965 kg? (perhaps with fairing)
Deployment rocket at liftoff (GLM) = 546,700 kg
Time of 4.5 days getting this package into lunar orbit.

LRO 1846 + 1043 (upper spent stage) = 2889 kg
2889/546700 = .528%

This pathetic payload ratio is even worse if the specified Atlas 5 GLM

of 546700 kg didn’t happen to include the payload mass of 1965 kg.

Why are such modern and supposedly advanced rockets getting so
terribly inefficient? (Saturn 5 certainly wasn’t)

Saturn V(5) GLM = 3,038,500 kg (+ a few tonnes of ice loading)
Payload delivered into lunar orbit = 47,000 kg.
Time of <3.5 days getting this hefty package into lunar orbit.
47000/3038500 = 1.547% (not incl. spent upper stage of 14.7 t)
incl. spent upper stage becomes 47000+14700/3038500 = 2.031%
The overall GLM inert ratio of Apollo was worth roughly 30%

And no solid fuel boosters were utilized (as used by Atlas 5)

It seems Saturn 5 was on fly-by-rocket steroids by having offered at
least 4 times more all-inclusive payload efficiency, as well as having

cut roughly more than a day off the trip to boot, of which takes a

great deal of extra energy in order to go there faster and then having

reserve energy in order to slow down once arriving at the moon.

If this LROC is half of what it’s cracked up to be, it should be
capable of resolving those upper stage impact craters in terrific
resolution, because smacking that lunar surface with 14.7 tonnes (of
mostly bright aluminum and one powerful rocket engine) has got to
leave quite a substantial mark as it encounters that physically dark,
crystal dry, electrostatic charged and otherwise extremely dusty old
surface at 2.6 km/s or better, as it vaporizes and coats everything

within at least a km or more with all of that aluminum. How hard can
a 2 km wide crater and surrounding field of debris that has exposed
those brighter lunar minerals plus having vapor coated everything with
aluminum be to find, especially while surrounded by such a physically
dark as coal surface.

It seems a little off/odd that terrestrial astronomy observations

can’t seem to identify any such horrific impact sites, even though our
best having near100 meter resolution. Our National Science
Foundation's (NSF) Arecibo Telescope in Arecibo, plus the Green Bank
telescope offers 13 cm radar obtained images of 20 meter resolution,

as having existed since early 2005, and with that resolution

capability existing as of years before then.

Apparently our recently serviced and extensively camera upgraded

Hubble is dead to us (perplexing computer lock-up glitch), because
otherwise it too could perform rather nicely, even via earthshine