Russia & India to send joint manned mission to Moon

(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?


This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

Michael


-george william herbert

Michael Petukhov wrote:
(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

gives a useful summary of the true explanations of the fallacies
mentioned by you above.

Of course, as with holocaust deniers and UFO believers, psychological
factors are more important than historical or scientific ones in
understanding why people hold these beliefs.

John

John Mullen wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

gives a useful summary of the true explanations of the fallacies
mentioned by you above.

Of course, as with holocaust deniers and UFO believers, psychological
factors are more important than historical or scientific ones in
understanding why people hold these beliefs.

Sometimes yes sometimes no. as for "true explanations" well
as usual, John anyone have to decide what is more credible the
facts or its "true explanations".

Michael


John

John Mullen wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html


John, just a few comments on that site. It is nicely
organized. It does include refernces to original materials
and it discusses most (not all tought) important NASA problems
with that Moon landings. Moreover tt seems author prepared
a book to disprove NASA hoax theory, which is on sale. But
there is one important problem. He lies, directly and openly.

He says:

"...
However, not the rover! If you watch the clip, you will see dust
thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect
parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. ..."

It is the lie. I am sure you have seen this video. If not take it
and look very closely. It is exactly opposite to what was actually
shown in NASA official videos. Namely clouds of dust from rover
wheels stopped by the air exactly like on the earth were shown.
Very visible, very clear. BTW the same effects for dust from
astranouts foots is also sometimes very clearly visible.

Why he lies, John? If so, after that, how we can trust a word
from this guy about his on other topics, easily received
discussions with NASA experts etc.? No way.

"... Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the
Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel
and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the
video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a
beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum. Had NASA
faked this shot, they would have had to have a whole set (which would
have been very large) with all the air removed. We don't have this
technology today! ..."

Exactly. This is the Earth?

Michael
This is another case of selective vision on the part of the HBs.



gives a useful summary of the true explanations of the fallacies
mentioned by you above.

Of course, as with holocaust deniers and UFO believers, psychological
factors are more important than historical or scientific ones in
understanding why people hold these beliefs.

John

Michael Petukhov wrote:
John Mullen wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...


Michael Petukhov wrote:


[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html



John, just a few comments on that site. It is nicely
organized. It does include refernces to original materials
and it discusses most (not all tought) important NASA problems
with that Moon landings. Moreover tt seems author prepared
a book to disprove NASA hoax theory, which is on sale. But
there is one important problem. He lies, directly and openly.

He says:

"...
However, not the rover! If you watch the clip, you will see dust
thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect
parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. ..."

I can't see that Michael. All I can see is the dust going up from the
wheels and falling straight back down again, as it would in a vacuum.

It is the lie. I am sure you have seen this video. If not take it
and look very closely. It is exactly opposite to what was actually
shown in NASA official videos. Namely clouds of dust from rover
wheels stopped by the air exactly like on the earth were shown.
Very visible, very clear. BTW the same effects for dust from
astranouts foots is also sometimes very clearly visible.

Why he lies, John? If so, after that, how we can trust a word
from this guy about his on other topics, easily received
discussions with NASA experts etc.? No way.

"... Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the
Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel
and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the
video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a
beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum. Had NASA
faked this shot, they would have had to have a whole set (which would
have been very large) with all the air removed. We don't have this
technology today! ..."

Exactly. This is the Earth?

I don't think so.

Michael
This is another case of selective vision on the part of the HBs.

Do you have a ref for these clios that you refer to?

John



gives a useful summary of the true explanations of the fallacies
mentioned by you above.

Of course, as with holocaust deniers and UFO believers, psychological
factors are more important than historical or scientific ones in
understanding why people hold these beliefs.

John

John Mullen wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
John Mullen wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...


Michael Petukhov wrote:


[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html



John, just a few comments on that site. It is nicely
organized. It does include refernces to original materials
and it discusses most (not all tought) important NASA problems
with that Moon landings. Moreover tt seems author prepared
a book to disprove NASA hoax theory, which is on sale. But
there is one important problem. He lies, directly and openly.

He says:

"...
However, not the rover! If you watch the clip, you will see dust
thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect
parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. ..."

I can't see that Michael. All I can see is the dust going up from the
wheels and falling straight back down again, as it would in a vacuum.

What you cannot see? The clouds of dust stopped by the air?
In vacuum there would not clouds, The trajectory would be
symmetrical ballistic parabola, the horizontal speed of
the particles at the end of the trajectory would be the same
as it was in beginning. None of this is visible in NASA clip.

Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover" at:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...ann/videos.htm



It is the lie. I am sure you have seen this video. If not take it
and look very closely. It is exactly opposite to what was actually
shown in NASA official videos. Namely clouds of dust from rover
wheels stopped by the air exactly like on the earth were shown.
Very visible, very clear. BTW the same effects for dust from
astranouts foots is also sometimes very clearly visible.

Why he lies, John? If so, after that, how we can trust a word
from this guy about his on other topics, easily received
discussions with NASA experts etc.? No way.

"... Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the
Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel
and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the
video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a
beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum. Had NASA
faked this shot, they would have had to have a whole set (which would
have been very large) with all the air removed. We don't have this
technology today! ..."

Exactly. This is the Earth?

I don't think so.

Michael
This is another case of selective vision on the part of the HBs.

Do you have a ref for these clios that you refer to?

Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...ann/videos.htm

Michael


John



gives a useful summary of the true explanations of the fallacies
mentioned by you above.

Of course, as with holocaust deniers and UFO believers, psychological
factors are more important than historical or scientific ones in
understanding why people hold these beliefs.

John

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:


There are no dust clouds in this video.

The dust is thrown off the rear wheel and immediately falls
back to the ground with no plume of dust hanging suspended
as happens when you drive in desert areas on earth.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:


There are no dust clouds in this video.

The dust is thrown off the rear wheel and immediately falls
back to the ground with no plume of dust hanging suspended
as happens when you drive in desert areas on earth.

Ok Keith your visibility clearly does not allow you to see this
air effects in Moon, as well as to all NASA defenders.

As for me "clouds" of very fine particles of dust hanging
suspended in the air and as well as "clouds" of more heavy
particles concetrated in areas where they lost horizontal
speed (due to air resitence) and fall down almost vertical,
are all pretty visible to me. Let's see maybe others have
a bit better visibility, than you have.

Michael

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:


There are no dust clouds in this video.

The dust is thrown off the rear wheel and immediately falls
back to the ground with no plume of dust hanging suspended
as happens when you drive in desert areas on earth.

Keith


also, if you pay particular attention to the part where he slams on the
brakes at the end, you will notice the dust falls forward across the wheel
well and onto the ground immediately.

(Michael Petukhov) wrote in message . com...
John Mullen wrote in message ...
Michael Petukhov wrote:
John Mullen wrote in message ...

Michael Petukhov wrote:

(George William Herbert) wrote in message ...


Michael Petukhov wrote:


[...]
The funny side that even time delays would be just fine
not to speak that the signal does come from the moon.
The later is for radio enthusiasts all over the world.

Hm... tell me the tue. this is what you wanted to ambush
me on? Right? Little naive boy...

So, would you mind explaining from the start for those of
us who missed your earlier postings, what makes you think
that this was faked at all?



This is very big field full of false claims and contra claims.
I cannot give you a complete list but in my view there
are lots of very strange things in NASA official pictures
and particualrly in movies (wrong shadows, untouched dust
directly under LM engine, clouds of dust from under rover
wheels etc.), strange elements of LM design like
inward opening hatch, space and van-allen belts radiation
which was largerly ignored etc.

On radiation you can start with:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

it has references on valid nasa documents and measuremrnts.

As for the pictures there are many sites on internet.
Try "moon hoax" you would have tons of that with pictures
refernces etc. Both pro and contra, false and true.
So be careful you can be mislead.

As IMO you have been!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html



John, just a few comments on that site. It is nicely
organized. It does include refernces to original materials
and it discusses most (not all tought) important NASA problems
with that Moon landings. Moreover tt seems author prepared
a book to disprove NASA hoax theory, which is on sale. But
there is one important problem. He lies, directly and openly.

He says:

"...
However, not the rover! If you watch the clip, you will see dust
thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect
parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. ..."

I can't see that Michael. All I can see is the dust going up from the
wheels and falling straight back down again, as it would in a vacuum.

What you cannot see? The clouds of dust stopped by the air?
In vacuum there would not clouds,

You don't need vaccums.
Lunar Landers make their own clouds, it's MAGIC.

The trajectory would be
symmetrical ballistic parabola, the horizontal speed of
the particles at the end of the trajectory would be the same
as it was in beginning. None of this is visible in NASA clip.

That is only because NASA wasted 20 years of our
national budget collecting Moon ROCKS.
They are amatuer photographers, whom the only people
on Earth who are paid less are the Russians.

What you fail to understand is what we have to keep
reminding British retart physicists even more often
that we have to remind US retart physicists:

The moon is not a vacuum.
Vacuum's only exist in Pisa, and it's closely allied partner
in low IQ, Paris.


Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover" at:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...ann/videos.htm



It is the lie. I am sure you have seen this video. If not take it
and look very closely. It is exactly opposite to what was actually
shown in NASA official videos. Namely clouds of dust from rover
wheels stopped by the air exactly like on the earth were shown.
Very visible, very clear. BTW the same effects for dust from
astranouts foots is also sometimes very clearly visible.

Why he lies, John? If so, after that, how we can trust a word
from this guy about his on other topics, easily received
discussions with NASA experts etc.? No way.

"... Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the
Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel
and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the
video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a
beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum. Had NASA
faked this shot, they would have had to have a whole set (which would
have been very large) with all the air removed. We don't have this
technology today! ..."

But, the US never claimed to France that we have the technology.
Our claim is the same as it's always been:

We have the knowledge, we have the power, we have the freedom:
hence you commies are toast.