Awesome moonscape

On Dec 26, 1:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
BTW, our moon's albedo on average of 0.11 is nearly as physically dark
as an open pit coal mine.

So what? The albedo of a green golf course is 0.13. The albedo of a
conifer forest is only about 0.083.

You need to get out more. Go to a basalt flow on Earth - there are
plenty. Or get outside and look up at the full moon some night. You're
hanging your hat on the most feeblest of all threads.

Speaking of coal mines, compare these photos: http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/I..._coal_mine.jpg http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/N...-Geologist.jpg

with this one: http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/Project...SolarSystem/Jp...

Those are certainly a couple of terrific coal mine pictures, with the
floor or deck of that first one at roughly 0.1 or less, and the
overcast albedo worth of the second at 0.12 or slightly better, and of
the third one being of a certain guano island as having that nifty
array of xenon arc lamps that's illuminating their foreground as
though this local source of artificial illumination is situated
nearby, with those nearly soft white and either extremely eroded and/
or dusty hills in the background.

BTW; Can I use all three of those images in a court of law?

And so all of that is why the NASA/Apollo moon wasn't ever the least
bit dark or much less blue, and probably the same reason as to why
Venus was always so darn invisible. Now we all know the Jim Logajan
truth, and thanks ever so much.


So what did you think of the piloting of Neil Armstrong? (Trying to
make this topical! ;-))

That's easy: especially when there's no such fly-by-rocket lander to
start with.

- Brad Guth

Bertie,

This is like watching an idiot being kept busy by a card that says
"How do you keep an idiot busy? See other side." printed on both
sides! LOL

Brad,

"See other side"

BradGuth wrote in
:

On Dec 26, 2:08 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:d0c3eab4-7172-4870-96fb-

m:

On Dec 25, 5:04 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:d9231cb8-3876-4199-8723-





om:

On Dec 25, 3:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote

Obviously those Antichrist and most all those 'pretend
atheists'

So does a pretend atheist believe in god and says he doesn;t,
or does he say he does and secretly doesn't?

A pretend Atheist is very much a faith-based believer in some
kind of
god, but that gets in the way of being a good Usenet rusemaster
that always needs to jump those various faith-based fences as
often as they like, as they topic/author stalk their ulterior
motivated way within Usenet.

Usually those Semitic pretend Atheist are rather easy to spot,
as their actions upon others is what typically goes along the
exact very same path or mindset as would any Old Testament
thumping Zionist or devout hard core Jew. Sometimes I can even
spot those Mormon pretend Atheists, because a true Atheist would
tend to embrace the notions of ETs and of whatever their
intelligent design might have had to do with the unusually
complex forms of life as we know it.

Unfortunately, most honest folks of Usenet are deathly afraid of
their own shadow, and the other 99.9% are simply born-again
liars unless snookered and/or dumbfounded past the point of no
return. Which group do you fit into?

Dunno, I thought you had alreadty decided and were goingto save me
the trouble of deciding for myself.

Bertie

That's my MI5/CIA spook, doing the usual buck passing, or isn't it
a little more like a hot potato pass.

No, just saving myself loads of work by allowing you, with yur
tremendous insight, to tell me how it all works.

Bertie

Unlike yourself, I'm not the least bit all-knowing, except I usually
know when I'm being snookered along.

Our blue moon as having been recently color CCD imaged with quality
bandpass coated optics is in fact looking rather bluish, pretty much
as it should appear to those insufficiently filtered cameras.

BTW, our moon's albedo on average of 0.11 is nearly as physically dark
as an open pit coal mine. Go figure upon which other nearly white
guano moon as having been xenon arc lamp spectrum illuminated that our
rad-hard Apollo wizards landed upon, instead of the unavoidably
reactive naked surface of iron, cobalt, sodium and titanium worth of
such a dry and extremely dusty moon that's so physically dark and as
such representing that unavoidably gamma and X-ray anticathode nasty
environment in addition to its naked basalt surface as being so
unavoidably electrostatic charged.




mmmm hmm.

Bertie

BradGuth wrote in
:

On Dec 26, 2:06 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:b7785863-0c6f-47aa-a988-

om:



On Dec 25, 5:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:3b0561a5-3f5d-4d62-b111-870da88f0234
@i29g2000prf.googlegroup
s.c om:

Those NASA/Apollo folks were simply a whole lot smarter than
given credit, especially those Third Reich of the Semitic kind.

Even if having such a reliable fly-by-rocket lander (of which
our Apollo wizards did not have); would you have taken those
moonsuit naked EVA walks upon such a gamma saturated moon that's
at least 8 fold worse off in secondary/recoil X-rays than any
nasty Van Allen belt?

You bet I would.

Bertie

And that's either because you had yourself an actual fly-by-rocket
lander (though of undocumented prototype R&D) as of 4 decades ago
and oddly not doable as of today, and/or is this naked moon
walkabout possible because of your superior rad-hard DNA?

Remember that you folks can't even tell us why the NASA/Apollo moon
wasn't the least bit physically dark or much less looking blue, not
to mention your not knowing of where or how the hell Venus was
hiding.

I could but since you're a k00k you wouldn't listen anyway.

Bertie

In other words, you claim to know the truth but have elected as to not
share and share alike. Figures, doesn't it.

Yes, I've dedicated my life to keeping you in the dark.

I'm obviously a tremendous success in this regard.


Bertie

BradGuth wrote in
:

On Dec 26, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:22182b62-522e-4d49-9840-b033ba040697
@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.c
om:

On Dec 25, 5:05 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:d0b2366f-3592-4e9a-9799-





om:

On Dec 25, 3:19 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in
news:8e815ed4-80c6-4b6d-8e8c-
:

Is this also why you silly brown-nosed folks can't share and
share alike, such as for sharing in the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, as to why our NASA/Apollo moon wasn't
ever all that physically dark and blue, especially to all of
those unfiltered Kodak moments?

I never use Kodak. Only Fuji. I find the color saturation more
satisfying. However, if I'm going for a pastel or Andy Wyeth
egg tempera sort of feel I do use Kodak. So, guilty as charged.

Bertie

In other words, that loaded MIB gun that's pointed at the back
of your empty head has gotten your undivided attention.

The only thing pointed at my head has been a glass of wine.

Bertie

In that case, if you should ever slip up, just keep checking that
wine for Po210. (standard MIB issue)

Po 210? Was that a Cessna vuilt under licence in Warsaw?

Bertie

Gee whiz, you certainly got that one correct. Your pathetic life gets
summarily terminated while riding within a Cessna 210. Go figure, why
the hell not.

Whoosh!

Well, everythign goes whoosh in your head, doesn't it?

Bertie

wrote in news:09e7597d-32e1-48a4-b6b4-0c49a6b24c17
@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com:


Bertie,

This is like watching an idiot being kept busy by a card that says
"How do you keep an idiot busy? See other side." printed on both
sides! LOL


Yeah, he's not the most challenging idiot I've played with. There were
plenty of conspirawhackoes in alt.disasters.aviation if you like this sort
of thing. They get kind of boring after a short time for me. Other k00k
hunters just love 'em to bits though!

Bertie

BradGuth wrote in
:

On Dec 26, 1:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
BTW, our moon's albedo on average of 0.11 is nearly as physically
dark as an open pit coal mine.

So what? The albedo of a green golf course is 0.13. The albedo of a
conifer forest is only about 0.083.

You need to get out more. Go to a basalt flow on Earth - there are
plenty. Or get outside and look up at the full moon some night.
You're hanging your hat on the most feeblest of all threads.

Speaking of coal mines, compare these photos:
http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/I..._coal_mine.jpg
http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/N...-Geologist.jpg

with this one:

http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/Project...SolarSystem/Jp.
..

Those are certainly a couple of terrific coal mine pictures, with the
floor or deck of that first one at roughly 0.1 or less, and the
overcast albedo worth of the second at 0.12 or slightly better, and of
the third one being of a certain guano island as having that nifty
array of xenon arc lamps that's illuminating their foreground as
though this local source of artificial illumination is situated
nearby, with those nearly soft white and either extremely eroded and/
or dusty hills in the background.

BTW; Can I use all three of those images in a court of law?


You're going to sue NASA?


Bertie

On Dec 27, 6:02 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Brad wrote :


On Dec 26, 1:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Brad wrote:
BTW, our moon's albedo on average of 0.11 is nearly as physically
dark as an open pit coal mine.

So what? The albedo of a green golf course is 0.13. The albedo of a
conifer forest is only about 0.083.

You need to get out more. Go to a basalt flow on Earth - there are
plenty. Or get outside and look up at the full moon some night.
You're hanging your hat on the most feeblest of all threads.

Speaking of coal mines, compare these photos:
http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/I..._coal_mine.jpg
http://www.geokem.com/images/scans/N...-Geologist.jpg

with this one:

http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/Project...SolarSystem/Jp.

..

Those are certainly a couple of terrific coal mine pictures, with the
floor or deck of that first one at roughly 0.1 or less, and the
overcast albedo worth of the second at 0.12 or slightly better, and of
the third one being of a certain guano island as having that nifty
array of xenon arc lamps that's illuminating their foreground as
though this local source of artificial illumination is situated
nearby, with those nearly soft white and either extremely eroded and/
or dusty hills in the background.

BTW; Can I use all three of those images in a court of law?

You're going to sue NASA?

Bertie

Why the hell not?

Since we've been snookered (some of us to death) by our own kind, at
least I want my portion of the loot returned, along with a few billion
in compensation for emotional damages.

Of course this will likely become a class action lawsuit, thus 99.9%
of Usenet and all of their fellow uplink.space.com minions will have
to get pulled into the soup.

- Brad Guth

On Dec 27, 5:36 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote :

On Dec 26, 2:07 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:22182b62-522e-4d49-9840-b033ba040697

@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.c



om:

On Dec 25, 5:05 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:d0b2366f-3592-4e9a-9799-



om:

On Dec 25, 3:19 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in
news:8e815ed4-80c6-4b6d-8e8c-
:

Is this also why you silly brown-nosed folks can't share and
share alike, such as for sharing in the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, as to why our NASA/Apollo moon wasn't
ever all that physically dark and blue, especially to all of
those unfiltered Kodak moments?

I never use Kodak. Only Fuji. I find the color saturation more
satisfying. However, if I'm going for a pastel or Andy Wyeth
egg tempera sort of feel I do use Kodak. So, guilty as charged.

Bertie

In other words, that loaded MIB gun that's pointed at the back
of your empty head has gotten your undivided attention.

The only thing pointed at my head has been a glass of wine.

Bertie

In that case, if you should ever slip up, just keep checking that
wine for Po210. (standard MIB issue)

Po 210? Was that a Cessna vuilt under licence in Warsaw?

Bertie

Gee whiz, you certainly got that one correct. Your pathetic life gets
summarily terminated while riding within a Cessna 210. Go figure, why
the hell not.

Whoosh!

Well, everythign goes whoosh in your head, doesn't it?

Bertie

Again; is that the best physics and replicated science as to why our
NASA/Apollo moon wasn't ever the least bit blue, and as to why Venus
was never anywhere in sight?

As you say "everythign goes whoosh" doesn't it. BTW, you are a bit
dyslexic too, I see.

- Brad Guth

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
BradGuth wrote in
:

On Dec 26, 2:06 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:b7785863-0c6f-47aa-a988-

om:



On Dec 25, 5:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote
innews:3b0561a5-3f5d-4d62-b111-870da88f0234
@i29g2000prf.googlegroup
s.c om:

Those NASA/Apollo folks were simply a whole lot smarter than
given credit, especially those Third Reich of the Semitic kind.

Even if having such a reliable fly-by-rocket lander (of which
our Apollo wizards did not have); would you have taken those
moonsuit naked EVA walks upon such a gamma saturated moon that's
at least 8 fold worse off in secondary/recoil X-rays than any
nasty Van Allen belt?

You bet I would.

Bertie

And that's either because you had yourself an actual fly-by-rocket
lander (though of undocumented prototype R&D) as of 4 decades ago
and oddly not doable as of today, and/or is this naked moon
walkabout possible because of your superior rad-hard DNA?

Remember that you folks can't even tell us why the NASA/Apollo moon
wasn't the least bit physically dark or much less looking blue, not
to mention your not knowing of where or how the hell Venus was
hiding.

I could but since you're a k00k you wouldn't listen anyway.

Bertie

In other words, you claim to know the truth but have elected as to not
share and share alike. Figures, doesn't it.

Yes, I've dedicated my life to keeping you in the dark.

I'm obviously a tremendous success in this regard.

In that case, MI5/CIA has the right infowar borg of a brown-nosed
minion for the job.

- Brad Guth