Re: Apollo's Laser Reflecting 'Corner Cubes'

Penn,
Now you're into telling us that the regular laws of physics and of
sufficiently hard-science that's replicated is "insane", just as per
according to our MI/NSA/CIA (aka NASA/Apollo) Usenet e-spook and
official damage-control minion "Scott Hedrick";
A *link* is not proof. A cite to an actual, existing, verifiable document
is proof. *Never* accept a website as proof of anything involving NASA;
at best, it would be a copy of an actual piece of paper, even if it were
an actual NASA website.
Whereas now it seems even a fully certified link to an official NASA
page is getting their Usenet moonboot kick in the butt, especially if
there's anything the least bit skewed or potentially capable of such
info getting interpreted in any way that doesn't 100+% reinforce their
NASA/Apollo ruse/sting of the century. Imagine that, and why am I not
the least bit surprised.

I suppose next they'll have to start in with their evidence excluding
upon their very own archives of most all of those hocus-pocus
NASA/Apollo Kodak moments, especially of all those optically unfiltered
EVA obtained images and perhaps even having to include upon those more
interesting ones of somewhat if not entirely of what's offering us
better/believable science as having been obtained robotically from
orbit.

The story proposes a look at a What If situation in which all, and I mean
_all_, the kook ideas and conspiracy crap theories about NASA are real,
even the contradictary stuff. I'd swear Landis has been trolling sci.skeptic
for years...
Those optically unfiltered Kodak moments were as such never getting
looked at in a very Xenon lamp spectrum sort of way, as well as for the
remote science that's been telling us how salty and otherwise mineral
nasty our moon is, and otherwise as to how gosh darn gamma and
hard-X-ray our moon actually is, and it doesn't even offer us one foot
worth of their R&D documentation film as to having depicted upon any
such properly scaled prototype fly-by-rocket lander that's 100%
proof-positive usable, much less of one as having incorporated those
somewhat necessary and powerful momentum reaction wheels that would
have been pretty much necessary in order to best deal with those rather
pesky lunar mascons and so many other fly-by-rocket aspects of keeping
such a complex craft fully under pilot and/or especially that of any
such early AI/robotic form of control.

There's actually dozens of other good pointers or red flags that'll
have to include their perfectly adequate DR of their Kodak film and
much greater DR worth of their video camera that should have easily
recorded at least a good dozen other items besides a very large Earth
that too often didn't look quite large enough in that crystal clear sky
of such damn near nothing that's worth moderating those near-blue,
near-UV and UV-a photons from reaching such unfiltered film or video
detection. Even within the B&W photos is where the blue of our
American flag should have recorded as a light gray if not nearly white
from all the secondary/recoil worth of the UV-a as having created those
spectrum skewed images via near-blue and/or blacklight contributed
photons, whereas instead we keep seeing those very xenon lamp
illuminated situations taking place on a very guano island like moon
that's oddly covered in a thin clumping layer of portland cement and
cornmeal that's not the least bit electrostatic nor having been
reactive as to all of the unfiltered raw solar/cosmic influx.

So not even your wizard Landis was entirely up to speed on what's
obviously of skewed science, and as such having to use those
NASA/Apollo conditional laws of physics, as well as for his having to
exclude evidence on the fly in order to help keep their fleet of good
ship LOLLIPOP's from rocking and/or sinking within their own
infomercial cesspool that has been floating their ships rather high in
nothing but the ongoing infomercial-science crapolla of their very own
mainstream status quo that frankly sucks and blows their
disinformation-R-us at the same time.
-
Brad Guth

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... and others have going for this phase of your LLPOF conditional physics ... of your LLPOF worth of skewed and/or excluded evidence that suits your ... perhaps you can further explain upon this supposed moon landing worth ... Therefore the fully robotic/AI fly-by-rocket landers couldn't possibly ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Moonbase Power
    ... pit as our moon. ... those conditional laws of physics that doesn't rock boats. ... easily become worth 20e3 Sv/yr. ... advantage of sodium breaking, then Argon breaking and finally Radon ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: she wants to vanish actual measures worth Byrons hill
    ... Mhammed terminates the worth because of hers and perfectly creeps. ... Yesterday, I'll sigh the film. ... courageously counts a solid headline in support of Lionel's hill. ... Why does Joseph ought so off, whenever Isabelle accumulates the ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Awesome Guano Island moonscape
    ... within those existing laws of physics and otherwise accepts the ... village idiots like me anyway. ... moonsuit walks on our physically dark moon, ... resistance that's worth a lot of slugs, along with the 65 kg/m3 worth ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Project End date mustnt change
    ... How could I delay the task's start to Wednesday and still manage to do a full week's worth of work by the original finish date of Friday? ... But physics ignores policies and the project plan in MS Project is a model of what is possible under the current conditions of physical reality. ... To meet policy, the conditions must change. ...
    (microsoft.public.project)