Re: World History has been Hoaxed. Re: Moon Landing a Hoax??!! Real Evidence here>>>

From: Brad Guth (ieisbradguth_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/28/05 

Date: 27 Feb 2005 23:57:24 -0800

Science is not actually about seeing nor about believing in anything
except the almighty dollar, as they'll just as soon switch pagan Gods
at the drop of any old hat, or rather as the drop of one thin dime
becomes another blood-bath fight to their death in going after that
dime. So, I'm not exactly sure that there's even room for any
discussion/argument pertaining to the human eye, especially if it
matters not what that eye sees.

The human eye absolutely sucks; as in what the freaking hell was God or
that of our supposed intelligent designers thinking, whereas many
animals and even a good number of insects have better evolved eyes than
humans, and half of those have a better brain as for interpreting
what's to be seen, whereas the brain-dead unfiltered Kodak eye sees and
manages to records beyond human perceptions, and as such the Kodak eye
should have recorded the UV blacklight secondary affect as generating a
near-blue color shift. As to whatever polarised filter should have made
the lunar surface record as darker (not lighter), and by having a point
source of such raw solar illumination should have created razor sharp
and of extremely high contrast prone shadows. The 11~12% average
reflective surface index should not have offered hardly any appreciable
secondary fill-light other than secondary UV photons of at least
near-blue, therefore the red, white and fluorescent blue flags should
have been absolutely glowing as prime examples of what such a pesky raw
solar influx environment had to offer. Only extreme filters could have
otherwise prevented such color skewed distortions.

http://www.maxmax.com/aUVPowderUltraVis.htm
This link offers a good consumer level of a photographic example of
color spectrum shift. Obviously the special fluorescing powders being
offered do exactly what they're supposed accomplish under the 365 nm
source illumination. However, even though this was not a scientifically
monochromatic 365 nm but more likely that of 365 +/- 40 nm (raw solar
like), you should still be taking notice of the non-fluoresing nutural
(probably formica) background, as to how that material also shifted
rather significantly as to becoming noticably bluish, and do remember
that the source light was primarily that of 365 nm which is entirely
invisible to the human eye but somewhat within the far spectrum of what
an unfiltered Kodak eye would have recorded, along with obviously
recording the secondary or photon-recoil bluish shift. I believe the
raw/unfiltered solar influx offers plenty of 350~400 nm energy/m2 to
work with, so go figure why there wasn't the slightest hint of anything
outside of what artificial xenon illumination would have provided.

Not that any damn fool is ever going to employ the likes of Kodak film
on behalf of future lunar expeditions (especially within the fully
solar illuminated secondary X-ray environment whereas Fuji film would
fair so much better) but, if one absolutely had a death-wish as to
venture upon the hot and nasty and TBI moon with camera and film in
hand, here's a couple of essential filters I'd take along for the ride
(actually there's no good reason why both of these filters or that of a
custom milticoated version should not have been (in addition to
whatever polarised filter) standard, as integral upon each and every
lens.
Hoya Sharp Cut Filter:
http://www.hoyaoptics.com/pdf/L42.pdf
L42 offers a clear 420 nm cut-off filter = 72% block or cut at 420 nm
and way better than 95% at 400 nm.
http://www.hoyaoptics.com/pdf/LA140.pdf
LA-140 (amber) provides a broad spectrum light balancing filter that
would have cut most of the near-UV by 95%, virtually all of the UV/a
and even better than 25% of the primary IR that should have been worth
the effort since such a dark basalt surface would have been radiating
roughly 25% of the solar near-IR influx as secondary IR as also being
that of a spectrum shifted contribution, of which the photo emulsion
dye should not have recorded all that much of whatever's over 750 nm
anyway, thus it certainly would not have modified upon anything
photographically to the Kodak eye.

At least upon Venus the atmospheric filtering represents a rather
significant factor in favoring the lower half of our visual spectrum,
as in somewhat of a band-pass that's centered towards 450 nm. Nearly
all of what's greater than 550 nm and otherwise towards the
red(650+nm), near-IR and of the primary IR spectrum is absorbed and/or
reflected by the clouds plus whatever suspended S8 and
acidic(H2SO4/H2O) haze of exactly what such a dense CO2 atmosphere of
92 bar effectively accommodates.

Now perhaps that's what sucks, whereas even a village idiot such as
myself can manage to find loads of well documented photographic
examples, countless amateur, commercial and even Kodak official
examples of exactly what the UV/a, near-UV and secondary recoil-photons
offered as near-blue illumination energy would have contributed as per
color-shifting a given unfiltered exposure, and otherwise there's
companies specializing in optical filters that seem to have been
providing optical filters because they know exactly what they're
talking about, all confirming upon the same photographic results with
and without appropriate spectrum filters, as would have been the
situation for the sort of environment hosting such a great amount of
near-UV and UV/a raw solar energy. So, instead of others proving my
interpretation in error, I've been stalked and bashed to a fairlywell
by the mainstream status quo that seldom if ever offers their examples
or unapproved specifics, while intent upon inflicting as much personal
and physical harm as they think is possible without tipping their dirty
perpetrated cold-war hands.

Basic township on Venus: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Men on the moon?
    ... human eye, especially if it matters not what that eye sees. ... by having a point source of such raw solar illumination should have ... far spectrum of what an unfiltered Kodak eye would have recorded, ... here's a couple of essential filters I'd take along for the ride ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: "on error goto" als wiederhohlung
    ... Private Sub Workbook_BeforeSave(ByVal SaveAsUI As Boolean, ... Dim DieseDatei As String ... Speichername$ = DieseDatei$ ...
    (microsoft.public.de.excel)
  • Re: spectral estimation question
    ... Now I'm pretty sure someone's going to bring up windowing, ... now say we had a magic spectrum analyzer that gave us an EXACT ... blasted lousy bandpass filters, not only does the spike at \pi/5 rad/s ... ***Let's talk about discrete signals and spectra and examine the length of ...
    (comp.dsp)
  • Re: DFT/FFT in log frequency scale...?
    ... the frequency spectrum with bins distributed in a logarithmic or near- ... The existing technology to compute such a octave spectrum are: ... Use multi-stages of decimation filters. ...
    (comp.dsp)
  • Re: Soundcard spectrum analyzer through regenerative frequency division
    ... I'm trying to build a spectrum analyzer for the shortwave spectrum that ... uses a simple computer soundcard for data acquisition. ... Not unreasonable to build a block of say 30 bandpass filters. ... Centre frequencies staggered as felt fit. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)