Re: Lunar Reflectors ...

Paolo Ulivi,
Besides those NASA/Apollo laser retroreflectors that technically as
well as scientifically suck, here's a few other topic related words of
wisdom to chew upon.

Here's another one of my best shots in the dark with yet another one of
my infamous lose cannons. This contribution is what I'd recently
offered to Lord/Wizard/spook and all-knowing head incest cloned borg
(MI6/NSA spook) '[[The Commentator]]'

Dear incest cloned borg (MI6/NSA spook) [[The Commentator]],
Being that your all-knowing collective of wizards are seeming not about
to honestly contribute squat as to my previous questions, such as to
the energy/m2 worth of secondary/recoil photons upon such a highly
reactive moonscape and otherwise within what the raw/unshielded
environment should have been providing, nor even as to the whereabouts
of Venus and the bluish Sirius star system, or of anything else that
might further taint your already badly sinking good ship LOLLIPOP, in
which case here's a little something old and something new that I'd
thought may have been overlooked, as in slipping through your
orchestrated infomercial and perpetrated cold-war disinformation-R-us
cracks, that perhaps should be given another fair and balanced
look-see.

With a little further regard to what's impacting our moon at a fairly
alarming rate.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/TM-3487/ch11-3.htm
CHAPTER XI: CONCLUSIONS: LUNAR ORBITER'S CONTRIBUTION TO SPACE
EXPLORATION
Besides somewhat interesting chapters chuck full of downright nifty
though old data, for some reason there's lots and lots of missing
pictures as obtained from such orbiting missions (we're to believe
those pictures must not have been important, as in hardly worth the
billions upon billions of dollars it required for obtaining those
honest to god shots of our moon that simply didn't match up with
anything subsequently obtained from their Apollo EVA surface obtained
images).

In this next worthy consideration; even though there are many better
examples to work from, take a brief look-see as to how unusually
dark/subdued-blue (nearly black) that portion of our flag is, and
otherwise how normal of whites and reds, with that supposed moon-dirt
that's affording a rather good 55% reflective index (no hint of any
3~5% albedo uncovered turf of being within any actual landing zone) in
respect to the white of our flag or of that other artificial white item
in the background.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/images/a11flag.jpg

Sorry folks but, it seems these links simply are NOT offering up any
natural moon color images. Must have been the entire lack of any
secondary/recoil photons and not hardly enough heat to cook an egg.
http://www.uni-salzburg.at/geo/idrisi/remote_sensing_tutorial/rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sect19/originals/fig19_3.jpg
http://www.uni-salzburg.at/geo/idrisi/remote_sensing_tutorial/rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sect19/sect19_3.html
http://kvtr.elte.hu/tnp/nineplanets/luna.html

Here's some moon color photos that are just a wee bit more true to
life.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/planetary/moon/gal_moon_color.jpg
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/planetary/earth/apollo08_earthrise.jpg
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
Disregard all surface photos, as such unfiltered Kodak moments simply
don't match up with anything obtained form orbit, not to mention those
rather spot-illumination zones and as being so very xenon spectrum like
colors instead of the raw solar spectrum which should have included a
great deal of UV-c, UV-b, UV-a and near-UV contributions that are
disproportionately of greater intensity as to the red end of the visual
spectrum, not to further mention a good dosage of secondary/recoil
worth of hard-X-rays and near-blue photons that are nowhere in sight of
what their unfiltered Kodak eye was recording.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?47
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?50
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?51
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?60
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?62
Later Apollo missions that realized the previous error(s) started to
utilize B&W film and/or sufficient band-pass filters so as to improve
their from-orbit pictures as being a whole lot more like their phony
baloney surface pictures, though at least those images are a still a
lot more akin to terrestrial and other subsequent orbiter images,
therefore even though there's no proof-positive nor technical
requirement that such were obtained via manned orbiting missions,
there's also no good reason to believe these images from orbit are not
the real thing. It's also rather odd that even though from orbit of
slightly more than 100 km as their command module traversed multiple
times directly over each of the supposed landing zones, and even though
using an extremely good camera, fine-grain film and telephoto lens
(thus contributing far greater than the best resolution of KECK by at
least 100 fold) they never once managed to capture one of their own
landing sites, other than what looked exactly like most any other
recent impact zone.

For some reason this unfortunate Apollo-14 page includes a 'BLUE
SCREEN' oops frame, yet never once an inclusion of mother Earth.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?73

Of course there are any number of other unmanned orbiter images that
captured their terrific images via color/CCD format that in some cases
included mother Earth along with the moon as bathed in the very same
raw solar illumination, a few shots even included the vibrance of Venus
within frame (actually pretty damn hard to exclude Venus) whereas lo
and behold the golden/orange composite mineral color of the otherwise
relatively dark albedo moon is exactly what the true color of the lunar
surface is, exactly as per what the likes of carbon, iron and titanium
deposits upon an otherwise mostly basalt (coal like) dark and dusty
environment that's loaded with impact related debris of strewn
meteorites and secondary shards as it should have been. Whereas
terrestrial images of the moon are somewhat color shifted by the
secondary/recoil affect of the lunar reflected solar light having to
get through to Earth, at least until Earth itself blocks most of the
solar spectrum worth of UV energy that'll cause the moon to look so
bluish instead of it's natural golden/orange tinge.

Of course the artificial Xenon lamp(s) of spot-lighting affects
involved within this next image rather sucks almost as bad as all of
their nicely clumping foot prints in what looks exactly like a few
centimeters worth of portland cement, cornmeal and perhaps even a layer
of ground coal, all of which being available to even a village idiot
moron that's stuck here upon Earth, yet without any sign of near-blue
secondary/recoil photons in sight.
http://www.donaldedavis.com/BIGPUB/ALDRIN2.jpg

This one offers way too much portland cement and cornmeal instead of
the approprate dosage carbon, iron, titanium and basalt deposited dust
that should have been meters deep and hardly clumping. Notice how the
local albedo is roughly No.3(medium gray) spectrum from the bottom of
their test strip, or possibly even No.6 from the bottom. And notice all
of the rather nicely eroded but otherwise not hardly dusty rocks (I
wonder how the heck that happened?).
http://www.donaldedavis.com/2002_addons/AS17CLR2.jpg

Another dusty moon sub-topic; Why the heck is our fairly substantial
gravity sucking and reasonably large moon so unusually dust-free, when
little old insignificant Phobos is apparently loaded down with dust.
http://www.astro.up.pt/nd/astro_news/98/uk98-9.15.html
Martian moon Phobos hip-deep in powder
"New temperature measurements show the surface must be composed largely
of finely ground powder at least three feet (one meter) thick,
according to scientists studying infrared data from the Thermal
Emission Spectrometer instrument on the spacecraft."

"The extremely fast heat loss from day to night as Phobos turns in its
seven-hour rotation can be explained if hip-deep dust covers its
surface, said Dr. Philip Christensen of Arizona State University,
Tempe, principal investigator for the experiment on the Mars Global
Surveyor spacecraft."

Terrestrial radar probings into the surface of our moon have since
indicated 10+ meters worth of a rather nasty dust accumulation (tj
Frazir having previously contributed some odd 40 foot worth of said
nasty moon dust), that which previous attempts by Russian lunar surface
probes instantly sank into and out of sight for good, yet never once
within any of our Apollo EVA's was there more than a couple of inches
or so worth of a nicely moisture like clumping nature of any dark soil
to deal with, and then somewhat 55% reflective (portland cement and
cornmeal composite like substance) as their oddly clumping moon dust at
that contained such damn few meteorites and/or related impact shards
for as far as their unfiltered Kodak eye could see. Oddly our own radar
imaging and terrain substance data from the likes of SMART-1 and of via
so many other orbital missions before are somewhat missing in action
(much like all of our fly-by-rocket R&D as well as whatever prototypes
remain as stealthy as WMD), as in evidence exclusions and/or of the
usual need-to-know of nondisclosure classified info. Of course, before
our friend 'tj Frazir' went missing, whereas it seems 'tj Frazir'
certainly had lots to share as to the truth and nothing but the truth
as to the harsh environment and thin but existing atmosphere of our
moon, confirming that them dirty rotten Russians were in fact
accomplishing the very same perpetrated cold-war and subsequent
dog-wagging, spin, hype and damage-control thing on behalf of their end
of this very same nasty and spendy ***-stick, as being utilized to
rape and snooker thy humanity for all it's worth.

Sorry folks, and as always my remorse goes out to all of our incest
cloned borgs/spooks of our MI6/NSA (aka NASA/Apollo) of our mercenary
perpetrated cold-war and now oil pillaging and Muslim exterminating
freak show from hell, whereas I suppose that you're all thinking this
is simply another wall-of-words rant, thus way too many words, whereas
otherwise I can share fewer and/or tens of thousands of additional
words along with enough of your own evidence to sink your very own
stinking good ship LOLLIPOP right in the middle of your status quo
sucking mainstream, that's actually just another intellectual cesspool
outflow of what's been overflowing as freely upon your task of
snookering an already dumbfounded humanity for decades. Perhaps 'The
Washington Post' and 'The New York Times' should have another one of
their tight ***-crack reviews upon their 'fact checking' before they
continually purger themselves ever deeper into the nearest intellectual
space-toilet, not to mention offer a 12-step program on behalf of
'Sandy Woods" as being their infomercial NPR token bitch and
intellectual-hore that has been almost as bad off as per most all of
their spendy NOVA disinformation-R-us infomercial productions from
hell.

I don't suppose the collective likes of our warm and fuzzy incest
cloned borgs (MI6/NSA spooks) '[[The Commentator]]' would care as to
share by defending his/her/their own intellectual cesspool(s)?

Perhaps an actual cold-war smoking Russian gun would become a rather
nice thing to contribute. Either that or perhaps a few films of those
Russian landers or just as to our R&D upon those nifty fly-by-rocket
landers could certainly go the distance towards convincing folks that
at least we might actually have had 'the right stuff' way back in the
late 60's, and not just another typically American stinking ***-load
of our intellectual crapolla.
~

GUTH Venus Township, Bridge & cool ET Park-n-Ride tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
BradGuth LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Other somewhat nasty topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm

.

Loading