Re: Moon Hoax people

>Yes, but unfortunately that doesn't really help. Remember,
>we soft-landed a couple of Surveyors and the Russians
>soft-landed at least one laer reflector.
Where's all the supposed hard science proof?
Where's the R&D of prototype fly-by-rocket landers?

As far as I've located, Russia has absolutely nothing and neither does
our NASA have anything to show us. Only remote science via orbit, plus
then we get their science of impact. There are no live images obtained
from the moon, not then, not from anything Apollo, and not ever since.
We still can't manage to get so much as an empty beer can safely
deployed on to the moon, much less if it's containing beer.

Kodak film really doesn't like being roasted and then TBI to death from
all of the secondary/recoil photons of hard-X-rays. Kodak film as
unfiltered would also have recorded far more than the human eye can
see. Kodak film should have recorded a couple of other planets besides
Earth, and the Sirius star system is simply another given.
-
Brad Guth

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Moon Hoax people
    ... >we soft-landed a couple of Surveyors and the Russians ... moon, not then, not from anything Apollo, and not ever since. ... Kodak film really doesn't like being summarily roasted and then TBI to ... Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree far beyond; WAR is WAR, ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: A scientific approach to proving whether man landed on the moon - photogrammetric rectificat
    ... and of the physics and of the replicated science as ... reflected off such a physically dark moon and from having illuminated ... good physics and of science that's capable of being replicated, ... about Kodak film, and by physics and the repeated the science, how, by, ...
    (sci.space.history)