On Apr 11, 3:37 pm, BradGuth  wrote:
> On Apr 11, 12:10 pm, Eric Chomko  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 10, 10:28 pm, BDK  wrote:
>
> > > In article <41d9e69e-bd36-4f7d-b4c1-
> > > ea2e7237b...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, pne.cho...@comcast.net
> > > says...
>
> > > > On Apr 9, 2:01 pm, BDK  wrote:
> > > > > In article <5e89257d-b19e-4195-8488-8d1a5e3ac6a2
> > > > > @b5g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
> > > > > > On Apr 8, 8:28 pm, BDK  wrote:
> > > > > > > In article <a437fe31-702e-4e3b-9375-0044922e6ec4
> > > > > > > @u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
> > > > > > > > On Apr 7, 11:01 pm, BDK  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article <7515955b-3a60-4de0-8ba8-db26330e26e6
> > > > > > > > > @s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Apr 5, 6:50 pm, Isa HardDik  wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I see you're STILL a fuckwit Brad!
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yes Hitler/Bush, we understand perfectly as to what your born-again
> > > > > > > > > > Zionist mindset of global domination is trying to say.
> > > > > > > > > > . - Brad Guth
>
> > > > > > > > > No Brad, that's just being sane, not a whackjob like you.
>
> > > > > > > > > BDK
>
> > > > > > > > In other words, you and others of your Third Reich kind still have
> > > > > > > > nothing objective as proof-positive, outside of your NASA/Apollo
> > > > > > > > Koran(Quran).
>
> > > > > > > > Of the JAXA/KAGUYA(Selene) or of anything of CNSA(Chang'e No.1) simply
> > > > > > > > has not generated one worthy frame of their quality video or of
> > > > > > > > whatever individual FOV as having our physically dark moon looking the
> > > > > > > > least bit if anything like those NASA/Apollo video/photographic
> > > > > > > > frames.  Clearly those JAXA/Selene images with having the foreground
> > > > > > > > of the physically dark moon along with mother Earth are of those
> > > > > > > > officially tampered with, as of prior to their being shared with the
> > > > > > > > public.  We're not even allowed to see the other 99.9% of such images,
> > > > > > > > even of those HDTV format with having their moon related color
> > > > > > > > saturations removed and/or having been sufficiently dynamic range
> > > > > > > > skewed in order to suit the ongoing demands of all that's NASA/Apollo.
>
> > > > > > > > By now, and at merely one frame per minute, how many tens of thousand
> > > > > > > > frames from their TC of 10 meter resolution obtained images are archived,
> > > > > > > > but not being shared.
>
> > > > > > > > The greater spectrum sensitivity and vastly improved dynamic range of
> > > > > > > > those JAXA/Selene cameras, along with their best available optics as
> > > > > > > > having been quality bandpass coated, is simply of further proof
> > > > > > > > positive that our NASA team of crack damage-control wizards are in
> > > > > > > > fact still hard at work, protecting each and every one of their LLPOF
> > > > > > > > butts for all it's worth.  Of their selective spectrum imaging is what
> > > > > > > > otherwise proves that our moon offers a wide range of mineralogy
> > > > > > > > considerations.  Yet where's the observationology worth of their
> > > > > > > > ongoing mission?
>
> > > > > > > > It looks promising that CNSA is going in for the kill, as soon enough
> > > > > > > > having to orbit at 50 km, of which should do nearly as well as the
> > > > > > > > JAXA/Selene mission at 100 km, if not slightly better.  It seems, of
> > > > > > > > their quality cameras and bandpass coated optics of this CNSA moon
> > > > > > > > research and mapping effort is also rather bluish or somewhat purple/
> > > > > > > > violet saturated from the very same secondary/recoil worth of the raw
> > > > > > > > solar UV energy that's unavoidably interacting with that sodium vapor
> > > > > > > > spewing moon of ours.
>
> > > > > > > > I tell you NASA certified wise-guys what;  why don't you pull out a
> > > > > > > > few dozen originals of them tens of thousands of official NASA/Apollo
> > > > > > > > Kodak moments, and let us see via digital scanning down to the grain
> > > > > > > > of that original film as to whatever truth there is to behold, of
> > > > > > > > their unfiltered images from orbit and from those surface EVAs that
> > > > > > > > made their moon look as though xenon arc lamp spectrum illuminated and
> > > > > > > > of that guano island albedo the likes of 0.65 ~0.75(75%).  Then we
> > > > > > > > each try to explain once again how the hell they managed as of
> > > > > > > > missions A11, A14 and A16 to have so entirely missed Venus.
> > > > > > > > . - Brad Guth
>
> > > > > > > Man, that was a big load of Guth rant!
>
> > > > > > > BDK
>
> > > > > > I've got more aspects of Guth rant worthy stuff to share, but then you
> > > > > > folks only seem to function on behalf of extracting those bits of out-
> > > > > > of-context stuff, so that you can pretend being so brown-nosed wise
> > > > > > and all-knowing without your ever having to disclose the actual truths
> > > > > > about much of anything.
> > > > > > . - Brad Guth
>
> > > > > Keep the Guthball stuff coming!!
>
> > > > Suppose the truth is in line with what the brown-nosers say? Would
> > > > Brad then simply lie? Evidence points to that he would!
>
> > > He's so far out there, it's hard to guess what he would do. His Venus
> > > fixation cracks me up.
>
> > Yes, it is sort of bizzare. I'd love for him to be a PI for an actual
> > mission.
>
> > He used to have this theory that Sirius and our sun co-orbit each
> > other every 105,000 years. I told him, like annual rings within trees,
> > we'd have geological evidence of a thermal cycle if Siruis ever got
> > that close.
>
> And, of how close would it take? (not very, especially if Sirius b had
> been going somewhat red giant)

Sirius B is a dwarf star! We know that!

>
> Considering the shock and awe power of Sirius a/b (possibly c),
> getting to within 0.86 ly would likely more than do the trick, not to
> mention the interactive Oort cloud worth of icy flak.

I wish I was as smart as you. As you obviously know that the
established science of Sirius' system and our sun are wrong. Yet I
still wait for your explanation as to how that science is wrong and
your's is right.

Eric