On Sep 19, 12:22 pm, Government Shill #2  wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:01:56 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sep 19, 11:49 am, Government Shill #2  wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:41:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth  >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Sep 19, 11:30 am, Government Shill #2  wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:25:43 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth 
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On Sep 19, 6:30 am, rich...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) wrote:
> >> >> >> In article ,
>
> >> >> >> BradGuth   wrote:
> >> >> >> >You obviously live in a pretend world, where governments and their
> >> >> >> >faith-based puppet masters do not continually lie their mutual cold-
> >> >> >> >war perpetrating butts off.
>
> >> >> >> No, but unlike you we aren't willing to believe anything so long as
> >> >> >> it obvious nonsense.
>
> >> >> >Now the regular laws of physics and best available science is "obvious
> >> >> >nonsense"?
>
> >> >> > ~ BG
>
> >> >> Only when interpreted by you ~ BG. You take science, run it through your
> >> >> internal processor and out comes "babble babble babble bable..."
>
> >> >How many tens of thousands of USSR government, military and civil
> >> >service jobs plus whatever employed and/or retirement benefits were on
> >> >the line at the end of WWII?
>
> >> Huh? See ~ BG? This is what I mean about the incomprehensibility of your
> >> posts. One post you are talking about physics, the next you are waffling
> >> about the USSR and WWII. I am not as crazy as you. These disparate items do
> >> not appear to go together. I'm sure that with the extra voices you have
> >> going in your head this conversation is seamless, but us sane people are
> >> missing half (or more) of your conversation.
>
> >> >Same question applied to the American side or point of view.
>
> >> I'm sure it does... What do your other voices tell you is the answer?
>
> >> --
> >> Shill #2
>
> >> Ears on the loon go round and round, round and round, round and round.> >>  theobviousgcashman
>
> >Evidence exclusion and perpetual denial has been mainstream status quo
> >for centuries, if not thousands of years.  How many thousand
> >documented examples of government and faith-based lies upon lies and
> >of subsequent consequences would you like to ponder?
>
> Babble babble babble babble babble babble babble babble babble babble
> babble babble babble babble babble babble. Babble  babble babble babble
> babble babble babble babble babble babble-babble babble babble babble
> babble babble babble babble babble babble babble babble?
>
> > ~ BradGuthBrad_Guth Brad.GuthBradGuth BG
>
> --
> ~ Shill #2 Shill_#2 Shill.#2 Shill#2 S2
>
> Ears on the loon go round and round, round and round, round and round...
>  theobviousgcashman


Here’s yet another good one, as recently published in Popular Science,
of where the DARPA mainstream is continually trying to snooker and
dumbfound its way along.

“To get the resolution to the point where one pixel was the size of a
foot print, Hubble would need a primary mirror of 2,400 feet in
diameter”

Every 5th graders knows or at least should know that the size of a
primary mirror has nothing to do with optical magnification or of its
pixel resolution.  GeoEye at a low orbit that’s easily doable, as such
could image our physically dark as coal Selene/moon as tight as an
Apollo moon-boot foot print per pixel.  The USAF has had better than
GeoEye optics as of decades ago.

  ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG

On Sep 22, 2:02 pm, BradGuth  wrote:
> On Sep 22, 10:10 am, "M104gal...@gmail.com" 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 11:37 am, BradGuth  wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 22, 7:07 am, "M104gal...@gmail.com" 
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 22, 12:48 am, BradGuth  wrote:
>
> > > > > On Sep 21, 2:09 pm, "M104gal...@gmail.com" 
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Sep 21, 2:43 pm, BradGuth  wrote:
>
> > > > > > > “What exactly is it about US and USSR government, military and of
> > > > > > > nearly countless civil service related job security with vast benefits
> > > > > > > that you and others of your mainstream status quo kind do not
> > > > > > > understand?”
> > > > > > >  ~ BG
>
> > > > > > As a former NASA employee who worked in the Office of Manned Space
> > > > > > Flight in the 60ties while attending GU law school, I can state
> > > > > > without reservation that you are a nutcase!
>
> > > > > No you can't.
>
> > > > > > Hundreds of thousands of government employees and contractors could
> > > > > > keep such a secret for 30 years with no leaks??
>
> > > > > What's to leak if you and 99.9% of all others didn't know squat to
> > > > > begin with?
>
> > > > > > You have no clue as to
> > > > > > how the federal government operates; "leaks" are a tactical, political
> > > > > > tool and Washington way of life frequently used for a variety of
> > > > > > nefarious objectives.
>
> > > > > Are you suggesting that our government doesn't create and publish all
> > > > > sorts of disinformation?
>
> > > > > >  Do you also believe the government is hiding little green men?? Alien
> > > > > > space ships??
>
> > > > > I believe our government lies and otherwise tells us only whatever
> > > > > they want to share.
>
> > > > > > BTW, I have no "job security or benefits" to worry about--I have
> > > > > > accumulated a rather large sum of money in savings over the last 40
> > > > > > years.
>
> > > > > Most all of which being of public loot, I suspect.
>
> > > > > Would you care to share a copy of your various nondisclosure policies
> > > > > that you and others had to sign in your own blood?
>
> > > > >  ~ BG
>
> > > > I had a top secret clearance and DID NOT sign a non-disclosure policy.
>
> > > > And you are suggesting that only .1% of the folks would have known the
> > > > lunar landings were fake?? You are totally clueless. Nobody can be
> > > > that dumb; you are either a troll having fun stirring people up or you
> > > > have a serious mental problem.
>
> > > > Top management of the manned lunar program during the mid-60ties were
> > > > virtually all outside private industry top managers from companies
> > > > such as IBM and Raytheon, not "government civil servants worried about
> > > > pensions". I know; I helped recruit them and devise ways to short-
> > > > circuit the burdensome civil service hiring procedures.
>
> > > > Do the names Brainard Holmes, Jim Turnock, Mike Yarymovich, etc, etc
> > > > mean anything to you.  Geez!
>
> > > No they do not.  Were they another part of DARPA?
>
> > > btw,  I didn't realize that so much of our moon had such a relatively
> > > smooth/clean surface albedo of greater than 0.65, whereas in many of
> > > those Apollo Kodak moments our Selene/moon surface looks as though its
> > > albedo was worth nearly 0.75, and xenon arc lamp spectrum illuminated
> > > at that.
>
> > > Too bad our physically dark as coal Selene/moon is otherwise so gamma
> > > saturated, as having been gamma bandpass imaged from our side of the
> > > magnetosphere.
>
> > >  ~ BG
>
> > No, not  DARPA. They were the top moon flight managers at NASA's OMSF
> > in the planning stages in the 60ties. Google them, you will learn
> > something.
>
> > Holmes came from Raytheon where he had directed the BMEWS project
> > ( the largest single technical project since Manhatten ), Turner from
> > IBM ( head of the Federal Systems Division ) and Yarymovich from DOD
> > ( the Air Force had a manned space flight program then ). Dr.
> > Yarymovich was a "boy wonder" in his late 20ties who is still active
> > in aerospace. NASA's OMSF was full of military officers on TDY in the
> > 60ties.
>
> Thanks much for that constructive and otherwise informative feedback.
>
> Now, how about that pesky moon albedo consideration, knowing that our
> spendy and intentionally made reflective Apollo moonsuits were of at
> least a 0.8 to 0.9 albedo as the given DR(dynamic range) point of
> reference (say 0.85), and don't forget each of those camera lens with
> their polarized optical element that by rights should have made those
> otherwise unfiltered Kodak moments of that lunar surface record as
> though darker, rather than lighter, and especially the case of their
> supposedly having that single spot source of illumination with loads
> of raw solar UV energy to deal with.
>
> What the hell went so off-world wrong with the physics of Kodak film,
> especially since there supposedly wasn't hardly any local, cosmic or
> nasty solar radiation factors to deal with?
>
>   ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG

Brad-

Don't mean to be insulting but you are just hopeless in your
continuing notion that this sort of "secret" could be held by
thousands, in and out of the US government for almost 40 years. Your
photography questions are irrelevant and easily explained by
knowledgeable folks if you want to listen.

Of course the government keeps some secrets but a moon landing
fabrication? Didn't happen friend; I was deeply involved which I'm
sure you will ignore and plow ahead since you seem to have lots of
time on your hands.

"Cover ups"?? Of course, they happen from time to time as with the
fairly recent shuttle tragedy where the NASA managers knew the shuttle
had a serious hole in it long before re-entry ( cost the Program
Manager and the NASA Administrator their jobs ) but that sort of
nonsense didn't happen with the moon LANDINGS ( plural ). There is a
LARGE amount of Apollo gear ( not just footprints ) left on the moon
for all to eventually see including a Christian cross Buzz Aldrin
left. I have personally seen several he took up and brought back--
which raised a big stink with our Jewish brothers at the time and Buzz
then denied it ever happened.

And I did have a typo above--it was "Jim Turnock" of IBM not "Jim
Turner".