The most probable origin of NASA moon rocks [Archive]

Michael Petukhov

October 16th 03, 10:17 PM

(Mikhail Medved) wrote in message >...
> "Bill Silvey" > wrote in message >...
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous stupidity?
> >
> > I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who doesn't adhere to
> > the Soviet point of view
>
> Hey, my friend, don't bring political agenda to the argument about the
> facts: the Soviet Union never doubted the authenticity of American
> lunar expeditions.

indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
not broadcasted live on TV.

Michael

>
> > clouds your vision quite a bit, but I *do* find it
> > amazing that you can't accept scientific facts - that the United States sent
> > not one but three men to the moon, all of whom returned successfully,
> > several times. That your nation failed to do so has to be the only reason
> > for this continued petulence on your part.
> >
> > If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your own nation, good
> > lord no! Please, seek *reliable* mental health care somewhere in the west.

Michael Petukhov

October 16th 03, 10:18 PM

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> And of course you also believe the Soviets sent a robot, Lunakhod (sp?) to the
> moon and retrieved their own rocks?
>

Sure I do.

Michael

> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Michael Petukhov

October 16th 03, 10:25 PM

"Mark Test" > wrote in message >...
> And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????

Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US moon
landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module with
new portion of US heros.

Michael

>
>
> --
> "A liberal is a person who sees a fourteen-year-old girl performing live sex
> acts onstage and wonders if she's being paid the minimum wage."
> Irving Kristol
>
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> > http://www.meteorlab.com/METEORLAB2001dev/offering21o.htm
> > http://webs.wichita.edu/lapo/meteor/moometeo.htm
> > http://epsc.wustl.edu/admin/resources/meteorites/moon_meteorites_list.html
> > http://www.mars.li/labels.html
> > http://209.238.151.128/nwa482sale.htm
> > http://www.alaska.net/~meteor/achon.htm
> > ...

Snuffy Smith

October 16th 03, 11:05 PM

Are you onto this again? You are as bad as Stuart Wilkes.

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> http://www.meteorlab.com/METEORLAB2001dev/offering21o.htm
> http://webs.wichita.edu/lapo/meteor/moometeo.htm
> http://epsc.wustl.edu/admin/resources/meteorites/moon_meteorites_list.html
> http://www.mars.li/labels.html
> http://209.238.151.128/nwa482sale.htm
> http://www.alaska.net/~meteor/achon.htm
> ...

Keith Willshaw

October 16th 03, 11:43 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
>...
> > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
>
> Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US moon
> landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module with
> new portion of US heros.
>
> Michael
>

Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.

I think he's doing a good job :)

Keith

Jim Atkins

October 17th 03, 12:00 AM

Check out www.badastronomy.com for a concise and informed refutation of the
"We didn't go to the moon arguments"- Excellent.

--
Jim Atkins
Twentynine Palms CA USA

"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read."
- Groucho Marx

B2431

October 17th 03, 12:52 AM

>From: (Michael Petukhov)
>Date: 10/16/2003 4:18 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
(B2431) wrote in message
>...
>> And of course you also believe the Soviets sent a robot, Lunakhod (sp?) to
>the
>> moon and retrieved their own rocks?
>>
>
>Sure I do.
>
>Michael
>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>So, if the Soviets went to the moon albeit with a robot why do you refuse to
believe the U. S. went ther with men when both countries brought back rocks ?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Michael Petukhov

October 17th 03, 09:27 AM

Michael Petukhov

October 17th 03, 10:34 AM

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (Michael Petukhov)
> >Date: 10/16/2003 4:18 PM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> (B2431) wrote in message
> >...
> >> And of course you also believe the Soviets sent a robot, Lunakhod (sp?) to
> the
> >> moon and retrieved their own rocks?
> >>
> >
> >Sure I do.
> >
> >Michael
> >
> >> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
> >
> >So, if the Soviets went to the moon albeit with a robot why do you refuse to
> believe the U. S. went ther with men when both countries brought back rocks ?
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Sorry this mashine went crazy and send unfinished post by its own.
By the way Apollo computer had as much as 2kb of memory as and according
to NASA stalled was rebooted during first landing on the moon several
times.

Anyway I continue... as U. S. Air Force veteran can you imagine that
someone was capable to perform landing in a surface of space object
(never done before) 6 times in a row using completely new technology
without actual testing it? I cannot. Remember for instance how many
aviation pioneer died in much easy conditions of landing until they
learned how to do it properly. And it is not only one. There are tons
of strange NASA pictures and films, strange elements of LM design
like hatch opening inward cabine having not enough space for two
men in space suits etc. And also have you any idea about level of
space radiation above 1000km altitude particularly in van allen
belts they crossed without, according to NASA, any special
radiation protection. There is nice discussion on space radiation
based on recent NASA official data in:

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-03.htm

However here:

http://srag-nt.jsc.nasa.gov/FAQ/Index.html

NASA says that Organ Specific Exposure Limits for Astronauts
for 30 days are 25rem for blood forming organs,
100rem for eyes and 150rem for skin. Does it sounds
good for you? You can look at Britannica which says
that maximum permissible annual (!!!) dose for eyes
150 mSv (15rem) and for all others (e.g., red bone
marrow, breast, lung, gonads, skin, and extremities)
500 mSv (50rem). For acute exposures Britannica specifically
says: "Acute exposures in excess of 100 mSv (10 rem) are
justified only by life-saving actions in emergency
situations".

Actual dosage received in Apollo moon missions,
according to NASA were in the range of 0.5-1.4rem/mission
even less than that in some skylab (17.8 rem) and Shuttle
(7.8rem) which flew much below van-allen belts.

Also if actual space radiation dosage is so low why
NASA Organ Specific Exposure Limits for Astronauts are
so crazy high?

Michael

Michael Petukhov

October 17th 03, 10:49 AM

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
> >
> > Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US moon
> > landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module with
> > new portion of US heros.
> >
> > Michael
> >
>
> Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
> how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.

Hm... never minded about my credibility in this NG particularly
in your Keith eyes. It is you Keith who care so much about
my credibility every time I post something new on US moon
landing hoax.

>
> I think he's doing a good job :)
>

Sure I do a good job. now even you Keith know where
NASA took their 400+kg of moon rocks. Not bad indeed.

Enjoy

Michael

> Keith

Keith Willshaw

October 17th 03, 12:07 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> > >...
> > > > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
> > >
> > > Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US
moon
> > > landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module with
> > > new portion of US heros.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> >
> > Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
> > how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.
>
> Hm... never minded about my credibility in this NG particularly
> in your Keith eyes. It is you Keith who care so much about
> my credibility every time I post something new on US moon
> landing hoax.
>
>
> >
> > I think he's doing a good job :)
> >
>
> Sure I do a good job. now even you Keith know where
> NASA took their 400+kg of moon rocks. Not bad indeed.
>

You'll have to try harder than that Michael

The only way we know so called Lunar meteorites are
from the moon is by comparing them with the samples
retrieved. There are only two sources for such reference
samples, the Apollo Missions and the Soviet lander

So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
years later.

Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.

I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
can lead even intelligent people astary.

Keith

Stuart Wilkes

October 17th 03, 01:27 PM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote in message >...
> Are you onto this again? You are as bad as Stuart Wilkes.

You are a spiteful liar, Mark. I have never made any claim similar to
this.

But then, we all know that you have to run off and tell spiteful lies
about me when I've beaten you in argument.

Stuart Wilkes

Bill Silvey

October 17th 03, 02:03 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om

> Sorry this mashine went crazy and send unfinished post by its own.

PEBCAK

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

usertx

October 17th 03, 03:41 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...

>
> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
> not broadcasted live on TV.
>
> Michael

US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
remember.

Matt Wiser

October 17th 03, 06:07 PM

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote:
>
>"Michael Petukhov" >
>wrote in message
om...
>> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
>...
>> > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
>>
>> Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an
>important role in the US moon
>> landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered
>return module with
>> new portion of US heros.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
>how seriously to take him when he posts on other
>topics.
>
>I think he's doing a good job :)
>
>Keith
>
>
All Michael needs to do is ask Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11)
Al Bean (Apollo 12)
Ed Mitchell (Apollo 14) Dave Scott (Apollo 15) John Young and Charlie Duke
(Apollo 16), and Gene Cernan and Jack Schmitt (Apollo 17). Talk to the moonwalkers
and they won't give any conspiracy theorists the time of day. Once some nut
tried to get Buzz Aldrin to admit to a Apollo hoax and Buzz punched the guy's
lights out (this was in L.A. about six months ago), and the LA County DA
wouldn't prosecute. Seems the DA felt the kook got what he deserved. Add
the guys who were unfortunately stuck in lunar orbit in the CSM, and you've
got a bunch of astronauts who won't listen to any conspiracy idiocy.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

B2431

October 17th 03, 07:49 PM

>From: (

<snip>

>Anyway I continue... as U. S. Air Force veteran can you imagine that
>someone was capable to perform landing in a surface of space object
>(never done before) 6 times in a row using completely new technology
>without actual testing it?

Every system, including the lander, was extensively tested prior to the first
landing. Feel free to reasearch this. You will find examples of failures and
successes.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Michael Petukhov

October 17th 03, 09:21 PM

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > > om...
> > > > "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > > > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
> > > >
> > > > Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US
> moon
> > > > landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module with
> > > > new portion of US heros.
> > > >
> > > > Michael
> > > >
> > >
> > > Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
> > > how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.
> >
> > Hm... never minded about my credibility in this NG particularly
> > in your Keith eyes. It is you Keith who care so much about
> > my credibility every time I post something new on US moon
> > landing hoax.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I think he's doing a good job :)
> > >
> >
> > Sure I do a good job. now even you Keith know where
> > NASA took their 400+kg of moon rocks. Not bad indeed.
> >
>
> You'll have to try harder than that Michael
>
> The only way we know so called Lunar meteorites are
> from the moon is by comparing them with the samples
> retrieved.
> There are only two sources for such reference
> samples, the Apollo Missions and the Soviet lander
>

Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
Sun and only after that was found on Earth. As for the Lunar
materials... well a standard marker composition can be easily
measured by an automatical probe and results send here by radio.
They did send automatical probes (Surveyors) to moon prior
"manned missions", did'n they? Moreover it was easy to guess
about some picularities of moon rocks, like extreme lack of
water or free oxigen and certain minerals which are known to
originate from nonexistent on moon processes. Given big enough
meteorite collection it is easy to design such a marker set.
Just a piece of cake, Keith!

by the way Keith so far NASA did not claim to land man on
Mars or in asteroid belt rocks, but meteorites from all
these places are easy to recognize and of course is on
sell with certificates as well.

> So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
> by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
> the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
> Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
> years later.

"If" is not a proper wording here, keith. They knew for sure.

>
> Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
> of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.

why? somebody was noticing. As far as I know so far no
lunar meteorites were officially found in US soil
while it is estimated to be around of a few % of all
meteorites found today. Don't you think it is a bit of
strange give US with US huge deserts? Although of course
you don't. particularly given that NASA was known to buy
lots of them from privat persons all over the world.

>
> I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
> can lead even intelligent people astary.

Never say never, Keith. European SMART-1 is on the way to moon
and japanese Lunar-A and Selene are getting ready to follow soon.
They can send us very unexpected pictures of Apollo landing sites.
US privat company's "TrailBlazer" can do in principle but who in
a good mind can trust US data? Not me at least.

Michael

>
> Keith

Orval Fairbairn

October 17th 03, 09:33 PM

Orval Fairbairn

October 17th 03, 09:38 PM

In article >,
(Michael Petukhov) wrote:

> (B2431) wrote in message
> >...
> > >From: (Michael Petukhov)
> > >Date: 10/16/2003 4:18 PM Central Daylight Time
> > >Message-id: >
> > >
> > (B2431) wrote in message
> > >...
> > >> And of course you also believe the Soviets sent a robot, Lunakhod (sp?)
> > >> to
> > the
> > >> moon and retrieved their own rocks?
> > >>
> > >
> > >Sure I do.
> > >
> > >Michael
> > >
> > >> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
> > >
> > >So, if the Soviets went to the moon albeit with a robot why do you refuse
> > >to
> > believe the U. S. went ther with men when both countries brought back rocks
> > ?
> >
> > Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
> Sorry this mashine went crazy and send unfinished post by its own.
> By the way Apollo computer had as much as 2kb of memory as and according
> to NASA stalled was rebooted during first landing on the moon several
> times.

There was a memory rationing on programs/data that went into the IU. I
wrote one of the algorithms for guidance.

> Anyway I continue... as U. S. Air Force veteran can you imagine that
> someone was capable to perform landing in a surface of space object
> (never done before) 6 times in a row using completely new technology
> without actual testing it? I cannot. Remember for instance how many
> aviation pioneer died in much easy conditions of landing until they
> learned how to do it properly. And it is not only one. There are tons
> of strange NASA pictures and films, strange elements of LM design
> like hatch opening inward cabine having not enough space for two
> men in space suits etc. And also have you any idea about level of
> space radiation above 1000km altitude particularly in van allen
> belts they crossed without, according to NASA, any special
> radiation protection. There is nice discussion on space radiation
> based on recent NASA official data in:

There was a lot of realistic simulator action, including flying
testbeds, that trained the crews. Rememnber, also, that the astronauts
were also top-grade test pilots, who knew flying things inside and out.

> http://guthvenus.tripod.com/vl2-iss-03.htm
>
> However here:
>
> http://srag-nt.jsc.nasa.gov/FAQ/Index.html
>
> NASA says that Organ Specific Exposure Limits for Astronauts
> for 30 days are 25rem for blood forming organs,
> 100rem for eyes and 150rem for skin. Does it sounds
> good for you? You can look at Britannica which says
> that maximum permissible annual (!!!) dose for eyes
> 150 mSv (15rem) and for all others (e.g., red bone
> marrow, breast, lung, gonads, skin, and extremities)
> 500 mSv (50rem). For acute exposures Britannica specifically
> says: "Acute exposures in excess of 100 mSv (10 rem) are
> justified only by life-saving actions in emergency
> situations".
>
> Actual dosage received in Apollo moon missions,
> according to NASA were in the range of 0.5-1.4rem/mission
> even less than that in some skylab (17.8 rem) and Shuttle
> (7.8rem) which flew much below van-allen belts.
>
> Also if actual space radiation dosage is so low why
> NASA Organ Specific Exposure Limits for Astronauts are
> so crazy high?

The CSM had radiation protection built in. There indeed were limits on
the total time the crew spent outside the CSM.

Matt Wiser

October 18th 03, 12:09 AM

(B2431) wrote:
>>From: (
>
><snip>
>
>>Anyway I continue... as U. S. Air Force veteran
>can you imagine that
>>someone was capable to perform landing in a
>surface of space object
>>(never done before) 6 times in a row using
>completely new technology
>>without actual testing it?
>
>Every system, including the lander, was extensively
>tested prior to the first
>landing. Feel free to reasearch this. You will
>find examples of failures and
>successes.
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
The two inflight tests of the LM were on Apollo 9 (earth orbit), and Apollo
10 (lunar orbit and approach) LM on 10 went to within 50K feet of Lunar surface.
Apollo 10 certified the LM for 11's landing mission.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Alan Minyard

October 18th 03, 12:09 AM

On 17 Oct 2003 18:49:32 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>From: (
>
><snip>
>
>>Anyway I continue... as U. S. Air Force veteran can you imagine that
>>someone was capable to perform landing in a surface of space object
>>(never done before) 6 times in a row using completely new technology
>>without actual testing it?
>
>Every system, including the lander, was extensively tested prior to the first
>landing. Feel free to reasearch this. You will find examples of failures and
>successes.
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"

Al Minyard

Mary Shafer

October 18th 03, 01:43 AM

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:09:44 -0500, Alan Minyard
> wrote:

> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"

Nope. The LLRV/LLTVs balanced out 5/6ths of the weight, so they were
operating at lunar gravity, not zero g. They could simulate the LM's
engines, too, so the landings could be simulated, and there were, no
doubt, times when the normal acceleration was zero g, not 1/6th g.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

B2431

October 18th 03, 01:55 AM

>From: Alan Minyard a

>NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
>It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
>the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
>
>Al Minyard
>
I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one just
before it crashed.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 02:10 AM

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 02:10 AM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
...
> Bill Silvey wrote:
>
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous stupidity?
> >
> > I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who doesn't
adhere to
> > the Soviet point of view clouds your vision quite a bit, but I *do* find
it
> > amazing that you can't accept scientific facts - that the United States
sent
> > not one but three men to the moon, all of whom returned successfully,
> > several times. That your nation failed to do so has to be the only
reason
> > for this continued petulence on your part.
> >
> > If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your own nation,
good
> > lord no! Please, seek *reliable* mental health care somewhere in the
west.
> >
> Please, Mr. Silvey.
> Why would you want to invite Mr. Petukhov out of Russia.
> They have especially well developed psychiatric facilities in Russia,
> left over from the soviet system.
> --
> Rostyk
>

Yeah but Sticky, you know perfectly well...insane people were not kept in
Russian whacko bins. They were for housing handicapped and the political
disbelievers.

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 02:10 AM

"D.K." > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
> >
> >"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> >>
> >> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
> >> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
> >> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
> >> not broadcasted live on TV.
> >>
> >> Michael
> >
> >US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
> >remember.
>
> Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
>
> What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
> (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>
>

Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.

>
>
>
>
>

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 02:10 AM

Michael, you have been smoking that Afghani hashish again!

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> > >...
> > > > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > > > om...
> > > > > "Mark Test" > wrote in message
> > >...
> > > > > > And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
> > > > >
> > > > > Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in the US
> > moon
> > > > > landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return module
with
> > > > > new portion of US heros.
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
> > > > how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.
> > >
> > > Hm... never minded about my credibility in this NG particularly
> > > in your Keith eyes. It is you Keith who care so much about
> > > my credibility every time I post something new on US moon
> > > landing hoax.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think he's doing a good job :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sure I do a good job. now even you Keith know where
> > > NASA took their 400+kg of moon rocks. Not bad indeed.
> > >
> >
> > You'll have to try harder than that Michael
> >
> > The only way we know so called Lunar meteorites are
> > from the moon is by comparing them with the samples
> > retrieved.
> > There are only two sources for such reference
> > samples, the Apollo Missions and the Soviet lander
> >
>
> Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
> Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
> on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
> its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
> Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
> Sun and only after that was found on Earth. As for the Lunar
> materials... well a standard marker composition can be easily
> measured by an automatical probe and results send here by radio.
> They did send automatical probes (Surveyors) to moon prior
> "manned missions", did'n they? Moreover it was easy to guess
> about some picularities of moon rocks, like extreme lack of
> water or free oxigen and certain minerals which are known to
> originate from nonexistent on moon processes. Given big enough
> meteorite collection it is easy to design such a marker set.
> Just a piece of cake, Keith!
>
> by the way Keith so far NASA did not claim to land man on
> Mars or in asteroid belt rocks, but meteorites from all
> these places are easy to recognize and of course is on
> sell with certificates as well.
>
> > So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
> > by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
> > the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
> > Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
> > years later.
>
> "If" is not a proper wording here, keith. They knew for sure.
>
> >
> > Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
> > of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.
>
> why? somebody was noticing. As far as I know so far no
> lunar meteorites were officially found in US soil
> while it is estimated to be around of a few % of all
> meteorites found today. Don't you think it is a bit of
> strange give US with US huge deserts? Although of course
> you don't. particularly given that NASA was known to buy
> lots of them from privat persons all over the world.
>
>
> >
> > I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
> > can lead even intelligent people astary.
>
> Never say never, Keith. European SMART-1 is on the way to moon
> and japanese Lunar-A and Selene are getting ready to follow soon.
> They can send us very unexpected pictures of Apollo landing sites.
> US privat company's "TrailBlazer" can do in principle but who in
> a good mind can trust US data? Not me at least.
>
> Michael
>
> >
> > Keith

Bob McKellar

October 18th 03, 02:42 AM

B2431 wrote:

> >From: Alan Minyard a
>
> >NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
> >It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
> >the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
> >
> >Al Minyard
> >
> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one just
> before it crashed.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Fella name of Armstrong.

Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.

Wonder whatever happened to him........

Bob McKellar

Bill Silvey

October 18th 03, 02:54 AM

"Bob McKellar" > wrote in message

> B2431 wrote:
>
>>> From: Alan Minyard a
>>
>>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
>>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
>>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
>>>
>>> Al Minyard
>>>
>> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one
>> just before it crashed.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Fella name of Armstrong.
>
> Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.
>
> Wonder whatever happened to him........
>
> Bob McKellar

Went on to do some flight testing for equipment with some alphabet-soup
organization down on the sleepy part of Florida's east coast, IIRC. Some
government branch or something.

It's rumored after that one incident that only two other guys in the whole
place would fly with him.

Sad, really.

;-)

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

[email protected]

October 18th 03, 03:18 AM

"Bill Silvey" > wrote:

>"Bob McKellar" > wrote in message

>> B2431 wrote:
>>
>>>> From: Alan Minyard a
>>>
>>>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
>>>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
>>>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
>>>>
>>>> Al Minyard
>>>>
>>> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one
>>> just before it crashed.
>>>
>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>> Fella name of Armstrong.
>>
>> Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.
>>
>> Wonder whatever happened to him........
>>
>> Bob McKellar
>
>Went on to do some flight testing for equipment with some alphabet-soup
>organization down on the sleepy part of Florida's east coast, IIRC. Some
>government branch or something.
>
>It's rumored after that one incident that only two other guys in the whole
>place would fly with him.
>
>Sad, really.
>
>
>
>
>;-)

Sounds familiar...isn't he the guy who got a little off course
and landed his craft on some little used spot something like a
quarter of a million miles from home?...I hear that he got it
back home ok though, lucky for him. :)
--

-Gord.

David Windhorst

October 18th 03, 03:37 AM

Snuffy Smith wrote:

>snip
>
>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>

Uh -- don't bet on that, Sparky.

B2431

October 18th 03, 03:45 AM

>From: "Snuffy Smith"

<snip>

>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>

Want to place a bet on that?
She was Gargarin's wife. Oh, and she was the first girl cosmonaut.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Gordon

October 18th 03, 04:12 AM

>>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.

The first true space passenger, and a woman besides.

As for the publicity that early Soviet launches recieved, I have two framed
newspapers over my desk - one is of Yuri's flight, the other is Carpenter's
first flight. Coverage on both events is remarkably similar, and comprise the
entire front page of the Houston newspapers. Folks in the US knew all about
Sputnik and Gagarin - those two flights were always discussed in the context of
the flashpoint for the space race. I have a pretty vivid memory of a talking
head explaining the difference between models of the Saturn V and Soviet launch
vehicles.

v/r
Gordon
PS, whoever assumed no one north of the Mason/Dixon would know who Tereshkova
was needs to remember that it was a space *race*, and Americans sure as heck
knew who else was in the race. As for painting all Americans with the
broad-brush term of "Yankee", well, that's just plain quaint.

Fred J. McCall

October 18th 03, 05:22 AM

(D.K.) wrote:

:What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
:(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?

Talked about? Sure. Popularized? Not so much.

It didn't help that the Russians didn't allow TV broadcasts for a lot
of this stuff out of fear that something might go wrong.

--
"The odds get even - You blame the game.
The odds get even - The stakes are the same.
You bet your life."
-- "You Bet Your Life", Rush

Orval Fairbairn

October 18th 03, 05:28 AM

In article >,
(B2431) wrote:

> >From: "Snuffy Smith"
>
> <snip>
>
> >Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
> >but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
> >
>
> Want to place a bet on that?
> She was Gargarin's wife. Oh, and she was the first girl cosmonaut.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Speaking of Gagarin, it is rumored that he really wasn't killed in an
accident flying a MiG-15, but was murdered for straying away from the
official Party line. Apparently, he came back from space and realized
that the whole Soviet apparatus was nothing but a Potemkin village and
wasn't afraid to say so.

Fred J. McCall

October 18th 03, 05:30 AM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:

:"D.K." > wrote in message
...
:>
:> What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
:> (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
:
:Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
:but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.

Wrong.

--
"Adrenaline is like exercise, but without the excessive gym fees."
-- Professor Walsh, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"

Garrison Hilliard

October 18th 03, 05:34 AM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:
>Michael, you have been smoking that Afghani hashish again!

Michael desperately needs to meet Buzz Aldrin's fist!

p.s. Seventy-two years old and still able to clock the lunatic... GO BUZZ!

Garrison Hilliard

October 18th 03, 05:41 AM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:
>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.

The Soviet space babe, right? So you're a liar... although one of high principles.

Steve Hix

October 18th 03, 05:48 AM

In article >,
"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:

> "D.K." > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
> > >
> > >"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > >
> > >>
> > >> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
> > >> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
> > >> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
> > >> not broadcasted live on TV.
> > >>
> > >> Michael
> > >
> > >US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
> > >remember.
> >
> > Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
> >
> > What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
> > (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?

Quite widely, at least for my cohort; I was born in 1950, and was quite
space-mad up through the mid-1970s, at least. As were most of the boys,
and some of the girls, that I went to school with.

> Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
> but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.

Maybe there's something wrong with kids from New England, but every kid
my age certainly knew who Valentina Tereshkova, as well as Gagarin,
Titov, and the rest of the early crowd.

Pete

October 18th 03, 06:09 AM

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> "Bill Silvey" > wrote:
>
> >"Bob McKellar" > wrote in message
>
> >> B2431 wrote:
> >>
> >>>> From: Alan Minyard a
> >>>
> >>>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
> >>>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
> >>>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
> >>>>
> >>>> Al Minyard
> >>>>
> >>> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one
> >>> just before it crashed.
> >>>
> >>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >>
> >> Fella name of Armstrong.
> >>
> >> Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.
> >>
> >> Wonder whatever happened to him........
> >>
> >> Bob McKellar
> >
> >Went on to do some flight testing for equipment with some alphabet-soup
> >organization down on the sleepy part of Florida's east coast, IIRC. Some
> >government branch or something.
> >
> >It's rumored after that one incident that only two other guys in the
whole
> >place would fly with him.
> >
> >Sad, really.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >;-)
>
>
> Sounds familiar...isn't he the guy who got a little off course
> and landed his craft on some little used spot something like a
> quarter of a million miles from home?...I hear that he got it
> back home ok though, lucky for him. :)

I think he even got out to ask for directions, but couldn't find anyone.

I guess they just kind of aimed in the general direction of home, and found
it.

Pete

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 18th 03, 06:10 AM

Snuffy Smith wrote:

> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Bill Silvey wrote:
>>
>>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous stupidity?
>>>
>>> I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who doesn't
>>> adhere to the Soviet point of view clouds your vision quite a bit,
>>> but I *do* find itamazing that you can't accept scientific facts -
>>> that the United States sent not one but three men to the moon,
>>> all of whom returned successfully, several times.
>>> That your nation failed to do so has to be the only reason
>>> for this continued petulence on your part.
>>>
>>> If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your
>>> own nation, good lord no!
>>> Please, seek *reliable* mental health care somewhere in the west.
>
>>Please, Mr. Silvey.
>>Why would you want to invite Mr. Petukhov out of Russia.
>>They have especially well developed psychiatric facilities in Russia,
>>left over from the soviet system.
>>--
>>Rostyk
>
> Yeah but Sticky, you know perfectly well...insane people were not
> kept in Russian whacko bins. They were for housing handicapped
> and the political disbelievers.
>
Oh sure. But the inmates were still given psychiatric treatments.
By real russian psychiatrists.
And I'd rather see those good doctors continue to practice
in russia, rather than emigrate and find work elsewhere e.g.
in Israel or for the US government.

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 18th 03, 06:18 AM

Snuffy Smith wrote:

> "D.K." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
>>
>>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
>>>
>>>>indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
>>>>lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
>>>>perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
>>>>not broadcasted live on TV.
>>>>
>>>>Michael
>>>
>>>US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR!
>>>You are just too young to remember.
>>
>>Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
>>
>>What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
>>(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>
> Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
> but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>
Well not you obviously!
Though I don't remember Leonov.

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 12:53 PM

"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
...
> (D.K.) wrote:
>
> :What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
> :(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>
> Talked about? Sure. Popularized? Not so much.
>
> It didn't help that the Russians didn't allow TV broadcasts for a lot
> of this stuff out of fear that something might go wrong.
>

Ever notice any of the parallels between current day China and the old
Soviet Union?

That flu virus that started in China was known for months. The Chinese tried
to black out the world on what was going on. People in China didn't even
know there was a deadly flu bug swirling all around them.

Now we see that they backed out on showing their space launch live.

Then you have all that Falun Gong and Tibet persecution stuff.

The question is how long before China implodes like the Soviet Union????

>
> --
> "The odds get even - You blame the game.
> The odds get even - The stakes are the same.
> You bet your life."
> -- "You Bet Your Life", Rush

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 12:59 PM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
...
> Snuffy Smith wrote:
>
> > "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Bill Silvey wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om
> >>>
> >>><snip>
> >>>
> >>>Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous stupidity?
> >>>
> >>> I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who doesn't
> >>> adhere to the Soviet point of view clouds your vision quite a bit,
> >>> but I *do* find itamazing that you can't accept scientific facts -
> >>> that the United States sent not one but three men to the moon,
> >>> all of whom returned successfully, several times.
> >>> That your nation failed to do so has to be the only reason
> >>> for this continued petulence on your part.
> >>>
> >>> If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your
> >>> own nation, good lord no!
> >>> Please, seek *reliable* mental health care somewhere in the west.
> >
> >>Please, Mr. Silvey.
> >>Why would you want to invite Mr. Petukhov out of Russia.
> >>They have especially well developed psychiatric facilities in Russia,
> >>left over from the soviet system.
> >>--
> >>Rostyk
> >
> > Yeah but Sticky, you know perfectly well...insane people were not
> > kept in Russian whacko bins. They were for housing handicapped
> > and the political disbelievers.
> >
> Oh sure. But the inmates were still given psychiatric treatments.
> By real russian psychiatrists.
> And I'd rather see those good doctors continue to practice
> in russia, rather than emigrate and find work elsewhere e.g.
> in Israel or for the US government.
>

It may not be such a terrible thing...I mean the South Americans
(Brazilians?) didn't seem to mind all that much when Mengele came to town.

There's a lot of news going around lately about Siamese twins being
successfully separated. If Mengele had continued his practice, by now he
could have gotten pretty good at sewing twins together. He could then refer
them to doctors who would take them apart and they would later refer them
back to Mengele. It would have been a been windfall for the medical
profession.

Keith Willshaw

October 18th 03, 02:35 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> >
>
> Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
> Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
> on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
> its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
> Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
> Sun and only after that was found on Earth.

Spectroscopy will tell you what elements are present and in what
proportions but can tell you nothing about the structure of the
objects themselves. Diamond, graphite and hard coal all show
up as carbon in a spctroscopic analysis

But you know this Michael so you seem to be being somewhat
less than wholly truthful.

> As for the Lunar
> materials... well a standard marker composition can be easily
> measured by an automatical probe and results send here by radio.
> They did send automatical probes (Surveyors) to moon prior
> "manned missions", did'n they? Moreover it was easy to guess
> about some picularities of moon rocks, like extreme lack of
> water or free oxigen and certain minerals which are known to
> originate from nonexistent on moon processes. Given big enough
> meteorite collection it is easy to design such a marker set.
> Just a piece of cake, Keith!
>

Nonsense Michael, this tells you nothing about the structure
of the rocks, the density, crystalline structure, evidence of
folding and distribution. All vital to the geologist.

As an example the microscopic pitting and high helium 3
surface content of the surface layer on rocks recovere by
both the soviet and lunar sampling efforts was unexpected.
These are believed to be caused by micrometeoroid impacts
and interaction with the solar wind are unque to those samples
retrieved from the moon as the meteorites of lunar origin have
the surface burned away on re-entry

> by the way Keith so far NASA did not claim to land man on
> Mars or in asteroid belt rocks, but meteorites from all
> these places are easy to recognize and of course is on
> sell with certificates as well.
>

Because since the 1960's much more advanced automated
landers have been available.

> > So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
> > by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
> > the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
> > Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
> > years later.
>
> "If" is not a proper wording here, keith. They knew for sure.
>

Hardly Michael , the surveyor probes which landed on the
moon in the late 60's had primitive sampling mechanisms
which were pretty much limited to performing soil
mechanics tests. They were sent to check that the surface
was hard enough to land on.

The experiments performed were

1) Alpha Scattering Surface analyser used to determine the
abundances of the major elements of the lunar surface with
the important exceptions of hydrogen, helium, and lithium

2) Surface bearing tests using strain gauges , accelerometers
and rate gyros

I find it comical that you claim advanced automatic lab facilities
capable of a full analysis were available when in you earlier
post you were stressing how primitive the available computers
were.

> >
> > Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
> > of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.
>
> why? somebody was noticing. As far as I know so far no
> lunar meteorites were officially found in US soil
> while it is estimated to be around of a few % of all
> meteorites found today. Don't you think it is a bit of
> strange give US with US huge deserts?

Since nobody knew what a lunar meteorite looked like
until after Apollo 11 returned its precisely what any
sane person would expect.

> Although of course
> you don't. particularly given that NASA was known to buy
> lots of them from privat persons all over the world.
>
>
> >
> > I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
> > can lead even intelligent people astary.
>
> Never say never, Keith. European SMART-1 is on the way to moon
> and japanese Lunar-A and Selene are getting ready to follow soon.
> They can send us very unexpected pictures of Apollo landing sites.
> US privat company's "TrailBlazer" can do in principle but who in
> a good mind can trust US data? Not me at least.
>

Doubtless you'll use some other excuse when pictures of the
Apollo Landers are beamed back.

Keith

Keith Willshaw

October 18th 03, 02:39 PM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
.. .
> Snuffy Smith wrote:
>

> Well not you obviously!
> Though I don't remember Leonov.
>

On the contrary his spacewalk was covered on tv
at prime time and the Soyuz Apollo mission was
top TV viewing.

Keith

Peter Skelton

October 18th 03, 02:44 PM

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 00:36:51 GMT,
(D.K.) wrote:

>In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
>>
>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
>>
>>>
>>> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
>>> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
>>> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
>>> not broadcasted live on TV.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>>US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
>>remember.
>
>Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
>
>What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
>(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>
Popularized no, reported yes.

Peter Skelton

Duke of URL

October 18th 03, 04:25 PM

"D.K." > wrote in message

> In article >, "usertx" >
>> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>> om...
>>
>>> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said
>>> these lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact.
>>> USSR was perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon
>>> landings" were not broadcasted live on TV.
>>
>> US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young
>> to remember.
>
> Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
> What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
> (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?

I don't think "popularized" is the right word. Right from the first
one (I remember going out in the yard at night with my mother to spot
Sputnik twinkling over), it shocked the Hell out of Americans. We just
couldn't understand how those primitive, incompetent Russkis could
accomplish this! Of course, now we know they did it by spying and
stealing Western scientific info/techniques/equipment, but still...

Duke of URL

October 18th 03, 04:26 PM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote in message
. net

> Michael, you have been smoking that Afghani hashish again!
>
I think he's moved on to massive doses of LSD-25.
>
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
>> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in
>> message
> >...
>>> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>>> om...
>>>> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in
>>>> message
>>> >...
>>>>> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>>>>> om...
>>>>>> "Mark Test" > wrote in message
>>> >...
>>>>>>> And this has what to do with sci.military.naval????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lots. For instance US NAVY was playing an important role in
>>>>>> the US
>>> moon
>>>>>> landing hoax. After all it was NAVY who recovered return
>>>>>> module with new portion of US heros.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Micheal just wants to establish his credibility so we all know
>>>>> how seriously to take him when he posts on other topics.
>>>>
>>>> Hm... never minded about my credibility in this NG particularly
>>>> in your Keith eyes. It is you Keith who care so much about
>>>> my credibility every time I post something new on US moon
>>>> landing hoax.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think he's doing a good job :)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure I do a good job. now even you Keith know where
>>>> NASA took their 400+kg of moon rocks. Not bad indeed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You'll have to try harder than that Michael
>>>
>>> The only way we know so called Lunar meteorites are
>>> from the moon is by comparing them with the samples
>>> retrieved.
>>> There are only two sources for such reference
>>> samples, the Apollo Missions and the Soviet lander
>>>
>>
>> Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
>> Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
>> on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
>> its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
>> Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
>> Sun and only after that was found on Earth. As for the Lunar
>> materials... well a standard marker composition can be easily
>> measured by an automatical probe and results send here by radio.
>> They did send automatical probes (Surveyors) to moon prior
>> "manned missions", did'n they? Moreover it was easy to guess
>> about some picularities of moon rocks, like extreme lack of
>> water or free oxigen and certain minerals which are known to
>> originate from nonexistent on moon processes. Given big enough
>> meteorite collection it is easy to design such a marker set.
>> Just a piece of cake, Keith!
>>
>> by the way Keith so far NASA did not claim to land man on
>> Mars or in asteroid belt rocks, but meteorites from all
>> these places are easy to recognize and of course is on
>> sell with certificates as well.
>>
>>> So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
>>> by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
>>> the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
>>> Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
>>> years later.
>>
>> "If" is not a proper wording here, keith. They knew for sure.
>>
>>>
>>> Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
>>> of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.
>>
>> why? somebody was noticing. As far as I know so far no
>> lunar meteorites were officially found in US soil
>> while it is estimated to be around of a few % of all
>> meteorites found today. Don't you think it is a bit of
>> strange give US with US huge deserts? Although of course
>> you don't. particularly given that NASA was known to buy
>> lots of them from privat persons all over the world.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
>>> can lead even intelligent people astary.
>>
>> Never say never, Keith. European SMART-1 is on the way to moon
>> and japanese Lunar-A and Selene are getting ready to follow soon.
>> They can send us very unexpected pictures of Apollo landing sites.
>> US privat company's "TrailBlazer" can do in principle but who in
>> a good mind can trust US data? Not me at least.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>>
>>> Keith

Duke of URL

October 18th 03, 04:30 PM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote in message
. net
> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Bill Silvey wrote:
>>> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>>> om
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous
>>> stupidity?
>>> I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who
>>> doesn't adhere to the Soviet point of view clouds your vision
>>> quite a bit, but I *do* find it amazing that you can't accept
>>> scientific facts - that the United States sent not one but three
>>> men to the moon, all of whom returned successfully, several
>>> times. That your nation failed to do so has to be the only
>>> reason for this continued petulence on your part.
>>> If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your own
>>> nation, good lord no! Please, seek *reliable* mental health care
>>> somewhere in the west.
>>>
>> Please, Mr. Silvey.
>> Why would you want to invite Mr. Petukhov out of Russia.
>> They have especially well developed psychiatric facilities in
>> Russia, left over from the soviet system.
>
> Yeah but Sticky, you know perfectly well...insane people were not
> kept in Russian whacko bins. They were for housing handicapped and
> the political disbelievers.

Not exclusively. And shurley they have at least *one* comfortable,
padded-wall room available for Mikey. Russians are an extremely
emotional, sympathetic people - I think they'd take pity on such a
terrible case of derangement and put him away where he can't hurt
himself.

Matt Wiser

October 18th 03, 04:34 PM

"Garrison Hilliard" > wrote:
>
>"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:
>>Michael, you have been smoking that Afghani
>hashish again!
>
>Michael desperately needs to meet Buzz Aldrin's
>fist!
>
>
>p.s. Seventy-two years old and still able to
>clock the lunatic... GO BUZZ!
That's just what Buzz did a few months ago in L.A.; and the LA District
Attorney didn't get involved. When astronauts and conspiracy theorists get
together, the astronauts win. Now if we could get Michael and Buzz, Al Bean,
Dave Scott, and Gene Cernan all together in the same room....

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Duke of URL

October 18th 03, 04:37 PM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote in message
. net

> The question is how long before China implodes like the Soviet
> Union????

Ahem. <putting on Historian Hat - the one I earned specializing in
Governmental Evolution> Thirty years ago, I loudly predicted that the
Communist Empire in China would last no more than 100 years. And that
after about 50 years, the nature of their new Imperial Class would
change.
This has been the record of EVERY group that took over China over the
millenia - HUGE changes *at first*, then gradually absorbed by the
inherent Chinese inertia. The current Chinese Empire is, so far,
cooperating with me - it's not even vaguely "Communist" any longer,
it's rapidly changing into a traditional Fascist state. The biggest
indicator of that is the way the PLA/PLAN are spending far more
manpower & resources & time on managing/developing their commercial
enterprises than they are on "military" affairs.

Fred J. McCall

October 18th 03, 04:46 PM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:

:"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
.. .
:> (D.K.) wrote:
:>
:> :What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
:> :(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
:>
:> Talked about? Sure. Popularized? Not so much.
:>
:> It didn't help that the Russians didn't allow TV broadcasts for a lot
:> of this stuff out of fear that something might go wrong.
:
:Ever notice any of the parallels between current day China and the old
:Soviet Union?

Not really, no.

:That flu virus that started in China was known for months. The Chinese tried
:to black out the world on what was going on. People in China didn't even
:know there was a deadly flu bug swirling all around them.

I assume you're referring to SARS? Not a "flu bug". China actually
had public thermometers to check people on the street. You seem a bit
misinformed here.

:Now we see that they backed out on showing their space launch live.

This is typical of any semi-dictatorship.

:Then you have all that Falun Gong and Tibet persecution stuff.

Again, typical of any semi-dictatorship.

:The question is how long before China implodes like the Soviet Union????

It won't happen. China has been much more economically flexible than
the old Soviet Union was.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw

Alan Minyard

October 18th 03, 06:37 PM

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 00:36:51 GMT, (D.K.)
wrote:

>In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
>>
>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
>>
>>>
>>> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
>>> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
>>> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
>>> not broadcasted live on TV.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>>US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
>>remember.
>
>Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
>
>What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
>(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>
>
They were widely reported in all of the media. Of course, live
coverage was impossible due to Soviet secrecy.

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard

October 18th 03, 06:37 PM

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:43:18 -0700, Mary Shafer >
wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:09:44 -0500, Alan Minyard
> wrote:
>
>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers controls.
>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
>
>Nope. The LLRV/LLTVs balanced out 5/6ths of the weight, so they were
>operating at lunar gravity, not zero g. They could simulate the LM's
>engines, too, so the landings could be simulated, and there were, no
>doubt, times when the normal acceleration was zero g, not 1/6th g.
>
>Mary

Thanks, you are, of course, correct. For some reason "zero G" was
stuck in my brain. I could blame my recent stroke :-)

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard

October 18th 03, 06:37 PM

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:10:46 GMT, "Snuffy Smith"
> wrote:

>
>"D.K." > wrote in message
...
>> In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
>> >
>> >"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> >
>> >>
>> >> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
>> >> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
>> >> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
>> >> not broadcasted live on TV.
>> >>
>> >> Michael
>> >
>> >US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
>> >remember.
>>
>> Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.
>>
>> What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
>> (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
>>
>>
>
>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>
>>
Not correct, I know who she was. She was a female cosmonaut intended
to show the world how "emancipated" soviet women were.

Al Minyard

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 18th 03, 07:21 PM

Keith Willshaw wrote:
> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
> .. .
>
>>Snuffy Smith wrote:
>>> ...................
>>
>>Well not you obviously!
>>Though I don't remember Leonov.
>
> On the contrary his spacewalk was covered on tv
> at prime time and the Soyuz Apollo mission was
> top TV viewing.

Nothing contrary :)
I'm not contradicting the coverage.
I just am admitting that I don't remember
many of the names or even details of the
space exploration saga.
Certain events are remembered, others not.
Valentina Tereshkova I remember.
I remember some of the ribald ideas
and conjectures that went around at the time.
--
Rostyk

Fred J. McCall

October 18th 03, 07:43 PM

(D.K.) wrote:

:P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
:Tereshkova?

Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.

--
"Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die."
-- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer

Keith Willshaw

October 18th 03, 07:48 PM

"D.K." > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Snuffy
Smith" > wrote:
> >

>
> >but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova
> >was.
>
> That's what I thought. I caught the movie "The Right Stuff" while
> channel surfing the other day. Although the movie is about American
> efforts to put a man into space, it managed to not mention Soviets
> even a single time! Not a single word during entire movie - neither
> before, nor after Shepherd's launch.
>

Not so comrade , indeed the movie went to great lengths
to emphasise the fear and paranoia that drove the Americans
to invest so much economic and political capital in the program

> LOL. What a piece of propaganda! This is like publishing a book on
> American history and managing not to mention the Indians OR the
> British.
>

Actually its more like a book on US history that doesnt mention
the cossacks.

Keith

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 18th 03, 08:18 PM

Fred J. McCall wrote:

> (D.K.) wrote:
>
> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
> :Tereshkova?
>
> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
>
Sour grapes?
I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.

As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?
--
Rostyk

Michael Petukhov

October 18th 03, 09:23 PM

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> > >
> >
> > Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
> > Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
> > on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
> > its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
> > Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
> > Sun and only after that was found on Earth.
>
> Spectroscopy will tell you what elements are present and in what
> proportions but can tell you nothing about the structure of the
> objects themselves. Diamond, graphite and hard coal all show
> up as carbon in a spctroscopic analysis.

So what?

>
> But you know this Michael so you seem to be being somewhat
> less than wholly truthful.
>

100% truthful. NASA had tons of meteorites of different type.
only from ANSMET program NASA got some 10000 Antarctic meteories
Spectroscopy data were good enough to separate lunar rocks from that
stock. BTW lunar meteorites have no single structure. It can be
as different as basalts and breccias.

> > As for the Lunar
> > materials... well a standard marker composition can be easily
> > measured by an automatical probe and results send here by radio.
> > They did send automatical probes (Surveyors) to moon prior
> > "manned missions", did'n they? Moreover it was easy to guess
> > about some picularities of moon rocks, like extreme lack of
> > water or free oxigen and certain minerals which are known to
> > originate from nonexistent on moon processes. Given big enough
> > meteorite collection it is easy to design such a marker set.
> > Just a piece of cake, Keith!
> >
>
> Nonsense Michael, this tells you nothing about the structure
> of the rocks, the density, crystalline structure, evidence of
> folding and distribution. All vital to the geologist.

folding... of rocks you mean?

>
> As an example the microscopic pitting and high helium 3
> surface content of the surface layer on rocks recovere by
> both the soviet and lunar sampling efforts was unexpected.
> These are believed to be caused by micrometeoroid impacts
> and interaction with the solar wind are unque to those samples
> retrieved from the moon as the meteorites of lunar origin have
> the surface burned away on re-entry

No idea. Maybe. Although this was not mandatory to separate
lunar meteorites from other types.

>
> > by the way Keith so far NASA did not claim to land man on
> > Mars or in asteroid belt rocks, but meteorites from all
> > these places are easy to recognize and of course is on
> > sell with certificates as well.
> >
>
> Because since the 1960's much more advanced automated
> landers have been available.
>

Good! So I record: Keith is agree that samples of moon rocks were
not necessary to recognize lunar meteorites.

> > > So if you believe the Americans faked their samples
> > > by buying lunar meteorites they would have to know
> > > the nature of the lunar rocks or to fake or get the
> > > Soviets to buy similar fakes for their lander several
> > > years later.
> >
> > "If" is not a proper wording here, keith. They knew for sure.
> >
>
> Hardly Michael , the surveyor probes which landed on the
> moon in the late 60's had primitive sampling mechanisms
> which were pretty much limited to performing soil
> mechanics tests. They were sent to check that the surface
> was hard enough to land on.
>
> The experiments performed were

>
> 1) Alpha Scattering Surface analyser used to determine the
> abundances of the major elements of the lunar surface with
> the important exceptions of hydrogen, helium, and lithium

hm..

>
> 2) Surface bearing tests using strain gauges , accelerometers
> and rate gyros
>
> I find it comical that you claim advanced automatic lab facilities
> capable of a full analysis were available when in you earlier
> post you were stressing how primitive the available computers
> were.

Then Keith even more comic for you is that "Alpha Scattering
Surface analyser used to determine the abundances of the major elements
of the lunar surface..." sounds exactly like determination of the chemical
markers for lunar meteorites I was talking about.

>
> > >
> > > Then of course their the problem of buying 400 kg
> > > of different meteorite fragments with nobody noticing.
> >
> > why? somebody was noticing. As far as I know so far no
> > lunar meteorites were officially found in US soil
> > while it is estimated to be around of a few % of all
> > meteorites found today. Don't you think it is a bit of
> > strange give US with US huge deserts?
>
> Since nobody knew what a lunar meteorite looked like
> until after Apollo 11 returned its precisely what any
> sane person would expect.

If one have reliable markers it was easy to separate lunar
meteorires from the rest and to know "what any sane person
would expect"

>
> > Although of course
> > you don't. particularly given that NASA was known to buy
> > lots of them from privat persons all over the world.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I'm afraid all you did is demonstrate how prejudice
> > > can lead even intelligent people astary.
> >
> > Never say never, Keith. European SMART-1 is on the way to moon
> > and japanese Lunar-A and Selene are getting ready to follow soon.
> > They can send us very unexpected pictures of Apollo landing sites.
> > US privat company's "TrailBlazer" can do in principle but who in
> > a good mind can trust US data? Not me at least.
> >
>
> Doubtless you'll use some other excuse when pictures of the
> Apollo Landers are beamed back.

We will see. I do not know how about you but I am looking
forward to see that.

Michael
>
> Keith

Snuffy Smith

October 18th 03, 09:32 PM

"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
...
> "Snuffy Smith" > wrote:
>
> :"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
> .. .
> :> (D.K.) wrote:
> :>
> :> :What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
> :> :(Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?
> :>
> :> Talked about? Sure. Popularized? Not so much.
> :>
> :> It didn't help that the Russians didn't allow TV broadcasts for a lot
> :> of this stuff out of fear that something might go wrong.
> :
> :Ever notice any of the parallels between current day China and the old
> :Soviet Union?
>
> Not really, no.
>
> :That flu virus that started in China was known for months. The Chinese
tried
> :to black out the world on what was going on. People in China didn't even
> :know there was a deadly flu bug swirling all around them.
>
> I assume you're referring to SARS? Not a "flu bug". China actually
> had public thermometers to check people on the street. You seem a bit
> misinformed here.
>

Well duhhh! Only AFTER they looked like fools in the eyes of the entire
world.

> :Now we see that they backed out on showing their space launch live.
>
> This is typical of any semi-dictatorship.
>
> :Then you have all that Falun Gong and Tibet persecution stuff.
>
> Again, typical of any semi-dictatorship.
>
> :The question is how long before China implodes like the Soviet Union????
>
> It won't happen. China has been much more economically flexible than
> the old Soviet Union was.
>

Never say never.

>
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> --George Bernard Shaw

Steven P. McNicoll

October 18th 03, 09:44 PM

Give it a rest. The most probable origin of NASA moon rocks is the moon.
Going to the moon and picking up some rocks is just simply far easier and
cheaper than the elaborate scheme that would be required to fake it.
Occam's razor!

Keith Willshaw

October 18th 03, 11:44 PM

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > >
> > >
> > > Not necessary. This is because you are not a scientist Keith.
> > > Otherwise you would know that humans never landed
> > > on Sun and other distant stars (at least officially) but
> > > its material compositions are known from spectroscopy data.
> > > Some elements (helium for instance) were first discovered on
> > > Sun and only after that was found on Earth.
> >
> > Spectroscopy will tell you what elements are present and in what
> > proportions but can tell you nothing about the structure of the
> > objects themselves. Diamond, graphite and hard coal all show
> > up as carbon in a spctroscopic analysis.
>
> So what?
>
> >
> > But you know this Michael so you seem to be being somewhat
> > less than wholly truthful.
> >
>
> 100% truthful. NASA had tons of meteorites of different type.
> only from ANSMET program NASA got some 10000 Antarctic meteories
> Spectroscopy data were good enough to separate lunar rocks from that
> stock. BTW lunar meteorites have no single structure. It can be
> as different as basalts and breccias.
>

Ansmet started in the year 1976, how do you propose
NASA accessed its findings back in 1969 ?

<snip>

>
> If one have reliable markers it was easy to separate lunar
> meteorires from the rest and to know "what any sane person
> would expect"
>

And the reliable markers were of course obtained by the Apollo samples

Keith

Fred J. McCall

October 19th 03, 12:13 AM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
:> (D.K.) wrote:
:>
:> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
:> :Tereshkova?
:>
:> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
:> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
:> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
:>
:Sour grapes?

Not hardly.

:I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
:purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
:scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.

As I understood it, she was sealed in with instructions not to touch
anything.

:As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
:Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?

Funding. He's a Senator and can help get it raised.

[And no, we shouldn't have sent him, either. But you don't see us
touting it as a great 'victory'. However, in your case, I suppose you
have to grab what little glory you can find wherever you can find it.]

--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney

Fred J. McCall

October 19th 03, 12:31 AM

"Snuffy Smith" > wrote:

:"Fred J. McCall" > wrote in message
.. .
:>
:> I assume you're referring to SARS? Not a "flu bug". China actually
:> had public thermometers to check people on the street. You seem a bit
:> misinformed here.
:
:Well duhhh! Only AFTER they looked like fools in the eyes of the entire
:world.

Well duhhh! You don't even know what it was and you think THEY looked
like fools?

:> :The question is how long before China implodes like the Soviet Union????
:>
:> It won't happen. China has been much more economically flexible than
:> the old Soviet Union was.
:
:Never say never.

The odds are just as good that WE will implode like the Soviet Union.
Never say never, after all.

--
"We come into the world and take our chances.
Fate is just the weight of circumstances.
That's the way that Lady Luck dances.
Roll the bones...."
-- "Roll The Bones", Rush

Steve Hix

October 19th 03, 12:36 AM

In article >,
"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:

> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>
> > (D.K.) wrote:
> >
> > :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
> > :Tereshkova?
> >
> > Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
> > actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
> > 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
> >
> Sour grapes?
> I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
> purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
> scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.

About the same time that the Mercury astronauts were selected and in
training, a group a woman aviators were undergoing a similar process.

One of my flight instructors around 1972, when I was working on getting
my pilot's license, Irene Leverton, was a member of that group. At the
time is was taking instruction from here, she had something like 20,000
hours transport time logged along with most of the expected tickets. Not
someone to take any guff from anyone, was my impression at the time, but
she was a very good instructor.

The project was killed for political reasons; they figured that the
American public wouldn't tolerate a woman being killed on flight
operations.

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 19th 03, 05:14 AM

Fred J. McCall wrote:
> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:
>
> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :
> :> (D.K.) wrote:
> :>
> :> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
> :> :Tereshkova?
> :>
> :> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
> :> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
> :> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
> :>
> :Sour grapes?
>
> Not hardly.
>
> :I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
> :purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
> :scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.
>
> As I understood it, she was sealed in with instructions not to touch
> anything.

So how does that contradict, or affect the validity of anything
which I said, even in the scientific field? After all did orbiting
Laika by the russians, or the monkeys and apes by the USA not provide
valuable biometric data?
>
> :As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
> :Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?
>
> Funding. He's a Senator and can help get it raised.
>
> [And no, we shouldn't have sent him, either. But you don't see us
> touting it as a great 'victory'.

I think that AARP is :)

> However, in your case, I suppose you have to grab what little glory
> you can find wherever you can find it.]
>
Indeed! :) I will revel and bask in any glory that I can garner :)
And I won't in any small and mean spirited way deny the fame, glory
and credit due to the space pioneers of any beings in this universe.
--
May you live long and prosper
Rostyk

Fred J. McCall

October 19th 03, 06:50 AM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:
:>
:> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> :
:> :> (D.K.) wrote:
:> :>
:> :> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
:> :> :Tereshkova?
:> :>
:> :> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
:> :> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
:> :> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
:> :>
:> :Sour grapes?
:>
:> Not hardly.
:>
:> :I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
:> :purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
:> :scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.
:>
:> As I understood it, she was sealed in with instructions not to touch
:> anything.
:
:So how does that contradict, or affect the validity of anything
:which I said, even in the scientific field? After all did orbiting
:Laika by the russians, or the monkeys and apes by the USA not provide
:valuable biometric data?

Not especially, no, as I understand it. We sent up monkeys first
because we were afraid something would go wrong with the vehicle and
kill the occupant, and monkeys are generally more expendable than
fighter pilots.

I suspect the Soviet reason for sending a dog was similar.

:> :As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
:> :Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?
:>
:> Funding. He's a Senator and can help get it raised.
:>
:> [And no, we shouldn't have sent him, either. But you don't see us
:> touting it as a great 'victory'.
:
:I think that AARP is :)

Perhaps. No doubt they're enamoured of "Pukin' Jake" Garn, too. Both
of those flights, however, were pure fund raisers and should never
have happened.

[Jake Garn *was* a study subject, by the way. They were studying
space sickness. He was a 'good' subject.]

:> However, in your case, I suppose you have to grab what little glory
:> you can find wherever you can find it.]
:
:Indeed! :) I will revel and bask in any glory that I can garner :)
:And I won't in any small and mean spirited way deny the fame, glory
:and credit due to the space pioneers of any beings in this universe.

There are heros and then there are heros. It's not particularly
heroic if you don't understand what's going on when it happens to you.

When you ask most 'heros' about what they did, the usual answer is
roughly, "**** happened and I did what I had to do. Heroic? I almost
fainted when it was all over!"

--
"This is a war of the unknown warriors; but let all strive
without failing in faith or in duty...."

-- Winston Churchill

John Keeney

October 19th 03, 07:49 AM

"Pete" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Bill Silvey" > wrote:
> >
> > >"Bob McKellar" > wrote in message
> >
> > >> B2431 wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>> From: Alan Minyard a
> > >>>
> > >>>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers
controls.
> > >>>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
> > >>>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Al Minyard
> > >>>>
> > >>> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one
> > >>> just before it crashed.
> > >>>
> > >>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> > >>
> > >> Fella name of Armstrong.
> > >>
> > >> Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.
> > >>
> > >> Wonder whatever happened to him........
> > >>
> > >> Bob McKellar
> > >
> > >Went on to do some flight testing for equipment with some alphabet-soup
> > >organization down on the sleepy part of Florida's east coast, IIRC.
Some
> > >government branch or something.
> > >
> > >It's rumored after that one incident that only two other guys in the
> whole
> > >place would fly with him.
> > >
> > >Sad, really.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >;-)
> >
> >
> > Sounds familiar...isn't he the guy who got a little off course
> > and landed his craft on some little used spot something like a
> > quarter of a million miles from home?...I hear that he got it
> > back home ok though, lucky for him. :)
>
> I think he even got out to ask for directions, but couldn't find anyone.
>
> I guess they just kind of aimed in the general direction of home, and
found
> it.

Yea, but last I heard he was teaching school some place in Ohio...

John Keeney

October 19th 03, 08:03 AM

"Gordon" > wrote in message
...
> >>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually
lost,
> >>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>
> The first true space passenger, and a woman besides.
>
> As for the publicity that early Soviet launches recieved, I have two
framed
> newspapers over my desk - one is of Yuri's flight, the other is
Carpenter's
> first flight. Coverage on both events is remarkably similar, and comprise
the
> entire front page of the Houston newspapers. Folks in the US knew all
about
> Sputnik and Gagarin - those two flights were always discussed in the
context of
> the flashpoint for the space race. I have a pretty vivid memory of a
talking
> head explaining the difference between models of the Saturn V and Soviet
launch
> vehicles.
>
> v/r
> Gordon
> PS, whoever assumed no one north of the Mason/Dixon would know who
Tereshkova
> was needs to remember that it was a space *race*, and Americans sure as
heck
> knew who else was in the race. As for painting all Americans with the
> broad-brush term of "Yankee", well, that's just plain quaint.

The classic cartoon: the foreign tour guild apologizing for the
"Yankee go home" painted on the wall to which one of the tourist
replies "That's all right, we all's from the south."

John Keeney

October 19th 03, 08:09 AM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
...
> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>
> > (D.K.) wrote:
> >
> > :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
> > :Tereshkova?
> >
> > Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
> > actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
> > 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
> >
> Sour grapes?
> I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
> purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
> scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.
>
> As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
> Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?

Political pay back mixed with publicity stunt.

Brian Allardice

October 19th 03, 08:58 AM

In article >, says...

>Political pay back mixed with publicity stunt.

Oh hell.... If I had the influence I would use every sneaky trick in the book
to get a place on such a flight. Good on the Senator!

Cheers,
dba

ArtKramr

October 19th 03, 03:54 PM

>Subject: Re: The most probable origin of NASA moon rocks
>From: "John Keeney"
>Date: 10/18/03 11:49 PM Pacifi

>> I guess they just kind of aimed in the general direction of home, and
>found
>> it.

haven't we all at one time or another? (sigh)

Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

B2431

October 19th 03, 07:13 PM

>From: "John Keeney"
>Date: 10/19/2003 1:49 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"Pete" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > "Bill Silvey" > wrote:
>> >
>> > >"Bob McKellar" > wrote in message
>> >
>> > >> B2431 wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>>> From: Alan Minyard a
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> NASA even built a "zero-G" test rig to try out the landers
>controls.
>> > >>>> It had a lift engine that could be throttled to exactly balance out
>> > >>>> the weight of the rig, so the thrusted operated at "zero-G"
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Al Minyard
>> > >>>>
>> > >>> I think they had more than one. I recall a pilot punching out of one
>> > >>> just before it crashed.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>> > >>
>> > >> Fella name of Armstrong.
>> > >>
>> > >> Probably ruined his career, busting up the gear like that.
>> > >>
>> > >> Wonder whatever happened to him........
>> > >>
>> > >> Bob McKellar
>> > >
>> > >Went on to do some flight testing for equipment with some alphabet-soup
>> > >organization down on the sleepy part of Florida's east coast, IIRC.
>Some
>> > >government branch or something.
>> > >
>> > >It's rumored after that one incident that only two other guys in the
>> whole
>> > >place would fly with him.
>> > >
>> > >Sad, really.
>> > >
>> > >;-)
>> >
>> >
>> > Sounds familiar...isn't he the guy who got a little off course
>> > and landed his craft on some little used spot something like a
>> > quarter of a million miles from home?...I hear that he got it
>> > back home ok though, lucky for him. :)
>>
>> I think he even got out to ask for directions, but couldn't find anyone.
>>
>> I guess they just kind of aimed in the general direction of home, and
>found
>> it.
>
>Yea, but last I heard he was teaching school some place in Ohio...
>
Now you know the real reason NASA has female astronauts; they now have someone
to send out to ask for directions.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Peter H. Granzeau

October 19th 03, 09:04 PM

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:18:11 -0400, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj"
> wrote:

>> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
>> :Tereshkova?
>>
>> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
>> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
>> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
>>
>Sour grapes?
>I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
>purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
>scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.
>
>As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
>Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?

Senate appropriations. What else?

Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj

October 20th 03, 06:10 AM

You keep changing the subject. :)

Fred J. McCall wrote:

> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:
>
> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote:
> :>
> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> :
> :> :> (D.K.) wrote:
> :> :>
> :> :> :P.S. First American woman in space was what - 20 years after
> :> :> :Tereshkova?
> :> :>
> :> :> Yes, the difference being that we didn't send one until she had an
> :> :> actual purpose in being there. 'Parachute packer in a can' as a
> :> :> 'first' is hardly something to be beating your chest about.
> :> :>
> :> :Sour grapes?
> :>
> :> Not hardly.
> :>
> :> :I believe that in addition to the obvioous political political
> :> :purpose, they even manufactured a set of 'opportunity knocks'
> :> :scientific, medical, purposes for launching her.
> :>
> :> As I understood it, she was sealed in with instructions not to touch
> :> anything.
> :
> :So how does that contradict, or affect the validity of anything
> :which I said, even in the scientific field? After all did orbiting
> :Laika by the russians, or the monkeys and apes by the USA not provide
> :valuable biometric data?
>
> Not especially, no, as I understand it. We sent up monkeys first
> because we were afraid something would go wrong with the vehicle and
> kill the occupant, and monkeys are generally more expendable than
> fighter pilots.
>
> I suspect the Soviet reason for sending a dog was similar.

What ever the reasons for the launch (flight). I find it surprising
that you dismiss the value of any data, collected from the 'experiments'
which I have mentioned. I would like to read what you consider to have
been the 'true' purposes of these launches, and what alternative
experiments you would have sent up as the payloads of these launches.

>
> :> :As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
> :> :Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?
> :>
> :> Funding. He's a Senator and can help get it raised.
> :>
> :> [And no, we shouldn't have sent him, either. But you don't see us
> :> touting it as a great 'victory'.
> :
> :I think that AARP is :)
>
> Perhaps. No doubt they're enamoured of "Pukin' Jake" Garn, too.
> Both of those flights, however, were pure fund raisers and should
> never have happened.
>
> [Jake Garn *was* a study subject, by the way. They were studying
> space sickness. He was a 'good' subject.]

What do you see as the actual purposes of these launches and payloads.
What more useful alternatives would you propose for the expenditure
of the resources?
>
> :> However, in your case, I suppose you have to grab what little glory
> :> you can find wherever you can find it.]
> :
> :Indeed! :) I will revel and bask in any glory that I can garner :)
> :And I won't in any small and mean spirited way deny the fame, glory
> :and credit due to the space pioneers of any beings in this universe.
>
> There are heros and then there are heros. It's not particularly
> heroic if you don't understand what's going on when it happens to you.
>
> When you ask most 'heros' about what they did, the usual answer is
> roughly, "**** happened and I did what I had to do. Heroic? I almost
> fainted when it was all over!"
>
'Heroes' is your term introduced into the discussion so that you can
have aand straw 'man' target to demolish.
I have simply refered to them as pioneers.
Not heroes according to your derscription, but brave individuals
who knowing the dangers to them nevertheless chose to face those
risks to do what they did. They didn't act spontaneously because
'**** happened' rather they acted in a calculated risk taking mode.
--
Rostyk
>

Peter Twydell

October 20th 03, 08:52 AM

In article >, B2431
> writes
>>From: "Snuffy Smith"
>
><snip>
>
>>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>>
>
>Want to place a bet on that?
>She was Gargarin's wife. Oh, and she was the first girl cosmonaut.
>
>Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

She married Andrian Nikolayev, another Soviet cosmonaut, not Gagarain.

I always had the sneaking suspicion that their marrying and having
children was part of the Soviet space research programme. ISTR that it
happened fairly soon after their flights.
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

ANDREW ROBERT BREEN

October 20th 03, 03:42 PM

In article >,
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj > wrote:
>
>As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
>Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?

One of the purposes of the mission was to fly the Spartan-201
solar observatory (must get around to looking at that data again
sometime..). The purpose of having glenn on board was more obscure,
though I do recall comments to the effect that it was intended to
test the endurance of the rest of the crew.

:)

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

Steven P. McNicoll

October 20th 03, 03:53 PM

"Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" > wrote in message
...
>
> As a slight parallel, What was the purpose of Senator John
> Glenns' 1998, STS-95 return trip into space?
>

It was a political payoff for subverting a Senate investigation.

B2431

October 20th 03, 10:34 PM

>From: Peter Twydell
>Date: 10/20/2003 2:52 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>In article >, B2431
> writes
>>>From: "Snuffy Smith"
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>Not at all. Sputnik created the space race...which Russia eventually lost,
>>>but you won't find a single yankee soul who knows who Tereshkova was.
>>>
>>
>>Want to place a bet on that?
>>She was Gargarin's wife. Oh, and she was the first girl cosmonaut.
>>
>>Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>She married Andrian Nikolayev, another Soviet cosmonaut, not Gagarain.
>
>I always had the sneaking suspicion that their marrying and having
>children was part of the Soviet space research programme. ISTR that it
>happened fairly soon after their flights.
>--
>Peter
>
>Ying tong iddle-i po!
>
Hey, put a bunch of men is space suits and they all look alike. Thank you for
the correction.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Brian Allardice

October 23rd 03, 08:04 PM

In article >,
says...

>Then again, I like the (mis)quote from Ice Station Zebra, which goes
>something to the effect of:
>
>"The Russian satellite which was built by their German scientists was
>shot down by a rocket built by your German scientists while carrying a
>camera built by our German scientists."

Times change....

"American components, Russian components, is all made in Taiwan"

from one of those 'comet blasts planet earth' movies...

Cheers,
dba

Gordon

October 23rd 03, 10:56 PM

>
>Times change....
>
>"American components, Russian components, is all made in Taiwan"
>
>from one of those 'comet blasts planet earth' movies...

"Raawwshin ****, Amuriccan ****, iiitz awl ****!"

Eric Chomko

October 27th 03, 09:44 PM

Michael Petukhov ) wrote:
: (Mikhail Medved) wrote in message >...
: > "Bill Silvey" > wrote in message >...
: > > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
: > > om
: > >
: > > <snip>
: > >
: > > Komrad Mikey, why do you continue on with this outrageous stupidity?
: > >
: > > I know your burning hatred for everyone not Russian or who doesn't adhere to
: > > the Soviet point of view
: >
: > Hey, my friend, don't bring political agenda to the argument about the
: > facts: the Soviet Union never doubted the authenticity of American
: > lunar expeditions.

: indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
: lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
: perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
: not broadcasted live on TV.

Pardon me for jumping in...

My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
first moon landing.

So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
did it.

Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
all went back to the Pentagon the next day.

Eric

: Michael

: >
: > > clouds your vision quite a bit, but I *do* find it
: > > amazing that you can't accept scientific facts - that the United States sent
: > > not one but three men to the moon, all of whom returned successfully,
: > > several times. That your nation failed to do so has to be the only reason
: > > for this continued petulence on your part.
: > >
: > > If I were you I'd seek psychological help, but not in your own nation, good
: > > lord no! Please, seek *reliable* mental health care somewhere in the west.

Eric Chomko

October 27th 03, 09:59 PM

D.K. ) wrote:
: In article >, "usertx" > wrote:
: >
: >"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
: om...
: >
: >>
: >> indeed. although as far as I know USSR also never officialy said these
: >> lunar expeditions were for real. It was ignored in fact. USSR was
: >> perhaps the only country in the world where "US moon landings" were
: >> not broadcasted live on TV.
: >>
: >> Michael
: >
: >US moon landings were broadcasting in USSR! You are just too young to
: >remember.

: Yep, they were broadcast. I vaguely remember it when I was a kid.

: What I'd like to know is how widely Soviet space achievements
: (Sputnik, Gagarin, Leonov, Tereshkova) were popularized in the USA?

I have a book (Giants in Space -or some such, I'll check later) from 1968
that has equal coverage about American and Russian manned space
achievements.

Eric

John Penta

October 28th 03, 08:14 AM

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC),
(Eric Chomko) wrote:

>Pardon me for jumping in...
>
>My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
>And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
>first moon landing.
>
>So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
>did it.
>
>Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
>all went back to the Pentagon the next day.
>
>Eric

I wish they'd declassify and distribute that.:-/

I wonder how ASCII art looked off a teletype. I know you can do some
pretty...Impressive things with PC ASCII.

Eric Chomko

October 28th 03, 04:31 PM

John Penta ) wrote:
: On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC),
: (Eric Chomko) wrote:

: >Pardon me for jumping in...
: >
: >My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
: >And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
: >first moon landing.
: >
: >So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
: >did it.
: >
: >Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
: >all went back to the Pentagon the next day.
: >
: >Eric

: I wish they'd declassify and distribute that.:-/

I'm considering going through DOJ FOIA to see about exactly that. I'd say
from an intel point of view that after 30+ years anything from the hotline
would be cold intel to say the least.

: I wonder how ASCII art looked off a teletype. I know you can do some
: pretty...Impressive things with PC ASCII.

The paper was white and not the canary yellow that I have on my ASR-33.
In fact, the TTYs were the larger console types according to my dad and
not the stand alone ASR/KSR/RO that I used in high school and then
eventually bought while in college to hook to my home computer.
See: http://www.obsoletecomputermuseum.org/swt/

Also, the ink on the white paper was purply-blue. Geez, even a camera
photo of the message would have been nice.

Eric

Jack Linthicum

October 28th 03, 06:49 PM

John Penta > wrote in message >...
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC),
> (Eric Chomko) wrote:
>
>
> >Pardon me for jumping in...
> >
> >My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
> >And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
> >first moon landing.
> >
> >So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
> >did it.
> >
> >Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
> >all went back to the Pentagon the next day.
> >
> >Eric
>
> I wish they'd declassify and distribute that.:-/
>
> I wonder how ASCII art looked off a teletype. I know you can do some
> pretty...Impressive things with PC ASCII.

Spin Control: Pravda of Moscow, the Soviet Union, manages to keep the
moonwalk story at the bottom of the page while the top headline says,
"Collectivism is the Feature of the New World People," whatever that
means

did anyone save their copy of Pravda for July 20, 1969?

This is what you get by searching for "July 20, 1969" in Pravda's
files. Remember the Russian saying "There is no Truth (Pravda) in
Pravda and no News (Isvestia) in Izvestia.

http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=9994
America's Moon Expedition a Fake? - 05/15/2003 18:05

Even people ignorant of space technologies understand that then-level
of technological and electronic development wouldn't allow to perform
complicated space maneuvers

Forty years ago, American President John Kennedy urged the people to
get united about the Moon landing idea: the USA wanted to win the
space competition of the 1960s at any price to maintain the image of a
superpower. This was a dispute on superiority of two social systems:
the flourishing (as it seemed at that time) socialism and the
"decaying" capitalism. The USSR experienced problems of its post-war
period, what is more, the Soviet country had to suffer great spending
in the arms race in order to be ready for a probable war against any
of the former allies from the anti-Hitler coalition. Nevertheless, the
USSR always managed to be ahead of rich America. It was the Soviet
Union that first sent an artificial Earth satellite which meant
undoubted advantage of the Soviet missile production. Already at that
time it was clear that level of missile technologies would become the
criterion of military superiority in the nearest future.

<more>

Eric Chomko

October 28th 03, 09:47 PM

Jack Linthicum ) wrote:
: John Penta > wrote in message >...
: > On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC),
: > (Eric Chomko) wrote:
: >
: >
: > >Pardon me for jumping in...
: > >
: > >My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
: > >And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
: > >first moon landing.
: > >
: > >So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
: > >did it.
: > >
: > >Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
: > >all went back to the Pentagon the next day.
: > >
: > >Eric
: >
: > I wish they'd declassify and distribute that.:-/
: >
: > I wonder how ASCII art looked off a teletype. I know you can do some
: > pretty...Impressive things with PC ASCII.

: Spin Control: Pravda of Moscow, the Soviet Union, manages to keep the
: moonwalk story at the bottom of the page while the top headline says,
: "Collectivism is the Feature of the New World People," whatever that
: means

: did anyone save their copy of Pravda for July 20, 1969?

: This is what you get by searching for "July 20, 1969" in Pravda's
: files. Remember the Russian saying "There is no Truth (Pravda) in
: Pravda and no News (Isvestia) in Izvestia.

: http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=9994
: America's Moon Expedition a Fake? - 05/15/2003 18:05

: Even people ignorant of space technologies understand that then-level
: of technological and electronic development wouldn't allow to perform
: complicated space maneuvers

: Forty years ago, American President John Kennedy urged the people to

What I find interesting and somewhat off topic but related to JFK, is that
the current accepted belief about JFK's assassination is the same
officially in Russia is the same officially as it is in the US. Namely,
that JFK was killed by a lone nut name Lee Harvey Oswald.

Eric

: get united about the Moon landing idea: the USA wanted to win the
: space competition of the 1960s at any price to maintain the image of a
: superpower. This was a dispute on superiority of two social systems:
: the flourishing (as it seemed at that time) socialism and the
: "decaying" capitalism. The USSR experienced problems of its post-war
: period, what is more, the Soviet country had to suffer great spending
: in the arms race in order to be ready for a probable war against any
: of the former allies from the anti-Hitler coalition. Nevertheless, the
: USSR always managed to be ahead of rich America. It was the Soviet
: Union that first sent an artificial Earth satellite which meant
: undoubted advantage of the Soviet missile production. Already at that
: time it was clear that level of missile technologies would become the
: criterion of military superiority in the nearest future.

: <more>

ZZBunker

October 28th 03, 11:26 PM

(Jack Linthicum) wrote in message >...
> John Penta > wrote in message >...
> > On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC),
> > (Eric Chomko) wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Pardon me for jumping in...
> > >
> > >My father was working at the Pentagon on the Moscow-Washington "Hotline".
> > >And I saw with my own eyes from Russia ASCII art congradulating us for the
> > >first moon landing.
> > >
> > >So at least those technicians on duty at the Hotline in Moscow believed we
> > >did it.
> > >
> > >Boy I wish I was able to keep one of those hardcopy tranmissions, but it
> > >all went back to the Pentagon the next day.
> > >
> > >Eric
> >
> > I wish they'd declassify and distribute that.:-/
> >
> > I wonder how ASCII art looked off a teletype. I know you can do some
> > pretty...Impressive things with PC ASCII.
>
> Spin Control: Pravda of Moscow, the Soviet Union, manages to keep the
> moonwalk story at the bottom of the page while the top headline says,
> "Collectivism is the Feature of the New World People," whatever that
> means
>
> did anyone save their copy of Pravda for July 20, 1969?
>
> This is what you get by searching for "July 20, 1969" in Pravda's
> files. Remember the Russian saying "There is no Truth (Pravda) in
> Pravda and no News (Isvestia) in Izvestia.
>
> http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=9994
> America's Moon Expedition a Fake? - 05/15/2003 18:05
>
> Even people ignorant of space technologies understand that then-level
> of technological and electronic development wouldn't allow to perform
> complicated space maneuvers
>
> Forty years ago, American President John Kennedy urged the people to
> get united about the Moon landing idea: the USA wanted to win the
> space competition of the 1960s at any price to maintain the image of a
> superpower. This was a dispute on superiority of two social systems:
> the flourishing (as it seemed at that time) socialism and the
> "decaying" capitalism.

The USSR experienced problems of its post-war
> period, what is more, the Soviet country had to suffer great spending
> in the arms race in order to be ready for a probable war against any
> of the former allies from the anti-Hitler coalition.

Since the USSR *never had* a socialist system, that's obviously
the reason that we are world renown for not only telling
Stalin-Krushev fans, but also telling Jane Fonda and
Paul McCartney fans to not only to go to hell, but do it in China.

Nevertheless, the
> USSR always managed to be ahead of rich America. It was the Soviet
> Union that first sent an artificial Earth satellite which meant
> undoubted advantage of the Soviet missile production. Already at that
> time it was clear that level of missile technologies would become the
> criterion of military superiority in the nearest future.

It does'nt matter that Ruskies sent a sattelite up first,
since the Americans sent GPS up first.
Sattelites are things moron At&T type people invented,
not people with computers and brains.